“Masculinity Crisis” – More Like Gender Breakthrough! (CORE POST #2)

“Masculinity Crisis” – More Like Gender Breakthrough!

I have a serious issue with the way Steven Cohan, writer of Masked Men: Masculinity and the Movies in the Fifties,  has analyzed the male condition in American society. Cohan uses the 1959 Hitchcock feature film, North by Northwest, to compare and contrast the male and female characters and how they mirror the gender statuses in American society at that time.

Cohen argues that World War II has fostered a decline in men’s emotional maturity. Men have lost their sense of responsibility and “instead of protecting, they want to be protected.” For example, the film’s lead, Roger O. Thornhill shows dependency when he calls his mother like a whimpering baby while he is being held at the police station. Roger also shows a lack of trust in women, through his weariness of Eve and his two unsuccessful marriages.

Cohen backs up his theory about Roger O. Thornhill by referencing several articles. “The Decline of the American Male” article states: “Scientists worry that in the years since the end of World War II, the American male has changed radically and dangerously; that he is no longer the masculine, strong-minded man who pioneered the continent and built America’s greatness.” This is the point where my feminist side started to cringe a little. The words “decline”, “worry” and “dangerously” all have terribly negative connotations. The fact that people worry and fear change is what’s concerning and worrisome, not the fact that there is change. Change is a good thing most of the time. Yet these so-called scientists are “worried” about such a “dangerous” change. Then he goes on to define “masculine” as “strong-minded”. Since feminine is the opposite of masculine, if they are saying that men are becoming less masculine and strong-minded, does that mean that they are becoming more “feminine and weak-minded”? This association is purely sexist. Cohen goes on to call this a masculinity crisis. “Nation’s masculinity crisis: that men let themselves be dominated by women.” The fact that the male status is in flux scares men to death. Suddenly, women are becoming stronger, they’re standing up for their rights, and they’re rising as equals or superiors. Domination isn’t a crisis. If it is, then women would have been in crisis for the last 200,000 years!

“The danger, of course, is that we will become too soft, too complacent and too home-oriented to meet the challenge of other dynamic nations like China and the Soviet Union.” First of all, the writer has revealed himself here, by saying “we”. He is a man and he is worried about the “condition” of his own gender. I believe this article would have been very different had a woman written it. A female writer would have seen the same traits and behaviors of Roger O. Thornhill in North By Northwest, but she probably wouldn’t have labeled them as “weak” and “immature” or called it a “crisis” or “danger.” This is a clear sign of gender insecurity. Furthermore, there is no reason to compare ourselves to China and the Soviet Union. The United States is socially advanced in comparison. Communism is still present today in China. Russia is against homosexuality entirely. The US should be proud of its more liberal views. Gender fluidity and the breakdown of stereotypes is something advanced nations, like the US, should be proud of. Soft men and strong women are common and completely normal. There will always be strong men and soft women; but there will also be strong women and soft men. We’re simply balancing out. This is not a crisis; this is an achievement! A breakthrough in gender norms!