Description of Masculinities Essay

Masculinities imply different versions of describing manly composure and behaviour of both men and women. For three decades, several studies have been carried out in an attempt to come up with a clearer description of ‘masculinities,’ to no avail. Notably, perceptions of masculinity are evolving over time and among as well as within societies, resulting in an array of masculinities.

Whereas some researchers believe masculinities represent various patterns of behaviour inclined toward the roles that men play in the society, others concur that masculinities involve more than just men: that women can also show ‘masculinity’ if their actions and achievements are analogous to that of their male counterparts (Connell1998, pp2-6; Wong et al 2011, pp236-255).

In an attempt to address masculinities, the initial recognition of the social construction of sexuality triggered more discussions on ‘values’ and the ‘normal’ roles of each gender(Connell1998, pp2-6). This was a significant step, nonetheless, in defining the impact of masculinity in the society.

Today, the actual connotation of masculinity has evolved past the notion of ‘the role of men,’ though this notion also defines a ‘group’ of masculinity. An emphasis of compliance with masculine beliefs also goes beyond the manner in which breaking conventional rules may work positively toward building masculinity (Graef,Tokar, & Kaut 2010, pp319-333).Gender issues are historically not constant, andthe involvedness of masculinities suggests disagreements that can impact change.

Yet some view masculinities as representative of a variation between the feminine and masculine genders, a dissimilarity that is today implying the variations in authority between males and females commonin the male chauvinistic cultures. Under such structures, the women are believed to be inferiorto men. There has been aremarkable doubt and conflictregarding inclusion of ‘masculinities’ in gender-basedactivities (Parent et al 2011, pp354-367).

The arguments supporting or against masculinities have been based on fears that this could result in the suppression of the feminist ideology. Worries about the possible chocking of females of resources and the weakening of women empowerment programmes has been rising. Men are believed to be having the potential of manipulating women based on policies and ‘morals’ in favour of masculinities (Liang, Salcedo, & Miller 2011, pp201-215).

Masculinities arguments

Studies of development of youthindicate multiple avenues of acquiring different characteristics in boys(Evers 2006, pp229-243). These findings conflict the common notion that an aggressive, forceful masculinity isconnected to biological components of the body(Connell1998, pp2-6).Steinfeldtet al (2011, pp247-259) suggests there is a local impact on acquiring information to inspire action on matters associated withmasculinity.

Additionally, there are connections among different masculinities. In view of these links, gender structures, relating to associations between men and women, also involve links among masculinity groups. These connections are arguably less significant within and across various groups involving the female gender.

In most cases the masculinity links involvepecking order and social segregation, in which case, at least one group of masculinity isdominant in the society and other inferior caucuses form, resulting in their bearing of the brunt of disrespect or marginalisation (Kiselica, & Englar-Carlson 2010, pp276-287).

Hegemonic Masculinity

Hegemonic masculinity is an expression used to refer to the sociallyfundamentalConstruction of manliness among several masculinities, in a social preference of the gender (Burriss,Welling, & Puts 2011, pp1023-1027).

Contests for hegemony or masculine preference among males often result in stress or even violent confrontations (Graef,Tokar, & Kaut 2010, pp319-333).Collectivenessof masculinities can be achieved if groups within the social patterns are institutionalised in units such as military, rights movements or bureaucracies.

On the other hand, informal groups such as friendship relations or families can also be used to define masculinities. These multiple ways in which manifests is a clear indication that masculinity is not just acknowledged at the personal level, but at the wider perspectives of the social fabric (Addis 2010, pp109-112; Wong et al 2010, pp170-181).

Additionally, Evers (2006, pp232-237) believes masculinities are manifest in mutual cultural ways such as myths andtraditions, media channels, social labels. The collective realism is wellmanifest in institutional ethnographies of learning centres and armed forcesorganisations.

Collective reality forges a strong masculinity force, which complicates an evolution of gender roles among males through persuasion only. An individual male may see the light of treating both genders as able persons, but the organizational environment, or the influences of a peer groupmay alter the equation (O’Neil 2010, pp98-106; Pachankiset al 2011, pp142-152).

Social influences

Liang, Salcedo, and Miller (2011, pp201-215) indicate that masculinities are established by intertwined social factorsdeveloped over tens or hundreds of years.

Nonetheless, the wider perspectives offered on masculinity emphasizes the contributions made by the older generations,especially the impact of a father’s counsel on his son or daughter. Women are also arguably active participants in process of defining masculinities (Burns,& Mahalik 2010, pp347-353).Generally, a woman is a parent, kin, friend, spouse, and work in the different environments where masculinities exist.

