R. W. Connells Masculinities Reply

8/8/2019 R. W. Connells Masculinities Reply

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/r-w-connells-masculinities-reply 1/5

R. W. Connell's "Masculinities": ReplyAuthor(s): R. W. ConnellSource: Gender and Society, Vol. 12, No. 4 (Aug., 1998), pp. 474-477Published by: Sage Publications, Inc.Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/190181

Accessed: 08/09/2010 11:46

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless

you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you

may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=sage.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed

page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Sage Publications, Inc. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Gender and

Society.

http://www.jstor.org

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=sage

http://www.jstor.org/stable/190181?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp



http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

http://www.jstor.org/stable/190181?origin=JSTOR-pdf




474 GENDER & SOCIETY / August 199874 GENDER & SOCIETY / August 1998

ninity is a continuousgenderproject n the lives of girls andwomen;they must

(and do) engage it, whethersociologists study it or not. I hope Masculinitiesstimulatesnewscholarship nfemininities. want o know moreabouthowwomen

practice,andresist, varied femininities and with what effects to themselves and

others(see Pringle1988). Connellsuggeststhat women can "domasculinities."

want to understand hatdynamicand how men"do femininities"as well.

Masculinitiesare culturalvalues in addition o practices.Leading,being com-

petent,beingstrong,andstandingupfor one's beliefs are valorized n society; theyare also normativelyassociatedwithmen andmasculinity/ies.Except perhapsas

mothers,women arenormatively,and often empirically,discouraged rom these

practices.A girl knows that these standards reculturallyadmiredyet she knowsalso,orlearns, hatwhen sheachievesthem,shemaybe criticized.Althoughmanymasculinitiesarepositivefor bothgenders,many emininitieshavea mixed valence

for women and arelargely negativefor men(see Connell1987).So what about my question?The answer is: He can! If masculinities and

femininitiesare practices, everyonecan do both (limitedby a few bodily con-

straints).Connelladmires hemasculinitypracticeof "sacrifice n behalfof others"

(p. 233), arguing or its preservation.Thispracticemaybe idealmasculinitybutit

is also normative emininity,a kind that is frequentlyburdensome o women and

girls. Yet,practicesike this one, which are

culturallyavailableto both

genders,may offer a place from which to begin creatingConnell's favored "complex

equality" hatsavorsoptions,toleratesvariability, ndavoids extensive differentia-

tionbasedon gender.

REFERENCES

Connell,R. W. 1987. Genderandpower.PaloAlto, CA: StanfordUniversityPress.

. 1995.Masculinities.Berkeley:Universityof CaliforniaPress.

Ferguson,Kathy.1984.The eministcase against bureaucracy.Philadelphia:TempleUniversityPress.Kondo, Dorrine. 1990. Craftingselves: Power, gender,and discourses of identity in a Japanese

workplace.Chicago:Universityof ChicagoPress.

MacKinnon,Catherine.1987.Feminismunmodified.Cambridge,MA: HarvardUniversityPress.

Pringle,Rosemary.1988.Secretaries alk:Sexuality,power,and work.Sydney:Allen and Unwin.

Schrank,R. 1994. Two women, threemen on a raft.In Differencesthatwork,edited by M. Gentile.

Boston:HarvardBusiness School.

PATRICIA ANCEYMARTINFlorida State University

Reply

The firststirringsof Men'sLiberation n theearly 1970s launcheda debateabout

problemswithin the"malerole,"as well as men'splaceinpatriarchy. oryearsthe

ninity is a continuousgenderproject n the lives of girls andwomen;they must

(and do) engage it, whethersociologists study it or not. I hope Masculinitiesstimulatesnewscholarship nfemininities. want o know moreabouthowwomen

practice,andresist, varied femininities and with what effects to themselves and

others(see Pringle1988). Connellsuggeststhat women can "domasculinities."

want to understand hatdynamicand how men"do femininities"as well.

