Masculinity: A Social Construct

What is "masculinity"? What are "masculinities"? What defines these concepts?

Masculinity can be described as any qualities or characteristics pertaining to typical or idealistic male. Failure to oblige by these social interpretations of what a man should exhibit could result into a frustration of one’s identity and even labels of homosexuality. The social construct of masculinities breed the notion of what any one man should acquire or even develop over time, which have been reinforced through generations. One could also define masculinity with contrast to femininity, which is echoed in George Orwell’s 1984, and how masculinity is reflected in times of conflict – specifically in regards to a nation.  Masculinity, therefore, is defined by primitive evolutions of a depiction of a man, the contrast to femininity, and the role it plays in times of conflict.

The typical powerful and self-assured male figure may have begun by hunter and gatherer in its’ primitive stages, and evolved into the modern day assertive businessman or even an athletic specimen who is tall with broad shoulders – most likely seen in advertisements such as Nike Sport or CSI: Miami. These once were desirable trait for maybe fending off mountain bears, but now are more of symbolic reminders of the simplistic approach to determining the characteristics of a male. With the evolution of man, also comes a reinterpreted sense of what an ideal man requires. In most cases, it is a combination of these traits in a modern time that constitute as an ideal man – who much be successful, assertive, tall, and even carries over to personal characteristics as being charismatic and accepted by their peers – which can be reflected in President Obama’s term in government.

While the description of a masculine man may have altered, the same cannot be said about its’ definition that is derived by the direct contrast to femininity. George Orwell explores this unique relationship in his 1984, in which he reflects a woman’s dependence on the male figure. Similarly, the major characters in the text are male who in turn hold importance and power, in which the women fall secondary. He describes a male as “perpetually working, fighting, triumphing, [and] persecuting” (Orwell, 77), whereas a female would be considered reliant on a male’s protection. Accordingly, this dependency on a masculine figure is translated into times of war, where an idealistic man opposes the will and defends the honor of their wife and children. Marchbank et al. in her research articulates ethnic conflict was used as rape and sending gender ethnic message, for example: One rapes women – women not accepted now – impregnate them – muddy their blood – and men who are supposed to be protecting their women are not able to – thus making them less of a man than the men who are raping them (Marchbank & Letherby A, 44-9). Men and boys are consequently being systematically raped and not just woman, who are now beneath of the man who can impose there will.

The definition of masculinity, therefore, are primitive evolutions of a depiction of a man, the contrast to femininity, and the role it plays in times of conflict. While it is not necessary for all of these aspects to constitute as masculinity, a combination of them will parallel a relationship to a masculine persona. Thus, the connection between masculinities and their perceived application to the idealist man is time-orientated, where different aspect in history will construe to different characterizations accordingly.