White Guys: Studies in Postmodern Domination and Difference

by Fred Pfeil

What do men—white straight men in particular—want? In a series of witty and provocative investigations of American popular culture, Fred Pfeil exposes the contradictions in the construction of white heterosexual masculinity over the last fifteen years. White Guys probes such topics as the rock‘n’roll bodies of Bruce Springsteen, Axl Rose, and the late Kurt Cobain; the “male rampage” films Die Hard and Lethal Weapon and the films of “sensitive transformation” that followed in their wake; and the curious yet symptomatic activities of the men’s movement whose “rituals” Pfeil has investigated firsthand.

Genres: Cultural Studies

290 pages, Paperback

First published June 17, 1995

Reviews

[Tristan Bridges · Rating 5 out of 5]

Pfeil's analysis of transformations in white masculinities in the media is really incredible. He charts everything from movies, to music, to advertising icons and more to discuss the various ways that white masculinities are adapting to new cultural climates--climates that have (thankfully) grown increasingly aware of, and sometimes hostile to, older configurations of white masculinity. His findings are really eerily similar to the ways that social theorists have discussed changes in dominant, culturally exalted models of (primarily white) masculinities in the U.S. (like Mike Messner and Demetriou Demetrakis). There's been a lot of changes in "style" (what's considered "masculine"), but less change in "substance" (the fact that masculinity is still associated with power, dominance, and gender inequality. In some ways, the emergence of new styles can be seen as obscuring gender inequality in new ways as previous justifications of gender inequality come increasingly under attack. Great read. Lots of wonderful examples and in depth analyses.

[Malcolm · Rating 4 out of 5]

I really like Fred Pfeil's work, in that he provides us with a socially savvy, politically aware, class and gender derived analysis of popular culture that accentuates ways and means of masculinity and of masculine power. In this collection he explors a range of films, detective fiction, and the anti-feminsit mythopoetic men's movemnt that seemed so powerful in the 1990s. Highly recommended.

[Don · Rating 4 out of 5]

Another book that has been on my shelves for years and just happened to tumble ....

Pfeil's basic argument is that 'guys' are a pain but exactly what sort of a pain they are varies from class to class and age to age. Furthermore, masculinity "might itself be a dialectical co-c0nstruction whose ongoing existence is at least partially dependent on the very forms and modalities of femininity it seeks to dominate and control..." . To be even more succinct, heterosexual men and women make gender together, though not necessarily in conditions of their own choosing.

The argument expands basically through a cultural studies focus, look at things like 'male rampage' films of the Lethal Weapon and Die Hard type. Compared to the 'frankly reactionary' Dirty Harry and Death Wish films of the preceding decade. Whilst remaining in line with the vision of the national hero male in revolt against 'soft' liberal regulated law enforcement of the Reaganite era they also have things in common with art films like Brazil and Diva. Post-industrial landscapes provide settings in which the car chases and violence takes place even if plotted against very different relationships between characters.

Another chapter expounds on 'year of living sensitively' films, with City Slickers, Regarding Henry, The Doctor, and Fisher King providing the case studies. Pfiel sees in these an element of Johanna Brenner's argument, that "feminist demands for equality have been increasingly institutionalised and culturally incorporated as women's right to compete and contract free from limitations imposed on account of her sex." The attitudes of middle and working class men shift as a consequence of the gains of liberal feminism and incorporate the perception that the ability to control women has been undermined. For 'difference feminism' the failure of men to change is a consequence of things so deeply-rooted they are effectively in their blood. For Pfeil, what is missing from this latter group of films is the sense of gender constructed historically and maintained by a distinctive set of power relations.

Other areas of engagement for the book's argument include rock music (Axl Rose and Bruce Springsteen) and detective fiction. For the latter, the old Sam Spade-type character, who stood in solitary isolation from others and society in general is being eclipsed by a more neurotic individual who is in negotiation with the feminine and is becoming a 'hyper-masculine' who moves between sensitivity and enforcement. However, his apparent emotional openness is no obstacle to levels of brutal violence than his predecessors might have used.

What all this points to is the fact that relations between men and women have changed and are continuing to do so. The emotional lives of characters who live in the mind of the public have been altered by the forces which shape the societies in which they live. Post-industrialisation, the entry of women into the professional workforce, feminist ideology are all factors that play their part. But something is also working across all these levels which at the moment is ensuring that, by and large, everything remains broadly the same. A much deeper interrogation of these forces is necessary, with art and cultural activity playing its part, if the masculinities of white guys is ever going going to be confronted.

[Steven · Rating 3 out of 5]

Read this previously but never posted a review. Picked this up originally because of a chapter - "Soft-Boiled Dicks" - about 1980s PI novels and how they differ from PI books of the 1930-40s. The first chapter, though, is an interesting analysis of the first two movies in the Lethal Weapon and Die Hard series' that came out in 1987-1990. Also has a related analysis of the 1993 movie with Michael Douglas Falling Down. Skipped the rest of the book on this reading. Heavy-duty post-structuralist lingo to wade through, but some interesting takes on pop-culture.

[sleeplessdecember · Rating 2 out of 5]

I couldn't get myself to finish anything other then the first 1 and a half chapters. Tried to skip around a bit to the other chapters to see if the content might be more capturing for me which wasn't the case.
I'm not going to say this is an awful book it just wasn't for me. There certainly is an audience for this kind of book but I'm guessing it to be more masculine and more of the age of a millennial.
The content just isn't quite working in 2023 as it might have when this book was published almost 30 years ago.