3) We should do away with what is currently known as ‘masculinity’ because it is a constricting entity that is exclusive to certain kinds of men and is socially constructed. Masculinity itself stems from the ideas of gender. Gender itself is socially constructed. Lorber states how, “gender is constantly created and re-created,” in society (Lorber 55). It is a widely believed concept and key feminist theory that social constructionism is how gender should be viewed; social constructionism being the notion that gender is a social construct and not related to genitalia, and the ‘correct’ execution of gender changes across time and space throughout different societies (Launius and Hassel 27). Fausto-Sterling comments saying that gender and …show more content…
If gender is a social construct, and by extension so is masculinity, how unnatural and constricting is masculinity if it is unable to change even as a social construct? Rebuttals to the notion that masculinity is biological is states as Kimmel explains how if masculinity were, “biological, it would be as natural as breathing or blinking,” and yet contemporary masculinity is as unnatural as gender (Kimmel 51). With the idea of masculinity being so narrow, it is fitting to say that, “masculinity is socially constructed and highly constrained in our society,” (Kirk and Okazawa-Rey 11). Kimmel describes the “Guy Code,” as fitting, “as comfortably as a straightjacket,” because not every man can fit into the contemporary version of masculinity (Kimmel 51). Kimmel explains how men fear not being thought of as “real men” by other men, and how so much of male culture is about men being scared of other men not thinking that they are masculine enough (Kimmel 47). And herein lies the heart of the issue. This notion must be thrown out. Men, as a result, learn from other men that they need to act and be a certain way (not feminine) in order for their masculinity to be validated by men. Masculinity is often seen as being the opposite of femininity in …show more content…
Piece by piece. The “’mask of masculinity,’” needs to be shed for all men (Kimmel 53). By looking at evidence that gender is social, as well as masculinity, it can be deduced that masculinity needs to be corrected to be more inclusive. My new definition is that masculinity should be like a wall (entirely exclusive from the connotations the word ‘wall’ now has as a result of Trump). A wall is sturdy and strong and, yes, built by humans. The current wall of masculinity is currently made of the same type of brick, with the same color and material, replicated over and over and over and over with no mortar in between these bricks. Other shapes and colors and types of bricks do not have room to become part of the wall of masculinity. The only reason this wall hasn’t fallen down yet is because the current bricks are so heavy and relentlessly stubborn and they have stayed up because people have not unified to push hard enough to knock the wall down. Once that happens, a new wall can be built. A fabulously colorful wall will be built. This new wall of masculinity will be able to accommodate all shapes and sizes of bricks. Bricks can be expressed, colored, shaped and decorated however they please. These bricks will be able to fit because mortar will be used in between these bricks to hold them together. The mortar is ‘human love, compassion, empathy and understanding’ because it is through those key traits that all kinds of men will be able to
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.
Jensen proposes three ideas on why masculinity must be terminated: masculinity is harmful for both men and women, men are surrendering their humanity by conforming to masculinity, and that all characteristics should simply be human characteristics, not male or female.
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
Aaron Devor’s essay “Becoming Members of Society: Learning the Social Meanings of Gender” describes how despite popular belief, gender and sex are not directly related and how social norms affect individual’s choice of gender. Devor‘s main argument is that gender is not determined by genitalia, but instead by the individual's own choices. Michael Kimmel’s essay “Masculinity as Homophobia” claims that gender equality is a positive thing for males and that social norms force men to act a certain way. Kimmel’s main argument is that men are always having to protect their masculinity in order to prevent themselves from appearing weak. Both authors present compelling arguments for both gender equality and for how social norms influence individuals’ gender choice. However, the two authors approach the same topic in different ways. Kimmel takes a more laid-back approach to the topic by using simple words and a conversational tone that relates to the casual gender sociologist. Devor writes a more sophisticated essay using complex terms and a more formal tone that relates to the serious sociologist that research gender studies.
