This series of posts primarily exists to allow me to navigate and tag future entries as I see fit. As I read the material regarding masculinity appearing in the fields of communication and rhetoric, I felt a few holes needed to be addressed. I am certain that I am not including all the features of masculinity that appear in the plethora of academic journals that accept entries from university faculty clamoring to establish themselves in the field. Some are likely real stretches that exist for novelty and a publication line on the author’s curriculum vita.

My additions to the features of masculinity are by no means exhaustively explained. Doing so would prevent these posts from ever being written given the time it takes to carefully research, write, and revise material on an academic level (although I would argue this is no less valid given the ideological motives and concessions necessary to publish in journals nowadays). Examples of each will be built upon and further refined in the future. For now, I provide the following in addition to the established features of masculinity (Physical power or force, occupational achievement, familial patriarchy, frontiersmanship, and heterosexuality):

Loyalty: The degree to which men seek to identify with a group or entity to establish a sense of trust.

Culpability: The willingness of men to accept responsibility or blame for conditions, be it their fault or not, to establish a position of authority.

Conformity: The expectations placed upon men to forfeit individuality in such a way as to provide a baseline veil of anonymity.

Stoicism: The rejection of a personal or structural weakness to maintain a perceived position of power.

These terms will be tagged in future posts to indicate that they appear in the mundane forms of communication surrounding us. I may even revisit these terms to alter them in case I got them all wrong.

So, the groundwork is set and it is off to put the pieces together. My intent in utilizing this language is to show that pushing men to fit the mold within the confines of these features may be more detrimental than understanding how these features work and allow men to manipulate the landscape of masculinity to validate and feel comfortable with who they are.