Hegemonic Masculinity and Subordinated Masculinity

Subordinated masculinity is a concept within the framework of hegemonic masculinity, a theory of gender relations and the hierarchy of masculinities. This framework was significantly shaped by the work of sociologists R.W. Connell and James W. Messerschmidt, among others. Hegemonic masculinity refers to the cultural norms and practices that promote the dominant position of men and the subordinate position of women, as well as a hierarchy among men themselves.

Subordinated masculinity refers to forms of masculinity that are positioned below the hegemonic ideal in the social hierarchy. These forms of masculinity do not conform to the norms and expectations of hegemonic masculinity, which valorizes traits such as physical strength, heterosexuality, authority, and emotional stoicism. Instead, subordinated masculinities may embody traits or identities that are devalued and marginalized within the gender order, such as being homosexual, displaying emotional sensitivity, or engaging in practices and occupations that are culturally coded as feminine.

The concept of subordinated masculinity is crucial for understanding the dynamics of power and identity among men. It highlights that not all men benefit equally from the patriarchal dividend—the advantages men gain from the subordination of women—because the gender order also hierarchizes relations among men. Men who are associated with subordinated masculinity often face discrimination, marginalization, and violence, which serve to reinforce the dominance of hegemonic masculinity by stigmatizing and penalizing deviations from its norms.

Importantly, the concept also underscores the fluidity and relational nature of gender identities. Masculinities are not fixed; they are performed and can change over time and in different contexts. The relationships between different forms of masculinity (hegemonic, complicit, subordinated, and marginalized) are dynamic, with shifts in cultural, economic, and social contexts leading to changes in what is considered hegemonic or subordinated at any given time.

Understanding subordinated masculinity is essential for addressing issues of gender inequality and for promoting more inclusive and equitable gender relations. It challenges the binary view of gender and opens up spaces for diverse expressions of masculinity that challenge traditional norms.

See also: Complicit Masculinity

Meaning of Complicit Masculinity Explained

"Complicit Masculinity", a term coined by gender sociologist R.W. Connell (in "Masculinities", designates a nuanced landscape of male behaviors and their impact on gender dynamics. It pertains to men who may not actively dominate or demean women, yet indirectly support a gender system that favors men over women. The are, in a sense, wing-men for hegemonic masculinity By not challenging gender inequality, they sustain a system that provides them with advantages, making them complicit in the process.

Consider a man who doesn't dominate women or exhibit macho behavior, but also doesn't intervene or silently agrees when witnessing sexism or gender inequality. His silence and inaction indirectly contribute to the perpetuation of the male dominance system. This is an example of complicit masculinity in action.

The defining characteristic of complicit masculinity is its subtlety. It's not about blatant dominance or aggression. Instead, it's about silently accepting the privileges that come with being part of the dominant group. It involves enjoying the benefits of being a man in a patriarchal society without directly participating in the subordination of women.

In our everyday life, instances of complicit masculinity are not rare. It's the men who remain silent when casual sexism occurs, those who gain from the gender pay gap without questioning it, or those who relish their male privileges without acknowledging the struggles faced by women and other marginalized genders.

Recognizing and understanding complicit masculinity is a significant stride towards achieving gender equality. As long as it persists, the system that favors men is continually reinforced, and gender inequality remains intact. It's crucial for men to not only avoid being complicit but also to actively work towards challenging and dismantling these unfair norms and systems.

Meaning of Hegemonic Masculinity Explained

The term "hegemonic masculinity" coined by gender sociologist R.W. Connell in her book "Masculinities", is a critical concept in understanding gender dynamics. It refers to the dominant cultural norm of masculinity that is accepted and recognized widely in society. The essence of hegemonic masculinity lies in its ability to maintain the established patriarchal order, ensuring men's dominance and women's subordination.

But what does this mean in everyday life? It's crucial to understand that hegemonic masculinity doesn't refer to the most common type of masculinity performed by all men. Instead, it represents a particular kind of masculinity that is upheld as the ideal, the 'gold standard,' so to speak. This ideal is what sustains the dominant social position of men and the subordinate social position of women.

Hegemonic masculinity is about power and control. It is about the ways in which society validates and promotes certain masculine behaviors and attitudes that reinforce men's power over women. These practices can range from overt displays of physical strength and aggression to more subtle forms of control and dominance, like financial control or emotional manipulation.

