The concept of ‘hegemonic masculinity’ and the corresponding ‘emphasized femininity’ have been formulated three decades ago and they are still one of the cornerstones of gender sociology. They have enjoyed tremendous success, as they posit a sociological theory in the true sense. With the help of Raewyn Connell’s ideas, we can make sense of how gender organizes society, specifically how ‘gender order’ and ‘social hierarchies’ structure our lives.
In an expanding literature on men and masculinity at the end of the ’80s and the beginning of the ‘90s, there was a growing concern with gender systems. In discussing the autonomy of the ‘gender order’ some theorists argued for external factors as the catalyst for changes in gender systems: either external historical factors, the economy or class relations. Connell found herself on the opposite side of this argument and tried to establish ‘the laws of motion’ of gender systems. The concept of ‘hegemonic masculinity’ was employed as a direct critique of the ‘sex-role theory’ (Donaldson 1993, 643). This view offered the possibility to account for change within the systems and more importantly, for power relations. It would be naïve to think that people in society are just performing their assigned or assumed roles and that we are all equal in this enterprise.
As I will present in the next sections …show more content…
Connell (1987) makes perfectly clear that neither women, nor men need to embody these femininities and masculinities in order to be part of the hegemonic group. ‘Hegemonic masculinity is not necessarily what powerful men are, but what sustains their power and what large numbers of men (and women) are motivated to support’ (ibid, 185). It is exactly this idealization of characteristics that makes men ‘real men’ and what motivates others to support keeping them in
In an expanding literature on men and masculinity at the end of the ’80s and the beginning of the ‘90s, there was a growing concern with gender systems. In discussing the autonomy of the ‘gender order’ some theorists argued for external factors as the catalyst for changes in gender systems: either external historical factors, the economy or class relations. Connell found herself on the opposite side of this argument and tried to establish ‘the laws of motion’ of gender systems. The concept of ‘hegemonic masculinity’ was employed as a direct critique of the ‘sex-role theory’ (Donaldson 1993, 643). This view offered the possibility to account for change within the systems and more importantly, for power relations. It would be naïve to think that people in society are just performing their assigned or assumed roles and that we are all equal in this enterprise.
As I will present in the next sections …show more content…
Connell (1987) makes perfectly clear that neither women, nor men need to embody these femininities and masculinities in order to be part of the hegemonic group. ‘Hegemonic masculinity is not necessarily what powerful men are, but what sustains their power and what large numbers of men (and women) are motivated to support’ (ibid, 185). It is exactly this idealization of characteristics that makes men ‘real men’ and what motivates others to support keeping them in