I really appreciated this article because I felt that Jackson Katz was able to make some difficult ideas and theories understandable and accessible within his article, "Advertising and the Construction of Violent White Masculinity." As he was discussing this establishment of the white, heterosexual, middle-class male as violent, I was struck by his identification of the rise and eventual prominence of these 'cultural heroes' as a result of the, "increasing economic instability and discoloration, the perception of gains by people of color at the expense of the White working class, and a women's movement that overtly challenged male hegemony" (pg. 351, paragraph 1). He identified this cause of violence as predictable because it displayed masculinity, coded through violence, as a power play over these groups that were threatening the economic status of these individuals. It makes sense to me that when one begins to lack dominance in a certain area, they seek to acquire it in another. Do you feel that men who are less economically stable are inclined to assert their masculinity through violence in this manner?