Jensen provides evidence throughout the text for three assumptions on why masculinity must be terminated from pertaining to just males. It is proposed that masculinity is harmful for both men and women, that men are surrendering their humanity by conforming with masculinity, and
140). Hegemonic masculinity alludes to the stratification and interpretations of masculinity and, progressive systems of force, power, and acknowledgement among men, and amongst men and women (Connell, 1993). “International research has strongly confirmed the initial insight that gender orders construct multiple masculinities” (Connell, & Messerschmidt, 2005, p. 835). At any point in time, one type of masculinity can be socially elevated and more prominent in social settings (Connell, 1993). Hegemonic masculinity is the arrangement of gender stereotypes that encapsulates the current acknowledged response to the issue of the authenticity of patriarchy—which ensures the predominant position of men and the subordination of women (Connell, 1997). Furthermore, a considerable body of research shows that masculinities are not simply different but also subject to change” (Connell, & Messerschmidt, 2005, p. 835). “Hegemonic gender norms set expectations about what is “appropriate” for men and women” (Friedman, 2015, p. 147). For example, in our neoliberal capitalist culture men and women are bombarded with marketing that supports hegemonic masculinity and defines what being a man or woman should look like. “Hegemonic masculinity was understood as the pattern of practice (i.e., things done, not just a set of role expectations or an identity) that
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
Masculinity is described as possession of attributes considered typical of a man. Hegemonic masculinity is a form of masculine character with cultural idealism and emphasis that connects masculinity to competitiveness, toughness, and women subordination. Masculinity hegemonic is the enforcement of male dominion over a society. Masculine ideology dates back to the time of agrarian and the industrial revolution in Europe when survival compelled men to leave their homesteads to work in industries to earn a living for their families while women remained at home to take care of family affairs (Good and Sherrod 210). Women did not work in industries then because industrial labor was considered too physical beyond their capacity. This led to definition of roles which placated the position of men in a society while condemning women as mere subordinates who cannot do without men. The critics of gender stereotypes in America describe the following five hegemonic features of masculinity: frontiersman ship, heterosexuality, occupational achievement, familial patriarchy, and physical force and control (Trujillo 4). The advent of the 20th century led to sweeping changes in American masculinity.
‘Women and men are different. Equal treatment of men and women does not result in equal outcomes.’ (Corsten Report, 16: 2007) According to Covington and Bloom (2003) numerous feminist writers have demonstrated and documented the patriarchal nature of our society and the variety of ways in which the patriarchal values serve masculine needs. ‘Despite claims to the contrary, masculinist epistemologies are built upon values that promote masculine needs and desires, making all others invisible’ (Kaschak, 11: 1992).
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.
Masculinity is a subject that has been debated in our society for quite some time. Many wonder what it means to be masculine, as it is difficult to define this one –sided term. Pairing this already controversial term with “feminist studies” can bring about some thought - provoking conversation. Feminist studies of men have been around for many years with regards to the feminist movement. It seeks to create gradual improvements to society through its main principle of modifying the ways in which everyone views what it means to be a man. Feminist studies of men bring forth the discussion of hegemonic masculinity; how this contributes to the gender hierarchy, the radicalized glass escalator and ultimately the faults of this theory.
In our society today, the view of Masculinity has changed a lot where it almost
Masculinity and femininity are two terms, which have been interpreted differently throughout history. Both the males and the females have responsibilities and duties but these duties differ based on one’s gender. Gender has played a prodigious role in the economy, politics, and the society. Everyone starts making interpretations of the strengths and weaknesses based on one’s gender. These interpretations are not always based on his or her ability but is usually based on his or her gender. Males tend to be judged as extremely strong and unfashionable in terms of appearance. Whereas, females are judged as expensive and very fashionable. Males and females both differ in their abilities and their enjoyments. Fashion, entertainment, and strength are three topics, which are used to define masculinity and femininity in the 21st century.