Interesting thread on militaristic constructions of male gender and how Captain America is designed around them https://twitter.com/KivanBay/status/1198467627426828289

disclaimer that superheroes don't matter and you're incredibly uncool if you even hear about them let alone think about them

that said, I enjoyed the thread because it starts to frame Marvel's (male) superheroes as expressions of male gender with Cap at the 0, 0 center

If you were to follow that line with the other Avengers you'd have a rough map of the various masculinities endorsed by Marvel and probably a decent idea of why that one cis guy in your film class wears Hulk merch all over, or why your trans masc friend is obsessed with Iron Man

More than emblems of a moral framework (since all superheroes share the same morality of bad=different, therefore punch bad) superheroes are badges of which variety of masculinity a fan subscribes to.
I know because of all the times I was called faggy for liking Spider-Man

Keeping to the simplified Brannon outline that Kivan uses (because the actual Brannon scale is 110 items and haha fuck that) each Avenger conforms or diverges from the rock solid foundation of Captain America, and each character gets an excuse for their divergent masculinity

For antifemininity (femininininity?)—which is probably a complex bar but Kivan characterizes as not wanting to wear tights
Iron Man diverges due his diagnosed Shrapnel Heart which necessitates hyperfocus on what he wears
Thor diverges due to his status as a prince
Hulk conforms

I'll throw in Vision because there was a period in which tumblr fans were really saying, out loud and in public, that Vision represented a new and improved, non-toxic masculinity—hilarious—and he does not conform as a way to honor his creators

At stoicism and independence, there's less consistency
Iron Man sort of conforms, in the sense that most of his emotions are displayed in an ironic fashion, and he definitely does not want anyone's help ever—in his mainline series. As an Avenger, he's all about getting everyone

his ironic display of emotion is underlined by that "proof Tony Stark has a heart" knickknack, which again points to his tragic Shrapnel Heart as cause for divergence
Thor diverges and he's infantilized for it as a character not yet ready to be king
Hulk diverges due to Trauma

note Hulk also never wants help and pushes people away. But then note on THAT note he hasn't had a solo movie this decade
Vision conforms in stoicism, but diverges from independence and is both infantilized and arguably feminized for it, due to being a robot with shiny rock brain

In adventurousness/aggression, Iron Man diverges, but the plot comes to him. He only throws himself into danger at the pre-climactic moment when he realizes he's Just Crazy Enough to Win.
Also note the plot coming to him is the reason he's got Shrapnel Heart. Pressure feminizes.

Thor conforms, and only diverges once he matures enough to be king, at which point the plot—Thanos—comes to him. Which is an interesting construction; probably accidental.
Hulk aggressively diverges. Hulk would like to unsubscribe from his plot, from Avengers plot, and all plot.

Of course, once the plot finds him, Hulk is the very definition of aggression. Again, this is characterized as Trauma.
Vision diverges, again due to being a newborn baby robot whose soul is basically the most precious conflict diamond in the universe. Vision RSVPs to the plot.

For status/achievement, Iron Man is again interesting because he doesn't strive for either but was born with them, brags about them endlessly, and spends a whole movie defending them and another movie avenging the source of his status
I'm gonna call that divergence

Thor diverges because he so badly wants to stay a prince and never be king, and again is infantilized for it.
Hulk is interesting here because he's supposed to be this genius physicist guy but he's only ever known for being a human bomb, yet we never see him doing genius physics

At least not until Endgame, when he's in human bomb mode forever and all analysis of him fails because what the fuck was Professor Hulk, anyway?
(hands you a taco)
Vision, oddly enough, conforms here but only inasmuch as he will do anything asked of him, and he's modest about it

Back to Thor for a second: as soon as he does mature and does accept the status/achievement of being a king, he gets fat and loses all of his masculinity
(and, not that I condone thinking about superheroes or tweeting about them, but Kivan has written extensively about Fat Thor)

So to recap:
Iron Man diverges on all counts—a little fuzzy on stoicism/independence—due to Shrapnel Heart. His masculinity constructed out of irony and self-defense, a sort of hard shell around a wobbly center, hence his status as patron hero of transmascs.

Thor diverges on all counts except adventurousness/agression due to his immaturity and fear of responsibility. His masculinity is of a child playing with a stick, and you might assume anyone whose masculinity imprinted on Thor to be the Peter Pan type who think pranks are funny.

Hulk diverges on all but antifemininity and aggression due to a vague Trauma that can just be understood as being a dude. His masculinity is a fantasy in which the pressures of masculinity build up to an explosion of aggression, and I'd posit him as patron hero of incels

Vision diverges on all but stoicism and status due to being a coin operated twink made of diamonds. His masculinity is the kind sold in Hallmark movies and the the back of the box for a really expensive vibrator. He's the patron hero of boring drag kings played by straight girls

This thread was brought to you by my procrastinating on cleaning my mom's bathroom.
Also I skipped Spidey because if I analyze Spider-Man's masculinity I will do it for each film version of him sorryyy