The Masculine Secret
Iceaura said:
And removing publicly identified womenbeaters from the fields of hero worship and congratulatory entertainment would chickify those fields - be a result of the influence of chicks, and nothing one would expect from masculine men.
One of the things I find strange about this part of the War of the Sexes is that as much as we tend to consider masculinity, none such as Limbaugh or our neighbor would actually define what that is. For instance, you're aware of a thread devoted to concepts of
"Men, Masculinity, and Humanity"; we might note that specifically defining masculinity makes people uncomfortable.
And well it should; indeed, it should be just as unsettling as trying to define femininity. Yet from Sciforums on up to FOX News and the hallowed halls of Congress and Parliaments around the world, we can always find someone willing to push this undefined masculinity as some manner of license to privilege.
Last month, for instance, FOX News lined up some of its female hosts to explain to the audience how good it is to be sexually harassed;
let men be men.
For the last several years at Sciforums we've been able to find someone arguing in defense of men that we are nothing more than brainless machines; strangely, when such arguments are offered in defense of rape and sexual harassment, the MRAs are less willing to complain.
But what is masculinity? How can something be chickified or feminized if we don't know what it is in the first place?
That is to say, is the implication really so vicious? Is "masculinity" a fighting, killing, raping, brutalizing, dominating antisocial phenomenon? Is "masculinity" really so antithetical to civilized society? As I once told a prevention advocate who compared men to hand grenades, we're escalating the argument from, "Seek help", to, "Men should be locked away for the sake of society".
Then again, that is only according to this weird, reactionary anti-identification.
In my lifetime, masculinity has largely been identified as an affecting force; it's hard to think of any aspect that isn't tainted by some manner of self-interest. Fighting, controlling, exercising authority. There are always the so-called upsides of manhood being identified with the ability to support one's family, but those also comes alongside very authoritarian and denigrating self-reinforcement. While there are plenty of men who simply "do their jobs", as such, what is the job description, and is it
really a duty for men only? After all, we only hear the duties laid out by those advocating male supremacism, groups like Promise Keepers or the Republican Party.
It should be obvious, though, why men resist enumerating the attributes of masculinity. And it is just as obvious why those who would push masculinity as some sort of license insist on defining femininity. That is, we are still stuck at the de Beauvoir concept:
When women act like human beings, they are accused of trying to be like men.
I think it would probably be helpful, then, if those who think and argue as our neighbor has would actually bring masculinity to the forefront.
To wit, I wonder if our neighbor realizes just how much of "masculinity" is being identified and claimed by homosexuals. And that's fine, too. But, generally speaking, one would not imagine men in general will be pleased by the resolutions of that discussion. Indeed, those who hide behind vague notions of masculinity, those whose constant pandering to the concept of what is manly or girly, will most likely be disappointed in the outcomes.
Part of the crisis is that we don't seem to have a clue what masculinity actually is, and those who most need the concept in order to justify themselves aren't rushing to let us in on the secret.
____________________
Notes:
Signorile, Michelangelo. "Misogyny and Homophobia in the NFL: Is America's Crisis of Masculinity Playing Out in Its Favorite Sport?" The Huffington Post. September 16, 2014. HuffingtonPost.com. September 20, 2014. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michelangelo-signorile/nfl-misogyny-homophobia_b_5828874.html
