Hegemonic Masculinity In Australia

The emergence of ‘Jock Culture’, where an elite, male heterosexual body is valued over

all others, has socially forced men into a narrow box that promotes manhood as strong,

independent and aggressive (Sparkes; Partington; Brown 2007). The social practices

surrounding and following this gender hierarchy, where hegemonic masculinity

dominates all other genders, can be problematic when oppressive and exclusionary codes

of behaviour emerge (Hickey 2006). The belief in ‘Jock Culture’ is just one of the many

gender related issues that exist in Australia.

In Hickey’s (2006) exploration of the role of sport and Physical Education (PE), he

discovered a shadow of ‘alienation and oppression’ (Hickey 2006, p. 17). While the

United Nations (UN)

endorses ‘PE’s capacity to contribute to the social/emotional
well-being of society’ (Hickey 2006 p. 17), Hickey (2006), on the other hand, is
concerned with how many of the practices within PE and sport can be corrupted to do the
opposite of what the UN promotes, that is, to separate and divide.

There is a culture of abuse and an uptake of many discourses associated with hyper

masculine sports (Hickey 2006). The 12 commandments of ‘Jock Culture’ introduce

oppressive and exclusionary codes of behaviour (Hickey 2006; Sparkes; Partington;

Brown 2007). Commandment 2, ‘choose your sport wisely’ (Sparkes; Partington; Brown

2007, p. 299) coincides with Hickey’s (2006) ethnographic project depicting a

conversation between boys aged 7-8 who argue over which sport is considered socially

acceptable for an Australian Male. Rugby League is seen as ‘tough and manly’ whereas

football (soccer) is ‘weak and feminine. It is evident that these boys believed in sporting

discourses, associated with hegemonic masculinity, and used it as a vehicle to exclude

and discriminate against their cohort (Hickey, 2006). Therefore, those who choose Rugby

League as a Sport will experience a sense of belonging whereas those who choose Soccer

will experience ridicule and exclusion. Ultimately, this coincides with Brown’s (1998,

2005) study of an ‘identity playground hierarchy” that includes groups of insiders

and
outsiders (Hickey 2006).

The 12th Commandment of ‘Jock Culture’, ‘gain positions of power’ (Sparkes;
Partington; Brown 2007, p.

314) encourages those who are athletic to obtain a position of

power where in turn, they establish practical power and authority (Sparkes; Partington;

Brown 2007, p. 314). Hickey (2006) investigated such issues by discovering what

moments defined men’s lives. Mark was considered to be one of the more uncoordinated

boys during his school years. He felt very excluded during PE class and experienced

serious physical abuse from ‘the footballers’. What is more disturbing is that ‘the

footballers’ were very popular among peers and teachers, particularly the PE teachers,

reinforcing the discourse where sport and PE endorses only the skilful and athletic

(Hickey, 2006). Consequently, all men involved in this study reported the existence of

insiders and outsiders where groups of sporting males had banded together to ‘administer

abuse of one form or another’ (Hickey, 2006, p. 19).

Although the attributes, which make up hyper-masculine sports, are built up around elite

levels, their influence on society has clearly impacted well beyond this context (Hickey,

2006). It is within the role of PE teachers and coaches to encourage young players to

‘develop a sense of individual responsibility for their actions’ (Hickey, 2006, p. 20)

and
to develop group cultures that are socially responsible and tolerant (Hickey, 2006).
Reference List
Journal Articles