The Wussification of Men

Society has created cookie cutter descriptions on what it is to be a man and what it is to be a woman. Men are suppose to be masculine; qualities or appearance traditionally associated with men (Oxford Dictionary); they are suppose to be independent, non-emotional, aggressive, competitive, strong, active, self-confident, hard, sexually aggressive, and rebellious. Whereas woman are suppose to be feminine; having qualities or appearance traditionally associated with women (Oxford Dictionary); they are suppose to be dependent, emotional, passive, sensitive, quiet, graceful, innocent, weak, flirtatious, nurturing, self-critical, soft, sexually submissive, and accepting.  But what happens when people want to breakout of those stereotypes, men want to be feminine and woman want to be masculine? Should we stop them? Should we conform them back to what society thinks is right?

According to Nick Adams the author of American Boomerang, he believes that men in general are becoming feminine and that it needs to stop. His beliefs are obvious when he states “men have gone from wrestling crocodile to wrestling lattes, it is a phenomenon that is really dangerous and having an adverse effect on men around the world”  (Nick Adams). He claims that there are just angry woman left in the world and wussy men and all of this is due to feminism. But why is this dangerous? Why are strong independent women considered angry? Why is the idea of gender roles switching such a danger? In Adams’ mind the danger is the mind set change in America.

Adams has an infatuation with American even stating in his book that he “loves America because it is confident, competitive, … and courageous… It is everything as a nation that (he) wish(es) to be a person” (Adams, 2). Is it surprising that the qualities he “loves” about America are those to define masculinity?  Adams’ belief is that with the loss of America’s “masculine” men or more accurately the acceptance of non-traditional men characteristics, the characteristics of the nation are going to change to those of less masculine tendencies and more feminine ones. This in his mind is dangerous because it will leave America venerable, weak, passive, and soft, and will create a national security threat. He states that “Wimps and wussies deliver mediocrity, and men win. And what America’s always been about is winning.” Adams believes that the only way to save America is to teach our boys at a young age to be “manly” men and stay away from the metrosexual characteristics and ideals.

I have many problems when it comes to Adams’ beliefs alone. The first problem with his argument is the stereotype he is placing on men. Adams believes that all men have to be masculine and that without that masculine tendency the nation is threatened. This belief that all men have to be masculine is not only offensive but also wrong. Adams is targeting all men that are not following that stereotype and calling them a threat. Is the fact that my Dad likes to read rather than hunt a threat to our nation? Are men who enjoy dancing and singing over football and hunting a threat to our nation? The last time I checked a man showing that he’s sensitive does not destroy or corrupt a country on the contrary I personal think it makes the country stronger. My other problem with Adams’ beliefs is that he believes feminism is breeding angry women. Why is it okay for men to be independent and strong but women are its considered a threat and a show of anger. The inequalities Adams displays in this article towards girls and guys is prominent when he agrees with the point that girls should be raised as girls and guys should be raised as guys. Who is to define what a girl is and what a guy is?

As I looked more and more into this news cast I began to wonder how Fox news could support such lucrative views and not notice the inequality and stereotyping in Adams statements, and I found research that Fox News actually agrees with Adams and his views. Fox News has on mulitiple occasions talked about the Wussification of America and the top 10 things that need to change.

  1. Firing abusive coaches
  2. Co-ed sports teams
  3. Human Resources
  4. Helmets for youth soccer leagues
  5. Common core math strategies
  6. The possible redskin name change
  7. Paid interships
  8. A police officer who was suspended for cursing
  9. Fines for poor sportsmanship

10. Yoga for children.


I personally agree with all the items stated above, everything done by society; the firing of abusive coaches, Co-ed sports teams and HR; was not done to “wussy” a nation but was put in place to make a nation more accepting, safer and accessible to everyone.



  1. It is truly sad that men are expected to be strong and confident (and therefore the superior sex), while women are supposed to be passive and dependant. Nick Adams clear has a skewed definition of what feminism is. He seems to believe that feminism is meant to make men more “feminine” (not that this is a bad thing), when really feminism simply aims to achieve equal rights for both men and women. It’s men like Nick that seem to be halting society’s progress in terms of gender equality.

  2. Great posting, I agree on every point of your writing. As I read carefully and replayed the video several times, I found Nick Adam’s language very offending for both women and men. I personally think that the core problem of his beliefs is that he is generalizing the whole population into his own mindset. Thus, Nick Adams is approaching this topic very dangerously. He also does not have the right to generalize all men, thinking that all men would agree to his point. Also, I completely agree with you on the reason why strong women are perceived negatively when strong men are viewed positively.

  3. The issue Adams has raised is a very interesting one, where the individual attitudes between and toward gender roles translates into the nation’s identity as a whole on a global scale. I do not think Adams is entirely wrong when he argues that woman and men should stay within society’s designed gender roles in terms of national security. My reasoning behind this is that it is possible that even the slightest shift in politics could lead to dramatic instability; the window of time during the transition could be just enough for an intruder to attack and take advantage of. The potential for change is unknown but avoiding certain alterations could be beneficial in order to keep security strong. That being said, I agree with you that Adams’ views on gender stereotypes are old-fashioned, however I think it is important to bring up the idea that you and Adams are possibly defending very different arguments. On one hand, Adams is worried about national security for the love of his country, a point I think everyone can empathize with. From my interpretation, he is not pointing fingers at women but instead he is looking at the relationship between men and women and that the roles each group plays (regardless of stereotypes) are necessary for society to successfully function the way it has been for years. I wonder, is Adams arguing against feminism or is he just showing concern for his country’s security? Are his views sexist or are we disagreeing with an argument he was not intentionally trying to make in the first place? From my understanding, the topic at hand is not about men being strong and women being weak, but instead it is about the power dynamic between the groups and how both roles have equal importance as they work together to harmonize a nation.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s