Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The feature of hegemonic masculinity
The feature of hegemonic masculinity
How does masculinity get constructed in society
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The feature of hegemonic masculinity
Hegemonic masculinity practices are not only dominate towards women - domination practices also involve ‘other’ masculinities. Hegemonic masculinity is thus “the hegemony over women and hegemony over subordinate masculinities”, according to Demetriou (2009,341).
Not all men and their practices, fall within the hegemonic masculine “category”. Connell and Messerschmidt (2005:846) observe that there are hierarchy within masculinity and describe this as a pattern of hegemony. Within this hierarchy, certain masculinities are socially more central and more associated with authority and power compared to others. They expand by stating that non-hegemonic masculinities, within the masculinities sphere – are subordinate to their hegemonic brothers. They describe this subordination as complex with factors such as cultural consent, discursive centrality and marginalization playing a part in the process of domination and the creation of non-hegemonic masculinities.
Demetriou (2001, 341-343) label non-hegemonic masculinities as internal hegemony (or masculine hegemony over other masculinities). Three forms of internal hegemony are identified: subordinate masculinity, marginalized masculinity and complicit masculinity.
Subordinate masculinities, according Demetriou and in concurrence with Wedgwood (2008:335), specify that certain groups of men have less status and privilege than the ‘dominant’ hegemonic group. He uses the example of gay versus heterosexual men - with gay men receiving the short end of the stick in relations to material practices and is discriminated against in a political-, economic-, cultural- and legal sphere.
Marginalized masculinities refer to the domination of men (by men) based on their social class and/or et...
... middle of paper ...
... were still engaging in violent criminal practices. Many were violently abused by their fathers. Violence was historically and presently deeply embedded in the lives of the men. (Walker, 2005).
Walker (2005, 232) observed that many of the respondents were struggling with conflicting masculinities; on the one hand they felt guilty for beating their girlfriends, while on the other hand they identified with a gender order that did not denounce gender violence. In some instances defiant sexual behavior such as a right to sex regardless of the woman ‘not wanting it’ did translate into feelings of remorse, while others perceived violence towards women as the norm. The respondents were thus in constant turmoil; they do not feel comfortable within traditional masculinity but are having difficulty relating to ‘prescribed’ (as per the ‘new’ liberation) modern sexualities.
Therefore, this definitely adheres to the idea of masculinity being based on dominance, self-assuredness, as well as autonomy. Deborah Tannen’s theory of difference states
The concept of masculinity is considered as the qualities and characteristics of a man, typical what is appropriate to a man. In this article, A Community Psychology of Men and Masculinity: Historical and Conceptual Review, The author Eric S. Mankowski and Kenneth I. Maton, analyze four main themes: "Men as gendered beings, the privilege and damage of being a masculine man, men as a privileged group, and men’s power and subjective powerlessness. The second and fourth themes are described as
Realistically, when someone is more powerful, they have the ability to set the rules. Men have historically held power in society, which means that women did not have as much stance or freedoms as men have had in the past. For example, Canadian women did not have the right to vote until the year 1916. This factor has continued to trail into the present day, creating the ‘weak’ image towards women, overall forcing and pushing men to become the opposite of this factor. Thus, cultural ideals of masculinity rely on the ideas of femininity through patriarchy and gender binaries. The emphasis on characteristics of men are being exaggerated, as society is pressuring men with unattainable standards of masculinity such as being tough, muscular and buff. Men continue to conform to these characteristics, in the fear of being oppressed through exclusion, which only strengthens society’s standards even more. This leads to more societal pressures on men, thus leading men to experience more societal pressures in the fear of feeling excluded. These “systems of inclusion and exclusion are divisions or barriers that prevent people from joining and belonging.” (50). For example, if a man wears nail polish, they may be oppressed and excluded through facing ridicule and bullying, because wearing nail polish is considered “girly”, therefore this boy is rebelling against society’s socially
In the reading, Playing in the Gender Transgression Zone, McGuffey & Rich argue that the ways youth build their “hierarchy” in school, camps, etc. can explain the way ‘gendering’ in society’ happens and why. It discusses how boys are seen as the high status members of society. This is a result of the ideology of hegemonic masculinity. This says that there is a predominant way of doing gender relations that elevates the status and privileges of masculinity over femininity. This establishes a socially constructed level of male social power and explains why male dominance continues on past the middle school ages. Men still have high status in higher level of social organization, especially political/ governmental institutions.
Aaron Devor’s essay “Becoming Members of Society: Learning the Social Meanings of Gender” describes how despite popular belief, gender and sex are not directly related and how social norms affect individual’s choice of gender. Devor‘s main argument is that gender is not determined by genitalia, but instead by the individual's own choices. Michael Kimmel’s essay “Masculinity as Homophobia” claims that gender equality is a positive thing for males and that social norms force men to act a certain way. Kimmel’s main argument is that men are always having to protect their masculinity in order to prevent themselves from appearing weak. Both authors present compelling arguments for both gender equality and for how social norms influence individuals’ gender choice. However, the two authors approach the same topic in different ways. Kimmel takes a more laid-back approach to the topic by using simple words and a conversational tone that relates to the casual gender sociologist. Devor writes a more sophisticated essay using complex terms and a more formal tone that relates to the serious sociologist that research gender studies.
