ArticlePDF Available

Abstract

Research and critical studies into men and masculinity has originated as one of the most emerging areas of sociological investigation. More books and articles have been published on this study area alone as well as the introduction of two specialized journals and the creation of several websites all providing different explanations of their understanding of menand masculinity at the millennium age. Masculinity is an area of sociology that has, since the mid-1950s, drawn on many theories,including structural functionalism, Marxism, psychoanalysis, critical structuralism, and more recently, post-structuralism and theories of the post-modern (Whitehead & Barrett, 2001). Within popular culture, the media have also come across the perceived 'crisis of masculinity' in Western cultures – newspapers, documentaries and talk shows have increasingly pondered the changingmeaning of manhood in our modern age (Alsop et al, 2002). The purpose of this writing is to understand men and masculinity in the modern world putting into consideration the sociology of masculinity, the social construction of masculinity, the crisis with in masculinity as well as a fair contrast with masculinity and feminism. lo
Sciknow Publications Ltd OJSSR 2013, 1(2):42-45
Open Journal of Social Science Research DOI: 10.12966/ojssr.05.05.2013
©Attribution 3.0 Unported (CC BY 3.0)
Understanding Men and Masculinity in Modern Society
Flourish Itulua-Abumere*
University of Roehampton, Alumna;Daytona Global Enterprise Limited;VGC, Ajah.Lagos. Nigeria
*Corresponding author (Email:flourishabumere@gmail.com)
Abstract - Research and critical studies into men and masculinity has originated as one of the most emerging areas of
sociological investigation. More books and articles have been published on this study area alone as well as the introduction of
two specialized journals and the creation of several websites all providing different explanations of their understanding of men
and masculinity at the millennium age. Masculinity is an area of sociology that has, since the mid-1950s, drawn on many theories,
including structural functionalism, Marxism, psychoanalysis, critical structuralism, and more recently, post-structuralism and
theories of the post-modern (Whitehead & Barrett, 2001). Within popular culture, the media have also come across the perceived
'crisis of masculinity' in Western cultures newspapers, documentaries and talk shows have increasingly pondered the changing
meaning of manhood in our modern age (Alsop et al, 2002). The purpose of this writing is to understand men and masculinity in
the modern world putting into consideration the sociology of masculinity, the social construction of masculinity, the crisis within
masculinity as well as a fair contrast with masculinity and feminism.
Keywords - Masculinity, Social Construction of Masculinity, Sociology of Masculinity, Cultural Construction of Masculinity
1. Introduction
1.1. What is masculinity?
The closest answer to this question is to state that masculinity
consists of those behaviors, languages and practices, existing
in specific cultural and organizational locations, which are
commonly associated with males and thus culturally defined
as not feminine. So masculinity exist as both a positive, in as
much as they offer some means of identity significations for
males, and as a negative, in as much as they are not the 'Other'
(Feminine). Masculinity and male behaviors are not the simple
product of genetic coding or biological predispositions
(Clatterbaugh, 1990; Whitehead & Barrett, 2001).
All societies have cultural accounts of gender, but not all
have the concept 'masculinity'. In its modern usage the term
assumes that one's behavior results from the type of person one
is. That is to say, an un-masculine person would behave
differently: being peaceable rather than violent, conciliatory
rather than dominating, hardly able to kick a football,
uninterested in sexual conquest, and so forth. This conception
presupposes a belief in individual difference and personal
agency. In that sense it is built on the conception of
individuality that developed in early-modern Europe with the
growth of colonial empires and capitalist economic relations
(Whitehead & Barrett, 2001). But the concept is also
inherently relational. 'Masculinity' does not exist except in
contrast with 'femininity'. A culture which does not treat
women and men as bearers of polarized character types, at
least in principle, does not have a concept of masculinity in the
sense of modern European/American culture (Connell, 2001).
Attention to historical specificity and historical change
illustrates the social construction of masculinity, the
multiplicity of ways in which masculinities can be enacted or
lived and the existence and potential of change (Alsop et al,
2002).
