Hegemony In The Prison Notebooks: Case Study

In The Prison Notebooks (1971) Gramsci does not associate hegemony with the governance of a solitary individual or any structuralist energy phenomena, such as a discourse, collective conscience, deep structure or culture. Instead, hegemony from a Gramscian perspective signifies a variety of different organizations of people and agents in state formations, such as a structure, a practice, an apparatus, a unity of opposing structures or a function of leadership (Gramsci, 1971). Hegemony is always considered to be a process (Gramsci, 1971). In other contexts, hegemony may refer to a level or moment, which is equal to an evolutionary stage of leadership. Hegemony also may refer to a social grouping related to a particular social, political, cultural,

140). Hegemonic masculinity alludes to the stratification and interpretations of masculinity and, progressive systems of force, power, and acknowledgement among men, and amongst men and women (Connell, 1993). “International research has strongly confirmed the initial insight that gender orders construct multiple masculinities” (Connell, & Messerschmidt, 2005, p. 835). At any point in time, one type of masculinity can be socially elevated and more prominent in social settings (Connell, 1993). Hegemonic masculinity is the arrangement of gender stereotypes that encapsulates the current acknowledged response to the issue of the authenticity of patriarchy—which ensures the predominant position of men and the subordination of women (Connell, 1997). Furthermore, a considerable body of research shows that masculinities are not simply different but also subject to change” (Connell, & Messerschmidt, 2005, p. 835). “Hegemonic gender norms set expectations about what is “appropriate” for men and women” (Friedman, 2015, p. 147). For example, in our neoliberal capitalist culture men and women are bombarded with marketing that supports hegemonic masculinity and defines what being a man or woman should look like. “Hegemonic masculinity was understood as the pattern of practice (i.e., things done, not just a set of role expectations or an identity) that

An ability with regards to viciousness, or the capacity to support violence, is a vital element of hegemonic masculinity in contemporary Capitalist Western culture. At the point when conditions for the resistance of patriarchy change, the basis for the strength of a specific masculinity are dissolved. New associations might contest old explanations and thusly develop a new concept of hegemony. The predominance of any gathering of men might be tested or challenged by women. Hegemony, then, is a truly versatile connection. “These hegemonic gender norms influence men’s expectations and experiences with work and family roles” (Friedman, 2015, p. 147) In the workplace, hegemonic masculinity may lead to violence, and or