改变中的男人和男子气概:对罗伯茨、艾略特和拉尔夫的回应

IF 2.1 Q2 SOCIOLOGY

NORMA Pub Date : 2022-11-02 DOI:10.1080/18902138.2022.2139522

Andrea Christofidou

{"title":"改变中的男人和男子气概:对罗伯茨、艾略特和拉尔夫的回应","authors":"Andrea Christofidou","doi":"10.1080/18902138.2022.2139522","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In this short article I provide a response to Steven Roberts, Karla Elliott and Brittany Ralph’s reply to my recently published article, Men and masculinities: a continuing debate on change. I address Roberts, Elliott and Ralph’s critique over the limitations of comparing the frameworks of inclusive and hybrid masculinities, and I respond to their claims over the use of intersectionality to account for the lack of change among less privileged men. Throughout the article I highlight the need for analysing men and masculinities in relation to wider systems of inequality and power hierarchies between men and women on the one hand, and among men on the other. I also keep insisting that research on changing men and masculinities should rely on intersectional, multi-layered analyses that take into careful consideration the contextual, interactional and situational factors that may affect men’s practices and (re)constructions of masculinity.","PeriodicalId":37885,"journal":{"name":"NORMA","volume":"18 1","pages":"65 - 71"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Changing men and masculinities: a reply to Roberts, Elliott and Ralph\",\"authors\":\"Andrea Christofidou\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/18902138.2022.2139522\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT In this short article I provide a response to Steven Roberts, Karla Elliott and Brittany Ralph’s reply to my recently published article, Men and masculinities: a continuing debate on change. I address Roberts, Elliott and Ralph’s critique over the limitations of comparing the frameworks of inclusive and hybrid masculinities, and I respond to their claims over the use of intersectionality to account for the lack of change among less privileged men. Throughout the article I highlight the need for analysing men and masculinities in relation to wider systems of inequality and power hierarchies between men and women on the one hand, and among men on the other. I also keep insisting that research on changing men and masculinities should rely on intersectional, multi-layered analyses that take into careful consideration the contextual, interactional and situational factors that may affect men’s practices and (re)constructions of masculinity.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37885,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"NORMA\",\"volume\":\"18 1\",\"pages\":\"65 - 71\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"NORMA\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/18902138.2022.2139522\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"NORMA","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/18902138.2022.2139522","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

在这篇短文中，我对史蒂文·罗伯茨、卡拉·艾略特和布列塔尼·拉尔夫对我最近发表的文章《男人和男子气概:关于变革的持续辩论》的回复做出了回应。我回应罗伯茨、艾略特和拉尔夫对比较包容性和混合型男性气质框架的局限性的批评，并回应他们关于使用交叉性来解释弱势男性缺乏变化的主张。在整篇文章中，我强调有必要分析男性和男性气质与更广泛的不平等和权力等级制度的关系，一方面是男女之间，另一方面是男性之间。我还坚持认为，关于男性和男子气概变化的研究应该依赖交叉的、多层次的分析，仔细考虑可能影响男性行为和(重新)建构男子气概的背景、相互作用和情境因素。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Changing men and masculinities: a reply to Roberts, Elliott and Ralph

ABSTRACT In this short article I provide a response to Steven Roberts, Karla Elliott and Brittany Ralph’s reply to my recently published article, Men and masculinities: a continuing debate on change. I address Roberts, Elliott and Ralph’s critique over the limitations of comparing the frameworks of inclusive and hybrid masculinities, and I respond to their claims over the use of intersectionality to account for the lack of change among less privileged men. Throughout the article I highlight the need for analysing men and masculinities in relation to wider systems of inequality and power hierarchies between men and women on the one hand, and among men on the other. I also keep insisting that research on changing men and masculinities should rely on intersectional, multi-layered analyses that take into careful consideration the contextual, interactional and situational factors that may affect men’s practices and (re)constructions of masculinity.

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

NORMA Social Sciences-Gender Studies

CiteScore

3.00

自引率

14.30%

发文量

期刊介绍： NORMA is an international journal for high quality research concerning masculinity in its many forms. This is an interdisciplinary journal concerning questions about the body, about social and textual practices, and about men and masculinities in social structures. We aim to advance theory and methods in this field. We hope to present new themes for critical studies of men and masculinities, and develop new approaches to ''intersections'' with race, sexuality, class and coloniality. We are eager to have conversations about the role of men and boys, and the place of masculinities, in achieving gender equality and social equality. The journal was begun in the Nordic region; we now strongly invite scholarly work from all parts of the world, as well as research about transnational relations and spaces. All submitted manuscripts are subject to initial appraisal by the Editors, and, if found suitable for further consideration, to peer review by independent, anonymous expert referees. All peer review is double blind and submission is online via Editorial Manager.