Recap, Conclusions, Prospects
This thesis has analyzed contemporary gender constructions in postfeminist media culture (approx. 1980 to present) through two popular masculine figures, the Fuckboy and the Instagram Husband, and by situating these figures within trends of the media history of the 20th and early 21st centuries. In particular, a preliminary tension of masculine/feminine in a male role can be seen in the 1950s’ dawning of Playboy, when the Playboy bachelor figure engaged in feminine-associated indulgences of art, dining, and culture but safeguarded his heterosexuality with the clear sexual objectification of women both in the magazine’s photos and real-life sexual encounters.
The New Man of the 1980s was an apparent response to second-wave feminism. This figure expressed a softer masculinity than had been seen before and supposedly supported women’s empowerment, which was seen as attractive by women. The New Man enjoyed similar feminine pursuits as the Playboy, such as fashion and culture, but without boldly proclaiming his heterosexuality through women’s sexualization, New Man was charged with fraudulence in his maleness. This accusation was specifically brought by the 1990s’ New Lad, who, on the other hand, claimed to be an uncomplicated man’s man, reduced to the simplest pleasures of true manhood: beer, sports, and sex. New Lad’s brashly sexist and racist statements were proof of his authenticity.
A similar story of recoil against feminized masculinity took place in the metrosexual and retrosexual relationship. The metrosexual was characterized by many of the same features as the New Man, including a focus on consumerism, but with the revision of self-care and city-dwelling. The retrosexual was said to be a direct response against the metrosexual as a way for men to return to the past; a traditional manhood with an appreciated for simpler days, and a time uninfluenced by women’s quest for equality.
This history of masculinity in media evidences that several themes of gender have remained consistent. In particular, softer masculine figures that either implicitly or explicitly appreciate feminine activities, women, and feminist empowerment exist simultaneously in tension with hypermasculine male figures. These hypermasculine caricatures express an aversion to both the softer masculinities and female enfranchisement, which is done often through irony so as to provide a defense against the sexist or offensive statements. These more traditional masculinities excuse their behavior and sexism using the justification of nature, or ‘it’s just the way men are.’ The retrosexual, the New Lad, and general hypermasculine figures are continually portrayed as accurate representations of the nature of real men, while the more feminine versions are derided as inauthentic men merely seeking to appease man-hating feminist women.
The Fuckboy and Instagram Husband have internalized these same contradictions, which is in line with Gill’s qualities of postfeminist media culture. These figures update their predecessors with their use of social media, such that the use of digital technologies now partially defines manhood and men’s interactions with women. As the globalized world has increasingly required male connectivity, men’s social media usage has become a very important aspect of the many factors that construct masculinity in today’s world.
In terms of the Fuckboy, social media usage is the channel through which the not-so-new manipulative, sexually promiscuous masculinity is performed. The affordances of digital social platforms enable Fuckboys to engage in sexual encounters with as many women as possible while providing them with false or misleading ideas about the nature of their relationship, such that Fuckboys use social media as the channel to act out ‘natural’ predatory manhood.
The Instagram Husband, on the other hand, seemingly has a distaste for social media and social networking, akin to the retrosexual’s disavowal of modern technology. While the Instagram Husband helps his wife to some degree, he lays on thick irony to voice his displeasure at being emasculated by aiding his wife’s frivolous pursuits; what these men would rather be doing remains unclear.
In both cases, the figures take on some aspects of femininity, particularly communicative functions: the Fuckboy uses correspondence connectivity, while the Instagram Husband engages in snapshot photography; two styles of communication that have long been linked to domesticity, and thus femininity. However, it is notably these specific aspects that source the primary tensions within these discourses; the Fuckboy and Instagram Husband then retain their manhood by engaging in the traditionally masculine pursuits of manipulative sexual promiscuity and derision of women’s professional efforts, respectively, both of which perpetuate traditional gendered power structures.
By manipulating women into gullibility in the quest for sex (Fuckboy) and seeking to regain power over their visual representation (Instagram Husband), these figures both interact with feminism while also acting to dismantle gender equality through contradictions that could only be postfeminist. Consequently, this analysis has exposed these two figures as merely new expressions of old ideas of gender that are broadcast within the framework of contemporaneous media trends and technologies.
Since mediated figures are exaggerated expressions of societal trends, which themselves are concentrated representations of real-life, this analysis makes clear that many parts of today’s available masculine roles are still primarily based on a fear of the feminine. This fear manifests in the ways that real-life men distance themselves from traditionally female activities and make implicit and explicit attempts to deter women from accessing masculine tendencies and power.
This research also implicitly offers the claim that separations between public/private, individual/society, online/offline, professional/personal, and, indeed, male/female are increasingly blurring. Consequently, while the focus of these cases is intimate relationships, their implications apply to a much broader outlook. For instance, drawing upon the Instagram Husband’s ‘human selfie stick’ notion, which the creators squandered with a gendered statement, researchers may wish to address this emergent crossroads of neoliberal labor: when others help with social media self-branding and self-presentation by taking photos, is this ‘human selfie stick’ objectification an astute entrepreneurial strategy or exploitation? How does this new style of looking affect the artistic product and the role of the ‘artist’s hand’? Relevant to the Fuckboy discussion, academia may be interested in an analysis of homosexual dating advice or exploring other sites of scripts updated by communal online personal advice. Another stimulating direction would be an investigation of media figures that are considered to have had a positive impact on society and in what ways.