They use such avenues to benignly shape masculinities in the society, as it is believed the procedure of establishing masculinity is mostly silent and almost hard to notice. However, it can manifest in highly structured systems such as in gender-segregated learning settings, military academies,and games in which one specific gender dominates the other (Connell1998, pp2-6).

The close analysis of the development of masculinities, through past experiences,theinternal multifaceted nature of gender issues arise. There are usually contradictory psychological trends in every individual’s life (Leaseet al 2010, pp195-207).Different gender stances in dialogue, which an individual canconsider, have existed from time immemorial.

Conflicting demands may impose on males different behaviours, for instance, tosustain their own standing and to acknowledge women’s privileges. Males mayhave significant abilities such as to care for infants, but become surrounded by social situations that hardly press them to show these competences (Addis 2010, pp109-112).

Thesecomplicated situations mayresult in women assuming such roles willingly or unwillingly depending on individual understanding. Such cases sometimes raise tension, which may degenerate into violence, because a number of males have difficulty relating with women. Some men despise femininity out of fear of what it entails and may seek tosabotage it (Parent et al 2011, pp354-367).

Conclusion

Generally, there are several masculinities based on the prevailing social values, biological factors and parental influence. Formal and informal masculinities exist, though the latter can be easily influenced by persuasion. Economic transformation, conflict, generational change, and broader evolution of society beliefs, may contribute to the development of different masculinities.

In line with masculinities issues, there has been strong belief about the linkage ofindividual disparities in normative perception on masculinity, consistency with masculine role beliefs, and conflict that the masculine gender grapple with in an effort tolook for psychological assistance (Wong et al 2010, pp170-181).

These three facets of masculinity are encompassed in the emotional analysis of the male gender and thought to beresulting issues of masculinity socializationachievements. Though the three issues overlap, they are different concepts, invoked only during proper evaluation of masculinities. Masculinity beliefs and traditional values on masculine roles reflect distinct features of normative manliness. In a nutshell, masculinity ideology implies the defined thresholds of the conduct of males.

References

Addis, M.E. 2010. Response to commentaries on the problem of masculinity.Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 11(2),pp109-112.

Burns, S. M., & Mahalik, J.R. 2010.Suicide and dominant masculinity norms among current and former United States military servicemen.Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 42(5), pp347-353.

Burriss, R.P., Welling, L.L.M., &Puts, D.A. 2011. Mate-preference drives mate – choice: Men’s self-rated masculinity predicts their female partner’s preference for masculinity.Personality and Individual Differences, 51(8), pp1023-1027.

Connell, R.W. 1998. “Introduction: Studying Australian Masculinities,” Journal of International Gender Studies, 3 (2), pp1‐8.

Evers, C. 2006. “How to Surf.” Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 30 (3), pp229-243.

Graef, S.T., Tokar, D.M., &Kaut, K.P. 2010.Relations of masculinity ideology, conformity to masculine role norms, and masculine gender role conflict to men’s attitudes toward and willingness to seek career counseling.Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 11(4), pp319-333.

Kiselica, M.S., & Englar-Carlson, M. 2010. Identifying, affirming, and building upon male strengths: The positive psychology/positive masculinity model of psychotherapy with boys and men. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training, 47(3), pp276-287.

Leaseet al. 2010. Masculinity and interpersonal competencies: Contrasting White and African American men. Psychology of Men &Masculinity,11(3), pp195-207.

Liang, C.T.H., Salcedo, J., & Miller, H. A. 2011. Perceived racism, masculinity ideologies, and gender role conflict among Latino men.Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 12(3), pp201-215.

O’Neil, J.M. 2010. Is criticism of generic masculinity, essentialism, and positive-healthy-masculinity a problem for the psychology of men?Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 11(2), pp98-106.

Pachankiset al 2011. The influence of sexual orientation and masculinity on young men’s tobacco smoking. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 79(2), pp142-152.

Parent et al. 2011. Evidence of construct distinctiveness for conformity to masculine norms.Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 12(4), pp354-367.

Steinfeldtet al. 2011. Masculinity socialization in sports: Influence of college football coaches.Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 12(3), pp247-259.

Wong et al. 2010.Content analysis of Psychology of men & masculinity (2000–2008).Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 11(3), pp170-181.

Wong et al. 2011. The Inventory of Subjective Masculinity Experiences: Development and Psychometric Properties.Journal of Men’s Studies, 19(3), pp236-255.