Distinguishing the rather different places media and

This preview shows page 13 - 15 out of 20 pages.

distinguishing the rather different places, media, and practices of construction of masculinity; 2) historicizing and contextualizing the manifold ways masculinity operates; 3) utilizing the analytical potential of gender as a category that signifies, establishes, and fuels power structures. Masculinity may be understood as ideology, and as such it is “created and propagated through various social forms, especially through images, myths, discourses, and practices” (Reeser 2010, 21). Consequently, masculinities have been studied—so also in this volume--from different disciplinary approaches and by using different types of sources. Analyzing the relation of two trajectories has been most successful: first, the representations of masculinity in laws, literature, and artifacts; and second, the subjective experience and appropriation of such representations. Neither exists independently from the other. It was the “crisscrossing of ideologies and experience, of discourses and material transformation” that propelled or barred change (Canning 2006, 15). To determine the causes, processes, and consequences of this change and to explore how masculinities are constructed, how they work, and what impact they have, students need to carefully reflect on the differences between those “social forms” and the specific knowledge they allow to establish. Nazi representations of martial, hard, and heroic masculinity contrast with the fluidity, flexibility, and ambiguousness of masculinity as practiced by ordinary men at home, on the battlefields, and anywhere in between.
14 Gender, as a category of social difference, works in conjunction with, and through distinction from, other categories of social differences. Constructions of masculinity intersect with, are shaped by, and themselves shape, other constructions of social difference such as class, race, age, sexuality, religion, ethnicity, nation (Collins and Bilge 2016). Masculinity operates in the mode of plurality. Multiple masculinities coexist or compete in any given society, at any given time. The full range of this plurality has barely been fathomed yet. Instead, martial masculinity, often in its superhuman representations of Nazi art and propaganda (Mangan 1999), is usually considered as the idiosyncrasy of male perpetrators and bystanders, as if they all were enthused about war or even genocide. However, the social cleavages of German as well as other European societies, the division between Christian believers and Nazis, between working and middle class men, between entrepreneurs and soldiers, between older and younger men did not simply disappear after Hitler’s ascent to power in 1933 or the beginning of World War II in 1939, nor did the different codes and norms of masculinity they had honored before the Nazis tried (but never succeeded) to establish a totalitarian society. And when it comes to assess masculinities of the victimized people, generic ideas about provider and protector roles of men in modern societies are taken as the standard of Jewish and non-Jewish societies. But the Jews that

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture