CHAPTER TWO
Like the literature on white identity, the male identity literature revealed a variety of different approaches for understanding maleness. The psychoanalytic approach, constructed by Sigmund Freud during the late nineteenth century, addressed the thoughts, feelings, and fantasies of people in order to explore how these might have been affected by early childhood experiences (Edley and Wetherell, 1996). Combining psychotherapy and sociology is the role theory approach which uses a theatrical metaphor to describe men's roles as the performance of socially prescribed behaviors (Edley and Wetherell, 1996). Sociologists produced the third approach, the social relations perspective, identifying "masculinity" as a "set of distinctive practices that emerge from men's positioning within a variety of social structures" (Edley and Wetherell, 1996). Each approach differs in its assumptions about how identity is formed, maintained, and changed. Still, an examination across the literature of these approaches produces a list of characteristics commonly identified by each approach as an issue in male identity development. The following is a review of the literature regarding three approaches for understanding male identity followed by a review of the issues of male identity development frequently discussed throughout the literature.
Three Approaches for Understanding Male Identity
Psychoanalysis. Freud, the founder of psychoanalysis, believed that children are naturally driven toward certain types of physical satisfaction, and the way in which parents respond to this drive is the key factor in establishing a child's identity (Edley and Wetherell, 1996). According to Freud, little difference exists between the psyches of boys and girls during the first few years of life. Then, between the ages of three and six, children's psychosexual energies focus on the parent of the opposite sex, developing in the male a strong sexual pull toward his "first love-object," his mother, and a simultaneous pull away from his "imagined rival," his father (Freud, 1935, p. 289). Wong explains:
The male's incestuous cravings for the mother bring him into conflict with the father, a much larger and more powerful object than himself. The resulting fear and anxiety...causes him to repress his sexual feelings toward his mother. Since he cannot fight his father, he chooses instead to switch allegiances and begins to identify with his former rival (1982, p. 79).
Freud (1935, p. 290) termed this stage of desiring one's mother and hating one's father the "Oedipus complex" and argued that it is through resolving this struggle that the male develops an inflated superego and learns to repress his feminine side, in fear of his father. According to Freud,
Along with the dissolution of the Oedipus complex the object-cathexis of the mother must be given up. Its place may be filled by one of two things: either an identification with the mother or an intensified identification with the father. We are accustomed to regard the latter outcome as the more normal... In this way the passing of the Oedipus complex would consolidate the masculinity in the boy's character (1927, p. 41).
This marks the beginning of a boy's masculine identity.
Freud's assertion that the male child learns to repress his feminine side illustrated another critical aspect in Freudian thought on gender. He argued that everyone has both masculine and feminine qualities (Freud, 1927). Moreover, he hypothesized that by nature, humans are bisexual (Freud, 1927, p. 40) so that, for successful gender identity development, one set of qualities must be suppressed.
Freud's theory has been challenged and elaborated countless times. Carl Jung, spending part of his career as Freud's colleague and another as his adversary, added some dimensions to describe the male child's drive. His concept of "archetypes," the "collective unconscious" which results from the history of one's lineage, offered a different dimension of explanation for male behavior (Wong, 1982). Jung, like Freud, believed that people are naturally bisexual, with each gender inherently carrying both masculine and feminine qualities. Unlike Freud, he argued that the different genetic structures of males and females, naturally held in the "collective unconscious" of each group, resulted in different psychological development for the two groups (Wong, 1982). In males, the masculine archetype, called "animus," is dominant, but the feminine archetype, called "anima," remains, representing the existence of female genes and the male's female ancestry. Wong (1982) summarized Jung's theory:
On the basic foundations laid by the animus and anima, the boy child builds his conception of what is masculine and what is feminine. In his relations with men and women, he builds on the archetypes. They affect his view of what he comes to experience as male and female as he projects his anima and animus onto his object relations in the interactive process of building gender identity and receives an idea of what to expect from the other sex (p. 83).
Harry Stack Sullivan also contributed to Freud's conception of masculine identity development. Where Freud stressed biology and Jung stressed psychology, Sullivan introduced the importance of interpersonal relationships to identity development (Wong, 1982). The first important interaction is with a child's mother, as the mother is the first "object of his/her beginning experience of object relationships" (Wong, 1982, p. 83). Sullivan's ideas of the Oedipal complex were based primarily on the experiences between parents and child rather than on genetics (Wong, 1982). He argued that a sense of empathy naturally grows between a child and the parent of the same sex. As a result, the male child develops the characteristics of his father and begins to develop his father's attitudes about people of the other sex (Wong, 1982). Also, it is the father who teaches male children about the difficult aspects of life, forming a closer bond between father and son than between mother and son. Meanwhile, the child "retains more of the idealization of the parent of the other sex" through the empathy process (Wong, 1982, p. 83). Then, according to Wong,
to the degree that the parent of the same sex is oversensitive to this relative antipathy directed toward him/her, the Oedipus/Electra conflict and its associated fear, anger, and guilt will appear (1982, p. 83).
