Analysis Of Dave Barry 's ' Guys Vs. Men '

Have you ever wondered why all men act the same? In the reading “Bros Before Hos: The Guy Code”, Michael Kimmel critics what it means to be a man and the “Guy Code” they are expected to follow. According to Kimmel, masculinity is a problematic social construct that invokes behaviors that men tend to follow unconsciously. The unconscious behaviors that men tend to follow is know as the “Guy Code” that is passed down to them when they were young. Kimmel informs the audience, mainly women about the negative effects inflicted upon men due to following the “Guy Code”. Kimmel uses pathos and logos very effectively to paint an image of why men act the way they do and how it hurts them.

What is it that drives commercials towards their target audience? Commercials can be aimed toward certain age, race, along with certain gender groups. Pop culture has influenced minority groups and shed light on women 's rights or so it may seem. Lisa Shaffer a fellow student feels otherwise and believes that Pop culture has only defended traditional values and does little to challenge those who already have power . Commercials bring in gender norms and in Steve Craig’s article, “Men’s Men and Women’s Women” he speaks on four particular TV ads directed towards male and female audiences. Interestingly enough these tv ads deliver a false image of the opposite sex to the audience catering to their preferences. It is the image of what the audience wants to see that appeals to them. This is all in an attempt to sell products and take advantage of our desires and anxieties. Craig shows how commercials bring gender norms that produce the stigmas of a man’s man and a woman’s woman, which makes it apparent that he would agree with Shaffer because it promotes an old way of thinking.

In the article “Bros before Hos: The Guy Code”, by Michael Kimmel he writes about many different standards and ideals that young men must live up to, to be accepted in today’s society. The article talks about genders, at different ages sixteen to twenty six and how it is directed towards anyone that wants to know more about genders and how it can relate to masculinity and men. It was also based off of a book that he had written in the late two- thousands. According to (Kimmel) young men must live and abide, by a set of rules known as the spectacular “Guy Code”. The “Guy Code” was created to help understand why young men feel and act the way they do, and how masculinity may be perceived in their cultures. The code has been instilled into many young men around the world by their peers, family, and media at the age of four, or maybe even when a child has developed somewhat of a understanding. Being taught how to be masculine at a very young age is important to teach your child, it helps them discover who they are as a person, and who they are supposed to be perceived as, and how to find their inner virility as a young male. Kimmel also uses exemplification to help explain how the “Guy Code” is a collection of attitudes, values, and many traits that are together to help compose what it really means to be a man. The code lets us know how men are not suppose to cry, and how they are not suppose to be or act like sissies. But how men must be very

Hatfield states, “Fictional television can be seen either as an influence on, or reflection of, culture—the shared norms, values, and beliefs held by a society. Yet many groups exist within a society and multiple value systems may be at play” (p.530). On television and in movies there are very few forms of masculinity shown. The majority of male masculinity usually ranges from gun toting hard asses, to a playboy, to the effeminate man that is often there for comic relief. Men in society do not always fit into these three categories. Masculinity is a much more complex and complicated identity to develop. There are shows like 24 where the main character, Jack Bauer, is a governmental agent going around the world in twenty-four hours to stop terrorism. He is unattached emotionally and highly dangerous. This does not represent a real form of masculinity that we have in today’s culture. There are men that probably do fit into the same category as the fictional character, but they are very unlike the average males in society today. A second common type of masculinity shown on television is the playboy style masculinity: men that have multiple sexual partners and seem to have the ultimate bachelor lifestyle with no worries or concerns. According to Ward, Merriwether, and Caruthers “ because men do not live in isolation, their beliefs about masculinity are likely to influence not only

Dave Barry is a Pulitzer Prize-winning humorist whose syndicated column appears in more than 500 newspapers. Barry’s published works, totaling more than 25, include ‘Stay Fit and Healthy until You’re Dead’ (1985), ‘Dave Barry Hits Below the Beltway’ (2001), and ‘Dave Barry’s Complete Guide to Guys: A Fairly Short Book’ (1995). The preface to Barry’s book ‘Dave Barry’s Complete Guide to Guys: A Fairly Short Book’, ‘Guys vs. Men’, is his perspective on the difference between “Guys” and “Men.” While both words no doubt bring to mind an image of a human male, they are very different in there description of that male. First, guys like to buy “neat” things that they don’t really need. Also, guys like a really pointless challenge. Last, but not

