hegemonic masculinity and domestic violence essay

Encyclopedia of Domestic Violence pp 1–8 Cite as

Masculinity and Domestic Violence: Hegemonic Masculinity

• J. Levell 2 &
• M. Hester 2  
• Living reference work entry
• First Online: 28 December 2023

25 Accesses

Hypermasculinity ; Perpetrators ; Toxic masculinity

Definitions

Hegemonic masculinity.

Hegemonic masculinity is the culturally idealised form of masculinity in a given historical and social setting. It is culturally honoured, glorified, and extolled situationally—such as at the broader societal level (e.g., through the mass media) and at the institutional level (e.g., in school)—and is constructed in relation to ‘subordinated masculinities’ (e.g., homosexuality) and in relation to women. (Messerschmidt, 2005 , p. 198)

There has long been a difference in societies treatment and expectations of women and men as distinct groups. Patriarchal notions of gender-inequality can be traced as far back as Aristotle’s writing, in fourth century BC, who noted that ‘the relation of male to female is that of what is better by nature to what is worse, and that of ruler to ruled’ (cited in Bahadır Türk, 2020 , p. 568). However, this perspective was still rooted in biological...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution .

Anderson, E., & McCormack, M. (2016). Inclusive masculinity theory: Overview, reflection and refinement. Journal of Gender Studies, 9236 (March), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/09589236.2016.1245605

Anderson, K. L., & Umberson, D. (2011). Gendering violence: Masculinity and power in men’ s accounts of domestic violence. Gender and Society, 15 (3), 358–380. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3081889

Bahadır Türk, H. (2020). Hegemonic masculinity and terrorism: The case of the PKK and Abdullah Öcalan. Critical Studies on Terrorism, 13 (2), 258–279. https://doi.org/10.1080/17539153.2019.1708039

Article   Google Scholar  

BBC News. (2021). Homosexuality: The countries where it is illegal to be gay . https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-43822234

Butler, J. (1988). Performative acts and gender constitution: An essay in phenomenology and feminist theory. Theatre Journal, 40 (4), 519–531.

Connell, R. W. (1987). Gender and power . Stanford University Press.

Google Scholar  

Connell, R. W. (2005). Masculinities (2nd ed.). Polity Press.

Connell, R. W., & Messerschmidt, J. W. (2005). Hegemonic masculinity: Rethinking the concept. Gender & Society, 19 (6), 829–859. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243205278639

Crenshaw, K. W. (1991). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of colour. Stanford Law Review, 43 (6), 1241–1299.

Deuchar, R. (2018). Social constructions of masculinity, marginalisation and violence. In Gangs and spirituality: A global perspective (pp. 57–59). Palgrave Macmillan.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Goodey, J. (1997). Boys don’t cry: Masculinities, fear of crime and fearlessness. British Journal of Criminology, 37 (3), 401–418. https://doi.org/10.3366/ajicl.2011.0005

Gottzén, L., Bjornholt, M., & Boonzair, F. (2021). What has masculinity to do with intimate partner violence? In Men, masculinities and intimate partner violence (pp. 1–15). Routledge.

Hester, M. (2010). Commentary on “mothers, domestic violence, and child protection,” by heather douglas and tamara walsh. Violence Against Women, 16 (5), 516–523. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801210366289

Hester, M., & Newman, C. (2021). Considering “treatment” and gender in programmes for intimate partner violence perpetrators. In L. Gottzen, M. Bjornholt, & F. Boonzaier (Eds.), Men, masculinities and intimate partner violence . Routledge.

Holmes, M. (2007). What is gender? Sociological approaches . SAGE Publications Ltd.

Book   Google Scholar  

Javaid, A. (2021). Behind closed doors in gay relationships. In L. Gottzen, M. Bjornholt, & F. Boonzair (Eds.), Men, masculinities and intimate partner violence . Routledge.

Jewkes, R., & Morrell, R. (2018). Hegemonic masculinity, violence, and gender equality: Using latent class analysis to investigate the origins and correlates of differences between men. Men and Masculinities, 21 (4), 547–571. https://doi.org/10.1177/1097184X17696171

Levell, J. (2021). On masculinities: Navigating the tension between individual and structural considerations. Journal of Gender-Based Violence, 6 (1), 227–234. https://doi.org/10.1332/239868021x16231535098549

Levell, J. (2022). Boys, childhood domestic abuse and gang involvement: Violence at home, Violence on-road . Policy Press.

