
Macho, alpha males are everywhere. Men's circles are modeling another way to be a man
Tyrone Marsh felt a void in his life.
He was in his 40s and married with two kids. A self-described extrovert, he socialized often. But living in New York after years of moving around, he realized his existing relationships lacked a certain level of depth. His conversations with other men tended to revolve around sports or romantic pursuits, and he longed for more substance.
In other words, he wanted real friends.
In 2018, in search of connection, he came across a Meetup group that he thought was a book club. It was something else entirely: The ManKind Project, an organization offering intensive retreats and support groups to help men improve their relationships with themselves and others.
Intrigued, Marsh decided to join one of the organization's men's circles, or structured spaces in which men gather regularly to talk. At his first meeting, he found what he had been missing all his life.
'I can sit there with this group of men and fumble through whatever these thoughts are that I'm having,' he says. 'And those men hold the space for me and ask questions, and I don't feel like I'm being judged.'
Marsh's quest for connection underscores a major challenge that many men currently face.
While men and women alike are experiencing a rise in loneliness and isolation, men struggle especially to form deep friendships — a trend that scholars and researchers warn has serious implications. Socially isolated men are creating more work for their wives and girlfriends; they're falling prey to an online pipeline of misogyny; and in severe cases, they face heightened risks of depression, suicide and domestic violence.
At a time when some men are finding community in toxic parts of the 'manosphere,' men's circles offer another, more positive model of masculinity.
Experts say there's a growing appetite for these groups across the US, UK, Canada and Australia — and Marsh and others who participate in them say they're challenging deeply entrenched ideas about what it means to be a man.
Through years of participation in men's circles, Marsh — who is currently ManKind Project USA's co-chair for intercultural competence and belonging — has built a network of close friends he can rely on.
That, in turn, has taught him a lot about himself. Now if he's unsure about something at work, he admits it, instead of spiraling internally about not being good enough. He lets himself cry in front of his children so they know it's okay to show emotion. He makes an effort to think before he speaks.
'We're taught as men to suppress our feelings, to just do it by ourselves, man up and be strong. I know for me, that was isolating,' he says. 'These circles flip the script.'
We're taught as men to suppress our feelings, to just do it by ourselves, man up and be strong. I know for me, that was isolating.
Tyrone Marsh
Men's circles run by trained facilitators tend to follow a similar structure.
First, the facilitator sets some ground rules for the meeting. Attendees then introduce themselves and check in with each other about how they're feeling. They might engage in another icebreaker before eventually sharing what's going on in their lives, discussing everything from relationship issues and career challenges to a health crisis. The men take turns listening to each other and offer each other feedback. Finally, the meeting closes with some takeaways, or perhaps just acknowledgement or gratitude for what was just accomplished.
These gatherings can help men strengthen social skills and their relationships with other men, says Pasco Ashton, co-founder and executive director of the UK-based organization Men's Circle.
'Men don't really have the tools,' he says. 'They haven't learned the same tools that I think women do in social situations: to have the small talk, to connect deeper emotionally, all the emotional intelligence that is part of what we practice.'
That realization is what led Ashton to start a men's circle in 2020.
He felt helpless after losing two friends to suicide. He also wanted to work on himself after conversations with female friends about #MeToo. And generally, he felt lonely and unable to confide in most of his male friends.
That gathering of a few friends in a London park eventually grew into a larger organization spanning across the UK, with some participants in Europe and the US. His organization also offers workshops, retreats and more casual meetups.
Ashton says that while many men who attend circles come looking for social connection, they leave with much more: In an informal survey conducted by his organization, participants reported gaining mutual support and life perspective, as well as improvements in their emotional regulation, self-awareness and other key skills.
The reason so many men seem to lack deep connections isn't because of some innate biological difference, says Niobe Way, author of 'Rebels with a Cause: Reimagining Boys, Ourselves, and Our Culture.' Rather, it's a culture problem.
In studying adolescent development for more than four decades, she's found that boys do want intimate friendships. But as they get older, the pressure to man up results in what Way calls a crisis of connection.
