1
Societal influences on the design of masculinity in movies- How do these portrayals of
masculinity affect young men?
John Hoffman
Concordia University Chicago
2
Introduction
What does it mean to be a man? What does a man look like? How does a man learn how
to be masculine? Of the multiple answers one could give to these essential questions, one sticks
out over the rest. Most individuals would respond with answers such as their dad, an uncle, or
some other male figure. However, increasingly more and more men learn their gender role and
what it means to be a man through the media and its portrayal of masculinity. This paper will
explore an area of media which has a huge influence on masculinity: movies. It will explore how
certain societal gaps, wants, and needs for masculinity influence movies to create masculine
roles to fulfill these desires. In turn, it will also explore how these movies then influence ideas of
masculinity and identity, as well as explore how these beliefs influence how men act or should
act in society.
Evolution of the “action hero”
According to Moss (2012:21), men learn from images the media provides as examples
and models for men to follow, more so than actually interacting with other men. This means that
films, magazines, and television shows offer a surrogate example of masculinity for many men to
follow. These images portrayed in such outlets become so internalized and accepted that the
concept of masculinity and what it means to be a man is derived from these images. These
outlets are tailored to young men because of an increased use of violence and action hero status,
in which the main actor in these movies use violence, skill, or deception to get what he wants or
end the day in a heroic fashion (Moss 2012).
There have obviously been a substantial number of movies made which could have
influenced masculine roles. Beginning in the early 1950s we start to see actors such as Marlon
3
Brando and James Dean come onto the scene in their films and portray a certain style and look of
masculinity. From there we see Clint Eastwood beginning in the 1960s with his western movies
and receive another look into a persuasive masculine role. In Clint Eastwood’s case, the “action
hero” was stern, quite, and “tough” getting the job done and saving the day. It wasn’t until the
1970s and 1980s where we saw this explosion of explosive, hyper-masculine embodied action
stars like Arnold Schwarzenegger and Sylvester Stallone, who defined masculinity on muscular
physic and violence (Moss 2012: 24).
Why did this explosion of violence and tough, rugged muscular physic occur in these
films, and how did it effect media production after? The answer may not be simple, but Moss
(2012) explains one idea as to why this explosion of violence and male assertion occurred. In the
context of the late 1960s and early 1970s, the explosion of hyper-masculine roles parallels the
United States involvement in the Vietnam War. The war, in the eyes of the American public was
a lost cause. In the sense of the American male, not being able to win the war was a failure of
what it meant to be a man. In a society which felt disconnect from is masculine abilities, the
attempt to reinforce a dominate role in masculinity occurred in films. These action heroes served
as a new outlet for American men to become dominate once again. The film which fully
epitomizes the concept is Stallone’s Rambo. Moss (2012) explains that for men watching these
films, the content and actions were a vital component in recapturing something essential that was
missing. He describes it as a reaffirmation of traditional American Values like self-reliance,
honesty, courage, and a concern for fellow citizens, something that was exploited through the
experience of the Vietnam War and the inefficiency to win the police action.
Variations of the hyper-masculine male soon worked its way into Hollywood and onto
film screens. One of the most notable and unique variations of the hyper-masculine male was the
4
selection of Tobey Maguire as Spiderman. Maguire looked like the quintessential school boy,
oozing sweetness and good manners, the exact opposite of actors like Stallone and
Schwarzenegger. However, Maguire is tasked with trying to save the world from evil in the form
of the villains he encounters. In an essence, Maguire becomes the new masculine identity or
influence in the action superhero role. He provides the same relief and action as the previous
actors stated above, but opposed to relying on muscular physic and hyper-violence, he is small
framed and fights in a way different from the heroes of the 1970’s and 1980’s (Moss 2012:26).
