Skip to main content

Masculinity

Masculinity

SEX VS. GENDER

PLURAL MASCULINITIES

GENDER IDENTITY

GENDER AS AN INSTITUTION

DOING GENDER

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Masculinity refers to the social roles, behaviors, and meanings prescribed for men in any given society at any one time. As such, it emphasizes gender, not biological sex, and the diversity of identities among different groups of men. Although we experience gender to be an internal facet of identity, the concept of masculinity is produced within the institutions of society and through our daily interactions (Kimmel 2000).

SEX VS. GENDER

Much popular discourse assumes that biological sex determines ones gender identity, the experience and expression of masculinity and femininity. Instead of focusing on biological universals, social and behavioral scientists are concerned with the different ways in which biological sex comes to mean different things in different contexts. Sex refers to the biological apparatus, the male and the femaleour chromosomal, chemical, anatomical, organization. Gender refers to the meanings that are attached to those differences within a culture. Sex is male and female; gender is masculinity and femininitywhat it means to be a man or a woman. Whereas biological sex varies very little, gender varies enormously. Sex is biological; gender is socially constructed. Gender takes shape only within specific social and cultural contexts.

PLURAL MASCULINITIES

The use of the pluralmasculinities recognizes the dramatic variation in how different groups define masculinity, even in the same society at the same time, as well as individual differences. Although social forces operate to create systematic differences between men and women, on average, these differences between women and men are not as great as the differences among men or among women.

The meanings of masculinity vary over four different dimensions; thus four different disciplines are involved in understanding genderanthropology, history, psychology, and sociology.

First, masculinities vary across cultures. Anthropologists have documented the ways that gender varies cross-culturally. Some cultures encourage men to be stoic and to prove masculinity, especially by sexual conquest. Other cultures prescribe a more relaxed definition of masculinity based on civic participation, emotional responsiveness, and collective provision for the communitys needs. What it means to be a man in France or among Aboriginal peoples in the Australian outback are so far apart that it belies any notion that gender identity is determined mostly by biological sex differences. The differences between two cultures version of masculinity is often greater than the differences between the two genders.

Second, definitions of masculinity vary considerably in any one country over time. Historians have explored how these definitions have shifted in response to changes in levels of industrialization and urbanization, in a nations position in the larger worlds geopolitical and economic context, and with the development of new technologies. What it meant to be a man in seventeenth-century France or in Hellenic Greece is certainly different from what it might mean to be a French or Greek man today.

Third, definitions of masculinity change over the course of a persons life. Developmental psychologists have examined how a set of developmental milestones leads to differences in our experiences and our expressions of gender identity. Both chronological age and life stage require different enactments of gender. In the West, the issues confronting a man about proving himself and feeling successful change as he ages, as do the social institutions in which he attempts to enact those experiences. A young single man defines masculinity differently than do a middle-aged father and an elderly grandfather.

Finally, the meanings of masculinity vary considerably within any given society at any one time. At any given moment, several meanings of masculinity coexist. Simply put, not all American or Brazilian or Senegalese men are the same. Sociologists have explored the ways in which class, race, ethnicity, age, sexuality, and region all shape gender identity. Each of these axes modifies the others. For example, an older, black, gay man in Chicago and a young, white, heterosexual farm boy in Iowa would likely have different definitions of masculinity and different ideas about what it means to be a woman. Yet each of these people is deeply affected by the gender norms and power arrangements of their society.

Because gender varies so significantlyacross cultures, over historical time, among men and women within any one culture, and over the life coursewe cannot speak of masculinity as though it is a constant, universal essence, common to all men. Gender must be seen as an ever-changing, fluid assemblage of meanings and behaviors; we must speak of masculinities. By pluralizing the term we acknowledge that masculinity means different things to different groups of people at different times.

