Hegemonic M asculinity in thirtysomething ROB ERT H ANKE 0 - Tim fir/kIt' nllh.:'",1 th.. cOTlal,1 of ht'g<'morlic mosculinnv In analyze the It Ilr"wn/al,,,,/ oj men m thirtysomething. ThB pn1ln·. tl m., I' nt"5,lhrfJugh its specific aruculanon oj a "flt'<1' meu: oj snanhood." rtlJrt'Jt' '' t ~ a negotiated L'e rJW Tl of h'.J:/ morll' mavcuimitv tJ/fl11-l ablt' to ".\/nt'H and contain elements oj Ilberaljeminisl likuta!! \, udnlv T"OIW lTllTI.l! cO/1//)!J u l with donunantoender /lI,·"log\,. ,\If)rt'over, In its r da!/li7I .1 to ,,'fin Im/mla,. texts. thin ysolllt'th ing \ /ll.\ /O Tl uJ ,\,·~f,fn ..!/d\llll), and loving 1\ omculatvd tu nnddic-cta,s, IhemJw1I!/(' cultute lind lIit!o/u,£!V. :"T1 1. RECJ::. :-':TLY, media <t udies has not considered masculinity a problema tic or U hi-aorirally troubled categorv (Penley & \\'illi" 1988). Grossberg and Treichler ( 1987) SU~~('stthal sludirs of media and gender have h('('n la rgely oriemed tow ard " tht' 'depiction ' (piciu rine) of femah- , on u-levision in relation to presumed cu lt ura l re;ll itit', and norms.' For the most part. as Feje s', ( 19M\) ) review indicates, most empirical media rt'SI';UTh «n uu-n uuli zcd an d was limited to the sr-x-role framework of functiona list s(l (" io l()~y. a cld r es,i n~ the nat ure and effect s of stereot yp ed ma le a nd Iemah- role- p ortrayals. Femi nist theorv and schola rship has. for obvious reasons, concenrrated on women's devaluation in com munication pn xvsses. the social construe­ liollllf fcrnininitv. and women's eJfllrh to r('sist or challenge patriarchal ideology.' \ q lile much n-searrh all these issues remains to ht· done. there is also a need to analyze ~hr media production and re-prod uction of mascufinitv as a cultural ratn:ory. - This article e-xa mine-s thlrtY_llm/"III/II.£! for its discursive con struction of masculin­ it}', The series artirnlates a llegot iated version of hegemonic ma sculinity that re mains lnrnplil'it wit h do minant (masc ulinist) ideologv by reinforcing the marital status quo and fatherhood. a nd pri\ikg:ing bcrerosexualism. In addition. th is vers ion of hege­ mnnil' masculinnv. as a s t ra t t' ~y of n-presentauon. also operates by leveling some ~e l1l le r differeuo-s. etlacing ideoloeiral "critiqur-..· and framing ideas of "self." fr iendship. and l ovi ll ~ in terms of middle-class. therapeutic cu lture a nd ideo logy . .\n analysi.. of the disulrsin' ron-arurrion of masculinity in the media, pa rticularly tch-vision, sf!;UTs a number of pr emi ses wit h a feminist framework for media studies Inn focuses instead on tht' representation of ma scu lini ty, ma le ident ity, a nd male H" f" n l lim k. is ,-h)1J1U1I1 !' ,, ~kH (n III the lJ ,p il r l m o ll oj Cmllmulllcalwn. L '1ll1 ~' n l t )' oj 1./}II/I1 '/!le. I il.· ( rl l l.-l1{ c"m7/l"nl~ mill IIlfO!,'JII'm, oj th ree alllmymQ U5 rei seuvrs and lane Hr", 'rung arc gmldi./h nchllou.ted!!. d. ! h u arncle H a rerssed ocrswn oja pa!,er preJeIl1<'d at lil,· 7th l ntcrnananat eo,,/..,..,/,.' 0" C ultu re am! (;"mmIlTll callOn III Philadt'iplllu III October 19W_ Copyright 1990, SeA 2j2 MASCULINITY tN THIRTYSOMETHING SEPTEMBER 1990 CSMC HANKE experience/ subjectivity wi thin the context of capita list patriarchy . First, to avoid the harnessi ng working- class resistance to authoritarian ends. Action- adventure clearly common categoricalism of structuralist analyses of gender, it is also necessary to represents a popular ge nre in whic h the domi nant ideology-mascul inism­ analyze differences within the catego ry of masculi nity such as, class, race, ethnicity, continues to define men in relation to power, authority, agression, and technology. gene ration, nationality, and sexua l preferen ce (M ou fTe , 1983). Second, masculinity Other anal ysts have suggcsted tbat the meanings of masculinity in male-oricnted must be seen as the product of historical processes, reacting to changing defin itions of genres are not so clear-cu t. Flitterman ( 1985) arg ues that television tou gh guys, like femininity (Kimmel, 1987). Third, as Penl ey and Willis (1988) observe, although M agnum, have made over the tra ditional Playboy image so tha t they may be viewed masculi ne dominance is almost universal, not all masculinities have the same relation by wome n as erotic sex objects. Fiske ( 1987), follow ing A ndrew Ross, suggests that to discourses and institutions of power. the image of men in shows like Xl iam i Vice, while conforming to the