..

Chapter 7
Masculinity
 SAN MATEO MUNICIPAL COLLEGE
General Luna St., Guitnang Bayan I, San Mateo, Rizal
Tel. No. (02) 997-9070
www.smmc.edu.ph

Chapter 7 –Masculinity
LEARNING OBJECTIVES

After this module the students are expected to:

1. explain the importance of understanding that masculinity is a construct; and

2. state why the concept of masculinity can be oppressive to men.
____________________________________________________________________________________
INPUT INFORMATION:
Men and Gender Studies
This chapter will discuss the idea of manhood and masculinities from both local and international studies. While
information on masculinities in the Philippines is available, few discussions tackle youth and masculinity. The idea
of the male gender as a gender also lacks discussion because men are often seen as the template for all genders;
any deviations from the male heterosexual template are seen as different.
The discussion of masculinities will center around straight or heterosexual cisgender men. Straight means that
these men are attracted to people from the opposite gender, such as women. Cisgender means that these men
see themselves as men, and often ascribe to themselves the role of the masculine self as dictated by society. It is
important to discuss that masculinity is the prevalent notion which shapes all aspects of society, from politics and
legislation to schoolyard interactions. Only then can one see the effect of gender inequality and gender
socialization on both genders.
Beginning of Masculinity
Carol Gilligan, an American psychologist known for her study of women's ways of learning, noted that women's
socialized roles as caregivers tasked them with the responsibility of caring for young children. Girls who see an
older woman doing a certain task will associate the gender with that task. Women, then, are trained from
childhood to be caring and nurturing. This view is learned through emulation. Hence women's ways of knowing
are relational. Women learn femininity through association or attachment.
More traditional models of the household have the men working solely outside of their homes, making them
absent during a child's early years. This scenario leaves young boys with no male model to learn from. The
presence of the female and absence of the male lead to boys learning masculinity through dissociation from their
mothers. There is a conscious attempt to separate themselves from what they see as "women's tasks." Men's
ways of knowing are then more distanced. The analysis of boyhood shows that men learn to be men through
dissociation and separation-posited by Gilligan as the root of men's problems.
Boys, and then later young men, learn masculinity from what they see on media and interactions in their schools.
The lack of empathy of men may be rooted in the fact that they are actually socialized to be unlike women who
must have empathy to raise children. What then happens when what is shown on TV normalizes sexism violence
and the objectification of women?

What Makes a Man a Man?

Manhood is something that one can describe through adjectives tough, brave, strong-but whose definition is often
continuously evolving. Sociologist Michael Kimmel, for example, describes the specific meaning of masculinity to
be fluid, though one thing remains constant: the need to prove one's masculinity, regardless of how it is defined in
a given culture at a specific period of time.

Proving Masculinity
Gender is an identity that is socially constructed through interaction. The constant need to prove one's masculinity
along with the notion that it is hard to win and easy to lose makes one wonder: Who do men need to prove
themselves to? One myth of manhood is that men act to prove themselves to women. But the fact that masculinity
is so strongly connected to a shared gender identity shows that men must constantly prove their masculinity to
other men. Men perform their masculinity mostly to and for other men. They also compare themselves to other
men as was done in childhood learning. Women may even be the objects or the means to the end of impressing
other men.
Manhood is hard to win. While no actual rituals signal the transition of a boy into manhood, various subcultures
devise ways to initiate a boy into male adulthood. These rituals may include initiation processes to enter
fraternities, gangs, or even clubs. Others may win manhood through physical activities, sports, or even through
public acts of homophobia. The idea that manhood requires proof places men in positions to commit dangerous or
violent tasks. Alternatively, men will also avoid or even ridicule tasks that challenge their manhood, such as doing
activities normally performed by women.
Lad culture is a concept often linked to the crisis of masculinity in the West. In this campus culture, men in
colleges or universities perpetuate traditions that objectify and sexualize others, usually women and the LGBT.
This practice is done to reclaim their "manhood" as a possible backlash to feminism and the empowerment of
women. Lad culture is related to raunch culture because of the potential and actual harm it can cause students,
from binge drinking to harassment. It is often associated with pressing issues such as violence against women in
schools, sexual harassment, and discrimination against the LGBT, certain religious groups, or ethnicities.
In the U.S., the counterpart of lad culture is the hookup culture on campuses. Here, sexual activity is regarded as
the transition marker from boyhood into manhood. The use of sexuality to define masculinity has shown that boys
either use their socialized gender traits to enact their sexuality, or use their sexuality to represent their socialized
gender traits— power, detachment, competition. Dominant public norms tell men to distance themselves
emotionally from women, objectify girls, and sleep around. Women then become the means to an end— for men
to show their virility and power. However, these norms prevent men from experiencing deep and intimate
relationships.
An Aversion to the Feminine: Masculinity as Homophobia
Manhood at its essence is still defined in relation to womanhood or in opposition to women. Women and non-
dominant masculinities are seen as the "other," in "which heterosexual men project their identities, against whom
they stack the desks as to compete in a situation that they will always win, so that by suppressing them, men may
stake a claim for their own manhood.
The argument for the conditions of manhood blinds people to the content of manhood or the behavior that men
must display. This content is equally important to note as it provides the behaviors expected of men and the
behaviors that can add to one's understanding of why men do what they do and how gender drives these
behaviors. One example is the condemning of non-masculine actions. Boys, for example, are severely punished
for acting in a non-masculine way. A true man must then have aversions to anything feminine, or consciously
declare themselves as secure with their masculinity before doing anything stereotypically feminine.
A study by Kimmel shows that masculinity may be studied in relation to school shootings in the U.S. The
perpetrators of these school shootings were all male who did do not fall under the typical male figure. These boys
were teased, bullied, and beaten up. More often than not, they were ostracized. Often, their sexuality would be
called into question as they may have failed to enact the dominant masculinity of their school. Nearly all of these
boys were bullied because they were different, not because they were actually gay. Their ultimate revenge (the
school shooting) seemed to be their final act to prove themselves as men, or as revenge against those who
bullied them for being "different" and not ascribing to the male code of that school.
Masculinity, through its dissociation with women and femininity, may have become a form of homophobia.
Homophobia is not the fear itself of gay men, but the fear that a man can and will become gay or feminine.
Kimmel sees homophobia as the cause of sexism, racism, and heterosexism" as it is an aversion to becoming the
"other" or the non-dominant masculinity. In its extreme self, masculinity then is the desire to be not women-or not
feminine-which has become fragile due to the changing gender norms of society.

