About Masculinity

Connell (2000) in his examination of masculinity makes the argument that, "The patterns of conduct out society defines as masculine may be seen in the live of individuals, but they also have an existence beyond the individual. Masculinities are defined collectively in culture, and are sustained in institutions" (p. 11). What this effectively suggests is that when on looks across the broad scope of culture in a given locale, the specific patterns of conduct that govern how men act will be somewhat uniform. Although the argument made by Connell appears to be clearly grounded in theoretical observation, one cannot help but to challenge this contention in the context of new statistics which show that more men are electing to have plastic surgery. Nash (2006) reports that the number of men having plastic surgery has grown by more than 65 percent in the last five years.

When looking at the process of plastic surgery as a cultural and social phenomenon, Gimlin (2000) argues that this process has been typically viewed as a means for women to fell better about their appearance. Because of the social pressure placed on women to retain their "youthful" appearance, cosmetic surgery has been widely viewed as a female institution. Given the notable changes that have occurred in the context of the demographics of plastic surgery patients, the question that evolves in this case is whether or not the decision by more men to have plastic surgery is one that is supported in the context of the collective masculinity that is reported by Connell. If this indeed the case, it would be possible to argue that the modern conceptualization of masculinity in the Untied States has witnessed a notable change. If this is not the case, then it would be possible to argue that masculinity in the Untied States is not as widely shaped by collective masculinity as Connell argues. This would promulgate further investigation into the forces that drive the development of masculinity in modern America.

Literature Review

When looking at the subject of how collective consciousness informs the laymen's understanding of masculinity, it is important to consider the issue of how this process occurs. Butler (1995) makes the argument that, "...gender is produced as a ritualized repetition of conventions and that this ritual is socially compelled in part by the force of compulsory heterosexuality" (p. 31). When placed in this perspective, it appears as if Butler does indeed agree with Connell in terms of the collective pressure that culture and society place on men to act "masculine." In many respects the argument made by Butler appears to focus the social pressure faced by men, asserting that the collective pressure of the heterosexual identity is what pressures men to act the way in which they do.

With the realization that heterosexuality provides the collective basis for the definition of the masculine identity, it only stands to reason that a process or practice that is widely viewed as feminine-thus, giving it the connotation of homosexual when applied to the individual male's behavior-would not be the norm. For this reason, the reality that more men are actively seeking plastic surgery as a viable alternative to help them regain their youthful appearance appears to be antithetical to the assumption that a collective masculinity pervades modern development of the male identity. This argument is further supported when one considers that the act of undertaking plastic surgery carries with it feminine or homosexual connotations. In terms of Butler's argument about what drives collective masculinity-i.e. heterosexuality-the practice of males seeking plastic surgery clearly makes no sense whatsoever.

While the information provided by both Connell and Butler appear to create a paradox when it comes to understanding men's behavior with respect to the issue of plastic surgery, it is important to note that Connell does provide some understanding with respect to how this paradox may have occurred. In particular, Connell makes the following observations: "Unless we subside into defining masculinity as equivalent to men, we must acknowledge that sometimes masculine conduct or masculine identity goes together with a female body. It is actually very common for a (biological) man to have elements of 'feminine' identity, desire and patterns of conduct" (p. 16-7). As such, the masculine identity-even the collective masculine identity-is not just rooted in modern social conceptions of what it means to be masculine-i.e. in terms of the behavior of the individual. As argued by Connell, it is possible for the male to exhibit traits of the feminine in the context of identity development.

When placed in this perspective a host of issues arise. First, when looking at what Connell writes in the context of a man's desire to have plastic surgery, one must to consider if this change is a direct reflection of the feminine side of the male identity emerging. If this is the case, one could clearly make the argument that Connell is correct in his assertions about the way in which masculinity is constructed. Second, one must also address the issue of collective masculinity in the context of understanding the behavior of men when it comes to plastic surgery. If the male's desire to have plastic surgery is not simply an extension of the feminine component of masculine identity, one could make the argument that social and cultural understandings of masculinity are changing. This realization could have dramatic implications for understanding masculinity and the modern conceptualization of the male identity.

Finally, when looking at the issue of cosmetic surgery and its application to understanding conceptions of masculinity, some understanding of how heterosexuality and homosexuality impact male behavior must be considered. Butler argues that trends toward heterosexuality serve as the impetus to shape male behavior. If increases in the number of males having cosmetic surgery is a reflection of changes in the collective understanding of masculinity, the impact that this data has for constructing hetero- and homosexual identities must be addressed. In short, it must be determined if heterosexual and homosexual definitions are shifting and men are still leaning toward a collective identity that involves the heterosexual identity. Clearly, changes that challenge Butler's conceptions will have ramifications for understanding both collective masculinity and the definitions of hetero- and homosexuality.

Methodology

Two studies would be needed to address the issues outlined above. In the first study, surveys of men and women undergoing plastic surgery would have to be considered. The goal in this case would be to determine the reasons why men and women choose to have plastic surgery. If the reasons given by both men and women were similar, one could conclude that the masculine identity is indeed directly linked to components of the feminine identity. Radical deviations in men and women's responses would be reflective of changes in society that are placing more pressure on men to have cosmetic surgery. This data would confirm that collective understanding of masculinity may be changing.

The second type of study that would need to be undertaken in this case, is one that considers social reaction to men having plastic surgery. Using a random sample of an urban population, surveys of how both men and women feel about men having plastic surgery could provide a more integral understanding of how this behavior is viewed. If a majority of respondents viewed men having plastic surgery as a positive process, one could conclude that social conceptions of masculinity are changing. If the data demonstrated a clear disdain for men having plastic surgery one would be able to assume that collective masculinity has not changed drastically. In this case, some degree of examination of the data would be needed to help determine trends with respect to understanding why such notable changes in men's behavior have occurred in recent years.

References

Butler, J. (1995). Melancholy gender/ Refused identification. In: Berger, M., Wallis, B., & Watson, S. (Eds.), Constructing Masculinity. New York: Routledge.

Connell, R.W. (2000). The Men and the Boys. Sydney: Allen & Unwin.

Gimlin, D. (2000). Cosmetic surgery: Beauty as a commodity. Qualitative Sociology, 23(1), 77-98.

Nash, K. (2006). Men electing cosmetic procedures in growing numbers. Cosmetic Surgery Times, 9(4), 6-9.