1.2. Sociology of masculinity
The sociology of masculinity concerns the critical study of
men, their behaviors, practices, values and perspectives. As
such the sociology of masculinity is informed by, and locates
itself within, feminist theories. Writers within the genre are
understood to be personally/politically aligned with feminist
agendas and to have a desire for gender justice. The critical
writings of men and masculinity which constitute the
sociology of masculinity seek to highlight the ways in which
men's powers come to be differentiated, naturalized and
embedded across all cultures, political borders and
organizational networks. Since its beginnings in the 1950s, the
sociology of masculinity has moved through three prominent
theoretical waves, in part mirroring similar shifts in the
theoretical patterns of feminist thinking. The first of these
waves was concerned with the problematic of male role
performance and the cost to men of attempting to strictly
adhere to dominant expectations and masculine ideology,
what Joseph Pleck (1995) has termed ‘male’ gender role
(discrepancy). The second wave arose in the early 1980s and
sought to highlight, not so much the cost to men of patriarchy,
but the centrality of male power to dominant ways of being a
man (Whitehead & Barrett, 2001).
Exemplified by the work of Carrigan, Connell and Lee
(1985), second-wave theorizing introduced the concept of
'hegemonic masculinity as a political, multiple, contested, yet
powerful concept. The third wave within the sociology of
masculinity has been primarily influenced by feminist
post-structuralism and theories of post-modernity (Butler,
1990; Nicholson, 1990). Here the theory is validated through
dominant discursive practices of self, and how men's sense of
Flourish Itulua-Abumere:Understanding Men and Masculinity in Modern Society
43
identity work connects with (gender) power and resistance
(Whitehead & Barrett, 2001)
In recent years, sociologists have become increasingly
interested in the positions and experiences of men within the
larger order that shapes them. This shift within the sociology
of gender and sexuality has led to new emphasis on the study
of men and masculinity within the overarching context of
gender relations, the societal patterned interactions between
men and women. Sociologists are interested to grasp how male
identities are constructed and what impact socially prescribed
roles have on men's behavior (Giddens, 2001). In gender and
power (1987) and masculinities (1995), R. W. Connell sets
forth one of the most complete theoretical accounts of gender.
His approach has been particularly influential in sociology
because he has integrated the concepts of patriarchy and
masculinity into an overarching theory of gender relations.
According to Connell, masculinities are a critical part of the
gender order and cannot be understood separately from it, or
from the femininities which accompany them (Connell, 1995;
Giddens, 2001).
1.3. Social/cultural construction of masculinities
In the last ten years field studies in the industrial countries
have multiplied and new theoretical languages have been
proposed. There is no settled paradigm for this new work, but
some common themes are clear: the construction of
masculinity in everyday life, the importance of economic and
institutional structures, the significance of differences among
masculinities and the contradictory and dynamic character of
gender (Connell, 1995). Richard Gruneau and David
Whitson's Hockey Night in Canada shows in great detail how
business and political interests constructed the aggressively
masculinised world of professional ice hockey (Gruneau&
Whitson, 1993). The construction of masculinity in spot also
illustrates the importance of the institutional setting. Messner
emphasizes that when boys start playing competitive sport
they are not just learning a game, they are entering an
organized institution (Messner, 1992).
Economic circumstance and organizational structure also
contribute to the making of masculinity at the most intimate
level. As Mike Donaldson observes in Times of Our Lives,
hard labour in factories and mines literally uses up the
workers' bodies; and that destruction, a proof of the toughness
of the work and the worker, can be a method of demonstrating
masculinity (Donaldson, 1991). Cockburn emphasizes the
political character of the construction of masculinity, and of
change in masculinity (Cockburn, 1991). The same point is
made by a Canadian research team in Recasting Steel Labour;
the first important study of masculinity is to combine survey
research with ethnography (Corman et al, 1993). Despite the
emphasis on multiple masculinities and on contradiction, few
researchers have doubted that the social construction of
masculinities is a systematic process (Connell, 1995).
However, the authors, Morgan (1992), Sedgwick (1985),
Maclnnes (1998), and Cornwall and Lindisfarne (1994) all
agree that masculinities is socially and historically, not
biologically, constructed. A good point with which to start is
Morgan's (1992) assertion that what is masculinity(and
femininity) is best approached from the stand point of what
men and women do (that is, how they behave) rather than what
they are. If gender is cultural, then it follows that women as
well as men can step into and inhabit masculinity as a 'cultural
space', one with its own sets of behaviors. In this view 'the
masculine' and 'the feminine' signify a range of culturally
defined characteristics assignable to both men and women
(Beynon, 2002). Masculinity
Male version/Female version
Femininity
Male version/Female version (Beynon, 2002).
