NHL Advertising Campaign - Article Example

In a much aggrandized discourse of hegemonic masculinity, Mediating Sport, Myth, and Masculinity: The National Hockey League’s “Inside the Warrior” Advertising Campaign by Sarah Gee, it can be noted that there is close attributes to how Mrs. Gee tries to argue out the campaign (Hanold, 2012). Indeed, Mrs. Gee realizes the importance of the masculinity in explaining the inherent interpretation of the campaign. Primarily, Mrs. Gee closely examines the interpretation of the campaign in the dominion of patriarchy over matriarchy.

Gee argument is based on empirical social research, and on this account, she successfully use Hockey as a sport to explain local gender hierarchies. Her discourse is substantial in reflecting to the bold perception of economic affiliation as explained in the role of masculinity, mentally and physically. This discussion will attempt to provide a double sided criticism of hegemonic masculinity as interpreted by Sarah Gee in her review against the 2005 inside Warrior campaign. Critique Criticism for In debate of gender equality, the concept of one triumphing over the other has become the center of focus.

Naturally, sports require both mental and physical attributes, which in this case, men triumph on the physical side. However, as this debate will attempt to singularize, there is an inherent subordinate role of social position in men. The 2005 campaign is a feature event that on several accounts explained the inherent role of men in the general society. The campaign sought to clarify the concept of hegemonic masculinity and how, in relation to this campaign, men maintain their dominant role in the society – primarily protection.

Hegemonic masculinity has deep relation in a much elaborated theory, cultural hegemony by Antonio Gramsci. In both theories, a scholar will realize the analysis of power amongst social classes. While feminism is largely attributed as the intrinsic ability to reproduce, the patriarch camp has been vicious enough to apply masculinity to sustain a leading dominant position in the society. As the discussion will attempt to discover, there is close relation between the two centers of power, in how they alter each other.

Currently, a significant percentage of men have not been involved in bellicose activities regarding physical hurting at war or any form of violence. This explains the validity of this campaign in concept of viscosity. Any scholar will note at ease the derived relation of hegemonic masculine theory in the aspect of struggle to explain the bread winning regime. Traditionally, the masculine affiliation has been attributed to violent, brutal, pseudo-natural and tough actions which psychologically explains why men should not only apply mental power in soliciting economic life, but as well as physical power.

In relation to the 2005 campaign, it is coherent to concur that men not only applied their physical strength against equally trained men, but the also applied sticks which in this case had a close significance to a real time war (Hanold, 2012). The validity of these actions has close sources to the argument of anxiety provoking in a pursuit of a better economic good. The notion of hegemonic masculinity has been applied to explain social embodiment of masculine configuration. The theory clarifies that man cannot survive, that is in a smooth environment, without