Masculinities do not first exist and then come into contact with femininities; they are produced together, in the process that constitutes a gender order. We are so accustomed to thinking of  gender as the attribute of an individual, even as an unusually intimate attribute, that it requires a considerable wrench to think of gender on the vast scale of global society. The substantive questions remain: What is the shape of that structure, how tightly are its elements linked, how has it arisen historically, what is its trajectory into the future? The unevenness becomes clear when different structures of gender (Connell 1987; Walby 1990) are examined separately. These structures include: The Division of Labor, Power Relations, Emotional Relations and Symbolization. Men’s bodies are positioned in the gender order, and enter the gender process through body-reflexive practices in which bodies are both objects and agents-including sexuality, violence, and labor. At the level of collective practice, masculinities are reconstituted by the remaking of gender meanings and the reshaping of the institutional contexts of practice. Let us consider each in turn. More important, I would argue, is a process that began long before electronic media existed, the export of institutions. We must however, recall two important conclusions of the ethographic moment in masculinity research: that different forms of masculinity exist together and that hegemony is constantly subject to challenge.