girls can have dirty minds too.

What do these images communicate about gendered identities? First of all these images are as cryptic as some post-secret, indie-rock cover art, and could be taken in a large number of ways. If I didn't look up Barbara Kruger, I wouldn't have known that she has feminist angles and therefore wouldn't really know how to analyze these images. Figure 10.1 is debating the moments of joy that, I'm assuming given the context of the question, men experience. I'm going to take another stab in the dark and assume that Ms. Kruger is among those less than happy with the political state of things. Saying that men's joyous moments have the precision of military strategy is perhaps implying that these moments are not precise at all, and perhaps moreso bumbling and testosterone driven. Is she criticizing what men enjoy? I really don't think so. Perhaps she is criticizing the idea that moments of joy can be calculated or pre-meditated. I know I've had boyfriends who strategically plan out dates to maximize romance and joy, and who knows, those calculations may have just been to ensure the "joy" of the boyfriend at the end of the night. I could never declare that this is what Kruger is trying to say, its just the only juice I can squeeze from my mind-grapes on the image. The next image, Figure 10.2 could perhaps be saying that all of the manias prevalent in males (and oh, there are many) are no longer just attributed to masculinity, thank god. There is science to decipher the behavior of all of us, and in saying that "your manias become science" could be indicating that less than proper behavior in males should not go written off as simply an attribute of being manly, but looked more deeply into in a scientific way. By scientific I am deliberately including social science, by the way. Instead of just looking at them as manias, we should try to figure out the biological and sociological reasoning behind masculinity. The third image, Figure 10.3 is a complicated one indeed. Before I give an intelligent response to the image, I have to admit that male masturbation comes to mind when viewing this image, and perhaps the history she talks about is the potential progeny in your tissue. Gross, sorry about that. From a less 14-year-old boy point of view, this image could be discussing the male feeling of obligatory success. You had better be doing something important, because as a man you're bringing home the bacon and making history while you're doing it. You are the ones who will be remembered in history books and on statues. What is the business she is talking about? Doing business implies getting something accomplished, and business definitely carries with it a connotation of a male-o-cratic businessman mentality. Perhaps Kruger is using sarcasm in this image, maybe she is poking fun at the sense of importance people feel when accomplishing menial tasks that are inflated in importance because of the capitalistic constructs under which we live.
I think for the first image, we could possibly say that Kruger is specifically targeting males, but the other two seem androgynous enough to be commenting on the norms that cluster around the sign of masculinity. We should be steadfast in remembering, however, that a great deal of social constructs are based on the male point of view. Women are definitely making waves, but as of now in mainstream society, the voices and opinions that are actually heard are often limited to deodorant commercials and diet plans. The difference between the two choices given in this question is that males do not necessarily reflect the social norms of masculinity, and vice versa. Also, there are masculine ideologies that constantly effect women, and therefore in targeting only males Kruger would be doing an injustice to all those without a penis that are equally blinded by these imposing ideologies.