There is a popular saying: “It’s a man’s world.” We have lived and still live in a world where male domination is felt in all social circles, from the smallest social unit like the family, to social gatherings like school, church, groups among peers and even in the workplace. This is even more evident in sports, media, leadership positions, and in settings where individuals who exhibit certain characteristics and attributes are considered normal and those who do not are considered “others.” Television and cinema are not left out. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why violent video games should not be banned”?Get the original essayThe concept of hegemonic masculinity was formulated two and a half decades ago by Australian sociologist Raewyn Connell (1987). This highlighted those traits that various cultures attribute only to "real men", which not only distinguishes these "real men" from women and all other men, but also justifies that all men are generally in a position of domination over women. This phenomenon has been extensively documented by paradigm theorist Stuart Hall and is known as cultural studies (Griffin, 2011). In his work, these cultural industries include television producers, content creators, film producers, fashion, magazines and newspapers, emphasizing that media has such an important voice in our lives. “The media are watchdogs, guides, informants, messengers, participants and sometimes comrades” (Khunou, 2013, p. 191). Therefore, it is important to note that the media is an important source that orchestrates the perception of individuals. Consciously or unconsciously, cultural industries including media, particularly television and cinema, are seen as influential apparatuses of social control that ultimately incite the uprising of hegemony and masculinity; preserve the domination of the most powerful members of society. Some of the benefits they have through all these titles are the ability to teach society who deserves what and provide guides that describe our awareness of the world (Griffin, 2011). Cinema and television are important tools that build and reinforce the roles of men and women in societies. Gender representation in media is crucial because individuals learn about gender roles during the socialization process. In addition to female identity, masculinity is also a construct and fictional male characters produced in both film and television send messages about masculinity to audiences. In this article, male representation in both television and cinema is compared and the question "Whether male representation reinforces the existing patriarchal male image or produces an alternative male role model" is the area of ​​interest of the study. Hegemony, a part of cultural studies, is linked to many smaller, more specific ideologies. The one we will focus on in regards to media representation is hegemonic masculinity, a concept that entered popular perspective in the 1970s and which refers to a dominant "hegemonic media representation of masculinity." At local and regional levels, hegemonic masculinity manifests itself. in varied and constantly evolving forms, leading researchers to conceive the idea of ​​multiple hegemonic masculinities. Globally, hegemonic masculinity is arepresentation of the societal ideal regarding masculine behavior. Today's world is constantly connected to religion and, more importantly, those popular beliefs and opinions that the media wants to represent as they remain one of the most powerful tools of influence. Hegemonic masculinity is not considered normal in the statistical sense of the term. Only a minority of men could adopt it. But it is certainly normative in that it embodies the currently most honored way of being a man, it forces all other men to position themselves in relation to it, and it ideologically legitimizes the overall idea of ​​subordination of women to men. . (Connell and Messerschmidt, 2005, p.832). A common misunderstanding of hegemonic masculinity is when the concept is used to refer to boys or men who behave badly, or to refer to the "alpha male". Although in some contexts the concept refers to men's engagement in toxic practices – including physical violence – these practices are not always the defining characteristics. Cultural ideals of masculinity do not have to conform to the personalities of real men or the realities of men's everyday accomplishments. Therefore, masculinity differentiates based on certain factors such as history, class, culture, gender identity, sexual orientation, religion, race and ethnicity. , and as a result of this differentiation, various inequalities emerge. On the other hand, Connell and Messerschmidt (2005) assert that the proponent of hegemonic masculinity can not only continuously act according to the norms presented by society's culture, but also modernize gender relations and reform masculinities. According to them, since gender relations are a kind of stress field, an ascribed masculinity can remain hegemonic for a period to resolve these tensions. In reality, its function is to legitimize the social ascendancy of men over women in all aspects of life, which is evident in Nigeria and many societies around the world. Furthermore, hegemonic masculinity also emphasizes the superiority of “manly” men over “less manly” men. This social ascendancy is often represented through religious practices, the media, businesses and even through government policies and practices. Harry Brod (1987) argues that pervasive images of masculinity hold that “real men” are physically strong, aggressive, and in control of their lives. work. Therefore, if the insecurities generated by these contradictions are personally dissatisfying for men, these insecurities also cause them to cling all the more tightly to the sources of validation of masculine identity offered by the image system. “For working-class men, who have less access to more abstract forms of power validating masculinity (economic power, workplace authority, etc.), the physical body and its potential for violence provide a concrete means to achieve and affirm virility” (Brod, 1987, p.14). Just like femininity, masculinity as an identity is produced by societies according to a gender approach; we can see that there are many identities of femininities and masculinities in cyclical and cultural ways. This phenomenon is similar in Nigeria as in other countries. The scientific literature on masculinity has highlighted the negative consequences of the hegemonic reproduction of masculinity in different spaces of daily life (Connell, 1987, 2005, 2006; Kimmel, 2000; Messerschimdt, 1993; Bourdieu, 1998). . Some examples of this reproduction processare work inequality, gender violence, sexism and crime. In the field of employment, certain analyzes have been carried out several times. From a sociological perspective, Kimmel (1996, 2000) argues that masculinity is fully influenced by the capitalist production process. Market economies place men in the primary role in the public sphere, confining women to the private sphere. At the organizational level, success and masculinity possess many of the same traits and similar linguistic cues (strength, endurance, dog-eat-dog, man). -up, etc.). Some women who rose to positions of power in organizations suggested that adopting "masculine traits" was one of the ways they could succeed and compete in a male-dominated environment. By conforming to the idea that masculinity is a marker of success in business, we run the risk of perpetuating a culture of exclusion. There are some interesting movements that are fighting these traditional norms. For too long, the loudest "alphas" have been appointed to lead teams, relegating the quieter skilled professionals to the background, and it has become clear that this aggressive leadership style can hinder both inclusion and productivity. Cinema and television are the two most powerful mass media that reflect social values. Films have a plot that has the power to reflect and influence the social value system. Storytelling provides identification. In addition to cinema, television illustrates the power of mass communication to inform, educate and influence the public. While industry professionals often deny this power, claiming that television is just entertainment, it is clear that adults and children learn a lot from watching television week after week. Some critics claim that television teaches negative values ​​such as stereotypes, consumerism and a superficial and trivial approach to life. The American film industry is one of the main sources of construction of hegemonic masculinity, which fuels global culture with an endless stream of violent male icons. Tens of millions of people, mostly young men, flock to cinemas around the world or rent videos of what Katz (2011, pp. 261-262) calls the "action-adventure" films of male icons such as Arnold Schwarzenegger, Sylvester Stallone, John Paul II. Claude Van Damme, Bruce Willis, Christian Bale and Matt Damon. Local or regional equivalents of Hollywood-created male icons now dominate local and regional film and television industries in other parts of the world – from India's Bollywood to our own Nollywood. Added to this inventory of images is the music video industry and the widespread practice in advertising aimed at emphasizing gender difference, implicitly and even explicitly reaffirming the “natural” dissimilarities between men and women. And then there are the inevitable military and sporting symbolisms that proliferate in all forms of media, including video games, all reinforcing the association between muscularity and “ideal masculinity.” Gray and Ginsberg (2007, p. 19) assert that: The rise of women has created a crisis of masculinity around the world. Particularly in cultures where the traditional role of men as breadwinner and protector has declined and machines have replaced muscle, the pursuit of muscularity has become one of the few ways men have to show their masculinity. Worldwide, advertisements. 2006).