In all, I thought All The President’s Men was a great tool to learn more about the Watergate scandal and the Nixon administration. I liked the movie because it told the story as a narrative, rather than just listing facts. Woodward and Bernstein did a great job of revealing the scenario through their involvement with mysterious informant, Deep Throat, as well as detailing the Nixon administration’s corruption. I would recommend that anyone watch All The President’s Men because it adeptly portrays the media’s ability to influence politics and serve as a watchdog for the government. All The President’s Men is a great historical account of the Watergate break-in and the scandals that ensued.

A short essay “ Guys vs. “Men” written by Dave Barry, presents Dave’s perception on the difference between “Guys” and “Men”. Dave presents his essay in a comical way that generalizes the “men” vs. “guys” and also gender biased generalization. Dave argues that men hold too much of responsibilities and many expectations in which guys do not and they live happier life. One of the methods he uses to support his argument is a comparison. Other method he uses is the description of how he views “men” vs. “guys” and gives his perspective. And the last method he uses to further his argument is the use of hyperbole, exaggeration through out the essay.

In the very first line of his essay, Barry uses a metaphor to convince his audience of the truth behind men’s stereotypical role in the kitchen. When addressing controversial topics such as gender roles, there are two approaches that can be taken: beat around the issue until the stance is implied or to just outright state the position; Barry opts for the second approach, choosing to address his topic head on. Right off the bat, Barry breaks the ice around gender stereotypes by blatantly stating that “men are still basically scum when it comes to helping out in the kitchen.” The shocking honesty of Barry’s introduction establishes the humorous tone to be built upon throughout the rest of his essay. Not only does this approach establish his humorous tone, but it also grabs his female audience’s attention and lightens the mood around men’s role in the kitchen. Barry’s female audience feels a sense of pride about their superiority in the kitchen because he implies their leadership in this domain by bashing the usefulness making fun of the uselessness of men. Consequently, his audience is more willing to listen and accept his positions throughout the rest of his essay because he chose to directly approach them from the beginning instead of talking around the issue.

Imagine the world is invaded by aliens. Some of them eat humans, some live among humans, and others live outside of our world. You don’t know it, but many of the people who have shaped our lives and our culture aren’t even human themselves. This is the world of the 1997 film Men in Black, directed by Barry Sonnenfeld. Men in Black is a sci-fi comedy about a group of enforcement agents defending and regulating aliens from invading Earth. But if you take their costume off, Men In Black can be seen as far more than a comedy about space aliens. Under the lens of postcolonial criticism, the film reveals itself to be a veiled, political commentary on immigration. A lens is a way for us to look at a piece of literature in a whole new depiction that we may not have thought of the first time we had read or watched a piece of literature. Through the postcolonial lens, I can see the movie as a biased contrast between the immigrants and the immigration police. Interpreting the movie through this lens allows me to see that the Men in Black are the immigration police, and are considered to be the protagonists of the film. On the other hand, the aliens, or immigrants when looking through the lens, are the antagonists of the movie; The Men in Black protect the US from bad aliens, giving immigration police the positive reinforcement of the brutal evictions immigrants received in the 90s.

Kimmel’s Bros Before Hos: The Guy Code investigates the complicated social environment in which young males are anticipated to prepare for manhood based upon considerable sociological inquiries conducted from Kimmel himself. His main argument institutes what was formerly a comparatively definite and direct transition for males to experience boyhood to manhood has become much more perplexing and sophisticated. In his revealing chapter, Bros Before Hos: The Guy Code, Michael S. Kimmel examines and determines the adversities young men endure through daily, from the standards society place upon them in deeming what a man is. These principles dictate how masculinity is sown into a man from the anxiety of being ostracized as well as being perceived a feeble individual instead of naturally behaving in this manner. In addition, through Kimmel’s analysis on both the causes and the effects of this extended state of adolescence, they can be particularly influential to male connotations for connections between family members, fellow adults and peers, and personal achievements.