Later psychoanalysts continue to build on and rethink the ideas originally discussed by Freud, Jung, and Sullivan. Erik Erikson introduced the effects of national and ethnic identity on male identity formation (1950), straying from Freud's tight focus on psychological identity formation. Psychoanalysts of the 1960s and 1970s, including Ralph Greenson (1968), argued that men, as opposed to women, are the insecure and fragile set because young boys, after being cared for primarily by their mothers, are forced to disassociate with them. Others challenged Freud's assumption of the superiority of masculinity over femininity, arguing that men "appear to be in a constant state of uncertainty about their own gender identities; always in a state of having to prove themselves as men" (Edley and Wetherell, 1996, p. 98).
Psychoanalytic theories of male identity development have been criticized for failing to sufficiently recognize social and cultural variables in the formation of identity. Critics include a new generation of psychoanalysts who assert that the psychological processes described by Freud and elaborated by others are not causes of the sexist society, but are consequences of that society. They have begun to ask a different set of questions about male identity, summarized by Edley and Wetherell:
...if being a man does not mean being emotional, dependent, and caring (like his mother), then what sort of relationships will men enter into with their parents, children and friends? Moreover, if and when men begin to sense that they do have emotional needs and desires, how do they deal with these feelings (1996, p. 100).
The new generation of psychoanalysts challenge Freud's assertion that the fear of castration plays such an important role in a male child's life, suggesting instead that they are motivated by the recognition of the power that comes with identifying with men (Edley and Wetherell, 1996). This, they claim, in central to male identity development.
Role Theory. Role theory is based on the assumption that all behavior is determined by socially prescribed roles. Men take on masculine identities, performing, as if in a theatrical work, the roles assigned them by society (Edley and Wetherell, 1996). David and Brannon broadly define the "roles" of role theory as "any pattern of behaviors which a given individual in a specified (set of) situation(s) is both: (1) expected and (2) encouraged and/or trained to perform" (1976, p. 5). As men learn to perform these roles, their male identity develops.
According to Edley and Wetherell (1996), role theory was first developed in the 1930s by Luis Termini and Catherine Miles. Termini and Miles placed masculinity and femininity on opposite ends of a bipolar model, called the "M/F scale," assigning each a list of opposing attributes consistent with masculine and feminine roles. While the masculine role was accorded attributes such as courage, roughness, and self-reliance, the feminine role was accorded their opposites: timidity, tenderness, and dependence (Edley and Wetherell, 1996 [citing Archer and Lloyd, 1985]). Termini and Miles argued that the gender identity of an individual could be determined by tabulating their traits; therefore, if more masculine traits are found, the individual exhibits a masculine identity.
Since Termini and Miles' work, other role theorists have attempted to describe male identity by constructing models attributing specific characteristics to men. David and Brannon identified four themes which "seem to comprise the core requirements for the role" (1976, p. 12):
1. No Sissy Stuff: The stigma of all stereotyped feminine characteristics and qualities, including openness and vulnerability.
2. The Big Wheel: Success, status, and the need to be looked up to.
3. The Sturdy Oak: A manly air of toughness, confidence, and self-reliance.
4. Give 'Em Hell!: The aura of aggression, violence, and daring.
"No Sissy Stuff" is the requirement to "never, never resemble women, or display strongly stereotyped feminine characteristics" (David and Brannon, 1976, p. 14). At first, this proves to be difficult, because, according to David and Brannon (1976), male children, like female children, identify closely with their mothers. Consequently, at some point male children must fight the urge to continue that identification and begin to perform a masculine role, unlike female children who may continue to identify with their mothers. Even so, David and Brannon suggest (1976), male children are more pressured to fully take on a masculine identity than female children are to take on a feminine identity. The stigma attached to femininity, or "sissy-ness," they argue, can be observed in every aspect of personality and life: language, hobbies, food, profession, physical appearance, voice, emotion, openness, etc. David and Brannon describe the fear of this stigma:
This terror of being a sissy, at an age when the child can hardly understand the meaning of that accusation, let alone ignore it, apparently leaves a deep wound in the psyche of many males (1976, p. 14).