1.4. Socialization into masculinity
Sociology, in particular, has contributed to our understanding
of how factors like class, culture and ethnicity impact on
masculinity, which is seen to be shaped by the institutions in
which men and women are embedded. Male aggression,
competitiveness and emotional inarticulateness are held to
reflect their position in the economic system. Capitalism
places men in a network of social relations that encourages
sets of behavior recognized as masculine. Masculinity is thus
viewed as a set of practices into which individual men are
inserted with reference to upbringing, family, area, work and
sub-culturalinfluences. Socio-economic positioning
profoundly impacts upon the masculine sense of self so much
so that men's identities are constructed through social
structures which exist over and above any actions of the
individual (Edley&Wetherell 1995).
The still widely accepted view among the general public
is that men and women fundamentally differ and that a distinct
set of fixed traits characterize archetypal masculinity and
femininity. This is reflected in popular sayings such as 'Just
like a man' or 'Just like a woman' and in the kinds of features
found in popular magazines along the lines of 'How manly is
your man?', with a list of attributes to be rated or boxes to be
ticked. Masculinity and femininity are often treated in the
media as polar opposites, with men typically assumed to be
rational, practical and naturally aggressive and women, in
contrast, are held to be expressive, nurturing and emotional
(Beynon, 2002). The role model depicts men and women not
as free agents but like actors following pre-scripted roles: so to
'be a man' is to play a certain masculine role. To take the
theatrical metaphor further, masculinity is a performance, a set
of stage directions, a 'script' that men learn to perform.
Socializing agents like the family, school and the media
inculcate and validate gender appropriate behavior and the boy
learns the male role through observation, initiation and
feedback (Bandura, 1977).
Brannon (1976), Pleck and Thompson (1987) and Moore
and Gillette (1990) have over the years identified some typical
males (for example, being a 'big wheel', 'sturdy oak', 'no sissy
stuff'). However, Ian Harris (1995) eventually provided the
most comprehensive study to date of the socialization into
roles perspective based on extensive interview data with large
numbers of men in the United States gathered over a number
of years. Critiques found in many ways Harris study as
difficult and challenging but nevertheless it provides a very
comprehensive 'map' of contemporary American masculinity
Open Journal of Social Science Research (2013) 42-45
44
in the words of men themselves. The socializing 'messages'
emanate from parents, teachers, peers, the media,
organizations like church and the Scouts, and constitute a
series of 'scripts', or guidelines, by which men live their lives
(cited in Beynon, 2002).
1.5. Relationship between masculinity and identity
The relationship between masculinity, identity and gender as
social structure has changed somewhat during the various
phases of development with the sociology of masculinity.
Early influences tended to draw heavily on notions of gender
role and its 'strains' or ‘discrepancies’ for men (Pleck, 1981).
Thus, social constructionists argue that gender role theory was
inadequate for exploring male power and failed to fully
recognize differences between male and female (Kimmel &
Messner,1989;Connell,1987).Thestrength of
post-structuralism accounts of masculinity, especially those
which draw on Jacques and Foucault, is that they offer a means
by which to link social action and power relations with identity
processes, without, however, falling into a deterministic
understanding of power relations as an ideologically inspired,
unchanging structure (Sarup, 1993).
From a post-structuralism perspective identity is
understood as always in process, never finally accomplished.
So in this regard, there is no core, grounded, or fixed self, but
rather a fluid arrangement of multiple subject positions which
together provide the means by which the individual achieves a
sense of identity (Rajchman, 1995). The importance of
masculinity to this process of identity work is in the validation
it can give to this fluid self. So if we accept there is no core self,
then socially dominant forms of being a male (masculinities)
can be seen to provide an acceptable means by which boys and
men may express their gender and thus their sense of identity.
