Hegemonic Masculinity: Annotated Bibliography

Allen, Louisa. “Sensitive and Real Macho All at the Same Time.” Men and Masculinities, vol.
10, no. 2, 2007, pp. 137-152. http://jmm.sagepub.com.ezp1.lib.umn.edu/content/10/2/137.full.pdf+html. Accessed 13 Oct. 2016.

Allen’s article published in the scholarly journal, Sage, offers insight to the world of relationships through the lens of hegemonic masculinity. Through a study performed in New Zealand including seventeen different focus groups, Allen discusses the idea of a new heterosexual masculinity in romantic relationships. This intriguing article challenges societal norms and brings up an interesting argument.
Allen’s main argument of romance being a source for change in heterosexual masculinity is a fact claim backed up by a study
based off of value claims. Values of relationship expectations, romantic gestures, and societal expectations are brought to her subjects’ attention with effort to constitute a new kind of heterosexual masculinity, specifically in relationships. Her subjects are asked questions that are to be answered based off of opinions, what is right or wrong, or rather, their values as defined in chapter 7 of our textbook. This source is published in 2007 and this University of Auckland professor establishes credibility for that time period by being published in the nationally known Sage Journal. Because of the credibility of the discussion during that time, I am able to compare the 2007 discussion of hegemonic masculinity in relationship roles to today’s discussion in order to emphasise my argument of change in these stereotypes over time; specifically comparing to today’s discussion of “locker room talk” as a masculine thought of relationships. By comparing these two relationship centered discussions, we can analyze if different times agree with the argument that hegemonic masculinity is changing and should change.

Edwards, Ayden. “It’s a Man’s World: The Effect of Traditional Masculinity on Gender
Equality.” E-International Relations Students, 29 March 2015, http://www.e-ir.info/2015/03/29/its-a-mans-world-the-effect-of-traditional-masculinity-on-gender-equality/. Accessed 17 October 2016. This online source is an essay published to a website that is home to many different essays and dissertations from international students targeted towards international politics. The topic of gender equality is heavily researched in this essay, discussing the difference of gender vs. sex, the role science plays in gender equity, and how society reacts to different gender roles. While informing his audience of these topics, Edwards makes a policy claim resembling the thought that society should break down the stereotypes of masculinity in order to achieve gender equality. This policy claim being discussed is backed up by logos coming from credible sources and well-known scholars. Edwards comments on studies by Sigmund Freud and Charles Darwin when discussing the role of science in gender and by doing so, exemplifies logos by stating facts, and also exemplifies credibility by quoting well-known historical figures. The credibility of this online source is also built by its reputation in its bio stating that the website receives over 3 million viewers every year and is a source that scholars from all over the world utilize. These demographics qualify this website as a credible source for well-thought out information. This essay in particular would be useful towards my counterargument. While hegemonic masculinity and the role it plays in our society could be countered as subjective, this essay enforces the scientific views of gender roles giving the audience facts and statistics that essentially cannot be argued. So when examining the implications of masculine hegemonic views, these credible studies can strengthen my argument overall.

Gregory, Michele Rene. The Face of the Firm: Corporate Hegemonic Masculinity at Work.
Routledge, Feb. 2016

The book “The Face of the Firm: Corporate Hegemonic Masculinity at Work” is a piece that highlights the implications of hegemonic masculinity specifically in the workplace. Chapter three, in particular, caught my interest because Gregory focuses on the implications of different kinds of men’s inequalities with one another when looking at the relationship between image and employee status. Gregory makes a fact claim in this chapter that hegemonic masculinity is still a problem today.
Throughout this chapter, Gregory uses kairos to back up her fact claim by bringing in women who have dealt with men who felt pressured to live up to this hegemonic ideal. These experiences are important to discuss when talking about the implications of these stereotypes society sets and because this book was published just a few months ago, the credibility is strong because of the relevant time period.
This claim that is made by the author is important to strengthen my argument the these masculine hegemonic ideals should change because this chapter gives reason for change. By exploring the negative experiences that have come out of these stereotypes, society’s desire to change is exemplified thus strengthening my argument for change.