This wound is a constant reminder in the life of each male to avoid any activity or trait which may, in any way, associate him with femininity.
"The Big Wheel," according to David and Brannon, is the requirement of the male role "to command respect and be looked up to for what one can do or has achieved" (1976, p. 19). This can be accomplished in a variety of ways. David and Brannon (1976) list "Wealth and Fame" as the most desired identifier of masculine success. They suggest that status may be attained in other ways, as well. They offer the examples of the neighborhood champion dart thrower or the fastest sorter in the mail room, both of which have attained status, albeit for a smaller audience. David and Brannon (1976) also identify the need to be competent and knowledgeable, citing as an example the stereotypical male driver who refuses to stop for directions.
"The Sturdy Oak" is the male role requirement to display toughness, confidence, and self-reliance (David and Brannon, 1976, p. 23). They point out admired male movie actors and their roles, including William Holden in Stalag 17, Humphrey Bogart in The African Queen, Paul Newman in Cool Hand Luke, Marlon Brando in Streetcar Named Desire, and John Wayne in True Grit, all of whom lack social status, but have something which is "harder to identify, for it seems more a matter of style than tangible achievement, and its ingredients are variable" (1976, p. 24). These characters, extreme illustrations of "The Sturdy Oak," are confident, portraying "real men," ready to die, refusing to retreat at any cost. They are tough, both physically and mentally, willing to stand their ground, win or lose (David and Brannon, 1976).
The "Give 'Em Hell" male role requirement involves portraying an "aura of aggression, violence, and daring" (David and Brannon, 1976, p. 27). According to David and Brannon (1976), "Give 'Em Hell" is the more covertly negative side of "The Sturdy Oak." They describe it as "the need to hurt, to conquer, to embarrass, to humble, to outwit, to punish, to defeat" or "to move against" people (1976, p. 27). Aggression takes many forms, such as the "aggressive ballplayer," the "aggressive businessman," and "the aggressive thinker". Aggression sometimes leads to violence. David and Brannon (1976) note that fathers tend to send the message to male children that violence, while not condoned, is also not condemned through phrases such as "never start fights," or "never throw the first punch."
David and Brannon's model depicts, in their words, a "hypothetical" man portraying the male role to its extreme. They assert that "real people do not and cannot fulfill the idealized cultural prescriptions in every respect, and are not expected to" (1976, p. 36). Instead, working toward realizing the male sex role in full becomes the constant struggle for most males. In general, role theorists, such as David and Brannon, have worked from the assumption that roles can be easily identified and differentiated between sexes. Role theorists have considered these tightly defined roles in positive terms, suggesting that they uphold social stability and allow for the performance of needed social functions (Connell, 1995).
It was not until the emergence of feminism as a research perspective during the 1970s that the positive concept of "sex roles" was challenged. Connell (1995) calls role theory "logically vague," pointing out that the roles are defined on "shifting bases." He suggests that the "prescribed" or biological assumptions of role theory are flawed, failing to consider social inequality and power as well as homosexuality (1995, p. 26). Connell (1995) and others (Kimmel, 1987; Brittan, 1989) also criticize role theory's dichotomization of gender and its resulting exaggeration of difference between men and women.
Social Relations Perspective. The social relations perspective on male identity is based on the idea that identity emerges from "men's positioning within a variety of social structures" (Edley and Wetherell, 1996). Social relations perspectivists, influenced by the feminist movement, directly address how cultural institutions (such as family, school, work, and peer groups) and cultural identifiers (such as race, class, gender, and sexual orientation), affect the development of individuals' identities. If men are, in fact, aggressive, oppressive, unemotional, and competitive, they argue, this is only because of their positions within social structures.
Andrew Tolson, one of the pioneers of the social relations perspective, describes its starting point:
My starting point is perhaps the most basic of all feminist propositions: the distinction between biology and culture. When we talk about 'masculinity', or when we respond to the masculine 'social presence', we draw upon certain specific forms of social knowledge. This is to say, although certain aspects of sexual behavior are obviously functions of biological sex (including genetic aptitude and physical development), by far the major part of sexuality is cultural (encompassing personality, social behavior; and involving symbolic meanings transmitted in linguistic communication) (1977, pp. 11-12).
Tolson (1977), like researchers from the other approaches for understanding male identity discussed above, argues that the foundations for male identity development are established during childhood. He identifies the family as the first cultural and emotional influence on male children. He describes how the early male identity is developed:
Boyhood experiences are romanticized - as daring exploits, and dramatic confrontations. But right at the heart of these experiences, as the thread of memory and imagination which binds them together, is a growing sense of what it means to be a man. Boyhood is also enveloped by a masculine sensibility - an awareness of the power conferred upon men by the world of work and money. And because of the form in which this masculinity appears, because of the specific ways in which masculine feelings are structured, a boy begins to feel ambivalent about his masculinity, and begins to feel the need to 'prove himself' (1977, p. 23).