GENDER IDENTITY

Recognizing diversity ought not to obscure the ways in which gender definitions are constructed in a field of power. Simply put, all masculinities are not created equal. In every culture, men contend with a definition that is held up as the model against which all are expected to measure themselves. This hegemonic definition of masculinity is constructed in relation to various subordinated masculinities as well as in relation to women, writes sociologist R. W. Connell (1987, p. 183). As Erving Goffman once described it,

In an important sense there is only one complete unblushing male in America: a young, married, white, urban, northern, heterosexual, Protestant, father, of college education, fully employed, of good complexion, weight, and height, and a recent record in sports. Any male who fails to qualify in any one of these ways is likely to view himselfduring moments at leastas unworthy, incomplete, and inferior. (1967, p. 128)

Definitions of masculinity are not simply constructed in relation to the hegemonic ideals of that gender, but also in constant reference to each other. Gender is not only plural, it is also relational. Surveys in Western countries indicate that men construct their ideas of what it means to be men in constant reference to definitions of femininity. What it means to be a man is to be unlike a woman; indeed, social psychologists have emphasized that although different groups of men may disagree about other traits and their significance in gender definitions, the antifemininity component of masculinity is perhaps the single dominant and universal characteristic.

Gender difference and gender inequality are both produced through our relationships. Nancy Chodorow argued that the structural arrangements by which women are primarily responsible for raising children creates unconscious, internalized desires in both boys and girls that reproduce male dominance and female mothering (1978). For boys, gender identity requires emotional detachment from mother, a process of individuation through separation. The boy comes to define himself as a boy by rejecting whatever he sees as female, by devaluing the feminine in himself (separation) and in others (male superiority). This cycle of men defining themselves through their distance from and devaluation of femininity can end, Chodorow argues, only when parents participate equally in child rearing.

GENDER AS AN INSTITUTION

Although we recognize gender diversity, we still may conceive masculinities as attributes of identity only. We think of gendered individuals who bring with them all the attributes and behavioral characteristics of their gendered identity into gender-neutral institutional arenas. But because gender is plural and relational, it is also situational: What it means to be a man varies in different institutional contexts, and those different institutional contexts demand and produce different forms of masculinity. Boys may be boys, writes feminist legal theorist Deborah Rhode, but they express that identity differently in fraternity parties than in job interviews with a female manager (Rhode 1997, p. 142). Gender is thus not only a property of individuals, some thing one has, but a specific set of behaviors that are produced in specific social situations. Thus gender changes as the situation changes.

Institutions are themselves gendered. Institutions create gendered normative standards and express a gendered institutional logic, and are major factors in the reproduction of gender inequality. The gendered identity of individuals shapes those gendered institutions, and the gendered institutions express and reproduce the inequalities that compose gender identity. Institutions themselves express a logica dynamicthat reproduces gender relations between women and men and the gender order of hierarchy and power.

Not only do gendered individuals negotiate their identities within gendered institutions, but also those institutions produce the very differences we assume are the properties of individuals. Thus, the extent to which women and men do different tasks, play widely disparate concrete social roles, strongly influences the extent to which the two sexes develop and/or are expected to manifest widely disparate personal behaviors and characteristics (Chafetz 1980, p. 112). Different structured experiences produce the gender differences that we often attribute to people (Chafetz 1980).

For example, take the workplace. In her now classic work Men and Women of the Corporation (1977), Rosebeth Moss Kanter argued that the differences in mens and womens behaviors in organizations had far less to do with their characteristics as individuals than with the structure of the organization itself and the different jobs men and women held. Organizational positions carry characteristic images of the kinds of people that should occupy them, she argued, and those who do occupy them, whether women or men, exhibited those necessary behaviors (Kanter 1977, p. 21). Though the criteria for evaluation of job performance, promotion, and effectiveness seem to be gender neutral, they are, in fact, deeply gendered. While organizations were being defined as sexneutral machines, she writes, masculine principles were dominating their authority structures (p. 241). Once again, masculinitythe normwas invisible (Kanter 1975, 1977). For example, secretaries seemed to stress personal loyalty to their bosses more than did other workers, which led some observers to attribute this to womens greater level of personalism. But Kanter pointed out that the best way for a secretaryof either genderto get promoted was for the boss to decide to take the secretary with him to the higher job. Thus the structure of the womens jobs, not the gender of the job holder, dictated their responses.

Sociologist Joan Acker has expanded on Kanters early insights and has specified the interplay of structure and gender. It is through our experiences in the workplace, Acker maintains, that the differences between women and men are reproduced, and in this way the inequality between women and men is legitimated. Institutions are like factories, and one of the things that they produce is gender difference. The overall effect of this is the reproduction of the gender order as a whole (see Acker 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990).