Importantly, hegemonic masculinity doesn't just impact women. It also affects men who don't fit this ideal mold, including those who reject traditional gender norms or embrace more egalitarian relationships. This form of masculinity is not necessarily enacted by all men, but it exerts a powerful influence over societal expectations of what it means to be a 'real man.'

In Summary, the concept of hegemonic masculinity provides a framework for understanding gender power dynamics. It helps us decode how societal norms and expectations shape our behaviors and relationships. Recognizing the influence of hegemonic masculinity is the first step towards promoting more diverse, inclusive, and equitable expressions of masculinity.

See also: The Many Types of Masculinities 

The Many Types of Masculinities

Maculinity, says R.W.Connell. is not just one this, and instead we should be talking about “masculinities” in the plural, and here are some examples:

1.  Hegemonic Masculinity: At its core, this concept refers to the configuration of gender practice which embodies the currently accepted answer to the problem of the legitimacy of patriarchy, which guarantees (or is taken to guarantee) the dominant position of men and the subordination of women. It is not necessarily the most common form of masculinity, but rather the form that sustains the dominant social position of men and the subordinate social position of women.

2.  Complicit Masculinity: Refers to men who may not themselves enact dominant forms of masculinity but benefit from the hegemony of men over women. These individuals do not challenge the status quo of gender relations and thus indirectly support the structure of hegemonic masculinity.

3.  Subordinated Masculinity: Masculinities that exist in opposition to or at a lower rank than hegemonic masculinity within the social hierarchy. This often includes masculinities associated with homosexuality, certain racial and ethnic identities, and other non-normative gender expressions, which are marginalized because they do not fit the hegemonic ideal.

4.  Marginalized Masculinity: Focuses on the intersections of gender with race, class, and ethnicity, highlighting how certain groups of men are marginalized within the gender order. This concept emphasizes that while these men may be privileged by gender, they are disadvantaged by other social factors.

5. Protest Masculinity: A form of masculinity adopted by those who feel disenfranchised or disempowered by the socio-economic system. It is characterized by the exaggeration of traditional masculine norms and behaviors (such as toughness and aggression) as a form of resistance against perceived marginalization.

6. Toxic Masculinity: Although not coined by Connell, this term has been used in discussions about hegemonic masculinity to describe cultural norms that can be harmful to men, women, and society overall. It characterizes manhood as defined by violence, sex, status, and aggression, emphasizing the destructive aspects of failing to conform to hegemonic masculinity.

7. Masculinity and Capitalism: Connell has also explored the relationship between masculinity and the economic structure, particularly capitalism. Hegemonic masculinity is seen as supporting and being supported by capitalist economic relations, reinforcing gender inequality through the division of labor and the valorization of certain types of work over others.

8. Global Hegemonic Masculinity: The concept has been expanded to consider the global dimension, where certain forms of masculinity (often those associated with Western, white, middle-class men) are privileged over others on a global scale, influencing international politics, economics, and culture.

9. Hybrid Masculinities: This concept refers to the ways in which some men adopt elements of identity traditionally associated with marginalized or subordinated masculinities, while still maintaining overall positions of gender privilege. It highlights the fluidity and complexity of gender identities and the strategic negotiation of masculinity in contemporary societies.

10. Precarious Masculinity: The idea that masculinity is not an innate attribute but rather a status that must be continually earned and demonstrated through performance. This precariousness can lead to overcompensation through aggressive or dominant behavior.

11. Masculinity and Emotion: Challenges the traditional association of masculinity with stoicism and emotional restraint. It explores how emotional expression and vulnerability are integral to redefining and understanding masculinities in a more nuanced way.

12. The Crisis of Masculinity: Refers to the perceived crisis in traditional male roles and identities resulting from social changes, including the feminist movement, economic shifts, and the changing nature of work. This concept examines how these changes challenge traditional notions of what it means to be a man.

 

R.W. Connell – "Masculinities": The History of Masculinity - summary

In chapter eight of "Masculinities" R.W. Connell reasserts her previous proposition according to which masculinities are historical objects. In order to understand the present pattern of masculinity Connell wishes to go back to the time of its formation. For Connell, the origins of contemporary masculinity are found at the time of increasing European and American power and the rise of global imperialism and global capitalist economy. In other words, modern masculinity has had to do with global violence.