This need for males to prove themselves, according to Tolson, is further encouraged institutionally, from boyhood to manhood, by family, school and peer groups. In the family, he points out identity-laced messages passed through generations by parents such as "boys don't cry" and "boys will be boys" (1977, p. 23). Such messages, along with the cultural pressure for boys to match the achievements and social status of their fathers, become confusing to male children who maintain closer emotional ties to their mothers who have nurtured and paid closer attention to them since birth. Tolson (1977) argues that a crucial step in the identity development of male children is in dealing with the father's absence from their lives, both emotional and physical, as it is often primarily the mother who cares for the kids while the father works. During this quest for resolution, boys develop a strong need for recognition and reward, constantly struggling and competing for both (Tolson, 1977).
According to Tolson, schooling adds a dimension to male children's quest for resolution, encouraging further struggle and competition. He notes that schools facilitate academic and athletic competition, both measures of "masculine competence" (1977, p. 34). School also introduces boys to the idea of hierarchy. As Tolson explains, boys must learn how to negotiate a number of hierarchical dimensions,
before he, in his turn, attains the privilege of employing a first form 'fag' to run to the tuck-shop. A boy learns which staircase is reserved for prefects, which outhouse for lower-fifth smokers. And above all, when caught, he learns to accept punishment without flinching (1977, p. 36).
Tolson suggests that, in working through these hierarchical structures, boys adopt masculine values, such as competitiveness, personal ambition, social responsibility, and emotional restraint (1977).
Peer groups also provide an outlet for male children to act out inner struggles and develop male identity. The male child's peer group becomes his audience and he develops a "repertoire of stories, jokes, and routines" which help him relate to the group (Tolson, 1977). Emotionally, according to Tolson,
he is concerned with the physical presence he is able to maintain, as 'a force to be reckoned with'... He does not actually need to 'prove himself', so long as he can return the banter, or hint at some skill or knowledgeability. For masculinity is more impressive played cool, in choice gestures and side-remarks, rather than in open boasting or violence (1977, p. 43).
Tolson also addresses how work and the capitalist system affect how men develop their identities. He argues that the system of capitalism creates a social relations structure which people have to learn to work through in order to survive. The set of behaviors men adopt to survive in the system are, according to Tolson, those we consider "masculine" (Tolson, 1977). The behaviors may differ depending on socio-economic status and group pressures associated with that status. For example, working-class men are more likely than middle class men to dominate at home and adopt a more aggressive, violent persona because of their need to compensate for the powerlessness they feel at work. For all males, the necessity to develop an identity to fit the system of social relations constructed by capitalism results in a tendency for them to be less self-expressive and introspective than women (Tolson, 1977).
Like the other approaches for understanding male identity, the social relations approach has been challenged and criticized. Victor Seidler points out that this approach undermines "people's trust in their own experience," not allowing them to participate actively in defining "what they want for themselves both individually and collectively" (1990, p. 225). He also suggests that it allows men to dodge any sense of responsibility for their dominant positions in society (1990). Seidler challenges the social relations approach's failure to address "contradictions within men's experience" (1990, p. 226). Edley and Wetherell (1989) argue that Tolson's approach fails to address a more important question: "What makes most, if not all men want to dominate in the first place?"
Issues in Male Identity Development
An abundance of research has been conducted by sociologists, psychologists, social psychologists, cultural theorists, anthropologists, and educators regarding male identity. Though this research comes from a variety of fields, as well as a variety of approaches (as discussed above), a review of the literature produces a list of themes consistently identified throughout male identity research as issues in male identity development. These include: 1) fear of femininity, 2) emotional and affectionate inexpressiveness, 3) homophobia, 4) need for power and control, and 5) obsession with success.
Fear of femininity. According to James O'Neil (1982), the fear of femininity is the core source of identity conflict for. This fear is instilled into boys during early childhood and is reiterated through socialization throughout men's lives (O'Neil, 1982; Hartley, 1976). Males quickly learn to exhibit all things masculine, while being discouraged from revealing any hint of femininity (LaFollette, 1992; Meth, 1990; David and Brannon, 1976; Hartley, 1976). The ultimate insult is to be called names associated with femininity, such as "sissy" or "wimp" (Connell, 1995; David and Brannon, 1976; Buchbinder, 1994). O'Neil (1982) suggests that it is this deep-rooted fear of femininity which psychologically causes men to struggle with other issues such as emotional and affectionate inexpressiveness, homophobia, and a need for power and control.
