hegemonic masculinity essay

Hegemonic Masculinity Essay

To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
As a template for you assignment

Introduction

Hegemonic masculinity, unlocking men, unmasking masculinities: doing men’s work in prison, a social network analysis, doing hegemony: military, men, and constructing a hegemonic masculinity.

This essay attempts to critically and comprehensively review the concept of hegemonic masculinity. The hegemonic masculinity theory is particularly significant in understanding concepts such as the predisposition of men to violence, the evaluation of social network analysis in relation to hegemonic masculinity and the links between social identity and the occupation that someone belongs to.

The essay begins with an introduction and an analysis of the concept of hegemonic masculinity and proceeds to critically analyze articles that address the concept in relation to gender and social change.

Hegemonic masculinity, an influential theory in gender studies was first advanced by R.W Connell; the phrase is used to describe a social construct that is a benchmark for evaluation of all other forms of masculinity.

(Momsen, 2004 p.81-83) Hegemonic masculinity restricts and defines masculine behavior within a given social context and all other forms of masculinity are seen to be subordinate to it. In the society, hegemonic masculinity is not the prevailing form of masculinity; rather, it is a standard, endorsed by the society, against which, men are measured (Schipper, 2009 p.19-20).

Hegemonic masculinity is a theory that proposes that, there exists a normative standard for male behavior in society; men in the society are meant to attain these set standards of masculinity. The theory is characterized by the inclination of men to dominate other men and to subordinate women. Hegemonic masculinity is characterized by aggression, self reliance, and ambition, attitudes that are encouraged in men but are discouraged in women.

Several criticisms have been leveled against the Hegemonic masculinity theory. Connell, the original proponent of the theory cited his inspiration as being rooted in feminist theories that dealt with the concept of patriarchy and the associated issues about the role of men in altering the concept of patriarchy. Critics contend that the theory is responsible for fostering negative attitudes towards the concept of patriarchy (Howson, 2006 p.64).

It is claimed by critics of the theory that hegemonic masculinity is only a theoretical perspective and it cannot be translated in the real world situation. A critique advanced proposes that the theory can be conceived as a type of projection that deliberately victimizes women instead of men.

This victimization is done either collectively or limited to individuals. This is to say, the theory cannot be closely contrasted or applied in examining the lives of any real men. Furthermore, the critics of the Hegemonic masculinity theory propose that the theory fundamentally misconstrues the mental representation of male identity.

Critics also associate the theory with fostering attitudes of male superiority and negative machismo as manifested by excessive aggression and undue self reliance. (Ibid) The hegemonic theory has also been described as providing inexact, indistinct and inaccurate depiction of the concept of gender and masculinity because it does not take into account the unstable nature of all forms of masculinity (Howson, 2006 p.5-7).

In summation, despite the numerous criticisms that have been advanced against the theory, Hegemonic masculinity was and still is a significant theory that provides an in-depth analysis of the concept of masculinity (Speer, 2005 p.107-109).

To adequately discuss the theory of Hegemonic masculinity, it would be important to review a number of articles that address the concept and critically examining the related concepts of gender and social change.

The article attempts to establish a credible link between hegemonic masculinity and criminality. There has been prior research that has been done to explore this link; however, what makes this approach different is that it seeks to explore the correlation between correctional interventions and the destructive effects of hyper masculinity in prison.

Hyper masculinity refers to the over emphasis on conventional male behavior manifested by strength, virility and aggression. (Kimmel and Aronson, 2004 p.503-507)

The article examines two related programs initiated in men’s prisons in California and Massachusetts. The survey was carried by consultations and observation with volunteer. Essentially, the article illustrates how the program attempts to deconstruct hyper masculinity in correctional facilities and its effects in assisting inmates in redefining the concept in order to produce pro-social outcomes.

These programs applied are branches of the Mankind project, a large voluntary organization that is founded on the philosophy of the mythopoeticmen’s movement that emphasizes psychological self help, therapeutic techniques and personal growth.

Essentially, the aim of the program is to reorient the inmates’ perceptions of masculinity in a manner that will serve them better both in prison and in their lives after being reintegrated into society (Karp, 2010 p.63). The report highlights the relationship between violent crime and gender.

The figures in the article reveal that more men than women get arrested and convicted for violent crimes in contrast to more women than men who get arrested for non-violent crimes such as prostitution and running away from home However, the statistics also indicate that in recent years, there has been an increase in the number of females arrested and convicted for violent crimes.

Research reveals that, this increase that has been witnessed can be attributed to the net-widening of the criminal justice system and not necessarily as a result of an actual increase in the commission of violent crimes by females (Karp, 2010 p.63).

A number of theories have been advanced in an attempt to explain why more women than men commit crimes. The strain theory proposes that criminality is a function of greed and excessive societal emphasis on material possessions. However this theory does not explain why more men than women commit crime seeing as women are subjected to the same strain as men are.

Moreover, the labeling theory proposes that criminality is caused by shame, stigmatization and out casting especially of members of minority groups. However, this theory does not explain why women, who are subjected to the same conditions as men, are not as inclined to commit crimes (Karp, 2010 p.64-65).

The article proposes that the disparate rates of criminality between men and women can be explained by the hegemonic masculinity conceptualization.

This implies that the hegemonic nature of masculinity that emphasizes strength and aggression predisposes men to violence and consequently violent crime (Messerschmitt, 1993 p.27-30). Hegemonic masculinity is the exclusive premise of men and this may explain why more men than women commit violent crimes.

In my opinion, the theory of Hegemonic masculinity as the possible explanation of the disparate rates of violent crime commission by men and women is to a large extent accurate. This is because; all other theories of criminality adequately address the causes of the phenomena but do not consider why more men than women commit violent crimes. The Hegemonic masculinity theory adequately addresses this question.

In recognition of this fact, the article examines the interventions being initiated in the penal system, for instance the mankind project, the inside circle foundation and the Jericho circle project. These initiatives are meant to offer the inmates an opportunity to experience self discovery and personal growth in an attempt to counter the negative effects of hegemonic and hyper masculinity.

The article tries to involve important theory on social life brought forward by Connell’s in two schools. The social theory on gender was developed by Robert Connell to address the prevalent sexual, gender and power inequality between men and women. The theory examines the gender-based division of labor, power and the nature of carthexis (Connell, 1987 p.64-65).

The article uses arithmetical techniques to examine power affairs, violence and social connections in relation to the male supremacy beliefs of the students. In the secondary school in question; one demonstrated the validity of Connell’s theory in the fact that Hegemonic masculinity was placed on top of the hierarchy of other forms of masculinity.

The other secondary school has a different orientation that demonstrates the support for the other viewpoint that gender is relational and that the hypothesized effects are evident, even after considering and accounting for the rest of the explanatory factors. This illustrates the fact that there is considerable empirical evidence to support Connell’s theory (Usher and Robbins, 2010 p.23-25)

The study examines a ruling-class and a middle class school in Australia. The different hierarchical structures are explained by the fact that, the ruling class school fosters attitudes that are based on masculinity. The middle class school has a structural equation modeling (SEM) approach that considers the effects of male dominance, gay-male homophobia, anti-academic attitudes and attitudes of anti-feminism.

The article proposes to establish a relationship between gender and power inequality. The article is significant in that it is the first study undertaken using qualitative research methodology that takes into account the context of the local environment and cultural factors. The study does not work on the assumption that people act independently of the society in which they live.

Essentially, the theory attempts to explain the fundamental relationship between power and violence. This article proposes that, Hegemonic masculinity is an expression of power inequality between men and women. This implies that the power inequality contributes significantly to the commission of violence and the fostering of attitudes of subordination towards women (Usher and Robbins 2010 p.31-35).

This article proposes that Hegemonic masculinity is at the pinnacle of the gender hierarchy. Furthermore, the article proposes that Hegemonic masculinity subordinates all other gender constructs. Conventionally, Hegemonic masculinity is focused on the tenets of self discipline, sadism, belligerence and many other signs of control.

The article is based on a study that involved interviewing 43 men emphasizing the process of establishing Hegemonic masculinity constructs. The interviewees included military officers from different specialties, different rank levels and different levels of ability.

Essentially, this implies that men construct hierarchies that subordinate other people. At the same time, these characteristics show the way men place themselves in supremacy symbolism (Hinojosa, 2010 p.180)

Furthermore, the article examines the ways in which men that are aiming to join military service position themselves on the top of the hegemonic construct of masculinity.

The men present themselves as better placed in terms of intelligence, strength, skills and ability as compared to ordinary civilians. In so doing, this person panning to join the military construct a masculinity that is symbolically dominant over other forms (Hinojosa, 2010 p.181-182)

A critical review of the article establishes a conclusive link between the concepts of social identity and perceptions of the self and their relationship with the institutions that they belong to, in this case, the military. This implies that people who have a career in the military tend to derive a large extent of their personal identity from the occupation that they belong to (Hinojosa, 2010 p.184)

In my opinion, the assertion that people derive a large part of their social identity from the occupation that they belong to is accurate. The article cites conclusive evidence that people planning to join the military have a heightened sense of Hegemonic masculinity. This notion of social change can be directly attributed to their occupation of choice

In conclusion, a critical examination of the three articles establishes a tenable link between hegemonic masculinity, gender and social change. These three concepts are inextricably linked in that the perception of gender is affected by the theory of hegemonic masculinity. On the other hand, both gender and hegemonic masculinity are determined by social change.

Connell, R. (1987) Gender and power: society, the person and sexual politics. California: Stanford University Press. p.64-65

Hinojosa, R. (2010) Doing Hegemony: Military, Men, and Constructing a Hegemonic Masculinity. P.180-185

Howson, R. (2006) Challenging hegemonic masculinity. NY: Routledge Publishing Inc. p.64

Karp, D. R. (2010) Unlocking Men, Unmasking Masculinities: Doing Men’s work In Prison. P.63-65

Kimmel, M. S. and Aronson, A. (2004) Men and masculinities: a social, cultural, and historical encyclopedia, Volume 1. CA: ABC-CLIO Inc. p.503-507

Messerschmitt, J.W.(1993) Masculinities and crime: Critique and reconceptualization Of theory . USA: Littlefield Inc. p.27-30

Momsen, J. (2004) Gender and Development . NY: Routledge Publishing Inc. p.81- 83

Schipper, W. C. (2009) Masculinity, spirituality, and sexuality ; The interpreted, lived experience. MA: Proquest LLC. p.19-20

Speer, S. A. (2005) Gender talk; feminism, discourse and conversation analysis. NY: RoutledgePublishing Inc. p.107-112 p.107-109

Usher, D and Robbins, G. (2010) A Social Network Analysis. nd. P.23-35

A Woman From a Western Culture Intending to Work in a Non-Western Culture
Gender and Politeness
“The Most Dangerous Game” a Story by Richard Connell
“Mission: Impossible II”: Hegemonic Masculinity and Male Bonding
The United States as a Hegemonic Country
Gender Differences in Communication
Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Sexuality in the Hispanic Culture
Compare and contrast Germon's account of intersex in 'dangerous desires: intersex
Influence of sex roles on the manifestation of leadership
Sexual Harassment and Culture
Chicago (A-D)
Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2019, May 2). Hegemonic Masculinity. https://ivypanda.com/essays/hegemonic-masculinity-essay/

"Hegemonic Masculinity." IvyPanda , 2 May 2019, ivypanda.com/essays/hegemonic-masculinity-essay/.

IvyPanda . (2019) 'Hegemonic Masculinity'. 2 May.

IvyPanda . 2019. "Hegemonic Masculinity." May 2, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/hegemonic-masculinity-essay/.

1. IvyPanda . "Hegemonic Masculinity." May 2, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/hegemonic-masculinity-essay/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Hegemonic Masculinity." May 2, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/hegemonic-masculinity-essay/.