Marsh felt that acutely growing up. He was raised in the inner city of Nashville with an incarcerated father and an abusive stepfather, in a home where 'there was no such thing as emotional intelligence.' Any hint of perceived softness was met with harsh discipline, treated as something to be stamped out.
Marsh tried to model another way for his two children, letting them know their feelings were valid and that their voices deserved to be heard. But some ingrained ideas proved hard to shake.
Before Marsh started attending men's circles, his son Kapila, 20, says he felt that he and his older sister were sometimes held to a different standard when it came to showing emotion.
'At times, my emotions were valued, but her emotions were 100% of the time valued,' he says. 'For me, there needed to be an extra step of 'This is how you're feeling, but what are you going to do with this?' rather than 'This is how you're feeling' and being able to sit back.'
Kapila says he internalized that pressure growing up, feeling like he needed to prove himself to be taken seriously. But he started to notice changes in his father once he got involved with the ManKind Project.
Marsh began asking his son more open-ended questions, trying to get to the root of why he felt a particular way. It took Kapila some adjusting to — he was used to following his dad's advice, and it felt like his dad wasn't interested in giving it anymore.
Kapila now realizes that his dad was training him to trust his intuition and move through the world on his own. In Kapila's eyes, it made him a better parent.
Rick Fortier, 63, has felt the crisis of connection, too. For most of his life, he says he felt safer around his female friends.
'I'd always had a feeling of being judged walking on eggshells around other men most of my life: Was I saying the right thing? Were they doing the right thing? Was I man enough?' he says.
His first experience in a men's circle challenged those norms. The environment was open and nonjudgmental, and the attendees pushed each other to be honest and authentic. And though it took some trial and error to find a circle that felt like the right fit, Fortier says his current group — which he's been attending for eight years — is helping him figure out the kind of man he wants to be.
The six or so members meet biweekly, and the issues that come up run the gamut: They talk about negative self-image, romantic challenges and the pressures they feel as men to act a certain way. Two members passed away in the last year, so feelings around death have also become a major topic of discussion.
'It's deep in our soul to have a brotherhood, and we don't know how to do that in our society other than through sporting events, drinking, going hunting or whatever might be typical of accepted men's behavior,' he says.
Even as men commit to improving themselves, they don't always get it right.
As Ian McElroy wrote in 2021 for The Cut, 'these groups are still run by men, men with all their baggage and acculturation and gazes.'
Plenty of groups end up reinforcing stereotypical ideas about who men should be, says Angelica Ferrara, a developmental and social psychologist whose research focuses on masculinity and gender.
'Some men's groups work by saying that a 'real' man is emotionally vulnerable and a provider not just through finances, but through emotional support to others,' she wrote in an email to CNN. 'These frameworks still imbue men with value (and status in other men's ideas) solely on what they provide to others—that's a big problem.'
The ManKind Project and other men's organizations also lean on initiation rituals and specific archetypes to help men get in touch with themselves — stemming from their roots in the 'mythopoetic' men's movement, which in the '80s and '90s brought men into the woods to rediscover their innate masculinity through drumming circles and chanting.
The ManKind Project's circles, for example, use the labels 'king,' 'warrior,' 'magician' and 'lover' (an apparent reference to Robert Moore and Douglas Gillette's 1991 book that defines four essential aspects of manhood). Its weekend retreats, which reportedly involve cold showers and blindfolding, invoke mythologist Joseph Campbell's 'hero's journey.'
While Marsh and others have found these frameworks empowering and transformative, some critics note that they can present an outdated and limiting view of masculinity.
Still, Ferrara says it's important not to let perfect be the enemy of good.
The most promising men's circles, in her view, 'explicitly name patriarchy and stringent ideas of masculinity as the root of men's suffering, rather than something to be reconfigured or revived.'
But even if Ferrara sees flaws in some of their approaches, men building emotional intelligence and deeper community stands to benefit them and everyone in their lives — and she hopes that as a result, more men might start to question traditional ideas around masculinity altogether.
