On
Performative Masculinity
6/18/09
For
all
the attention focused
on how what
they’re supposed to
do is hard,
women at least get to know
what it is they’re
supposed to do:
look at the women most sought-after by guys, and try to look
like them. For
guys, it’s
not that simple. Look
at the guys most sought-after by women,
and what you get isn’t necessarily a template for aesthetics. In
high school
and college, for example, the guys girls like most usually go around in
ratty
shorts and ballcaps. Are
girls turned on
by ratty shorts and ballcaps the same way that men are turned on by
false eyelashes
or fishnet stockings? Of
course
not. The point of
these clothes on the
guys who wear them isn’t that they look
good; it’s that they identify them as members of the dominant
group. Their
function is akin to that of a military
uniform (which women also reputedly find attractive).
Once
you're out
of school,
you’ve got the fact that women find guys
in suits attractive, but this is kind of the same shit.
Unlike women’s
formalwear, a suit or tux does not show off that you have a nice body. In
fact, the point
of suits and tuxes seems to be that
guys with nice bodies and
guys with bad bodies look pretty much the same in them.
They’re
attractive because nice ones are
expensive, thus making it look like you have money — which is a
good deal if you
have money, but who the fuck has money?
Sure,
I
can go into
evolutionary biology here, and talk
about how males evolved to look for cues that the female was physically
capable
of producing multiple healthy offspring (so it’s all about
what the woman looks
like) and females evolved to look for cues that the male could protect
them
once they were born (evidence that he has resources and/or a posse),
but
there’s no point in annoying everyone with backstories that
don’t provide solutions. Whatever
the explanation for the situation,
the situation sucks. As
a guy, how the
hell are you supposed to be sexy if you are a)
no longer in school, so festooning yourself with the symbols of
a feared ninja clan is irrelevant, and b)
not rich?
The
solution is simple. If
what guys are supposed to do doesn’t
work, then stop doing what guys
are supposed to do, and just do the male version of what girls are
supposed to
do: look at physically
attractive
guys, and try to look like them.
Granted,
we sort
of
do this already, but in a severely handicapped way.
Women
grow up developing a far, far
more finely tuned sense of what
constitutes having a “nice”
any-particular-part-of-the-female-body.
As
guys, we do not. We
know that there is such
a thing as having a nice butt,
but we don’t know
exactly what
this would entail, since knowing what this would entail would
involve… well,
looking at guys’ butts. So
instead we
look at the parts of attractive guys that are heterosexually
“safe” to look at,
and this inevitably leads us down the wrong path: we hear
women say
Johnny Depp
is hot, so we try to grow a stupid moustache that only looks good on
Johnny
Depp, merely to discover at a later date that the funny thing about
stupid
moustaches that only look good on Johnny Depp is, they
only look good on Johnny Depp.
"Why
did I grow this
moustache?
Purely
to fuck with
you, for I
am Depp."
So
the first thing guys need to
do in the 21st
century is develop a sense of what it means to be a hot guy in a sense
at least
comparable to women’s sense of what it means to be a hot
girl: and not just by
copying some actor’s haircut,
but by
looking below the neck too.
Have
you
ever heard girls joke
about how guys look silly
naked? About how,
whereas girls look
“balanced” or “complete,” what
with there being cool stuff upstairs, cool stuff
downstairs, and just generally cool stuff everywhere, guys just have a
penis
and nothing else worthy of notice?
Well,
that is
true. On
guys who don’t
work out.
One
unfortunate effect of the
fact that discussions of
sexual attractiveness in our culture all center on the female body is
that this
has led to everyone talking about how you’re born:
this woman was so lucky because she was born looking this
way, and that woman has it so tough because she was born looking that
way. Whatshername
has a nice this,
and So-and-so has
a nice that,
and it’s all just luck.
And
although women can and do
benefit from exercise,
this “born lucky” idea is
true
to an
extent where female attractiveness is concerned: if you do
not
naturally
have big
boobs, there is nothing you can do to get big boobs outside of plastic
surgery; a woman who works out enough will have a great body, but it is
also possible
just to be born with one. This
is,
however, not true at
all for men.
