David M. Matthews seeks to redefine masculinity as something that is not just about strength or aggression but also vulnerability and emotionality - traits which are often viewed as feminine or weak within society . He argues that men should feel free express themselves authentically without fear judgement from others , encouraging them strive for unity rather than division when comes interacting with each other . In contrast , Jackson Katz takes more direct approach tackling issue of gender inequality . His talk focuses on breaking down language used describe women & how this contributes overall problem . He points out discrepancies between words used male-dominated situations (e.g., “chairperson” vs “chairman”) shows audience how language can shape our understanding world we live in while also perpetuating cycles oppression/discrimination against certain groups people - he encourages men think more critically when speaking about issues related gender equality order create fairer society all. These talks have challenged my own ideology of masculinity by helping me realize that there is no one-size-fits-all definition for what it means to be a man - instead there much room exploration flexibility here which opens up possibilities living life differently than traditionally prescribed . Additionally , I now understand importance being conscious word choices using respectful terminology when discussing topics related gender equality so not further perpetuate oppressive systems already place

Sample Solution

The two TedTalks analyzed in this essay, "Breaking the Rules of Masculinity" by David M. Matthews and “How Not to Talk To Men About Gender Equality” by Jackson Katz, both express a desire to challenge traditional ideas of masculinity and what it means to be a man. However, they do so in different ways.