Comparison:
It’s more an attempt to scrub away the humiliating stain of womanhood from any trait or behavior before letting boys anywhere near it.
Cultural observer, critic, and wise counselor Ruth Whippman in a New York Times op-ed ponders some current attempts to revamp masculinity. She rightly concludes that our worn-out labels of “masculine“ and “feminine“ do much to constrict and prevent us from discussing and using universal human values, norms, and expectations. Her stealth metaphor of stains and scrubbing away help to quickly position and focus our attention on specific sources of our hyper-genderized language and practices. See the context for much. much more.
Context:
There is a lurking sexism in the whole positive masculinity conceit. If we have to attach the label ‘masculine’ to a behavior before it can have value to men, then we are subtly communicating that embracing anything associated with women is a demotion, even an indignity. ‘Positive masculinity’ is not about de-gendering universal human qualities, and certainly not about encouraging boys to believe that they could have something to learn from women or female cultural norms. It’s more an attempt to scrub away the humiliating stain of womanhood from any trait or behavior before letting boys anywhere near it.
Citation:
Whippman, Ruth. “We Can Do Better Than ‘Positive Masculinity’.” New York Times, 08 Oct. 2024. Web.
(Illustration by Lee Aigue, base image courtesy of Canva, Oct. 2024)
Комментарии