Institutions accomplish the creation of gender difference and the reproduction of the gender order through several gendered processes. Thus, advantage and disadvantage, exploitation and control, action and emotion, meaning and identity, are patterned through and in terms of a distinction between male and female, masculine and feminine (Acker 1990, p. 146). We would err to assume that gendered individuals enter gender-neutral sites, thus maintaining the invisibility of gender-as-hierarchy, and specifically the invisible masculine organizational logic. At the same time, we would be just as incorrect to assume that genderless people occupy those gender-neutral sites. The problem is that such genderless people are assumed to be able to devote themselves single-mindedly to their jobs, to have no children or family responsibilities, and perhaps even to have familial supports for such single-minded workplace devotion. Thus, the genderless job holder turns out to be gendered as a man.

Take, for example, the field of medicine. Many doctors complete college by age twenty-one or twenty-two, and medical school by age twenty-five to twenty-seven, and then face three more years of internship and residency, during which time they are occasionally on call for long stretches of time, sometimes for even two or three days straight. They thus complete their residencies by their late twenties or early thirties. Such a program is designed for a male doctorone who is not pressured by the ticking of a biological clock, for whom the birth of children will not disrupt these time demands, and who may even have someone at home taking care of his children while he sleeps at the hospital. No wonder women in medical schoolwho number nearly one half of all medical students todaybegan to complain that they were not able to balance pregnancy and motherhood with their medical training.

In another example, in a typical academic career a scholar completes a PhD about six to seven years after the BA, roughly by age thirty, and then begins a career as an assistant professor with six more years to earn tenure and promotion. This is usually the most intense academic work period of a scholars life and also the most likely childbearing years for professional women. The tenure clock is thus set to a mans rhythmsnot just any man, but one with a wife to relieve him of family obligations as he establishes his credentials. To academics struggling to make tenure, it often feels that publishing requires that family life perish.

Embedded in organizational structures that are gendered, subject to gendered organizational processes, and evaluated by gendered criteria, then, the differences between women and men appear to be the differences solely between gendered individuals. When gender boundaries seem permeable, other dynamics and processes can reproduce the gender order. When women do not meet these criteria (or, perhaps more accurately, when the criteria do not meet womens specific needs), we see a gender-segregated workforce and wage, hiring, and promotional disparities as the natural outcomes of already present differences between women and men. It is in this way that those differences are generated and the inequalities between women and men are legitimated and reproduced.

DOING GENDER

There remains one more element in the sociological explanation of masculinities. Some psychologists and sociologists believe that early childhood gender socialization leads to gender identities that become fixed, permanent, and inherent in our personalities. However, many sociologists disagree with this notion today. As they see it, gender is less a component of identityfixed, staticthat we take with us into our interactions and more the product of those interactions. In an important article, Doing Gender, Candace West and Don Zimmerman argued that a persons gender is not simply an aspect of what one is, but, more fundamentally, it is something that one does, and does recurrently, in interaction with others (1987, p. 140). We are constantly doing gender, performing the activities and exhibiting the traits that are prescribed for us.

Doing gender is a lifelong process of performances. As we interact with others we are held accountable to display behavior that is consistent with gender norms, at least for that situation. Thus consistent gender behavior is less a response to deeply internalized norms or personality characteristics and more a negotiated response to the consistency with which others demand that we act in a recognizable masculine or feminine way. Gender is not an emanation of identity that bubbles up from below in concrete expression; rather, it is an emergent property of interactions, coerced from us by others.

Understanding how we do masculinities, then, requires that we make visible the performative elements of identity, and also the audience for those performances. It also opens up unimaginable possibilities for social change, as Suzanne Kessler points out in her study of intersexed people (hermaphrodites, those born with anatomical characteristics of both sexes or with ambiguous genitalia):

If authenticity for gender rests not in a discoverable nature but in someone elses proclamation, then the power to proclaim something else is available. If physicians recognized that implicit in their management of gender is the notion that finally, and always, people construct gender as well as the social systems that are grounded in gender-based concepts, the possibilities for real societal transformations would be unlimited. (Kessler 1990, p. 25)

Kesslers gender utopianism raises an important issue. In saying that we do gender we are saying that gender is not only something that is done to us. We create and recreate our own gendered identities within the contexts of our interactions with others and within the institutions we inhabit.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Acker, Joan. 1987. Sex Bias in Job Evaluation: A Comparable Worth Issue. In Ingredients for Womens Employment Policy, eds. Christine Bose and Glenna Spitze, 183196. Albany: State University of New York Press.

