Jump to content

The sexual objectification of men.


Recommended Posts

Hanging around these boards has made me realize one thing. While the emergence of mass media has enabled the sexual objectification of women, this can only be coupled with the sexualization of masculinity.

 

Up until the mid 70s, the dominant representation of masculinity was actually that of provider. Men were expected to lead, provide and protect. (Of course not all men did, and I am not saying this needs to be so). For many of the guys on these boards nowadays, however, masculinity seems to be predominantly measured through sexuality: the capacity to sleep with as many women as possible (the hotter the better).

 

Given that some studies show the drive to love is stronger than sex-drive, the men who reduce their masculinity to "sexual promiscuity" must experience a lot of suffering (as witnessed on here). (I am qualifying this, because a lot of the guys on here do demonstrate the capacity to protect and care for others. They also seem to be the men who are most comfortable with their masculinity).

 

So what say you, has masculinity been emptied of its meaning, to the detriment of men?

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

For now, my only input is that this mentality is developed during a man's formative years, i.e., his secondary education and even college years...it's during this time that sexual "notoriety" is looked favorably upon, and social culture almost always rewards such behaviors...so those who "succeeded" carry this "masculinity" with them, while those who didn't hopelessly chase after the pinnacle of masculinity with their tail between their legs...

Link to post
Share on other sites
So what say you, has masculinity been emptied of its meaning, to the detriment of men?

 

Yup. It all seems back to front nowadays.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just kidding, I have one more thing to add. I've also observed that the more educated and career-minded a woman is, the less she may associate sexual notoriety with masculinity and success. For example, I met a girl on the cruise last week who told me she didnt go to school anymore and instead works in a restaurant, goes to the gym, and drinks and smokes weed all day...suffice to say, you can guess the kind of guys she swooned over on the boat...

 

So the status of the woman certainly plays into the dynamic of the male mind. If he possesses more of the traits that make him a good "provider," he will likely be surrounded by more likeminded women. However, I proffer that a majority of the complainers in this world don't have those provider traits to begin with, so they are probably more lilely to see day to day those women in a similar life situation..surely perpetuating this whole mentality we're discussing...

 

But I'm simply thinking out loud...

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Hanging around these boards has made me realize one thing. While the emergence of mass media has enabled the sexual objectification of women, this can only be coupled with the sexualization of masculinity.

 

Up until the mid 70s, the dominant representation of masculinity was actually that of provider. Men were expected to lead, provide and protect. (Of course not all men did, and I am not saying this needs to be so). For many of the guys on these boards nowadays, however, masculinity seems to be predominantly measured through sexuality: the capacity to sleep with as many women as possible (the hotter the better).

 

Given that some studies show the drive to love is stronger than sex-drive, the men who reduce their masculinity to "sexual promiscuity" must experience a lot of suffering (as witnessed on here). (I am qualifying this, because a lot of the guys on here do demonstrate the capacity to protect and care for others. They also seem to be the men who are most comfortable with their masculinity).

 

So what say you, has masculinity been emptied of its meaning, to the detriment of men?

 

The men I deal with on an everyday basis don't appear to be having a crisis of masculinity....but I see articles about it and, of course, there is much discussion of it on the internet.

 

Really, I see the angsting over it as being very much an American thing. There's this wild west, John Wayne cowboy notion of masculinity that I think American men were traditionally (based on very recent tradition in comparison with other cultures) encouraged to take a sense of identity from. I think it's an overblown-for-Hollywood ideal of masculinity...but that there's a sense among a lot of men that there was some golden age when this was what men everywhere were like.

 

Although we're not talking about terrorism here, for me this article (which I've linked on here before, and I don't think anybody ever actually reads it - which I'm sad about as it is hugely relevant to understanding our modern conflicts) really hits the nail on the head in terms of demonstrating the storm created by

 

a) people deriving their sense of identity from idealised and unattainable images of the past. The glory days.

 

b) related to (a) - a hatred of modernity, a sense of loss of power (since the idealised glory days) and a sense of feeling marginalised from the world as it is today.

