| Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision |
| kimmel_manhood_in_america [2026/02/05 15:50] – cspivy | kimmel_manhood_in_america [2026/02/08 14:56] (current) – willmack |
|---|
| |
| Kimmel also asserted that gender is a socially outward performance, socially constructed, and that men have to outwardly demonstrate their masculinity in order to affirm their own notions (and everyone else's) that they have a sense of manhood wether toxic, and subconscious or not."Either we think of manhood as innate, residing in the particular anatomical organization of the human male, or we think of manhood as a transcendent tangible property that each man manifests in the world, the reward presented with great ceremony to a young novice by his elders for having successfully completed an arduous initiation ritual."((Page 3)). (Tea Aliu) | Kimmel also asserted that gender is a socially outward performance, socially constructed, and that men have to outwardly demonstrate their masculinity in order to affirm their own notions (and everyone else's) that they have a sense of manhood wether toxic, and subconscious or not."Either we think of manhood as innate, residing in the particular anatomical organization of the human male, or we think of manhood as a transcendent tangible property that each man manifests in the world, the reward presented with great ceremony to a young novice by his elders for having successfully completed an arduous initiation ritual."((Page 3)). (Tea Aliu) |
| | |
| | Kimmel believes definitions of masculinity from the nineteenth century until now have largely been created by homosocial relations. At the center of men’s desire and ability to prove their manhood is the view others hold of them. This aspect of needing to prove oneself is embedded in many of the relationships men have, such as paternal, educational, occupational, and fraternal. A man in this view cares more about his perception and reputation than his overall actual ability to live up to traditional masculine qualities. This culture is then responsible for deep feelings of homophobia in men. The fear in homophobic men is not that of queer men themselves, but of being seen as queer. LGBT+ identity poses the threat of not being able to live up to traditional masculinity like other men. (Tanner Gillikin) |
| | |
| | |
| | ----- |
| |
| ====== Part 1: The Making of the Self-Made Man in America, 1776-1865 ====== | ====== Part 1: The Making of the Self-Made Man in America, 1776-1865 ====== |
| Kimmel also discusses in length the general fear by men that other men will deem their "performance" unsatisfactory, and therefore dominate them. Men fear being judged, humiliated or belittled by other people as well. Masculinity is then understood to be a homosocial interaction where they seek validation from other men, and not just women. (Tea Aliu) | Kimmel also discusses in length the general fear by men that other men will deem their "performance" unsatisfactory, and therefore dominate them. Men fear being judged, humiliated or belittled by other people as well. Masculinity is then understood to be a homosocial interaction where they seek validation from other men, and not just women. (Tea Aliu) |
| |
| | In this section, Kimmel also makes the instability of the Male Archetypes specifically with how the self-made man can be revoked due to a lack of self-control or a severe mistake. Showing that the stability in the archetypes can be seen through the support behind the men; the guild for artisan heroes, the wealth and pre-established status for the genteel patriarch, and the connections from the self-made man. -(sage milton) |
| ==== Economic Success and Manhood ==== | ==== Economic Success and Manhood ==== |
| |
| As industrialization and the market economy changed the reality of what it meant to be self-sufficient, manhood was increasingly made dependent on economic success. However, the lack of economic stability associated with the market economy meant that the only way to achieve this "success" was to continuously push for greater wealth and renown. Since supporting one's family and achieving independence was crucial to demonstrating manhood, this relentless pursuit became both an ideal and a perceived necessity. Those who didn't thrive in the market economy were then seen as a failure economically but also a failure in cultivating masculinity. (Cameron Spivy) | As industrialization and the market economy changed the reality of what it meant to be self-sufficient, manhood was increasingly made dependent on economic success. However, the lack of economic stability associated with the market economy meant that the only way to achieve this "success" was to continuously push for greater wealth and renown. Since supporting one's family and achieving independence was crucial to demonstrating manhood, this relentless pursuit became both an ideal and a perceived necessity. Those who didn't thrive in the market economy were then seen as a failure economically but also a failure in cultivating masculinity. (Cameron Spivy) |
| |
| | Kimmel's analysis of the tie between economic success and manhood makes clear how the attitudes of the time saw economic self-dependence as a pillar of masculinity. In the burgeoning era of industrialization kicked off, success came to be associated with not just profit but also ones ability to navigate this new changing sea of business, thus those who were able to do so came to be seen as titans with great financial and social power both in part due to their monetary wealth but also their perceived masculinity. ( J.D.J) |
