In my view, there are three archetypal idioms of manhood: The Soldier, The Poet, and The King. By archetype, I mean a cluster of values and attitudes widely recognized as belonging together.
The Soldier is a young man’s vision of manhood. His masculinity is defined the presence (or absence) of the martial virtues—strength, toughness, bravery, courage, physical and mental competence, unflinching stoicism in the face of pain and adversity, indomitable persistence, honor, self-sacrifice, and a certain capacity for violence, cruelty and vengeful wrath. The ancient Greeks did not consider a man fully a man until he had killed in battle. In fact, those who had not done so were called androgynes, from which we get the word androgynous. His opposite is the Coward.
The King is a mature man’s vision of manhood. This, of course, embodies all the qualities of executive competence—sound judgment, intelligence, decisiveness, unsentimentality, a sense of justice, a sense of dignity, seriousness. It applies to men of senatorial age, who are expected to display a certain gravitas. His opposite is the Fool.
The Poet or Lover is a transitional vision of manhood, which is less public and defined by his ability to appreciate beauty and obtain meaning and pleasure from life. These are the qualities of a good husband—a good provider, a constant lover, a devoted friend, a loving parent. His opposite is the drug addict.
In this respect, being “a man” has to do with fulfilling certain broadly held cultural role expectations. This, in turn, tends to be decided by the sexual division of labor in any given culture.