This Article Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 1097184X07309502v1 12/1/30    most recent References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Coles, T. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Negotiating the Field of Masculinity

The Production and Reproduction of Multiple Dominant Masculinities

University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia

This article presents a theoretical model of masculinities based on a combination of Connell’s theories on hegemonic masculinity and Bourdieu’s concepts of habitus, capital, and fields. The work of Connell has been both profound and pervasive in its influence on the study of men and masculinities. However, there are limitations, particularly in relation to the disparity between the theoretical concept of hegemonic masculinity as the culturally dominant ideal and men’s lived experiences of a variety of dominant masculinities. The model presented herein introduces the possibility of multiple dominant masculinities that operate within subfields bound by a field of masculinity. The model also outlines the ways in which masculinities are both produced and reproduced as a consequence of struggles between dominant and subordinate groups of men. These struggles also provide a rationale for resistance and complicity determined by what is deemed to be valued capital within the field of masculinity.

Key Words: hegemonic masculinity • Bourdieu • habitus • physical capital • field of masculinity

This version was published on October 1, 2009

Men and Masculinities, Vol. 12, No. 1, 30-44 (2009)
DOI: 10.1177/1097184X07309502


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?