Masculinitiesare culturalvalues in addition o practices.Leading,being com-

petent,beingstrong,andstandingupfor one's beliefs are valorized n society; theyare also normativelyassociatedwithmen andmasculinity/ies.Except perhapsas

mothers,women arenormatively,and often empirically,discouraged rom these

practices.A girl knows that these standards reculturallyadmiredyet she knowsalso,orlearns, hatwhen sheachievesthem,shemaybe criticized.Althoughmanymasculinitiesarepositivefor bothgenders,many emininitieshavea mixed valence

for women and arelargely negativefor men(see Connell1987).So what about my question?The answer is: He can! If masculinities and

femininitiesare practices, everyonecan do both (limitedby a few bodily con-

straints).Connelladmires hemasculinitypracticeof "sacrifice n behalfof others"

(p. 233), arguing or its preservation.Thispracticemaybe idealmasculinitybutit

is also normative emininity,a kind that is frequentlyburdensome o women and

girls. Yet,practicesike this one, which are

culturallyavailableto both

genders,may offer a place from which to begin creatingConnell's favored "complex

equality" hatsavorsoptions,toleratesvariability, ndavoids extensive differentia-

tionbasedon gender.

REFERENCES

Connell,R. W. 1987. Genderandpower.PaloAlto, CA: StanfordUniversityPress.

. 1995.Masculinities.Berkeley:Universityof CaliforniaPress.

Ferguson,Kathy.1984.The eministcase against bureaucracy.Philadelphia:TempleUniversityPress.Kondo, Dorrine. 1990. Craftingselves: Power, gender,and discourses of identity in a Japanese

workplace.Chicago:Universityof ChicagoPress.

MacKinnon,Catherine.1987.Feminismunmodified.Cambridge,MA: HarvardUniversityPress.

Pringle,Rosemary.1988.Secretaries alk:Sexuality,power,and work.Sydney:Allen and Unwin.

Schrank,R. 1994. Two women, threemen on a raft.In Differencesthatwork,edited by M. Gentile.

Boston:HarvardBusiness School.

PATRICIA ANCEYMARTINFlorida State University

Reply

The firststirringsof Men'sLiberation n theearly 1970s launcheda debateabout

problemswithin the"malerole,"as well as men'splaceinpatriarchy. oryearsthe



COMMENT AND LETTERS 475

debateremained actshort, f notfactfree,a situation n which fantastic alesabout

masculinitycouldbe thoughta revelation.By the early 1990s, a certain volume of researchon men and gender had

accumulated-Gender &Society playingan honorablerole in theprocess.One of

the main purposesof Masculinitieswas to document and evaluate this research

(much of which was not well known), place it in historical context, offer a

theoretical ramework or understandingt, andassayits intellectualandpolitical

consequences. PatriciaYancey Martin and Judith Lorber are generous in their

appraisalof this effort,andI ampleasedthat suchjudges shouldthink it useful. I

welcome their criticismstoo, which arefairlystatedandimportant.nthe spiritof

testing arguments o improvethem,here are briefresponsesto some mainpoints(space preventsme fromresponding o others).

My rathercomplicateddefinition of masculinityarose from a strongsense of

the multileveled and multidimensional haracterof gender,and from a research

literature hat dentifiedmasculinities n such different hingsas a neuroticperson-

ality,a subculturalpeer group,a formalorganization, nda mass mediaimage.No

single-level notion of "core"or "true"masculinitywill do.

Have I stretched he term too far?Martinquerieswhethermasculinitycan be a

"place"or an "effect."Her exampleis to the point.When a man dresses "like a

woman,"he is preciselyoccupyinga feminineplaceinthatsegmentof the structureof genderrelationsthat defines semiotic oppositionsin dress. The metaphorof

"place"s partof theconceptionof genderasstructure.But thestructures complex.The man in drag need not be occupying a feminine place in otherpartsof the

structure, uch as the division of labor-a pointof importance, n understandingthe different orms of genderambiguityandtransgression.

Socialpractices ncludingdress and laborhavebodilyeffects,and a good many

(frompumping ronandplayingball to cosmeticsurgeryandlearningdeportment)are intendedas partof theconstructionof gender.I wouldarguethatthe circuit of

interactionbetween social andbodily processes

is of suchimportance

hat these

effects shouldbe included n the definitionof "masculinity"and"femininity").Martin s rightthat the meaningof anyplace arises from the structure;t is not

fixed. Wearinga shortpleatedskirtwas a masculinepractice n early 18th-centuryScotland,a femininepractice n 20th-centuryManhattan.So farI would go with

Kondo. But conceptions of genderthatemphasize performancerisk truncatingthe whole field. Gender s not only a systemof signs andmeanings; t involves the

material aborof houseworkandmachineminding, he accumulation f wealth,the

materialitiesof violence andpower,pregnancyand childrearing,and so on. Our

models should not privilege the symbolic dimensionof social practiceover all

others.

