Men, Masculinity and the Media

Steve Craig

• Publisher: SAGE Publications, Inc
• ISBN:
  9781506320472
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Social Sciences
• Subtopic: Gender Studies
• Index: Social Sciences

Although studies of men and masculinity have gained momentum, little has been published that focuses on the media and their relationship to men as men. Men, Masculinity and the Media addresses this shortcoming. Scholars from across the social sciences investigate past media research on men and masculinity. They also examine how the media serve to construct masculinities, how men and their relationships have been depicted and how men respond to media images. From comic books and rock music to film and television, this groundbreaking volume scrutinizes the interrelationship among men, the media and masculinity.

PART ONE

PAST STUDY ON MEN AND THE MEDIA

2

Masculinity as Fact

A Review of Empirical Mass Communication Research on Masculinity

FRED J. FEJES

In media studies, the topic of masculinity is only at the very earliest stages of emerging as a research area in its own right. Compared to the study of women and the media, one finds few studies explicitly addressing the interrelationship between the media and social definitions of masculinity. For example, in review of the empirical literature of the past decade, the author was able to locate only five items that focused primarily on men and masculinity (Cantor, 1990; Gray, 1986; Meyers, 1980; Postman, Nystrom, Strate, & Weingarter, 1987; Skelly & Lundstrom, 1981) and two of these were qualitative in nature.

This is not to suggest, however, that media studies has totally ignored the topic of masculinity. Two major areas of empirical research contribute to a knowledge of masculinity and mass communications. First, there is the research that focuses on sex roles and the media. This area of research deals both with the investigation of the type of images of men presented in the media and the effects such portrayals have on an individual’s notion of his or her own gender. Although researchers in masculinity question the entire efficacy of using the sex-role perspective in studying masculinity and gender (Davies & Harré, 1990; Kimmel, 1987d; Pleck, 1982; Stacey & Thorne 1985), the sex-role research in mass communication provides the only major empirical analysis within the social science perspective that treats the issue of masculinity and the media. Major reviews of the research on sex roles and the mass media can be found in Durkin (1985a, 1985b), Busby (1985) and Gunter (1986). Second, the empirical research on pornography presents another exploration of masculinity. The concern about pornography is essentially a concern about male sexuality. In most research on pornography the subjects are generally male, and the goal of the research is to study the male response to sexualized images.

A reading of the research in these two areas will emphasize what the literature presents on the subject of masculinity. In most cases the topic of masculinity was not the major, or even a secondary topic of these studies. As a result the author had to attempt a reading of the work in which he had to construct the masculinity subtext. While there are problems with this kind of approach, it does show that, taken as a whole, research on sex roles and pornography does present a coherent discourse about masculinity.

Sex-Role Research and Masculinity

Content

The bulk of media and sex-role research has been a traditional analysis of manifest media content that examines the way male and female sex roles have been portrayed. As noted by Durkin, such research has “concentrated on the female role and the male sex role tends to be illustrated by default, and is often assumed to be the converse of whatever characteristics are identified as associated with the female stereotype” (1985a, p. 110). A further reservation is that most analyses emphasize the differences rather than the similarities found between the sex roles. Again as noted by Durkin, while male and female may be commonly portrayed in the media differently in some areas, such as occupation, they are often both portrayed as similar in other areas, such as intelligence, yet such similarities are not often the subject of research. The implications of the differences can be better understood only in the context of the overall picture of both differences and similarities.

Broadcasting

Within the study of television programming, one consistent finding is that in terms of simple frequency, television is a male-dominated medium with more portrayals of men than women (Butler & Paisley, 1980, p. 78; Durkin, 1985a) and with men placed more often in starring roles (Dominick, 1979). Beyond the dominance in simple frequency, men are more likely to be found in action/drama programming and less likely to be found in situation comedies and soap operas (Greenberg, Simmons, Hogan, & Atkin, 1980; Gunter, 1986, p. 8; Miles, 1975; Miller & Reeves, 1976). Thus viewers tend to see men in programming contexts that emphasize action and drama at the expense of humor, emotions or interpersonal relationships.