Jewkes, Rachel et al. “Hegemonic Masculinity: Combining Theory and Practice in Gender
Interventions.” Culture, Health & Sexuality, 16 Oct. 2015, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4706037/. 17 Oct. 2016.
This government document written by a group of nine different authors highlights the importance of how to start the conversation to achieve gender equity while tackling the difficult subject of hegemonic masculinity.
By comparing studies done in both Sweden and South Africa, the authors introduce the concept of masculinity and follow that by examining the effective ways to hold interventions conceptualizing around discussions of hegemonic masculinity.
The end of the introduction makes evident the fact claim that this article is trying to achieve; that of changing hegemonic masculinity. Immediately after, the examples of the interventions being studied establishes credibility by describing the staff members experience on this topic before they engaged in the interventions. By having experience in the discussion of gender roles, the author states that these staff members will know how to properly facilitate the discussion without bias. This credibility strengthens the trust in the studies being shown.
Further, the author uses these interventions as kairos to back up his claim to change hegemonic masculinity. By bringing in examples of discussions, I am able to use the techniques that the staff members discussed when bringing up my own argument or solutions to the problem. Because of the desire of this author to achieve gender equity, this piece will be valuable to my
argument.

Schippers, Mimi. Review of Hegemonic Masculinities and Camouflaged Politics, by James Messerschmidt, The University of Chicago Press Journals, July 2011, p. 342.

Shippers reviews the book “Hegemonic Masculinities and Camouflaged Politics” by commenting on the usefulness of the content that is describing hegemonic masculinity as well as evaluating the citations used and the strength of empirical evidence finishing Messerschmidt’s book. Shippers makes a value claim that overall the book was “successful” when analyzing the use of hegemonic masculinity specifically in both George Bush Sr. and George Bush Jr.’s time of presidency.
Shippers backs up this value claim by identifying the strengths of how the author defined masculine hegemony as well as analyzing the identification of masculine hegemony in both speeches by Bush Sr. and Bush Jr. This review is deemed credible not just because of the recent publication but because of the journal it is published in. The University of Chicago Press Journals is a scholarly well known journal with valid peer-reviewed works.
The analysis of Bush Jr. and Bush Sr.’s speeches is useful to my paper because of the reinforcement given by the review that both of these speeches do in fact use hegemonic masculine principles to depict the politicians as “heroes” saving the femininity of the world. With the use of this book review, my paper will not only cover the popular culture idea of masculinity but also, how political statements create a country that is comfortable with this gender inequity.

Sexton, Jared Yates. “Donald Trump’s Toxic Masculinity.” The New York Times, 13 Oct. 2016, http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/13/opinion/donald-trumps-toxic-masculinity.html?_r=0. Accessed 14 October 2016.

Sexton’s magazine article published in the New York Times discusses the effects of the current republican presidential nominee’s use of the phrase “locker room talk” and analyzes the topic of masculinity.
By telling the story of his stepfather, effects of the stereotypical masculine mindset, and Trump’s use of the hegemonic ideas, Sexton challenges his audience to converse about the idea of “being a man” and what the phrase actually implies.
This educated author makes a fact claim that ultimately argues how masculinity can be more of a disease than an identity. This idea is fascinating especially because of the author’s usage of pathos and logos to back it up. Professor Sexton states mortality rates having connection to masculine mindsets as logos and finishes off with a touching story about his stepfather’s death as an appeal to our emotions, or pathos. This article is credible to my topic because of the social aspect my argument holds. Hegemonic masculinity is essentially a social ideal made up by society and thus the opinions of society on this topic are important to address in my paper. The credibility of the New York Times is strong and though this article is found in the opinion section, that adds to the pathos I can bring to my argument. It adds because society is run by the educated public and because this article was written by a professor at Georgia Southern University, this educated opinion is important when creating value claims in my own
paper.