 

c) The creation of scapegoats to blame and punish for the loss of this golden past and the associated identity crisis

 

The more reliance there is on this rugged individualist galloping his horse through Monument Valley who represents "man as he should be" the more frustration sets in. In the article I linked, Michael Mazarr talks of a need for disaffected people to have a model for the future, which will cement a sense of identity that can work with things as they are - rather than being reliant on the way things are perceived to have been hundreds of years ago.

 

I think that the men who have a strong sense of self, regardless of feminism, the industrial revolution and other changes that have occurred in the last couple of centuries, are the ones who have this clear model of what a twenty-first century man who is comfortable with the world around him looks like.

 

Others see that man as somebody who has been emasculated...but of course, the world disempowers all of us to a certain extent as we have to adjust ourselves to fit in it - rather than expect it to alter to suit our tastes and needs.

Edited by Taramere
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Immediate disqualifer:

 

I myself am as far removed from the masculine ideal in the 1970s as I am removed from the modern ideal of picking up girls for the evening, fooling around or anything like that. Because neither ideal appeals to me, and never has.

 

Sure I have my issues, but I am honestly happy that I am not constantly engaging in a rat race / p*ssy race in an, meaningless attempt to prove my masculinity.

 

So what say you, has masculinity been emptied of its meaning, to the detriment of men?

I would say it could be to the benefit of men. The real question is: how do men give meaning to their lives?

 

Confirming to the preconceived notions of masculinity cannot give meaning to your life in itself. In order to create meaning, you have to relate in a meaningful manner to yourself and to others (in a physical and emotional sense).

 

Meaning is something each of us creates in his own way. For some it is family life, for others it is erotic conquests, practicing religion, making money, or "experiencing things". There are people out there who do even have more seemingly obscure ways of relating to life and the world they inhabit. What happens is that for most people the ideal of masculinity is a amalgam of the various ideals (the breadwinner and the Casanova).

 

If you see life as a p*ssy race, and you are not particularly successful in getting women in your bed, it is tempting to think that masculinity has gone down the drain. Likewise, if you see masculinity as being a breadwinner, and you are not successful in your romantic life, it is tempting to think that masculinity has gone down the drain.

 

A problem is that we are often very limited in what we can do. "Experiencing things" costs money, usually a lot of money. Erotic conquests, usually requires some effort, and naturally some investment of time. Etc.. All of these ideals (including the rejection of those ideals) shape us psychologically (and I would argue not all are equal, in terms of mental health of the subject), and our perceptions of our world. This is not something your average boy (and I say boy, because those perceptions are mainly formed in childhood) can control at will: it is an illusion that we are free, both economically as well as psychologically.

 

We think we are free, but our freedom is actually very precisely circumscribed.

 

Masculinity, as traditionally defined has certainly lessened in importance. But the fact that people are still forced to hang on to concepts of "masculinity" and "femininity" is the real problem, and not one that will disappear overnight. These concept are highly contradictory ideals. Letting oneself be restricted by the ideological straitjacket does not make one free.

 

Insofar people are better able to reject the ideologically narrow defined ideals of masculinity and femininity, we can perhaps speak of progress. Freedom is meaningless if is is presented as a choice between black and white. We have to break out of such idiotic thinking to make real progress as humankind.

 

Now, I'll spare you all the rant on the ossification of productive and social relationships ...

Edited by d'Arthez
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Author

You guys absolutely rock!

 

You've raised another question I've been trying to formulate for ages... One which both Mazarr and D'Arthur hint at:

 

Why are alienation and authenticity such recurrent tropes of modern life? Clearly, the two are linked. Authenticity is often presented as "the cure" for alienation. But both authenticity and alienation are two faces of the same coin (modernity). Plus, I can't help but view authenticity as socially negotiated. "Authentic" choices only make sense in a system which attributes moral value and personal responsibility for life choices.

 

But I do buy into this modern existentialist religion (:cool:). I would rather be able to choose, to have the freedom to emancipate my self from defined gender roles. But is there a way to do this outside of a frame of authenticity-alienation?

 

Or put another way: why is authenticity so important to the emancipatory project of (counter) modernity?