Outside
of a few general basics
(e.g., height, cock size),
there is nothing
that constitutes
having a “nice body” on a man that is simply a
matter of being “born that
way.” What
a good body means on a guy is
your musculature, and no-one is born
ripped. You get
ripped by working out,
and that’s it.
So
why doesn’t every
guy just work out, if it’s that simple?
Is
it just laziness? Well,
some guys are
lazy, to be sure, but
that’s not the whole explanation.
For
a
lot of guys who are certainly industrious about many other things in
life, it
comes down to "sincerity paranoia" about who you really
are: “Oh,
I am not some
jock, so if I got all
muscular,
that wouldn’t be the real
me…”
And
this degree of paranoia is,
well, pathetic. Being
in shape does not change who you are
any more than a girl’s wearing makeup or high heels changes
who she is. Honestly,
if you are scared to work out, that
is equivalent to a woman being scared to wear makeup.
It
is kid stuff.
Now,
this is usually where a
bunch of people chime in with
“Yeah, but not every girl likes those huge bodybuilder
guys…”
Whoa. One problem
at
a time. You
have
never worked out in
your life, but right off the bat you’re afraid about getting too
huge? Guys who look
like that
devote every waking
moment to making themselves look like that, adopt crazy diets and
supplementation programs, and — maybe not all, but definitely
lots — take
steroids. There is
absolutely zero
chance that by doing a 45-minute weight routine three days a week you
are
somehow going to get huge to the point where it’s weird. This
would be like a girl
deciding that,
because not every guy likes insane fake pornstar boobs, she
doesn’t want to
have boobs at all. Having
boobs at all
is unquestionably a
plus, and so
is being muscular at
all. If
you’re still
so scared about it,
concentrate on cardio + abs, since there are no girls who dislike
sixpacks and
that obliques “V” thing.
Yes,
in college, you heard some
girls say that they don’t
want guys to exercise at all in any way, because of some fucked-up
political
explanation.
Here’s
the thing: They
were lying. That's just the female equivalent of
those guys
who pretend they want girls to wear jeans and sneakers all the time
because
they’re so “nice,” so you don’t
care what they think anyway. They
are just going to be pissed at you no
matter what you do, unless it is turn asexual or kill yourself.
I
know they are skilled at
convincing you that you are a
“bad person,” but that’s because, much
like the pro bodybuilders mentioned
above, they devote their entire day every day to nothing aside from
figuring
out how to convince you that you are a bad person.
But
anyway, your main problem so far isn’t
that they
are convincing you that
working out will make you a bad person — it’s that you
are convincing yourself of that all
on your own.
Are
we as guys lucky not to be
evaluated as stringently
based on physical attributes as girls are?
Of course — the way women's bodies get
discussed in our culture is balls-on-the-moon insane, and I can't
imagine what it must be like to put up with.
But the
downside to being the gender whose bodies get discussed less is, it can
make us complacent about how we look.
The
best strategy is, even if we’re not
being
judged as harshly as women, imagine
that we are. It’s
this complacency that
makes some guys think stupid shit like “Well, I am a
sensitive writer, so not
only do I not need
to have a nice
body, but I should actually avoid
having one, because having one would mean that I am not a sensitive
writer
anymore.” Seriously, that makes no sense.
Look
at it this way: when you
see a chick who is wearing
glasses and a pencil skirt because she is going for a Sexy Librarian
thing, do
you want her to not
have an amazing
body because the look she's going for is intellectual, or do you want her
to be
going for that look and also have an
amazing body? Obviously,
you want her to
also have an amazing body. There
is no
possible aesthetic for which
the
equation [given
aesthetic] + [amazing
body] = [even better] does not
hold. So why would
girls think of us any
differently?