In terms of occupation, men are more likely to be shown as employed in higher status jobs (Barcus, 1983; Durkin, 1985a) and are less likely to be shown in a home environment (Downs, 1981). Moreover, they tend to be employed in occupations that are traditionally defined as male occupations (lawyers, ministers, doctors) (Seggar & Wheeler, 1973).

Other aspects of the portrayal of men in television reveal that men are less likely to be shown as being married (Manes & Melnyk, 1974; McNeil, 1975), generally shown as being older, and less likely to be shown involved in a romantic relationship (Downing, 1974; Durkin, 1985a; Signorielli, 1982). Men are portrayed as being more dominant than females (Lemon, 1978), more likely to engage in acts of violence (Gerbner, 1972; Potter & Ware, 1987), and more likely to give or receive responses and to be involved in the reinforcement or punishment of behavior, thus being depicted as possessors of both power and status through the greater control of rewards and punishment (Downs & Gowan, 1980). A study of prime-time humor revealed that, because of their greater number on television, men were more often the object of humor or disparagement, although males were more likely to disparage females than the reverse (Suls & Gastoff, 1981).

Examining the visual portrayal of men on television, one study found in commercial television programming a tendency to portray men in terms of close face shots as opposed to full body shots, as was the case for the portrayal of women (Copeland, 1989). The author suggests that this example of “face-ism” may be a manifestation of deeply rooted cultural myths of men, pictorially represented by their faces, as intellect, and women, pictorially represented by their bodies, as heart or emotion.

Compared to women, men drove, drank, and smoked more, used firearms, did athletic things, and made more business calls. They made more plans for themselves and others and were more likely to be involved in problem solving (Downs, 1981; Henderson & Greenberg, 1980; Greenberg, Richards, & Henderson, 1980). A study of the portrayal of men and women on noncommercial public television showed little difference between that medium and commercial television in regard to the representation of men. The only major difference noted was in an equal distribution between men and women in the initiating of action (Matelski, 1985).

Based on these empirical studies, it is evident that men, as portrayed on adult television, do not deviate much from the traditional patriarchal notion of men and masculinity. Men are powerful and successful, occupy high-status positions, initiate action and act from the basis of rational mind as opposed to emotions, are found more in the world of things as opposed to family and relationships, and organize their lives around problem solving.

Moreover, the masculinity portrayed on television is a white, middleclass heterosexual masculinity. For example, Gray (1986), in a study of the portrayal of black men in situation comedies, argues that television presents an assimilationist image of the black man that is far from the reality of most black Americans. Cantor (1990), in a review of the research on the portrayal of families on television, noted that in situation comedies that revolve around a family, there are few stereotypical macho men. She found, however, that class was an important determinant in how father/husband figures were portrayed. Working-class father/husbands were generally portrayed as clumsy, awkward, and inept, with the wife dominating as the primary decision maker. In situation comedies involving a middle-class family, the husband is portrayed as kind, sensitive, caring and domesticated, in many ways an idealized figure that is equally unrealistic.

Regarding sexual orientation, although there has been no empirical study on the presentation of gay men in the media, the negative stereotypical presentation of both gay men and lesbians is so well recognized that gay and lesbian organizations such as the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) have come into existence to work for the elimination of such presentations (see also Montgomery, 1981). Even when gay men are presented in a sympathetic manner, the central focus is on the heterosexual characters’ response and acceptance of the gay characters’ homosexuality. The gay characters are totally defined by their “problem” (Gross, 1989; Henry 1987). Programming that presents a gay character’s homosexuality in a non-problematic manner is exceptional and is usually relegated to pay cable channels or public television.

