Hegemonic Masculinity: Rethinking the Concept - Study Notes

HEGEMONIC MASCULINITY: Rethinking the Concept

Authors and Context

  • Authors: R. W. Connell (University of Sydney) & James W. Messerschmidt (University of Southern Maine)

  • Date of Publication: December 2005

  • Journal: Gender & Society

  • DOI: 10.1177/0891243205278639

Introduction to Hegemonic Masculinity

  • Influence on Gender Studies: The concept has significantly influenced various fields by providing insight into masculinity, gender relations, and social hierarchy.

  • Criticism: Offers a defense of its usefulness against critiques.

  • Research Importance: The concept was essential for the rise of men’s studies and critiques of traditional gender roles.

Conceptual Origins

  • Initial Proposals: Originated from studies in Australian high schools (Kessler et al. 1982), related discussions on masculinities (Connell 1983), and debates in labor politics (Connell 1982).

  • Early formulations developed through:

    • Field studies documenting multiple gender hierarchies.

    • A critique of male sex role literature leading to a theory of multiple masculinities (Carrigan, Connell, and Lee 1985).

Development of Hegemonic Masculinity

  • Articulation from Feminist Theories: Integrated concepts from feminist theories tackling patriarchy and discussions on the role of men (e.g., Goode 1982; Snodgrass 1977).

  • Gramscian Hegemony: Grounded in the notion of cultural control and the dynamics of social structures (Connell 1977).

  • Social psychology interventions: Early literature recognized the social implications attached to masculinity and the possibility for change (Pleck 1981).

Formulation of Hegemonic Masculinity

  • Definition: A pattern of practice that enacts men's dominance over women while acknowledging associated subordinated masculinities.

  • Normativity vs. Normalcy: Hegemonic masculinity isn't a statistical norm but rather a dominant cultural narrative that shapes expectations and validates a hierarchy.

  • Mechanisms of Hegemony: As an ideological construct, it perpetuates gender inequalities via cultural means rather than violence.

Applications of the Concept

  • Fields Practiced:

    • Education: Dynamics in classroom settings and resistance patterns (Martino 1995).

    • Criminology: Connection between masculinity and crime, analyzing behaviors associated with hegemonic masculinity (Messerschmidt 1993).

    • Media Studies: Examined representations of masculinity in sports and narratives (Jansen and Sabo 1994).

    • Health: Explored through men’s health practices and socio-psychological impacts (Sabo and Gordon 1995).

Critiques of Hegemonic Masculinity

  • Foundational Criticism:

    • Definitional Ambiguity: Questions on meaning and power dynamics regress the utility of the concept (Collinson and Hearn 1994). Criticism of multiple masculinities as leading to static typologies.

    • Over-structural Representation: Critics argue for clearer distinctions in how gender constructs influence power relations and dynamics, pushing for recognition of internal hegemony (Demetriou 2001).

    • Essentialist Criticism: Framing of masculinity as an essence, ignoring the complexities and variations that exist within men (Petersen 1998).

Reformulation Suggestions

  • Complexity of Gender Hierarchy: Better understanding of relations helping explain social constructions of masculinities at local levels, recognizing the importance of agency (Poynting et al. 2003).

  • Geography of Masculinities: Understanding local, regional, and global factors in masculinity construction and their interplay.

  • Social Embodiment: More deeply address how embodiment relates to practices of hegemonic masculinity, particularly in contexts involving transgender individuals.

  • Internal Dynamics and Change:Embrace masculinity as adaptable, acknowledging internal conflicts and the potential for change within gender norms..