IvyPanda uses cookies and similar technologies to enhance your experience, enabling functionalities such as:

Basic site functions
Ensuring secure, safe transactions
Secure account login
Remembering account, browser, and regional preferences
Remembering privacy and security settings
Analyzing site traffic and usage
Personalized search, content, and recommendations
Displaying relevant, targeted ads on and off IvyPanda

Please refer to IvyPanda's Cookies Policy and Privacy Policy for detailed information.

Certain technologies we use are essential for critical functions such as security and site integrity, account authentication, security and privacy preferences, internal site usage and maintenance data, and ensuring the site operates correctly for browsing and transactions.

Cookies and similar technologies are used to enhance your experience by:

Remembering general and regional preferences
Personalizing content, search, recommendations, and offers

Some functions, such as personalized recommendations, account preferences, or localization, may not work correctly without these technologies. For more details, please refer to IvyPanda's Cookies Policy .

To enable personalized advertising (such as interest-based ads), we may share your data with our marketing and advertising partners using cookies and other technologies. These partners may have their own information collected about you. Turning off the personalized advertising setting won't stop you from seeing IvyPanda ads, but it may make the ads you see less relevant or more repetitive.

Personalized advertising may be considered a "sale" or "sharing" of the information under California and other state privacy laws, and you may have the right to opt out. Turning off personalized advertising allows you to exercise your right to opt out. Learn more in IvyPanda's Cookies Policy and Privacy Policy .

DOI: 10.1177/0891243205278639
Corpus ID: 5804166

Hegemonic Masculinity

R. Connell , J. Messerschmidt
Published 1 December 2005
Gender & Society

5,269 Citations

Ruptures in hegemonic masculinity: the dialectic between ideology and utopia, from hegemonic masculinity to the hegemony of men, the differentiation of masculinity as a challenge for the concept of hegemonic masculinity, hegemonic masculinity on the sidelines of sport, is “hegemonic masculinity” hegemonic as masculinity two israeli case studies, hegemonic masculinity as a historical problem, measurement of masculinity ideologies: a (critical) review., rethinking masculinities: challenging hegemonic norms and embracing diversity, conceptual or theoretical elements around men and masculini-1, hegemonic masculinity or masculine domination, 133 references, connell’s concept of hegemonic masculinity: a critique, subordinating hegemonic masculinity, male readings of feminist theory: the psychologization of sexual politics in the masculinity literature, what is hegemonic masculinity, research on men and masculinities, of boys and men: masculinity and gender in southern african studies, negotiating hegemonic masculinity: imaginary positions and psycho-discursive practices.

Highly Influential

Masculinities and Globalization

Men in the third world: postcolonial perspectives on masculinity, related papers.

Showing 1 through 3 of 0 Related Papers

Hegemonic Masculinity

February 2007
In book: The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Sociology (pp.1-4)

University of Lisbon

Hanken Schoolof Economics/University of Huddersfield

University of Wollongong

Discover the world's research

25+ million members
160+ million publication pages
2.3+ billion citations
Sex Res Soc Pol

Matthew Numer

Ann-Dorte Christensen
Ann Phoenix

Emily Schwartzman
Nicholas O. Rule

Vasileios Petrogiannis

Jenny McMahon

Robert William Connell

Lucas Forsberg
Connell Robert Carrigan Tim

Bob Blauner
R. W. Connell
Raewyn W. Connell

Recruit researchers
Join for free
Login Email Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google Welcome back! Please log in. Email · Hint Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google No account? Sign up

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

We're Hiring!
Help Center

Hegemonic Masculinity- Rethinking the Concept (R. W. Connell and James W. Messerschmidt)

Related Papers

Angelaki: Journal of the Theoretical Humanities (Vol. 20 No. 1)

Timothy N Laurie

This essay examines masculinity as a quasicausal object and naming practice that guides a range of discussions around gender, with a particular focus on the sociology of masculinity. It begins by examining R.W. Connell’s widely used concept of “hegemonic masculinity,” and scrutinises a series of specialised metaphors around hegemony – strategies, positions, goals – that present masculinity as an effect of competitive communion between men. Having identified key tensions in the explanatory model of hegemonic masculinity, the essay then turns towards the analysis of sense and language outlined in Gilles Deleuze’s The Logic of Sense (1969). Deleuze’s notions of “singularity” and “event” are reworked to support a pragmatic account of how masculinity studies can engage tense relationships between observation, description and representation, an engagement that remains salient for developing the ethical scope of gender studies more broadly.

Tristan Bridges

Cultural capital and hegemonic masculinity are two concepts that have received intense attention. While both have received serious consideration, critique and analysis, the context or field-specificity of each is sometimes ignored. They have been used in a diversity of ways. Using ethnographic and interview data from a US male bodybuilding community, this study highlights one useful employment. Hegemonic masculinity takes different shapes in different fields of interaction, acting as a form of cultural capital: gender capital. Inherent in this discussion are the cultural contradictions apparent among individuals striving for either physical or ideological embodiments of gender capital. Individuals can attempt to embody hegemonic idealizations, but bodies are not only inscribed with gender, inscriptions are read, and read differently by different social actors and in different settings. The capacity of gender capital to remain elusive is precisely what enables gender practices and projects like bodybuilding to retain passionate participation.

Dominic Sciberras

Lynne Gerber

Ex-gay ministries, like many evangelical groups, advocate traditional gender ideologies. But their discourses and practices generate masculine ideals that are quite distinct from hegemonic ones. I argue that rather than simply reproducing hegemonic masculinity, ex-gay ministries attempt to realize godly masculinity, an ideal that differs significantly from hegemonic masculinity and is explicitly critical of it. I discuss three aspects of the godly masculine ideal—de-emphasizing heterosexual conquest, inclusive masculinity, and homo-intimacy—that work to subvert hegemonic masculinity and allow ministry members to critique it while still advocating for innate gender distinction and hierarchy. I conclude by arguing that gender theorists need to be more precise in distinguishing conservative religious masculinities from hegemonic ones.

Men and Masculinities

Abigail Hatcher , Christopher J Colvin , D. Peacock

Matthew Filteau

Christopher J Colvin

This article addresses a paradoxical stance taken by young straight men in three groups who identify aspects of themselves as “gay” to construct heterosexual masculine identities. By subjectively recognizing aspects of their identities as “gay,” these men discursively distance themselves from stereotypes of masculinity and privilege and/or frame themselves as politically progressive. Yet, both of these practices obscure the ways they benefit from and participate in gender and sexual inequality. I develop a theory of “sexual aesthetics” to account for their behavior and its consequences, contributing to a growing body of theory regarding the hybridization of contemporary masculinities and complicating theories of sexual practice.

Social Politics

Cenk Ozbay , Ozan F Sousbois

Politics plays a crucial role in the construction of masculinities. This article examines the workings of political masculinities in Turkey in two categories: conventional party-related political masculinities and the emergence of a cosmopolitan masculinity. This article contributes to, and moves beyond, existing debates on hegemonic masculinity by bringing in political actors and traditions in the lives of ordinary men that are affected by leaders and discourses. We contend that there is a correlation between hegemonic masculinity and political masculinities as they connect and work upon relationality, justification, and persuasion in gender relations , the legitimation of patriarchy, and hierarchical masculinities.

Laura Grindstaff

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

Hegemonic masculinity: combining theory and practice in gender interventions

Rachel jewkes.

a Gender & Health Research Unit , Medical Research Council , Pretoria, South Africa

Robert Morrell

b Office of the Vice-Chancellor , University of Cape Town , Cape Town, South Africa

c School of Humanities, Education and Social Science , Örebro University , Sweden

d Management and Organisation , Hanken School of Economics , Stockholm, Finland

e Human and Health Sciences , University of Huddersfield , Huddersfield, UK

Emma Lundqvist

f Amphi Production , Stockholm, Sweden

David Blackbeard

g School of Applied Human Sciences , University of KwaZulu-Natal , Pietermaritzburg, South Africa

Graham Lindegger

Michael quayle.

h Department of Psychology , University of Limerick , Limerick, Ireland

Yandisa Sikweyiya

Lucas gottzén.

i Department of Social and Welfare Studies , Linköping University , Linköping, Sweden

The concept of hegemonic masculinity has been used in gender studies since the early-1980s to explain men’s power over women. Stressing the legitimating power of consent (rather than crude physical or political power to ensure submission), it has been used to explain men’s health behaviours and the use of violence. Gender activists and others seeking to change men’s relations with women have mobilised the concept of hegemonic masculinity in interventions, but the links between gender theory and activism have often not been explored. The translation of ‘hegemonic masculinity’ into interventions is little examined. We show how, in South Africa and Sweden, the concept has been used to inform theoretically-based gender interventions and to ensure that men are brought into broader social efforts to build gender equity. We discuss the practical translational challenges of using gender theory broadly, and hegemonic masculinity in particular, in a Swedish case study, of the intervention Machofabriken [The Macho Factory], and illustrate how the concept is brought to life in this activist work with men. The concept has considerable practical application in developing a sustainable praxis of theoretically grounded interventions that are more likely to have enduring effect, but evaluating broader societal change in hegemonic masculinity remains an enduring challenge.

Résumé

Depuis le début des années 80, le concept de masculinité hégémonique est utilisé dans les études de genre pour expliquer le pouvoir des hommes sur les femmes. Soulignant le pouvoir de légitimation du consentement (plutôt que le pouvoir physique brut ou politique pour assurer la soumission), il a été utilisé pour expliquer les comportements de santé des hommes et le recours à la violence. Si les militants pour l’égalité des genres et les autres personnes engagées pour changer les relations entre hommes et femmes ont mobilisé le concept de masculinité hégémonique dans les interventions, les liens entre la théorie du genre et le militantisme n’ont guère été explorés. La traduction de « masculinité hégémonique » dans les interventions est peu examinée. Nous montrons comment, en Afrique du Sud et en Suède, ce concept a été utilisé pour orienter les interventions sur le genre basées sur cette théorie et garantir que les hommes soient associés à des activités sociales plus larges pour construire l’égalité des genres. Nous discutons des défis translationnels pratiques d’une large utilisation de la théorie du genre et de la masculinité hégémonique, en particulier dans un cas d’étude suédois, de l’intervention machofabriken [fabrique de machos] et montrons comment le concept prend forme dans cette approche de militantisme avec les hommes. Le concept a une application pratique considérable dans le développement d’une praxis durable d’interventions théoriquement ancrées qui sont plus susceptibles d’avoir un effet persistant, mais l’évaluation d’un changement sociétal plus large dans la masculinité hégémonique reste un défi qui perdure.

Desde principios de los ochenta se ha utilizado el concepto de masculinidad hegemónica en los estudios sobre los diferentes sexos para explicar el poder de los hombres sobre las mujeres. Al recalcar el poder legitimante del consentimiento (más que el primitivo poder físico o político para garantizar la sumisión), el concepto ha servido para interpretar las conductas con respecto a la salud y el uso de la violencia por parte de los hombres. Los activistas en cuestiones de género y otras personas que quieren cambiar las relaciones de los hombres con las mujeres han movilizado el concepto de masculinidad hegemónica en las intervenciones, no obstante con frecuencia no se han estudiado los vínculos entre la teoría de los sexos y el activismo. Y tampoco se ha analizado suficientemente la traducción de “masculinidad hegemónica” en las intervenciones. Aquí demostramos cómo ha servido este concepto en Sudáfrica y Suecia para crear intervenciones sexuales de base teórica y asegurar que los hombres participen en acciones sociales más amplias para fomentar la igualdad entre los sexos. Analizamos los retos prácticos de interpretación al utilizar más ampliamente la teoría de los sexos y sobre todo la masculinidad hegemónica en un estudio monográfico sueco, del programa Machofabriken [La fábrica machista], e ilustramos cómo este concepto cobra vida en este trabajo de activistas con los hombres. Este concepto tiene una amplia aplicación práctica en el desarrollo de una praxis sostenible de intervenciones de base teórica con más probabilidad de que tengan un efecto duradero, sin embargo, evaluar el cambio social más amplio en la masculinidad hegemónica sigue siendo un reto continuo.