Early Modern Masculinity

When surveying the history of nowadays masculinity R.W. Connell starts with the 16^th century, the undermining of the power of the Catholic Church and the spread of renaissance and protestant culture. On the one hand this period replaced the ideal of the ascetic monk with a cultural emphasis on institutionalized heterosexuality. On the other hand the rise of the idea of self expression brought about individuality, which according to Connell is fundamental for masculinity as it is for imperialism.

Another development of this age is colonial settlement. Connell argues that colonialism was gendered from its beginning, a product of the male-only occupations of maritime trade and soldiery. The first settlers of the west were for Connell the first examples of modern masculinity, characterized with violence and a search for gold and converted, and a tendency to be recalcitrant.

The third development in the 16^th century is the growth of cities as centers of commercial capitalism. The gendered consequences of this development were only apparent later on, but the included individuality, rationalism and free enterprise. Capitalist culture according to Connell founded a form of masculinity which created a new type of gendered labor.     

 A fourth development followed from the 16^th and 17^th century religious wars. These wars according to Connell overthrow not just the existing class order but also the gender order. At this time patriarchal order was established with the aid of the new power of the nation state, with professional armies and a new relation between military violence and nationalistic patriotism.

see also:
history of masculinity 
present day masculinity 

The Many Types of Masculinities 

Raewyn Connell – "Masculinities", 1995

Science of masculinity

Chapter two: Men's Bodies

Chapter 3: The Social Organization of Masculinity

Chapter 4: Live Fast Die Young - summary

Chapter 5: A Whole New World

Chapter 6: A Very Straight Gay

Chapter 7: Men of Reason

Chapter 8: The History of Masculinity

Chapter 9 : Masculinity politics

Chapter 10: Practice and Utopia

Contemporary politics of masculinity

R.W. Connell – "Masculinities": Relations within Masculinity

In chapter three of Masculinities ("The Social Organization of Masculinity") R.W. Connell is searching for a structure of gender that will incorporate three different types of relations: power relations, production relations and cathectic relations.

Power relations: the prime axis of power in contemporary western culture is the subordination of women to the rule of men, what the women liberation movement referred to as patriarchy.

Relations of production: the gendered division of labor turns capital into a gendered form; this is because the accumulation of capital is related for Connell to the field of reproduction,

Cathectic relations: following Freud Connell perceives passion is emotional energy invested in subjects, and the practices which shape passion are gendered and can raise difficult questions such as those regarding homosexuality.

Gender for Connell is not an isolated subject but one that is present in all aspects of society, and consequently all social practices are constructed, among other things such as race and ethnicity, through the prism of gender. Masculinity as a gender category therefore intersects with other power relation systems such as race and ethnicity. Connell concludes that gender and masculinity cannot therefore be understood in separation of other social arrays and structures, arrays and structures which in turn cannot be understood without appealing to gender. 

Relations between masculinities

In light of the aforesaid, Connell holds that one should not talk about masculinity but rather about masculinities. Connell is not concerned with identifying white masculinity or black masculinity, bourgeois masculinity of blue collar masculinity, but to examine the relation between these masculinities and to avoid a fixed typology of masculinities.

Connell examines the main practices which structure masculinity in western modern culture: hegemony, subordination, cooperation and marginalization.

Hegemony: the concept of hegemony of taken from the works of Antonio Gramsci, and in its adaptation in Connell's theory one form of masculinity takes precedence as the preferred type over other masculinities and aims at maintaining its privileged status. The existence of hegemonic masculinity is sustained on condition of some overlapping between a cultural ideal and institutional power. The nature of Hegemony as suggested by Gramsci is dynamic, and it can be challenged by other forms of masculinity that in time gain or lose hegemonic power.

Subordination: hegemony warrants the subordination of one group to the rule of another, in the field of masculinity Connell argues that the predominant subordination of our age is the subordination of homosexual masculinity to heterosexual masculinity through a number of material practices. 

Cooperation: few are the men who actually completely meet the definition of hegemonic masculinity, but many of them nevertheless enjoy its benefits. Connell therefore suggests that relations of cooperation exist between hegemonic masculinity and different groups that take part in it and sustain it without completely belonging to it.

Marginalization: this type of relationship characterizes a situation in which one masculinity is oppressed by another (usually the hegemonic masculinity) or alternatively empowered by it (like black athletes that are turned into of model of hegemonic masculinity).