Link to post
Share on other sites
But I do buy into this modern existentialist religion (:cool:). I would rather be able to choose, to have the freedom to emancipate my self from defined gender roles. But is there a way to do this outside of a frame of authenticity-alienation?

One cannot overcome alienation by living authentically. Alienation still determines all others and their relationships, even their relationships with you. To see the individual as a ball of energy that can somehow keep "the evil forces" out, is a false idea.

 

Or put another way: why is authenticity so important to the emancipatory project of (counter) modernity?

Authenticity is an ideological construct. Without authenticity, us all "being individuals", what point is there to life, other than the endless slaving for wages?

 

The authentic life is held up as an ideal, which only a fraction of the population can achieve. The rest, are simply consigned to lives of perpetual misery (though of course such a life is made a bit more bearable by various ideologies trying to give dignity to people whose dignity was stripped away by the economic system in the first place).

Link to post
Share on other sites
The real question is: how do men give meaning to their lives?

 

Confirming to the preconceived notions of masculinity cannot give meaning to your life in itself.

 

Throughout history a preconceived idea of what a man should be is all that has sustained many men through life. From father to son, a code of how to be and how to act has taken men through the darkest of times without depression, confusion, doubt and despair.

 

When I read many of the young lads on this site, or listen to the lads I teach, I see and hear a lack of understanding for that security and knowledge of ones self and their place in the world. There's an emptiness and a childlike mentality that once wasn't there. Now we no longer expect men to be what they once were that emptiness and childishness will continue.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Author

Another thing I feel is linked to the question of masculinity and "authentic" identity choices:

 

As women, we are now raised to question the ways in which society tries to impose its norms on us. Are men? I often feel questioning dominant ideology must be more confusing for them, as they, in appearance, stand to lose the most (being dominant). For women, we're told really young that challenging stereotypical gender norms can be emancipatory (to the point where, now, striving to be armcandy can be considered an emancipated choice :confused:.). Emancipation from masculinity seems to be a lot more controversial (as demonstrated by the whole 'emasculating' discourses). Is the price of freeing oneself from dominant masculinity higher than that of stereotypical feminity?

 

Throughout history a preconceived idea of what a man should be is all that has sustained many men through life. From father to son, a code of how to be and how to act has taken men through the darkest of times without depression, confusion, doubt and despair.

 

When I read many of the young lads on this site, or listen to the lads I teach, I see and hear a lack of understanding for that security and knowledge of ones self and their place in the world. There's an emptiness and a childlike mentality that once wasn't there. Now we no longer expect men to be what they once were that emptiness and childishness will continue.

 

Yes! That's the impression I get from reading these posts, and perhaps what I was trying to enunciate. Like Taramere, I rarely meet men who seem in crisis in the course of my everday life. It's likely, as Hokie suggests, because of the networks I inhabit. My own students tend to be the kind who believe social change is possible. They're outstanding young men. In the classes where discuss gender, however, they do express some discomfort - I tend to lead it as a discussion on the "domination of the dominant", which allows them to question how their masculinity is conditioned by society.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Emancipation from masculinity seems to be a lot more controversial (as demonstrated by the whole 'emasculating' discourses). Is the price of freeing oneself from dominant masculinity higher than that of stereotypical feminity?

It probably is easier for women than men to reject traditional ideals.

 

Women often pay a price for rejecting stereotypical femininity (SF), but in general it is seen as a rational choice (though we all know that gender bashing happily continues in popular culture); earning their own income is general promoted as a positive development. In most Western countries women's careers are not minor, relatively low skilled jobs, but proper careers.

 

This is a lot easier in 2012, than it was in say 1962. SF has become an increasingly outdated concept. Families often cannot survive on a single income anymore for instance. As such a lot of (bright) young women are rejecting part of the ideals of SF, whilst at the same time they still feel forced to abide by other parts of SF, such as the beauty ideal.

 

Women who reject SF are not as ostracized as they were 50 or even 100 years ago. But this is only a partial rejection. Look at "women's magazines" and you know that the rejection of SF effectively has increased pressure on women to be everything (career, wife, sex bomb) even more now than 50 years ago.

 

For men the story appears to be different. There are two processes at work, simultaneously:

1) men end up unemployed, underemployed, or end up earning less than their spouses, so that they effectively do not play their traditional roles anymore.

