Masculinity: An Artificial Journey from Boyhood to Fatherhood.
The initial focus of my research was that of analysing the current theories behind what is the social ‘make-up’ of the modern man, and its portrayal within society. This allows for analysis to be made on whether the theory is persuasive, and ultimately, whether masculinity is a social construct. Connel and Messerschmidt outline the theory of hegemonic masculinity. Brooks sets the psychological dimensions of ones ‘manhood’, whilst Shirazi and Mosse contrast the creation of men and their actions within the modern world.
Connell, R. W., and J. W. Messerschmidt. "Hegemonic Masculinity: Rethinking The Concept." Gender And Society 19.6 (2005): 829-859. British Library Document Supply
…show more content…
Connel highlights the ‘unitary’ perspective that men are analyzed within due to the application of this theory within research of education, criminology and professional practices. It is argued that this theory has shaped ‘the selectiveness of images in mass media’ in regards to how masculinity is portrayed within wider society. This article is useful in assisting to understand the scope within which males are seen in academic and societal spheres.
Brooks, Gary R., and William B. Elder. "History and Future of the Psychology of Men and Masculinities." APA Handbook of Men and Masculinities. 3-21. Washington, DC, US: American Psychological Association, 2016. PsycBOOKS. Web. 21 Mar. 2016.
Brooks argues that the traits that one would typically associate with that of being male are instilled within those of the male sex through specific cultures’ ideas of what it the norm. This social learning affects the life experiences and choices males make from birth to fatherhood, and furthers the dual patriarchal society (whereby men exert power over women and other men) we exist within. This article is useful as it emphasizes the importance of the acquisition of traits through the observation of role models, which in turn strengthens the claim that masculinity is a social construct and not biologically
…show more content…
The study reveals that within the confines of the study, there is an innate belief within the education system, that ‘boys are wild’, and as such, an invisible framework exists with which to combat this seemingly innate nature. Efforts to curb this ‘wildness’, through corporal punishment, then shape the Jordanian boys’ actions. This article is limited in that it focuses on a specific culture, and if used to support Brooks’ claims, must be used in conjunction with other
Good afternoon, today I will be discussing the perceptions of masculinity and the need to take responsibility for one’s own actions.
The topics that Joe Ehrmann uses as framework for his Building Men for Others program are quite intriguing and make you really question masculinity. The first topic, rejecting false masculinity, can be interpreted a few different ways. In the book, it states: “As young boys, we’re told to be men, or to act like men” soon followed with “we’ve got all these parents say ‘be a man’ to boys that have no concept of what that means. I completely agree with the statement of Joe Ehrmann and often question the definition of ‘being a man’. Many boys and men will reject the idea of a man being anything other than being big and strong or having power.
In Kimmel’s essay “’Bros Before Hos’: The Guy Code” he argues that the influence of society on masculinity is equal to or greater than biological influences on masculinity. In the essay, Kimmel uses various surveys and interviews to validate his argument. He points to peers, coaches, and family members as the people most likely to influence the development of a man’s masculinity. When a man has his manliness questioned, he immediately makes the decision never to say or do whatever caused him to be called a wimp, or unmanly. Kimmel’s argument is somewhat effective because the readers get firsthand accounts from the interviewees but the author does not provide any statistics to support his argument.
In the essay, “The High Cost of Manliness,” writer Robert Jensen discusses the harmful effects of having male specific characteristics, such as masculinity. Jensen realizes that men’s actions and ways of living are judged based upon the characteristic of being manly. He argues that there is no valid reason to have characteristics associated with being male. Society has created the notion that masculinity is the characteristic that defines males as males.
The concept of masculinity is considered as the qualities and characteristics of a man, typical what is appropriate to a man. In this article, A Community Psychology of Men and Masculinity: Historical and Conceptual Review, The author Eric S. Mankowski and Kenneth I. Maton, analyze four main themes: "Men as gendered beings, the privilege and damage of being a masculine man, men as a privileged group, and men’s power and subjective powerlessness. The second and fourth themes are described as
Why do so many guys seem stuck between adolescence and adulthood? Guys might not completely buy into the negative parts of their atmosphere, but because it’s the group norm, they act accordingly. So if the reverse can be done, I think that can be a redeeming aspect of Guyland. In describing the young male adult culture, the author talks about there being some redeeming qualities. They’ve seen mistakes their parents have made, and they’re trying to account for that. There certainly is a negative aspect of guys not growing up in college or post-college. But there is the positive aspect: we are taking more time to think about what we want to do, and make sure that what we are doing is something we want, something we can do well. In their late
Over time, the image of men has changed. This is due mostly to the relaxation of rigid stereotypical roles of the two genders. In different pieces of literature, however, men have been presented as the traditional dominate figure, the provider and rule maker or non-traditional figure that is almost useless and unimportant unless needed for sexual intercourse. This dramatic difference can either perpetuate the already existing stereotype or challenge it. Regardless of the differences, both seem to put men into a negative connotation.