This system of hegemony/subordination, cooperation and marginalization/empowerment is according to Connell a dynamic system of practices, not identities, and any gender oriented analysis must therefore account for developments in these relationships. 

See also: The Many Types of Masculinities 

R.W. Connell – "Masculinities": The Social Organization of Masculinity - summary

After illustrating how main currents of research (psychoanalysis, social sciences  and gender role theory) have failed to produce a coherent science of masculinity, R.W. Connell concludes that the problem is that masculinity is not a coherent object of study, at least not if taken in isolation. Connell therefore devotes chapter three ("The Social Organization of Masculinity) of "Masculinities" to a methodological declaration of intent for the rest of her book, mapping her object of study and defining masculinity as collection of practices within a system of gender relations.

Definitions of masculinity

R.W. Connell argues that the term masculinity in its modern use is derived from European individuality that evolved with the growth of colonial empires and capitalist economy, and therefore masculinity in the sense that we use it is a relatively novel concept. As she suggested in chapter 2 of "Masculinities", masculinity for Connell is a relational term which is always defined in opposition to femininity.

Connell locates four main strategies for defining masculinity: the essentialist strategy, the positivistic, the normative (a standard of masculinity) and semiotic definitions, all rejected by Connell who nevertheless borrows from the semiotic approach the idea the masculinity exists in relation to a complex symbolic system.

Gender as constructing social practices

According to Connell, gender is a manner in which social practices are organized. These practices relate to the processes of reproduction and human bodily structures. The practice of gender in not limited to isolated actions but to branched arrays referred to by Connell as collections of gender practices. 

Connell describes how institutions are gendered not only as a metaphor but also in an active manner. The state, for example, is gendered since state organizational practices are constructed in relation to the field of reproduction – the fact that it is still mostly men who hold key position of power in the state is not only the reason for the state's masculinity, but also its outcome.

Connell quotes Gayle Rubin who perceived gender as a complex structure in which several logical systems conjunct. Connell therefore proceeds to argue that masculinity includes different systems, and this inevitably leads to internal contradictions and historical change.

For Connell, in order to acknowledge gender as a social pattern it must be viewed as a product of history as well as the producer of history. The last two centuries have been characterized by the rise of gender politics, with the male group looking to sustain its privileged position and the female group looking to undermine the existing structure of power relations. Patriarchy instills men with financial, political and symbolic gains, and the politics of masculinity is therefore not only a personal matter of identity, but also one which relates to questions of social justice.

Connell argues that the ideology of patriarchy legitimizes violence towards women and subordinated forms of masculinity as a result of the hegemonic masculinity's superiority over them. Furthermore, violence is a male institute which usually functions between men (like in war). Violence of minority men is the rebellion of masculinities which were marginalized by hegemonic masculinity. Violence is according to Connell a part of the system of domination, but it is also a sign of the system's weakness, for it wouldn’t have to resort to intimidation if its legitimacy was not questionable. Therefore Connell argues that today's masculinity is, in Jürgen Habermas's terminology, crisis inclined with the collapse of the legitimacy for the patriarchic order. The main point R.W. Connell makes here is that changes in gender relations over the past centuries have led to far reaching changes in the practices of masculinity.

part 2  

Raewyn Connell – "Masculinities", 1995

Science of masculinity

Chapter two: Men's Bodies

Chapter 3: The Social Organization of Masculinity

Chapter 4: Live Fast Die Young - summary

Chapter 5: A Whole New World

Chapter 6: A Very Straight Gay

Chapter 7: Men of Reason

Chapter 8: The History of Masculinity

Chapter 9 : Masculinity politics

Chapter 10: Practice and Utopia

Contemporary politics of masculinity

See also: The Many Types of Masculinities 

R.W. Connell – "Masculinities": Science of masculinity - summary

In chapter one of her book Masculinities titled "science of masculinity" R.W. Connell examines the production of knowledge regarding masculinity, arguing to its ambiguous nature and problems with its claim for objectivity on account of its gendered practices of research and production of knowledge about masculinity and gender differences.

Connell surveys three main attempts to form a science of masculinity in the 21^st century: the clinical (psychoanalysis), the one of social psychology and gender role theory and the one of sociology, anthropology and history (see hyperlinks for detailed discussion).

