On Masculinity

Day 2,252, 19:03 • Published in Belgium Belgium • by Konrad Neumann


The concept of manhood and masculinity is a common theme in the articles of Liberation Front members. From members like GW Junior, Shadow, Aries Sun, Vincent Pain and many others used the issue of masculinity as a form of critique and attack. We had seen strange and distasteful comments from these people. We had seen recent articles like WE NEED REAL MEN GOV!!!! but is masculinity so simple as liking people with big breast? What do they mean real men? How do they define masculinity? The issue of masculinity is very interesting and while I am not a sociologist, I would like to share my thoughts on this issue. I will first talk about what I call eClassical masculinity (the common view of masculinity) and then offer alternative views of masculinity.



Masculinity itself does not exist in nature but a social construct. It is a cultural device and not biological. The ideals and tenets of masculinity changes throughout history and is not constrained by space and time. Therefore, masculinity should not be understood as an tangible item that men can lose or be taken away.



But what is masculinity? I do not think there is one clear definite answer; however, the most common understanding of of this term are economic and hegemonic masculinity. Be it of political/legitimate power like that of a CP or respected politician (in this game it can be expanded to military leaders) or economic masculinity which in this game is linked with strength (means to obtain strength and high damage). I would classify these two forms of masculinity as eClassical masculinity as it is the most traditional and common understanding of the concept of masculinity.

If we look at PTOers in general (be it in eBE and abroad) it is more or less an issue of masculinity for they either seek treasure and/ or power. Marketplace masculinity or economic masculinity is very interesting as the marketplace is a highly genderized. The contestation of MU's strengths and what they can offer members, etc is very engendered arena where tensions are high. Not only does it base on actual strengths it also equates to the spending power and economical success. The marketplace is an arena where masculinity is tested and proved. The more the individual or MU can offer, the more damage an MU can unleash, demonstrates prowess in masculinity. With the nature of this game where people can spend real life money into this game, it is also a means of public proclamation masculinity as well. For under no traditional form of masculinity in RL media, portray a homeless person as the archetype of masculinity. The ability to spend real life cash into this game (which is not cheap especially if one upstarts a big MU) shows that the person must have the economic resources to do so in the first place. Means of survival are taken care of and the surplus moneys can be spent on recreational activities like eRepublik. I would say in the case of GW and VP, they seek more economical (base on their past demands for state funds for their MU and private programs) masculinity while Shadow, ChristijanXD, and Thorin etc seeks hegemonic.



Why are they doing this? While there are political and economic reasons, there are correlations for an argument base on masculinity . For men are in constant contestation with other men. They compare themselves to others, trying to outdo others. It is to have power over other men and women. The term masculinity is that of a comparison of the self to others. It is a relentless test against anything that is perceived as weak or feminine. Therefore, it is not uncommon both in the game and in real life to see correlation of masculinity with sexism and homophobia.

As mentioned already, men are in a constant competition with others. We can think eClassical masculinity as a homosocial enactment in which manhood is demonstrated for other men's approval. As being masculine as being anti-feminine, men do feats of risk, challenges, aggressions, and other "non-sissy stuff" to seek approval of other men. Many fear a poor self prospection. This fear of being not masculine (feminine/ homosexual) is a great fear which many faces and often the case reacts in feats of aggression and violence in hopes to obtain approval from others.



This explains the articles of the PTOers quite well. I think to add insult to injury, we in eBE have a "Gay Government." Not only do they do not have the power they seek, the people who controls apparatus of governance are real life are the antithesis of the archetype masculine men. Therefore, we see GW's and other articles about needing a real men government. They are using the Queerness of Valeyard and myself as an attack. I do not think others would stop voting or supporting the government solely base on our orientation nor is it effective an effective political attack. Their intent is to offend people, trying to hurt them but more importantly, an act of aggression in hopes of seeking approval with his cohort of friends and supports within Liberation Front. We also see in the past of comments attacking MaryamQ's gender etc. The reason for their attacks on MaryamQ is not much different. As ChristijanXD comments for MaryamQ to return to the kitchen etc, it is his attempt to dominate and seek power to control that of the non-masculine. For there are no means of physical violence in this game but verbal attacks is the closest thing to violence in the game.



I personally am not a fan of the eClassical masculinity. I do not think it is healthy nor productive. For there is no need for such contestation. It does not bring any good or benefits to the society. On the contrary I see it only bring more negatives. It brings hostility and bigotry out of some. However, will they admit it or not, it tells a lot about the people who use hateful language and comments. It shows their inner anguish and self perception. To hurt others to boost themselves up while ethically questionable; tells that the victims of violence are not the only person that is suffering. It might be empowering to know players who do questionable things like PTO's, stealing treasuries, trolling, and other forms of abusive and "violent" conducts are suffering a lot more than the victims. While we should not feel happy and enjoy schadenfreuden, but I think this concept is very important for us to understand.



With that said, I think we should have a rethink of what masculinity should be. It is not about enjoying pictures with breast for it would be strange to call lesbians masculine. In addition, many women also fall into eClassical masculinity minus the gender constraint. I think the ideal solution is to have a post gender construct world where there is equality in the social construct for all genders. (male female, intersex, etc) It is based on self security and of ethics. Until that day comes, my ideal form of masculinity reflects on the ideals of post gender construct. The term masculine should not be base on contestation but of being self secure. While this has links to the classical way of understanding the term, the ideal form of masculinity should have actual self security that is not base on perception. For a term that is base on perception breeds vulnerability and of fear. This fear breeds contestation and more insecurity which breeds negative results in our overall game and real life communities. That means being self secure is vital to the ideal form of masculinity where even if you are gender non-conforming, the most important thing for that individual to be at ease with his identity. It is my opinion, that it is more manly for a man who is at ease with who he is be it LGBT straight, etc those who attack him for being different. Lastly, I think there should be a moral component to masculinity. It should not be that of power (economic, political, and/ or physical in real life). It should include doing the right thing. I understand that there are many different forms of ethics but in this case, I would argue for the deontological ethics. For motive is vital. Despite the consequence, the motive is more telling of the individual. Actions should not be taken in expense of another person. As Kant said, "Nothing in the world—indeed nothing even beyond the world—can possibly be conceived which could be called good without qualification except a good will." Take the moral high road and in many cases, it is more risky and challenging to trek in this path.

In short: Masculinity should not be a struggle from without but from within.