2) men who consciously reject the ideals that are forcefed them. That is something that is still in its infancy compared to the rejection of SF.

 

Stereotypical masculinity (SM) is something which was an expression of masculine power (to earn the bacon). As such men who cannot fit the bill for SM, do end up feeling powerless, and perhaps even end up blaming women for taking "their jobs". Naturally this serves certain vested interests, and as such "whine, b*tch and moan" sentimentality often finds expression in media and popular culture.

 

The rejection of SM is something that is only in its infancy. The men who consciously and willingly reject SM are probably a tiny fraction in compared to those who are unable to fit the bill of SM. And though that they often end up paying a social price. Even though they render themselves as outsiders, they do not tend to be economically or creatively impotent, and as such are still conforming to a part of the masculine ideal (by being breadwinners, or at least contributing to the family fund).

 

However, I do doubt that in 50 years time SM will have disappeared to the same extent as SF has disappeared. It is theoretically possible, but I cannot see the massive changes to the legal and economic world that are required for such a thing to happen, come to fruition.

Edited by d'Arthez
Link to post
Share on other sites

I definitely agree, Kam. I think there are many men suffering for the worth that society places on a man's sexual prowess. For example, there should really be no shame in a man still being a virgin prior to his first committed relationship. Yet so often you see men being shamed, ridiculed, for such. You see men calling other men names when they don't conform to THEIR ideas of masculinity. Wimp, chump, pussy, poof, loser... the list goes on. One can immediately draw parallels to the phenomenon of women themselves pushing back women's liberation by ostracizing women who didn't conform to the stereotypical ideals of feminity. Really bad.

Link to post
Share on other sites
ThaWholigan
I definitely agree, Kam. I think there are many men suffering for the worth that society places on a man's sexual prowess. For example, there should really be no shame in a man still being a virgin prior to his first committed relationship. Yet so often you see men being shamed, ridiculed, for such. You see men calling other men names when they don't conform to THEIR ideas of masculinity. Wimp, chump, pussy, poof, loser... the list goes on. One can immediately draw parallels to the phenomenon of women themselves pushing back women's liberation by ostracizing women who didn't conform to the stereotypical ideals of feminity. Really bad.

Actually, most of my male peers and brothers have been pretty supportive of me and my virginity. Occasionally they might prompt me with the "you need to get laid" pep talks (like in the male virgin/escort thread), but honestly they often tell me there is no rush for me and I shouldn't worry about it too much.

 

I cannot say that I am particularly as uncomfortable about my masculinity as I was before. Any lack of comfort that I have had has often come from my own insecurity questioning myself, but primarily because I have often been afraid of my masculinity and my own power. It has often been a source of much frustration, fearing an imaginary backlash at seizing my own power. Power that other people seemed to have an interest in harnessing, and now I want to take it for myself.

 

I think every man's acceptance/struggle with masculinity is individual to himself, and their definition is dependent on his own identity IMO.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Actually, most of my male peers and brothers have been pretty supportive of me and my virginity. Occasionally they might prompt me with the "you need to get laid" pep talks (like in the male virgin/escort thread), but honestly they often tell me there is no rush for me and I shouldn't worry about it too much.

 

I cannot say that I am particularly as uncomfortable about my masculinity as I was before. Any lack of comfort that I have had has often come from my own insecurity questioning myself, but primarily because I have often been afraid of my masculinity and my own power. It has often been a source of much frustration, fearing an imaginary backlash at seizing my own power. Power that other people seemed to have an interest in harnessing, and now I want to take it for myself.

 

I think every man's acceptance/struggle with masculinity is individual to himself, and their definition is dependent on his own identity IMO.

 

I'm glad you have had such good male support, and it certainly has borne fruit. :) I think that many men don't, though. I have myself seen the things that some men who don't adhere to certain personal constraints of 'masculinity' are called. Why, it even happens here.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Author
Why, it even happens here.

 

A lot! And I would say the conservative views of masculinity do not emanate from the male membership only. Masculinity seems to be a topic of debate for everyone, whereby "real men" are expected to be this or that. (I merely believe there is no better love than the love of a real man :laugh:.)