Albeit the lengthy discussion of these forms of organized knowledge about masculinity, Connell suggests that other, none clinical or academic, forms of knowledge about masculinity have accumulated, namely the form of political knowledge.

This type of knowledge about masculinities accumulated in various political spheres with the most important of them being the gay liberation movement and the women's liberation movement.

The gay liberation movement, by the way of coining the term homophobia, realized that homophobia and gay persecution are related to dominant and hegemonic forms of masculinity. Connell notes that one of the interesting products of the gay liberation movement and the discussion of homophobia was the blurring of the distinction between the men/women polarization and the homosexual/straight polarization. In this respect it is interesting to see the onward attacks on gender conventions, such as drag, which formed the queer style.

Second wave feminist thinking initially dealt with the concept of patriarchy and at some point turned its attention to male violence. The theory of gay liberation shares feminists' take on mainstream masculinity as an institution which is essentially related to power, is organized for the purpose of domination, and which resists any change out of allegiance to existing power relations.

At the end of chapter one of "Masculinities", "The Science of Masculinity", R.W. Connell wonders if masculinity is the problem of gender politics, or whether the problem is not masculinity (or hegemonic masculinity) itself but rather the institutional arrangements which produce inequality and bring forth the need to scrutinize masculinity.

Connell believes that masculinity is shaped out of the reciprocal relations between the personal and social dimensions, and she therefore wonders if this type of dynamic interaction allows for a stable object of knowledge, and if the science of masculinity is at all possible?

As far as positivistic science of masculinity is concerned than Connell's answer is a definite no, unless we are willing to reduce this science to biology only while excluding psychoanalysis, sociology and ethnography.

With masculinity being a relational concept, for masculinity and femininity only exist in relation to one another, masculinity as an object of study will always be masculinity in relation. The science of masculinity for Connell will always be the science of gender relations.

As elaborated later on in chapter three, R.W. Connell defines masculinity as practice configurations which are structures by gender relations. Masculinities according to her are essentially historical constructs, and their changing invention is a political process which influences the balance of interests in society and the courses of social change. Knowledge about masculinity can never be positivistic, and it can never be objectively reflective – it must be critical. 

Raewyn Connell – "Masculinities", 1995

Science of masculinity

Chapter two: Men's Bodies

Chapter 3: The Social Organization of Masculinity

Chapter 4: Live Fast Die Young - summary

Chapter 5: A Whole New World

Chapter 6: A Very Straight Gay

Chapter 7: Men of Reason

Chapter 8: The History of Masculinity

Chapter 9 : Masculinity politics

Chapter 10: Practice and Utopia

Contemporary politics of masculinity

See also: The Many Types of Masculinities 

5 Important Feminist Thinkers to Know

Feminist and gendered thought is an amazing example and perhaps the only one of its kind in the power of a stream of thought that manages to bring about far-reaching changes in reality. It is difficult today to compare the relationship between men and women today with that of men and women a century ago so a combination of feminist thought and action began to emerge that would become a movement that would change the face of our society. The list of feminist thinkers (as well as some men) is long and respectable, we have gathered for you here some of the prominent figures worth getting to know.

 

Virginia Woolf

Virginia Woolf is rightly recognized primarily as a marvelous writer in her sensitivity but alongside her literary work also retains a place of honor at the beginning of feminist thought. In Wolfe's book "A Room of One’s Own" she wonders why women have diminished throughout history writing books. Her answer is that they never had a "room of their own" in which to write books, when in "room" Wolf means not only a physical space but what such a private physical space represents.

 

Simone de Beauvoir

Simone de Beauvoir's feminism is found not only in the content of her library but also in her career, her role in the feminist revolution and the way she broke out and claimed a place of honor within the masculine European philosophy of her time. In her important book "The Other Sex" Beauvoir argues that woman has always been the "other" of man and has been defined in relation to him, without an identity of her own. De Beauvoir's inquiry into the sources of inequality between men and women was fundamentally an intellectual inquiry, but it paved the way for many ideas that sought to change the situation. Renowned philosopher Jean Paul Sartre is also remembered, among other things, as the stormy partner of Simone de Beauvoir.

