kimmel_manhood_in_america
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision | ||
| kimmel_manhood_in_america [2026/04/22 21:47] – hprior | kimmel_manhood_in_america [2026/04/27 18:00] (current) – [Chapter 9: Wimps, Whiners, and Weekend Warriors: The Contemporary Crisis of Masculinity and Beyond] cspivy | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 177: | Line 177: | ||
| In following the traditional path to manhood of protector and provider through the military/ | In following the traditional path to manhood of protector and provider through the military/ | ||
| + | |||
| + | While John F. Kennedy—who Kimmel describes as “perhaps the last president cast in [the] heroic mold”—was able to successfully pair his more aggressive masculine side with charisma, both of the presidents who came after him struggled greatly to achieve this same balance, thus exacerbating the Vietnam War. Lyndon B. Johnson appeared as incredibly insecure, pushing heavily for an aggressive masculinity in his politics that prevented him from being able to admit that the war in Vietnam had been an error. Nixon, too, did not want to seem “soft” or unmanly in his actions, therefore continuing to escalate the war in order to prove himself as a masculine authority. (Noah Rutkowski) | ||
| + | |||
| ----- | ----- | ||
| Line 188: | Line 191: | ||
| Like in the 1896 election where William McKinley was pressured to portray himself as a manly solider type where he leaned heavily on his service in the Civil War, George H.W. Bush had to push back against claims of lacking the proper masculinity to be vice president. He did so by using specific vocabulary like how after a televised debated he stated that he " | Like in the 1896 election where William McKinley was pressured to portray himself as a manly solider type where he leaned heavily on his service in the Civil War, George H.W. Bush had to push back against claims of lacking the proper masculinity to be vice president. He did so by using specific vocabulary like how after a televised debated he stated that he " | ||
| + | Kimmel describes the ways that, over time, the very core of what historically gave men " | ||
| + | |||
| + | In the context of the late twentieth century, Michael Kimmel argues that traditional forms of hegemonic masculinity lost their relevance as a result of various socio-economic and cultural changes. Among these were the struggles for discursive and material equality by previously excluded groups such as women, queer people, and people of color. In response to the successes of these movements, many men formed men’s liberation movements to advocate for men’s rights. Within this cultural context, movements such as Muscular Christianity gained a certain degree of popularity and social impact. Members of this movement often portrayed Christian life through the lens of martial virtues, suggesting that Jesus could be compared to figures like Rambo and that heroic, manly struggle represents the ultimate path to spiritual development. From this perspective, | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===== Chapter 10: The Anxiety to Anger since the 1990s ===== | ||
| - | **Chapter 10: The Anxiety | + | Similar |
| - | Similar | + | Kimmel states, similar |
| - | GOT TO HERE--WBM | ||
| + | Kimmel uses music as a way to look at masculine archetypes based on the genre. It was also a way for the masculine ideals surrounding the specific genre being spread to other communities that originally did not have that exact type of masculinity. With music it can show how sectional masculinity had become with the different groups, focused on race, class status, or personal ideals. (Sage Milton) | ||
kimmel_manhood_in_america.1776894448.txt.gz · Last modified: by hprior