| ==== Race and Manhood ==== | ==== Race and Manhood ==== |
| |
| Besides different varieties of masculinity, Michael Kimmel's study demonstrates the creation and the use of racially and ethnically “Others” as one of the crucial mechanisms of masculinity construction. In particular, M. Kimmel indicated the paradoxical nature of the white perspective on African American masculinity. On the one hand, they were viewed to be “hypermasculine” because of association with violence and disobedience. On the other hand, they were thought to be “hypomasculine,” with dependence and helplessness as the key features. A similar process of racial and gendered “Othering” occurred with Native Americans, especially during Andrew Jackson's presidency. Overall, M. Kimmel's work illustrates that the varieties of hegemonic white masculinity did not develop in isolation, but they were often constructed in interaction with the masculinities of racially and genderly “Others.” - Nikolai Kotkov | Besides different varieties of masculinity, Michael Kimmel's study demonstrates the creation and the use of racially and ethnically “Others” as one of the crucial mechanisms of masculinity construction. In particular, M. Kimmel indicated the paradoxical nature of the white perspective on African American masculinity. On the one hand, they were viewed to be “hypermasculine” because of association with violence and disobedience. On the other hand, they were thought to be “hypomasculine,” with dependence and helplessness as the key features. A similar process of racial and gendered “Othering” occurred with Native Americans, especially during Andrew Jackson's presidency. Overall, M. Kimmel's work illustrates that the varieties of hegemonic white masculinity did not develop in isolation, but they were often constructed in interaction with the masculinities of racially and genderly “Others.” - Nikolai Kotkov |
| | |
| | {{ https://www.americanyawp.com/reader/wp-content/uploads/3a27255u-1000x1246.jpg?200|Cartoon of Martin van Buren}} |
| |
| ==== Political Character and Success ==== | ==== Political Character and Success ==== |
| |
| Constructions of manhood were deeply linked to America's political identity as formed through the American Revolution. Britain was cast as the tyrant father or the effeminized aristocrat that America overthrew in order to establish both a better political system and a better type of man. Republicanism and individualism became linked to manhood, while aristocracy and wealth were linked to femininity. Cultivating American manhood was then not only a social imperative, but was necessary for the political success of the United States. Leaders invoked ideas about the fall of Athenian democracy, caused by the supposed degradation of Athenian men into those characterized by laziness and greed who failed to abide by democratic ideals. Their masculinity was firmly tied not only to their political character, but to the health of their democracy. The 'American Experiment' could then only succeed if the nation was composed of hardworking and enterprising men that would safeguard democracy and protect against the temptations of luxury. (Cameron Spivy) | Constructions of manhood were deeply linked to America's political identity as formed through the American Revolution. Britain was cast as the tyrant father or the effeminized aristocrat that America overthrew in order to establish both a better political system and a better type of man. Republicanism and individualism became linked to manhood, while aristocracy and wealth were linked to femininity. Cultivating American manhood was then not only a social imperative, but was necessary for the political success of the United States. Leaders invoked ideas about the fall of Athenian democracy, caused by the supposed degradation of Athenian men into those characterized by laziness and greed who failed to abide by democratic ideals. Their masculinity was firmly tied not only to their political character, but to the health of their democracy. The 'American Experiment' could then only succeed if the nation was composed of hardworking and enterprising men that would safeguard democracy and protect against the temptations of luxury. (Cameron Spivy) |
| | |
| | |
| | Andrew Jackson acts as one of the best embodiments of the “Artisan Hero,” with a potent, vengeful form of masculinity. Kimmel proposes that one does a more Freudian analysis of Jackson’s character to get a background on why he had this vindictive nature. Growing up without a father figure left Jackson with only a mother and no solid masculine figure for him to model as he grew up. This lack of paternal guidance gave Jackson a constant fear of infantilization and a hatred towards those with infantile positions. This is why, during his campaign and his time in the presidency, he put in a lot of effort to rid the nation of what he perceived as overbearing “maternal” institutions that benefited men who did not need to work. Attacks on the National Bank notably characterize it as “Mother Bank.” The digs at the gold standard similarly harm the traditional gentry, a group of men who did not need to work for their wealth, all the while helping the poor men, those who had to use their labor or skill to gain anything. (Tanner Gillikin) |
| | |
| | ----- |
| |