Martin s quiteright hat he termhegemonicmasculinityhas come to havemore

than one meaning.Whenmy colleagues (TimCarriganand JohnLee) andI were

first trying to define it, we thoughtof hegemony as a situation,which arose in

historyandcould changein history.But in some writingsince, the term has come



476 GENDER & SOCIETY / August 1998

to stand or a fixedcharacterype, something ike aTypeApersonality-and almost

alwayswithnegativeconnotations.I must take some responsibility or this. The termis defined in relation to the

legitimacy of patriarchy.Although I have tried to be consistent in defining it

historically, n some usages I refer in a shorthandway to hegemonic masculinitywhen the topic is menbehavingbadly(withrespectto genderequality).And this

gives an openingto the notionof a fixed negativecharacterype.But I do thinkit possibleforhegemonyto be a positiveforce. That was partof

Gramsci's original conception of hegemony in class relations,and it is quiteconceivable thatacertainhegemonycould be constructed ormasculinities hatare

less toxic, more cooperativeand peaceable, than the currenteditions. That is,indeed,a usefulwayof formulating oalsforeducational ndpoliticalwork.Which

leads to questionsof political strategy.Lorberbegins and ends her remarkswith a categorizinggesture("men'sfemi-

nism") which has considerable mplications.I thinkeveryone would agree that

feminism has beenof crucial mportanceorthedevelopmentof recentresearchon

men andmasculinity.That s certainly rue orme.Myworkongender ssuesbeganas a response to feminism, and has been conductedin constantdialogue with

feminists,especiallyPam Bentonbutincludingmanyothers.

Yet,acknowledginghis in the fullest terms is not to

acceptthe

categorizationof the work on masculinityas men's feminism.First,a gooddeal of it (andnot the

least influential) is done by women: Nancy Chodorow,Lynne Segal, Ursula

Mueller,CarolHagemann-White, nd ElisabethBadinter,amongothers.Second,

significantpartsof the work do not stem from feminismat all. The concept of

hegemonic masculinitywas adaptedfrom Gramsci'sMarxism,the concept of

hierarchies f masculinitywas workedoutby GayLiberation, ndother deas have

come fromFreud,Foucault,Sartre, tructuralism,ndpoststructuralism.ome of

the bestworkon men'ssexuality s aresponse othe HIV/AIDSepidemic,andsome

of the best historicalworkonmasculinitygrows

outof concernswith colonialism

andrace.

I think t importanto recognizethemultiplesourcesof the recentworkonmen

andmasculinity n order o grapplewith thepoliticaldilemmaLorberposes.Men's

feminism-as she senses, in her commentson men's inabilityto sharewomen's

"angerandresentment"-can only be tail-endism,anda weak assetpolitically.(Itwill also be a weakasset for feminism ntellectually, ince it will reflect thealreadyfeminist theoriesthat t "applies.")Thenonfeministandantifeministmen'smove-

ments sharethis view of men's feminism and ridiculeprofeministactivists and

researchersas, to quote a currentAustralianbook, "the sackcloth and ashes

brigade."Thepoliticalargument f Masculinitiess notaPollyannahopeof making hings

betterfor everyone,butan argumentabout the significanceof social alliancesin

genderreform.Lorberdoes not thinkmuchof this approach, ince "few women"

have benefitedfromprogressivesocial policies. Theremay be otherreasonsfor

being waryof alliances,but thatis not a good one; the evidence rangesfromthe



COMMENT AND LETTERS 477

historicalgains for womenfromthe growthof publiceducation n Americato the

current osses women aresufferingas the welfarestateis trashedby reactionariesin Britainand Australiaand the regimeof formalequality s trashed n theformer

Soviet states.

If one is concernedwith buildingsocial majorities n supportof progressive

genderpolitics,thenit is importanto form allianceswithothersocialmovements,and to think how to bring groupsof men into them. Whatsuch alliancesneed as

bindingis a robustconceptionof socialjustice.And it is a politicsof socialjustice,rather han a tail-end relationwith feminism,thatprovidesthe groundon which

progressivegenderpoliticsamongmen can stand.

Whateverone's view of alliancepolitics,I shouldthink hatMartin,Lorber,andI are in agreementon this: Foranyform of progressivegenderpolitics,a vigorous,multisourcedmovement of researchandactivism on issues aboutmen andmascu-

linity will be a long-termasset.

R. W.CONNELL

Universityof Sydney

Documents

R. W. Connells Masculinities Reply