In August of 2025, I was contacted by a journalist who was writing an article about “mankeeping” and the role of the American Psychological Association’s (APA) Division 51 in publishing the idea in its journal Psychology of Men & Masculinities. Given my essay/podcast from June 2025, “Mankeeping – Academia’s Latest Attack on Men,” the journalist asked me to comment on the topic. The journalist sent me two quotes (not shown in full below) from the academic who published the “mankeeping” paper - Angelica Ferrara. From those two quotes, the journalist then asked me to respond to three questions. My responses to the journalist’s three questions are provided below verbatim. Also, before I answered the journalist’s three questions, I commented on two statements that were made by Ferrara in her two quotes.
The text that is bolded below represents the quotes from me that were included in the article by the journalist. The article is titled “How ‘Mankeeping’ Entered the Psychological Lexicon,” and it was published in The Dispatch on September 23, 2025. In the article, the journalist revealed that Ferrara declined to comment on my responses.
Hi [Journalist Name],
The quotes that you provided from Ferrara show how irresponsible many academics are in not thinking through their ideas and the impact that those ideas might have on society. From the quotes you provided, it seems like Ferrara is now doing a mix of backtracking and obfuscating about what she wrote in her paper.
Ferrara says: “there is nothing wrong with being your partner’s central emotional support”
This is disingenuous backtracking from Ferrara. She did not make such a statement in her paper nor did she discuss that women providing emotional care might make women feel good or derive purpose and meaning out of life (i.e., loving the partner who they value).
Ferrara says: “Mankeeping isn’t about scorekeeping or encouraging animosities between genders”
This is disingenuous backtracking from Ferrara. I suspect that many people have taken issue with her concept of “mankeeping” because it does encourage animosity between the genders. She establishes this animosity by claiming that something that is normal in relationships (i.e., a woman caring for her male partner) as part of the “patriarchy” and reinforcing “gender inequality.” Note that Ferrara explicitly refers to this emotional support provided by women as a “burden.” Ferrara will likely argue that she is only referring to the “disproportionate” or “unequal” or “unreciprocated” care that women provide to men. However, Ferrara is not entitled to make such a claim because she has not bothered to measure or discuss the unique type of care that men provide to women (e.g., physical protection, his salary, fixing things around the house, opening jars, etc.).
1-Do you feel the article frames men’s social needs and the help their partners provide in ways which stigmatize men from speaking up and asking for help?
The concept of “mankeeping” as presented by Ferrara is problematic because one’s partner is usually one’s key support person. So, she is essentially discouraging men from seeking emotional support from their female partners and from female partners providing such support. Moreover, Ferrara expresses hesitation toward men attending certain men’s spaces (i.e., spaces that are not feminist-approved). Thus, Ferrara does not want men attending spaces where men might receive support, understanding, and connection; yet, Ferrara also does not want men to depend on their partners for such support. So, where exactly does Ferrara want men to go? She does not provide a clear answer to this question, but she suggests that men are permitted to hang out with other men so long as that particular men’s space is feminist-approved.
Answering the question about where men should go for social connection was never really the intent of Ferrara’s paper. That is why she spent so little space on that subtopic. Ferrara’s paper was more about wanting to help women than men.
2-Does it approach the subject of male isolation/loneliness from a place of insensitivity?
Ferrara’s concept of “mankeeping” is not really intended to help men. It is intended to bring attention to a supposed issue for women. Ferrara talked about male isolation/loneliness in so far as doing so helped her to present a new way in which she believes women are disadvantaged.
3-Is it grounded in good research, or does it rely on studies lacking robustness?
Even if data show that women serve as emotional supporters or social facilitators for men, why does Ferrara automatically assume that this is a bad thing for women? Women have a greater propensity for working in care fields and fields that involve working with people (e.g., psychology, social work). Thus, many women might derive meaning and purpose out of life by being a support for the men in their lives. In the old days, this used to be called love. It was called love because many women understood that in exchange for the emotional and social care that they provided their partners, they received something in return (i.e., whatever she values her male partner for – e.g., physical protection, laughter, affection, money, their children). In other words, if a survey finds that women provide emotional care for the men in their lives, that should not be the end of the research. Researchers should then follow up with questions like: (a) does the woman enjoy providing this support and derive purpose and meaning in life from providing this care; and (b) to what extent do men participate in “womankeeping” and what unique characteristics are men bringing to their romantic relationships.
Because Ferrara appears to be interested only in women’s side of the story and framing the story as one of “patriarchy” and “gender inequality,” then future research on “mankeeping” is going to be rigged from the start. It will capture only the side of the story that Ferrara wants it to capture.
Regards,
James L. Nuzzo, PhD, CSCS
Related Content at The Nuzzo Letter
SUPPORT THE NUZZO LETTER
If you appreciated this content, please consider supporting The Nuzzo Letter with a one-time or recurring donation. Your support is greatly appreciated. It helps me to continue to work on independent research projects and fight for my evidence-based discourse. To donate, click the DonorBox logo. In two simple steps, you can donate using ApplePay, PayPal, or another service. Thank you!
"In the old days, this used to be called love. It was called love because many women understood that in exchange for the emotional and social care that they provided their partners, they received something in return".
In my marriage, and in the marriages of all my relatives and friends this is still the case.
It is the source of happiness and contentedness in life and the basis for all we do.
Ferrara et al appear to have a very distorted view of the realities of life.
I believe the ideal relationship is one based on mutual devotion. I have such a relationship. The idea that I have to suffer from "womankeeping", or that she has to deal with "mankeeping", is ridiculous. We are different, as man and woman. We both bring things to the table as a result of our biological sex, gender roles, etc. And those differences are celebrated.
Feminism is a fundamentally hateful ideology based on ridiculous, patently false assumptions. It pits women against men as if we are at war and women must win. No such war exists except in the minds of feminists.
I appreciate you calling out the blatantly sexist notion of "mankeeping."
Is it sexist? As always, reverse the sexes and imagine the results. Imagine a mainstream media outlet publishing an article about how men are tired of "womankeeping" and imagine the results - cancellation, street protests, government intervention.
Enough.