Kimmel's book ‘Manhood in America: A Cultural History’ is about the history of the male experience in America. It is not a study on what the men actually did since the birth of the nation but is about what they were supposed to be like-what they were supposed to think, feel, act and do. Kimmel gives a scholarly account of how American men have been defined and described in the popular culture since the country came into being. Kimmel talks about the three stereotypical men of America- ‘the genteel patriarch’, ‘the heroic artisan’ and ‘the self-made man’ (Kimmel 16). The genteel patriarch was modelled after a typical gentleman from Europe-classical and trustworthy. He was a man of refined taste and sensibilities, subscribed to a code of honor that was typically upper class and was an aristocrat with lot of dignity. He owned property, provided for the family and was the source of moral instruction for his sons. He served the public, gave away without being stingy and was generally useful. Examples of the genteel patriarch from that era would include John Adams, George Washington and Jefferson (Kimmel 17). The Heroic Artisan was another model taken from the European man. He was honest, independent and someone who kept his word. His relationships with men were characterized by loyalty while with women he was reticent and formal. He was not only an artisan who took pride in his work but was also someone who was self-assured and reliant on his own strength. The most American of the three was the self-made man. This was in tune with the image America projected-where everything was possible, the land where your dreams would come true no matter who you were. He was a man whose identity was based on the actions and activities he did in the public sphere. The self-made man’s identity and status in society was dependant on the money he had made on his own and how far he could move up the social ladder (Kimmel 23). America was the land of immigrants; where people from all over came for the ideals of democracy and social mobility. The self-made man embodied this- hardworking and in search of better opportunities. He was on the move constantly and seldom stayed long in one place and put roots. It was a thirst for finding new fortune and adventure that defined him and it was this characteristic that also defined America. Farmers who went in search of better land, Adventurers looking for new land and Gold, teachers, miners and ministers were all part of the self-made man. In the end, it was not the ideal of the European gentleman which became the basis for masculinity in the country but rather the self made man who became the ideal and who dominated America’s notion of manhood. This stereotypical definition of a strong provider who was not afraid to test the frontiers became entrenched and was the ideal to follow for almost close to two hundred years.
"Manhood," Kimmel argues in his book, "is less about the drive for domination and more about the fear of others dominating us (Kimmel 6, 7)." he goes further in his book and comes up with the prototype of men the Americans have invented but that which had also proved to be unsatisfactory and that which had let down men and women for many years. He examines both the feminist movement and the men’s movements and the cultural role of homosexuality in defining a man and concludes that "Propping up manhood by exclusion has never brought men the security and comfort of a stable gender identity (Kimmel)." Instead he advocates for a world in which equality is embraced and differences are celebrated.
The search after the great man is the dream of youth and the most serious occupation of manhood. Man can paint, or make, or think, nothing but man. He believes that the great material elements had their origin from his thought. Other men are lenses through which we read our own minds. Each man seeks those of different quality from his own, and such as are good of his kind; that is, he seeks other men.”
—Ralph Waldo Emerson “Uses of Great Men,”Representative Men.
It is natural for both men and women to believe in great men- the man who can be everything at all given times- compassionate, strong, understanding, kind, courageous, productive, intellectual, energetic and more. But what is seldom known is that great men also occupy a position of isolation and loneliness. The code of supremacy says that the fraternal order is the highest communal area and that every member should show loyalty and fealty to each other. It is this unwritten bro-code which has been quite successful in keeping the men where they are. it is what tells the men to behave in a certain way and to have little tolerance for anyone who do not conform to the code. When a boy is saddled with such expectations early on he is under high pressure to perform. Feelings of disconnect from the family are taught to be alien and seen as vulnerability. As a result men grow up thinking that these feelings of longing, the need for security and vulnerability and are not masculine and proceed to mask it their entire lives. There are not alone in it as their whole brotherhood does the same and loyalty to the brotherhood is paramount. They grow up shame-phobic unlike girls who are just shame-sensitive (Dueck 107). The male code of secrecy also demands that a male adheres to this illusion of superiority they have created for themselves. Any deviation from this superior status would be seen by the men themselves as a sign of weakness.