In taking up these localized and culturally specific signifying
practices, males achieve an association with other males and
also a differentiation from the 'Other' not only women but also
those males who appear 'different'. The difference is usually
marked by sexual orientation, but can also include forms of
embodiment and ethnicity, as well as national and cultural
variations of masculine performance (Whitehead & Barrett,
2001).
Because individuals do not have biologically fixed
identities, any sense of self can only come about through
working to achieve a sense of 'belonging' in the social world.
However, 'belonging' is not an automatic process, and so far
most men masculine performance is central to achieving entry
to, and being accepted within, any particular 'community' of
men. This desire for belonging creates, then, both gender and
an individual's sense of self. As Bell describes it, identity is
the effect of performance and not vice versa.” (Bell,
1999;Butler, 1990) Such understandings do not assume that
males are passive in this process of identity work; this is not
simply a case of all-powerful gender socialization. Rather, all
individuals are skilled at creating theirselves, but within the
parameters of their social and cultural experience, factors
which are also subject to change (Whitehead & Barrett, 2001).
Men and masculinity suggest that masculinity is
intimately linked to wider social and cultural transformations
within the British nation-state andother western countries and
that the assumed crisis of masculinity can be read as an
effectof the wider crisis of late modernity. The question of
identity has once again emerged as one of the key dynamic
concepts in the context of rethinking social and cultural
change. It is suggested that socio-cultural change is marked by
the disintegration of older social collectivises such as social
class and increased fluidity of social relationship, with an
accompanying interest in identity and subjectivity (Bradley,
1996). More specifically, there has been a focus on the
dislocation (Giddens 1991; Hall 1992). The concept of
identity is a highly resonant term that is used in a wide variety
of ways in different contexts. Britain (1989) illustrates the
usefulness of the concept of identity, examining three
emphases, which are relevant to the theorization of
masculinity, namely, the socialization case, masculine crisis
theory, and the reality construction model. Sociologically, the
high conceptual value of identity emerges from its
contribution to new individuals and society (as cited in Alsop
et al, 2003, p. 17).
1.6. Crisis in masculinity
Claims that men and masculinities are constantly in crisis are
constantly and vociferously made, the precise nature of the
crisis in masculinity (that is, how it manifests itself and is
actually experienced) is ill defined and elusive. The idea that
masculinity, in one guise or another, is in a state of deep crisis
has become widely accepted as a 'fact'. But is it a case that
something, repeated time and again, is assumed to exist on the
'no smoke with out fire' principle? Moreover, if there is a crisis,
then there are three possible explanations, namely that it is
new and unique to our times, that it has existed in the past,
either in the same or different forms, or that it is constitutive of
masculinity itself (Beynon, 2002).
1.7. Evidence for men in crisis
In the 1990s men have been seen to be in the fore front of
social concerns about jobs, changing family patterns, failure in
school and violent crime. Cowards (1999, p. 52) has listed a
list of some contradictory factors that lead to crisis in
masculinity. According to Cowards (1999) in his list, he
mentioned that men are generally far more reluctant than
women to face up to and respond to physical and
psychological problems. They suffer deep depression at the
loss of the breadwinner role and the status that went with it as
this was regarded as one of the crises of masculinity.
Furthermore, Cowards explained that men face constant job
role changes, the threat of unemployment and job related
stress daily. The advent of post modernity has resulted in
redundancy and downsizing: less than 50 per cent of men aged
55 and over in Britain are in work and many such men die
prematurely. Many remain bad at acknowledging and
expressing feelings and are trapped between old-style,
machismo and nurturing 'new man-ism'. All of these put
together are some of the crisis faced by men in the late modern
society (Beynon, 2002).
Masculinity, certainly as it has been traditionally
understood, has become unfashionable and the 'crisis' has been
created by a reversal in value of 'male' and 'female' traits.
