The Strong, Heroic Male

This week we discussed male representations in our society, reflected through our television shows and cultural ideologies. These beliefs are also illustrated by our advertisements. Through Meyer’s “The O.C.” we discovered the four different types of males: hegemonic, complicit, subordinate and marginalized. The hegemonic male is the most valued in society for this is the male who is seen as strong, heroic and macho.

In Meyer’s article we saw how Ryan was an example of the hegemonic male because of his behavior and actions. When people called him “gay” he fought to prove his strength and power, in turn illustrating this is not typical homosexual behavior and so he must be straight. That is our societal norm: strong, heroic males are not straight and weak, feminine males are homosexuals. Ryan also went out of his way multiple times to be a hero and rescue Marissa or Seth from difficult situations. Again, reinforcing the fact that his power, control and heroic masculine abilities let nothing stand in his way. This is how our heterosexual male is supposed to act in our society for this is how we define him.

Advertisements like this one for Versace underwear reinforce this ideology. The man is strong, fit and active. His face portrays one of anger or defense. His fists are held in a boxing position. Versace used the idea of the hegemonic male to sell this underwear. It is not made for skinny, defenseless men, instead it is made for the “heroes” of our society- the men who are not afraid to fight.

Another advertisement like this Izod one illustrates the idea of protection. The female turns to the large, masculine male for comfort and safety. Again, this reflects the same idea as in The O.C. Whenever Marissa needed someone Ryan was always there, putting himself in danger just to prove he was masculine and strong enough to take care of any woman. Multiple times Marissa was shown as the weak character while Ryan was shown as the savior.

Lastly, this Bavaria ad shows a man on a beach grilling an octopus. The bubble above him features the battle he had with the octopus right before he decided it would be his dinner. He is shown drinking the beer, his chest swollen with pride and his six pack glistening in the light. This illustrates the idea that men must put themselves in dangerous situations just to prove their strength and power- in turn a parallel to their masculinity. This man had to dive into the ocean and fight an octopus just so he could then enjoy a nice sip of Bavaria. It shows that he earned this beer, through his masculine efforts and dangerous pursuit.

Overall through television, advertisements and other media representations our society defines the best male as one who possesses strength, a desire for adventure and an ability to fight to the death. This is not an accurate portrayal of men in our society for everyone is different and has different talents and views on life; yet, our media and society has defined this as the best type of male and in turn this is the picture many men want to live up to.

Bruce Willis Can Escape Danger, But Not His Hegemonic Masculinity.

I’ve seen a decent share of action/adventure and science fiction/fantasy films to understand the “hierarchy of masculinities” (Meyer, 456). I want to focus on one of my personal favorite actors, Bruce Willis and how he is always depicted as the type of hegemonic male figure. As Elizabeth J. Meyer describes the hegemonic man to have, “…heterosexuality, power, authority, aggression and technical competence,” I will briefly examine some of the movies Willis has starred in and how he plays the same role in them.

Die Hard (one through 4), Pulp Fiction, The Fifth Element, and Sin City, are all films that Willis was casted in. In all of these movies Willis fights, rescues other people, and has issues with his very heterosexual relationships (Meyer, 457). Bruce Willis seems to be this man’s man with his muscles, baldhead, and ability to kick some evil butt to save a pretty girl.

I think what really stands out for me is that in The Fifth Element, Bruce Willis is sort of like the equivalent of an ex-Marine turned taxi driver who happens to be the only one who could save the most powerful being in the universe (the fifth element, who just happens to be an attractive woman). So, just to clarify how hegemonically masculine Bruce Willis is, he can save a mumbling, aspiring baker (16 Blocks), an element, which saves the world, and all other complicit male side kicks he encounters in any of his movies by fighting the other either with his own hands or weapons (whatever gets the job done).

I don’t care if Willis keeps playing his hegemonic role, although he is not getting any younger, I will still see his movies and enjoy all the action there is. Although, I do have to say that after reading the Meyer article, I never realized just how much Willis plays the same hegemonic character in his films. So in any future movies I see of Willis’, I’ll be on the lookout to see if his increasing age affects the hegemonic role he plays.

Men on top

We were discussing in class how women never achieved anything on their own. It is because of our father or husbands that we are able to achieve whatever we have gained. For example, in the OC Kristen was working at one the biggest construction companies in Newport but because of her father. On the other hand, Julie Cooper is a stay home mom but gained her social life and respect through the man she is with at the moment. There is never a story when a woman achieves her accomplishments on her own. In the media, women always seem like they are an accessory to men. Men are able to be a father and a business man, simultaneously. However, women are represented to always loose something. She is either a workaholic and not a good mother or a good mother and not so respected at her job or sometimes don't even have a job. I feel like this is a problem because we are feeding these kinds of messages to our society, especially our kids. I wouldn't want my younger sister to feel like she had a choice to make between working and being part of a family. Like someone mentioned in class, everyone is not fortunate enough to learn what we learn in class and have a critical lens about the media. So the media should step up and really try to come up with ways to send messages that support ideas other than women being an accessory to men. They should not abuse their power and really take control and help the society as a whole to change how we think about each other and the gender roles in our society.

