draft research paper#1

GUADIA J AZIZE
INSTRUCTOR: MAGDALENA BOGACKA
ENG. 101 0800
November 3, 2010


I will attempt to explain the equivocal standard of masculinity, by giving credibility to its proverbial aspect of leadership. As many of you know, men have been at the center of many public discussions concerning their social roles and behaviors in the context of American culture. I will define masculinity, through my own words, how masculinity has incorporated the deftness in which they carry out, politically, militarily, an also in a morally dignified way the meaning of being a leader .In turn, traditional masculinity has a significant role in America. Perhaps, you might wonder why men have to be tough, self-centered and brave to show their homosocial identity?. I confront this question by saying, these are qualities that men have evolved from the traditional life-styles that were instilled by their ancestors, and enacted through-out history, whether it was to conquer foreign land; fight for the oppressed; or just simply to keep the values of freedom intact.
Since men are strong and aggressive, I argue that they are more equipped to face and overcome hardships; as oppose to idling around doing nothing, they actually initiate, command, lead, or take charge of the pending situation if one was ever present. I will further discuss the leadership aspects of masculinity through sources I obtained and analyzed from a 2009 year’s prescriptions of Esquire, in which I was able to make-out the type of masculinity being conveyed to the reader. The magazine helps me describe the certain aspects that correlate with a man being in control while showing poise and determination. Just as I have chosen Esquire to be my primary source; my secondary sources are just as important to support the leadership patterns Illustrated in my primary sources.
When you characterize masculinity in a soldierly like fashion. What comes into mind is a man who follows certain rules and laws to abide by. Men are perceived as machines whose only goals is to bolster the self-confidence that is required of them to show off their masculine characteristics in an imposing and commanding manner. The thought of enacting the male gender in a military, warlike environment, can make anyone frown at the prospect of a soldier having to leave his family to engage in military activities. In the article “We’ve Seen The Future” the writer makes a distinction between civilian and military life by saying:
Air force Staff Sergeant Charles Anderson pucks his
wristwatch from the cup holder and crosses into the
warzone. He wears the watch only at work, and the
ritual shifts his thoughts from the everyday, which
lately has been occupied by wedding plans and house
huntings (Mockenhoupt 131).
This statement coincides with a reference I picked out from the Bush At War , where the author argues:
They wanted the president to be seen reaching out to
families of the thousands of victims who had died
when the towers collapsed, as well as the rescue
workers who were struggling around the clock in a
desperate search for survival (Woodward 54).
The reference made by Woodward supports the leadership role that is illustrated in “We’ve Seen The Future” because Woodward is pointing to the difficult times that men in general, are facing as husbands, fathers and military leaders. Every day they have to make sure their families are safe and sound before parting ways to take on other responsibilities, such as operating unmanned vehicles, coordinating cameras, and overseeing maintenance procedures that keep predators flying in good conditions. So basically, they are beginning to accept he harsh reality of having to juggle their civilian as well as their military life.
In another example the writer stresses the importance of having humans to control unmanned vehicles without relying too much on computers (Mockenhoupt 136). His concern with aerial vehicles suggests, we still need a reliable commander to take charge of the situation as oppose to getting too comfortable with technology. This type of masculinity is the normative aspect of masculinity because in the Bush At War, the former deputy director for operations, James L. Pavitt explains “This covert action program will include paramilitary, logistical, and psychological warfare elements as well as classical espionage”. (qutd. in Woodward 50). This statement emphasizes the strategy of implementing the leadership qualities of masculinity especially how Woodward uses the word psychological to describe the mental one-manship incorporated to intimidate the enemy.
The leadership qualities portrayed in the political arena focuses on the charisma, determination and on the deftness of masculinity. As we all know, politics can be a dirty game of mud-slinging and bottomless pockets. But here, I will explain how the leadership aspect of masculinity takes center-stage to establish itself as the intellectually minded person who makes the tough decisions and manage fund-raisers to elect potential candidates. For instance, in “The Men Who Made Obama” Jim Messina, The Deputy Chief Of Staff Argues, [David Plouffe], “if he wanted to go invent cold fusion, he’d figure out a way to do it” (qtd. in taddeo 124). This proclamation conveys the mental focus of David Plouffe who, through his subtle and engaging personality, managed to elect the first African American President of the United States. This statement also refers to a man who thinks out of the box by not listening to his adversaries instead, leaning towards a more (I’m-in-control) aspect of masculinity. This type masculinity seems to be in sync with the American people since the author argues, in The Audacity Of Hope:
