An artistic interpretation based off of a statue of Zeno of Citium, the Father of Stoicism. His philosophy was defined by indifference in the face of hardship.
Artwork by u/LationStoic
It has never been as difficult to be a man as it is in the 21st century.
According to Oxford Languages, the term masculinity is defined as a set of “qualities or attributes regarded as characteristic of men and boys.” Common examples of masculine traits include confidence, stoicism (rationality), and strength. Societal expectations concerning these traits are represented in numerous ways including visions of the ideal male body being muscular and through phrases such as “take it like a man.” These expectations are consistent with the lifestyle that is considered typical for many men and is often a necessity in multiple areas of everyday functioning. In this context, masculinity carries a positive connotation as it teaches adolescent boys lessons that are integral to meeting societal standards and, more importantly, maturing in a physically and mentally healthy manner.
However, the expectations of society placed on men have begun to display contradictory and hypocritical messages. The existence of toxic masculinity, characterized as a more intense focus on the expression of masculine traits to a detrimental degree, has increasingly been used to make exaggerated claims. For example, one article published on a website catered toward feminism claims that working out is a form of sexism. Another source of propaganda features a male fashion designer that glorifies acceptance of overweight body types and asserts that men are allowed to be weak. Whether or not these opinions are true or false is not the issue. The issue is that there are contradicting views in society in regards to if being masculine is positive or not so much so that the definition of masculinity itself is being challenged.
Part of a collection of short stories by American author Nicole Krauss titled “To Be a Man” exemplifies an altered definition of masculinity. The two short stories worth highlighting are “Broken Ribs” and “Freedom.” Both are split into three separate parts and are narrated from the perspective of a middle-aged Jewish woman.
In “Broken Ribs,” the relationship between the narrator and her lover nicknamed the German Boxer (GB) is depicted in a variety of different interactions. In the first section, the narrator and the GB are taking a nature walk in Grunewald (a German forest) as they discuss whether or not the GB would have been a Nazi if he had been born during Hitler’s regime; in the second section, they have a date at a restaurant in New York while the narrator monologues about having a “certain power over men”; and in the third section, they are lying down in the same bed as the GB explains how he cannot sleep with another woman due to a lack of intimacy that caused a divorce with his previous wife.
In “Freedom,” the relationship between the narrator and her close friend named Rafi is illustrated through a multitude of different anecdotes. In the first section, the narrator describes her friend Rafi as physically active from a young age, promiscuous as an adolescent, devoted to his country as a young adult, and reflective as a middle-aged man; in the second section, Rafi recounts a story from his time as an officer in the Sayeret Golani (Israeli special forces) in which he and his team were tasked with assassinating a religious leader; and in the third section, the narrator and Rafi discuss the consequences of his and his wife’s choice to commit to an open relationship on their marriage.
A figurative representation of a man’s body composed of different parts. Places emphasis on the confusion in connection to what it means to be a man.
Artwork from “To Be a Man”
A biased narrative of masculinity is conveyed in Nicole Krauss’s short stories due to her use of certain circumstances that are fictitious. These elements are unrealistic depictions of masculine traits in different contexts and thus come off as over-exaggerations. Such is present in the relationships between the female lead and the German Boxer & Rafi.
Expectations concerning masculine traits are misconstrued in the interactions between the narrator and her lover & friend, respectively. In her first interaction with the GB, he points out that “I am exactly the kind of person they would have recruited for the Napola.” When she asks if he would have killed people, his response is an immediate “Of course.” There are several unsettling points with this interaction. Firstly, the GB outright admits that he would have killed Jews as a Nazi, despite the blatant fact that he is talking to his lover who is a Jewish person. The portrayal of this behavior is unrealistic and serves as a bloated demonstration of aggressiveness. Secondly, his admission is framed in a way that blames his masculinity as the cause of his behavior. The GB is implied to be a strong and prideful man, and these traits are presented as representative of Nazi-like behavior by proxy. This trend of scrutinizing masculinity harshly continues in Rafi’s anecdote of his time as a soldier. Specifically, he notes how he and his team attached an explosive to the vehicle of the Hezbollah leader, their plan being to detonate the bomb during his morning routine. What they were not told, however, was that the Hezbollah chief was present with his wife and children. Struggling with the moral dilemma of prioritizing the mission over innocent lives, Rafi recalls how he “was [maybe] no longer even an animal, and had become a machine.” Here, blind loyalty is implied to risk the lives of family and children: a valid message if not for the negative connotation Rafi’s loyalty is given.
Other interactions in “Broken Ribs” and “Freedom” convey similar instances of devaluing masculinity through an improper representation of masculine traits. More generally though, the main takeaway is that portrayal of masculinity in society has proven to be hypocritical in more ways than one. In the presence of these contradictions, how exactly should masculinity be defined? The answer is not as clear and concise as it should be at present.
Nevertheless, one thing to consider is that, if anything, it is okay to be weak, but it is never okay to stay weak.
Commenti