What exactly is it to be masculine or feminine? Is being masculine what it is to be a man, and being feminine what it is to be a woman? How are these two terms defined and what purpose do they serve? The readings in this critical review attempt to answer these questions.

In Lois Gould’s reading, “X: A Fabulous Child’s Story”, she tells the story of a child raised without being defined by their gender. Gould challenges the notion of what it is to be “male” and what it is to be “female” by refusing to create a division between the two genders. This creates a powerful message about how gender or masculinity and femininity are merely socially constructed and how much society relies on these constructions.

Emily Martin illustrates in her reading, “The Egg and the Sperm: How Science Has Constructed a Romance Based on Stereotypical Male-Female Roles”, that the construction of what it is to be “male” or “female” is implied even at the earliest stage of life; conception.

bell hooks speaks about the feminist movement and its portrayal as being “man-hating” in her reading, “Feminist Masculinity”, and how the feminist movement has failed to include men. hooks explains the unfortunate image that many men not only feel they need to conform to as being “masculine”, but do not know how to identify themselves without it.

To be a man or a woman in our society is not just defined by the biological traits someone possesses, but it is also defined by what is expected that a man or a woman should act like in our society, which has been socially constructed and fed to us beginning at a very young age.

From the beginning of life, we are lead to believe that by being a boy or girl we will have to follow certain unwritten “rules” of what is expected of us based on our sex. This construction of “femininity” or “masculinity” normally begins with the colour of our clothing. Traditionally, pink is for girls, blue is for boys. Growing up, as children we are given toys that reinforce these “rules” of “femininity” or “masculinity” and to reflect what our future role in society will be. Girls are given dolls and play kitchen sets, because one day we are going to be “mommies”, and we will be the one who is doing most of the cooking, for her children and husband. Boys of course and given chemistry sets and G.I. Joe’s, because they will grow up to be smart, successful, strong and powerful.

Gould points out how people interact with children in a specific way geared towards the child’s gender. If a boy falls down and cries, they are told that little boys should not cry. Little girls are told they should not be too loud or should not get dirty when playing, because that is not what little girls do. (Gould, pg. 83). Gould’s reading makes you think, why should we not cuddle with little boys and give them lots of affection, and why should we not have little girls participate in sports? Why does there have to be a division between the two genders at all? Gould mentions in her story about how the child that was not defined by their gender ended up possessing no identity problem. This notion seems to indicate that in fact many of us have identity problems because we are defining ourselves by our gender, whether all the traits of being “masculine” or “feminine” fit us or not. How sad it is that many of us do not know who we are as individuals without identifying ourselves with our gender.

The imposing of conforming to being “masculine” and “feminine” is all around us, whether it be in the media or ideals transferred onto us by our parents. However, more and more we are discovering it in more subtle forms. Martin, who examines the language used in describing the process of conception, gives one example of a subtle form. Historically, the description of conception seems to downplay or devalue the part that the egg (hence the woman) plays in this process, while the male sperm is the active participant, and doing all the work, and “saving” the egg from “death”. Even this description reflects the way that males and females are supposed to act, with the egg (female) being passive, and the sperm (male) being active (Martin, pg. 31). It is my opinion that not only has this process been described with patriarchal roots, but that somehow this description is being used to justify why a man acts the way he does, and that being “masculine” is somehow biological, and hence even embedded and transferred into the male sperm. Although, this notion would seem somewhat ironic when you consider that this very “masculine” sperm can create a female child.

Many of us women have focused on challenging the idea of “femininity”. Over the last number of years, women have become more involved in sports, they are no longer expected to always wear skirts or dresses, women have taken more powerful positions within society and taking more control over their lives without the reliance on a man. However, what have we, or society done for men? I do not think we have done much, or at least enough to allow men to challenge the idea of “masculinity”. We have left men in the shadows. Many men have already come to question their exact role in society as men. Men use to be seen as the “protectors”, the “breadwinners”, the “leaders”, etc… Now that women are more independent, making money of their own, and so forth, it has left men wondering what exactly their purpose is, and what is it to be a man. “Patriarchal masculinity teaches men that their sense of self and identity, that their reason for being, resides in their capacity to dominate others” (hooks, pg. 70). However, many men are afraid that by challenging or not conforming to the stereotypical image of a man or being “masculine”, that they somehow become more feminine. It is as though there can only be one definition of what is it to be a man, and that this definition cannot expand or be flexible. I agree with hooks that we need to help men find an alternative definition of masculinity. What we need is a vision of masculinity where self-esteem and self-love for one’s uniqueness is the basis of identity. (hooks, pg. 70).

I think these readings are very insightful in a women’s studies course. Often our focus is on women, and how sexism affects us. In the meanwhile, many women forget just how much men can also suffer from patriarchy and sexism, and the social construction of masculinity in addition to femininity. Feeling as though we need to conform to being masculine or feminine only separates men and women, and serves no real purpose in society. Masculinity and femininity do not have to be two separate entities or at opposite ends of the spectrum.

I think we need to reconstruct what it is to be “feminine” or “masculine”. We must realize that both men and women possess traits that would consist of both, and that this is healthy, and in fact better for both men and women. Our world would be a much better place if we could be free to act the way we want, and express the way we feel without being burdened by what we should or should not do according to our sex. Through this, not only will it make for a better society, one that moves away from the teachings of patriarchy, but it will benefit relationships between a man and a woman, and benefit ourselves by allowing us to be free and be the complete human beings that we are.