霸权男性气质应用中的失误:乱伦者案例研究

IF 3 2区 社会学 Q1 SOCIOLOGY
Stu Lucy
{"title":"霸权男性气质应用中的失误:乱伦者案例研究","authors":"Stu Lucy","doi":"10.1177/1097184x241240415","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Although an important theoretical tool within the field of critical study of men and masculinities, mishandling of Connell’s theory of multiple masculinities and subsequent developments frequently overlooks the relational and legitimizing components central to the hegemonic masculine construct, producing conceptual ‘slippage’. This case study demonstrates such misapplication, examining four investigations within the emerging field of research concerning the antifeminist masculine performances and ideological constructs associated with involuntary celibates (incels). Each study lacks acknowledgement and demonstration of the political mechanics of relational legitimacy that define hegemonic masculinity, producing, instead, trait analyses of non-hegemonic dominant or dominating masculine behaviour resting on fixed, often toxic character types. As novel and emergent communities of men receive scholarly attention, it is important researchers heed repeated attempts to guide correct use of theory by engaging with the history and evolution of employed concepts.","PeriodicalId":47750,"journal":{"name":"Men and Masculinities","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Slippages in the Application of Hegemonic Masculinity: A Case Study of Incels\",\"authors\":\"Stu Lucy\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/1097184x241240415\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Although an important theoretical tool within the field of critical study of men and masculinities, mishandling of Connell’s theory of multiple masculinities and subsequent developments frequently overlooks the relational and legitimizing components central to the hegemonic masculine construct, producing conceptual ‘slippage’. This case study demonstrates such misapplication, examining four investigations within the emerging field of research concerning the antifeminist masculine performances and ideological constructs associated with involuntary celibates (incels). Each study lacks acknowledgement and demonstration of the political mechanics of relational legitimacy that define hegemonic masculinity, producing, instead, trait analyses of non-hegemonic dominant or dominating masculine behaviour resting on fixed, often toxic character types. As novel and emergent communities of men receive scholarly attention, it is important researchers heed repeated attempts to guide correct use of theory by engaging with the history and evolution of employed concepts.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47750,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Men and Masculinities\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Men and Masculinities\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/1097184x241240415\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Men and Masculinities","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1097184x241240415","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

康奈尔的多重男子气概理论及其后的发展虽然是男性与男子气概批判研究领域的重要理论工具,但对该理论的误用却经常忽略了霸权男性建构的核心关系和合法化要素,造成概念上的 "滑坡"。本案例研究证明了这种误用,它考察了新兴研究领域中的四项调查,这些研究涉及与非自愿独身主义者(incels)相关的反女权主义男性表现和意识形态建构。每项研究都缺乏对界定霸权男性的关系合法性的政治机制的承认和展示,而是对非霸权的主导或支配性男性行为进行特质分析,这些特质建立在固定的、通常是有毒的性格类型之上。随着新出现的男性群体受到学术界的关注,研究人员必须注意反复尝试,通过了解所使用概念的历史和演变来指导理论的正确使用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Slippages in the Application of Hegemonic Masculinity: A Case Study of Incels
Although an important theoretical tool within the field of critical study of men and masculinities, mishandling of Connell’s theory of multiple masculinities and subsequent developments frequently overlooks the relational and legitimizing components central to the hegemonic masculine construct, producing conceptual ‘slippage’. This case study demonstrates such misapplication, examining four investigations within the emerging field of research concerning the antifeminist masculine performances and ideological constructs associated with involuntary celibates (incels). Each study lacks acknowledgement and demonstration of the political mechanics of relational legitimacy that define hegemonic masculinity, producing, instead, trait analyses of non-hegemonic dominant or dominating masculine behaviour resting on fixed, often toxic character types. As novel and emergent communities of men receive scholarly attention, it is important researchers heed repeated attempts to guide correct use of theory by engaging with the history and evolution of employed concepts.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
4.00%
发文量
20
期刊介绍: Men and Masculinities presents peer-reviewed empirical and theoretical scholarship grounded in the most current theoretical perspectives within gender studies, including feminism, queer theory and multiculturalism. Using diverse methodologies, Men and Masculinities"s articles explore the evolving roles and perceptions of men across society. Complementing existing publications on women"s studies and gay and lesbian studies, Men and Masculinities helps complete the spectrum of research on gender. The journal gives scholars interested in gender vital, balanced information on the burgeoning - and often misunderstood - field of masculinities studies.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信