| ===== Chapter 2: Born to Run: Self-Control and Fantasies of Escape ===== | ===== Chapter 2: Born to Run: Self-Control and Fantasies of Escape ===== |
| |
| In what many men perceived as the chaos of industrialization and the marketplace, the doctrine of self-control became a way to demonstrate manhood. This manifested in the self denial of vices such as sex, masturbation, and alcohol, which were perceived as degrading men both spiritually and physically. Sermons and self-help books warned young men against the dangers of masturbation, claiming that it expended too much of a man's finite energy. This would leave men without the energy to succeed economically and therefore prove their manhood. Other sources urged husbands to lessen the frequency with which they had sex with their wives, framing desire itself as destructive. Sexual activity, by oneself or with another, was framed as degrading one not only spiritually, but as even causing physical degradation, with supposed effects ranging from epilepsy to premature baldness. Self-control was then a way to achieve manhood even as it also challenged men's relationship with sex, which was also an aspect of their manhood. (Cameron Spivy) | In what many men perceived as the chaos of industrialization and the marketplace, the doctrine of self-control became a way to demonstrate manhood. This manifested in the self denial of vices such as sex, masturbation, and alcohol, which were perceived as degrading men both spiritually and physically. Sermons and self-help books warned young men against the dangers of masturbation, claiming that it expended too much of a man's finite energy. This would leave men without the energy to succeed economically and therefore prove their manhood. Other sources urged husbands to lessen the frequency with which they had sex with their wives, framing desire itself as destructive. Sexual activity, by oneself or with another, was framed as degrading one not only spiritually, but as even causing physical degradation, with supposed effects ranging from epilepsy to premature baldness. Self-control was then a way to achieve manhood even as it also challenged men's relationship with sex, which was also an aspect of their manhood. (Cameron Spivy) |
| | |
| | One of the foundational pieces for the “self-made man” archetype is self-control. The rapid industrialization of the early nineteenth century was causing a massive crisis in masculine culture. The emerging market culture gave young men new avenues to accrue wealth and upward mobility without following the footsteps of their fathers. This model promoted aggression and competition between men while disincentivizing taking after more stable masculine models. To help keep these men from spiraling downward, the doctrine of self-control was invented. Men were motivated to act with sensibility and avoid indulging in temptation. Actions such as masturbation and drinking still carried with them a negative masculine connotation, but one that was holistically negative. (Tanner Gillikin) |
| | |
| |
| Self-control in the context of alcohol was another outcome of changing religious and social values. The consumption of alcohol was thoroughly integrated into men's lives both socially and economically. Kimmel describes how the consumption of alcohol in America between 1790 and 1830 was greater than any point before or after in history. Drinking was not only integrated into men's lives, but was potentially a way to cope with the economic uncertainty of the time as industrialization threatened more stable ideas of manhood. Efforts to curb drinking were therefore not well received. Many perceived this imposition as an example of women holding too much power, and resistance in the form of continued drinking "became an | Self-control in the context of alcohol was another outcome of changing religious and social values. The consumption of alcohol was thoroughly integrated into men's lives both socially and economically. Kimmel describes how the consumption of alcohol in America between 1790 and 1830 was greater than any point before or after in history. Drinking was not only integrated into men's lives, but was potentially a way to cope with the economic uncertainty of the time as industrialization threatened more stable ideas of manhood. Efforts to curb drinking were therefore not well received. Many perceived this imposition as an example of women holding too much power, and resistance in the form of continued drinking "became an |
| ==== Feeling "Trapped" in the Marketplace and at Home ==== | ==== Feeling "Trapped" in the Marketplace and at Home ==== |
| |
| | The emergence of popular ideals about the distinct spheres of men and women placed men firmly in the public sphere of the workplace, somewhere that they could prove their manhood, yet also the origin of their manhood's insecurity. The workplace was defined as an arena to prove one's manhood to others, the home a refuge maintained by wives where moral behavior was cultivated. However, as home became increasingly defined as a woman's area of control, men limited their time there. The 'refuge' now became oppressive, and it was common for men to spend long hours at work, where there manhood could be proved, instead of returning to the 'feminized' home. Spending too much time at work was draining, chaotic, or even challenged moral ideals, but returning home was framed as submitting to the moral authority of women. Masculinity never felt secure in either realm, boosting the popularity of escape fantasies where one could leave behind wife, family, and career to adventure west and cultivate homosocial relationships and independent communities. (Cameron Spivy) |