Being logical, disciplined, rational and competitive are “now
seen as the stigma of deviance [whereas] the very traits which
once marked out women as weak and inferior-emotional,
spontaneous, intuitive, expressive, compassionate,
empathetic-are increasingly seen as the makers of maturity
and health” (Clare, 2000, p. 68). For Clare (2000), 'at the heart
of the crisis in masculinity is a problem with the reconciliation
Flourish Itulua-Abumere:Understanding Men and Masculinity in Modern Society
45
of the private and the public, the intimate and the impersonal,
the emotional and the rational' (2000, p. 212). This is, of
course, a predicament shared with women, namely protecting
the personal and private against the intrusions and excessive
demands of a voracious economic system (as cited in Beynon,
2002)
2. Conclusion
In conclusion, the understanding of masculinity has
demonstrated that masculinity is not 'natural'. Instead, it is
seen as a gender identity that is socially and culturally
constructed, historical and political. It has represented the
social and cultural interpretation of maleness learnt through
engagement and participation in the society. The
understanding of masculinity in modern society has also seen
femininity as a treat on masculinity and an evidence of that is
the present crisis that men face in the world or work and job
roles in the society. So also, this essay has demonstrated how
socialization has lead into the creation of masculinity and the
relationship between masculinity and self-identity.
References
Alsop, R., Fitzsimons, A. and Lennon, K. (2002). Theorizing Gender.
Cambridge: Polity.
Bell, V. (1999). Performativity and Belonging: An Introduction. Theory,
Culture and Society, 16(2), 1-10.
Beynon, J. (2002). Issues in Cultural and Media Studies, Masculinities and
Culture. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Bradley, H. (1996). Fractured identities: changing patterns of inequality.
Cambridge: Polity Press.
Brannon, R. (1976). The male sex role: our culture's blueprint of manhood.
Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.
Brittan, A. (1989).Masculinity and Power. New York: Blackwell.
Butler, J. (1990). Gender trouble.Feminism and the Subversion of Identity.
New York: Routledge.
Carrigan, T., Connell, R. W. and Lee, J. (1985). Towards a New Sociology of
Masculinity. Theory and Society, 14, 551-604
Clare, A. (2000). On Men: Masculinity in crisis. London: Chatto and Windus.
Clatterbaugh, K. (1990). Contemporary Perspective on masculinity: Men.
Women, and politics in modern society. Boulder, CO: Westview press.
Cockburn, C. (1983). Brothers: Male dominance and technological change.
London: Pluto Press.
Cockburn, C. (1991). In the way of women: Men's resistence to sex equality in
organisations. London: Macmillan
Connell, R.W. (1987). Gender and Power: Society, the Person and Sexual
Politics. Cambridge: Polity.
Connell, R.W. (1995). Masculinities. Cambridge: Polity.
Corman, J., Luxton, M., Livingstone, D. and Seccombe, W. (1993).Recasting
Steel Labour: The Stelco Story. Halifax: Fernwood.
Cornwall, A. and Lindisfarne, N. (1994).Dislocating Masculinity:
Comparative Ethnographies. London: Routledge.
Coward, R. (1999). Sacred Cows. London: Harper Collins.
Donaldson, M. (1991).Time for our lives: Labour and Love in the Working
Class. Sydney: Allen &Unwin.
Donaldson, M. (1993). 'What is hegemonic masculinity?' Theory and Society
22, 643-57
Edley, N. and Wetherell, M. S. (1995). Men in Perspective: Practice, Power
and Identity. Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Giddens, A. (1991). Modernity and Self-Identity. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Giddens, A. (2001). Sociology (4th ed). Cambridge: Polity.
Gruneau, R. and Whitson, D. (1993). Hockey Night in Canada: Sport, Identies
and Cultural Politics. Toronto: Garamond Press.
Hall, C. (1992). The question of cultural identity, modernity and its furtures.
London: Polity
Harris, I. M. (1995). Messages Men Hear: Constructing Masculinities.
London: Taylor and Francis.
Haywood, C. and Ghaill, M. M. (2003).Men and Masculinities. Buckingham:
Open university Press.
Kimmel, M. S. and Messner, M.A (1989).Men's Lives. New York: Macmillan.
Maclnnes, J. (1998). The end of Masculinity. Buckingham: Open University
Press
Messner, M. A. (1992). Power at play: Sports and the problem of Masculinity.
Boston: Beacon Press.
Moore, R. and Gillette, D. (1990). King, Warrior, Magician and Lover:
Rediscovering the Archetypes of the Mature Masculine. New York:
Harper.
Morgan, D.H.G. (1992). Discovering Men. London: Routledge.