In the 1990s and early 2000s the hyper-masculine action hero shifts to a slightly
emotional hero. Moss (2012:25) goes on to describe that the reason this shift may have occurred
may be due to a more feminized American society, and a rise of metrosexual males and an
absence of wars like World War II, Vietnam, and Korea, as well as a lack of hardship in the
previous two decades of American Life. In the previous decades the media used the influence of
these wars and hardships to define the idea of masculinity. By using the wars and hardships of
the previous decades, we see the outline of violence, hard work, physical physic, and aggression
as the way to succeed and become a man. In a way, the movies were correct. During that time of
American society, the men had to fight to defend their country and win the war(s) and so that
time periods idea of a man would be very different from one in which the males of that society
did not experience war or hardship. As a result, suitable alternatives had to be found to illustrate
that time periods idea of masculinity, and interesting variations were created.
The Re-masculinization of American Culture
The urge to define masculinity is permeated by the older forms or ideas of masculinity
which have become bedrock in our history (Ryan and Macey 2013). The social and cultural
5
changes that shape masculine identity collide or make peace with a strong counter tide of honor
and nostalgia of forms of masculinity from the pre-Vietnam ear. One movie in particular which
struggles with the concept of masculinity and its multiple layers is We Were Soldiers. The movie
follows around a Calvary of 395 American soldiers and their three day battle with North
Vietnamese soldiers, numbering in the thousands. The movie, especially the narrator of the
movie, emphasizes the fact that the Vietnamese soldiers are highly trained, know the landscape,
are highly motivated, and have been fighting war for 20-30 years. The idea behind this narration
is on the emphasis of these facts because it strengthens the idea of heroic battling on the side of
the American soldiers. The movie ends it what seems like a victory for these few American
troops. Emphasis is placed on the fact that 79 American Soldiers lost their lives, in comparison to
the hundreds of North Vietnamese soldiers who lost theirs. The narration itself places the story in
the middle of American mythology (Smith 2009) of Custard and his historic “Last Stand.” The
soldiers in the movie We Were Soldiers were given the unlucky Calvary number of 7, same as
Custard’s 7th Calvary. The idea behind this is to give the story line a historic awe, a battle of the
wits essentially.
The difference in We Were Soldiers as opposed to the actual story of Custard is a win.
Custard and his “Last Stand” were unsuccessful; it was actually a mutilation of himself and his
troops. In the movie We Were Soldiers, the troops rally behind each other and defeat a massive
sea of warriors, rewriting mythology of masculinity in this country. Before the creation of We
Were Soldiers, the idea of a small American army fighting a massive foe ended in mutilation.
Post film era suggests that men in this culture have the ability to overcome challenges through
warfare and fighting, which suggests or influences masculinity to portray violence. The Vietnam
War built an aspect of masculinity, turning the soldier into a machine for warfare. This machine
6
was built on a drive to serve the country and use violence to win the ultimate goal: the war. Films
like We Were Soldiers and others are geared towards showing the human side of the soldier, and
the narratives turn the soldiers into a technology of war, used to facilitate a goal (Smith 2009).
This spilt between soldier as man and soldier as a fighting machine allows militant
masculinity to enter American society and popular culture. The films create a tool for
destruction, and this destruction aspect is seen in our popular culture as masculine. Smith
(2009:183) remarks, “In narratives featuring soldiers, the soldiers’ ability to kill, enhanced
through mechanization, is used only as a backdrop against which his or her humanness can be
revealed. The soldier is simultaneously part of the technology of war and part of the tradition of
Western Humanized “man”.” Essentially, the soldier becomes both a machine and an emotional,
living creature. The movies portray a struggle between human relationships and the mechanical
ability built into the soldier to complete his goal.
Often times, the movie highlights the machine aspect as the reason the soldier became the
hero; his ability to put the human characteristics aside and become the hypothetical machine.
Movies which portray this attitude include Robocop and The Terminator. In both of these films,
the masculine dominate hero is transformed into a machine built to control and eliminate. Both
films show human characteristics of the machines, but internally the machine is built for one
thing. How does this portrayal affect young men and masculinity itself? The idea that
masculinity includes dominance, control, and violence is highlighted in these movies.
Masculinity itself then must include a control over action with a source of fight to protect what it
is the man loves, wants, or needs. By watching and accepting the messages given through this
source of entertainment, masculinity is transformed into a need for control, dominance, and some
aspect of violence.
