Why It Is More Appropriate to Refer to Masculinities in the Plural - Essay Example

Why it is more appropriate to refer to ‘Masculinities’ in the Plural Name: Course: Tutor: Date: Why is it more appropriate to refer to ‘masculinities’ in the plural? The term ‘masculinity’ is used to describe societal thoughts on a man and his changing capabilities. It therefore does not only refer to the physical appearance of a male body but what the male species are capable of doing as compared to the females. This paper discusses why it is more appropriate to refer to masculinities in the plural. The medieval societies according to Karras (2003, p. 2) used many statements with men in mind. This was due to the hierarchical orders that sought to glorify men, thereby portraying them as heroic. Masculinity was dominant and the ideal man was portrayed as the ‘Knight in Shining Armour’; a man who was courageous, strong, selfless and honourable. Going back to the Bible, Karras (p.2) describes how men are portrayed as strong, continent, wise, brave, generous and loyal. Women on the other hand are portrayed as lustful, foolish, weak, untrustworthy, greedy, lovers of luxury and too soft to endure hardships. The aforementioned author’s research further shows how medieval authors spent a great deal of their time highlighting men’s achievements while downplaying those by women no matter how good they were. The middle ages used masculinities in plural and this became more grounded as the definition of ‘man’ changed with time. Men thus had so many qualities and their capabilities which qualified them as men changed over time and this is one reason as to why it was viewed as more appropriate by the medieval concepts to refer to them using the plural form. McLoughlin (2000, p. 95) discusses why it is more appropriate to refer to masculinities in the plural. According to the author, the society has laid down expectations on what femininity, masculinity and sexuality is and people always try to conform to be regarded as so. These views are however not unitary and this is why it is more appropriate if they took the plural form. According to McLoughlin (2000, p. 101), magazines communicate to people of different masculinities, femininities and sexualities and that is why a rigorous exercise is carried out by the marketers to learn what appeals to their targeted market. This way, masculinities are formed and other than females, the males are constantly lured into exercising their masculinities. Steve and David (2007, p. 109) further give an insight into why plurality of masculinities is more appropriate. According to these authors, there are distinctions as well as similarities between men and women as they are not a homogenous group. Using masculinity does not reflect too well on the diversity of what makes a man and it is seen as more inclined to the macho views which had their own definition of what made up an ideal man. Using the singular form is also seen by Steve and David as negative since most of what it entails is not acceptable in the contemporary society. According to Bettina and Kathrin (2005, p. 8), masculinity is not homogenous but rather hegemonic whereby hierarchy takes centre stage in how these masculine identities are classified. Hegemony is used here to show that no matter how plurality of masculinities is used variedly, men are still dominant while women remain subordinate. Plurality is therefore used to mask this discrepancy and make the power battles between men and women less critical to the masses especially in the era of gender equality. This however according to Bettina and Kathrin (p.8) does not equalize masculinities but rather puts them in a hierarchical order. Talking a hegemonic argument towards pluralism tends to portray other masculinity forms as inferior as it dwells on glorifying the man and further advices him on what he can do to attain a ‘superman’ status. Some of the forms of masculinities that are marginalized by the hegemonic angle include ages, social classes, abilities, sexualities and ethnicities. The hegemonic angle classifies these as feminine and this makes the other masculinity forms in relation to men superior. Adopting the plurality of masculinities dismisses the hegemonic angle and gives power to other forms of masculinities and seeks to portray them as equally important and powerful. The hegemonic angle is seen as racist and is dated back to the medieval societies where the man was held superior and the woman seen as subordinate, a view that contradicts the contemporary society where the use of masculinities in plural is upheld. Many theories have come up regarding plurality of masculinities and all seem to be bent on the male factor and this therefore takes the sex model. This theory puts female masculinities in question as these forms of masculinity only revolve around male behaviour and their biological component. Bettina and Kathrin (2005, p. 9) therefore base their argument more on the sense that the discourse of masculinity should change to masculinities whereby pluralism will be initiated to reflect on both male and female abilities in their distinct forms. Using masculinity in its singular form is viewed as inappropriate in the modern world where both sexes are viewed as equal due to their capabilities (p. 10). In his play, ‘Oleanna’, Mamet (1992) uses masculinity to bring across his idea of sexual harassment