| ==== Escape to the West ==== | ==== Escape to the West ==== |
| |
| | {{ https://images.fineartamerica.com/images/artworkimages/mediumlarge/2/1800s-1830s-colonel-david-davy-crockett-vintage-images.jpg?200| Davy Crockett}} |
| |
| M. Kimmel's second chapter is dedicated to the genealogy of the self-made man version of masculinity. In particular, M. Kimmel examines the gendered origins of the construction of the American West as a place of escape from civilization and effeminate middle-class domestic life. Using a wide range of sources, he argues that the West became associated with crudeness, physical labor, freedom, and ultimately a space for performing masculinity alongside other males. At the same time, this myth of the West led to the popularity of narrative discourses about the lives of famous pioneers, offering a glimpse of "moral sublimity" to men who were unable to go to the West. These arguments indicate a significant role of discursive masculinities and gender relations in the cultural imagination of the American West. - Nikolai Kotkov | M. Kimmel's second chapter is dedicated to the genealogy of the self-made man version of masculinity. In particular, M. Kimmel examines the gendered origins of the construction of the American West as a place of escape from civilization and effeminate middle-class domestic life. Using a wide range of sources, he argues that the West became associated with crudeness, physical labor, freedom, and ultimately a space for performing masculinity alongside other males. At the same time, this myth of the West led to the popularity of narrative discourses about the lives of famous pioneers, offering a glimpse of "moral sublimity" to men who were unable to go to the West. These arguments indicate a significant role of discursive masculinities and gender relations in the cultural imagination of the American West. - Nikolai Kotkov |
| | |
| | Kimmel details how, as the home became an increasingly feminized place, countless men were experiencing the "identity crisis" of the unstable manhood of the Self-Made Man for the first time and found the home to be a place of unease rather than a safe haven from the competition of the working world. In 1849, the California Gold Rush served as a highly desired outlet of freedom for many of these men seeking to escape both the constant questioning of their manhood and the restrictive influence of their wives. Even though these men didn't often "strike gold," so to say, they still found what Kimmel describes as "pure" manhood that was detached from the constant test of being self-made men. (Noah Rutkowski) |
| |
| ==== The Civil War and Manhood ==== | ==== The Civil War and Manhood ==== |
| |
| |
| | |
| | ----- |
| |
| ====== Part 2: The Unmaking of the Self-Made Man at the Turn of the Century ====== | ====== Part 2: The Unmaking of the Self-Made Man at the Turn of the Century ====== |
| A man who is a perfect example of the title of this section "The Unmaking of the Self-Made Man" is Rev. Russell Conwell. In the face of challenges to the tradition of the "heroic artisan" idea of masculinity posed by increasing financial dependence of men in factories, Conwell still claimed that every man's worth is up to him and a man's origins did not determine his future financial status. These claims made in his "Acres of Diamonds" sermon are significant because it demonstrates the persistence of the ideal "heroic artisan" who could make their own path despite challenges at a time where this idea becoming less and less realistic. (Henry Prior) | A man who is a perfect example of the title of this section "The Unmaking of the Self-Made Man" is Rev. Russell Conwell. In the face of challenges to the tradition of the "heroic artisan" idea of masculinity posed by increasing financial dependence of men in factories, Conwell still claimed that every man's worth is up to him and a man's origins did not determine his future financial status. These claims made in his "Acres of Diamonds" sermon are significant because it demonstrates the persistence of the ideal "heroic artisan" who could make their own path despite challenges at a time where this idea becoming less and less realistic. (Henry Prior) |
| |
| | GOT TO HERE--WBM |
| | |
| | ----- |
| |
| ===== Chapter 4: Playing for Keeps: Masculinity as Recreation and the Re-Creation of Masculinity ===== | ===== Chapter 4: Playing for Keeps: Masculinity as Recreation and the Re-Creation of Masculinity ===== |
| | |
| | ----- |
| |
| ====== Part 3: The New Man in a New Century, 1920-1950 ====== | ====== Part 3: The New Man in a New Century, 1920-1950 ====== |
| |
| ===== Chapter 7: “Temporary About Myself”: White-Collar Conformists and Suburban Playboys, 1945-1960 ===== | ===== Chapter 7: “Temporary About Myself”: White-Collar Conformists and Suburban Playboys, 1945-1960 ===== |
| | |
| | ----- |
| |
| ====== Part 4: The Contemporary "Crisis" of Masculinity ====== | ====== Part 4: The Contemporary "Crisis" of Masculinity ====== |
| |
| ===== Chapter 8: The Masculine Mystique ===== | ===== Chapter 8: The Masculine Mystique ===== |
| | |
| | ----- |
| |
| ===== Chapter 9: Wimps, Whiners, and Weekend Warriors: The Contemporary Crisis of Masculinity and Beyond ===== | ===== Chapter 9: Wimps, Whiners, and Weekend Warriors: The Contemporary Crisis of Masculinity and Beyond ===== |