Nicholson, L.J. (ed.) (1990). Feminism/postmodernism. New York:
Routledge.
Pleck, J. H. (1976). The Male sex role: Problems, definitions, and sources of
change. Journal of Social Issues, 32, 155-64.
Pleck, J.H. (1981). The Myth of masculinity. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Rajchman, J. (1995). The Identity in Question. New York: Routledge.
Sarup, M. (1993). Post-structuralism and postmodernism (2nd edn). New
York: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Sedgwick, E. K. (1985). Between Men: English Literature and Male
Homosocial Desire. New York: Columbia University Press.
Whitehead, S. M. and Barrett, F. J. (2001). The Masculinities Reader. Cambr
... Masculinity, on the other hand, is a collection of gendered traits like competence, strength, and reliability (Fernández-Álvarez, 2014), which are culturally expected of men and not women (Connell, 2005;Diabah & Amfo, 2018;Itulua-Abumere, 2013). Such expected masculine traits are not merely the result of "genetic coding or biological predispositions" (Itulua-Abumere, 2013, p. 42) but rather a system of practices into which each man is socialized relative to his cultural and socioeconomic background (Fernández-Álvarez, 2014;Itulua-Abumere, 2013). ...
... Masculinity, on the other hand, is a collection of gendered traits like competence, strength, and reliability (Fernández-Álvarez, 2014), which are culturally expected of men and not women (Connell, 2005;Diabah & Amfo, 2018;Itulua-Abumere, 2013). Such expected masculine traits are not merely the result of "genetic coding or biological predispositions" (Itulua-Abumere, 2013, p. 42) but rather a system of practices into which each man is socialized relative to his cultural and socioeconomic background (Fernández-Álvarez, 2014;Itulua-Abumere, 2013). These socially constructed expectations of masculinity may vary across cultures and over time (see Adjei, 2015;Fiaveh, 2020;Gyan et al., 2020;Holt & Thompson, 2004;Messerschmidt, 2019;Molander et al., 2019;OECD, 2021;Siripai, 2020). ...
Article
Drawing on the Hegemonic Masculinity Theory, a culturally idealized form of masculinity that legitimizes men’s dominant position over women and other marginalized men, this quantitative content analysis investigates the prevalence of hegemonic masculine traits (HMTs) in 182 Ghanaian-manufactured beer and bitters video ads sourced from YouTube and Facebook. It also investigates the association between the HMTs and the type of alcohol. Findings reveal that bonding, dominance, sexuality, successfulness, and aggressiveness are common HMTs in alcohol advertisements. Significant associations exist between bonding and aggressiveness with beer and sexuality with bitters. The study sheds light on how these ads reinforce gender norms and male dominance, especially over women. Implications include ethical concerns for advertisers, regulatory considerations, and insights for businesses entering the Ghanaian alcohol market. Limitations involve the study’s focus on video ads and call for future research on consumer perceptions and behaviors.
... Hence, masculinity (as well as femininity) is a product of social construction (Butler 2006). It varies across different contexts and can transform due to its social, cultural, historical, and political nature (Hearn and Collinson 1994;Itulua-Abumere 2013). ...
Article
Full-text available
Women's involvement in the Forum of Religious Harmony (Forum Kerukunan Umat Beragama - FKUB) is still rare. However, some FKUBs exhibit openness to women’s engagement. This study examines whether women’s involvement in the FKUB challenges the dominant beliefs and behaviors within religious groups and whether their involvement creates possibilities for change and contestation. Using a case study on the FKUB Bali and Sidoarjo and leveraging the theory from gender and masculinity studies to help frame the analysis, the study revealed two strategies used to involve women, which included forming a separate entity exclusively for women and developing an expanded familial framework inside FKUB. The findings also show that women's involvement is encouraged without altering the current structures. However, this study also discovered that the transformative masculinity exhibited by certain chairpersons contributed to the implementation of these strategies. They were strongly dedicated to gender equality, advocated for women's empowerment and involvement, and prioritized sustainable dispute resolution development. This study highlights the potential to expand research to include more cases, providing deeper insight into inclusion strategies and the role of transformative masculinity in progress toward gender equality._______________The original draft of this article has been presented at the 23rd Annual International Conference on Islamic Studies (AICIS), February 1-4, 2024, at Universitas Islam Negeri Walisongo Semarang, Indonesia.