 

Feminity is also a topic of debate here (clearly), but the debate is so extremist that it is only common sense for women to reject the ideas. The ones around masculinity seem to be a lot more nuanced.

Link to post
Share on other sites
ThaWholigan
I'm glad you have had such good male support, and it certainly has borne fruit. :) I think that many men don't, though. I have myself seen the things that some men who don't adhere to certain personal constraints of 'masculinity' are called. Why, it even happens here.

I think it is a projection of their own insecurities personally. In my experience, there are two ways people project these things: Internally and externally. My projections are internal. Most other people's are external, which they use as a form of dominion.

 

This is true of a lot of men who have a false sense of identity with what they BELIEVE to indicate masculinity. This is why a lot of people who do PUA suffer IMO, because they read up on the outer game stuff and complete sidestep a lot of the more hard hitting info in PUA, which is centered around being a well rounded man. I always knew I would be doing a lot more with my life without it revolving around banging lots of girls. In fact, I've only ever wanted just one. Or three :laugh:.

 

[i imagined that I would have 3 relationships in my life: The crazy girl, the super sexy girl. and the all rounder who fully encompassed both the previous :lmao:]

 

I hear you though, men are called some really harsh things when they don't adhere to the strict guidelines of what a man is supposed to be.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
A lot! And I would say the conservative views of masculinity do not emanate from the male membership only.

 

Oh, definitely. I see it as 'worse' when it comes from the same sex, though. For example, in some African/Middle-Eastern countries where people are trying to raise awareness about female circumcision, some of the strongest opponents of change are women themselves. I think that is worse than men opposing it, in a way. It's like, how can you expect others to help you when you are unwilling to help yourselves?

 

Feminity is also a topic of debate here (clearly), but the debate is so extremist that it is only common sense for women to reject the ideas. The ones around masculinity seem to be a lot more nuanced.

 

To be fair, I think there are some extremists who try to define what a 'real man' is, as well. Though those arguments typically descend into either porn or financial ones, depending on the instigator. :laugh:

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
A lot! And I would say the conservative views of masculinity do not emanate from the male membership only. Masculinity seems to be a topic of debate for everyone, whereby "real men" are expected to be this or that. (I merely believe there is no better love than the love of a real man :laugh:.)

 

Feminity is also a topic of debate here (clearly), but the debate is so extremist that it is only common sense for women to reject the ideas. The ones around masculinity seem to be a lot more nuanced.

I think the difference in hostility is a reflection of how much women have advanced over the past 50 years or so. Extreme versions of anti-feminism bear little resemblance to most women's lived experience of reality. Hence it is much easier to reject for women. "Masculinity" has not declined to the same extent as "femininity" has changed. Gender relations and gender concepts are not a zero-sum after all. Though of course, we superficially tend to think they are.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think you can draw parallels between men and women when it comes to this.

 

That's because our biology is significantly different.

We think in different ways, we act in different ways and from that, behaviour patterns were born that are self-perpetuating [still].

 

In my culture :

- On independence and self-reliance, men are encouraged to do this but even after 65 yrs of women in the work-force at very high levels there are some jobs that are the territory of one gender alone. Men who are independent are still seen as hot stuff by women and they still turn on women.

- Women will always be more organized when it comes to social networks than men are. That's how your biology is and that's that, you cannot change this.

- Women will still have somewhat of a problem with them earning more than their husbands. I have yet to see a succesfull couple in my RL where she earns a lot more than him and they are happy after many decades. I do know of several such couples that split, and all of the times, she left him.

Why ?

I suspect because she didn't respect him.

- Definition of masculinity is fluid but right now the men who realise that this needs to be defined are either not organized well enough or just plain supressed by the feminist agenda.

Funny enough, some of the most active ppl in the masculine movement are women.

As a guy it pains me, but i think we will need some smart women to bash the 4th and 5th wave feminists into understanding they went too far.

 

I believe that the definition of masculinity for the modern man is still what it was.

The old cowboy stereotype you guys had in the US still has the same basic good principles there are today.

