You Ain’t No Cowboy: Toxic Masculinity in Cowboy Culture

                                                                                                       Reagan Dailey
      The cowboy has long been a staple in American culture. The rough and tough image of the cowboy is used anywhere and everywhere as a macho and masculine figure. Cowboys in theory are well defined, but often carry multiple definitions depending upon who is asked. A cowboy can simply be a job, a way of life, or a culture. Cowboy as a job is relatively easy to define, as a person who earns their paycheck by pushing cattle. Cattle drives may not exist anymore, but cowboys are still alive and thriving. The cowboy way of life can be just as easily defined as carrying an intense passion for the values associated with cowboys, while not necessarily earning a living from them. The traditional cowboy may have only been those who do earn a living from cattle, but the definition has changed significantly. Modern cowboy culture challenges classic definitions and presents a new problem. Toxic masculinity is beginning to seep into cowboy culture through all aspects of life, poisoning the positive view of cowboys held by many. This becomes troublesome as a marketing ploy, due to the view held by many that “country boys rule the world” (Campbell 1) in politics, companies, and anywhere else they are allowed to exist. The image of the cowboy is ruined by preconceived false notions, television, and children’s characters. The only way to correct this issue is to stop targeted ads featuring images of the American cowboy twisted into messages of toxic masculinity is to redefine the classic cowboy. The culture surrounding cowboys remained stagnant for many years, and is long overdue for a serious makeover. In order to address and correct the issue, one must first address the beast that cowboy culture has ultimately morphed into.

     The modern day cowboy unfortunately carries with them a definition only upheld by Hollywood cowboys such as John Wayne, Buffalo Bill, and Jessie James. While these characters provide ample entertainment in movies, this image of the cowboy does not hold up to scrutiny. The very beginnings of the cowboy, then described as “dependable and hard-working when sober but vicious menaces when drunk” (Courtwright 86) are inconsistent with both the John Wayne mentality and the modern day cowboy. In the early days of the cowboy, most descriptions provided were even more unflattering than the aforementioned account. The John Wayne view of the cowboy is one of a suave and heroic ladies’ man. The cowboy exists to rescue the damsel in distress, and ride off into the sunset. Neither of these descriptions are true to the modern day cowboy. One fact that seems to hold consistently between both of these narratives is toxic masculinity. A cowboy must be tough as nails with no exceptions and is the ultimate figure of masculinity. Thus, the cowboy is often used in entertainment, marketing, and political campaigns. Unfortunately, the usage of the cowboy image has turned sour. In popular belief, “masculinity is the polar opposite of femininity” (Myers 126), which gives rise to the womanizing cowboy. The womanizing cowboy is born of a need to show the superiority and masculinity of cowboys by those who idolize them. Born of a need to emulate the suave nature of John Wayne, this idea quickly spread and twisted into a concept much uglier than originally intended. The natural consequence is that this negative connotation of the word cowboy is translated into the many entertainment, marketing, and political campaigns in which a cowboy is featured. This is especially harmful to the extremely malleable minds of youth, both male and female.

      The ideas presented and corrupted by toxic masculinity are often introduced to children by television programs. One example in particular is a scene within the popular television show Hannah Montana,​ which follows the double life of a pop star and cowgirl named Miley Cyrus. A new character, Rico, is introduced to the audience and wishes to impress Miley. While speaking to her father (Robby Ray), Rico comes to the understanding that he must dance to impress Miley. Miley’s father is skeptical, at best, of his strange movements. While Robby Ray “didn’t accuse Rico of being gay, he did problematize his feminine motion. To correct the problem, Robby Ray decided that Rico should “‘get in touch with his inner cowboy’” (Myers 126). There are two glaringly obvious problems with these actions normalized by ​Hannah Montana​, the first being that feminine expression in boys and men is wrong. Robby Ray also strongly suggested that Rico is homosexual, which is also insinuated as deeply wrong. This singular scene within a seemingly harmless children’s program introduces harmful concepts to the malleable minds of young children. The addition of Robby Ray’s assertion that Rico should “cowboy up” is merely salt in an already stinging wound. This statement divides men and women in the eyes of the youth viewing the television show. A cowboy in the eyes of many young boys is the epitome of what it means to be a man. “Cowboy up” divides this awesome, heroic figure from women and places him solely into the category of males. Characters such as Rico are exceedingly dangerous, as they symbolize undesirable characteristics in a man. These characters are “consistently feminized, with femininity signifying weakness and failure. Traditionally masculine characters often lurked in the background, reminding viewers what a ‘real man’ looked like” (Myers 126). Instilling such ideas into young children is bad practice at best and detrimental to the core values of society at worst. Once these ideas are introduced, they are centralized and adopted into the very core of what these children believe in. More importantly, these ideas are poison to the very idea of equality.