Manhood had not always existed; it was created through culture. Depending on the era, masculinity claimed a different meaning. But in all of its wandering definitions, it consistently contains opposition to a set of “others,” meaning racial and sexual minorities. (pp.45) One of the first definitions was the Marketplace Man, where capitalism revolved around his success in power, wealth, and status. A man devoted himself to his work and family came second. Although this is one of the first standing definitions, it still finds its spot in today’s definition, where masculinity consists of having a high paying job, an attractive young wife, and
She taught at universities both in Australia and the United States. Connell highly disagreed that the ideas about what established masculinity are ethically definite. In other words, masculinity is important to whom is referred to. For example, “if women are seen as weak, passive and emotional, then men are supposed to be strong, aggressive, and rational” (Seidman, 221). Additionally, masculinity is based on how people interact with each other in which correlates with their race, class, and sexuality. With this said, Connell said, “to recognize diversity in masculinity: relations of alliance, dominance and subordination… This is a gender politics within masculinity” (Seidman, 223). To point out Connell’s theorizing masculinity, she believes that diversity defines masculinity has its own relationships with authorities. In our text, Seidman gave a brief example of how the roles carry out to the social authority such as President, Senator, CEO, General, media executive, or surgeon. It is stated that while there are many senators, executives, or CEOs who are women, it is definite identify as masculinity because people think those high authorities is only for a male role. In our text, Connell has mentioned that “every society has a dominant or a “hegemonic” type of masculinity” (223). This means that she believes men has the power or control type of their masculinity in the
The movie, Tough Guise: Violence, Media and the Crisis in Masculinity produced by Jackson Katz and Jeremy Earp, deconstructs the concepts that create the social constructs of masculinity. Masculinity, a set of behaviors, roles, and attributes correlating to men, is earned, not given (Conley 190). Starting from television shows to children’s toys, the idea of masculinity has infiltrated their minds starting at a young age. Moreover, the concept of masculinity has physical attributes, such as muscles, a deep voice, and be able to protect themselves. Masculinity, for boys of any races, socioeconomic classes, or ethnicity, has grown up with the same stereotypical image of what a man should entail. Since many media outlets show that a form of masculinity
... E Glenn, and Nancy B Sherrod. The psychology of men and masculinity:Research status and future directions. New York: John Wiley and sons, 2001.
In the views of Micheal Kimmel “hegemonic masculinity” is a socially constructed process where men are pressured by social norms of masculine ideals to perform behaviors of a “true man” and its influence on young male’s growth. It is the ideology that being a man with power and expressing control over women is a dominant factor of being a biological male. The structure of masculinity was developed within the 18th to 19th century, as men who owned property and provided for his family with strength related work environments was the perfect example of being a generic “American man.” Kimmel introduces Marketplace Manhood and its relation to American men. He states, “Marketplace Masculinity describes the normative definition of American masculinity.
Prior to the 1970s when the theme of gender issues was still quite foreign, the societal norm forced female conformity to male determined standards because “this is a man’s world” (Kerr 406). The patriarchal society painted the image of both men and women accordingly to man’s approach of societal standards that include the defining features of manhood that consist of “gentil...
The "Femininity/Masculinity" Encyclopedia of Sociology. New York: Macmillan, n.d. 1-21. Web.
The concept of hegemonic masculinity, as described by R. W. Connell, is becoming more applicable than ever, namely in the world of sport. This notion was developed nearly twenty-five years ago, yet remains highly influential in the social construction of gender roles. In current Western societies, there is an automatic assumption that women involved in sports are all lesbians, and men posses more masculine traits than one who is not involved in sports. This double standard emphasizes the inequalities within the athletic community. The emphasis on masculinity brings forth different consequences for men and women, where men are regarded as strong and powerful, while women are intrinsically seen as more masculine (Baks & Malecek,