Boys Just Wanna Have Fun

This week’s readings focused primarily on the constructs of masculinity by the media and advertising and how such constructs influence men in the real world. We as an audience are used to the idea of the macho lone ranger, driven by honor and chivalry, if a bit oppressive to women. Only a few decades ago there were television shows on the air such as Andy Griffith and, more recently, Walker Texas Ranger. This idea of masculinity is long gone, however, and it continues to govern our lives simply because we allow it to.

In Dead Man Walking: Masculinity’s Troubling Persistence, Brendan O’Sullivan explains how being a man is no longer what it once was. He explains how it’s something that can be achieved by just about anyone when he writes, “There’s a growing recognition that anyone can perform traditionally male traits: the if-it-looks-smells-walks-talks-like test doesn’t work for men anymore. We’ve got butch women, drag kings, gender queers, and trannies hijacking masculinity, and conversely, men who are far from hitting the target. It seems that we aren’t satisfied with what’s ‘natural,’ and we’re stretching the concept to suit our needs” (102). It’s true, gender identities other than the two “mainstream” are popping up much more often than they used to. But, even though we don’t see the same “masculine man” on the television like we used to, we still reinforce the idea of masculinity. O’Sullivan explains, “Clinging to relevancy, masculinity has been reduced to caricaturing itself. He’s a Lady, another recent ‘reality’ catastrophe, was devoted entirely to a fake drag queen competition among a dozen men. Not surprisingly, there was no subversive intent behind the show; it was an analysis-free exercise in reinforcing traditional masculinity by using it as a frame of reference” (102). He goes on to explain that, although being a drag queen is not within the normal realm of “masculine,” audience members of such ludicrous programming find humor in these situations because it’s not supposed to happen. “Most of us… are laughing because men aren’t supposed to shave their legs, not because we’re foolish for believing they shouldn’t” (102). Although we realize that we don’t need some misconstrued idea of “Man the Protector,” we still find comfort in categorizing the human race: boy versus girl, masculine versus feminine. O’Sullivan recognizes this when he writes, “Some hope to give masculinity its proper eulogy: a complete reorganization of society where the man/woman distinction no longer wields its power. Others recognize masculinity’s end but fear the hijinks that would ensue if manliness lost its significance as a societal organizer” (103). We continue to allow the ideas of masculinity to control what is acceptable for either gender by continuing to go through the motions, even if we don’t mean it. “With a wink and a nudge, men can perform their masculine duties, making it clear they are aware it’s all an act. Irony allows us to admit, or at least refer to, masculinity’s passing and yet sustain the deceased concept…” (103). And even if you call somebody out on such oppressive behavior, it doesn’t matter. It’s as if joking about how sexist someone is makes it ok and even commonplace. Telling them they are being offensive makes you the one who is acting socially unacceptable. This is similar to what Marilyn Frye writes in her essay Oppression. The humor of masculinity is a wire in a bird cage. It is only good fun, how can it be hurtful to women if we’re only joking about being macho? O’Sullivan explains this mentality when he describes this metaphor, “If everyone is already joking about the emperor’s ‘skimpy’ new clothes, the boy who observes that he’s wearing nothing no longer matters” (104).

So, if the concept of masculinity is only a shadow of its former glory, being resurrected by irony and jest, how has its presence lasted so long in our psyche? In When Men Put on Appearances: Advertising and the Social Construction of Masculinity, Diane Barthel writes, “We use consumer goods to define and reinforce definitions of what is masculine and what is feminine” (138). Masculinity is made a martyr because it (and its “antithesis”: femininity) is what separates men from women. Men are threatened by women invading what used to be rightfully theirs. Women too are able to be the bread winners for the family and succeed in the workplace. Barthel writes, “It is the very threat of women invading such centers of power that makes the social construction, and perpetual re-construction, of masculinity so important” (140). Advertising has not, however, let the original idea of masculinity go unscathed. “Advertising has encouraged a ‘feminization’ of culture, as it puts all potential consumers in the classic role of the female: manipulable, submissive, seeing themselves as objects” (148). The media has leant masculinity the idea of keeping the same macho enjoyments—sex, alcohol, driving real fast—but it no longer shoulders the same responsibilities it once did. Barthel explains, “The old masculine definition of the serious, uptight male stoically shouldering family responsibilities was challenged by a new philosophy. The Playboy philosophy said that boys just want to have fun, and should have fun” (147-148).

Men are affected by media portrayal of masculinity as well as women. They are taught from an early age that they must be attracted to women. They shouldn’t be interested in things such as feelings or family. As Michael Kimmel argues in Men in Women’s Studies: Premises, Perils, and Promise, being a feminist does not mean you have to be a woman and, likewise, feminist issues can include men. In this way masculinity is used as a “master’s tool” to oppress men with differing gender expressions and cause them to conform.

~Katie Frye