Introduction

How does the concept of hegemonic masculinity inform practical, on-the-ground work (as distinct from policy work) by those who try to change men’s behaviour with a goal of building gender equity? Recent reviews of interventions with men and boys have highlighted the diversity of this work, its historical trajectory, as well as its broad global footprint (Flood 2011 ; Jewkes, Flood, and Lang 2014 , 2014 ; Ricardo, Eads, and Barker 2012 ). A unifying aspect of much of this is an underlying premise that although men are structurally related to women in a superior position and inherently benefit from this what Raewyn Connell called the patriarchal dividend (Connell 1987 ), they do have a ‘choice’ about whether or not actively to occupy oppressive positions vis-à-vis women and other men or to resist these. This choice may be highly constrained due to a lack of exposure to other ideas and information, but it is ultimately still a choice, and in this respect presents itself as a target for change by gender activists. A central task for individual-level work with men to change gender relations is to initiate a process of reflection on the implications of ways of living, and awareness of alternatives, to explore and empower them to work for gender equity. Yet ideas about gender operate in social groups and include the disparate social value accorded men over women in many societies (Hearn et al. 2012 ), which informs not just how men think about themselves, but also how social groups relate, access resources and prescribe and proscribe particular behaviours. Changing hegemonic masculinity ultimately requires change in ideals shared at a societal level.

This paper derives from a collaborative project between masculinity scholars in South Africa and Sweden. We first provide an overview of the theoretical concept of hegemonic masculinity that is our focus, then we describe the context of the dialogue between South Africa and Sweden; in the next section we discuss challenges that may arise in the course of deploying the concept of hegemonic masculinity in interventions and highlight a case study of the intervention Machofabriken [The Macho Factory] from Sweden.

Hegemonic masculinity: a theoretical overview

Raewyn Connell’s concept of hegemonic masculinity (Connell 1987 ) serves as an analytical instrument to identify those attitudes and practices among men that perpetuate gender inequality, involving both men’s domination over women and the power of some men over other (often minority groups of) men. The concept has been widely used and debated, and over the years refined (Connell and Messerschmidt 2005 ), with the basic idea that hegemonic masculinity is ‘a culturally idealized form’ and ‘is both a personal and a collective project’ (Donaldson 1993 , 645). In a recent review, a ‘usual’ conceptualisation of hegemonic masculinity is described as:

a set of values, established by men in power that functions to include and exclude, and to organize society in gender unequal ways. It combines several features: a hierarchy of masculinities, differential access among men to power (over women and other men), and the interplay between men’s identity, men’s ideals, interactions, power, and patriarchy. (Jewkes and Morrell 2012 , 40)

Masculinities are multiple, fluid and dynamic and hegemonic positions are not the only masculinities available in a given society. They may also be seen as positions that are occupied situationally, in that the position occupied, practices and values espoused in one context may be different from those of another. A core element of the construction of hegemonic masculinity is heterosexuality, and to a greater or lesser extent hegemonic masculinity is constructed as a gender position that is as much ‘not gay’ as it is ‘not female’.

The notion of hegemony has its roots in the writing of Gramsci and is a essentially a position of dominance attained through relative consensus rather than regular force, even if underpinned by force (Gramsci 1971 ). The consensus is one that is built among those who benefit from the promotion of masculinity, as well as many of those who are oppressed by it, notably women. Hegemonic masculinity is as much for women as for men a cultural ideal of manhood, which is rewarded by women’s interests, attentions and efforts to replicate this ideal in their male relatives and associates.

In the Sweden-South Africa collaboration, there were a number of major debates. One was about whether the masculinity of men who are structurally subordinated in society, for example working-class men in Sweden or poor African men in South Africa, could be regarded as ‘hegemonic’, as these men do not perceive themselves to be ‘in power’. In this respect, Connell and Messerschmidt’s (2005) elaboration that there can be more than one hegemonic masculinity within a society and it can pertain within sub-groups is helpful. It resonates with the experience of gender activists in the group about the utility of the concept in intervention work in subordinated communities.

However, the debate emphasised a challenge for those seeking to change masculinities, which lies in recognising that not all harmful masculinities are hegemonic (Connell 2005 ; Hearn 2004 ; Hearn et al. 2012 ). Some forms of destructive and exaggerated masculinities (or hypermasculinity [Herek 1987 ]) often develop among socially marginalised men in urban slums and emphasise power and force. They are not entirely separate from hegemonic masculinity to the extent that they emerge out of the relationship between hegemonic ideals and (some) men’s ability to meet them. Their origins lie in adversity, including in violence experiences in childhood that have enduring psychological impact, manifesting in a lack of empathy and remorse, which enable acts of violence while positioning the male actors as themselves victims (Bourgois 1996 ; Fulu et al. 2013 ; Jewkes et al. 2011, 2013 ; Mathews, Jewkes, and Abrahams 2011 ). Masculinities are constructed in ways that reflect poverty or power, regional cultures and neighbourhood dynamics. From Hindu understandings of violence in India (Mehta 2006 ) to bonds between men in Mexico (Magazine 2004 ) and youth understandings of sexuality and male control in South Africa (Wood and Jewkes 2001 ; Wood, Lambert, and Jewkes 2007 ), it is evident that subordinated men across the world are actors as well as acted upon. Moreover, there may be a conflation of individuals who are prone to violence because of childhood experience, peer cultures that exert peer pressure to commit violence, and social norms within the gender regimes, which legitimate violence. The confluence of these factors poses a formidable challenge to gender activists seeking to intervene.

The question about whether the use of violence was inimical to hegemonic masculinity was keenly debated. Hearn and others have argued that men’s violence against women has not been a major focus in the development of the theoretical concept of hegemonic masculinity (Groes-Green 2009 ; Hearn 2012 ). At the same time the use of violence diminishes men, and so other approaches, such as hypermasculinity (Herek 1987 ), may be more useful than hegemonic masculinity to refer to men who use violence, since they do not conflate a hegemonic process with a gender stereotype. Violent and sexist masculine values and practices may be, but are not, necessarily hegemonic in a given culture (Messerschmidt 2012 ). The counter argument is that men who use violence and threaten violence often have a considerable repertoire of everyday acts of low-level violence, particularly directed against their partner at home, and this does not diminish their public stature. Indeed, this may even serve indirectly to enhance it to the extent that they may be seen as ‘in control’ of their homes. Given the private nature of intimate partner violence and frequent reluctance of women to talk about it, a considerable amount of its use is never known about by those outside the intimate relationship (Garcia-Moreno et al. 2005 ). In South Africa, there is a considerable body of research on hegemonic masculinity (Morrell et al. 2013 ) that elaborates on the situated ‘contents’ of hegemonic masculinity and argues that demonstrating strength, toughness and the capacity to use and often actual use of violence are very much part of hegemonic masculinity there. This is different from Sweden, and highlights the need to understand the content of hegemonic masculinity in different settings (Hearn et al. 2012 ). Masculinities are context-specific and bear the imprint of history (Cornwall, Edström, and Greig 2011 ).

The relationship between gender norms, social collectivities and the individual is complex, with each impacting on the other, with different force and effect at different times. Hegemonic masculinity has been largely utilised as a social structural concept to explain the legitimisation of masculinities through social institutions and social groups (Morrell, Jewkes, and Lindegger 2012 ). It can also be used in this way in interventions that seek to impact on social norms related to masculinity, but when interventions are with individual men or groups of men, its value is to surface (and then shift) values and attitudes and provoke reflection on behaviour.

Another understanding of hegemonic masculinity that has been debated and examined is that it is a problem not only for women, but also for men. The system that keeps men in a collectively dominant position over women and in competitive relations to other men comes at a cost for men in terms of their health and quality of life. Faced with an ideal where physical resilience is valorised, men find it harder to seek healthcare and engage in preventive activities. The impact is most clearly seen in a country like South Africa in excess mortality from violence and chronic diseases (Cornell et al. 2012 ; Matzopoulos et al. 2014 ; Seedat et al. 2009 ). Thus, change in hegemonic masculinity can herald tangible benefits for men, as well as for women.

From its outset, the purpose of the collaborative project was to investigate the way in which hegemonic masculinity was understood in the two national contexts and how it was translated into practical gender equality work. The project was interested to understand how the concept was used in academic research and, more popularly, by activists and the lay public as the concept is now used quite widely. A means of doing this was to engage gender activists in conversation with academic researchers. Both in South Africa and Sweden, non-governmenatl organisations (NGOs) have emerged to undertake gender work with men, and these are generally staffed by committed gender activists who engage at multiple levels with issues of gender inequality, including developing materials and working with men, negotiating with government, using legal instruments and mounting protests. Although in both of the contexts gender equity was formally embraced as a goal and valued as a social good, there were significant economic, social-historical and cultural differences. Sweden had a relatively long history of feminism and social democracy, following its long-running imperial past; South Africa was a new constitutional democracy emerging from half a century of institutional and economic apartheid and three centuries of colonialism. Patriarchy was shaped in relation to racial inequalities, traditional social structures and economic disparities, and these were key intersectional features of the gender order. By contrast, Sweden has a strong history of state interventions such as the provision of paternity leave though aspects of gender inequality, including violence, certainly persist (Hearn et al. 2012 ; Johansson and Klinth 2008 ).

National differences meant that the interventions undertaken by NGOs that we discussed shared both similarities and differences. In South Africa, gender interventions with men have historically focused on two major problems – violence and HIV transmission. In Sweden, violence has also been a major focus, but other key interventions have worked with fatherhood and related aspects of the domestic and labour market divisions of labour. While South African interventions have diversified to include work on more enduring issues, such as fatherhood and unemployment, many of the interventions had short-term goals – reducing gender-based violence, reducing HIV transmission – with longer-term goals of transforming gender norms and behaviours. Swedish interventions have worked more towards longer-term goals. Changing values and attitudes that underpin, express and legitimise the everyday activities that perpetuate gender inequality has generally been the focus of their work. In South Africa, gender activists have worked largely in a political culture that espouses gender equity ‘talk’ and has a strong legislative framework, but where the ‘walk’ of political leadership has largely countermanded these efforts (Morrell et al. 2013 ). In Sweden, political leadership and social policy have been mostly consistent in supporting work of gender activists and have led to a relatively rapid gender change over the last 50 years (Hearn et al. 2012 ).

Differences between South Africa and Sweden were discussed over the four-year life of the project, with meetings held alternately in South Africa and Sweden. It became clear that there were different views about the ways in which hegemonic masculinity could be used in analysing gender relations, which reflected, in part, the different contexts and the challenges that flowed therefrom. Despite these differences, it was also clear that gender activists in both countries found some value in the concept and operationalised it in their programmes.

Changing hegemonic masculinity: challenge of translating theory into action

Setting goals.

The concept of hegemonic masculinity is sometimes used as part of a theory of change, but more commonly is seen in terms of identifying a key element in the gender order that is part of an explanation for the existence and perpetuation of gender inequality. While it is never fixed and explicitly accommodates change over time, and centrally argues that masculinities are by nature fluid and dynamic, it is not intended to enable identification of significant moments when hegemonic masculinity is more rather than less gender equitable. The concept of hegemonic masculinity can be actively incorporated into intervention design to enable change. It can be part of an intervention’s theory of change, but the question of whether hegemonic masculinity can change to the point of being not oppressive to women, and what happens to the hierarchy of masculinities at that point remains unclear.

One of the major debates in the project was about whether it was correct to view Sweden as a country that had ‘achieved’ gender equity and thus where hegemonic masculinity was largely egalitarian. Viewed from the lens of Swedish gender researchers and activists, any conclusion that gender equity in Sweden was ‘mission accomplished’ was not defensible. For as long as gender binaries and gendered power hierarchies have not been deconstructed and the gender order is upheld by the constant differentiation between masculinity and femininity, men will maintain hegemony (Hearn 2004 ). Yet when Sweden was compared to South African patriarchy, the gender order in Sweden was enviable. It seems that there is a danger in defining gender inequality interventions as a zero-sum game where unless patriarchy is demonstrably upended, changes over time in hegemonic masculinity are not celebrated, but treated with suspicion.