     As previously mentioned, television programs introduced early on in children’s lives that display a strong correlation between the cowboy and masculinity can lead to a lessened sense of equality between men and women. Boys exposed to television shows exclusively exhibiting traditional masculinity often feel obligated to behave in such a way that closely follows that of the characters in the show. Characters in shows such as these designed to exhibit classic signs of masculinity are often modeled after the cowboy. This is evident in the example ​Hannah Montana used previously. Thus, a culture of hegemonic masculinity is formed, meaning that an entire generation of young boys can and will behave in much the same way. Hegemonic masculinity is incredibly dangerous. This practice “serves to legitimize patriarchy and heterosexuality, guaranteeing the dominant position of men and heterosexuals and the subordination of women and non-heterosexuals” (Johnson 386). Whether inadvertent or purposeful, the culture created by children’s programming, such as ​Hannah Montana, ​is infinitely more harmful than positive. While not actively suppressive of women and men displaying characteristics seen as feminine rather than masculine, hegemonic masculinity does create a sense of entitlement in heterosexual males. Hegemonic masculinity “fosters access to power for those who are heterosexual and male. Therefore, hegemonic masculinity is a powerful tool used to secure and maintain the current social order” (Johnson 387). Obviously, women and non-heterosexual men are expected to sit quietly beneath them in the social order. This superiority inspired in males due to their apparently superior masculinity is accredited to them simply for fitting into the category of a cowboy, and brings nothing but suppression. These problems discussed are serious and must be fixed to prevent further decay to the image and values of the cowboy.

      The John Wayne mentality and view of the cowboy must be corrected. Unfortunately, it is entirely wrong and devoid of fact. The definition of a cowboy is constantly evolving, and is currently almost exclusively in disagreement with the commonly held view of the cowboy. A suave, heroic, and arguably sexist ladies’ man simply does not support the full truth of the cowboy anymore. The modern world and the growing movements within it leave no room for the definition of a cowboy as a “masculine persona of authority and control” (Campbell 1). A new, strong definition must be forged that prevents perversion of the critical values conveyed. Without the previous definition widely used by almost everyone, there is nothing to be twisted into a marketing ploy. Political campaigns, marketing, and advertisements will be forced to abandon the image of the cowboy if the status of the ultimate masculine figure is lost. Should a new definition be crafted for the cowboy, the notions of many people would be challenged. There is also the issue of how one would go about changing people’s minds. The cowboy is a pop culture phenomenon, featuring in countless movies, television shows, and songs. There are multiple lifetimes worth of contradictory material to any new definition proposed. Convincing the general public of any idea that goes against these movies, television shows, and songs that they have essentially grown up with is a huge undertaking. However, this is a task well worth the effort. Simply changing a few minds will do wonders for the perception of cowboys. This is only the beginning of changing this problematic figure into a hero worth looking up to. The next step in repairing the problematic nature of cowboy culture is protecting youth from the harmful reach of television programs which send the wrong message regarding masculinity.

