Tough Guise Film Review

What is the main thesis of this film?

What seemed to be the thesis of the film “Tough Guise” is that men use violence and aggression as a way to support their masculinity in society. Also, that over time the image that is seen as being masculine has changed. They used the example of the G.I. Joe action figure to show how they have become much more buff and muscular over the past fifty or so years.

Taken From http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1139643/

What are the main arguments in support of the thesis?

The main arguments in support of the thesis had to be how the image of masculinity has changed. It can be summed up in how the images of wrestlers, guns, and even children’s toys have increased in size over time. Guns have become larger in movies, and action movies have become more violent in a way to show that anger and aggression is an appropriate way to settle issues.

Taken From http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/2007_11.html

Taken From http://cooeystoybox.blogspot.com/2010/04/gi-joe-rumble-in-jungle.html

How does the thesis of the film relate to the course?

The thesis of this film is related to the course because it shows how the acceptable social norms are socially constructed and can have very large effects on the society. Also, gender identities are social norms that can change over time, and there are sanctions for not following the gender norms.

Which arguments/point did you find the most convincing?

The argument that I found the most convincing was that the image of masculinity has become much more violent over the last fifty-sixty years. This was supported with the provided evidence of how professional wrestlers have become much buffer, as well as action figures such as G.I. Joe. This has created an unobtainable image of masculinity, and that the frustration that comes from not obtaining this image can also result in violence. This very publically can include suicides and school shootings. This could very much be explained by James Gilligan’s “Shame, Guilt, and Violence”, and Michael Kimmel’s “What Triggers School Shootings?”

Taken From http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2009-04-13-columbine-myths_N.htm

Which arguments/points did you find the least convincing?

What I found the least convincing actually came from the fact that the film is a bit out of date. In the 13 years since the film was made the image of masculinity continues to change and evolve. I believe that the ideal image of masculinity has actually started to go back the other way, with muscles and size not mattering as much. This may coincide with a greater acceptance of types of lifestyles that has happened since the film was made. Possibly also through the media using what would be considered previously unmanly men in more and more comedic roles.

Research Study:

If I were to conduct a study I would want to interview high school students on what makes a man a man. I would want to interview both male and female students, and compare what they said to what was said by what appeared to be high school aged kids in the movie. I would want to see in the definition has appeared to change.