Mackay, F. (2021). Butch/ering the ‘real man’ what is masculinity anyway? In Female masculinities and the gender wars: The politics of sex (Issue November, pp. 117–139). I.B Tauris.

McCarry, M. (2015). Views and experiences of young men: Masculinity and gendered interpersonal violence. In N. Aghtaie & G. Gangoli (Eds.), Understanding gender based violence: National and international contexts . Routledge.

Messerschmidt, J. (2005). Men, masculinities and crime. In M. S. Kimmel, J. Hearn, & R. W. Connell (Eds.), Handbook of studies on men and masculinities (pp. 196–212). London: Sage.

Messerschmidt, J. W. (2016). Masculinities in the making: From the local to the global . Rowman and Littlefield.

Messerschmidt, J. W. (2019). The Salience of “Hegemonic Masculinity.” Men and Masculinities, 22(1), 85–91. https://doi.org/10.1177/1097184X18805555 .

Osthus, I. S., & Sewpaul, V. (2014). Gender, power and sexuality among youth on the streets of Durban: Socio-economic realities. International Social Work, 57 (4), 326–337. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020872814524966

Pence, E., & Dasgupta, S. D. (2006). Re-examining “battering”: Are all acts of intimate partner violence the same? Duluth, MN: Praxis International.

Rowlands, E. (2021). Hegemonic masculinity and male powerlessness: A reflection on African men’s experiences of intimate partner violence. South African Review of Sociology, 52 (1), 24–39. https://doi.org/10.1080/21528586.2021.2010240

Schermerhorn, N. E. C., Vescio, T. K., & Lewis, K. A. (2022). Hegemonic masculinity predicts support for U.S. political figures accused of sexual assault. Social Psychological and Personality Science . https://doi.org/10.1177/19485506221077861

Schrock, D. P., & Padavic, I. (2007). Negotiating hegemonic masculinity in a batterer intervention program. Gender & Society, 21 (5), 625–649. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243207304975

Sileo, K. M., Luttinen, R., Muñoz, S., & Hill, T. D. (2022). Mechanisms linking masculine discrepancy stress and the perpetration of intimate partner violence among men in the United States. American Journal of Men’s Health, 16 (4), 155798832211193. https://doi.org/10.1177/15579883221119355

Stark, E. (2007). Coercive control : How men entrap women in personal life. Oxford: Oxford University Press (Interpersonal Violence).

Tillapaugh, D. (2022). Masculinity as violence: College men sexual violence survivors and the impact of hegemonic masculinity. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 0 (0), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/09518398.2022.2127019

Tomsen, S., & Gadd, D. (2019). Beyond honour and achieved hegemony: Violence and the everyday masculinities of young men. International Journal for Crime, Justice and Social Democracy, 8 (2), 17–30. https://doi.org/10.5204/ijcjsd.v8i2.1117.This

Wang, X., Fang, G., & Li, H. (2019). Gender-based violence and hegemonic masculinity in China: An analysis based on the quantitative research. China Population and Development Studies, 3 (1), 84–97. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42379-019-00030-9

West, C., & Zimmerman, D. H. (1987). Doing gender. Gender & Society, 1 (2), 125–151.

Williamson, E., Morgan, K., & Hester, M. (2017). Male victims: Control, coercion, and fear? In N. Lombard (Ed.), He Routledge handbook of gender and violence . Routledge.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

University of Bristol, Bristol, UK

J. Levell & M. Hester

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to J. Levell .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Oakland University, Rochester, MI, USA

Todd K. Shackelford

Section Editor information

Department of Psychology, Oakland University, Rochester, MI, USA

Gavin Vance

Department of Psychology, Oakland University, Rochester Hills, MI, USA

Madeleine K. Meehan

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this entry

Cite this entry.