The quest or the search for the ideal manhood remains in every American boy. It is the ultimate status most boys yearn for. The need to prove his masculinity is pervasive and formative in most boys’ life. The boys try to learn every boy code or brother code that is available and tries to follow it to the last bit. As a result his emotions are masked for good. That’s why Kimmel in his book says that it is the fear of being dominated by others that make men behave the way they do. He goes on to say that American men define themselves not in relation to the opposite sex but in relation with each other (Kimmel 27). Bergman says that there is a cultural pressure to disconnect with the emotions that boys feel just as girls do (Bergman 78). But this pressure to disconnect is a disconnect from the whole relational mode and a disconnect from the self-growth. A boy or a man even when he is taken away from the normal bond a parent and a child share is forced to not complain about it and grin and bear it. That is what the code of masculinity demands of him and that is what he would follow, no matter what his personal losses or problems are due to this.
The code of masculinity also describes how a man should behave. The code of the homo-social panic states that men universally fear being considered effeminate or a homo-sexual. This goes against everything they had been taught or had believed in. American men in the early part of the last century not only had to deal with the feminine aggressiveness in both the workplace and the public sphere, they also had to deal with the roaring twenties- where homosexuality dominated the theatres and other public stages. These two factors combined together further fuelled their anxieties. The men then decided to hit back and describe Gay men as totally being feminine. This was done mainly to distinguish themselves from the gay population. Being the manly man, they could not bring themselves to identify with someone who would not only break the code of masculinity but also behave in a manner that was not in tune to what they were taught to believe in. The American male then needed a space to reinforce their ideals of what gender was and what masculinity was. Manhood was then related and seen as a way to preserve their own heterosexuality (Davis 15). Manhood and masculinity also became anything that was against the feminine characteristics of soft and weak. Sports and physical training dominated the world of men and it was an accepted stereotype that a man would be consumed by sports unlike a woman.
Gender is negotiated in part through relationships of power. Microlevel power practices (Pyke, 530) contribute to structuring the social transactions of everyday life, transactions that help to sustain and reproduce broader structures of power and inequality (Courtenay 1388). The idea of masculinity and manhood that is being practices is a vicious circle. Men grow up believing in an ideal of masculinity and this perpetuates the thought process that this is the ideal. It not only affects the men but it also affects the women as the myth that men are superior is being propagated. The code of supremacy and secrecy only help to further this thought that gender inequalities are natural and that it is a given that men are superior to women. They are not only indoctrinated with this belief but are also expected to stay loyal to this belief and keep up the status quo. The codes of masculinity offer the men a wall behind which they could hide and also serves as a place where they could fraternize. Frat clubs, freemasons, and other men-only clubs are bastions of masculinity where the gender difference is spread and also given credibility. Masculinity thus becomes not an ideal or an idea alone but a way of life that not only has to be protected but also something that has to be upheld and continued.
The history of the American male is thus entwined with the history of the country. As Kimmel says the construction of a male identity and masculinity is a social construct rather than a natural occurrence and the history of masculinity in any country cannot be studies without knowing about the history of the country. The masculinity construct is a centuries old practice that seems to have no end in the near future. As men are threatened in their chosen fields, the idea of masculinity reached ridiculous heights. The ideal of a man has changed according to the times but the ideal of a self-made man had remained strong over the centuries . Even in this day where the gender roles have been blurred and men do many of the thing that women had to do and women do many things that men alone did, the idea of a strong male, not very much in touch with his inner feelings is the ideal that many look for. This need to stick to the ideal is also a reason why homophobia exists in the country. Gender and masculinity is a social construct as kimmel says and this has been at work for centuries. The physically perfect male is the ideal and this comes out in the preference for physical sports like football, boxing, weightlifting and more. These sports not only create a physically perfect or a physically attractive and strong specimen but also create a fraternity where men ‘belong’. The codes of masculinity in these areas are enforced with great care and men not only learn to uphold it with whatever they have got but also are expected to be loyal to the code. Any behavior that is different from the accepted norms is not only considered as treason to the code of masculinity but also treated with hatred and indifference. Kimmel narrates this history of the American man, the history of not what he had done over the years but a story of how he was made to do what he does now. It is a history of how the modern American idea of masculinity came from.
References
Courtenay.W.H. “Constructions of masculinity and their in¯uence on men's well-being: a theory of gender and health.” Social Science & Medicine. 50 (2000) 1385-1401.
Davis.G.Robert. Understanding Manhood in America: The Elusive Quest for the Ideal in Masculinity. Heredom.10 (2002). 9-34.
Dueck Alwin and Lee Cameron. Why Psychology needs Theology: a Radical Reformation Perspective. Michigan: Eerdmans publishing co. 2005.
Kimmel, Michael. Manhood in America: A Cultural History. New York: Oxford University Press. 2006.
Pyke. K. D. Class based Masculinities: The interdependence of Gender , Class and Interpersonal Power. Gender and Society. 10. 527-549.