Masculinity as Power
The ever-pervading fear of losing one's masculinity may be tied to the fear of losing power. Masculinity is about
power: a masculine man is a powerful man who controls various resources. When the masculinity of a man is
challenged, he loses power unless he defends himself. It is challenged when a man is associated with the
feminine or perhaps when he is seen defending women or members of the LGBT. While making sexist,
homophobic, or racist statements is often part and parcel of heterosexual masculinity, silence and consent to
these put-downs result in gender-based violence and oppressive structures thriving in a society. Kimmel notes:
"Shame leads to silence-the silence that keeps other people believing that we actually approve of the things that
are done to women, to minorities, to gays and lesbians in our culture. The frightened silence as we scurry past a
woman being hassled by men on the street. That furtive silence when men make sexist or racist jokes in a bar.
That clammy-handed silence when guys in the office make gay-bashing jokes. Our fears are the sources of our
silences, and men's silence is what keeps the system running. This might help to explain why women often
complain that their male friends or partners are so often understanding when they are alone and yet laugh at
sexist jokes or even make those jokes themselves when they are out with a group”.
 This fear causes silence that is mistaken for consent—men consent to what is being done to women and the
LGBTs, those without power, and the like. Those who do not speak up condone gay bashing, rape jokes, and
sexist comments. Accepting these comments keeps this harmful system running. Masculinity has this power over
men-the fear of becoming effeminate when they stand to defend the non-dominant masculinity. This fear is a
representation demonstrating that a society thinks lowly of women.

Men as the Masculine Generic and Male Entitlement

When people think of gender, they readily think of the female or the LGBTs, and rarely the male. Men are viewed
as the masculine generic, largely the reason why gender studies often only bring women to mind. Privilege has
made a man's gender invisible—a man's gender is not important or essential to is being, as there are no societal
barriers that hinder him from accessing goods because of his gender. However, gender is, in fact, something that
greatly influences a man's life. The lack of recognition that men are gendered beings has excluded men from
conversations on gender. After all, masculinity was defined mostly by women and how they see and experience
masculinity. This lack of recognition has made women's, the LGBT's, and other's fights for gender equality a fight
that is solely a non-straight, non-male concern. This view was very different from how men saw themselves. Men
do not know that they are to be included in this discourse since they are not considered as gendered beings. Men
may see themselves as weak despite the fact that numerous privileges are afforded to them at work, in school,
and while growing up. The gender movement constantly speaks of men and their privilege, yet men are not aware
of it because of the damaging idea of manhood that society forces on men. Even those in power may be
constrained by gender. Furthermore, men may feel the need to prove their manhood through violence, addiction,
and oppressing non-dominant groups

Men and Fragile Masculinities

One buzzword that surrounds masculinity involves what is called fragile masculinities. Men have the privilege of
being the generic template of a human being. Women will always wake up and see themselves as women
because society constantly brings attention to their womanhood. Men, given their privilege, may ignore their
gender completely. Unless society challenges or brings attention to their manhood, it will never be questioned.
Masculinity is fragile because it can be easily lost as discussed in the previous section.
One may state that these issues are imaginary and that men are privileged enough to overcome these issues
given the power granted to them by the society. However, this is not always the case as shown by the gender-
role conflict scale (GRCS). The GRCS describes the "amount of psychological conflict, anxiety, tension, and
general negative emotion surrounding the male gender role."It states that having one's masculinity challenged
causes the greatest stress in most men, and that those with high levels of this type of anxiety are less likely to
seek counseling. Ironically, this problem is due to men's socialized gender role that assigns men as strong and
cool, able to ignore emotions, and the like. The very source of one's anxiety is what keeps one from seeking help.
The idea of precarious manhood perhaps comes from the idea that women indeed have been changing their ways
of life. With manhood as something that is so easily challenged or lost, it is difficult to maintain manhood if the very
thing men have used to define themselves is changing. After all, womanhood is retained, inherited, inborn, and
remains secure.