and sometimes someone will grab my hand and tell
me that they have great hopes for me, but they are
worried that Washington is going to change me and
I will end up just like all the rest of the people in
power (Obama 102).
This focuses on the concern of the American citizens who worried that Obama might turn out be a corrupted leader with the sole purpose to deceive the voters for personal and political status.
Furthermore, in an interview with Esquire, Bill Cinton argues, the Republican Party thought of the government as a nuisance, a propaganda, it (G.O.P) intended to sell to the public to divide the country and to show that a bigger government will ultimately hinder the economic progress. This is Bill Clinton, when asked in an interview with Esquire:
The whole idea was that government would
mess-up a two-car parade, therefore the only
thing it was good for was cutting taxes, laying
concrete, and supporting the defense department
(qtd. in warren 100).
The above reference as presented by Bill Clinton describes the ideology of the G.O.P. towards “Big Government” the author, Mark Warren portrays Bill Clinton as the man who successfully wiped-out the negative images associated with the government, in turn, saving its reputation. To summarize, the former president’s leadership skills were displayed in the face of uncertainty and animosity against congress. This particular issue, according to the author in The Audacity Of Hope, is a distraction used to make people doubt their own government by arguing:
The Republican Party has been able to
consistently win elections not by expanding
its base but by vilifying democrats, driving
Wedges into the electorate, energizing its
right wing….. (Obama 39).
The comparison between Warren’s and Obama’s quotes brings to light a type of masculinity that takes charge of the situation without actually engaging in verbal attack to discredit his opponent. On the contrary, it regroups and takes command as if to say (I’m not going to stoop to your level. rather, I’m going to take care of this in a more professional and subtle manner!). In addition, I will explain the moral values that come hand in hand with being a leader in the context of American culture
American values, for the most part, are what make each and every one of us humans because it gives us a sense of belonging and a profound appreciation for our share beliefs in individual freedoms and the constitution. In the article “Journal:Newtownville Massachusetts” the writer unknowingly tries to depict his feelings towards the 2008 election day process that subsequently, without controversy, nominated Barack Obama, and shifts to places where African Americans initially made their mark to improve the educational and social inequalities that were present during the better half of the 20th century. According to my observation, Charles Pierce P. describes James Meredith not as a follower, but as a leader who took the initiative, through his spirited and relentless effort, gained admittance, as the first colored person, to the University Of Mississippi (62). This belief is also reiterated by the author of The Audacity Of Hope, with his thoughts:
……. What ultimately broke the back of Jim Crow
and ushered in a new era of race relations
were the supreme court cases culminating in
Brown v. Board Of Education, the Civil
Rights Act Of 1965 (Obama 63).
In This quotation, Obama refers to the spirited, risk-taking quality of independent men who paved the way for a just society. Moreover, it supports Pierce’s thoughts about the ideal masculinity that guides a contingency with a firm, leading and imposing presence.
Men lead by example in the context of military, political, and family life; as illustrated in the Esquire magazine. A man in a family setting displays his leadership qualities instinctively when providing a safe home, tending to the needs of his significant other or taking the kids to the museum. A man that comprises all these qualities gives the impression of an exemplary figure and an aura of trustworthiness. Without warning, once again, masculinity shifts its Attention to take on other responsibilities, where leadership roles are literally on demand, especially when as a soldier, on a battlefield, your comrades expect from you to fight alongside without deserting them. Or the tough decisions you have to make as politician to keep the economy from nose-diving to the ground. Leaders can affect a whole nation. That is why they are constantly placed under a magnifying glass. The leaders of this post-modern world, are the ones who we look up to for guidance and reassurance during this unstable but yet promising times.
















Works Cited

Mockenhaupt, Brian “The Future Of War: We’ve Seen The Future And Is Unmanned” Esquire 153.3 (Mar: 2009): 131-137. Print.

Obama, Barack. The Audacity Of Hope: Thoughts On Reclaiming The American Dream New York: Three Rivers Press, 2006.

Pierce Charles P “Journal: Newtownville Massachusetts” Esquire 151.1 (Jan: 2009): 62. Print.

Taddeo, Lisa “The Man Who Made Obama: One Of This Man changed Politics For Ever” Esquire 153.3 (Mar: 2009): 122-127. Print.

Warren, Mark “Bill Clinton: Then and Now “ Esquire 152.4 (Oct: 2009): 100,102 Print.

Woodward, Bob. Bush At War New York: Simon and Schuster, 2002.