Acker, Joan. 1988. Class, Gender, and the Relations of Distribution. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 13: 473497.

Acker, Joan. 1989. Doing Comparable Worth: Gender, Class, and Pay Equity. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

Acker, Joan. 1990. Hierarchies, Jobs, Bodies: A Theory of Gendered Organizations. Gender and Society 4 (2): 149158.

Acker, Joan, and Donald R. Van Houten. 1974. Differential Recruitment and Control: The Sex Structuring of Organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly 19 (2): 152163.

Chafetz, Janet. 1980. Toward a Macro-Level Theory of Sexual Stratification. Current Perspectives in Social Theory 1: 103126.

Chodorow, Nancy. 1978. The Reproduction of Mothering: Psychoanalysis and the Sociology of Gender. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Connell, R. W. 1987. Gender and Power. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Goffman, Erving. 1963. Stigma. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Kanter, Rosabeth Moss. 1975. Women and the Structure of Organizations: Explorations in Theory and Behavior. In Another Voice: Feminist Perspectives on Social Life and Social Science, eds. Marcia Millman and Rosabeth Moss Kanter, 3474. New York: Anchor Books.

Kanter, Rosabeth Moss. 1977. Men and Women of the Corporation. New York: Basic Books.

Kessler, Suzanne J. 1990. The Medical Construction of Gender: Case Management of Intersexed Infants. Signs 16 (1): 326.

Kimmel, Michael. 2000. The Gendered Society. New York: Oxford University Press.

Rhode, Deborah. 1997. Speaking of Sex. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Risman, Barbara. 1999. Gender Vertigo. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

West, Candace, and Don H. Zimmerman. 1987. Doing Gender. Gender and Society 1 (2): 125151.

Michael Kimmel

Cite this article
Pick a style below, and copy the text for your bibliography.

  • MLA
  • Chicago
  • APA

"Masculinity." International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. . Encyclopedia.com. 27 May. 2017 <http://www.encyclopedia.com>.

"Masculinity." International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. . Encyclopedia.com. (May 27, 2017). http://www.encyclopedia.com/social-sciences/applied-and-social-sciences-magazines/masculinity

"Masculinity." International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. . Retrieved May 27, 2017 from Encyclopedia.com: http://www.encyclopedia.com/social-sciences/applied-and-social-sciences-magazines/masculinity

masculinity

masculinity The characteristics of, and appropriate to, the male sex. Although feminists would argue that most sociology has been by men, about men, and for men, the problem of analysing men and masculinity as issues in their own right remained relatively neglected until (ironically) the advent of second-wave feminism itself. Thus, for example, studies of delinquency (such as A. Cohen's Delinquent Boys, 1955) or of social class (say, J. H. Goldthorpe et al. , The Affluent Worker in the Class Structure, 1969
) were in effect the study of boys and men, but did not see gender itself as a concern. The issue of masculinity was largely ignored and gender served as a taken-for-granted variable.

There were some notable exceptions. Margaret Mead's comparative work suggested the cultural basis for, and relativity of, masculinity and femininity (a finding subsequently challenged by Mead's critics). Likewise, from the perspective of functionalism and role theory, Talcott Parsons described the sex roles of men and women as instrumental and expressive respectively. Parsons and his colleagues argued that such roles were internalized by young children and led to a neat division of labour in adult life, with men and women becoming well integrated into the social system, hence enabling it to function smoothly. In psychology, too, the idea of the male role was present, often coupled with the view that much of masculinity was a defence against an identity crisis, serving to mask men's essential vulnerability (see, for example, J. Pleck 's The Myth of Masculinity, 1981
).

Nevertheless, it was not until the 1970s that the topic of masculinity as such started to be more extensively researched, largely as an offshoot of the women's movement, proponents of which suggested that the problem of patriarchy was in fact ‘the problem of men’. Pioneering studies of gender roles and masculinity were conducted by Mirra Komarovsky, examining the functional significance and cultural contradictions of sex roles (see her Blue Collar Marriage, 1964, and Dilemmas of Masculinity, 1976
). Subsequently, with the development of the so-called Men's Movement, studies of masculinity began to appear in greater numbers. Andrew Tolson (The Limits of Masculinity, 1976) attempted to demonstrate that masculinity had to be located within a wider social framework of class, education, work, and age. Masculinity, like femininity, was far from a uniform cultural product, but itself assumed many dimensions. The centrality of seeing masculinity not as an essence but as a product of cultural and historical forces became paramount. By the 1980s, Men's Studies had become established as a specialist area of inquiry replete with its own internal schisms, theoretical debates, differing emphases, and divergent politics (see, for example, T. Carrigan et al. , ‘Towards a New Theory of Masculinity’, Theory and Society, 1985, or A. Brittan , Masculinity and Power, 1989
).