       Television programs targeted towards the extremely flexible minds of children can be extremely dangerous. This dangerous nature was revealed previously using ​Hannah Montanna​ as an example. To correct the problem proposed by children’s television shows, a solution must be utilized that starts with the content of the television shows themselves. Technology has an increasingly large place in the lives of everyone, from children to adults. Asking that children be shielded from television to correct the issue at hand would be impractical if not impossible. Therefore, no such solution will be proposed. In the instance that a solution such as this is proposed, there is no doubt that it would quickly fail and have no impact whatsoever on the true problem in desperate need of attention. Solutions must be proposed to writers and producers that work directly on the script and basis of shows frequently watched by impressionable children. These people must be held accountable for helping raise hegemonic masculinity conformed children. Hegemonic masculinity runs so rampant in our society that “Some scholars have insisted that we begin to cultivate non-hegemonic masculinities” (Myers 128). In other words, highly respected academic scholars and researchers suggest that parents should begin to encourage and foster respect for women and non-heterosexual men at a young age rather than let their first experience with masculinity be negative, such as those seen in children’s television programming. Better yet, do not expose children to hegemonic masculinity at all. Stop widespread purveyors of hegemonic masculinity at the source. Stop hegemonic masculinity from entering children’s programming. Unfortunately, “Children are affected by and grapple with cultural frames,” (Myers 130) both good and bad. This clearly includes both the negative and misinformed aspects of masculinity. This is sadly a solution to just one problem presented by toxic masculinity in cowboy culture, but it can be used in part as a solution to other problems.

        To combat the hegemonic masculinity often associated with cowboy culture, the solutions previously discussed for other similar issues are helpful. Hegemonic masculinity stems from both the John Wayne mentality often associated with cowboys and children’s television programs that feature masculine cowboy esque characters. Due to the source of hegemonic masculinity, the solutions used for the roots of this idea will have a relatively high degree of success. Feminism will also play a large role in combating hegemonic masculinity. Since the very purpose of hegemonic masculinity is to create and perpetuate the “Subordination of women and non-heterosexuals,” (Johnson 386) women and non-heterosexuals should refuse to submit to the coercions of hegemonic masculinity. Defying the very purpose of this idea will derail any hopes of continuing and encouraging the spread of both toxic masculinity and hegemonic masculinity. While the widespread reach of hegemonic masculinity can be suffocating at times, any attempt at fighting back will continue the ongoing battle against this idea. Once again, stopping the problem at the source will also be massively beneficial to the attempts at stopping the spread of toxic masculinity in cowboy culture. This would mean not allowing children to be exposed to such ideas, or making a point to expose them to positive representations of masculinity early on. Another solution previously discussed is changing the very definition of the word cowboy to exclude any possible mention or insinuation of masculinity. While these solutions may be difficult at first, the end product will be well worth the effort. The purification of cowboy culture is about more than just cowboys, it is about erasing the harmful effects of hegemonic masculinity from society. Unfortunately, cowboy culture is a large contributor to the spread of hegemonic masculinity and toxic masculinity. Therefore it is only natural that the eradication of both of these harmful ideas begins with cowboy culture.

       Toxic masculinity and hegemonic masculinity compliment each other in the worst sense. Often, one cannot exist without the other. This is especially true when speaking of cowboy culture. They exist only to wreak havoc on those they do not benefit. They plant seeds of hatred into the malleable minds of youth, poison a community of hard working honest people, and spread quickly and quietly. These challenges are difficult to overcome on their own, but often give rise to countless other issues as well. As discussed previously, there are solutions to these problems that require collaboration to succeed. They threaten the survival of the very essence of what it means to be a cowboy. The cowboy is a complex figure that has taken on many identities, never settling for too long on a singular definition. The beginnings of the word, however, have always held true. The rapid growth of toxic and hemogenic masculinity has almost reached this. This is why the actions discussed must be taken quickly and decisively in order to stunt their growth. With cooperation and determination, they can be entirely stopped. The future of the cowboy and today’s youth depends upon the outcome of the war on toxic and hemogenic masculinity. If they are allowed to continue, years will be lost in the fight for equality. Women and non-heterosexual men will lose their battle for respect and equality, and face unbelievably hard work to gain these basic rights back. However, the battle begins with the singular person. Just one person can and will make a huge difference. The battle starts now, and the whole of society must work together to face off against toxic and homogenic masculinity. Everyone must join the fight, one by one.