The play seemingly complicates the first scene’s public masculinity through Benvolio’s challenge towards the violence, but his failure to resist demonstrates how alternative masculine identities fail. Once the initial fight concludes and Benvolio and Tybalt join the fray, Benvolio encourages the men to “[p]ut up [their] swords” (1.1.70). Here, Benvolio attempts to stop the violence, which complicates the notion that all men must publicly perform violent behavior. By publicly taking this stance, Benvolio positions himself against societal norms and expectations, which places him at risk for society to view him as less masculine. The Courtier notes how deviations and failures to achieve traditional notions of masculinity result in society viewing …show more content…
Although Benvolio questions these notions, his failure to not fight suggests the failing notion of any challenge towards the dominant masculinity. For example, Tybalt acknowledges Benvolio’s hypocrisy of “[talking] of peace” (1.1.72) while simultaneously having his weapon “drawn” (1.1.72). Here, Tybalt delegitimizes Benvolio’s defiance against violent masculinity, by stating how he perpetuates this behavior despite vocally opposing it. Does Benvolio’s claim against the violence work if his sword is out? The text suggests that his attempt to advocate against public violence falters when he contributes to the same violence. The text punctuates this idea when the two characters join the fight with the previous characters. Here, the play displays Benvolio’s failure to indicate how the public demonstration of violence is part of the dominant masculinity. For instance, the fact that he partakes in it rather than opting out indicates the pressure men face in public spaces to perform …show more content…
For example, Benvolio and Mercutio criticize Romeo’s lovesickness by stating that the woman who hurt him is a “pale hardhearted wench...[who] [t]orments him so that he will sure run mad” (2.4.4-5). Here, Mercutio demeans women by describing the woman with misogynistic terms of corruption. Through this comparison, he lowers the woman’s place in society by attributing negative and destructive qualities to her, which displays his own power to do so. By demeaning her publicly, it causes more ruin to come to her because of the public audience that witnesses his criticism. Therefore, the public space allows Mercutio to express his power in the masculine structure by criticizing the woman. To better understand misogyny’s connection to gender expression and violence, Dympna Callaghan argues that “[m]isogyny is both a dramatic agent of violence and a vital instrument of gender differentiation” (123-124). By applying this concept to the text, Mercutio’s verbal attack towards the woman allows him to differentiate himself from women by expressing the masculine behavior of misogyny. Therefore, it would be difficult for Mercutio to perform his masculinity in this scene without verbally attacking a woman, which this scene demonstrates is a key avenue for Mercutio to express. The text suggests that this behavior is