7
Being a Man and Being Violent
According to the documentary Tough Guise, men and masculinity in society involves the
exploitation of what it means to be a man. The film indicates that men today are forced into a
narrow box of what it means to be a “real man” and the ideas behind what a real man is. They are
taught at an early age that in order to be a man you have to be tough, independent, strong, and
respected and if you are not you are assigned names such as wimp, wuss, fag, and sissy which
are insults designed to keep boys boxed into this idea of masculinity. In turn, there is a lot of
pressure for young boys to conform and put up an act or a wall which allows them to become
masculine. Obviously they learn this from a number of different sources, but media outlets,
especially films, show emphasis on men having power and control; the ability to get what they
want though an assertion of power, usually through violence. This concept is especially true for
men of Latino descent for example. As pointed out in Tough Guise, they are almost always
presented as boxers, gangsters, or tough guys in the neighborhood. They get what they want
through violence.
Since there are such few models of masculinity in the media for these men to turn to, the
images they do see are associated with masculinity and thus internalized and accepted as what it
socially means to be a man. The same can be said for African American men, or Asian men.
They too are at a disadvantage of media representation and have few options or images to relate
masculinity to. Asian men are almost always represented as a martial artist, or using a form of
martial arts to get what they want and assert power. The media in turn constructs violent
masculinity as a cultural norm, and thus it is not seen as a deviation rather it is seen as a normal
part of masculinity.
8
In terms of race, many different factors can play into the idea of masculinity. A great
example of masculinity for different races can be seen in films and movies which portray men of
different races as valuing different things and thus affecting that race’s identity of masculinity.
As discussed in the documentary Tough Guise, the races can be portrayed differently. In most
films, Latin men are portrayed as criminal, boxers, or gangsters. This lack of roles can turn men
of Latino decent into exactly what the movie portrays. What happens is since there is such a lack
of variation in roles Latino film stars play, the few roles they do play are internalized and seen as
what masculine is in Latino culture. The same goes for men of Asian descent, since they are
more often than not portrayed as the Karate Master or a mixed martial arts genius. Recently, the
explosion of Yakuza Movies in Japan has heightened this idea of violence and masculinity in
Japanese culture (Varese 2006:4).
The Yakuza Movies center around the crime syndicated families or mafias of Japan. The
movie highlighted these men as heroes of the culture, because they are able to dominate other
men and even authority figures to get what they want. Varese (2006) talks about what it means to
be a man in Japan, and the honor and pride one receives in being a man in Japanese culture. Men
in this culture are most dominate, in control, show little emotion, and are the ultimate head of the
family. In Japanese culture, men are regarded as the protectors and the providers for the family,
and if one cannot protect or provide for himself or his family, he is seen as less of a man. The
Creation of the Yakuza Movies center around the mob “bosses.” Basically, the boss is the head
of the mob, which in comparison is the head of that family. He provides for this family by all
means necessary, whether it means defining authority, corruption, or violence (Varese 2006). In
return, since these ideas or held dear to the culture, when an individual views these movies, he
can see it as what it means to be a man. In order to receive that power, dominance, control, and
9
assertion, as well as provide for his family, a man must use violence, corruption, and other
dominating aspects to receive it.
Shifting our attention back towards the United States, differences in race and violence
can create images of masculinity as well. One main example for this idea or concept is the World
Wrestling Entertainments ability to create the awe around professional wrestler John Cena
(Taylor 2010:2). John Cena entered the circuit in the early 2000s, but he brought a connection of
violence and race with him. Cena’s whiteness and connections to the United States military
allowed him to appeal to viewers who themselves were white, however his greatest ability was to
use his Hip-Hop side of his character to appeal to African American viewers. By doing so, Cena
created a muscular, powerful wrestler, with whom both races could connect to. By creating a
connection with the two races, Cena was able to use the violent actions over other wrestlers in
the circuit as justifiable and earned (Taylor 2010:5). The idea of masculinity transformed, into
having a connection to all races. Before, culture viewed African American males as more
violent, but with this creation of a model for both races, Cena gave white viewers a reason to
connect the images of violence they saw and the Hip-Hop connection as what it means to be
masculine and survive on the streets as a man in society today (Taylor 2010:9).