Article
Movies are a potent medium for learning, as they are not only accessible but also have the capability to shape behaviour and provoke meaningful conversations. It is crucial to recognize that not all cinematic content promotes positive examples; some scenes reinforce negative portrayals and harmful stereotypes. This study decisively examines the gender dynamics in the Walt Disney Company film "Brave," which exemplifies the persistent issue of gender stereotypes in media. The primary objective of this research is to assertively analyse the gender roles depicted in children's films, with a particular focus on Merida’s character in "Brave." A qualitative research approach is adopted, employing a thorough methodology that includes multiple viewings of the film, detailed summary readings, extensive note-taking, script interpretation, identification of key terms and dialogues, and review of pertinent academic journals and articles online. This study delves into the gender dynamics presented in the Walt Disney Company’s animated film "Brave," which serves as a compelling example of the lingering issue of gender stereotypes in media. The primary goal of this research is to critically assess the gender roles depicted in children's films, with a particular emphasis on the character of Merida in "Brave." It seeks to understand how Merida challenges traditional gender expectations and whether she ultimately conforms to established gender norms. The research questions are designed to scrutinize the characteristics of Princess Merida. The findings reveal that Merida embodies ten distinct masculine traits, illustrating her complexity as a character who defies conventional expectations of femininity.
Article
Full-text available
Introduction: Affirmative Action (Gender Equity) Act of 2024, (Act 1121) emasculates male masculinity, autonomy of women and human flourishing in Ghana. It creates the delusion that patriarchal society is paternalistically protecting women no matter how evanescent. Methods: This is an exploratory review of the Affirmative Action law, using the case-study approach to explain the law, identify the implementation challenges likely to emerge and the effect on male masculinity and human flourishing. Content analyses of complimentary legislation and policies on human rights were conducted, aided by lessons from other jurisdictions with Affirmative Action laws. Results: Act 1121 of 2024 provides Schedules for implementation that is likely to cause institutional misalignment and upheaval due to the pre-fixed quotas for women to be employed by public institutions without regard to meritocracy. The Act promotes gender-conscious discrimination against certain classes of men by denying them equal opportunity. It denies autonomy of some women, who may not need the program in order to flourish. It creates exceptionalism for women for employment, appointments and promotes entitlement mentality among women. The validity of the Act is evanescent, which could lead to new forms of discrimination, mediocrity in task performance, and social exclusion of women. The key question is: How long would the Affirmative Action program in Ghana last? Conclusion: Compelling society to accept Affirmative Act Law as designed by the Executive is unconstitutional. It goes against the spirit of the international conventions that were relied upon to promulgate Act 1121 of 2024, making it an illegal Act “ab initio”. Singapore, a somewhat comparator nation, practices meritocracy which provides a just and equal opportunity for all, an example which Ghana could have followed.
Article
Full-text available
Manga, a form of Japanese illustrated narratives including comics and animated cartoons, embrace an assortment of themes and constitutes a significant segment in the Japanese publishing/media industry attracting its audience across age groups, including children and adults alike. Remarkably, Manga has transcended national boundaries to establish a prominent presence beyond Japan, entrenching itself in global culture through translation in innumerable languages like English, “German, French and Indonesian, to name a few” (Saikumar and Raghavendra 511). It is vital to accentuate that Japanese comics and cartoons often include narratives that mirror and prompt their indigenous culture, societal norms, and ethical frameworks. The material embodiment of these values plays a pivotal role in the perpetuation of certain conventions and stereotypes. The present paper delves into Freud’s concept of “unconscious desire,” Michael Foucault’s concept of biopolitics, and posthuman agency to bring out children’s psyche/ latent desire of utopia and how these desires are beckoned by the posthuman agency vis-à-vis the manga movie Crayon Shin-Chan: Intense Battle! Robo Dad Strikes Back. The paper also explores the reorganised ontology of the gender spaces and visual rhetoric of the patriarchy tucked in the layered narratives of the movie that come into play through biopolitics and the agency of posthuman assemblages.These conceptual tools dissect the psychological undercurrents at play in the mind of Shinnosuke Nohara, a five-year-old character who readily embraces and develops a proclivity for his Robot Dad. This robotic entity is intentionally designed to infiltrate and assume control over domains traditionally reserved for women, adhering to stereotypical binary oppositions and essentialist constructs. Keywords: Posthuman, Biopolitics, Secondary World, Unconscious Desire.