Since President Donald Trump was said to have leveraged corners of the manosphere to help him win the 2024 US election, there's been a lot of discussion about the resurgence of more problematic ideas around masculinity. The recent Netflix series 'Adolescence' also sparked conversations about the pressures that boys face to adhere to certain norms.
In particular, many younger men seem adrift and more drawn to macho, traditional models of being a man. With hyper-masculine influencers on their social media feeds promoting self-improvement through extreme workout and diet regimens, the idea of sitting in a circle and talking about feelings might sound less appealing.
It's a major challenge men's circles are up against: They're not reaching the people who might need them most.
In their current iteration, men's circles and similar programs typically attract men in midlife. The ManKind Project does run a specialized version of its flagship retreat for men 18 to 35 (that also costs $995 to attend), and the organization says its overall age range has widened over time — still, Marsh says it struggles with getting younger men involved.
Knowing the difference men's circles made for him, Fortier says he's frustrated that so few young men seem interested. At 63, he's one of the younger men in his current group.
Over the years, he says some guys have shown up eager to discuss current affairs or sports. When encouraged to dig a little deeper, he says they seemed uncomfortable and often didn't return.
Dismantling generations of preconceptions about men is a daunting task, and men's circles are just one intervention in the broader project of reconsidering what it means to be a man.
But whether through men's circles or something else, Fortier says men need to step up and take accountability.
'We've created this situation,' he says. 'It's up to us to fix it.'

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
7 days ago
- Yahoo
Jodie Marsh wins fight with council to keep lemurs
Jodie Marsh should be allowed to keep lemurs at her private animal sanctuary, a judge has ruled. The former glamour model fought Uttlesford District Council in court after it refused her application for a wild animal licence in July 2024. Concerns had been raised about her taking a meerkat from her farm near Braintree, Essex, to the pub, but Ms Marsh insisted she was being targeted by online trolls. District Judge Christopher Williams said the 46-year-old was "someone who very much cares for animals". He ordered the local authority to pay her £19,641 in costs at Chelmsford Magistrates' Court. Neighbours of Fripps Farm, which Ms Marsh founded in Lindsell in 2020, attended several hearings to voice their opposition against her. Judge Williams said there was "considerable animosity" between all involved. Speaking to the BBC outside court, Ms Marsh said: "I hope that shuts my trolls up once and for all." Ms Marsh, who appeared in the ITV series Essex Wives in 2002, took the council to court after it did not allow her to adopt eight ring-tailed lemurs. She already cared for alpacas, emus and reptiles at the 3.5-acre (1.4ha) site and wept in court as the judge ruled in her favour. Judge Williams said: "There is no evidence she has mismanaged any animals or caused any animals harm." He criticised the council for providing "completely contradictory" views and going against reports stating Ms Marsh was a suitable keeper. The judge said Dr Stephen Philp, a vet hired by the authority to make a report, had relied on photographs sent to him of the farm, with no certainty they had not been edited. He also questioned why the authority said the lemurs would be too noisy, despite it admitting this was "impossible to measure". "The decision of Uttlesford District Council was wrong and, in light of evidence, it continues to be wrong," Judge Williams added. He said Ms Marsh was "passionate about the care and treatment of the animals in her care". Ms Marsh told the BBC she was "so happy and so grateful" with the ruling. "I'm just really sad that it has to come to this - It's a complete waste of time and effort," she said. "As the judge said, the decision was wrong in the first place. "I am just over the moon. He categorically proved in there I am a suitable person to rescue animals and that all I care about is the safety and health and wellbeing of the animals." An Uttlesford District Council spokesperson said councillors refused to allow Ms Marsh a wild animal licence after "careful consideration". They added: "Whilst we are disappointed with the ruling today, the court has taken a fresh look at it and reached a different conclusion, which we fully accept." Follow Essex news on BBC Sounds, Facebook, Instagram and X. Council feared backlash if Jodie Marsh kept lemurs Ex-model tells court why she took meerkat to pub Ex-model 'not strange' for sharing bed with meerkat Jodie Marsh: OnlyFans helps pay for my animal farm Uttlesford District Council Fripps Farm
