Hegemonic Masculinity: Is It Fragile?

Society’s current structure of masculinity is unforgiving in form. It cuts out other forms of masculinity, it physically and mentally demanding, and its ill effects extend far beyond the men it infuses itself in. Yet what would we do if we were given other options for masculinity, ones that allowed for unique blends of attitudes and perceptions? Looking in to the lives of homeless men we can see the forced strategies which create new masculine codes created for the adaption against patriarchal pressures. They are made out of survival need to circumnavigate the painful mental and physical reality that is only made worse by harsh masculine standards. Yet these new masculinities hold out a form of hopefulness for society. They offer up new discussion to what it means to be a man, the potential for change, and what we can expect from changes in male identity over time. Using what we learn from the disadvantaged, we can hope to improve the lives of people, although the process will take time, effort, and careful mediation.

Traditionally, the notion of “masculinity” has been tied to physical attributes of men: conceived as biologically determined, masculinity was considered a “fact of nature” which legitimized and perpetuated male power (Saco 1992:23; Stibbe 2004:32). However,

Hegemonic Masculinity is basically the idea of male dominance. This is important to American Culture because, it helps to explain why males put themselves higher than females. In the American culture it is easy to see that males have more power in the deciding aspects. One of the ways to see this is in the government. If you look at the United States government you would see that the majority of representatives are males. Additionally, if you look at the list of presidents you would see that they have all been males. This goes to show that the male dominance is a real thing in terms of a glance.

In this paper I will explore the many facets of masculinity and demonstrate how certain beliefs pertaining to it are perpetuated in our society. I will also uncover many of the contradictions between society's assigned definition of

The idea that manhood represents a fixed, inevitable; some natural state of being is a myth. It is a twist in its origin: Men created the concept of “masculinity” in order to cage himself in it. What became a norm for “masculinity” in a society is largely a made cultural frame, not something a male’s shared trait. One way to understand the

This masculinity is socially and culturally endorsed by the society (as noted by Robyn and Wendy) and its granted men benefit in terms of public status and privileges. A fundamental elements of hegemonic masculinity is that women are subordinate to men. Though it is not all men that practice this, but they all benefit from it. This masculinity promote values in men such as courage, inner strength, aggression toughness in mind and body and self reliance

Showing your humanity through raw emotions used to be seen as proof of a person’s sincerity, honesty, and integrity. Something happened in the 20th century, women became the picture of teary-eyed fragility and the tearless, aggressive male became the ideal of masculinity. Media messages, commercials, and television shows stopped portraying men as responsible, competent, and compassionate husbands, sons, and fathers, instead they consist of idiotic or misogynistic archetypes. When men are portrayed as sensitive humans, it is largely under the caveat of being gay. As stated in A New Vision of Masculinity, there is still little worse than being mistaken for a homosexual (Cooper, 2016).

To understand either work’s take on hegemonic masculinity, it is important to identify masculinity as a gendered hegemony. In her definition of gender, Judith Halberstam notes that gender is socially systematized, performed, and reproduced in cultures, institutions, and individual identities (Burgett, Bruce, and Hendler, 116). In a like manner, in her article on gendered violence, Mimi Schippers notes R.W. Connell’s research on masculinity to expand this definition, implying that masculinity is central to gender relations. In short, Connell defined masculinity as “simultaneously a place in gender relations, the practices through which men and women engage… in gender, and the effects of these practices on bodily experience, personality, and culture” (Schippers, 86). Here, masculinity is classified as a social position, the set and practice

Masculinity is associated with the biological male sex but Marc Feigen Fasteau says” the male stereotype makes masculinity not just a fact of biology but something that must be proved and re-proved, a continual quest for an ever-receding Holy Grail.” This shows that toxic masculinity requires men to prove and reprove their masculinity by conforming to society’s ideologies and

The notion of hegemonic masculinity has altered the field of gender studies and many academic arenas. An idea popularized by R.W. Connell, hegemonic masculinity has played an integral role in the emotional development of American men, articulating the impact that this societal construction has had on the concept of American masculinity. It is a contested topic, yet the impacts that it has in terms of sexuality, struggles for power and political leadership, and gender identities are valid (Connell 830). Although difficult to fully achieve, it acts as a guiding force for the stereotypically masculine. Hegemonic masculinity assumes the subordination of all other forms of masculinity, placing it at the top of the social hierarchy. At the same time, the idea of hegemonic masculinity has served as a bridge between the growing field of men’s’ studies and female studies (Connell 829). Several authors share the premise that men in American society conform to the standards of the social construct of hegemonic 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

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

According to Anthony Clare the heart of the masculinity crisis lies within the understanding of “the private and public sphere, the intimate and the impersonal, the emotional and the irrational” (Clare, 2000:212). Both men and women are both confined to their spaces and the line between the two has somewhat been blurred, thus resulting in a crisis. The way in which this line is blurred is by masculinity becoming more feminized. There have been two major shifts in masculinity over

There are many existing literatures on women and weightlifting. This research will be focusing on how hegemonic masculinity has set ideas of gender roles and how these women challenge the social discourse that they face being a muscular or look ‘manly’.

In-depth interviews and participant observation that were conducted confirm that hegemonic masculinity exists inside rock genre. There are five dimensions of hegemonic masculinity that will be explained in this study. First, I will discuss about hegemonic masculinity as a tool to ascertain male domination as previously said by Connell (1987) and Schippers (2002) that takes form in women’s interest on rock music. This domination renders masculinity as the real rock fan identity (Eastman, 2012). Masculine identity determined by the men causes men to reject or question women who happen to be in that terrain (Bourdieu, 2001; Yates, 2014). Rejection against women is not only done by men, but even women do so through judgment towards women who do not display masculinity (Howe & Friedman, 2014). Lastly, women rock fans also concur to this domination (Gramsci in Adams & Dickey, 2000). This consent is given by justifying sexist lyrics and continuing