Article
Full-text available
This paper presents detailed critiques of existing literature and debate on crucial issues of domestic violence against women in Rural Sindh, Pakistan. Primarily, definitions, causes, consequences, and prevention of domestic violence, as well as sociological and feminist theoretical framework perspectives, are discussed profoundly. Discussions and analyses of past materials, meanings, nature, and scope of studies on domestic violence worldwide and in Sindh, Pakistan, backgrounds are discussed. Patriarchy, masculinity, and their relation to domestic violence are briefly elaborated. The international perspective on domestic violence, ideology and concept of patriarchy, men and masculinity connecting to the situations of marriage, gender relations, roles, legal and religious perspective in Pakistan about domestic violence in Sindh, and previously reported incidence is also reviewed. Likewise, relevant literature and its review on the topic of past studies, connecting with the present study, have also been established with relevant theories, which have overlapping effects on domestic violence. Literature review sections of papers define that there is not any single theory or reason; rather, there are multiple socio-economic, psychological, and feminist viewpoints which allow perpetrators to commit domestic violence against women in rural Sindh, Pakistan.
Article
This article examines the effects of the heteronormative gender binary construct on identity formation, by offering a comparative reading of Sylvia Plath’s The Bell Jar (1963) and Stephen Chbosky’s The Perks of Being a Wallflower (1999). With a focus on the respective protagonists, Esther and Charlie, the reading analyzes the characters’ deviances from social constructs, and the subsequent punishments and effects on their behaviors. The present paper seeks to demonstrate how rigid social constructs undermine the complexity of the human experience, as exemplified by the two novels, and for which they remain relevant contributions to the larger present-day gender debate.
Chapter
Challenging Contextuality provides a new and innovative contribution to the study of biblical texts and their interpretation by bringing together current and promising, yet still marginal approaches to biblical interpretation. As marginal voices are often drivers of innovation, this volume, therefore, both sets the agenda for the future of the field and provides a synthesis of fruitful approaches so far. In doing so, it aligns itself with the broadly shared, yet still only partially operationalized hermeneutical conviction that contextuality is a catalyst for interpretation. This applies in equal measure to approaches and methods that are often framed as ‘traditional’ or ‘mainstream’ (e.g., the methodological canon of the historical critical approach as the offspring of the European Enlightenment) and those that are often dubbed ‘contextual’ (e.g., forms of feminist or ‘indigenous’ interpretation). Ultimately, this volume aims to ground contextual biblical interpretation within the broader landscape of biblical studies. The contributors to this volume are all interested in the contexts in which Bibles are read. Rather than a series of examples of contextual biblical interpretation, though, this book is concerned with what it means to do contextual biblical interpretation, how contextual biblical interpretation challenges biblical scholarship, and what chances there are for this mode of inquiry, going forward. The overarching thesis of this volume is not that context matters—that is self-evident. It is that context should be a challenge and a chance for biblical scholarship, and not only ancient contexts.
Article
Full-text available
Despite some changes in how masculinity is portrayed over time, certain disturbing patterns and characteristics continue. Yet, popular media exposure may be the primary way that children and most adults learn about others as well as absorb and internalize social norms, values, and beliefs that are reflected in the way the media is presented and expressed. One disturbing characteristic that is shown in TV series is toxic masculinity. This study aims to study the portrayal of toxic masculinity in Nate Jacob in the critically acclaimed series Euphoria (2019). In this research, the writers used the qualitative method to gather an in-depth, detailed, and comprehensive portrayal of toxic masculinity based on the characteristics of toxic masculinity proposed by Kupers. This study showed that Nate Jacobs portrays Kupers' characteristics of toxic masculinity: misogyny, homophobia, greed, and violent domination. He performs toxic masculinity to prove to himself, symbolically, that he is not like his father. Nate exhibits dominance and violence because of his biggest fear of becoming like his homosexual father.