Typical female response. However, you're wrong.
Testosterone affects the development of the brain, hence there is a biological argument here and not just a social argument.
Size: the male human brain is, on average, larger.
Risk tolerance: A study found a correlation between testosterone and risk tolerance in career choice
Attention - ability to focus in on one task
Memory - males have better memory
Spatial Ability - testosterone affects the development of the area of the brain that controls spatial intelligence. Hence, males are better at it.
And so on. These things are all backed up by science. So let's see here..... I said that sports are a sign of masculinity. Gee, what are sports if not COMPETITIVE? And competition is a testosterone-driven trait.
What I'm getting at is this:
Masculinity has two components (so does femininity - but that's not what we're focusing on here). One component is always in flux decade-decade and century-century (1,000 years ago - they had flux. 500 years ago - they had flux. Today - we have flux). The other component does not fluctuate so wildly. It's more of a solid standard that you see in a vast array of cultures throughout history and worldwide. It's not enough to just focus on the 'flux' components (drink, entertainment, sport) and hold to that - those will change, they always have.
Part 1: The STANDARD. The few traits that are found in almost every society - throughout a large span of history. These do not change much, and if they do it's very slow. A vast majority of societies will exhibit these traits, embrace them, and use them as they define masculinity. By this: you'd be able to find similar traits that go back to our European history as a Roman and even Greek society - and odds are - these same traits are found in a vast majority of cultures worldwide.
Physical attributes: Most people will think slender = feminine, stout = masculine (muscular or fat doesn't matter). However, what people are really focusing on are two things: a notable bustline-to-waist differentia. Masculinity does not contain a 'hips' or 'bust' component. That is in with the 'femininity'. If a male has gynecomastia he is seen as being emasculated. If he has a narrow waist or a pronounced backside, he shouldn't flaunt it (to do so, even if you're not attracted to males, is seen as 'being gay' - and yes, this is a standard. It's taken different names and been met with different responses which fluctuate but being seen 'as a girl' physically is 'gay' in most societies.)
In our nation's direct history (European) the only time this was not a standard was during the time of the Greeks and some time for the Romans where males who were youthful (smooth complexion/young features - and who stood in controposto post) were heralded as idyllic - it was a sign of physical fitness and agility. That doesn't qualify today. Men do not stand in controposto pose like Woody from Toy Story or Michelangelo's David.
Superiority over others:This is where your reference to 'competition' and so on might be seen. Competition itself is not governed by testosterone (because women, high in estrogen, are highly competitive as well). What this regards is the FORM that competitive nature is permitted to surface. Masculine = engaging in physical forms of competition. Feminine = engaging in non physical forms of competition *or* competition that focuses on physical appearance and style (Figure skating VS Football.). This is society's default. Why? Because it goes hand in hand with this: holding any position in society, a group, or culture which people rely *on you* or *look to you* to meet their needs.
Military, Law enforcement, government, judiciary, business management. Any time you have *people* serving underneath you or you have influence over the future of someone's life. you're seen as more masculine.
Superiority can be seen in your post with your choice of "men are better than women at ___ and ___" type references. You cannot escape (most males can't) that need to feel or be deemed better than others. A lot of men default to this - and it's seen throughout history, the compulsion to prove they're better (and the difficulty in accepting the reality when they're not - such as having 'better memories' and so on).
Potential - Earnings or otherwise: Yes - the *potential* to succeed is an early sign of 'masculinity' - some might argue it's more an issue of 'lazy' vs 'outgoing' or what not - but I think that gauging one's "potential future as a successful male in society" is the drive by parents and children early on that lead to certain choices which support various 'male-strong' paths in life.
Part 2: the FLUX. Fashion, entertainment, sports choices. This relies on trends and things that are 'in' - etc. Whatever this is: it's usually "the opposite of what the girls do" and "the girls who do this are 'one of the guys' or 'tomboys'." (Vice versa: femininity flux is anything that's 'not what the boys do' - boys don't paint their nails or wear makeup.) But
exactly what that is changes over time.
Figure skating VS Football (obvious reasons, here. Football relies on stout males and physical prowess. Figure Skating relies on feminine traits such as flexibility, poise, and appearances. Curling was a highly masculine sport in Scottland, yet these days most see it as being 'girly' - or 'nerdy'. Nerdy is often associate with the 'effeminate male' who's 'smart'. Other things are: jargon/language used, certain forms of employment (feminine: being a nurse and secretary.)
Because these things are flux - I disregard all of them. I think they're too menial to place any value in. They'll change numerous times *in my lifetime* so they hardly matter it they swing so wildly. Yet time and again too many people seem to hone in on *these* and make them of a higher importance. Likely: it's because they're personal *choices* and not 'I was born this way, I can't change who I am' - A guy can pretend to like football and force himself to swill beer.
Other things
are changing, though, and this is where thread should focus on:
Advancements and Changes: Certain industries have altered what people need to do in order to survive. Some changes are unprecedented in the history of human evolution: we no longer *need* to know how to hunt (for one example). We no longer need to collectively know how to redirect water sources to service our needs, or construct our own dwellings to live in (etc). For the first time in history: you do not have to be *exceptionally wealthy* in order to have others *provide you with a needed service or good* in order to ensure your survival.
- And this is what's changed so considerably that, even before the 1950's and the 1900's, the average citizen of the US no longer retained certain traits that were *standard* for survival throughout our history.
If we apply the 1800's standard of masculinity and femininity to society today you'd have a VERY different picture. A vast majority of our population (Yep - I wager more than 5/8) wouldn't qualify for either. . . and I don't think that testosterone levels have *anything to do with that*
Life itself has shifted - what was once frowned on (being the intellectually withdrawn and socially inept individual) can be the exact thing needed to set yourself up with a satisfactory life (in the new, technology reliant world we have).
And on and on - but you get my point?
Don't place too much value in menial crap that fluctuates and does NOT matter. NO myths. Masculinity and Femininity have notable, relatively unchanging components seen throughout history and they're unified by these.
I'm tempted to included being 'educated' as a standard because it's been an essential component of life since the days of the Greek - but I'm not too sure about that.
