I'm finally catching up with the comments on this piece--forgive me for not jumping in earlier! Thanks for the great feedback, I'm glad this piece resonates with all of you, and the discussion so far has been very interesting. Some comments are very much in line with what I've thought about this issue, and some I hadn't thought about before, but are entirely relevant to the discussion (e.g., the ideas of individual/collective with respect to the Cold War). I think it was Dave who mentioned the idea of a "healthy" masculine/feminine--and yes indeed, there are very healthy expressions as well as toxic ones. I tend to shy away from overly-subjective expressions about either term, as it is easy from a feminist perspective to fall into the idea that the masculine is somehow entirely "negative". A colleague of mine may have summed up one of my main themes by suggesting our society is "yanged out"--a reference to yin/yang, where the emphasis has been too heavy on the active, rational masculine to the detriment of its opposite.
The Cold War reference makes me think of negative expressions of the collective--the loss of identity and individual freedom, which archetypically may be seen as being "swallowed up" by the Mother--the creator is also the devourer. Both capitalism and socialism have their benefits, when they are in proper balance. But capitalism out of balance is a very negative masculine (an "every man for himself" view), and socialism out of balance is a negative feminine (everyone lives for the state).
My related research looks at death beliefs and how they affect this topic--whether we see death in a collective sense (like the ancient Greeks--everyone goes to the same place regardless of how they lived) or an individual sense (salvation, immortality of the individual soul, ethical behavior affecting reward or punishment) also influences the way we think about "masculine" and "feminine". But I'll save that discussion for another piece.