where he portrays women as the weaker sex in all manners. One of the characters in this play is a female named Carol who is exhibited as a poor performer in credit and actually cannot live her full potential without the help of a male by the name John. John is portrayed as successful and focused and is seen as a super male who has many accomplishments like property ownership and a recent promotion at work. In this case, masculinities would have been highlighted to showcase Carol’s strengths as well and not portray her as dumb just because she is female. John goes ahead to offer Carol conditional help whereby he will help her get As in her academic studies. This can be portrayed as sexual harassment since he insists that to do so for her, she has to see him regularly. However, John’s idea is not sexual in any way and he is just doing so to be comfortable with her and this shows a gross misunderstanding between these two genders. Halberstam (1998, p.16) shows how plurality of masculinities changes the whole meaning of masculinity. The author argues that masculinity shows male dominance where men feel that they are all-powerful and superior. Using masculinities in the plural form however kills this notion by showing that this is not a predominantly male show. Women also have female masculinity which fights against their being sidelined in a male-dominated world. Masculinity in this setting comes across as patriarchal whereby ‘woman’ is a term used to refer to those without the ‘male power’. It is therefore more appropriate to refer to masculinities in the plural since this gives women a voice and also highlights their strengths. Along this line, Edwards (2006, p. 23) argues that there must be fluidity of masculinities if males are to stop being seen as dominant and powerful in our societies today. The author notes that the only way to achieve this is to embrace plurality of masculinities where both males and females will feature equally. According to York (2008, p.1), there are major differences between men and women and they are more so due to socialization. In a male dominated world, women seek to compete for the same opportunities in spite their differences, which do not make them lesser people. The world is still patriarchal and this determines the women’s fate, who in most cases end up taking feminine roles. York further argues that there could be more than two sexes and that is the main reason why the concept of plurality of masculinities should be applied. Gender distinctions are being fought by transgender activists in a world where transsexuals undergo sex changes to take a female or male gender. These transsexuals have both characteristics of males and females and this makes it hard to place them in any class. This further asserts why masculinities should be used in their plural form with these changing trends. Males and females could have biological distinctions but this does not qualify why there should be a gender that is superior to the other (York, 2008, p.1). Just as there are female masculinities, there are also male femininities according to Bettina and Kathrin (2005, p.10), a fact that further demystifies the use of the word masculinity to refer to the male species. Masculinity is therefore not a men’s phenomenon as it is shared with their female counterparts and this further shows the appropriateness of using the plurality of masculinities. This also dismisses the use of masculinity to define certain groups such as race, gender and class. Deeper into the argument, Bettina and Kathrin (p.10) detail how women couple up as performers and consumers of masculinities. The word masculinity thus becomes fluid to be shared by both genders and this is where plurality comes in. Masculinity is therefore a broad term that embodies spaces, objects and places and seeks to stay away from sex and biological composition. Images of maleness are thus represented by the use of the term masculinity and this should not be the case since they are not necessarily shared (11). Conclusion According to this paper, it is with no doubt more appropriate to refer to masculinities in the plural as this addresses both males and females without sidelining either. It also depicts clearly that masculinity is outdated, something that was practiced in the medieval societies where everything revolved around the male species. In changing times, men and women have their distinctions but this does not warrant the condemnation of one sex as inferior. References Bettina, H. & Kathrin, H. (2005). Spaces of masculinities. Routledge Publishers. (Taylor & Francis Group, USA. Edwards, T. (2006). Cultures of masculinity, Routledge Publishers, New York. Halberstam, J. (1998). Female masculinity (5th edition), Duke University Press, Durham NC. Karras, R. M. (2003). From boys to men: Formations of masculinity in late medieval Europe, University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia. Mamet, D. (1992). Performing Gender. Oleanna: Sexual harassment, gender and truth, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, USA. McLoughlin, L. (2000). The language of magazines, Routledge, New York. Steve, Taylor & David, Field. (2007). Sociology of health and health care (4th edition), Blackwell Publishing, NJ. York, Frank. (2008). “Gender differences are real: Medical issues,’ National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality, NARTH. Read More