User:Jaydavidmartin/Manhood in the Making

Manhood in the Making: Cultural Concepts of Masculinity is a book by anthropologist David Gilmore, in which he explores the cultural conceptions of what it means to 'be a man' in different cultures.

Structure
The book is arranged as a comparative study of a number of cultures. In particular, it analyzes conceptions of masculinity among the Chuukese, the Mehinaku, 1940s-era Americans, the people of the Mediterranean Basin, the Samburu, the Sambians, the peoples of East and South Asia, the Tahiti, and the Semai.

Main ideas
Gilmore observes that in all of the cultures he analyzed 'manhood' is not something that boys grow into but is something that must be continually proven. In this sense, "'true manhood’ is a state of insecurity". Manhood is claimed through continual tests and demonstrations, which demonstrate toughness, aggression, stoicism, confidence in the face of danger, ownership of abundant resources, and sexual prowess. This is summed up best by the dictum: “Real men are made, not born." This contrasts with femininity, which Gilmore observes "develops naturally, and may be marked by ritual, but is not tested."

Despite the ubiquity of similar elements of manhood, Gilmore takes the lack of complete universality to mean they arise not out of genetics but out of culture: “Cultures construct an appropriate manhood...There is a constantly recurring notion that real manhood is different from simple anatomical maleness...Manhood is a critical threshold that boys must win against powerful odds [through testing]. This recurrent notion...is found among the simplest hunters and fishermen, among peasants and sophisticated urbanized peoples; it is found in all continents and environments.”

Reception
The book has received mostly positive reviews.

Nickola Shulman of The Sunday Times said the book was "colourful and fascinating stuff, painstakingly researched and feelingly described...An absorbing, well-argued, and finely written study." Library Journal called it "provocative and absorbing" and claimed that "this book is essential to both academic and general libraries." Publishers Weekly similarly called the book a "provocative, rewarding cross-cultural survey."

David H. J. Morgan, writing in the Journal of Gender Studies, praised the book for being a "wide-ranging comparative study...in a variety of different societies" that "may help to overcome some of the ethnocentrism that limits many recent discussions of men and masculinities."

The New York Times praised the maturity of the book: Real anthropologists see past the surface of beliefs and behaviors to the meanings below. Mr. Gilmore persuasively concludes that "manhood cults are directly related to the degree of hardiness and self-discipline required for the male role. . . . Manliness is a symbolic script, a cultural construct, endlessly variable and not always necessary." He manfully admits that his conclusion "strengthens [the basic feminist] argument by refuting the sociobiological evocation of male aggressiveness as innate, for . . . men are innately not so very different from women and need motivation to be assertive."

The Nanzan Institute for Religion and Culture said the book is "very fascinating and signifi­cant, because it gives us a holistic image of what it means to be a man," but believes it distorts the reality of Japanese culture.