You're likely to get dog-piled for that comment because it perpetuates a contemporary myth of "traditional men" rather than a historically grounded one. While

You're likely to get dog-piled for that comment because it perpetuates a contemporary myth of "traditional men" rather than a historically grounded one. While there have always been dudes living out in the bush alone, the "traditional" norm is that people spend most of their lives in a settled or roving community of some kind, and that community usually included some kind of sufficient support structure to help men (and others) make sense of their experiences and stay in tune with the community norms instead of just going feral. The shape of that support would vary, and may not always have been what we think of today as "friends", and certainly wouldn't have involved direct analogs to the emotion and psychology language we use today. But elders or shamans or pastors or imams or rabbis or parents or cousins or witchdoctors or etc etc etc were there and part of everyday life. Trying to live without that support now is charting a path into a dark unknown, not embodying some ancient rite of masculinity.