The portrayal of men in television programming aimed at children does not vary significantly from that of adult programming, with males greatly outnumbering females and occupying high-prestige occupations (Busby, 1985; Durkin, 1985a; Schechtman, 1978). A small number of studies attempting to assess the behavior of the male characters likewise find little difference between children’s programming and adult programming. Males are portrayed as aggressive, constructively engaged in building and planning activities, and less willing to defer to others’ plan or suggestions (Sternglanz & Serbin, 1974). Moreover, males more often display problem-solving ability, activity, and autonomy (McArthur & Eisen, 1976). A more recent study of child characters found that boys are consistently shown as more active, aggressive, rational and unhappy. Likewise, boy characters engaged in traditional male activities, such as playing sports, going places, and making mischief, while the girl characters talked on the telephone, read, and helped with the housework (Peirce, 1989). A study of children’s educational television showed little difference in that medium in the portrayal of males (Dohrmann, 1975).

Advertising

Research dealing with advertising shows similar evidence of a high degree of stereotyped presentations of gender roles. Again this research tends to be organized primarily around a concern over the portrayal of women; the first major study of sex roles and advertising was undertaken by the National Organization for Women (NOW) in 1972 (Hennessee & Nicholson, 1972). Compared to gender portrayals on television, which tend to be affected by plot and character aspects, the portrayal of men and women in advertising tends to be far more blatant in its sexual stereotypes. This is due in large to the fact that the products advertised are aimed at target male and female audiences, thus resulting in a higher level of specificity in sex-role portrayals.

Research conducted in the 1970s laid out the basic aspects of the advertising portrayal of men. Overall, men were portrayed as more autonomous than women, with men being portrayed in many different occupations as compared to women being shown mainly as housewives and mothers. Men were far more likely to be shown advertising alcohol, vehicles, or business products while women were found mostly in advertisements for domestic products. Men were far more likely to be shown outdoors or in business settings while women were shown primarily in domestic settings (Dominick & Rauch, 1972; Schneider & Schneider, 1979). Men are far more often portrayed as authorities (McArthur & Resko, 1975). Moreover, voice-overs, advertising narrations carrying the connotations of authority, are overwhelming male (Courtney & Whipple, 1974).

These findings tended to be confirmed with few variations by subsequent research in the 1970s and early 1980s. While some studies reported a greater balance in male and female voice-overs and product representatives, female voice-overs were mainly confined to food, household products, and feminine care products, while male voices were associated with a wide range of products (Knill, Peach, Pursey, Gilpin, & Perloff, 1981; Maracek, Piliavin, Fitzsimmons, Krogh, Leader, & Trudell, 1978; Meyers, 1980; O’Donnell & O’Donnell, 1978).

More recent studies suggest some changes. Ferrante, Haynes, and Kingsley (1988), replicating the 1972 study of Dominick and Rauch, reported significant declines in portrayal of men’s traditional roles, such as husband, father, athlete, and construction worker. Other recent studies of television advertising (Bretl & Cantor, 1988; Lovdal, 1989) show similar findings. One of the few studies of radio advertising (Melton & Fowler, 1987) reported that, as in television, the male voice tends to be the dominant voice in commercials, with 1,382 single male narrator commercials counted, compared to 144 female narrator commercials.

A qualitative analysis of 40 beer commercials found a very strong relationship between drinking and a stereotypical view of masculinity (Postman et al., 1987). The drinking of beer is related to challenge, risk, and mastery over nature, technology, others, and the self. Strong emotions and displays of affection are eschewed while solidarity with other men is stressed. Women are portrayed as a mere audience for male activities. Furthermore, boys are initiated into the community of men by their ability to drink. Men who are sensitive, thoughtful, scholarly, gay, or complex are not present in beer commercials.