The ultimate challenge for gender activists is change in the ‘idealised form’ of masculinity, which will result in the most enduring impact on a society, and yet most interventions are driven by the short-term goal of change in the attitudes and behaviour of individual men. A goal that is much easier to evaluate, with gender attitude scales and measures of use of violence, but that uncertainly maps on to the broader social project of change in an ideal. If interventions focus on particular men, then it becomes necessary to acknowledge contradictions and inconsistencies that will limit the impact of interventions, and to acknowledge that such interventions are incremental rather than widely socially transformative.

Talking gender

In most settings, it is possible to provide a context in which men and women will talk about their roles, relations and expectations, but transformative work on ‘gender’ implies a deep engagement that goes beyond this. A first hurdle is often gaining the attention of those who are to be engaged. Discussions of gendered power often need to be approached indirectly, lest resistance is encountered to processes that may be variously seen as outrageous in questioning men’s power, or ridiculous, where men’s power is ‘taken for granted’. If gender identities or power relations are not seen as ‘a problem’, it is hard to get engagement in gender interventions. Gender activists have often learned the need to open discussions indirectly, often through eliciting what is seen as a problem in the locale or by the target group, and to use these as a way in to discussions. This is done very effectively in an exercise in the Stepping Stones (Welbourn 1995 ) manual entitled The Joys and Problems of Sex, where the group, who have come together to discuss HIV prevention, are asked to call out (or write on paper) words linked to sex that reflect joys, problems or both. These are then discussed in order to enable group ownership of the ‘problems’, which opens the door to later discussion of their causes and consequences in a process of critical reflection and a facilitated dialogue on the gendered nature of these problems.

The challenge for gender activists is to engage with gender, and inevitably gender roles, without losing the analysis of power and gender identity. Gender roles and norms are familiar, and much easier to discuss in groups than reflection on gender binaries, values and power. There are a range of tools that gender activists can draw on in enabling change, these span the pedagogical theories of Paulo Freire ( 1970 ) (i.e., change through dialogue, reflexivity and consciousness-raising) to contributions from discursive psychology such as Edley and Wetherell (1997, 215) (i.e., ‘cultural struggle vividly reproduced in talk’) and Frosh Phoenix and Pattman (2002) (i.e., through ‘restoring agency’ through critical observation, reflection and exposure to counter-normative discourses). All of these can become tools within transformative processes.

Men’s rights movements champion the idea of men as ‘victims’ (in the face of women’s empowerment) through an analysis that ignores the structural dimensions of men’s power (Maddison 1999 ). Gender activists have the challenge of opening up discussion of men’s vulnerability, while steering group analysis of the situation of men away from the men’s rights movement position. It’s an essential discussion, as experience of personal trauma, for example in the form of abuse in childhood or homophobic abuse, has been linked to a greater propensity among men to use violence against women (Fulu et al. 2013 ), and many men who present a hypermasculinity have a personal trauma history. Allowing space to engage with men’s vulnerability is a key element in exploring masculine identities, as well as allowing men to feel supported and accepted, rather than blamed and judged. It is also critical to processes of breaking down the gender binary, where vulnerability is seen as reflecting feminised weakness and enabling discussion of multiple masculinities.

Creating, securing and keeping a constituency

To enable change, it is essential to reflect on the social construction of hegemonic masculinity. If an ideal of masculinity is a product of social processes, as opposed to ‘natural’, it can be changed. The Swedish intervention, The Macho Factory (see below) addresses this centrally in its title. For other interventions, social construction of hegemonic masculinity and subordinate masculinities and femininities can be made visible through exercises that both ‘reveal’ how men and women receive messages, and from whom, about what is expected of them as men and women, and how behaviour is rewarded and transgressions sanctioned. From a Freirian change model perspective, interventions that facilitate dialogue create opportunities to reflect, innovate and thereby transform positioning (Blackbeard and Lindegger 2014; Stromquist 2014 ). As shown in autophotography studies in South Africa, participatory groups can form around processes of documenting and discussing experiences, dilemmas and contexts of masculinity, thereby dialoguing new possibilities for individual and group positioning (Blackbeard and Lindegger, 2014). It is generally not possible to reach and retain men in participatory processes without engagement with men’s vulnerability and positive aspects of masculinity, so it is essential for interventions to balance reflection on the power, vulnerabilities and oppression of hegemonic masculinity and positive aspects of men’s aspirations.

One of the critical questions in developing processes of gender change is whether it is possible to deconstruct gender as a binary. Alsop, Fitzsimmons and Lennon (2002) argue that ‘even critical studies of masculinity which draw on a social constructionism often retain a residual essentialism that a division between men and women and the assumption that masculinity belongs to men and femininity to women unquestioningly underpins analysis’ (132). Essentially, The Macho Factory provides an example of both the importance of and an approach for deconstructing gender binaries. There are other possible approaches, and these may include participatory exercises that emphasise the overlap between traits of men and women (e.g., both can be caring or strong), for example through free listing of men and women’s characteristics and attributes required for their gendered work and then comparing what appears on both lists and discussing what cannot appear on the list of the other.

One of the challenges with small-group work is to find ways for the group to change in the face of social norms that encourage conformity (Campbell and Cornish 2012 ). The group environment itself is somewhat enabling, especially if it builds group selection on an existing group of peers (i.e., deliberate friendship-group recruitment). But it is hard for individuals to change, or sustain change, in the face of unchallenged broader social norms and so, in this respect, intervention at multiple levels within a social environment or other community is much more likely to be effective (Jewkes, Flood, and Lang 2014 ).

Further, the relational construction of gender is critical and it is much more likely that interventions that engage both men and women in critical reflection on gender identities, roles and practices will be successful (Jewkes, Flood, and Lang 2014 ). The concept of hegemonic masculinity is predicated on the subordination of women and girls, yet the latter are a key element in the construction and reproduction of the social model (Jewkes and Morrell 2012 ). Thus, work with women and girls is needed to create an environment in which men can change and sustain change, and where this will be embraced by women as partners, or potential partners (Talbot and Quayle 2010 ).

This work with women needs to proceed with gender analysis on a very similar discursive and reflective journey to that followed by men, so that women can develop critical consciousness of their right to live without subjugation by men as well as their role in reproducing their subordinate position through gender socialisation, their contribution to gender hierarchy through social sanctioning and marginalisation of certain femininities and masculinities, and responses to oppression in the family and community. Research on how women change has also highlighted the importance of change in the structural nature of relations between men and women through economically empowering women (Jewkes, Flood, and Lang 2014 ). For example, interventions such as the IMAGE microfinance and gender intervention in South Africa, which addressed the material insecurity of women and their gendered subordination, have been shown to enable women to protect themselves from intimate partner violence two years after the intervention, whereas, by contrast, just engaging women in microfinance (or elsewhere gender interventions alone) is not effective (Pronyk et al. 2006 ).

Interventions that seek fundamentally to change ideals of masculinity have been termed ‘gender transformative’ (Barker, Ricardo, and Nascimento 2007 ). This suggests that they are able to make a dramatic change in the relationship between masculinity and gender equity. However, a more cautious analysis of the types of change that are secured by such interventions suggests that men’s strides towards gender equity are at best incremental (Gibbs et al. 2014 ; Jewkes, Wood, and Duvvury 2010 ). Some interventions with men have shown an ability to reduce perpetration of violence, but the relationship between this and change in hegemonic masculinity is uncertain because the relationship between violence and hegemonic masculinity is itself contested (Jewkes et al. 2008 ). This observation does not mean that revolutionary change cannot ever be achieved, but it does suggest that in order to do so, interventions supporting structural and individual change need to be substantially different, and perhaps delivered over a much longer time frame than is currently common practice.

Donor-funded interventions are often expected to demonstrate short- or medium-term impact. This may bias intervention selection towards ones that are more likely to do this – essentially individually-based interventions – rather than more diffuse social-norm change models such as SHARE or SASA! in Uganda or COMBAT developed by the Gender Centre in Accra, Ghana, which only expect to achieve long-term goals after multi-year work in a community (Abramsky et al. 2012 ; Wagman et al. 2015 ).

A case study from Sweden: The Macho Factory ( Machofabriken )

The Macho Factory comprises educational material and associated activities designed for use in Sweden by professionals working with young people in schools, sports clubs and other leisure activities for young people aged 13–25 years. The aim is increased gender equity and violence prevention, by ‘breaking the link’ between masculinity and violence, and by focusing on how social norms of masculinity can be challenged and changed. The material consists of 17 short films and related exercises, divided into six different themes, along with an extended tutorial manual (Lundqvist et al. 2010 ). The material is intended to be used in mixed-gender groups of 5 to 20, but can also be used in groups with only girls or only boys.

The Macho Factory was developed with the idea that masculinity norms need to be at the centre when working with violence prevention, and could work as a way to change expectations on young men to use violence. When developing the material, several gender theories have been used. The material is based on ethnomethodological (West and Zimmerman 1987 ) and poststructuralist (Butler 1990 ) perspectives on gender; that is, gender is seen as something individuals learn and enact in everyday, embodied interaction. These theories are manifested in the name of the programme; the macho concept that has often been used to characterise certain dominant and/or stigmatised masculinities is combined with a concept that signals the social construction of gender. The Macho Factory therefore indicates the ‘doing’ and ‘undoing’ of masculinity.

The programme is explicitly inspired by masculinity theory, particularly hegemonic masculinity and hypermasculinity (Herek 1987 ), even if the link to the concept of hegemonic masculinity varies in the different parts of the material. Another important influence is gender system theory (Hirdman 1990 ), which presents two supporting logics that reproduce gender hierarchy: one is the male-female dichotomy and the other is the hierarchy according to which the man is the norm. Perhaps the most important influences are queer theory (Butler 1990 ; Sedgwick 1990 ) and intersectionality theory (Crenshaw 1991 ), which contribute with norm-critical, anti-essentialist perspectives on gender. Gender transformative programmes cannot simply emphasise how intersections of gender, class and race exacerbate violence in some groups, but it is also necessary to deconstruct social categories since there is otherwise a risk of essentialising certain groups of men as being more violent or oppressive than others (Gottzén and Jonsson 2012 ). Drawing on queer and intersectionality theories, the basic idea of the programme is that it is not enough to create more ‘gender equal men’, but that gender binaries and gendered power hierarchies have to be deconstructed since the gender order is upheld by the constant differentiation between masculinity and femininity. Crucial is which individuals and bodies are seen as masculine, who is able to define what is seen as proper masculine behaviour and which embodied individuals are seen as the Other. In this context, violence is positioned as a resource to accomplish proper masculinity and male superiority (cf. Messerschmidt 1993 ).

In order to explain the relation between individual and structure, where they are not seen as separate and fixed entities, the Macho Factory uses the idea of the box as a metaphor for the corporeal and material possibilities, and limitations, of attempts to accomplish masculine ideals. The content of these ideals is developed in each group by writing down the prohibitions and prescriptions associated with being inside the box. The box is always presented as a place that gives security and higher status, and that is connected to power and the monopoly of violence. But the box has also some limitations. It prohibits transgressions of masculine norms at the cost of losing privileges. However, individuals are also able to move in and out of the box and manage privileges. Women and individuals coded as ‘too feminine’ or in other ways breaching heterosexual and masculine norms are, according to the material, not able to get inside the box but could be close to it and could orientate themselves to its norms – or not. The option of violent behaviours to solve dilemmas is not sanctioned in group facilitation.

When developing The Macho Factory, 1 the group used ‘association exercises’ in which various masculinity archetypes were structured in relation to Connell’s ( 2005 ) hierarchical model. Because of the perception that hegemonic masculinity in Sweden is a power position where the use of violence is not necessary, the notion of hypermasculinity was used to reflect the use of extreme forms of violence that may be connected to a lower-status position, as it may create suffering ill health, and lower social status.