Whilst some sociologists have continued to use and develop traditional role theory, others have drawn from the work of feminist scholars and gay and lesbian studies, and have highlighted the prominence of patriarchy, heterosexism, and power for the analysis of masculinity. In Robert Connell's work, for example, there has been an increasing emphasis not on masculinity per se but on gender relations organized largely through power (see his Gender and Power, 1987
).

In 1990 Kenneth Clatterbaugh (Contemporary Perspectives on Masculinity) reviewed the whole field, and suggested there were several distinct theoretical stances with respect to the sociological issue of masculinity. The first continued a conservative line of thought, seeing masculinity as universal, unchangeable, and rooted largely in biology. Pro-feminist positions, by contrast, generally followed the analyses laid down by feminist theory, both in its liberal and radical versions. Third, there were the advocates of Men's Rights, who argued that men also were the victims of patriarchy and sexism. Fourth, a newly emerging position suggested the need for men to regain their spiritual roots, an argument exemplified in Robert Bly's Iron John (1991). Finally there were a range of arguments which linked the study of men with class, race, and gay issues. See also CULTURE AND PERSONALITY SCHOOL.

Cite this article
Pick a style below, and copy the text for your bibliography.

  • MLA
  • Chicago
  • APA

"masculinity." A Dictionary of Sociology. . Encyclopedia.com. 27 May. 2017 <http://www.encyclopedia.com>.

"masculinity." A Dictionary of Sociology. . Encyclopedia.com. (May 27, 2017). http://www.encyclopedia.com/social-sciences/dictionaries-thesauruses-pictures-and-press-releases/masculinity

"masculinity." A Dictionary of Sociology. . Retrieved May 27, 2017 from Encyclopedia.com: http://www.encyclopedia.com/social-sciences/dictionaries-thesauruses-pictures-and-press-releases/masculinity

masculine

mas·cu·line / ˈmaskyələn/ • adj. 1. having qualities or appearance traditionally associated with men, esp. strength and aggressiveness: he is outstandingly handsome and robust, very masculine. ∎  of or relating to men; male: a masculine voice. 2. Gram. of or denoting a gender of nouns and adjectives, conventionally regarded as male. 3. Mus. (of a cadence) occurring on a metrically strong beat. • n. (the masculine) the male sex or gender: the masculine as the norm. ∎  Gram. a masculine word or form. DERIVATIVES: mas·cu·line·ly adv. mas·cu·lin·i·ty / ˌmaskyəˈlinitē/ n.

Cite this article
Pick a style below, and copy the text for your bibliography.

  • MLA
  • Chicago
  • APA

"masculine." The Oxford Pocket Dictionary of Current English. . Encyclopedia.com. 27 May. 2017 <http://www.encyclopedia.com>.

"masculine." The Oxford Pocket Dictionary of Current English. . Encyclopedia.com. (May 27, 2017). http://www.encyclopedia.com/humanities/dictionaries-thesauruses-pictures-and-press-releases/masculine-0

"masculine." The Oxford Pocket Dictionary of Current English. . Retrieved May 27, 2017 from Encyclopedia.com: http://www.encyclopedia.com/humanities/dictionaries-thesauruses-pictures-and-press-releases/masculine-0

MASCULINE

MASCULINE. A term relating to grammatical GENDER in nouns and related words, contrasting with FEMININE (as in FRENCH) and feminine and neuter (as in GERMAN and LATIN). Words denoting male people and animals in such languages are usually masculine, but grammatical gender is not about sex: in French le courage du soldat, the courage is as masculine as the soldier. In English, the term is confined to personal pronouns (he/him/himself/his) and some nouns (such as drake in contrast with duck).

Cite this article
Pick a style below, and copy the text for your bibliography.

  • MLA
  • Chicago
  • APA

"MASCULINE." Concise Oxford Companion to the English Language. . Encyclopedia.com. 27 May. 2017 <http://www.encyclopedia.com>.