 

Betty Frieden

In 1963, Betty Frieden published a book called "The Feminine Mystique" with a chapter on "The Problem That Has No Name." High-middle-class white women who lived the "American Dream" in the suburbs suffered, despite all the happiness of their lives, from unexplained symptoms of depression and anxiety. Frieden was the one who pointed out that what causes these women to suffer is a feeling that they are no longer content with the life of a housewife, of a mother and wife, and that they seek self-realization outside the walls of the home. Frieden's book is identified as one of the causes of the wave of women's work in the 1960s and 1970s. Fan Fact: Frieden's theory was used by the creators of the "Mad Man" series who even named one of the main characters after her.

 

Judith Butler

Judith Butler belongs to the so-called "third wave" of feminism that seeks to abolish the gender distinctions and power relations contained within them. At the forefront of this struggle can be found Butler with books like "Gender Trouble" and formative ideas like "Performances" of "Gender". Butler examined the phenomenon of drag queens and argued that what they show is the way gender roles are something we "perform", unwritten codes of dress, movement, speech, etc. that drag queens mimic in an extreme way. This argument leads to the conclusion that gender differences are a matter of social construction, not nature.

 

Raewyn Connell

Australian Raewyn Connell is perhaps not the most influential thinker in the field of gender in the twentieth century but it is worth getting to know her for two reasons. First Connell is interesting as a gender thinker who experienced firsthand the complexity of the issue today, when she was born a man and eventually became a woman. Connell‘s biography of course influenced her thinking and she became one of the pioneers of the gendered preoccupation with masculinity, after decades in which men enjoyed the status of observers on the debate. Connell has published a highly influential book called "Masculinities" which claimed that there is more than one way to be a man and also, as Connell proves, one does not have to be a man at all.

Know your Feminism:

see our List of Great Feminist Theory Books

R.W. Connell – "Masculinities": Contemporary politics of masculinity

In the epilogue of "Masculinities" R.W. Connell is attempting to describe the politics of masculinity in contemporary times, flowing the works of Goode and Godenzi which show that despite openness to challenging claims made by feminism, men still have a strong hold in the material world and the equality is still far away. Connell is suggesting a model that has four dimensions of gender relation to try to account for the interests of men in contemporary patriarchy:

Power: man have favorable positions in business, state affairs, public spaces, the family, enforcement agencies and the means to generate violence. On the other hand: men are usually the ones who are arrested and executed, they are the main target of military violence and of liberal economic competition.

Division of labor: men's income is twice that of women and they enjoy favorable position in the economy and have better access to opportunities in the men dominated system. On the other hand hazardous works are mostly held by men and they rate higher as sole-providers. They pay more taxes while welfare divides state income to their disadvantage.

Cathexis: men are given unreturned emotional support from women. Society (for instance the media and culture) favors men's pleasure over women's and legitimizes their sexual freedom. On the other hand men's sexuality is more alienated and restrained. There are less free to express their emotions and they are excluded from contact with their children during their early years.

The symbolic level: men control most of the cultural institutions and enjoy a higher level of recognition. On the other hand humanities studies are becoming more and more a feminine field and mothers enjoy greater legitimization as parents.

in relation to the body Connell notes how men's occupations make them more vulnerable to physical injury while on the other hand they are not required to wear restricting cloths or spend time and money on their appearance.

This "checks and balances" approach might give the illusion that the benefits of masculinity even out with its costs, but Connell makes sure to note that the advantages of masculinity often serve men who are not the same as those who suffers from its drawbacks, and this is where gender crosses with other categories such as race and class. If Connell is talking about a variety of masculinities, than there is a variety of social position that those masculinities provide. But this, for Connell, does not mean we should abandon the category of men all together.  

Raewyn Connell – "Masculinities", 1995

Science of masculinity

Chapter two: Men's Bodies

Chapter 3: The Social Organization of Masculinity

Chapter 4: Live Fast Die Young - summary

Chapter 5: A Whole New World

Chapter 6: A Very Straight Gay

Chapter 7: Men of Reason

Chapter 8: The History of Masculinity

Chapter 9 : Masculinity politics

Chapter 10: Practice and Utopia

Contemporary politics of masculinity

R.W. Connell – "Masculinities": Degendering and recomposing hegemonic masculinity and gender relations

 In chapter 10 of "Masculinities" (practice and utopia) R.W. Connell suggests the strategy of "degendering" as a means for social justice in gender relations. Degendering is not to be carried out just at the level of culture and institutions but should also work on the bodies themselves. The mission of such degendering politics is according to Connell to bring about change in the practice of bodily reflection and working through the agency of the body in order to find new ways for men to use their masculine bodies.