Additional gender visibilities in media represent an important area of research and will become even more so as these discourses continue to develop over time. While a non-binary consideration of gender is significant and, as many believe, the path towards a progressive future, the scope of this thesis was narrowed to the male/female binary for brevity and breadth of applicability. Future research should consider these other gender identities and can utilize the framework of this thesis, which has unraveled taken-for-granted media concepts from a sociological standpoint.
Recent visibilities of new feminisms and misogynies have prompted the suggestion that postfeminism is no longer a viable tool for analyzing contemporary media culture. Gill (2016) rather has shown that new feminism is more closely related to postfeminism than the historical political feminist movement, particularly in the current focus of individual choice and overt sexuality as modes of empowerment. Since postfeminism and neoliberalism’s individualism seems to be here to stay, we should determine how to best navigate gender in society with this individuality in mind. To that end, I offer several suggestions.
To begin, these cases at the very least demonstrate that are still not enough available figures in media for everyone to identify with, such as a heterosexual man who casually dates women in a respectful way, or a heterosexual man who enjoys using Instagram in the style of an influencer. To open up these possibilities, media producers should make strides to more realistically depict gender constructions and interactions in media.
Media broadcasters, regardless of through social or mainstream media, should assess before dissemination whether their work conforms to untrue or misleading gender stereotypes and, if so, what steps they can take to avoid this. In a professional setting, this miscommunicative issue can be avoided by hiring an expert in society and culture. For the average social media user to promote accurate and inclusive media figures, I suggest engaging with women-made media, watching feminist films, and listening to the stories without assuming a female agenda other than having a voice; then, have a conversation about these media.
Another way for the layperson to affect such an extensive situation is to simply not accept the status quo: question tradition, question stereotypes, find all that we take for granted and ask where it came from. Seemingly innocuous trends spawned this critical research, which has made for a great many spirited discussions in my personal and professional life since its start; I hope these conversations have impacted my interlocutors as much as they have opened my eyes to how the non-sociologists of the world view society.
An Addendum of Advice
Eric Anderson’s inclusive masculinity theory (2009) suggests that present Anglo-American society calls for a new framework for hegemonic masculinity because the old style is now obsolete. His argument explains that homosexual men are increasingly more accepted by heterosexual men, and heterosexual men now exhibit an appreciation or embodiment of more feminine aspects without fear of emasculation (Anderson, 2009). While I believe in the existence of this inclusive society on my most optimistic days, I must concede that Anderson’s confidence in the broad overhaul of manhood was, sadly, premature; the Fuckboy and Instagram Husband – contemporary popular heterosexual male figures that deeply interact with femininity – provide evidence to the Anderson’s contrary: femininity in men is still cause for male concern.
Today’s millennial men, the age range associated with the figures in this research, grew up in the 1980s and 90s with an idealized manhood that was likely influenced by New Man and New Lad, perhaps even the metro- and retrosexuals. While these tropes are no longer popular, the younger versions of today’s men were socialized into a manhood at that time, and thus it stands to reason that their current selves hold some of the same values.
While our world is (hopefully) filling with increasing numbers of male feminists who use their position of privilege and power to aid women, there are those who seem to ceaselessly fight to ensure that misogyny reigns. Let us consider in this dichotomy the male feminist and the proud sexual assaulter, of which examples include the 44th and 45th Presidents of the US, respectively. In this ever-fracturing world, choosing a passionate side is inevitable. For this choice, I offer, with hope, the words of advice from the 44th president:
“We need to keep changing the attitude that raises our girls to be demure and our boys to be assertive, that criticizes our daughters for speaking out and our sons for shedding a tear. We need to keep changing the attitude that punishes women for their sexuality and rewards men for theirs…We need to keep changing the attitude that teaches men to feel threatened by the presence and success of women.”
Consequently, if men actually support a more equal view of women than, for instance, their fathers, they may need to critically examine the damaging stereotypes and behaviors they still hold. In more words of Obama (2016), “the most important change may be the toughest of all—and that’s changing ourselves.” If they truly believe in supporting the women in their lives to achieve power, men must acknowledge and leverage the privilege with which they have unwittingly been blessed; I believe such acknowledgement requires a level of humility and introspection that society does not freely encourage in masculinity.
As an example, the simple act of listening is considered passive by society and is thus inherently associated with femininity. For men to allow women to speak uninterrupted and listen with objectivity and without offense is a very simple step that men can take toward gender equality. As women are told to constantly monitor themselves in their behaviors as a friend, girlfriend, or daughter, then perhaps so too should men concern themselves with their actions, particularly in how they relate to, and interact with, women.
The West barrels forward into technological progress; with television commercials that target in-home voice-activated devices, mobile applications to track and assist with bodily functions, and self-driving cars, it is clear that the future is, to an extent, here. However, I hope this thesis has demonstrated that this future, despite its many progressions, still needs attention: gender equality has not been solved, feminism is not finished, and
JP 