Too womanly or not manly enough? A review of work consequences experienced by counter-normative men

IF 5.4 2区 管理学 Q1 MANAGEMENT
Payal N Sharma, Rachel E Sturm, Brett H Neely, Danielle V Tussing, Bradley L Kirkman
{"title":"Too womanly or not manly enough? A review of work consequences experienced by counter-normative men","authors":"Payal N Sharma, Rachel E Sturm, Brett H Neely, Danielle V Tussing, Bradley L Kirkman","doi":"10.1177/00187267251340602","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"For decades, precarious manhood theory has suggested that men are expected to prove their masculinity, given that it is a hard-won, tenuous state requiring continual social proof and constant validation. However, there is an emergent body of research that challenges these tenets and indicates that some men do not adhere to gendered expectations of their biological sex at work—which we refer to as counter-normativity. We conducted a systematic review to organize and synthesize this literature, thereby extending precarious manhood theory. Our review suggests the hegemonically masculine roots of precarious manhood theory are not uniformly idealized or revered as previously theorized, because counter-normative men do not necessarily value enacting the associated norms. In addition, women are often the punitive party, which is of note given that men’s counter-normativity is typically described as their acting like a woman, and is purportedly one of the worst things a man can do. Finally, although counter-normative men are largely punished in their organizations for breaking gender stereotypes, there are instances where they experience positive or neutral outcomes. We conclude by guiding forthcoming scholarship on masculinity at work, suggesting important implications for managing gender complexities in today’s work settings.","PeriodicalId":48433,"journal":{"name":"Human Relations","volume":"23 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Relations","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00187267251340602","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

For decades, precarious manhood theory has suggested that men are expected to prove their masculinity, given that it is a hard-won, tenuous state requiring continual social proof and constant validation. However, there is an emergent body of research that challenges these tenets and indicates that some men do not adhere to gendered expectations of their biological sex at work—which we refer to as counter-normativity. We conducted a systematic review to organize and synthesize this literature, thereby extending precarious manhood theory. Our review suggests the hegemonically masculine roots of precarious manhood theory are not uniformly idealized or revered as previously theorized, because counter-normative men do not necessarily value enacting the associated norms. In addition, women are often the punitive party, which is of note given that men’s counter-normativity is typically described as their acting like a woman, and is purportedly one of the worst things a man can do. Finally, although counter-normative men are largely punished in their organizations for breaking gender stereotypes, there are instances where they experience positive or neutral outcomes. We conclude by guiding forthcoming scholarship on masculinity at work, suggesting important implications for managing gender complexities in today’s work settings.
太女性化还是不够男性化?反规范男性所经历的工作后果的回顾
几十年来,不稳定的男子气概理论认为,男人应该证明自己的男子气概,因为这是一种来之不易的脆弱状态,需要不断的社会认同和认可。然而,有一项新兴的研究对这些原则提出了挑战,并表明一些男性在工作中并没有遵守对他们生理性别的性别期望——我们称之为反规范。我们对这些文献进行了系统的整理和综合,从而扩展了不稳定男子气概理论。我们的回顾表明,不稳定男子气概理论的霸权男性根源并没有像以前的理论那样被统一地理想化或受到尊重,因为反规范的男性并不一定重视制定相关规范。此外,女性往往是惩罚的一方,这一点值得注意,因为男性的反规范性通常被描述为他们表现得像个女人,据说这是男人能做的最糟糕的事情之一。最后,尽管违反规范的男性在他们的组织中因打破性别刻板印象而受到很大程度的惩罚,但在某些情况下,他们也会经历积极或中立的结果。最后,我们将指导即将到来的关于工作中的男性气质的学术研究,为当今工作环境中管理性别复杂性提出重要建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Human Relations
Human Relations Multiple-
CiteScore
12.60
自引率
7.00%
发文量
82
期刊介绍: Human Relations is an international peer reviewed journal, which publishes the highest quality original research to advance our understanding of social relationships at and around work through theoretical development and empirical investigation. Scope Human Relations seeks high quality research papers that extend our knowledge of social relationships at work and organizational forms, practices and processes that affect the nature, structure and conditions of work and work organizations. Human Relations welcomes manuscripts that seek to cross disciplinary boundaries in order to develop new perspectives and insights into social relationships and relationships between people and organizations. Human Relations encourages strong empirical contributions that develop and extend theory as well as more conceptual papers that integrate, critique and expand existing theory. Human Relations welcomes critical reviews and essays: - Critical reviews advance a field through new theory, new methods, a novel synthesis of extant evidence, or a combination of two or three of these elements. Reviews that identify new research questions and that make links between management and organizations and the wider social sciences are particularly welcome. Surveys or overviews of a field are unlikely to meet these criteria. - Critical essays address contemporary scholarly issues and debates within the journal''s scope. They are more controversial than conventional papers or reviews, and can be shorter. They argue a point of view, but must meet standards of academic rigour. Anyone with an idea for a critical essay is particularly encouraged to discuss it at an early stage with the Editor-in-Chief. Human Relations encourages research that relates social theory to social practice and translates knowledge about human relations into prospects for social action and policy-making that aims to improve working lives.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信