The Responsibility of Man

Michael Kimmel, in his address in the 2001 International Women's Day Seminar, had this to say about men in
gender equality:
"I believe that the reason that the movement for women's equality remains only a partial victory has to do with
men. In every arena— in politics, military, workplace, professions, and education—the single greatest obstacle to
women's equality is the behaviors and attitudes of men. "
He adds that it is necessary to change the attitudes of men towards gender equality, to show them that it is also
beneficial to them as men to be allies for gender equality." After all, it takes both genders cooperation to change a
sexist culture.
Women have seen radical changes concerning how society treats their gender, from school and workplace
inclusion to policies that fight for their reproductive rights. Men's rights have remained the same. There has been
little to no changes in their experience of work or sexuality. Men's gender identity being rooted in their dissociation
with women may be viewed as the cause for men's gender confusion-unlike women who have been afforded the
same opportunities through gender equality. Unexpectedly, what men have used to define their masculinity has
taken over their masculine roles. Men have no way to adjust to their changing gender role precisely because they
do not see themselves as gendered being. Perhaps an end to traditional masculinity, given its harmful nature,
could be the big step in the direction of global equal rights

Is the Philippines a Masculine Country?

The six-dimension model of national culture by Geert Hofstede shows the "six basic issues that society needs to
come to terms with in order to organize itself. "The Philippines leans towards what he calls a masculine society
(64 on a scale of 1 to 100), meaning that the Philippines may be driven to realize masculine values. These values
include "competition, achievement, and success." They put a premium on achievement through winning, or being
the best in one's field. On the other hand, feminine values involve caring for others, and about the quality of life in
the community. While the Philippines is community-oriented, its focus is currently on global competition and
personal achievement.
The Filipino masculinity is changing due to migration and globalization. Filipinos in general are becoming more
Westernized. Since the advent of colonization and the creation of modern Philippine society, men were made to
be dominant, tough, and oriented toward building camaraderie among themselves. Up to this day, the male
barkada is seen as a brotherhood, a space for men to be men, free from their wives and responsibilities as it is
accepted that men often needed a break from their work and home life. Some men who were seen as subjected
under their wives' control ("under the saya") were free to express themselves among their barkada. The so-called
forms of typical Filipino masculinities seem to express this gender's need to assert its dominance and capability.
Filipino masculinities are driven by their status as the main actors in the public realm—as drivers of development
and wealth creation. Even in pre-Hispanic times, ritual feasting, conspicuous consumption, and displays of skill
and strength were means to assert the worth of men as pillars of the community. However, women were more
involved in the public sphere during this period and the values of mechacismo may not have been so pervasive.
With the imposition of Western civilization, women were excluded and male clubs and male capacities were given
higher regard. Masculinities were constructed in a way that pressured Filipino men to be more manly and to not
exhibit female characteristics. Numerous forms of masculinities are actually present in literatures about Philippine
culture throughout history. They have evolved from the effeminate babaylan and spirit-possessed warrior to the
macho-posturing men of today as exemplified by basketball players, hunk actors, and business tycoons.
Masculinity has many faces because its definition continues to change. For instance, the traditional role of the
man in the family is being redefined as more women go abroad, leaving men or other women to care for their
children. Thus, it must be noted that the gendered character of men is not absolutely defined. In fact, it needs a
continuous conscious effort to realize. What is important is that as men define themselves and society defines
men, their self-realization should be creative and not destructive for both themselves and the people they dwell
with. Thus, the society must constantly study how masculinity is shaped to further the understanding of gender
culture and gendered interactions. The path towards gender equality is one that sees all persons as gendered
beings. It does not help to believe that gender is defined essentially by nature. Masculinity, as much as femininity,
is a human project. It is a shared pursuit of people who seek to engage with each other creatively and lovingly for
the realization of their embodiment and their desire to find intimacy. Understanding how this construct was
realized and defined will help individuals appreciate the projected character of gender and on becoming better
persons who love others and can care for others. And so, we must always inquire ourselves how we define our
own gender, what are the possible reasons and motives for this particular construction, and finally assess if this
construction helps or harms our self-realization and the flourishing of others.

References:
Gender and Society, The Whys of Women, Their Oppressions, and Paths to Liberation.
Agustin Martin G. Rodriguez et al.