An Unconscious Loss of Power

After discussing the topic of race, particularly African American women, I began to think about how Hooks made the claim that women in the entertainment industry have taken their bodies and sexuality and used them for power, but at the same time sexual "savagery." One area that comes to mind when I hear that idea is that of rap and hip-hop music videos. In those videos, women dance around sometimes half-naked, being degraded by the men who are indirectly rapping about them while essentially degrading themselves. This idea brings me back to the subject of the Hottentot Venus, as many people in society look at these music videos as a kind of spectacle in the media, amused yet shocked that a person's body is being portrayed as having such little worth. Also, while some performers use body parts such as the butt as a sign of taking something that was once negative and making it powerful, video vixens ultimately give their power back to the same people who had it in the past. Of course these girls may seem that they are independent and expressing their bodies in a way they want, but ultimately their bodies are once again looked at with no respect and are essentially made into commodities - something that can be purchased - just as black women's bodies were looked upon by their white counterparts in the past. Ultimately, changes need to be made and a message needs to be sent to the world of rap and hip-hop; they're messages aren't eradicating old ways of thinking - they continue to fuel them.

American Booty?

In this weeks lecture while watching Beyonce’s video “All The Single Ladies,” the discussion of butts was briefly touched on. Butts were never recognized as a sign of sexual empowerment to women. Since the casting of celebs wearing skimpy attire became popular through the use of music videos, I think that the act of women revealing their butts has become a huge symbol of sexuality in our culture. I feel like many artists these days will reveal parts of their body as a way to become more popular, instead of using their actual talent to get their fans. Unfortunately assumptions are automatically made based on how much skin women reveal, which is why it is so hard to distinguish between a woman who just likes wearing short shorts and a woman that is trying to be looked at for what is underneath her shorts. I think that the popular music culture of hip hop has played a major part of making women feel like they should want to wear short and revealing outfits to get attention from men. People look at the “All The Single Ladies,” music video and want to become just like Beyonce. The younger generation is what is mostly affected by the continuous playing of booty shaking, because they are constantly looking for music artists as role models. I hope that eventually our cultural use of the booty will change and not just be a sign of sexuality.

Avatar representation in Maplestory

MapleStory is a massively multi-player online role-playing game published by Nexon - it works on a "free-to-play" model which means, Nexon makes its money from people who buy decorative virtual goods for their online characters. This concept of avatars, particularly in MapleStory is pretty interesting in itself in relation to Hall's ideas of online representation and anonymity.

Character creation in MapleStory has ideologies on two fronts, the first is in a player's choice to select how they are represented online - they can chose female or male gendered characters, skin colors, hair types, and hair colors. See 1 and 2.

In context to the MapleWorld at large, particularly with skin color, I would argue that th

ere is definitely a hegemonic preference for lighter skin, and a very real difference in the way female characters are treated in comparison to male characters. Racist sentiments, either because of anonymity or the general young-age of MapleStory players (at the last rating change the game is intended for a 10+ audience) are a large part of this community.

They exist among the players and within the game's content itself. NPCs, non-player characters that give players quests and services within the game are largely light skinned - I can not think of very many dark skinned NPCs, and the ones I do think of have roles and titles that are more "savage-like" names such as "Blackbull" a tribal chief (right) and "Pio" a carpenter (left).

The Big Brown Box

After this week's discussion about what happened in Bobst Library, I needed to do some investigating.

I was super intrigued in hearing that our big brown box was built as a demonstration of power. Obviously I've always known the building is "off" somehow; the cube fortress juts out from the earth like a sore thumb and doesn't match any of the surrounding landscapes, the floor is crazy (to put it simply), and last week I finally recognized the crosses on the railings that everyone was talking about. So I looked up some things. Philip Johnston was commissioned by NYU to create several buildings around campus, including the library. He stated before his death in 2005 that Bobst was his "swan song" and that it was meant to be a "habitable sculpture" (not just a building). NYU representatives went on to say that Johnston created campus buildings that were instantly recognizable and that he transformed NYU from just another university to one of national prestige. That is to say, NYU was most concerned with how the library would be perceived by the country and not about its use to the students. It was never meant to be comfortable for us. It was simply supposed to give NYU that extra push to scholarly distinctness. Unfortunately, they couldn't predict that it would become a symbol of death.

Fast forward to the present, and NYU is still concerned more with the building than they are with the students that use it. They won't let the suicides combat the symbol of power that it is meant to stand for. The pristine image constructed by the famous architect must stand. So a few students jump over the banisters? Put in some Plexiglas but keep the design. A student manages to get over it a few years later? Send a tour through the atrium after we clean it up. Ignore and ignore and ignore and ignore. Don't give any statements to the press and don't give any statements of worth to the faculty and students. Because NYU is a university of national prestige. Not one where students kill themselves.

A friend of mine brought up a great point the other day. When there are so many other methods of suicide, why do these kids pick Bobst? Why do they always do it there? I think it's because they're sending NYU a message about the way it operates. And I think it may be time for NYU to listen.