Masculinity as Homophobia

The first article that I read for this week was Kimmel's "Masculinity as Homophobia", which I actually found really interesting. Kimmel makes several points in particular that caught my attention:

• manhood is a social construct
• maculinity must be proven to other men
• being a man means not being a woman
• being a man means success with the traditional male identity
• masculinity is a defense against potential humiliation

The way I see it, Kimmel brings all of this together in one statement: "we learn that our peers are a kind of gender police" (132). Not being a man, I cannot fully relate to these statements nor most of the others. However, my close group of friends is largely boys and most times that we get together I am the only girl. So, while reading Kimmel's article I found myself realizing that not only could many of my friends exemplify exactly what he was saying, but so could I. I realized that unintentionally, I am one way when with my girlfriends and another when with the boyfriends. Perhaps I am only biased but I think this has way more to do with the dynamics of each group than my own personality.

When I am with the girls I have no problem being girly. And by that I mean I enjoy being girly. This changes when I'm with the guys. Sure, I am still the same girl and I don't completely switch roles but I certainly limit my talk of "girly topics" such as chick flicks, my nails, clothes, the Hunger Games, etc. One reason is because I'd rather not alienate myself since they would have almost no input whatsoever but another is because they might not hang out with me if I could no longer keep up with their guy talk. I, much like them according to Kimmel, am constantly trying to prove that I'm not as feminine as they might think. 

Since becoming "one of the guys" I've gained more freedom in terms of how girly I am in their presence and the funny thing is, so have they. Having been friends for 5, 8, even 10 years they're all so comfortable with each other that they aren't afraid of anything. As an insider, I can say with certainty that no topic, no matter how "feminine", is off the table. Of course, this changes once an outsider enters the picture. Someone not as close is seen as someone "capable of humiliating him in front of his peers" and certain topics become more taboo. In this sense, manhood is most certainly a social construct. These social expectations of masculinity only hold in situations where people outside the group of us are involved. I would bet that most groups of friends are the same way.

Children of Immigration

While reading Children of Immigration, the fourth chapter Remaking Identities stood out most for several reasons. I took a Multicultural Education course last semester at UMass Amherst and we read many similar articles to the ones that we have already read for this class. Of course, we ended up talking a lot about identity - our own identity as students, our identity as future teachers, and the identity of others from different case studies, movies, or articles.

We watched a movie on the Arizona school system and the state's desire to (and ultimately, success in) cutting all cultural studies courses in the schools. As many of you probably know, Arizona has a very multicultural population and more specifically, a very large Latino population. The main focus of the movie was on a group of Latino students who were currently enrolled in those courses and their fight, along with their teachers, to maintain these classes in the school system. Many of these students were heartbroken that they were being cut and admitted that if it were not for those classes, they would have dropped out of school long ago and ended up in a very different place. The reason was simple: they had finally learned about who they were and where they came from rather than just looking at purely "American" (European...) influences and events. They finally discovered their identity through these classes.

That was a tough situation for kids who had grown up in the United States, as US Citizens who spoke English and were familiar with American customs. The Remaking Identities chapter opened my eyes to how much more difficult life would be for immigrant students who can claim none of this to be true. The Suarez-Orozco's mention that "the children of immigrants desperately want to be accepted, as most people do, and what is new for them is often what is most desirable. They understand that in order to survive, they must develop competencies in the ways of the new world" (91). At the same time, these children are juggling multiple roles in different parts of their lives: "immigrant children today may have their breakfast in Farsi, listen to African American rap with their peers on the way to school, and learn about the New Deal from their social studies teacher in mainstream English" (92). How could it ever be possible for a child to feel comfortable with all of that while going through all the normal social things of a middle or high schooler at the same time? How is it possible to handle both of those and gain a good education, which you are told you absolutely need in this day and age to have a meaningful future?

It seems so impossible. So many of us take for granted how easy it is, thanks to having been born in this country to parents who were just as lucky or maybe to those who survived it already so you did not have to. It is so disappointing to think that immigrants come to America, their eyes "sparkling with hope" (5), only for it last until the next generation, where it is often broken by countless obstacles and defeats.