Symbolic Displays Of Aggression And Male Masculinity In Rural American Literature Analysis

Introduction

Decades ago, the traditional of male masculinity was common to be responsible for the head and provider of the family. As for the females, they are expected to stay home, cook and take care of children and husband. “Both men and women in rural America have, thus, been forced to alter their discourse and engage in other symbolic actions to manage economic-based challenges to masculinity” (Heartland: Symbolic Displays of Aggression and Male Masculinity in Rural America). This explains that both men and women continues to point out on their economic status. In our text, Steven Seidman stated that masculinities are always known as the approach of feminists; therefore, “masculinity may give a clear edge to men in the competition for

McMahan’s article “Heartland: Symbolic Displays of Aggression and Male Masculinity in Rural America” stated “how masculinity is understood, defined displayed, identified, and positioned within a social system is created by and reflected within the interactions of social group members.” This indicates that masculinity started and created by the number of people interact in the environment. Masculinity can also lead to judgements when it is performed successfully or not. Despite of masculinity being judgmental, men must play the act of their “culturally specific, symbolic behaviors if they wish to construct a masculine identity in a given culture”. In this article, it gives a study to observe masculinity in a rural setting and how the community members view masculinity. The author who works as a bartender/bouncer found that there is violence that occurred, in which “it is impossible to avoid problematic interactions with bar customers, who might well be drink or under the influence of drugs, and it became to just sit there and observe” (Heartland, qtd: pg. 543), according to Winlow, Hobbs, Lister, and Handfield (2001). This indicates that violence can lead to dramatic problems when handling masculinity in

She taught at universities both in Australia and the United States. Connell highly disagreed that the ideas about what established masculinity are ethically definite. In other words, masculinity is important to whom is referred to. For example, “if women are seen as weak, passive and emotional, then men are supposed to be strong, aggressive, and rational” (Seidman, 221). Additionally, masculinity is based on how people interact with each other in which correlates with their race, class, and sexuality. With this said, Connell said, “to recognize diversity in masculinity: relations of alliance, dominance and subordination… This is a gender politics within masculinity” (Seidman, 223). To point out Connell’s theorizing masculinity, she believes that diversity defines masculinity has its own relationships with authorities. In our text, Seidman gave a brief example of how the roles carry out to the social authority such as President, Senator, CEO, General, media executive, or surgeon. It is stated that while there are many senators, executives, or CEOs who are women, it is definite identify as masculinity because people think those high authorities is only for a male role. In our text, Connell has mentioned that “every society has a dominant or a “hegemonic” type of masculinity” (223). This means that she believes men has the power or control type of their masculinity in the