Emotional and affectionate inexpressiveness. Woven into the fear of femininity, according to the literature, is emotional and intimate inexpressiveness. Men replace emotion with reason, intellectualizing and rationalizing feelings instead of displaying them outwardly (Meth, 1990; Pasick, Gordon and Meth, 1990; Balswick, 1982). The expressions of any emotion or intimacy suggesting vulnerability is socially unacceptable (David and Brannon, 1976; Balswick, 1982; Meth, 1990; Pasick, Gordon and Meth, 1990). This is even true within their peer group, where males, unlike females, are discouraged from expressing affection for same sex friends (Meth, 1990). At the root of men's emotional and intimate inexpressiveness is the knowledge that emotional and intimate expressiveness is considered to be a feminine trait and can result in insults such as "sissy" (David and Brannon, 1976; Balswick, 1982) or worse - it can result in a label such as "fag" or "homosexual" (Lehne, 1976).
Homophobia. A related fear among men to that of being considered feminine is being labeled "homosexual" (David and Brannon, 1976; Lehne, 1976; Balswick, 1982). O'Neil (1982), Lehne (1976) and others suggest that this fear is employed by men to enforce social conformity to masculine roles and to maintain social power and control. They put homosexuality at the bottom of the male identity hierarchy, giving heterosexual men more power and privilege than homosexual men (Pleck, 1980; Connell, 1995). Males, not wanting to lose their power and privilege, learn not to exhibit behaviors which may cause them to be labeled "homosexual," including physical contact with other men (Meth, 1990).
Need for power and control. The literature suggests that power and control are central to men's self-identity (Meth, 1990; O'Neil, 1982; Steinberg, 1993; Komisar, 1976). According to Kahn, "male power, especially over females, appears to be central to many men's definitions of themselves. With power they are men; without it they are not better than women" (1984, p. 238). According to Marielouise Janssen-Jurreit, physical power is, for men, the "most important criterion for the inferiority of women" (1982, p. 193). Power is seen as something external, something which must be taken from other people (O'Neil, 1982). One result of this is a tendency to assert power and control through acts of physical or sexual violence (Steinberg, 1993; Janssen-Jurreit, 1982). Another result is an escalated competitive spirit, as failure to assume power over others is seen as defeat or "emasculation" (O'Neil, 1982; LaFollette, 1992). This feeds directly into men's obsession with success and achievement.
Obsession with success. According to Steinberg, men "aspire to attain higher status, and they are perceived by themselves as more masculine when they succeed" (1993, p. 98). Success is often measured by income, but can also be measured in terms of occupational prestige, fame, and power (David and Brannon, 1976; O'Neil, 1982). David and Brannon explain:
Really massive doses of success at almost anything, in fact, seem so inherently masculine that the 'World's Greatest' artist, pianist, chef, hair-dresser, or tiddlywinks player is to some extent protected from the taint of unmasculine activity which surrounds less successful members of his profession (1976, p. 19).
Because measures of success are almost always work-related, men tend to become obsessed with work, spending much of their lives working, planning for work, or worrying about work (Pasick, 1990; O'Neil, 1982).
Summary of the Literature on Male Identity
Research on male identity has been conducted within a variety of different fields. Freud and later psychologists developed the psychoanalytic approach, concentrating on how early childhood experiences have affect people's identities (Edley and Wetherell, 1996). Role theorists, such as David and Brannon (1976), attempt to understand male identity as a collection of socially defined roles and behaviors. Andrew Tolson (1977) and other social relationists focus on how men are affected by their position within social structures including family, school, and peer groups.
While each school of thought continues to level criticisms at the other approaches, an overall review of the literature on male identity shows that similar themes emerge from the differing approaches, as well as the non-approach-specific literature. These themes, describing characteristics of male identity, include: 1) fear of femininity, 2) emotional and affectionate inexpressiveness, 3) homophobia, 4) need for power and control, and 5) obsession with success. The literature suggests that, while each of the themes can be considered and discussed separately, they are also interrelated. For example, homophobia, and the threat of being labeled "homosexual" is used by men to enforce social conformity to male roles and to maintain social power and control (O'Neil, 1982; Lehne, 1976); the need for power and control translates into competition and an obsession with success (David and Brannon, 1976); and the fear of femininity underlies each of these themes (O'Neil, 1982).
designed and maintained by Paul C. Gorski
url: home.earthlink.net/~gorski/dissertation/literature_male.html