Jensen provides evidence throughout the text for three assumptions on why masculinity must be terminated from pertaining to just males. It is proposed that masculinity is harmful for both men and women, that men are surrendering their humanity by conforming with masculinity, and
Manhood had not always existed; it was created through culture. Depending on the era, masculinity claimed a different meaning. But in all of its wandering definitions, it consistently contains opposition to a set of “others,” meaning racial and sexual minorities. (pp.45) One of the first definitions was the Marketplace Man, where capitalism revolved around his success in power, wealth, and status. A man devoted himself to his work and family came second. Although this is one of the first standing definitions, it still finds its spot in today’s definition, where masculinity consists of having a high paying job, an attractive young wife, and
She taught at universities both in Australia and the United States. Connell highly disagreed that the ideas about what established masculinity are ethically definite. In other words, masculinity is important to whom is referred to. For example, “if women are seen as weak, passive and emotional, then men are supposed to be strong, aggressive, and rational” (Seidman, 221). Additionally, masculinity is based on how people interact with each other in which correlates with their race, class, and sexuality. With this said, Connell said, “to recognize diversity in masculinity: relations of alliance, dominance and subordination… This is a gender politics within masculinity” (Seidman, 223). To point out Connell’s theorizing masculinity, she believes that diversity defines masculinity has its own relationships with authorities. In our text, Seidman gave a brief example of how the roles carry out to the social authority such as President, Senator, CEO, General, media executive, or surgeon. It is stated that while there are many senators, executives, or CEOs who are women, it is definite identify as masculinity because people think those high authorities is only for a male role. In our text, Connell has mentioned that “every society has a dominant or a “hegemonic” type of masculinity” (223). This means that she believes men has the power or control type of their masculinity in the
Masculinity was made hegemonic, by defining power in terms of force and control. This is because men are naturally created with body physique, which is characterized by a higher controlling force than women are. Therefore, using force and control to define power naturalized male superiority. The male body was used to represent power, which was masculinized as force, physical strength, control, speed, toughness, and d...
his Essay will analyse, introduce, and discuss the terms Hegemonic Masculinity and Emphasized femininity, if it still applies in modern times and the use of these concepts to comprehend the role of the man and female in Eastern Asia, in relation to post-war Japan. In order to present a clear and linear argument I will divide this essay into three parts: In the first part I will define the term hegemonic masculinity, the common traits and the influence that it has in society; the essay will continue then in explaining and outlining the term emphasized femininity. The second part will analyse the impact of the notions of hegemonic masculinity and emphasized femininity in relation to post war Japan has. The last part will briefly identify some
‘Women and men are different. Equal treatment of men and women does not result in equal outcomes.’ (Corsten Report, 16: 2007) According to Covington and Bloom (2003) numerous feminist writers have demonstrated and documented the patriarchal nature of our society and the variety of ways in which the patriarchal values serve masculine needs. ‘Despite claims to the contrary, masculinist epistemologies are built upon values that promote masculine needs and desires, making all others invisible’ (Kaschak, 11: 1992).
In the views of Micheal Kimmel “hegemonic masculinity” is a socially constructed process where men are pressured by social norms of masculine ideals to perform behaviors of a “true man” and its influence on young male’s growth. It is the ideology that being a man with power and expressing control over women is a dominant factor of being a biological male. The structure of masculinity was developed within the 18th to 19th century, as men who owned property and provided for his family with strength related work environments was the perfect example of being a generic “American man.” Kimmel introduces Marketplace Manhood and its relation to American men. He states, “Marketplace Masculinity describes the normative definition of American masculinity.
Masculinity is a subject that has been debated in our society for quite some time. Many wonder what it means to be masculine, as it is difficult to define this one –sided term. Pairing this already controversial term with “feminist studies” can bring about some thought - provoking conversation. Feminist studies of men have been around for many years with regards to the feminist movement. It seeks to create gradual improvements to society through its main principle of modifying the ways in which everyone views what it means to be a man. Feminist studies of men bring forth the discussion of hegemonic masculinity; how this contributes to the gender hierarchy, the radicalized glass escalator and ultimately the faults of this theory.
The "Femininity/Masculinity" Encyclopedia of Sociology. New York: Macmillan, n.d. 1-21. Web.
The concept of hegemonic masculinity, as described by R. W. Connell, is becoming more applicable than ever, namely in the world of sport. This notion was developed nearly twenty-five years ago, yet remains highly influential in the social construction of gender roles. In current Western societies, there is an automatic assumption that women involved in sports are all lesbians, and men posses more masculine traits than one who is not involved in sports. This double standard emphasizes the inequalities within the athletic community. The emphasis on masculinity brings forth different consequences for men and women, where men are regarded as strong and powerful, while women are intrinsically seen as more masculine (Baks & Malecek,