Is James Bond still the model for masculinity?

The history and reaffirming of women as sexualised beings in the media is a tale as old as time. But is the modern Bond an exemplar of masculinity, and has masculinity progressed from the Cold War era?

As discussed in the previous blog post ‘How James Bond propaganda fought communism and reverted the gender liberation.’ Bond was a role model for British society on how masculinity should be portrayed and acted as a form of propaganda for people’s attitudes towards Cold War politics and notions surrounding gender.

However, the understanding of the history of masculinity and the sexualisation of women in the Cold War, and its movement towards equality, in which women are not subject to sexualisation has not developed significantly since the beginning of the film franchise in 1962.

The history of masculinity and femininity has been rooted in the ideal of men as the strong aggressors, and women as sexualised beings who are seen as lesser than men in society. These idealisations have not been massively reconstructed in society or how they are reflected in the media, and especially the Bond films.

This discussion is incredibly important in understanding the impact media has on reinforcement of gender attitudes rooted in the early 1960s. As Bond is a role model figure who represents masculinity as the perfect example of strong, seductive Britishness, it’s important to note that this presentation of masculinity and femininity is still rooted in the Cold War period.

Looking at Bond through the history of masculinity and femininity is significant when looking at how its ideas have changed. MacArthur states that early Bond helped to reinforce the ideals of the patriarchy, and therefore ideas about masculinity and femininity stayed stagnant in the traditional ideals of a strong, independent man and a sexualised weaker woman as seen through the Bond films.

Neuendorf and others have noted that this idea of masculinity and femininity has not evolved and Bond girls remain similar to its predecessor in the earlier period of the second half of the twenty-first century, as all Bond girls are attractive and sexualised women, despite the time period.

‘Paloma’, No Time to Die, 2024, Odeon https://www.odeon.co.uk/odeon-scene/james-bond-no-time-to-die-cast-and-characters/ [accessed 6 May 2026].

This significance has recently become evermore important with the notion of the ‘manosphere’ seen by many influential men who denote ideas of tough masculinity who sexualise women, and often have a mass following. Recent media such as the TV show Adolescence and Louis Theroux’s dive Inside the Manosphere shows the history of masculinity and femininity had not changed far from a period of mass confinement in which women were sexualised and men had to be tough and emotionless, which Gioia argues.

Bond is no exception, as Bond was used as propaganda in the latter twentieth century to reinforce traditional notions about masculinity and femininity people watched Bond and admired how he is confident, wanted by women and seems to always be the hero in control.

Since its birth as a film series in the 1960s there has definitely been a shift from the overt sexualisation of women in Bond films, as Naomie Harris as Moneypenny rejects Bond’s sexual advances it is clear there is a changing dynamic in the presentation of women and femininity in the Bond films in comparison to the twentieth century that allows women to have a bigger role than a sexualised object.

‘Moneypenny’s close shave’, Skyfall, 2012, 007 https://www.007.com/bond-and-moneypennys-close-shave/ [accessed 6 May 2026].

As there is a hunt for the new Bond, it shows how these notions of masculinity and femininity are still rooted in the the Cold War era especially when debating the new representation of Bond. As the current climate still mainly associates independence, strength and heroism with masculinity this shows the historical narrative of Bond in the early 1960s still has a play in how women and femininity is viewed and presented in society and the media on a wider scale.

An article made by Euronews announced that Jessie Buckley was to be the new James Bond, marking the first female James Bond. This post however, was an April Fools joke. A newsletter by Meg Walters discussing the EuroNews article notes how

‘Naturally, the internet was sent into total uproar. A woman?! As Bond?! It’s a longstanding debate at this point, with quite a few Bond fanboys arguing that this is simply too woke.’

This outcry towards a satire suggesting Bond as a woman shows how present day society still accepts the traditional notions of gender identity seen in the early 1960s. Although people may not want to change the tradition of Bond as a man, this also alludes to the lack of progression in societal norms and expectations of gender roles, suggesting Bond as a woman is still not something people would welcome.

This parallel shows how the progression of women’s sexualisation has moved little in over 60 years in the media, especially in the Bond franchise. Moneypenny’s over-sexualization, as seen throughout the Bond franchise in the mid and late 20th century, is still prevalent in Daniel Craig’s Bond films although to a more discreet degree. This and Naomie Harris being a coloured actor could suggest a move towards greater gender liberation, however it is evident Bond is rooted in post-War Britain patriarchal ideas of masculinity and femininity.

As right wing politicians are creeping into the limelight in campaigns to diminish the rights of women, it becomes an interesting observation to examine the origins of media that includes sexualisations of women and toxic idealisation of masculinity and see how they have progressed.

Looking at the history of Bond and the overt demonstrations of masculinity and femininity provides an insight into notions surrounding masculinity and femininity and the repression of identity in the modern era. Although Bond once stood for charm, Britishness and a gentlemanly behaviour, the franchise’s inability to truly adapt to the modern age suggests its foundations are outdated in the twenty-first century.

The persistent sexualisation of women, and the portrayal of Bond as sexually ambiguous has not developed significantly since the first film in 1962. Which shows how the representations of gender roles and masculinity and femininity have not changed significantly, creating complicated discussions surrounding the presentation and societal acceptance of masculinity and femininity in the Bond film franchise through history.

Further readings:

[embed]How James Bond Can Fix the Crisis in Masculinity Here's what I'd do if I owned the 007 franchisewww.honest-broker.com

[embed]Wait, so is Jessie Buckley the new James Bond? Reports spread that Jessie Buckley would be taking over as James Bond - but were they true?www.glamourmagazine.co.uk

[embed]The seventh 007: Identity of the new James Bond revealed The casting news we've all been waiting for has finally dropped, and the reveal of Daniel Craig's successor as 007 may…www.euronews.com

Kimberly A. Neuendorf and others, ‘Shaken and Stirred: A Content Analysis of Women’s Portrayals in James Bond Films’, Sex Roles, 62 (2010) pp. 747–761. (pp. 753–4) doi.org/10.1007/s11199–009–9644–2.