This is illustrated by one of the short films in the programme material, namely, The Locker Room, where boys towel-whip one another. At first it is play, then one boy becomes too violent, accentuates what is allowed as play, with the consequence that he is regarded as problematic and is excluded from the group. The film tries to illustrate how boys and men who do not use ‘serious’ violence are responsible for making violence a possible alternative for those who ‘cross the line’. Destructive forms of violence are enabled when less severe forms of violence are enjoyed and used to create different forms of homosociality. Those boys and men who do not use violence, but are not condemning it (since it might result in group exclusion with loss of status), have indirect responsibility for more severe forms of violence used by some men (Kelly 1988 ). Boys may incite and provoke certain forms of violence without losing hegemonic position, but the ones using violence run the risk of being subordinated.

The Macho Factory also directly targets men’s violence against women. For instance, one film illustrates an interrogation with a young man suspected of assaulting his female partner and how he defends himself. The film aims to demonstrate how men are able to blame their victims and deny responsibility for their own violence. Another movie, Hemmakväll (literally translated as Home Night), portrays a young man that has raped his girlfriend but normalises his behaviour and does not want to identify himself as ‘someone who rapes’. This film also discusses the relation between normalised, man-to-man violence to violence against women as the character compares his girlfriend’s victimhood with his own experience of other men’s violence, which he rationalises does not need to be taken seriously. In the accompanying exercises, such minimising of sexual violence is challenged by scrutinising common accounts for violence and how they relate to hegemonic forms of masculinity, such as notions of men’s entitlement to women’s bodies.

The methods in the programme aim at enacting everyday situations in order to enable new ways to act and thus create change. The films are also tools for raising situations that may be too sensitive or difficult to discuss otherwise (Falk-Lundqvist 2010 ). Several of the methods used in The Macho Factory are inspired by drama education, with the basic notion that enactment in itself creates new understandings and enables changed behaviour (Byréus 2012 ). The explicit aim with the programme is to create spaces where young men are not expected to defend their position in the box. Through this, the aim is to help participants to do masculinity in new ways, which in the end they may practise outside the programme. One way to create such space is through so-called forum theatre, developed by Augusto Boal ( 1992, 1995 ), which is a form of critical theatre that enacts scenes with oppressors and oppressed. While the audience is not allowed to change the oppressor, it may suggest how to reduce oppression by, for instance, making the individuals act differently and not giving oppressors their consent. The Macho Factory is clearly inspired by forum theatre and the short films may be compared to Boal’s dramas, but with the structuralist tendencies (with already given hierarchies) toned down. In order to discuss the short films, the programme also uses ‘hearing’ exercises, where participants try to understand and question the intentions of the characters, as well as to create new stories and situations. For instance, participants may first see a film where a girl is sexualised when she auditions for a bass player position in a band. After the film, participants enact a scene where they enter the male characters in the film and answer to questions from the other participants about how they felt and thought when they behaved the way they did. This is a way to explore and question norms behind sexism.

Finally, a central dilemma in The Macho Factory is that the intervention is dependent on individuals, whilst gender inequality and oppression is societal. Leadership of group processes are crucial in order for the methods to lead to change and not reproduce power relations (Byréus 2012 ). The programme also employs exercises designed to create a secure and open environment by developing communication skills in competent group leadership. Trust between participants is a crucial prerequisite for challenging and changing gender norms (Wheelan 2010 ).

This paper illustrates how the concept of hegemonic masculinity is, and can be, used in interventions for building gender equity and to reduce gender-based violence against women. Hegemonic masculinity identifies how gender power operates at multiple levels, it provides an overarching framework for understanding how gender inequalities are produced and reproduced, both in the long term and the quotidian. On the other hand, because hegemonic masculinity is a concept that accommodates fluidity and dynamism, it is not easy to identify stasis or movement. Most interventions sidestep this problem by operating on a short-term project basis that addresses specific elements of hegemonic masculinity. This allows interventions to effect changes at individual, group and discursive levels or on individual male practices (such as reducing gender-based violence), which may impact on individuals but, unless taken to scale, will not by themselves contribute to change in the gender order.

Despite being an abstraction, hegemonic masculinity can practicably be put to use in interventions. This requires that careful attention be paid to the mechanisms that the theory that encompasses hegemonic masculinity identifies as being central to men’s domination of women. Research and practice related to gender-based violence prevention has highlighted the importance of using theoretically-based interventions and the much greater likelihood that these will be effective in bringing about change (Jewkes, Flood, and Lang 2014 ). We have shown that the theoretical concept of hegemonic masculinity is a key part of the evidence that needs to be worked into gender interventions and through so doing can result in interventions that seek to change men’s practices, identities and relations with women to reduce violence, promote gender equity and improve men’s health. While gender theorists have debated the utility of the concept, the parallel field of activism has been actively engaging with it and shown its value in both understanding men’s power over women and configurations of practice, as well as providing examples of how masculinity is transformed in a context where there is critical consciousness about the process and goals as well as a willingness to refine the theory. In so doing, both activists and theorists have enriched the concept of hegemonic masculinity through its critical application in transnational contexts.

Gender activists contribute to theory by translating in practical, hands-on contexts, an abstract concept into constituent parts and, at the same time, contribute to understandings of how gender relations, identities and regimes are transformed and what the obstacles are that prevent movement. As the example of Macho Factory shows, this involves a reflective process that constantly brings the theoretical concept of hegemonic masculinity into conversation with the practical challenges of intervention work.

Among the important findings that flow from combining theory with practice is that masculinity itself should not be presented as inherently problematic or oppressive. It is essential that interventions with individual men should focus on the male privileges that stem from the patriarchal social order and change in practices and beliefs of men, whilst contributing to an overarching goal of change in the configuration of masculine ideals. This challenge is also the Achilles heel of much gender work that seeks to take a theory that operates at a community or social structural level and implement it at individual and group levels. Alone, the effects of such work will be slow. Multi-level interventions that seek to enable and facilitate sustainable changes, including change in social norms, are much more likely to be successful in advancing the global project of building gender equity. A further implication is that work with women to secure change in social norms is essential in order to create an environment in which there can be sustained change among individual men.

The Hegemonic Masculinities and Men in Sweden and South Africa: Theorising Power and Change project was funded jointly by the South African National Research Foundation (NRF) and the Swedish Vetenskapsrådet (VR). RJ and YS are funded by the South Africa Medical Research Council and DFID.

Acknowledgements

This document is an output from the What Works to prevent Violence: A Global Programme, funded by the UK Aid from the UK Department for International Development (DFID) for the benefit of developing countries. However, the views expressed and information contained in it are not necessarily those of or endorsed by DFID, which can accept no responsibility for such views or information or for any reliance placed on them.

Marie Nordberg was an important part of the joint project group until her untimely death in 2015. Her contribution to gender research in Sweden and this project was immense and she is greatly missed.

