Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- kimmel_manhood_in_america [2026/04/22 15:54] – [Chapter 8: The Masculine Mystique] khamilt3
+++ 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/the new frontier, men in the 1970s found backlash instead. The "new frontier" of Vietnam was fighting back but many politicians feared in giving up on Vietnam they would be seen as a failure and effeminized. On the other hand in the anti-war movement men saw standing up for what they thought was right instead of going along with the government as a manly thing to do. (Katherine Hamilton)
+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 "kicked a little ass tonight," trying to appeal to the masculine good ol' boy architype. Additionally, the Regan and Bush campaign claimed that the Democratic candidate, Walter Mondale, was effeminate and fit the wimp archetype by producing bumper stickers stating that "Mondale eats quiche." (Henry Prior)
-GOT TO HERE--WBM
+Kimmel describes the ways that, over time, the very core of what historically gave men "manhood" in America has crumbled, making way for the countless conflicting ideas of manhood (such as the wimp) that we see in the 1980s and 90s. Everything from the vast decline of skilled workers to the dramatic increase of women in the workplace has tested the "foundations of traditional manhood," leaving men feeling frustrated as it gets increasingly more difficult to achieve the same economic independence that was once possible. According to Kimmel, the generation born in the 50s and 60s may be the very first in the US that will not be able to lead their children to be more economically successful than themselves. (Noah Rutkowski)
+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, the establishment of a Christian patriarchy, with its emphasis on both physical and spiritual prowess, functioned as a strategy by members of this movement to respond to growing cultural anxiety and uncertainty surrounding masculine ideals. - Nikolai Kotkov
+===== Chapter 10: The Anxiety to Anger since the 1990s =====
+Similar to the end of the nineteenth century, men in the 21st century are anxious about proving their manhood. However, Kimmel claims, that these concerns about manhood are being expressed more aggressively and their is more anger about manhood coming mainly from the middle to lower-middle class. This anger is expressed thorough rhetoric like the problems with political correctness, femininazis, and reverse discrimination while some of the lonelier of these men take their anger out by shooting their classmates or cutting people off in traffic. (Henry Prior)
+Kimmel states, similar to the nineteenth century, middle class men have been facing economic trouble which their fathers before them who were able to be the breadwinners of the house did not. This change in circumstances has led to men feeling as if their grasp on their manhood has been slipping due their inability to execute their "manly" duties. Social mobility through the form of the self-made man has also been harder as the wealth gap has grown.
+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)