NCJ Number
194879
Journal
Theoretical Criminology: An International Journal Volume: 6 Issue: 1 Dated: February 2002 Pages: 63-88
Date Published
2002
Length
26 pages
Annotation
This paper presents a critique of the theory of hegemonic masculinity as well as the tendency to present a one-dimensional view of masculinity that ignores important psychological factors.
Abstract
This paper critiques the theory of hegemonic masculinity as being, first, incorrect at its core, and second of being a one-dimensional understanding of masculinity. In the first part of this theoretical discussion, the author takes issue with the term hegemonic masculinity. He claims Connell, the theorist who coined the term “hegemonic masculinity,” is using the term hegemonic incorrectly. Hegemonic, the author suggests, connotes successful domination. If the domination of men were truly successful, or hegemonic, there would be no need for male violence according to the very theory of hegemonic masculinity itself. To claim that there is a crisis of masculinity and then to explain such a crisis by using the term hegemonic makes no sense, according to the author. The second part of this article proposes that a true understanding of masculinity cannot be arrived at without taking into account the psychic as well as the social dimension of masculinity. Theories of hegemonic masculinity are criticized as overly sociological, ignoring the psychological aspects of being a male. The author goes on to review some of the psychological literature concerning masculinity in order to offer a more complete and, thus, complex understanding of what it means to be male. Notes, References