What is Masculinity?

Just what is masculinity? In general? A dictionary definition states that masculinity is 'possessing qualities or characteristics considered typical of or appropriate to a man, The term can be used to describe any human, animal or object that has the quality of being masculine. When masculine is used to describe men, it can degrees of comparison- more masculine, most masculine.'

I guess you are wondering why I provided this definition. I want to discuss and analyse this using some seminal critics and texts to provide that the definition from the dictionary is partly right and partly wrong.

Firstly, I do believe that qualities and characteristics are given to men that are to be expected. For example, men are supposed to be the 'breadwinner' of the family and go out and provide for the family, while also protecting their offspring from any harm. However, you could argue that this changes during the Second World War when men were expected to fight in the army in France/Germany or Russia which left the men unable to provide for their family.

From this, women who during this period were expected to look after the home and the family had to fill in the gaps but also had to work in order to support the war effort. This would seem to have resulted in a change into how masculinity was viewed within the private and social spheres. For example my dissertation supervisor (Ben Brabon) and Stephanie Genz in their book Postfeminism:Cultural Texts and Theories argue that due to the changes and freedoms that women had seem to have changed how masculinity is viewed.

Obviously, during the 1960's, the emergence of Feminism seemed to critique and challenge concepts and views surrounding masculinity but also seem to highlight just how much power men had within social and private spheres. [Don't get me wrong, I'm not attacking feminism, I'm just saying that many critics seem to believe that this emphasises the strong social and private powers that masculinity can have. ] Feminism as a whole during this period is a collection of movements that were aimed at defining, establishing and defending political, economic and social rights and equal opportunities for women on the same EQUAL basis as men.

Now, critics have argued that within this period, Feminism seems to have scared alot of men due to the 'liberation' aspect being a part of the movement. As this 'liberation' would effect how masculinity and men's masculinities in particular are seen and analysed. As firstly, if women stick to the 'expected' traditions imposed on them, they would be looking after the family and home and dependant on the husband. But if they choose not to, they would be seen as 'dangerous' by men as they could go into education, work or, OR not have children. If the latter was not provided by a women, this would in the private and public spheres seem to impact on a man's masculinity as he has NOT been able to do what he should be able to do. Which is partly wrong as I believe it should be an individual’s choice to choose if they would like a career and children or just a career or children individually or not at all.

As masculinity goes through 70's and 80's, it seems that masculinity seems to be entering into chartered waters. As we go into the 80's, it would seem that masculinity within the eyes of the media seems to be under scrunity under public figures such as Freddie Mercury. We all know Freddie Mercury as the leader singer from Queen yes, but during the 80's, Freddie came out to the public and the media as an openly gay man. Which is great... not in the eyes of the media. Due to the scandal surrounding Homosexuality both publically, socially and legally under the Thatcher government and also an HIV/AIDS scares, this would seem to put masculinity under the public eye and reinforce all the 'expected' traditions and assumptions of what men should be.

Combined with this, the publication of Backlash by Susan Fauldi and also Iron John by Robert Fly seem to tackle what it means to be a man and what is expected of them. Backlash argues for the existence of a media driven 'backlash' against the advances of Feminism of the 1970's. She then extends this idea further to suggest that this is the sources of the problems that are showing within women in the late 1980's. From reading this book, it would seem that the media are fuelling this and would seem to based it without reliable and proofworthy evidence. This would seem to generate a 'clash' between masculinity and feminism firstly but secondly, seems to tackle and challenge the 'expected' assumptions for women but also men too.

Iron John argues that men need to find lessons from the past and look at previous generations of men in order to understand the cultural, political and personal context facing them within this period. Bly uses traditional concepts such as battles and history to illustrate this point. This would seem to reinforce the power and allusive history that men have but also it would seem to suggest that men are having a crisis within themselves....

Which leads me to the 1990's. A period within 60 years that masculinity seems to bear the brunt of all problems... well not like world peace or anything.... It would seem that within the 1990's masculinity seems to be according to Managan to be 'in a constant crisis and that masculinity itself is crisis'. Managan raises an interesting point. Masculinity could be seen as a 'crisis' as due to the aftermath of the Thatcher government (really don't like her btw), men didn't know what was expected of them as many men lost their jobs and had to rely on the public benefit system in order to support their offspring which seems to be explored in the male confessional novel genre by writers such as Nick Hornby, Mike Gayle etc.

However, you could say that the female confessional novels by writers such as Helen Fielding seem to also fuel the crisis surrounding masculinity. As Bridget Jones, seems to project an 'fantasy' of what her man should be... 'no emotional fuckwits or perverts' etc. Meanwhile, Bret Easton Ellis protrays masculinity within American Pyscho has in a crisis. Patrick Bateman seems to be a typical American man, working in Wall Street, loads of money and material things. But seems to have problems in his relationships with women (not being in a committed relationship and using prostitutes), and also issues surrounding his relationship with his father. But yet goes out and kills people for the fun of it. Why? Just why?

So what is masculinity? Is it just showing that you are male? is it showing that you can produce children? Is it showing you can be in a committed relationship? Is it providing for your offspring?

Hopefully, I'll be tackling these questions when commentating further on some critical texts and books that demonstrate or tackle what it means to be a man.

I hope I haven't bored you too much.

Until next time Jonesy x