Even as a small child I was totally aware that I could be obsessed with the Ninja Turtles and dress up as Luke Skywalker for Halloween and it was adorable whereas a boy who would get made fun of for loving Barbie and probably not even allowed to dress as Ariel. Girls have access to the whole rainbow, but for boys pink is forbidden. I don't see how it's not obvious.
The only wrinkle is that I think women are punished a lot more for not adhering to beauty standards and even given less room to participate in "masculine" activities if they aren't first and foremost traditionally pretty.
The pressure on women is different, I agree. And almost certainly worse for the less genetically blessed among us. But I was not a pretty child and I, like you, kinda felt this from an early age.
I totally believe the studies you link to-- but I do note that several of them are based on data from the 1990s and early 2000s. I wonder how the results would hold up if re-surveyed today; social attitudes toward homosexuality have changed a lot in the last 20 years (to be clear, I'm not saying homophobia isn't still a significant problem, only that the extent of the problem really has changed).
Feminism (correctly) told women that it was okay to take on masculine traits and virtues, but without a corresponding movement for men doing the inverse, it seems like men retreated into wholly negative definition of masculinity, wherein your manhood was defined only by what you are not, rather than what you are. Women may wear trousers, men may not wear skirts; women may become doctors, men may not become nurses. Most cruelly, woman can be attracted to whoever they want and still define their own sexuality, but men's sexuality is defined by others, and based on who you are not sleeping with - I think it's changing now but neither straight women nor gay men believed that male bisexuality was real.
Best case, I think this kind of thing results in a lot of exclusion and confusion, especially for young men who are being told by society to be masculine, but that every way one *can* be masculine, it's also feminine. But more dangerously, I think it leads men, especially non-elite men, to believe that opposition and defiance itself is now what defines masculinity. Once I started seeing "Defiance as Masculinity" it's very hard to un-see.
You're exactly right. Masculinity is defined by "not feminine." To an extent, this is because the very concept of gender is fundamentally hierarchical. Men and masculinity are superior, which means women and femininity are inferior.
The other reason masculinity is defined by "not feminine" is that it must be in order to mean anything. More on that here:
So true. Your illustration of the “power pyramid” of patriarchal values illustrates the essential truth of your point in a visual and spatial manner. While the role assigned to men in the patriarchy power pyramid is dominant and on top, the borders of the role assigned to men has narrower and more constrained borders.
We can also see this point illustrated in the default emotional reactions that people are socialized with in society as they grow up and become adults--- there is, in general a much greater and more visceral “ich” factor in the heteronormative world-view associated with sexuality between men than with between women. As an example, consider the rather torrid depiction of a sexual encounter between the two female protagonists in the movie Blue is the Warmest Color. Do a simple thought experiment, recast the same scene as playing out between two men, and put yourself in a multiplex cinema in Peoria—and watch as multiple men (and perhaps women as well) bolt from their seats and leave the theater.
In general, the “Ginger Rogers” rule holds true—her dance performance was doubly more difficult because she had to do exactly what Fred Rogers did, except backwards and in high heels. It is generally true that a patriarchal society will make almost everything more difficult and more dangerous for women than for men. But when it comes to men defying gender norms—or trans women embracing their gender identity—mainstream society seems to direct a greater level of opprobrium towards those persons.
Even as a small child I was totally aware that I could be obsessed with the Ninja Turtles and dress up as Luke Skywalker for Halloween and it was adorable whereas a boy who would get made fun of for loving Barbie and probably not even allowed to dress as Ariel. Girls have access to the whole rainbow, but for boys pink is forbidden. I don't see how it's not obvious.
The only wrinkle is that I think women are punished a lot more for not adhering to beauty standards and even given less room to participate in "masculine" activities if they aren't first and foremost traditionally pretty.
I wouldn’t know *hairflip*
The pressure on women is different, I agree. And almost certainly worse for the less genetically blessed among us. But I was not a pretty child and I, like you, kinda felt this from an early age.
I totally believe the studies you link to-- but I do note that several of them are based on data from the 1990s and early 2000s. I wonder how the results would hold up if re-surveyed today; social attitudes toward homosexuality have changed a lot in the last 20 years (to be clear, I'm not saying homophobia isn't still a significant problem, only that the extent of the problem really has changed).
I agree. I'd love to see fresher data. Then again, I feel like we're seeing a resurgence of queerphobia so who knows.
Feminism (correctly) told women that it was okay to take on masculine traits and virtues, but without a corresponding movement for men doing the inverse, it seems like men retreated into wholly negative definition of masculinity, wherein your manhood was defined only by what you are not, rather than what you are. Women may wear trousers, men may not wear skirts; women may become doctors, men may not become nurses. Most cruelly, woman can be attracted to whoever they want and still define their own sexuality, but men's sexuality is defined by others, and based on who you are not sleeping with - I think it's changing now but neither straight women nor gay men believed that male bisexuality was real.
Best case, I think this kind of thing results in a lot of exclusion and confusion, especially for young men who are being told by society to be masculine, but that every way one *can* be masculine, it's also feminine. But more dangerously, I think it leads men, especially non-elite men, to believe that opposition and defiance itself is now what defines masculinity. Once I started seeing "Defiance as Masculinity" it's very hard to un-see.
You're exactly right. Masculinity is defined by "not feminine." To an extent, this is because the very concept of gender is fundamentally hierarchical. Men and masculinity are superior, which means women and femininity are inferior.
The other reason masculinity is defined by "not feminine" is that it must be in order to mean anything. More on that here:
https://cathyreisenwitz.substack.com/p/the-new-york-times-is-lowkey-anti
So true. Your illustration of the “power pyramid” of patriarchal values illustrates the essential truth of your point in a visual and spatial manner. While the role assigned to men in the patriarchy power pyramid is dominant and on top, the borders of the role assigned to men has narrower and more constrained borders.
We can also see this point illustrated in the default emotional reactions that people are socialized with in society as they grow up and become adults--- there is, in general a much greater and more visceral “ich” factor in the heteronormative world-view associated with sexuality between men than with between women. As an example, consider the rather torrid depiction of a sexual encounter between the two female protagonists in the movie Blue is the Warmest Color. Do a simple thought experiment, recast the same scene as playing out between two men, and put yourself in a multiplex cinema in Peoria—and watch as multiple men (and perhaps women as well) bolt from their seats and leave the theater.
In general, the “Ginger Rogers” rule holds true—her dance performance was doubly more difficult because she had to do exactly what Fred Rogers did, except backwards and in high heels. It is generally true that a patriarchal society will make almost everything more difficult and more dangerous for women than for men. But when it comes to men defying gender norms—or trans women embracing their gender identity—mainstream society seems to direct a greater level of opprobrium towards those persons.
I still need to see that movie. Thank you for the thoughtful comment!
You may be one of those cinephiles who want to see a movie with completely fresh eyes and no spoilers. If so, don't click through this link to an essay about how the "male gaze" manifests itself in the film. https://sexualhealthalliance.com/nymphomedia-blog/the-male-gaze-in-modern-cinema