Struggle between Fighter and Wimp
The connection between being a man and being violent lies with the ability to assert
dominance over someone and get what you want. In order to assert domination a man must be
able to fight. If a man is not a fighter, he is a wimp (Moss 2012:27). In order for the man to rein
supreme, he must be violent and sexual. Two movies which epitomize this concept of being a
fighter or a wimp are Gladiator and Fight Club. The movie Gladiator follows Russell Crowe’s
10
character Maximus around. Maximus is the ultimate leader and an extremely skilled fighter and
commander of his troops. Maximus excels especially in individual combat, as well as being a
devoted family man. These characteristics mirror the characteristics of Mel Gibson in We Were
Soldiers. Both men are assertive in their control of their troops, as well as experts on individual
combat. One might ask themselves how these men became such influential leaders. The answer,
as outlined in both films, is their skilled ability to fight (Moss 2012: 28). Both men lead their
troops through skilled and experienced fighting techniques. They both win by dominating their
enemies through violence. Young men watch both of these films and understand that the process
in becoming a leader involves fighting and not being a wimp.
Moss (2012) also describes the fighter’s ability to both take and receive a punch. The
most skilled men can receive a hit, recuperate without being embarrassed, and give a blow of
equal or greater strength back. Those who cannot take the hit are seen as wimp. This idea of a
fighter or a wimp might be an explanation for the explosion of adolescent male’s fascination
with fighting. They see it as a rite of passage and an area to prove one’s masculine abilities and
assert dominance over another male, one which will be seen as a wimp. The movie which
outlines the fighter or wimp, hit and be hit concept is the movie Fight Club. The movie and book
is a conscious attempt to move men away from the softness of contemporary masculine culture,
which is influenced by an increasingly feminized society (Moss 2012:27). The movie
concentrates in the early 2000s, a time where more men were being raised by single mothers, and
women were a mainstream in the workplace, politics, and society. In an attempt to rescue
masculinity and counterbalance this feminized society, the movie brought men back to their
primal instincts, which was to be able to fight as well as take a punch and be willing to get beat
up.
11
Fight Club tries to reinvent a time when men were essential to society and were key
participants in the events of society. This idea includes the creation of war, in absence of an
actual war. To recreate this aspect, Fight Club brings men of all walks of life together with the
goal of fighting each other in an underground spectacle. The club itself is designed to bring
ordered ciaos to the participants, and since this era of time presented little war and hardship for
men, fighting seemed like a transition to manhood (Moss 2012:27). In the film, the actors who
initially come to participate in the club are seen as pushovers, weak, or underachieving.
However, by the end of the movie all participants have become stern, tough, able, and hungry for
success. They create their own dominance. This teaches young men to fight and assert
dominance over each other in order to become a man. It teaches them to go through this process
in order to become a leader, feared, and respected, which again may be the reason why we see so
many adolescent and young males so fascinated with fighting (Moss 2012).
The movie Fight Club oozes an idea of manhood. This concept is based around the idea
that men must fight, get beat up, and push through the pain to succeed. Those who do not push
through are thus the wimps of society, subject to ridicule and the idea of being less of a man
(Behm-Morawitz and Mastro 2008). Where did this idea that a man must fight to survive and
succeed develop? As discussed in the documentary Tough Guise 2, many reporters and different
news outlets try to blame this concept on a prehistoric idea that men are programmed to fight.
They argue that men have a inherit want or desire to fight and conquer others because this is
what they did when they were hunter-gatherers to survive. The other notion that “Boy will be
Boys” is also discussed in this film. However, by using the cop-out “boys will be boys” this
assumes that men have an excuse for violent or rough actions.