Independence, strength, rugedness, security in one's own skin, lack of fear, etc ...

Bottom line i think that women still need to respect men in order to love them.

Maybe not as providers, maybe not as handy men, but they do need to respect them for something in order to love them past the honeymoon phase.

Our job as men is to improve ourselves, women's jobs is to realise that masculinity doesn't mean boning tons of chicks or pampering with expensive gifts.

 

Someone mentioned circumcision above, do you guys know that most of the sensitivity in the penis is in the foreskin they cut off ?

Some ppl even try to reverse it in later life by extending the remaining skin forward.

 

PS: Sorry if the language is not ... the right one from a scientific pov.

Edited by Radu
Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh, definitely. I see it as 'worse' when it comes from the same sex, though. For example, in some African/Middle-Eastern countries where people are trying to raise awareness about female circumcision, some of the strongest opponents of change are women themselves. I think that is worse than men opposing it, in a way. It's like, how can you expect others to help you when you are unwilling to help yourselves?

 

 

 

To be fair, I think there are some extremists who try to define what a 'real man' is, as well. Though those arguments typically descend into either porn or financial ones, depending on the instigator. :laugh:

The porn and financial argument are funny as hell to see

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Author

Thanks Radu for your input!

 

Of course women need to respect men. Just as men need to respect women. I think what you're saying is that you feel women want to admire their partners (and I'd add, some men want their partners to admire them, or otherwise, be a sign that as men, they are worthy of admiration). I think you might be right, even though I don't agree this is part of our biological make up. I think it is a socially integrated belief, inherited from a time the only way women could access social mobility was through marriage.

 

I also feel that "feminism" is a term often misused here. As much as I would love to believe that feminist have loads of power to change the world, studies show it isn't feminism that's changing the definition of gender: it's economic restructurations. Whereby the majority of people used to live 'off the land' or off industrial manual labor, today, in most of the developed world, the majority of household maintain themselves through communicative, language intensive, labor. That's not the result of feminism, that's the effect of late capitalism and its ever-expanding markets. Again, we're doing a disservice to men if we continue to accept their "inability" to communicate. This belief, by the way, has been challenged in many psycho-social studies. Again, I don't think there's anything biological about it. But I can admit it is a topic of debate.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone mentioned circumcision above, do you guys know that most of the sensitivity in the penis is in the foreskin they cut off ?

Some ppl even try to reverse it in later life by extending the remaining skin forward.

 

I did not say that male circumcision is necessarily a good thing. In fact, I personally believe that boys should not be circumcised. They can choose for themselves later - doctors still perform elective circumcision at any age.

 

But that is irrelevant. Female circumcision is NOT the same thing. It is not simple removing of the hood of the clitoris via a sterile procedure, in those countries. It involves cutting off most of the labia at the very least, and usually more. It's the difference between skinning your finger and cutting it off. Male circumcision is debatable - female circumcision is inhumane.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Another thing I feel is linked to the question of masculinity and "authentic" identity choices:

 

As women, we are now raised to question the ways in which society tries to impose its norms on us. Are men? I often feel questioning dominant ideology must be more confusing for them, as they, in appearance, stand to lose the most (being dominant). For women, we're told really young that challenging stereotypical gender norms can be emancipatory (to the point where, now, striving to be armcandy can be considered an emancipated choice :confused:.). Emancipation from masculinity seems to be a lot more controversial (as demonstrated by the whole 'emasculating' discourses). Is the price of freeing oneself from dominant masculinity higher than that of stereotypical feminity?

 

Yes! That's the impression I get from reading these posts, and perhaps what I was trying to enunciate. Like Taramere, I rarely meet men who seem in crisis in the course of my everday life. It's likely, as Hokie suggests, because of the networks I inhabit. My own students tend to be the kind who believe social change is possible. They're outstanding young men. In the classes where discuss gender, however, they do express some discomfort - I tend to lead it as a discussion on the "domination of the dominant", which allows them to question how their masculinity is conditioned by society.

 

I don't understand why anyone, after a certain age, would allow themselves to be conditioned by society. After all, all there is to lose is yourself. Maybe they never found themselves in the first place.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
×
×
  • Create New...