1. The Macho Factory was developed by Amphi Poduktion, an educational company specialised in gender-based social change, on behalf of three organisations working on violence against women, the National Organisation for Women’s and Young Women’s Shelters in Sweden (ROKS), Unizon (formerly Swedish Association of Women’s Shelters and Young Women’s Empowerment Centres) and Men for Gender Equality Sweden. The material was developed over three years and included a researcher reference group, a youth pilot group, a methods development group with educators, several script and manuscript writers and a film team. All included, 149 people were involved in developing the Macho Factory, 55% of whom were men or boys. After the initial development, teachers and youth recreation leaders tested the programme with 439 girls and 491 boys between 13 and 25 years of age in different parts of Sweden and in a variety of settings, and then gave feedback to the programme developers. There are no records about class and ethnic background of the participants in this first wave of test groups. More than 500 group leaders were trained in the material in the first two years.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Abramsky T., Devries K., Kiss L., Francisco L., Nakuti J., Musuya T., Kyegombe N., et al. A Community Mobilisation Intervention to Prevent Violence against Women and Reduce HIV/AIDS Risk in Kampala, Uganda (the SASA! Study): Study Protocol for a Cluster Randomised Controlled Trial. Trials . 2012; 13 :96. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-13-96. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Alsop R., Fitzsimmons A., Lennon K. Theorising Gender . Cambridge: Polity; 2002. [ Google Scholar ]
Barker G., Ricardo C., Nascimento M. Engaging Men and Boys to Transform Gender-Based Health Inequities: Is There Evidence of Impact? Geneva/Rio de Janiero: World Health Organization/Institute Promundo; 2007. [ Google Scholar ]
Blackbeard D. R., Lindegger G. Dialogues through autophotography: young masculinity and HIV identity in KwaZulu-Natal. European Journal of Social and Behavioural Sciences . 2014; 10 :1466–1477. [ Google Scholar ]
Boal A. Games for Actors and Non-Actors . London: Routledge; 1992. [ Google Scholar ]
Boal A. The Rainbow of Desire: The Boal Method of Theatre and Therapy . London: Routledge; 1995. [ Google Scholar ]
Bourgois P. In Search of Masculinity - Violence, Respect and Sexuality among Puerto Rican Crack Dealers in East Harlem. British Journal of Criminology . 1996; 36 :412–427. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.bjc.a014103. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Butler J. Gender Trouble: Feminism and Subversion of Identity . New York: Routledge; 1990. [ Google Scholar ]
Byréus K. Kreativa Metoder För Grupputveckling Och Handledning [Creative Methods for Group Development and Instruction] Malmö: Liber; 2012. [ Google Scholar ]
Campbell C., Cornish F. How Can Community Health Programmes Build Enabling Environments for Transformative Communication? Experiences from India and South Africa. AIDS and Behavior . 2012; 16 (4):847–857. doi: 10.1007/s10461-011-9966-2. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Connell R. Gender and Power: Society, the Person and Sexual Politics . Palo Alta: University of California Press; 1987. [ Google Scholar ]
Connell R. W. Masculinities . Cambridge: Polity Press; 2005. [ Google Scholar ]
Connell R. W., Messerschmidt J. Hegemonic Masculinity: Rethinking the Concept. Gender & Society . 2005; 19 (6):829–859. [ Google Scholar ]
Cornell M., Schomaker M., Garone D. B., Giddy J., Hoffmann C. J., Lessells R., Maskew M., et al. Gender Differences in Survival among Adult Patients Starting Antiretroviral Therapy in South Africa: A Multicentre Cohort Study. PLoS Med . 2012; 9 (9):e1001304. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Cornwall A., Edström J., Greig A., editors. Men and Development: Politicising Masculinities . London: Zed Press; 2011. [ Google Scholar ]
Crenshaw K. Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence against Women of Color. Stanford Law Review . 1991; 43 (6):1241–1299. doi: 10.2307/1229039. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Donaldson M. What is Hegemonic Masculinity? Theory and Society . 1993; 22 :643–657. doi: 10.1007/BF00993540. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Edley N., Wetherell M. “Jockeying for Position” the Construction of Masculine Identities. Discourse and Society . 1997; 8 (2):203–217. doi: 10.1177/0957926597008002004. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Falk-Lundqvist Å. Grysell T., Winka K. Gestaltandets Utmaningar – Forumaktiviteter Och Lärande [The Challenges of Performance - Forum Activities and Learning] Lund: Studentlitteratur; 2010. När Vision Möter Verklighet Kommer Verkligheten Nära [When visions meet reality, reality comes close] ; pp. 45–62. [ Google Scholar ]
Flood M. Involving Men in Efforts to End Violence against Women. Men and Masculinities . 2011; 14 (3):358–377. doi: 10.1177/1097184X10363995. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Freire P. Pedagogy of the Oppressed . New York: Continuum; 1970. [ Google Scholar ]
Frosh S., Phoenix A., Pattman R. Taking a Stand: Using Psychoanalysis to Explore the Positioning of Subjects in Discourse. British Journal of Social Psychology . 2002; 42 :39–53. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Fulu E., Jewkes R., Roselli T., Garcia-Moreno C. Prevalence and Risk Factors for Male Perpetration of Intimate Partner Violence: Findings from the UN Multi-Country Study on Men and Violence in Asia and the Pacific. The Lancet Global Health . 2013 doi: 10.1016/S2214-109X(13)70074-3. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Garcia-Moreno C., Jansen H., Ellsberg M., Watts C. WHO Multi-Country Study on Women’s Health and Domestic Violence against Women: Initial Results on Prevalence, Health Outcomes and Women’s Responses . Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 2005. [ Google Scholar ]
Gibbs A., Jewkes R., Sikweyiya Y., Willan S. Reconstructing Masculinity? A Qualitative Evaluation of the Stepping Stones and Creating Futures Intervention in Urban Informal Settlements in South Africa. Culture, Health & Sexuality. 2014; 17 (2):208–222. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Gottzén L., Jonsson R. Gottzén L., Jonsson R. Andra Män. Maskulinitet, Normskapande Och Jämställdhet [Other Men: Masculinity, Normativity and Gender-Equality] Malmö: Gleerups; 2012. Goda Män Och Andra Män [Good Men and Other Men] pp. 7–23. [ Google Scholar ]
Gramsci A. Selections from a Prison Notebook . London: Lawrence & Wishart; 1971. [ Google Scholar ]
Groes-Green C. Hegemonic and Subordinated Masculinities: Class, Violence and Sexual Performance among Young Mozambican Men. Nordic Journal of African Studies . 2009; 18 (4):286–304. [ Google Scholar ]
Hearn J. From Hegemonic Masculinity to the Hegemony of Men. Feminist Theory . 2004; 5 (1):49–72. doi: 10.1177/1464700104040813. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Hearn J. A Multi-Faceted Power Analysis of Men's Violence to Known Women: From Hegemonic Masculinity to the Hegemony of Men. The Sociological Review . 2012; 60 (4):589–610. doi: 10.1111/sore.2012.60.issue-4. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Hearn J., Morrell R. Reviewing Hegemonic Masculinities and Men in South Africa and Sweden. Men and Masculinities . 2012; 15 (1):3–10. [ Google Scholar ]
Hearn J., Nordberg M., Andersson K., Balkmar D., Pringle K., Forsberg L., Klinth R., Sandberg L. Hegemonic Masculinity and beyond: 40 Years of Research in Sweden. Men and Masculinities . 2012; 15 :31–55. [ Google Scholar ]
Herek G. M. On Heterosexual Masculinity: Some Psychological Consequences of the Social Construction of Gender and Sexuality. In: Kimmel M. S., editor. Changing Men: New Directions in Research on Men and Masculinity . Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE; 1987. pp. 365–374. [ Google Scholar ]
Hirdman Y. The Gender System: Theoretical Reflections on the Social Subordination of Women (Report – Study of Power and Democracy in Sweden) Uppsala: Maktutredningen; 1990. [ Google Scholar ]
Jewkes R., Morrell R. Sexuality and the Limits of Agency among South African Teenage Women: Theorising Femininities and Their Connections to HIV Risk Practices. Social Science & Medicine . 2012; 74 (11):1729–1737. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.05.020. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Jewkes R., Nduna M., Levin J., Jama N., Dunkle K., Puren K. A., Duvvury N. Impact of Stepping Stones on Incidence of HIV, HSV-2 and Sexual Behaviour in Rural South Africa: Cluster Randomised Controlled Trial. British Medical Journal . 2008; 337 :a506. doi: 10.1136/bmj.a506. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Jewkes R., Wood K., Duvvury N. ‘I Woke up after I Joined Stepping Stones’: Meanings of an HIV Behavioural Intervention in Rural South African Young People’s Lives. Health Education Research . 2010; 25 (6):1074–1084. doi: 10.1093/her/cyq062. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Jewkes R., Sikweyiya Y., Morrell R., Dunkle K. Gender Inequitable Masculinity and Sexual Entitlement in Rape Perpetration South Africa: Findings of a Cross-Sectional Study. PloS One . 2011; 6 (12) doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0029590. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Jewkes R., Fulu E., Roselli T., Garcia-Moreno C. Prevalence and Risk Factors for Non-Partner Rape Perpetration: Findings from the UN Multi-Country Cross-Sectional Study on Men and Violence in Asia and the Pacific. The Lancet Global Health . 2013 doi: 10.1016/S2214-109X(13)70069-X. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Jewkes R., Flood M., Lang J. From Working with Men and Boys to Changing Social Norms and Reducing Inequities in Gender Relations: A Paradigm Shift in Prevention of Violence against Women and Girls. The Lancet. 2014; 385 (9977):1580–1589. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Johansson T., Klinth R. Caring Fathers: The Ideology of Gender Equality and Masculine Positions. Men and Masculinities . 2008; 11 (1):42–62. doi: 10.1177/1097184X06291899. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Kelly L. Surviving Sexual Violence . Cambridge: Polity; 1988. [ Google Scholar ]
Lundqvist E., Röcklinger K., Malmberg L., Gulbrandsen I., Nettelbladh-Malm C., Söderström D. Machofabriken . Malmö: Liber; 2010. [ Google Scholar ]
Maddison S. Private Men, Public Anger. the Men’s Rights Movement in Australia. Journal of Interdisciplinary Gender Studies . 1999; 4 (2):39–52. [ Google Scholar ]
Magazine R. Both Husbands and Banda (Gang) Members: Conceptualizing Marital Conflict and Instability among Young Rural Migrants in Mexico City. Men and Masculinities . 2004; 7 (2):144–165. [ Google Scholar ]
Mathews S., Jewkes R., Abrahams N. 'I Had a Hard Life': Exploring Childhood Adversity in the Shaping of Masculinities among Men Who Killed an Intimate Partner in South Africa. British Journal of Criminology . 2011; 51 :960–977. doi: 10.1093/bjc/azr051. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Matzopoulos R., Cornell M., Bowman B., Myers J. The 67th WHA Resolution on Violence Prevention Misses the Mark. The Lancet . 2014; 384 (9946):854–855. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(14)61487-2. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Mehta D. Collective Violence, Public Spaces, and the Unmaking of Men. Men and Masculinities . 2006; 9 (2):204–225. doi: 10.1177/1097184X06287762. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Messerschmidt J. Masculinities and Crime: Critique and Reconceptualization of Theory . Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield; 1993. [ Google Scholar ]
Messerschmidt J. W. Engendering Gendered Knowledge: Assessing the Academic Appropriation of Hegemonic Masculinity. Men and Masculinities . 2012; 15 (1):56–76. doi: 10.1177/1097184X11428384. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Morrell R., Jewkes R., Lindegger G. Hegemonic Masculinity/Ies in South Africa: Culture, Power and Gender Politics. Men and Masculinities . 2012; 15 :11–30. doi: 10.1177/1097184X12438001. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Morrell R., Jewkes R., Lindegger G., Hamlall V. Hegemonic Masculinity: Reviewing the Gendered Analysis of Men’s Power in South Africa. South African Review of Sociology . 2013; 44 (1):3–21. doi: 10.1080/21528586.2013.784445. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Pronyk P., Hargreaves J. R., Kim J. C., Morison L. A., Phetla G., Watts C., Busza J., Porter J. D. Effect of a Structural Intervention for the Prevention of Intimate Partner Violence and HIV in Rural South Africa: A Cluster Randomised Trial. The Lancet . 2006; 368 :1973–1983. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(06)69744-4. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Ricardo C., Eads M., Barker G. Engaging Boys and Young Men in the Prevention of Sexual Violence: A Systematic and Global Review of Evaluated Interventions . Pretoria: Sexual Violence Research Initiative; 2012. [ Google Scholar ]
Sedgwick E. K. Epistemology of the Closet . Berkeley: University of California Press; 1990. [ Google Scholar ]
Seedat M., Van Niekerk A., Jewkes R., Suffla R. S., Ratele K. Violence and Injuries in South Africa: Prioritising an Agenda for Prevention. The Lancet . 2009; 374 :1011–1022. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(09)60948-X. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Stromquist N. P. Freire, Literacy and Emancipatory Gender Learning. International Review of Education. 2014; 60 :545–558. doi: 10.1007/s11159-014-9424-2. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Talbot K., Quayle M. The Perils of Being a Nice Guy: Contextual Variation in Five Young Women’s Constructions of Acceptable Hegemonic and Alternative Masculinities. Men and Masculinities . 2010; 13 :1–24. [ Google Scholar ]
Wagman J. A., Gray R. H., Campbell J. C., Thoma M., Ndyanabo A., Ssekasanvu J., Nalugoda F., et al. Effectiveness of an Integrated Intimate Partner Violence and HIV Prevention Intervention in Rakai, Uganda: Analysis of an Intervention in an Existing Cluster Randomised Cohort. Lancet Global Health . 2015; 3 (1):e23–e33. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
Welbourn A. Stepping Stones . Oxford: Strategies For Hope; 1995. [ Google Scholar ]
West C., Zimmerman D. Doing Gender. Gender & Society . 1987; 1 (2):125–151. [ Google Scholar ]
Wheelan S. Creating Effective Teams: A Guide for Members and Leaders . Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE; 2010. [ Google Scholar ]
Wood K., Jewkes R. Dangerous’ Love: Reflections on Violence among Xhosa Township Youth. In: Morrell R., editor. Changing Men in South Africa . Pietermaritzburg: University of Natal Press; 2001. pp. 317–336. [ Google Scholar ]
Wood K., Lambert H., Jewkes R. Showing Roughness in a Beautiful Way”: Talk about Love, Coercion, and Rape in South African Youth Sexual Culture. Medical Anthropology Quarterly . 2007; 21 (3):277–300. doi: 10.1525/maq.2007.21.issue-3. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

Boys, Bullying, and Gender Roles: How Hegemonic Masculinity Shapes Bullying Behavior

Original Article
Published: 19 October 2018
Volume 36 , pages 295–318, ( 2019 )

Cite this article

Nicole L. Rosen ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-9390-7001 1 &
Stacey Nofziger 2

8018 Accesses

50 Citations

16 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

During adolescence, schools and peers are salient agents of gender socialization. Specifically, bullying is a common experience for many adolescents. While existing research has examined how bullying differs for girls and boys, very little has examined the ways that bullying serves to reinforce masculinity. This study combines quantitative and qualitative data to examine how bullying reinforces a specific lens of masculinity. By focusing on the experiences of bullying among middle school boys across the United States, we find that the context of school, peers, and bullying contributes to the social construction of masculinity for adolescents. By conducting a content analysis of data provided by victims, we find that many of the experiences of bullying are grounded in, or interpreted through, hegemonic masculinity. Four key themes that emerged from the data include the importance of heterosexuality, physical dominance and intimidation, acceptance and normalization of violence, and how gender intersects with other social locations. Findings from this study offer insight into how adolescent bullying perpetuates notions of masculine dominance and gender inequalities.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save.

Get 10 units per month
Download Article/Chapter or eBook
1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
Cancel anytime

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

“I Don’t Start a Fight; They Start my Powerful Engine”: Primary School Boys Negotiating Violence and Gendered Bullying

The Modern Passage from Boyhood to Manhood and Its Relationship to Bullying and Harassment

Unpacking Adolescent Masculinity: Relations between Boys’ Sexual Harassment Victimization, Perpetration, and Gender Role Beliefs

In earlier analyses, we compared the group of 275 boys who provided qualitative data with the 622 identified victims of bullying who did not provide a quote. These two groups did not vary on any demographic characteristic other than grade level, with those who provided a quote being slightly younger. Those who provided quotes did report significantly more frequent and subjectively more harmful bullying than victims who did not include qualitative data. A full comparison of these groups is available on request.

Anderson, E. (1999). Code of the street: Decency, violence, and the moral life of the inner city . New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Company Inc.

Google Scholar

Archer, J. (2004). Sex differences in aggression in real-world settings: A meta-analytic review. Review of General Psychology, 8 (4), 291.