Levell, J., Hester, M. (2023). Masculinity and Domestic Violence: Hegemonic Masculinity. In: Shackelford, T.K. (eds) Encyclopedia of Domestic Violence. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85493-5_1098-1

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85493-5_1098-1

Received : 09 January 2023

Accepted : 17 January 2023

Published : 28 December 2023

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-030-85493-5

Online ISBN : 978-3-030-85493-5

eBook Packages : Springer Reference Behavioral Science and Psychology Reference Module Humanities and Social Sciences Reference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• v.6(10); 2020 Oct

Understanding domestic violence: masculinity, culture, traditions

Domestic violence in South Africa is a consequence of the complex interplay of patriarchy, culture, and the negative masculine construct. The patriarchal cultural beliefs and traditions that emphasise on male assertiveness and domination of women influence the constructions of masculinity and reinforce domestic violence. The goal of this article was to highlight a relationship between culture, constructions of masculinity, and domestic violence in South Africa. Through adopting an African feminist lens, this paper unpacks how structures of patriarchy manifest in the traditional African context in which many men in South Africa construct and perform their masculinity and the embodied meaning attached to it. The paper argues that gender hierarchy and normative masculine and feminine roles prevalent in most South African cultures have implications for domestic violence. It argues that the inflexible gender hierarchy, which is enforced through culture and the dominant position of men in the home influence domestic violence. The article concludes that attempts to address domestic violence in South Africa must focus on changing patriarchal cultural norms and promote peaceful masculinity.

Psychology; Social science; Sociology; Domestic violence, Culture; Intimate partner violence; Traditions; Hegemonic masculinity, Gender inequality; Patriarchy; South Africa

1. Introduction

Domestic violence is a persistent worldwide problem that affects many women regardless of their demographic characteristics ( Dobash and Dobash, 2017 ; Mazibuko and Umejesi, 2015 ). Research shows that the problem of domestic violence in South Africa persists despite the current strategies aimed at addressing it ( Jewkes and Morrell, 2018 ). South Africa is ranked as one of the countries with high rates of domestic violence in the world ( Jewkes et al., 2013 ). According to the report by South Africa Demographic and Health Survey (2016) , over a quarter of women in South Africa reported experiencing domestic violence from their intimate partners. This report also suggests that the rate of domestic violence in South Africa may be higher than the recorded figures, given that many cases go unreported. Research shows that many survivors tend not to report abuse from their partners due to factors like, fear that the abuser will retaliate, desire to protect the family, financial dependence on the perpetrator, and fear of ending the marriage ( Mshweshwe, 2018 ).

Feminist research reiterates that domestic violence is a consequence of patriarchy, a system that promotes male dominance by giving men powers to dominate and control women ( Dobash and Dobash, 2017 ; Hamberger et al., 2017 ). Some researchers have attributed domestic violence to a set of interlocking factors, such as patriarchy, cultural beliefs, community norms, unemployment and low levels of education ( Jewkes and Morrell, 2018 ; Mshweshwe, 2018 ). Also, domestic violence is associated with the masculinity ideology, an endorsement of patriarchy related attitudes, beliefs, and behaviours assigned to men during the socialisation ( Graaff and Heinecken, 2017 ; Moolman, 2017 ; Ratele, 2015 ).

Research on the relationship between the constructions of masculinity, culture and domestic violence is limited in the literature of domestic violence in South Africa. To address this gap, the current research explores the link between culture, constructions of masculinity and domestic violence in South Africa. The research attempts to answer the question of, ‘how do constructions of masculinity in the African cultural context influence domestic violence’?

This literature-based research provides a summary of current literature relevant to the research question framing this study; how do constructions of masculinity in the African cultural context influence domestic violence? Focusing on local and international scholarly discourses relevant to explain domestic violence in South Africa, we conducted a review of the main databases in the following fields: sociology, gender studies, women's studies, social work. The databases searched included: Google scholar, Sociological Abstracts, Gender Watch, Women's Studies, SAGE. Search terms were used in this research separated with and, or. The search terms used are as follows; (domestic violence, intimate partner violence, domestic abuse, culture, traditions, masculinity, manhood, South Africa).

This research reviewed articles that were published between year 2010–2020. Due to many results in each search, the search was limited to peer-reviewed, scholarly literature. Articles were limited to those published in the English language. Papers that are not specifically addressing the topic under the investigation were excluded.