12
As a society, promoting this idea gives men an outlet to blame violence on. No longer are
we looking at the man as a violent offend, rather it is a biological factor with which we must
adhere to (Soulliere 2015). This notion can further be argued that boys are hardwired and
programmed to be murders, and violent offenders. However, the documentary Tough Guise 2
further explains that this is a learned behavior, not something hardwired in a male’s brain. Boys
learn at a very young age that violence, fighting, and domination is what it means to be a man.
We can see this in the films they watch. When these boys grow older and understand the movies
they watch, they further understand that these actions are key components of being a man
(Soulliere 2015).
The Emotional Mask
The last portion of this paper will discuss one of the biggest concerns around masculinity
today. The emotional mask refers to the front or mask men must put up to keep the tough guy
image, the rough edge, and the mask used to earn the respect of your masculine peers. This mask
rejects almost any kind of emotion, turning the man into a stone wall of actions. The
documentary Codes of Gender further describes the different rules or norms by which the male
gender must live by or live up to. The concept as to why men must mask their emotions is
essential to understanding masculinity in our society.
Modern films like We Were Soldiers, Terminator, Robocop, and Fight Club all portray
different types of heroic men and their accomplishments through actions of violence, or what is
seen as masculinity. In all of these movies, the men are rough, tough, and focused. Very rarely
do you see any of these men express any emotion outside of rage or anger. Why do these two
emotions seem to be the only expression of emotion by men in a great majority of movies? The
13
movies which men watch show men hiding the other emotions that everyone has, making it seem
like the only way to be a man or the only way a man is supposed to act is by showing those few
emotions discussed above. Whatever happened compassion, defeat, fear, love, or any of the other
emotions any one would feel? In these movies, those who show these emotions are defeated or
taken advantage of. These men who show emotional distress or remove their mask become the
opposite of what a man is (The Codes of Gender).
At an early age, men learn that showing emotion or expressing “feelings” are something
that girls do. They learn that men do not dry, they do not talk about emotional distress, instead
they are taught to “suck it up” and get over it. Essentially, they are constantly reminded and
encouraged to put this mask on. This is why we see men later in life whom have a hard time
opening up to peers and family. Men struggle with taking off the mask because they feel it will
expose them. They believe once they are exposed and the mask is gone, they are seen as less
masculine, which can destroy any man.
Conclusion
Society changes at a rapid rate and the ideas of masculinity can be seen through the
action heroes, film stars, and actors of the films from each stage of change. Society puts pressure
and emphasis on what it thinks a man should be or what masculinity is. As a result, Hollywood
and film studios create these desired role models through movies and essentially reinforce the
current society’s want or need for that masculine role. In turn, the images, ideas, and expression
of these films and their masculine role model influence the idea of what it means to be a man for
young men in present society.
14
References
Behm-Morawitz, Elizabeth, and Dana E. Mastro. 2008. Mean Girls? The Influence of Gender
Portrayals in Teen Movies on Emerging Adults’ Gender-Based Attitudes and Beliefs.
Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly 85(1):131-146.
Codes of Gender. Media Education Foundation, 2009. Film.
Moss, Mark. 2012. The Media and The Models of Masculinity. Lanham: Lexington Books.
Ryan, Kathleen M., and Macey, Deborah A. 2013. Television and the Self: Knowledge, Identity,
and Media Representation. Lanham: Lexington Books.
Soulliere, Danielle. 2015. Wrestling with Masculinity: Messages about Manhood in the WWE.
Sex Roles 55(1/2):1-11.
Taylor, Joy T. 2010. You Can’t See Me, OR Can You?: Unpacking John Cena’s Performance of
Whiteness in World Wrestling Entertainment.
Tough Guise. Media Education Foundation, 2002. Film.
Tough Guise 2. Media Education Foundation, 2013. Film.
Smith, Bradley. 2009. “Narrative’s Role in Constructing Masculinities in We Were Soldiers” in
Watson, Elwood (Ed.). Pimps, Wimps, Studs, Thugs, and Gentlemen: Essays on Media
Images of Masculinity. Jeffereson, North Carolina. McFarland and Company,
15
Inc.
Varese, F. 2006. “The Secret of Japanese Cinema: The Yakuza Movies”. Global Crime 7(1):105124.