The argument for dgendering echoes out of the feminist debate about equality and difference and the fear that equality would result in assimilation. For Connell the same problem holds for the will to criticize hegemonic masculinity that, if indeed degendered, might lose some of its more positive things and throw out the baby with the bath water. For Connell, in order to call for social justice in gender relations we must call for difference and degendering at the same time. Research and Connell's discussion shows that gendered traits and practices are common to both genders and the symbolic reintegration of these can be rather simple: body builders can work at kindergartens, lesbians can wear leather jackets etc.

Forms of Action

Following Andrew Tolson Connell points to the fact the various men's groups (the general men's liberation movement) are problematic in the sense that you cannot adopt emancipatory strategies if you are the dominating group. Anti-chauvinistic male politics that seeks social justice actually works against the interests of those man who take part in it, and such a stance should aim at breaking men's unity, not reinforce it.

But for Connell such a form of politics is still possible, especially outside pure gender politics. Male solidarity for males' sake is problematic, but solidarity (with women) for other sakes has a lot of potential for change in gender relations. The crossing of class and gender politics (and ethnic politics as well) is especially interesting for Connell for the possibility it holds for unity which is not absolute male unity. Instead of a men's movement this will be a politics of alliances, with the struggle for social justice depending on the intersection of interests.

Education for Connell is one of the prime sites for this degendering politics. She holds that every education program must address a variety of masculinities and the crossing of race, ethnicity, nationality and class. Connell calls for a reorganization of knowledge from the point of view of the oppressed and for the pluralization of sources in education programs. Another requirement is the capacity for empathy often so lacking in hegemonic masculinity. 

R.W. Connell – "Masculinities": Practice and Utopia

Chapter 10 of R.W. Connell's Masculinities discusses the meaning of knowledge about masculinity to questions of social justice in gender relation. For this end Connell holds that both existing practice and possible utopia are in need of scrutiny.

Connell research in Masculinities showed some changes in awareness towards gender relations starting from the 70's; however she holds that patriarchy is still very much the order of the day in contemporary western cultures, and that the change in historical consciousness is not yet manifested in the breakdown of the institutional and material structures of patriarchy and hegemonic masculinity.

The discussion of gender relations in the past two centuries are close, according to Connell, to introduce the demise of masculinity as we know it, with the wheels of change already in motion. Even reactionary stances regarding masculinity acknowledge the fact that masculinity is the subject of social transformation and is something which is currently under negotiation. Connell argues that no one assumes, and no one can any longer assume, that man and masculinity are just what they are.

In surveying the possible purposes of political action in the field of gender Connell distinguishes liberal pluralism and postmodernism. Both approaches according to Connell fail to bring into account the importance of practice, and not just politics or consciousness, in generating change or sustaining the current state of affairs. In the context of gender relations working towards social justice means to undermine straight men's favorable positions in social structures. This does not mean striving for uniformity, and Connell relies on Michael Walzer and his notion of complex equality in order to imagine the possibility of gender equality. Masculinity, in other words, does not need to be abolished but rather repositioned in the political and economical structure.  

But focusing on hegemonic masculinity's material and political gains alone will, for Connell, miss the point. For patriarchy and hegemonic masculinity, as demonstrated again and again throughout "Masculinities", in sustained through bodily division which are themselves sustained through reflexive bodily practices. The social organization of these practices into a patriarchic gender order is the cause of the hierarchic social order. All this leads R.W. Connell to argue for the strategy of degendering – the dismantlement of hegemonic masculinity and the decomposition of gender relations. 

see also:

Degendering and recomposing hegemonic masculinity and gender relations

Raewyn Connell – "Masculinities", 1995

Science of masculinity

Chapter two: Men's Bodies

Chapter 3: The Social Organization of Masculinity

Chapter 4: Live Fast Die Young - summary

Chapter 5: A Whole New World

Chapter 6: A Very Straight Gay

Chapter 7: Men of Reason

Chapter 8: The History of Masculinity

Chapter 9 : Masculinity politics

Chapter 10: Practice and Utopia

Contemporary politics of masculinity

R.W. Connell – "Masculinities": Masculinity Politics

Politics of Men and Politics of Masculinity

R.W. Connell opens chapter 9 of "Masculinities", titled "Masculinity Politics" by indicating the fact the public politics is masculine politics in almost every sense. Even in western countries women are still heavily underrepresented in power position, with a variety of formal barriers and hidden strategies to keep them out of the public sphere. Feminism has failed to mend to inequality but did manage to draw attention to it, and men's position regarding gender relations has become an object of politics.

