Masculinities
In Academic Viagra, Bryce Traister describes the development of American Masculinity Studies or heteromasculinity studies and how different ideologies of heterosexual manhood develop, evolve, compete, and gain status of truth. I struggled with much of the article because Traister includes a significant amount of discussion and critique of works with which I am not familiar. Nonetheless, I found that the article had some useful insights, including important points on heterosexual masculinity studies and the relationship and position with respect to women’s studies, gay male studies, queer studies, and gender studies.
Masculinity studies has allowed readings of classical texts in a new light, provided an academic answer to the regressive politics of menz and men’s rights movements, shed light on the how men constitute their masculinities against marginalized others, and demonstrated that the current performative, contingent, unstable, fluid, and constructed masculinity is in crisis and has constantly been in crisis throughout history.
Although Traister adopts this Judith Butler poststructuralist view that masculinity is performative and contingent, unstable, in flux, and constantly in a state of crisis, Traister also recognizes that American masculinity is notable for its ability to consolidate power and manage its others. Hegemonic representations could dominate the culture and yet be subject to change while not ever being stable, coherent, or authentic.
Traister further notes that masculine cannot simply be substituted for feminine within a feminist or gender studies framework because even though masculinities may be revealed as unsure and incomplete, this substitution does not appreciate characteristics of masculinity including its satisfied ego, imperial drive, individual power, sexual aggression, and assumption of citizenship as a matter of right. Although masculinity is performative and constructed, it is not hobbled by its constructed status. Ultimately, it may be very important to analyze heteromasculinity with a concern for the effects of the heterosexual male on marginalized subjects.
Share this:
Like this:
Related
One comment
I too found Academic Viagra an interesting, but dense and somewhat difficult article to sift through. However, I did find certain aspects very interesting. First, as Audrey illuminates about the article, Academic Viagra certainly is the academic answer to the ‘crisis theory’ and movements arising form it, such as menz and mens rights movements.
Certainly crisis theory has gripped men in society, and I find it especially troubling that the social repercussions of men’s rights movements is intertwined with marginalizing others. It’s so embedded in society. And the media…. I can’t take it with sickening trash found in the media. Particularly TV shows. Last night I’m with my girlfriend and her sister, and her sister has the remote, full control of the shows we’re watching. It’s crazy, just how many shows are about reclaiming masculinity, proving masculinity, or asserting power/managing others as a function of masculinity. Take one show on spike TV, something about these two professional cage fighters going around to fix up these failing gyms. Man, you had to see it. How the screamed and yelled at this lady who owned a gym, she’s crying, acting hysterical, and even trying to fight them. But these guys are ultimately right and she eventually give into them, and the gym is a ‘success’.
The worst part is, some of the people watching the show with me, completely put the lady at fault, having no idea that these shows put people in a particular light. Marginalizing others to assert masculinity.
The fact that there’s a rise of ‘heterosexual masculinity studies’, isnt a good idea because its written by academics who are probably in love with spike tv and the likes. It certainly is an academic answer to resist much needed change.