You
say you are going for a
Jarvis Cocker thing? Work
out anyway. If some
chump comes up to you and is like
“Hey, I don’t get it, how come you have Jarvis
Cocker hair and glasses but are
also buff? That’s
not allowed,” you can
be like “I just decided it was allowed.
If
you don’t like it, I will croon a dry
witticism about being a perv
and then break both your arms 90 degrees backward at the
elbow.”
Guys
grow up thinking that
“having a nice body” is one
of the aesthetic categories itself,
whereas girls (correctly) identify it as an attribute you should seek
out no
matter which category you are in: it doesn’t matter whether a
chick wants to be
a poet instead of a swimsuit model by profession — the culture tells her that she has to
be a poet with
a nice body, or she
might as well
not exist. Is this fair? I guess not. But something unfair can still motivate you, so this
is how intelligent guys have to
start thinking too.
|
+ |
|
Just
do
this, dumbass.
But
guys, function-minded as we
are, experience the
knee-jerk reaction that this advice makes no sense. “But
wait a minute,” we think. “It
makes no sense for me to try and look
like Wolverine, because I am not actually
like Wolverine — it is not an accurate representation of who I
am.”
But
you know what? No shit you are
not an ageless
indestructible Canadian
government experiment
gone wrong cursed with a loner’s destiny and eternally torn
between ineffable
stirrings of nobility and your undeniable animal nature.
You’re
not trying to make people think you
are.
You’re
just trying to get that
thing where your shoulder muscle has another smaller shoulder muscle
sticking
out from the middle of it, because it looks hot. Jeez,
do you not
want a chick to have Angelina Jolie lips unless she actually
leads a double-life as a
highly-paid globetrotting assassin?
Guys
sometimes get mad when
they perceive women as acting
like sex is “funny” or “a joke.” And
though it seems this way to us, it’s not that
they’re treating sexuality as “a
joke” so much as that they realize it is essentially
performative. In
our place and time (ancient Athens
and Elizabethan England were other matters), the performative nature of
sexuality is inescapable for women in a way that it profoundly is not
for
men. There is
simply no way to spend
three mortal hours getting dolled up to go out without at least making
it into
somewhat of a joke — blasting some Beyoncé crap,
posing for one another, talking
in funny voices, etc. You’d
go nuts
otherwise.
Men
can begin to get a window
into this when we adopt
performative practices ourselves, such as working out.
But
a lot of men — especially smart
men — resist
this, because it just seems so stupid
to get psyched up to pump iron by blasting some cock metal or whatever.
I
got serious about working out
a while back, and even
though I am a sensitive writer and all, I noticed that I could get into
it much
more effectively by blasting music I can take or leave, like Guns
‘n’ Roses or
Metallica, than music I actually like.
My
“real” personality prefers
sensitive music, but the problem is, Simon
& Garfunkel or Nirvana
Unplugged
doesn’t
make me want to exercise — it makes me want to put on an
oversize sweater and
curl up in the corner and smoke cigarettes.
You
don’t have to actually
like Guns
‘n’ Roses, or think that Axl
Rose should seriously be held up as
a model of how men should behave.
Just
take it for what it is — the masculine equivalent of Britney
Spears: performative
gender taken to the level of parody and consumed as a means to a
specific end.
If
you’re an
intellectual guy who’s tried to get in shape
before and failed, maybe the reason you’re having trouble is
that Plain
White Ts aren’t the best musical selection for psyching
yourself up to do that
extra lap. Just
swallow your pride and
download the theme from Rocky. What,
too embarrassed? Well,
I guess it would
indeed be lame if you
were having your friend follow you around the park blasting the theme
from Rocky
on a boom
box — but it’s 2009, the
shit is on your iPod, who’s gonna know?
If
you’re concerned that someone you pass
will actually read “Theme from
Rocky” scrolling across the iPod display screen, then just go into
iTunes and change it to read something else.
You
know, “Definitely NOT the Theme from
Rocky” or something.
If
psyching yourself up with
stereotypically masculine music
would still bother you regardless
of
whether anyone knows, ask yourself why.