"MASCULINE." Concise Oxford Companion to the English Language. . Encyclopedia.com. (May 27, 2017). http://www.encyclopedia.com/humanities/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/masculine

"MASCULINE." Concise Oxford Companion to the English Language. . Retrieved May 27, 2017 from Encyclopedia.com: http://www.encyclopedia.com/humanities/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/masculine

masculine

masculine † male XIV; (gram.); (pros.) of rhyme XVI; pert. to or characteristic of the male sex XVII. — (O)F. masculin, fem. -ine — L. masculīnus, -īna, f. masculus MALE; see -INE1.

Cite this article
Pick a style below, and copy the text for your bibliography.

  • MLA
  • Chicago
  • APA

"masculine." The Concise Oxford Dictionary of English Etymology. . Encyclopedia.com. 27 May. 2017 <http://www.encyclopedia.com>.

"masculine." The Concise Oxford Dictionary of English Etymology. . Encyclopedia.com. (May 27, 2017). http://www.encyclopedia.com/humanities/dictionaries-thesauruses-pictures-and-press-releases/masculine-1

"masculine." The Concise Oxford Dictionary of English Etymology. . Retrieved May 27, 2017 from Encyclopedia.com: http://www.encyclopedia.com/humanities/dictionaries-thesauruses-pictures-and-press-releases/masculine-1

masculine

masculineAlun, Malin, Tallinn •Jacklin • franklin •chaplain, Chaplin •ratline •Carlin, marlin, marline, Stalin •Helen, Llewelyn •Mechlin •Emlyn, gremlin, Kremlin •Galen • capelin • kylin • Evelyn •Enniskillen, penicillin, villein •Hamelin • Marilyn • discipline •Colin, Dolin •goblin, hobgoblin •Loughlin •Joplin, poplin •compline • tarpaulin •Magdalen, maudlin •bowline, pangolin •Ventolin • moulin • Lublin • Brooklyn •masculine • insulin • globulin •mullein • Dublin • dunlin • muslin •kaolin • chamberlain • Michelin •madeleine • Mary Magdalene •Gwendolen • francolin • mescaline •formalin • lanolin •adrenalin, noradrenalin •crinoline • zeppelin • cipolin •Carolyn • Jocelyn • porcelain • Ritalin •Ottoline •javelin, ravelin •Rosalyn •merlin, purlin •Dunfermline • purslane

Cite this article
Pick a style below, and copy the text for your bibliography.

  • MLA
  • Chicago
  • APA

"masculine." Oxford Dictionary of Rhymes. . Encyclopedia.com. 27 May. 2017 <http://www.encyclopedia.com>.

"masculine." Oxford Dictionary of Rhymes. . Encyclopedia.com. (May 27, 2017). http://www.encyclopedia.com/humanities/dictionaries-thesauruses-pictures-and-press-releases/masculine

"masculine." Oxford Dictionary of Rhymes. . Retrieved May 27, 2017 from Encyclopedia.com: http://www.encyclopedia.com/humanities/dictionaries-thesauruses-pictures-and-press-releases/masculine