Connell defines masculinity politics as all those process and struggles regarding the male gender and its position within gender relations. It is masculinity in need of an answer. Masculine politics for Connell wishes to trace the production and accumulation of gendered power, which for her stands at the base of some of the most crucial political questions of our time.

As stressed time and time again in Connell's Masculinities, there is no one masculinity but rather a number, not unlimited, of masculinities which are surveyed throughout 'Masculine Politics":

A therapy of masculinity

The challenges brought about by the feminist attack on patriarchy have led to the formation of a type of masculine politics which focuses on healing the wounds caused to heterosexual men by changes in gender relation. Connell describes the emergence of therapy groups and literature which attempt to reconcile men's denounced position and to soften their guild caused by feminist criticism.

The therapy of masculinity, according to Connell, is not so much about supporting the reform of gender relation as it is about finding a relevant political position within it. The foundation of this politics is that of cooperative masculinity (Masculinities, chapter 3), which does not comply but does cooperate with hegemonic masculinity. In this stance, the men do nor bear the blame for the wrongs of hegemonic masculinity, but are also not oppressed by it. The therapeutic practice and the images of the mytho-poetic movement tend to narrow the gap between men and women and to allow for adaptation in the field of personal relationships, unlike the more inflexible types of masculine politics which follow.

The Gun Lobby: Defending Hegemonic Masculinity

For Connell to preserve to rule of hegemonic masculinity is to preserve a whole institutional and ideological system. She relates to the example of the gun lobby and the NRA which has strong masculine characteristics and which ties masculinity with firearms and heroism. Despite some evidence against the link between masculinity and the heroic violence, Connell holds that the images of male heroism bear cultural relevance. They produce epitomes of masculinity which are an essential part of the politics of hegemonic masculinity. Defending hegemonic masculinity is not a unified campaign, but rather one which takes place in a variety of, often contradicting, contexts and institutions, all working to preserve men's prominent role in all spheres of society.   

Gay Liberation

R.W. Connell holds that the main alternative to hegemonic masculinity in western recent history is that of gay masculinity, and that the most explicit political opposition to hegemonic masculinity was articulated by the homosexual liberation movement. The initial objectives of the gay movement regarded mostly private rights, but have slowly, especially with the breakout of AIDS, began to form a politics of pressure groups reminiscent of those of ethnic minorities, seeking collective rights. Connell argues that masculine politics is inseparable from the gay presence around it. Yet the homosexual community is not an automatically opposition to hegemonic masculinity, but rather an alternative which has a presence that prompts a dynamic of change and negotiation within masculine politics.

Exit Politics

The concept of practice implies that social action is always creative, and for Connell this means that straight men can also resist hegemonic masculinity and fight patriarchy. The men liberation movement attempted, since the 70's, to create new gender relations based on social justice. Though ambivalently accepted by feminism, attempts to organize male movements in support of the women and gay liberation movements, "refusing to be a man", have been prevalent. This anti-chauvinistic politics sometimes resorted to gender vagueness such as cross-dressing and drag shows as a form of cultural protest. Connell argues that masculinity is shaped in relation to a comprehensive structure of power and in relation to general symbolization of difference. Anti-chauvinistic male politics is directed towards to former, while crossing gender lines is directed towards to latter. According to Connell exit politics operates at the edges of mass sexual politics, as the possibility of negating hegemonic masculinity. For Connell this type of masculine politics represents the most significant chance for change in the gender order of our time. 

suggested reading:

Raewyn Connell – "Masculinities", 1995

Science of masculinity

Chapter two: Men's Bodies

Chapter 3: The Social Organization of Masculinity

Chapter 4: Live Fast Die Young - summary

Chapter 5: A Whole New World

Chapter 6: A Very Straight Gay

Chapter 7: Men of Reason

Chapter 8: The History of Masculinity

Chapter 9 : Masculinity politics

Chapter 10: Practice and Utopia

Contemporary politics of masculinity