In Michael Kimmel’s non-fiction academic book chapter: “Bros Before Hos: The Guycode” is an excerpt from his critically acclaimed book Guyland released in 2008, that addresses the ideals and fundamentals of where masculinity stems from and society’s direct effect on young men and the creation of the modern day masculine male. Michael Kimmel’s combination of credible resources, informative personal research, and real-life personal narratives that help to establish and support his strong and feasible argument, of societies effect on male masculinity, that readers alike can relate to and understand.

In Guyland, Michael Kimmel chronicles the journey of young males and the issues they face while trying to exert their masculinity and prove themselves to their peers. Based on interactions among North American males between the ages of 16 and 26, Kimmel has found that at an age where young men had previously prepped for a life of work and committed relationships, they are now living in “Guyland” where they spend their time drinking, playing video games, and having immature relations with women. Kimmel explains that these young men are “frighteningly dependent on peer culture” and “desperate to prove their masculinity in the eyes of other boys.” (30) These young men live in constant fear that they will not measure up to the ideals of

What makes a man, a “man”? Is it how much money he makes? The car he drives? The life he lives? Or, the amount of “Masculinity” that he shows? These are some of the stereotypical question that becomes the ideas of what men should have or strive to achieve. In Post-Princess Models of Gender: The New Man in Disney/Pixar by Ken Gillam and Shannon R. Wooden, they bring forth the ideas/thought of what the characteristic of men should be, by the overly influential control Disney and Pixar have on us and our future generation. Similar to what Matthew Immergut, in his article Manscaping: The Tangle of Nature, Culture and the Male Body, they both share ideas on the thought of man. The argument addressed in the question is either the way we view masculinity should be changed or not to determine us as men. In which the answer is, yes it should. Male or man, is a gender identity which show/ categorize, us separate from our female counterpart, Female or woman. But then are criticized on their place a “males” by getting in situation the emasculate them. Just because men independent or allowing for help, either overly sensitive or possess a lack of emotion, or whether or not “he” shaves his body or not should deter what the worlds thought on his masculinity

If a girl begins to demonstrate some signs of male characteristics, she is referred to as a ‘tom-boy’. It is like a taboo to show such kinds of signs in a girl. On the other hand, if a male does not have masculine features, he is seen as an outcast. All of these perceptions are obtained from the media, and especially televisions and movies. According to Mehta and Hay (2005), media houses have for a long time helped to construct and reinforce stereotypical ideas about masculinity and men. From what is portrayed in the media, it is possible for people to dismiss others on the basis of whether they have masculinity or are feminine (Ferrey, 2008).

Masculinity, a seemingly simple concept. Yet, when examined more closely, it is clear that masculinity is constantly changing in its definition as well as in its most basic essence. Throughout the years, one can see this evolution firsthand by looking back at the men who have been portrayed in popular media in the United States of America. From the suave Don Draper types of the 1950s to the more casual, educated, and easygoing men- with perfectly chiseled abs, of course- that are portrayed in media today, the difference is clear. This drastic, yet unsurprising, shift in ideals, as well as the exponential increase of media consumed every day, has led to a change in how “masculinity” is perceived, as well as how it is enforced by society in the modern day. Alarmingly, this trend has led to the birth of so-called “toxic masculinity”, a bastardization of the original ideas behind masculinity which has created an enormous, detrimental effect on society as a whole. As defined in the article The Difference Between Toxic Masculinity and Being a Man, toxic masculinity is “manhood as defined by violence, sex, status, and aggression. It’s the cultural ideal of manliness, where strength is everything… where sex and brutality are yardsticks by which men are measured,” (O’Malley) This is a clearly displayed truth, and it’s astounding to see how even from a young age boys are taught not to show emotions other than anger, conditioned to believe that being “like a girl” is the worst possible