Yahoo
7 days ago
- Yahoo
Ex-glamour model Jodie Marsh can keep lemurs, judge rules
Jodie Marsh, the former glamour model, can keep lemurs at her Essex animal sanctuary, a judge has ruled. The 46-year-old applied for a wild animal licence to keep eight ring-tailed lemurs at her Fripps Farm sanctuary in Lindsell, but it was refused by the council over noise complaints. District Judge Christopher Williams said he was persuaded 'the noise made by the lemurs is not a nuisance' in a ruling on Tuesday. He added: 'I am satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the decision by Uttlesford district council was wrong and continues to be wrong. I allow the appeal.' Ms Marsh, who wore a black blazer, black top and leggings, sat behind her lawyer at Chelmsford magistrates' court and cried during the ruling before thanking her lawyer and the judge. Uttlesford district council rejected Ms Marsh's application last year, but she told an earlier hearing that online trolls were behind much of the criticism of her animal sanctuary. At a previous hearing, video clips of screeching lemurs at a zoo were played to the court. The district council said Ms Marsh had been unable to provide a noise nuisance survey, but Paul Oakley, for Ms Marsh, said the council's 'conclusion lemurs were likely to contribute to the [noise)] impact' was 'speculation'. The court previously heard Ms Marsh had hand-reared a meerkat called Mabel and joked about 'taking her to the pub four times a week' on GB News. Uttlesford district council received 19 statements from locals opposing the licence, but the judge ruled that Ms Marsh 'genuinely cares for the animals' at her sanctuary. Summing up his findings, he said: 'Ms Marsh may not be popular in the surrounding area, but based on the evidence given to this court I conclude that she is a person who genuinely cares for the animals. 'Ms Marsh is not and has not been responsible for any harm or ill-treatment [of the animals in her care].' The court heard Essex Police, Essex Fire and Rescue Service and the RSPCA had not raised any concerns over Ms Marsh's application for a licence to keep the lemurs. The judge ruled that Ms Marsh's licence application should be granted, with conditions. He approved an application for costs of £19,641 to be paid to Ms Marsh by Uttlesford district council. Speaking outside court, Ms Marsh said: 'I'm just really sad that it has had to come to this. You know, it's a complete waste of time and effort and everything else. As the judge said, the decision was wrong in the first place. 'I am just over the moon. He categorically proved in there that I am a suitable person to rescue animals and that all I care about is the safety and health and wellbeing of the animals. And I hope that shuts my trolls up once and for all.' Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Yahoo
14-05-2025
- Yahoo
I'm disagreeable – and it's backed by science. Can I change my personality?
The other day, a friend decided to playfully name our individual roles within the group: planner, emotional support, and so on. I was the fault-finder – or, as she put it, 'the grumpy teenager' – who points out problems, but doesn't suggest alternatives. She was only kidding around, but she struck at an insecurity I have: that I'm unacceptably, intolerably negative. My first instinct is to stress-test ideas for potential flaws. This critical tendency serves me well professionally, and feels true to who I am. If I don't enjoy a film, for example, I don't swallow my opinion. But I sometimes worry that it's not much fun to be around, and may be working against me in my personal life. What I experience as an even, nuanced discussion about the new Bridget Jones film, or the works of Joan Didion, friends will sometimes remember as a heated debate. I wanted to know if I could objectively measure this 'grumpiness'. Personality testing is a notoriously inexact science (and in the case of the Myers-Briggs, scarcely a science at all). But the so-called 'big five' test is considered the most robust. It assesses agreeableness (including empathy, cooperativeness and social skills), openness to experience, conscientiousness, extraversion and neuroticism: together summarised as 'Ocean'. When I took a free big five test online, the results were as I'd suspected. My highest ranking was 81 points for openness; by contrast, I scored just 33 for agreeableness. Does that mean I'm doomed to be disagreeable? Or can I change who I am? *** Journalist Olga Khazan has bad news for me. 'Agreeableness is the toughest one to change,' she says. Khazan, a staff writer at the Atlantic magazine, should know. She spent an entire year trying to change her personality – documented in her new book Me, But Better. Having recently decided to start a family, Khazan recognised that her flinty, lonerish tendencies might not serve her well in motherhood. To increase her extraversion, she took improv comedy classes, forced herself to throw parties and attended MeetUp groups of like-minded strangers. In the process, she discovered that personality was not a consistent, immutable truth. 