What is "masculinity"?

When I think of the term masculinity I tend to think of a male who exhibits the characteristics of bravery, strength, confidence and is a protector. The dictionary bluntly states the definition of masculinity as something traditionally considered to be a characteristic of a male. So what really is masculinity? Everyone has their own opinions and views the term masculinity differently. The media is constantly bombarding us with images of what a masculine man is. Men who are deemed goodlooking, intelligent, and successful. Who drive the nicest cars and get all the girls. In movies they always win the fight and always look cool doing it. But this is nothing new, we've grown up watching movies where superheros come and save the day and rescue those in distress. Many of us have always looked at masculinity as a strong man, one who protects and provides for others and hides their emotions. But I think in today's society this view of masculinity is changing. In the past men were the primary breadwinners and it was their job to take care of their families. Today more and more women are working and are able to provide for themselves not having to rely on men.
In Orwell's 1984 all of the main characters are men. All of the characters who have any power and control are men and the Party is male dominated. Everyone in the society is repressed and masculinity, which is seen as power and control is stripped from all males. Big Brother would be seen as the most masculine symbol in the novel, having total control over the entire population and being able to watch and read the minds of everybody. Winston Smith does not seem to be a character protraying any masculine qualities. He is not attractive, strong or powerful, however he is brave. He stands up for what he believes in and goes against the Party.

For both (or either) Adam Curtis and Sigmund Freud, it is possble to be happy? Why?

In the film The Century of the Self: The Happiness Machine, Adam Curtis claims it is possible to feel happiness, that is through consumerism. Edward Bernays idea of manipulating the masses by linking mass produced goods to people's unconscious desires is an idea widely used today. Through the media, and living in a day and age where staus is everything we are constantly consumed with wanting to have and wear the newest items available. When we see advertisements of smiling people happy with whatever they're promoting, we tend to relate our happiness to having that particular item. Bernays came up with the idea of what makes us happy is fullfilling our inner most selfish desires, and that if you link products to people's emotional desires and feelings you can persuade people to behave irrationally. An example of this was Bernays persuading women to smoke. Women smoking was seen as challenging male power. A women who smoked was looked at as more powerful and independent. But the actual concept of women being made more powerful and free by smoking is irrational.
I think that if based around consumerism, then we can never really be truly happy. We become happy when we buy something new, but eventually that happiness fades as the excitment for the new item wears off, or we learn of something new that we decide we want. There will always be something new to buy, and advances in technology are continually allowing new items be to created. We can only truly be happy when we realize that our happiness is not based around all the material items we own, but really with what type of person we are and how we choose to live our lives.

The Apology

1. Do you think these charges are legitimate? Is it a fair trail?


During the trail Socrates was charged with believing in different gods of the state and corrupting the youth . Even though this trail took place in a far different time period, I still think the trail was unfair. Meletus states that Socrates is atheist and does not believe in divinities. But that is not true. Socrates brings up the point that those who believe in divines in turn believe in divinities and says “ now, if these divinities are gods, then, as I say, you are joking and asking a riddle, as asserting that I do not believe in the gods, and at the same time that I do, since I believe in divinities” (Plato 33). Meletus then agrees with Socrates, contradicting himself. That there shows this charge was illegitimate.
Socrates is then charged with corrupting the youth. This I don’t believe to be true. Socrates does not go up to young men and push his beliefs on them, the young men follow him. Socrates says “.. bad citizens always do evil, and that good citizens do good, to those with whom they come in contact, while I am so extraordinary ignorant as not to know that, if I make any of my companions evil, he will probably injure me in some way? And you allege that I do this voluntary?” (31). He explains that he would never voluntarily corrupt the youth, therefore he does not corrupt the youth at all, or does so involuntarily which for that he cannot be charged for. Socrates does not publicly talk of what divinities he believes in, rather he cross-examines other men by continually asking questions and allowing them to come to their own conclusions. He allows others to think critically. Men Socrates “ cross-examined get angry with [him] instead of with themselves, and say that Socrates is an abomination and corrupts the youth” (28). People become angry with him for making them look unintelligent and say that he tries to teach such things as not believing in the gods.
In today's society this trail to most would seem unfair. In today's day and age people are allowed to practice any religion they wish and believe in any gods they choose. An individual is allowed to speak freely about their beliefs and values. Although this trail took place a long time ago, Socrates charges are illegitimate. Socrates is not an atheist and he did not corrupt the youth. The men that say Socrates is an abomination are the same men who were embarrassed by him. Meletus never argued with Socrates or told him he was wrong, he just simply answered his questions sometimes agreeing with Socrates and contradicting himself.

#2 Do you think it's possible to constantly feel guilty about the misery of others? Explain and provide answers.

Guilt is an unpleasant feeling felt by all human beings. It's a feeling that can creep up upon us at any moment and make us feel undeserving of what we have and helpless because we cannot do anything for those in need. Some people feel guilt more often then others and some more strongly, but is it possible for humans to feel guilty every second of everyday? I think the answer to this question is no.

Many of us are fortunate enough to have a roof over our heads, food, clean clothes, and the opportunity to be able to study at a post-secondary institution. But not everybody is as lucky. The majority of us watch TV and see ads for starving children in Africa in need of sponsors and donations and many of us hastily change the channel not wanting to see the images of sick children. We have all watched the news at one point or another and may learn of famine or a disease that is spreading in another part of the world. We see clips of natural disasters that have struck other countries and the destruction and number of casualties it's caused.  Many of us do feel guilt after seeing these images. In that moment it can be heart wrenching to see what some people are having to go through while others are safe at home. The guilt may last a few minutes, hours, or even days, but eventually it fades. We aren't constantly exposed to these images so as time progresses what we have seen drifts from our minds as we become busy and engrossed with our own lives. 

Everybody feels guilt differently. For some the feeling of guilt can overpower them to the point where it's to much for them to handle. I think that's how some of the people in Omelas felt when they saw the horrible image of the child suffering for the happiness of others. The guilt just consumed them to the point where they couldn't stay in Omelas and had to walk away. Others may have felt this same feeling but not to the same degree. They may have felt upset and angry over what the child was going through but it wasn't enough for them to leave. They may have also felt that leaving could not change the situation and that there was no possible way to help the child.

Naturally we all feel guilt at one point or another. Whether it comes from images that we've seen or from the hardships that people we know are suffering from, it's unavoidable. But sometimes without a constant reminder we tend to forget the guilt we once felt.