masculinity

masculinitybanditti, bitty, chitty, city, committee, ditty, gritty, intercity, kitty, nitty-gritty, Pitti, pity, pretty, shitty, slitty, smriti, spitty, titty, vittae, witty •fifty, fifty-fifty, nifty, shifty, swiftie, thrifty •guilty, kiltie, silty •flinty, linty, minty, shinty •ballistae, Christie, Corpus Christi, misty, twisty, wristy •sixty •deity, gaiety (US gayety), laity, simultaneity, spontaneity •contemporaneity, corporeity, femineity, heterogeneity, homogeneity •anxiety, contrariety, dubiety, impiety, impropriety, inebriety, notoriety, piety, satiety, sobriety, ubiety, variety •moiety •acuity, ambiguity, annuity, assiduity, congruity, contiguity, continuity, exiguity, fatuity, fortuity, gratuity, ingenuity, perpetuity, perspicuity, promiscuity, suety, superfluity, tenuity, vacuity •rabbity •improbity, probity •acerbity • witchetty • crotchety •heredity •acidity, acridity, aridity, avidity, cupidity, flaccidity, fluidity, frigidity, humidity, hybridity, insipidity, intrepidity, limpidity, liquidity, lividity, lucidity, morbidity, placidity, putridity, quiddity, rabidity, rancidity, rapidity, rigidity, solidity, stolidity, stupidity, tepidity, timidity, torpidity, torridity, turgidity, validity, vapidity •commodity, oddity •immodesty, modesty •crudity, nudity •fecundity, jocundity, moribundity, profundity, rotundity, rubicundity •absurdity • difficulty • gadgety •majesty • fidgety • rackety •pernickety, rickety •biscuity •banality, duality, fatality, finality, ideality, legality, locality, modality, morality, natality, orality, reality, regality, rurality, tonality, totality, venality, vitality, vocality •fidelity •ability, agility, civility, debility, docility, edibility, facility, fertility, flexility, fragility, futility, gentility, hostility, humility, imbecility, infantility, juvenility, liability, mobility, nihility, nobility, nubility, puerility, senility, servility, stability, sterility, tactility, tranquillity (US tranquility), usability, utility, versatility, viability, virility, volatility •ringlety •equality, frivolity, jollity, polity, quality •credulity, garrulity, sedulity •nullity •amity, calamity •extremity • enmity •anonymity, dimity, equanimity, magnanimity, proximity, pseudonymity, pusillanimity, unanimity •comity •conformity, deformity, enormity, multiformity, uniformity •subcommittee • pepperminty •infirmity •Christianity, humanity, inanity, profanity, sanity, urbanity, vanity •amnesty •lenity, obscenity, serenity •indemnity, solemnity •mundanity • amenity •affinity, asininity, clandestinity, divinity, femininity, infinity, masculinity, salinity, trinity, vicinity, virginity •benignity, dignity, malignity •honesty •community, immunity, importunity, impunity, opportunity, unity •confraternity, eternity, fraternity, maternity, modernity, paternity, taciturnity •serendipity, snippety •uppity •angularity, barbarity, bipolarity, charity, circularity, clarity, complementarity, familiarity, granularity, hilarity, insularity, irregularity, jocularity, linearity, parity, particularity, peculiarity, polarity, popularity, regularity, secularity, similarity, singularity, solidarity, subsidiarity, unitarity, vernacularity, vulgarity •alacrity • sacristy •ambidexterity, asperity, austerity, celerity, dexterity, ferrety, posterity, prosperity, severity, sincerity, temerity, verity •celebrity • integrity • rarity •authority, inferiority, juniority, majority, minority, priority, seniority, sonority, sorority, superiority •mediocrity • sovereignty • salubrity •entirety •futurity, immaturity, impurity, maturity, obscurity, purity, security, surety •touristy •audacity, capacity, fugacity, loquacity, mendacity, opacity, perspicacity, pertinacity, pugnacity, rapacity, sagacity, sequacity, tenacity, veracity, vivacity, voracity •laxity •sparsity, varsity •necessity •complexity, perplexity •density, immensity, propensity, tensity •scarcity • obesity •felicity, toxicity •fixity, prolixity •benedicite, nicety •anfractuosity, animosity, atrocity, bellicosity, curiosity, fabulosity, ferocity, generosity, grandiosity, impecuniosity, impetuosity, jocosity, luminosity, monstrosity, nebulosity, pomposity, ponderosity, porosity, preciosity, precocity, reciprocity, religiosity, scrupulosity, sinuosity, sumptuosity, velocity, verbosity, virtuosity, viscosity •paucity • falsity • caducity • russety •adversity, biodiversity, diversity, perversity, university •sacrosanctity, sanctity •chastity •entity, identity •quantity • certainty •cavity, concavity, depravity, gravity •travesty • suavity •brevity, levity, longevity •velvety • naivety •activity, nativity •equity •antiquity, iniquity, obliquity, ubiquity •propinquity

Cite this article
Pick a style below, and copy the text for your bibliography.

  • MLA
  • Chicago
  • APA

"masculinity." Oxford Dictionary of Rhymes. . Encyclopedia.com. 27 May. 2017 <http://www.encyclopedia.com>.

"masculinity." Oxford Dictionary of Rhymes. . Encyclopedia.com. (May 27, 2017). http://www.encyclopedia.com/humanities/dictionaries-thesauruses-pictures-and-press-releases/masculinity

"masculinity." Oxford Dictionary of Rhymes. . Retrieved May 27, 2017 from Encyclopedia.com: http://www.encyclopedia.com/humanities/dictionaries-thesauruses-pictures-and-press-releases/masculinity