'You have certain proclivities, but it is flexible – you do evolve over time, and if you want to change, you can change even faster,' she says. Even genetic factors aren't impervious to the environment. Attending university, for example, can foster openness as it exposes you to new ideas, different people or opportunities to travel. Two factors seem particularly pertinent to tweaking your personality, Khazan goes on. 'One is mindset: 'I would like to be like this, and I believe I can change.'' The other is follow-through – 'you have to actually do the behaviours associated with the new personality trait'. To some extent, personality change is about faking it 'til you make it, Khazan says: there's no bigger secret than 'go out and do it, for the rest of your life'. With time and repetition, improv, socialising with strangers and otherwise extending herself became easier. 'It doesn't necessarily feel like eating your spinach and running a marathon every day – it starts to feel more like just what you would like to do.' It's not that there are bad personalities, or that you should aspire to a total overhaul, Khazan adds. But if we stick with easy, instinctual or habitual behaviours, we may sell ourselves short. 'We tend to, over time, fall into patterns and habits that could use an update – to put it mildly,' she says. Now a parent, Khazan's experiments in extraversion are paying off. 'I've had a totally different approach to motherhood than I think I [otherwise] would have,' she says. 'I've really made it a point to join new mom groups, reach out to other new moms and cultivate new-mom friends.' Before her personality-change project, she would probably 'have tried to white-knuckle it', Khazan says. ''I'm not a joiner,' 'I don't need these other people,' 'I'm not like other moms' – I would have had more of that mentality.' Such 'limiting beliefs' about ourselves are often at the root of our disagreeable behaviours, Khazan writes. When I voice all the flaws I identified in a film, for example, it may come from a desire to express myself authentically or prove that I was engaged. Cultivating curiosity for what my friends thought could be a small step towards developing agreeableness, suggests Khazan. 'You could still hang on to those thoughts, and that skill of analyzing things really closely, but you could also start to mention some things you did like, or get interested in why the other person liked it.' But every group dynamic is different, Khazan adds, kindly: some friends might be accepting of my critical tendencies, even appreciative. 'That part of you might not need to be changed … Not everyone is for everyone.' *** Often people mistake agreeableness for being a chump or a pushover – 'just doing whatever everyone else says', says Khazan. But it's more about social skills, including picking your moment and knowing your audience. It's arduous work but worthwhile, Khazan suggests. People who rank high in agreeableness are happier, less likely to get divorced, have a high quality of life and are more resilient to adversity. People who rank lowest are generally psychopaths. I scored 33 points, not 0 – but I know what direction to be moving in. Many people seek to change their personality to make themselves more likable or gain others' approval. But there's also a selfish case, Khazan says. Addressing blindspots or imbalances can help us achieve our goals, and feel happier and more fulfilled. At the very least, the attempt can make us more comfortable with being uncomfortable. Khazan quotes the writer Gretchen Rubin: ''Accept yourself, but also expect better of yourself' – I think that's a good philosophy.' More from Why am I like this:Trying to become just a bit more agreeable feels forced at first, just as Khazan warned. But with time and attention, I start to better attune to social interactions. In conversations I try to catch myself before launching into my opinion, to assess whether it was really solicited, and look for opportunities to ask questions instead of making yet another comment. After two weeks of gentle effort, I realise that when I start being negative for no real reason, I'm probably feeling over-tired, socially awkward or both. It's strange to notice that I ramp up my views in hopes of generating energy or engaging my conversational partner. This feels productive: I might not have changed my personality, but I've gained more grasp on its expression. If 'who we are' is fluid, perhaps I can think of cultivating self-awareness and positive change as growth. Call it 1% more agreeable – or at least less psychopathic. Me, But Better: The Science and Promise of Personality Change by Olga Khazan is out now