Are
you concerned that embracing performative
masculinity, even as a
technique, will somehow make you “the same as” the
people you hate? Well,
if you are genuinely scared of that,
then you must not be very secure in the extent to which you are a good
person. Come on:
the guys you hate think
that Noah’s Ark really happened and call Barack Obama a
terrorist every five
minutes, and you think that you are somehow going to become
“the same as” them
just because you downloaded “Welcome to the Jungle?”
Dude,
honestly?
It’s
just music.
You
don’t have to actually
kill someone just because you
listened to “Enter Sandman” while working out, any
more than the girl who
listens to stupid dance pop while she does her hair and makeup actually
has to
take a ride on someone’s disco stick (although she certainly
can if she wants,
whereas on the whole it would probably be a good idea for you to
refrain from
killing people).
Not
Pictured: Man running up
stairs to a Bright Eyes song
Women
are taught to be
actresses — to “play
dress-up” — because
the sheer amount
of stuff they have
to do when it’s “time to be sexy”
necessitates this.
Conversely,
men see performativity as silly
at best and a form of insincerity at worst. Girls
learn to adopt different vibes for different
situations, and boys
learn to pick a vibe and stick to it: whereas a girl learns to say
“I will look
like Dita von Teese at this party, like Shirley Manson at that party
next week,
like ’80s Madonna for that dance party,” etc. as
needed, a guy just decides at age fifteen that “I am like
John Lennon, so I will try to look like John Lennon, and that will be
my thing every
day for the rest of my life.”
Neither
of these templates is
right or wrong — it is just a
matter of how girls on average learn to present themselves versus how
boys
do. The point is,
boys can benefit from
considering the girls’ template.
The
stumbling block for guys is
that we are hypervigilant about accurately
projecting our personalities — I
have to wear “A” and have haircut
“B,” so that anyone who sees me can plainly
tell that I am XYZ type of person.
But
people
don’t actually need as much help discerning our personalities
as we are
inclined to believe they do. In
fact,
occasionally adopting a style that doesn’t instantly
telegraph your demographic
might be socially beneficial, because it forces you to actually
interact with
people if you want them to know what you’re like.
I
understand the paranoia:
maybe this time
there will be some
chick there who has always been
looking for a guy who projects exactly what my
“real” personality is, and if I
get dressed up all “fake,” she won’t know
it’s me.
That seems
to make
sense, but the fact is that the knee-jerk
“real/fake” distinction here is an
illusion. It is
just the fear of failure
making stuff up to fuck with you.
Look
at it this way: chicks worked past that particular paranoia in middle
school, because they had no choice, because the culture makes it
plainly
obvious to them that they simply have
to
look hot wherever they go. And
in fact,
we as guys regard this as a sign of strength
and maturity
in women. When we
hear a girl say
something to the
effect of “Oh, I will just wear jeans and no makeup
everyplace, because someday
I will meet a guy who will love me best that way,” we just
feel sorry for
her. So why should
we do the same
pathetic thing?
Finally — and
maybe
most importantly — there’s the question of
whether, when you perceive a certain advantage as being characteristic
of a
rival or despised group (real or imagined), you choose to cede
that advantage to the despised
group, or deny
them its exclusivity. For
example, since
you’re reading this
website, I’m assuming you like
smart chicks — do you want smart chicks to refrain from
dressing sexy just
because some people think it’s what dumb chicks do, or do you
want smart chicks
to dress just as sexy? Obviously,
you
want smart chicks to be sexy too. So why would you assume that smart chicks wouldn't want smart guys to do the same?
And
that’s how I feel
about finally coming to terms with
what they referred to in college as “traditional notions of
masculinity.” When
I hear jocks/Conservatives talk about
how they can beat up nerds/Liberals, I don’t have to respond
by complaining about
how physicality is stupid. I can simply say “No, you
can’t.” And
as someone who used
to have to
respond the first way, believe me when I tell you
that the second way feels a lot better.
|