By comparison to the research on commercials on adults, the research on commercials aimed at children is not extensive. Generally, while the majority of ads aimed at children contain both boys and girls, boys are the dominant characters (Macklin & Kolbe, 1983). Ads aimed at boys have far more activity than those aimed at girls and contain more aggressive behavior (Verna, 1975; Welch, Huston-Stein, Wright, & Plehal, 1979). A study of the traits associated with boy and girl characters portrayed in children’s advertising indicated that boys were typically shown to be active, aggressive, rational, and unhappy (Peirce, 1989). Production characteristics of the ads were also gender-linked. Male voice-overs were predominant in male-oriented and neutral ads, and male-oriented ads were far louder than either female-oriented or neutral ads. Even the form of the ads was different. As noted in one study, “The commercials directed at boys contained highly active toys, varied scenes, high rates of camera cuts and high levels of sounds effects and loud music. . . . Commercials directed at girls had frequent fades, dissolves and background music” (Welch et al., 1979, p. 206).

Research on the portrayal of gender in advertising in other countries tends to duplicate the findings of American research. In studies of British television (Harris & Stobart, 1986; Livingstone & Green, 1986; Manstead & McCulloch, 1981) reported that males were typically portrayed as having expertise and authority, as being objective and knowledgeable about reasons for buying particular products, as occupying roles that are autonomous, and as being concerned with the practical consequences of product purchases. A study of British radio advertising found similar results (Furnham & Schofield, 1986). A study of Italian television found that medium to be very similar to British television in the portrayal of men (Furnham & Voli, 1989). A comparative study (Gilly, 1988) of sex-role portrayals in television advertising in Australia, Mexico, and the United States revealed that while the commercials of all three countries contained traditional stereotypes, Australian commercials were less stereotyped on a number of different factors, such as occupation, setting, marital status, whether a man or woman acted as a spokesperson and their credibility for that role, and whether they were recipients or providers of aid. Mexican commercials, on the other hand, were the most stereotyped on all the factors studied.

The portrayal of men in print advertising has also received attention. Skelly and Lundstrom (1981) used a scale designed to measure the level of sexual stereotyping in an analysis of 660 magazine ads from 1959, 1969, and 1979 to determine whether there was any change in the portrayal of men in print advertising over the two decades. They found a small and gradual movement toward the nonsexist portrayal of men over the 20-year period. Lysonski’s study (1985) of sex roles in British magazine advertising showed similar results. Looking at a sample of ads from British magazines in 1976 and 1983, he concluded that while the sex-stereotyping had decreased slightly, men still are more likely to be depicted in themes of sex appeal, as career-oriented, and in activities and life outside the home.

Other studies suggest little or no change. While the percentage of women portrayed in business suits increased from 1963 to 1983, there was no significant difference in the way men were portrayed in a business setting (Saunders & Stead, 1986). A study of computer ads in magazines showed that men appeared in such advertisements almost twice as often as women; were overrepresented as managers, experts, and technicians; and were portrayed as more active and accepting of new computer technology (Ware & Stuck, 1985). Massé & Rosenblum (1988), utilizing Erving Goffman’s approach (1979) to the study of gender and body positioning in advertising, analyzed 564 ads from 1984 editions of three male-oriented and three female-oriented magazines. In male-oriented magazines, males tended to be portrayed in a dominant stance; were less likely to be shown smiling; were less likely to be touching one another, themselves, or an object; and gazed full-faced at the viewer or an object, but not at others. In female-oriented magazines, the portrayal was similar, except that men were more likely to touch and gaze at others. As noted by the authors, “The ‘self’ in men’s magazines is a figure who does not defer. Unsmilingly, he touches objects rather than people, and he gazes outward at the viewer, apparently oblivious to those in the frame who gaze at and touch him. With some qualification, this is the same man we w...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Title
• Copyright
• Contents
• Acknowledgments
• Foreword
• Introduction
• Part One: Past Study on Men and the Media
• Part Two: Case Studies of Media and Masculinities
• Part Three: Representations of Men’s Relationships
• Part Four: Men, Media, and the Gender Order
• Part Five: Reading Mediated Masculinity
• References
• Author Index
• Subject Index
• About the Contributors