Article Google Scholar

Arseneault, L. (2017). The long-term impact of bullying victimization on mental health. World Psychiatry, 16 (1), 27–28.

Aseltine, R. H. (2009). A reconsideration of parental and peer influences on adolescents deviance. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 36 (2), 103–121.

Baldry, A. C., Farrington, D. P., & Sorrentino, A. (2017). School bullying and cyberbullying among boys and girls: Roles and overlap. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma, 26 (9), 937–951.

Barlett, C., & Coyne, S. M. (2014). A meta-analysis of sex differences in cyber-bullying behavior: The moderating role of age. Aggressive Behavior, 40 (5), 474–488.

Barzilay, S., Klomek, A. B., Apter, A., Carli, V., Wasserman, C., Hadlaczky, G., et al. (2017). Bullying victimization and suicide ideation and behavior among adolescents in Europe: A 10-country study. Journal of Adolescent Health, 61 (2), 179–186.

Beasley, C. (2008). Rethinking hegemonic masculinity in a globalizing world. Men and Masculinities, 11 (1), 86–103.

Bem, S. L. (1993). The lenses of gender: Transforming the debate on sexual inequality . New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Berlan, E. D., Corliss, H. L., Field, A. E., Goodman, E., & Austin, S. B. (2010). Sexual orientation and bullying among adolescents in the growing up today study. Journal of Adolescent Health, 46 (4), 366–371.

Bhana, D., & Mayeza, E. (2016). We don’t play with gays, they’re not real boys…they can’t fight: Hegemonic masculinity and (homophobic) violence in the primary years of schooling. International Journal of Educational Development, 51, 36–42.

Bond, L., Carlin, J. B., Thomas, L., Rubin, K., & Patton, G. (2001). Does bullying cause emotional problems? A prospective study of young teenagers. BMJ, 323, 480.

Britton, D. M. (2003). At work in the iron cage: The prison as gendered organization . New York, NY: New York University Press.

Butler, J. (2007). Gender trouble . New York, NY: Routledge.

Card, N. A., Stucky, B. D., Sawalani, G. M., & Little, T. D. (2008). Direct and indirect aggression during childhood and adolescence: A meta-analytic review of gender differences, intercorrelations, and relations to maladjustment. Child Development, 79 (5), 1185–1229.

Carrigan, T., Connell, B., & Lee, J. (1985). Toward a new sociology of masculinity. Theory and Society, 14 (5), 551–604.

Cohen, J. (1960). A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20 (1), 37–46.

Collins, P. H. (1990). Black feminist thought: Knowledge, consciousness, and the politics of empowerment . New York, NY: Routledge.

Connell, R. W., & Messerschmidt, J. W. (2005). Hegemonic masculinity: Rethinking the concept. Gender and Society, 19, 829–859. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243205278639 .

Connell, R. W. (1996). Teaching the boys: New research on masculinity, and gender strategies for schools. Teachers College Record, 98 (2), 206–235.

Connell, R. W. (2005). Masculinities . Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Contreras, D., Elacqua, G., Martinez, M., & Miranda, Á. (2016). Bullying, identity and school performance: Evidence from Chile. International Journal of Educational Development, 51, 147–162.

Cooper, M. (2000). Being the ‘go-to-guy’: Fatherhood, masculinity, and the organization of work in Silicon Valley. Qualitative Sociology, 23 (4), 379–404.

Crick, N. R., & Grotpeter, J. K. (1995). Relational aggression, gender, and social-psychological adjustment. Child Development, 66, 710–722. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.1995.tb00900.x .

Davis, S., & Nixon, C. L. (2014). Youth voice project: Student insights into bullying and peer mistreatment . Champaign, IL: Research Press Publishers.

Elliott, K. O. (2012). The right way to be gay: How school structures sexual inequality. In E. R. Meiners & T. Quinn (Eds.), Sexualities in education: A reader (pp. 158–166). New York, NY: Peter Lang Publishing.

Espelage, D. L., Mebane, S. E., & Swearer, S. M. (2004). Gender differences in bullying: Moving beyond mean level differences. In D. L. Espelage & S. M. Swearer (Eds.), Bullying in American schools: A social-ecological perspective on prevention and intervention (pp. 15–35). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

Chapter Google Scholar

Fields, L., & Prinz, R. J. (1997). Coping and adjustment during childhood and adolescence. Clinical Psychology Review, 17 (8), 937–976.

Fried, S., & Fried, P. (1996). Bullies & victims: Helping your child survive the schoolyard battlefield . New York, NY: M. Evans and Company Inc.

Goldstein, A. P. (1996). Violence in America: Lessons on understanding the aggression in our lives . Palo Alto, CA: Davies-Black.

Graneheim, U. H., & Lundman, B. (2004). Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: Concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse Education Today, 24 (2), 105–112.

Hamburger, M. E., Basile, K. C., & Vivolo, A. M. (2011). Measuring bullying victimization, perpetration, and bystander experiences: A compendium of assessment experiences . Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control.

Hooks, B. (1981). Ain’t I a woman: Black women and feminism . Boston, MA: South End Press.

Hoover, J. H., Oliver, R., & Hazler, R. J. (1992). Bullying: Perceptions of adolescent victims in the midwestern USA. School Psychology International, 13, 5–16. https://doi.org/10.1177/0143034392131001 .

Hruschka, D. J., Schwartz, D., St. John, D. C., Picone-Decaro, E., Jenkins, R. A., & Carey, J. W. (2004). Reliability in coding open-ended data: Lessons learned from HIV behavioral research. Field Methods, 16 (3), 307–331.

Johnson, A. G. (2005). The gender knot: Unraveling our patriarchal legacy . Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.

Kanter, R. M. (1993). Men and women of the corporation (2nd ed.). New York: Basic Books.

Katz, J., & Earp, J. (1999). Tough guise . Northampton, MA: DVD Media Education Foundation.

Kerr, D. C., Gini, G., & Capaldi, D. M. (2017). Young men’s suicidal behavior, depression, crime, and substance use risks linked to childhood teasing. Child Abuse and Neglect, 67, 32–43.

Kimmel, M. S., & Mahler, M. (2003). Adolescent masculinity, homophobia, and violence: Random school shootings, 1982-2001. American Behavioral Scientist, 46, 1439–1458. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764203046010010 .

Klomek, A. B., Sourander, A., & Elonheimo, H. (2015). Bullying by peers in childhood and effects on psychopathology, suicidality, and criminality in adulthood. The Lancet Psychiatry, 2 (10), 930–941.

Kochenderfer-Ladd, B., & Skinner, K. (2002). Children’s coping strategies: Moderators of the effects of peer victimization? Developmental Psychology, 38, 267–278. https://doi.org/10.1037//0012-1649.38.2.267 .

Kosciw, J. G., Greytak, E. A., Bartkiewicz, M. J., Boesen, M. J., & Palmer, N. A. (2011). The 2011 national school climate survey: The experiences of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender youth in our nation’s schools. New York, NY: GLSEN. http://glsen.org/sites/default/files/2011%20National%20School%20Climate%20Survey%20Full%20Report.pdf .

Krippendorff, K. (2013). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (3rd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publishing.

Lereya, S. T., Copeland, W. E., Costello, E. J., & Wolke, D. (2015). Adult mental health consequences of peer bullying and maltreatment in childhood: Two cohorts in two countries. The Lancet Psychiatry, 2 (6), 524–531.

Lorber, J. (1994). Paradoxes of gender . New Haven: Yale University Press.

Martin, P. Y. (2004). Gender as social institution. Social Forces, 82, 1249–1273. https://doi.org/10.1353/sof.2004.0081 .

Messerschmidt, J. W. (2014). Crime as structured action: Doing masculinities, race, class, sexuality, and crime (2nd ed.). Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.

Messerschmidt, J. W. (1993). Masculinities and Crime: Critique and Reconceptualization of Theory . Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

Meyer, E. J. (2009). Gender, bullying, and harassment: Strategies to end sexism and homophobia in schools . New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Morgan, D. L. (1993). Qualitative content analysis: A guide to paths not taken. Qualitative Health Research, 3 (1), 112–121.

Morris, E. W. (2012). Learning the hard way: Masculinity, place, and the gender gap in education . New Brunswick, NY: Rutgers University Press.

Nielsen, H. B., & Davies, B. (2017). Formation of gendered identities in the classroom. In S. Wortham, D. Kim, & S. May (Eds.), Discourse and education (pp. 135–145). Berlin: Springer.

Ocampo, A. C. (2016). “Manning up to being gay”: Minority masculinities in the community and at the club. In C. J. Pascoe & T. Bridges (Eds.), Exploring masculinities: Identity, inequality, continuity and change (pp. 301–310). New York: Oxford University Press.

Olweus, D. (1986). Aggression and hormones: Behavioral relationship with testosterone and adrenaline (pp. 51–72). Development of antisocial and prosocial behavior: Research, theories, and issues.

Olweus, D. (1993). Bullying at school: What we know and what we can do . Oxford: Blackwell.

Osterman, K., Bjorkqvist, K., Lagerspetz, K. M. J., Kaaukiainen, A., Landau, S. F., Fraczek, A., et al. (1998). Cross-cultural evidence of female indirect aggression. Aggressive Behavior, 24, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2337 .

Paechter, C. (2007). Being boys; being girls: Learning masculinities and femininities: Learning masculinities and femininities . London: McGraw-Hill Education.

Pascoe, C. J., & Bridges, T. (2016). Exploring masculinities: Identity, inequality, continuity and change . New York: Oxford University Press.

Pascoe, C. J. (2005). “Dude, you’re a fag”: Adolescent masculinity and the fag discourse. Sexualities, 8, 329–346. https://doi.org/10.1177/1363460705053337 .

Pascoe, C. J. (2007). Dude you’re a fag: Masculinity and sexuality in high school . Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Risman, B. J. (2004). Gender as a social structure: Theory wrestling with activism. Sociologists for Women in Society Feminist Literature, 18 (4), 429–450.

Robers, S., Kemp, J., Truman, J., & Snyder, T. D. (2013). Indicators of school crime and safety: 2012 . National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education, and Bureau of Justice Statistics, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. Available from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2013/2013036.pdf .

Rose, C. A. (2004). Bullying among students with disabilities: Impact and implications. In D. L. Espelage & S. M. Swearer (Eds.), Bullying in North American Schools (2nd ed., pp. 34–44). New York, NY: Routledge.

Ryan, G. W., & Bernard, H. R. (2003). Techniques to identify themes. Field . Methods, 15, 85–109. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X02239569 .

Schrock, D., & Schwalbe, M. (2009). Men, masculinity, and manhood acts. Annual Review of Sociology, 35, 277–295.

Simmons, R. (2002). Odd girl out: The hidden culture of aggression in girls . New York: Harcourt Inc.

Smokowski, P. R., Evans, C. B., & Cotter, K. L. (2014). The differential impacts of episodic, chronic, and cumulative physical bullying and cyberbullying: The effects of victimization on the school experiences, social support, and mental health of rural adolescents. Violence and Victims, 29 (6), 1029–1046.

Sourander, A., Jensen, P., Ronning, J. A., Niemela, S., Helenius, H., Sillanmaki, L., et al. (2006). What is the early adulthood outcome of boys who bully or are bullied in childhood? The Finnish “from a boy to a man” study. Pediatrics, 120 (2), 397–404. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2006-2704 .

Sullivan, K. (2011). The anti-bullying handbook (2nd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.

Book Google Scholar

Thorne, B. (1997). Gender play: Girls and boys in school . New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

Van Geel, M., Vedder, P., & Tanilon, J. (2014). Relationship between peer victimization, cyberbullying, and suicide in children and adolescents: A meta-analysis. JAMA Pediatrics, 168 (5), 435–442.

Wagner, C. M. (2017). Sticks and stones: An examination of the effects of bullying on health and relationships. In N. R. Silton (Ed.), Family dynamics and romantic relationships in a Changing Society (pp. 285–309). Hershey: IGI Global.

