Amy Gross’s personal essay on “The Appeal of the Androgynous Man” was a very opinionated view on two different kinds of men. I thought her views were very stereotypical and irrational. Her opinions were based primarily on previous relationships and observations on a public and personal level. An androgynous man is an idealistic mate; a man that is every bit as vulnerable, creative, empathetic and imaginative as you are. She created this androgynous man in her own mind as a “perfect” man. Anyone can do this with their ideals and sum up the perfect name for a ridiculously perfect man. The truth is, nearly everyone is imperfect. A perfect anyone would mean we all lived in a perfect world. On the other hand, Amy Gross also created another man of total opposite of the androgynous man called a man’s man. According to her, this man is a pure obstrocity. He will go the extra mile to prove that woman should do nothing put bow down to him. Signs of affection or knowledge towards art, deep conversations, and quirkiness are nonexistent. For Amy to say that an “all man’s man” gives off an “overly insensitive, effeminate, uncouth” impression may be true in her world. Although for many others, some of these qualities work well. On the other hand, qualities from either side of an androgynous man and a man’s man might mix up the perfect concoction for the ideal mate. Therefore, who says any of these ideals make for a despicable man or a desirable knight and shining armor? Only you can make the call.
No comments:
Post a Comment