masculine G iven such a framework, thc eoncept of " hegemonic masculin ity" may be usefu l ideo logy of action-orient ed genres, also redefines masculinity as ap pearance, as a for analyzing how masculinity is represented and construed in media discourse. body to be looked a t. H e concludes that ",\liami Vice 's cha llenge to the meaning of Ca rriga n, Co nnell, and Lee (1987) and Co nnell (1987) argu e that hcgemoni c masculinity may he the most insidious and poli ticall y effective because it occurs not at masculinity should not be understood as the "male role" but as a particular variety of the level of what is represented but how it is represented" (p. 222). But exactly how masculinity to which women and others (young, effeminate, or homosexual men) are this kind of contradictory image of men articulates with any specific social formation subordinated. For Carrigan et al. (1987), hegemoni c masculi nity is a q uestion of is not spelled out. " how particul ar men inh abit positions of power and wealth and how the y Icgitim ate The undeniable popula rity of action-a dventure and crime series offers a point of and reprod uce socia l re lationships th at gene rat e dominance"(p. 179). H egemonic entry into the social imaginary for many men , perhaps those who lack socioeconomic masculi nity thus refers to the socia l ascenda ncy of a particular ver sion or model of pow er or those who feel women cha llenge their authority in the public sphere. But masculinity that, operating on the terrai n of "common sense" and convent ional even as right -w ing discourse constructs "real" or "hard" men as violent, agg ressive, moralit y, defines "w hat it means to be a man." It thereby secures the domin ance of macho, and/or cha uvinistic, and even though " un reconstr ucted" mal e characters did some men (a nd the su bordina tion of women ) within th e sex /gender syste m. The not disappear from prime-time television wi th the advent of "liberated" male ascendancy of men as a ruling bloc within capita list patriarch y is achieved not only cha ra cters (Tankel & Banks, 1990), images of "soft," non violent, expressive , thro ugh violence and threats of unemployment bu t also through a cultural process in nurtur ing, and gay males are also part of television's representation of masculinity. w hich masculinisrn, the dominant ideol ogy of patriarch y, is resisted a nd cha llenged. Television also ridicules traditional macho roles (Cagney &- Lacey; Coach ), pairs For this reason , the a na lysis of hegemoni c masculinity is also an analysis of how sexist mal e cha rac ters with stro ng, independent female characters (Cheers; ,\loonlight­ oppositional gender ideologies (such as liberal feminism ) become absorbed, con­ ing), and presen ts as pects of sex-ro le reversals ( Who's the lioss.' ) as well as images of tained, and rearticulated. emotiona lly expressive men (St . Elsewhere; LA. Law ), childlike men (Pee-wee's Recent work lays foundation for a discussion of masculinity in the medi a. Fejes Playhouse) and gay men (DYllasty; Doctor, Doctor; B rothers).' (1989) notes that question s of masculinity a nd sexuality have been ta ken up in work Indeed , Le wis (1983) found th at images of " soft men " arc prevalent on Au stralian on pornography a nd in British film stud ies. Aron owitz (198 9) arg ues that direct television. H e attributes their pop ularity to Australi an programming's need to representations of working-class males disappeared in the mid- 1970s as " wo rking ­ appeal to both women and men . In the United States , in contrast, Ni elsen audi ence class mal e ident ity [was] dis placed to other u pwa rdly mobil e occu pa tions (e.g. police, estimates show that wom en in every demographi c category watch more weekly football player s, and other sites where conven tional masculine roles are ub iquitous)" television than men , and women watch more of every program type, including (p. 141 ). Wernick's ( 1987) ana lysis of images of men in magazine advert ising gene ra l d rama and adventure shows (N ielsen Media Research, February 1989). suggests th at, while patriarchal values have en dured, patr iarchal sym bolism also bas Thus, image s of "s oft men" may appeal more to women as well as to men who reject been weak ened, and the "assignment of gender to particular forces, institutions, and macho a nd tra ditiona l pat ernal stereotypes. M ore specifically, middle-class male product types has becom e mu ch less fixed"(p.