Wang, J., Iannotti, R. J., & Nansel, T. R. (2009). School bullying among adolescents in the United States: Physical, verbal, relational, and cyber. Journal of Adolescent Health, 45 (4), 368–375.

West, C., & Zimmerman, D. H. (1987). Doing gender. Gender and Society, 1, 125–151. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243287001002002 .

Wilkins, A. C. (2008). Wannabes, goths, and Christians: The boundaries of sex, style, and status . Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.

Wilkins, A. C. (2016). Masculinity dilemmas: Sexuality and intimacy talk among Christians and Goths. In C. J. Pascoe & T. Bridges (Eds.), Exploring masculinities: Identity, inequality, continuity and change (pp. 301–310). New York: Oxford University Press.

Wilton, M., Mahady, M., & Craig, W. M. (2000). Emotional regulation and display in classroom victims of bullying: Characteristic expressions of affect, coping styles and relevant contextual factors. Social Development, 9 (2), 226–245.

Wolke, D., & Lereya, S. T. (2015). Long-term effects of bullying. Archives of Disease in Childhood, 100 (9), 879–885.

Wolkomir, M. (2006). Be not deceived: The sacred and sexual struggles of gay and ex-gay Christian men . New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

The Ingenuity Project, Baltimore Polytechnic Institute, 1400 W. Cold Spring Lane, Baltimore, MD, 21209, USA

Nicole L. Rosen

Department of Sociology, University of Akron, Olin Hall 264, Akron, OH, 44325, USA

Stacey Nofziger

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nicole L. Rosen .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest.

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. As a secondary data source, data for this manuscript received permission from Penn State University’s Institute Review Board. In addition the IRB at The University of Akron was consulted and the project registered with “exempt from review” status.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Rosen, N.L., Nofziger, S. Boys, Bullying, and Gender Roles: How Hegemonic Masculinity Shapes Bullying Behavior. Gend. Issues 36 , 295–318 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12147-018-9226-0

Download citation

Published : 19 October 2018

Issue Date : September 2019

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s12147-018-9226-0

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Hegemonic masculinity
Gender socialization
Find a journal
Publish with us
Track your research

IMAGES

Hegemonic Masculinity
📚 Understanding Hegemonic Masculinity & Homophobia
Masculinity Crisis and Hegemonic Masculinity
Bullying and Impact of Hegemonic Masculinity
SOC 110, Essay 3
Masculinity Crisis and Hegemonic Masculinity

VIDEO

R.W CONNELL/ BOB ( Hegemonic masculinity)
Hegemonic Masculinity
Patriarchy ( Androcentrism heteropatriarchy, hegemonic masculinity, conclusion)part 2 in urdu
UWI: GEND 2013: Men and Masculinities in the Caribbean: Tutorial Presentation
Introductory Lecture on Gramsci by Michael Hemmingsen
Hegemonic Masculinity in football

COMMENTS

Hegemonic Masculinity
Introduction. This essay attempts to critically and comprehensively review the concept of hegemonic masculinity. The hegemonic masculinity theory is particularly significant in understanding concepts such as the predisposition of men to violence, the evaluation of social network analysis in relation to hegemonic masculinity and the links between social identity and the occupation that someone ...
Hegemonic masculinity
In gender studies, hegemonic masculinity is part of R. W. Connell's gender order theory, which recognizes multiple masculinities that vary across time, society, culture, and the individual. [1] [2] [3] Hegemonic masculinity is defined as a practice that legitimizes men's dominant position in society and justifies the subordination of the common male population and women, and other marginalized ...
The Salience of "Hegemonic Masculinity"
This article argues that the concept of "hegemonic masculinity" remains highly salient to critical masculinities studies. The author outlines Raewyn Connell's initial formulation of the concept, how that initial model of hegemonic masculinity has been historically misinterpreted, the reformulation of the concept by Connell and Messerschmidt, and the recent scholarly amplification of the ...
What Is Hegemonic Masculinity?
an instrumentality of the personal.44. Hegemonic masculinity is "a question of how particular groups of men. inhabit positions of power and wealth, and how they legitimate and reproduce the social relationships that generate their dominance."45. Through hegemonic masculinity most men benefit from the control of.
Hegemonic Masculinity: Rethinking the Concept
The concept of hegemonic masculinity has influenced gender studies across many academic fields but has also attracted serious criticism. The authors trace the origin of the concept in a convergence of ideas in the early 1980s and map the ways it was applied when research on men and masculinities expanded. Evaluating the principal criticisms ...
The Hegemony in Masculinity
Most citations to "hegemonic masculinity" focus on gender ideals and men's attempts to justify domination. Few scholars have tested the theory that masculinity can be hegemonic in effect by gaining the overt consent of others to their domination. We specify this largely untested theory and use data from a pilot study of middle-age men for ...
PDF Hegemonic masculinity as a historical problem Ben Griffin, Girton
Hegemonic masculinity and the history of masculinity The most obvious achievement of historians of masculinity over the last two decades has been to assemble a series of case studies demonstrating changes in the qualities associated with being a man. In the case of British history, for example, we now have histories charting the rise
PDF Hegemonic Masculinity in Sally Rooney's Novel Normal People: Subverting
hegemonic masculinity. As this essay aims to discuss the effects of hegemonic masculinity among the characters it is important that the main concepts and areas of hegemonic masculinity as well as hegemonic femininity are defined. 2.1 Hegemonic Masculinity Over the past two decades, Connell and Messerschmidt states in their article "Hegemonic
Hegemonic masculinity: combining theory and practice in gender
The concept of hegemonic masculinity has been used in gender studies since the early-1980s to explain men's power over women. Stressing the legitimating power of consent (rather than crude physical or political power to ensure submission), it has been used to explain men's health behaviours and the use of violence.
Masculinity and Domestic Violence: Hegemonic Masculinity
Hegemonic masculinity is the culturally idealised form of masculinity in a given historical and social setting. It is culturally honoured, glorified, and extolled situationally—such as at the broader societal level (e.g., through the mass media) and at the institutional level (e.g., in school)—and is constructed in relation to 'subordinated masculinities' (e.g., homosexuality) and in ...
[PDF] Hegemonic Masculinity
The concept of hegemonic masculinity has influenced gender studies across many academic fields but has also attracted serious criticism. The authors trace the origin of the concept in a convergence of ideas in the early 1980s and map the ways it was applied when research on men and masculinities expanded. Evaluating the principal criticisms, the authors defend the underlying concept of ...
Hegemonic Masculinity
In subject area: Psychology. Hegemonic masculinity refers to a societal pattern in which stereotypically male traits are idealized as the masculine cultural ideal, explaining how and why men maintain dominant social roles over women and other groups considered to be feminine (Connell & Messerschmidt, 2005). From: Clinical Psychology Review, 2018.
Concepts of Masculinity and Masculinity Tudies
ND MASCULINITY STUDIESTODD W. REESERAbstractThis essay provides a conceptual history of the study of masculinity the English-speaking academy from the birth of "men's studies" in. 1980s to current work on global masculinities. With a move from masculinity as singular toward a focus on multiple masculinities, the influential system of ...
Masculinities in global perspective: hegemony, contestation, and
The term "hegemonic masculinity" named a key mechanism sustaining an. oppressive society and implied that contesting this mechanism was an important. strategy of change. In the following decades, as research grew alongside public debates about men and masculinity, the concept of hegemonic masculinity was widely used.
(PDF) Hegemonic Masculinity
Email: [email protected]. Abstract. The concept of hegemonic masculinity is examined in terms of its foundational definitions and. theoretical influences; the relevance for analysis of men, women ...
Hegemonic Masculinity- Rethinking the Concept (R. W. Connell and James
Having identified key tensions in the explanatory model of hegemonic masculinity, the essay then turns towards the analysis of sense and language outlined in Gilles Deleuze's The Logic of Sense (1969). Deleuze's notions of "singularity" and "event" are reworked to support a pragmatic account of how masculinity studies can engage ...
Full article: Introduction: Masculinities
Through this focus on the regional, the essays gesture at new ways of thinking about the mobile and contingent concept of hegemonic masculinities. Masculinity studies in the last two decades have nuanced the original theorization of hegemonic masculinities: for instance, recent work has made visible the production of the individual 'masculine ...
Hegemonic masculinity: combining theory and practice in gender
Hegemonic masculinity identifies how gender power operates at multiple levels, it provides an overarching framework for understanding how gender inequalities are produced and reproduced, both in the long term and the quotidian. On the other hand, because hegemonic masculinity is a concept that accommodates fluidity and dynamism, it is not easy ...
Hegemonic masculinity: Combining theory and practice in gender
The concept of hegemonic masculinity has been used in gender studies since the early-1980s to explain men's power over women. Stressing the legitimating power of consent (rather than crude physical or political power to ensure submission), it has been used to explain men's health behaviours and the use of violence. Gender activists and others seeking to change men's relations with women ...
Marginalized Masculinities and Hegemonic Masculinity: An Introduction
This essay reviews the masculinities and intergroup relations literatures while introducing the authors whose research is highlighted in this special issue. The complexities of identity group politics are also examined. Not only does intergroup conflict occur in society, so does intragroup conflict.
The cultural belief of hegemonic masculinity
This essay discusses the concept of hegemonic masculinity in relation to gender and social change. Hegemonic Masculinity: Gender and Social Change The concept of hegemonic masculinity is criticized for being framed within hetero-normative conception of gender that essentializes male-female difference and ignores difference and exclusion within ...
Exploiting Patterns: A Critique of Hegemonic Masculinity
In particular, his concept of hegemonic masculinity has been used as a means of interrogating the practices, attitudes and meanings of both masculinities and men. In this article the author problematises Connell's tendency to map out an entire conceptual system for theorising masculinity/ies and power. ... 1 Throughout this essay I use ...
Boys, Bullying, and Gender Roles: How Hegemonic Masculinity Shapes
During adolescence, schools and peers are salient agents of gender socialization. Specifically, bullying is a common experience for many adolescents. While existing research has examined how bullying differs for girls and boys, very little has examined the ways that bullying serves to reinforce masculinity. This study combines quantitative and qualitative data to examine how bullying ...
Legitimation as linchpin: On Raewyn Connell's changing
7 In 1998 Connell (Citation 1998, pp. 475-476) noted that amongst critical masculinities scholars the concept of hegemonic masculinity has acquired more than one meaning, yet she reestablished that in the current social formation 'the term is defined in relation to the legitimacy of patriarchy.'And during the 20 years from 1985 to 2005 - or from the Carrigan et al. (Citation 1985 ...

Hegemonic Masculinity Essay

Introduction

Hegemonic Masculinity

5,269 Citations

Masculinities and Globalization

Hegemonic Masculinity

Hegemonic Masculinity- Rethinking the Concept (R. W. Connell and James W. Messerschmidt)

Related Papers

RELATED PAPERS

Hegemonic masculinity: combining theory and practice in gender interventions

Robert Morrell

Emma Lundqvist

David Blackbeard

Graham Lindegger

Yandisa Sikweyiya

Résumé

Introduction

Hegemonic masculinity: a theoretical overview

Changing hegemonic masculinity: challenge of translating theory into action

Talking gender

Creating, securing and keeping a constituency

A case study from Sweden: The Macho Factory ( Machofabriken )

Acknowledgements

Disclosure statement

Boys, Bullying, and Gender Roles: How Hegemonic Masculinity Shapes Bullying Behavior

Cite this article

Access this article

Similar content being viewed by others

“I Don’t Start a Fight; They Start my Powerful Engine”: Primary School Boys Negotiating Violence and Gendered Bullying

The Modern Passage from Boyhood to Manhood and Its Relationship to Bullying and Harassment

Unpacking Adolescent Masculinity: Relations between Boys’ Sexual Harassment Victimization, Perpetration, and Gender Role Beliefs

Author information

Corresponding author

Ethics declarations

Ethical Approval

Rights and permissions

About this article

Share this article

IMAGES

VIDEO

COMMENTS