Cooper Thompson's View on Masculinity.
For Thompson, "traditional definition of masculinity
include attributes such as independence, pride, resiliency, self control
and physical strength." (199) These traits associated to masculinity often
become over-valued and exaggerated. Thus these traits change into
qualities such as competitiveness, toughness, aggressiveness and love of
power. He says that a boy who does not show strong evidence
of these qualities might be called a "fag." He is most likely
going to be perceived as having feminine qualities.
Thompson says that there are two main forces
in the socialization of men that explain these "tough" traits usually associated
to masculinity: homophobia and misogyny. Homophobia
is the hatred of feminine qualities in a man and misogyny the hatred of
female qualities in a woman.
Thompson states that evidence from his practice
as a speaker in schools have proved to him that homophobia and misogyny
are the forces that drive the socialization of boys. He poses this
question to students: "If
you woke up tomorrow and discovered that you were of the opposite sex from
the one you are now, how would you and your life be different?"
Boys respond to this question with "disgust" because the activities associated
with girls seem to them to be inferior. According to Thompson, girls
usually respond that there are "clear advantages" in being a boy.
For Thompson, the cost that we have to pay
for the traditional images of masculinity is just too high. It can
be very stressful for boys to constantly feel the pressure to be tough,
especially while there are other boys competing to get to the top
and only few of them will win. In the name of "toughness," boys,
as well as men, get involved in dangerous physical activities that can
put their lives at risk.
The opposite of toughness is nurturance, Thompson
feels. Nurturance is an attribute that is not perceived as masculine
and hence not valued. Because of the devaluation of nurturance a
lot of men "experience a greater emotional distance from other people and
few opportunities to participate in meaningful interpersonal relationships."
(122)
The devaluation of nurturance affects men's
emotional ties and the expression of affection among men. Studies
show that fathers spend a very small amount of time with their children,
and men report a lack of loving relationships with other men. Men,
Thompson says, "are afraid of getting too close and don't know how to take
down the walls that they have built between themselves." (122)
One can add that the lack of value given to
nurturance and the necessity for constant displays of masculinity prevents
close loving relationships between the genders which sexual tension is
not present. The possibility of true comradeship among boys and girls
and men and women is annulled by the pressures on men to show their masculinity.
Also, the pressures put on men to dominate others and take control also
leads to abuse, assault and war.
Thompson says that because masculinity, like
many other traits, is determined both by biological and environmental factors,
that is to say, because nature and nurture each does its share to create
gender roles, we can begin to make the cultural changes which are necessary
for the healthy socialization of boys and for less stressful lives for
men. Thompson recommends the following:
a) Boys must learn to accept that they are vulnerable and to express
their emotions and look for emotional support when they need it.
b) Boys must learn to be gentle, cooperative, and communicative.
c) Boys must learn to find non-violent ways to resolve conflicts.
d) Boys must learn to accept attitudes and behaviors traditionally
associated with females. This implies an end to homophobia and
misogyny.
e) All these add up to teaching boys to love both boys and girls.
For Thompson these changes in the socialization
of boys should begin at an early age. Since boys learn traditional
masculinity from parents, siblings, friends and media, this will
require "massive efforts." School curriculum and the school environment
can help the socialization if boys. For example, school athletics
is one of those areas that can help shape this new masculinity. Thompson
says that while participation in competitive activities can be enjoyable
and healthy, "it too easily becomes a lesson in need for toughness, invulnerability
and dominance." (124) Athletes learn to ignore pain and sometimes
are willing to inflict pain to win over the opponents. Yet, the athletic
model is thought to be a model of problem solving for adult life.
For Thompson, schools should provide more
experiences in nurturance, empathy, peaceful conflict negotiation and cooperation.
He adds that this new masculinity can also benefit greatly from the active
role men are taking into fathering and from the efforts of feminism and
the liberation of women.
Thompson foresees a society in which boys
can cry, can be artists as well as athletes, and in which being a boy is
not a thing that they need to prove. In a society like this, relationships
between boys and girls will be one of mutual support, while the relationships
of boys with boys will reflect their care for each other rather than their
mistrust. It seems Thompson is implying that true world peace can
be achieved with the end of traditional masculinity.
Warren Farrell's Ideas on Masculinity.
In his article, "We Should Embrace Traditional Masculinity," Farrell says, "members of each sex do what they are socialized to do both to give themselves the feeling of being part of a whole and to deviate a bit to feel like an individual. This make both sexes equal--with different programming." (137) Farrell means that men and women have been socialized to use different procedures to reach the same ends. Like women, men are fair, nurturing, can assume leadership, act according to a set of beliefs and express emotions. The important thing is that we understand the particular procedures used by each of the genders.
Farrell says:
Men are giving
but that their acts of giving are not as evident as those of women.
Thus, men's efforts to make a living to support a family is an act of giving,
as is, he claims, men's tendency to pay when going with women to social
activities.
Men can also be nurturing
but they understand nurturing as listening and doing. Men's way of
nurturing is to actively solve the problems presented to them. For
men to nurture is to solve.
Men's leadership,
often referred to as "men have the power," is the result of "billions of
hours sacrificed" by men themselves to get this power. This leadership
has created wealth and has open spaces for women to be leaders.
Men's outrageousness
means that they have been socialized to stand out to get the attention
of women. This outrageousness has often broken ground for major historical,
scientific and social changes.
Men's tendency to
keep emotions under control is the way they prepare to respond effectively
and even heroically in times of crisis.
Men's ego strength
reflected in their competitiveness implies "recognizing the ego
strength required to conduct a self-reevaluation immediately after a loss."
(130)
Men's expression
of anger often is just a sudden release of
tension followed by calm. Farell says that this "intensity, like
all powerful energy, can be harnessed--and channeled into powerful lovemaking."
(130)
Men put
their lives at risk for others. Men
often risk their lives to save women. Women risk their lives for
their children.
Men give
up their lives for their beliefs. This
is usually done for their countries and families.
Men are self-sufficient,
and this is built into masculinity.
Fairy tales do not give the boy the fantasy of being rescued from hardship.
He must overcome hardship. He must always be self-sufficient, hence
men are choosers and doers.
Men are risk
takers. A capitalistic economy depends
on this trait with the risks involved in investing in stocks, business
and conglomerates. Men learn to take risk and this implies learning
how to succeed and how to fail. Risk-taking helps men deal with failures.
Men's risk-taking
facilitates the development of identity.
Men discover their identities by challenging contexts and testing boundaries.
Men's socialization
process is about taking responsibility.
A job, a car, and asking for a date all depend on their initiative.
Men are doers.
In their world it is "efficacy" (effectiveness) that counts, they push
the limits of their talents and complain little.
Finally Farrell says
that men have the ability to laugh at themselves, and are able to change
without blaming others, unlike the women's movement, which, he says, has
blamed men for all oppression. He claims that now men are becoming
more sensitive and active in their roles as lovers and fathers and they
have done this without blaming women. When compared to women, Farrell
says, "men have changed less, but they also have blamed less." (135)