3. Theoretic framework to understand domestic violence in South Africa

The feminist approach argues that domestic violence in heterosexual relationships is a consequence of patriarchy, a system of social structures, and practices in which men dominate, oppress, and exploit women ( Dobash and Dobash, 2017 ). Domestic violence is a consequence of men's desire to exercise power and control over their female partners, a behaviour that has been legitimized and justified within the patriarchal system ( Quek, 2019 ). Further, the broader patriarchal structures and institutions contribute to shaping the uneven distribution of power between men and women by reinforcing gender roles associated with domestic violence.

While the concept of patriarchy remains essential in analysing gender relations, however, its critics have pointed out problems in this theory. According to Patil (2013) , the concept of patriarchy fails to capture the historical and cross-cultural variations of gender inequality as well as the heterogeneity in masculinity. Further, Patil argues that recognising the diversity in masculinities is significant because it helps to reveal different ways in which men's violence can be explained. Also, it has been argued that intersectional analysis of the multiple realities of marginalised men who have little stake in the patriarchal dividend is essential for developing explanations of domestic violence in South Africa ( Boonzaier and van Niekerk, 2018 ). Such analysis should recognise how gender intersects with factors like race, class, ethnicity, culture, economic status, and education to oppress men and women alike ( Amadiume, 2015 ; Oyewumi, 2011 ). This recognition of intersectionality is crucial in explaining men's violence in South Africa as it helps to locate the problem of violence in the specific historical context of apartheid which involved the oppression of black people and subjecting them to systematic violence ( Burchardt, 2018 ; Moolman, 2013 ). Further, explaining domestic violence in South Africa requires an approach that recognises how South African life has been woven out of the apartheid narrative.

Masculinity studies have acknowledged the role of apartheid in influencing black men's violence in South Africa ( Clark, 2012 ; Morrell et al., 2012 ; Ratele, 2015 ). According to Morrell et al. (2012) , apartheid was a political and social system which enforced racial discrimination against black people during the era of white minority rule in South Africa. Black men were subjected to ongoing violence which includes being randomly assaulted in the public sphere and within their homes. This systematic violence has resulted in men's adoption of violent behaviour which tends to be transferred from one generation to another ( Ratele, 2015 ). Further, the apartheid system severely disrupted gender relations resulting to high levels of gender-based violence ( Lau and Seedat, 2017 ; Swartz et al., 2012 ). It also created poverty and unemployment in black communities by excluding black people from accessing economic opportunities ( Lau and Seedat, 2017 ). These structural factors have been argued to create a fertile ground for domestic violence to flourish ( Jewkes and Morrell, 2018 ).

This current research takes an African feminist perspective in explaining domestic violence in South Africa. The African feminist theory is one of the postcolonial theories that offer insight into black people's realities which are often not fully reflected in Western feminist discourses. For example, in domestic violence discourses, culture and traditions have not been properly explained in a way that translates to interventions that are necessary to address domestic violence in South Africa. Thus, culture is crucial for building an understanding of how patriarchy manifests in the traditional context.

4. Discussion

A starting point for research to understand men's use of violence in intimate relationships is a theoretical understanding of the South African Society as patriarchal ( Mudau and Obadire, 2017 ). South Africa has a strong patriarchal system of social structures that encourage men to dominate, oppress, and exploit women in the public and private sphere ( Stromquist, 2014 ). According to Sultana (2010) , the concept of patriarchy is useful in explaining the root cause of women's subordination and to describe the power relations between women and men. These power relations are characterised by hierarchical, and material base that serves to promote men's independence and enable them to dominate women. Such patriarchal social arrangements are based on the belief that since men and women are different biologically, therefore, men are entitled to more powers than women ( Sultana, 2010 ). Noteworthy, patriarchy is generally not an explicit ongoing effort by men to dominate women, but a long-standing system that all people are born into and even participate in, unconsciously ( Sultana, 2010 ). Meaning that people of all genders can perpetuate patriarchy, even though it is mostly men that reap its benefits. For example, Mshweshwe (2018) find that domestic violence in the rural traditional context is not perpetrated by men only, mother in laws also contribute by encouraging their sons to demand respect and submissiveness from their wives through violence.

While patriarchy operates in the public and private sphere, however, it is more serious in the private sphere where men subject women to abuse because of their perceived inferiority status ( Mazibuko, 2017 ; Mshweshwe, 2018 ). Further, abusive men tend to take advantage of the family and enforce their perceived power in decision-making, and in establishing the rules and control of the family, especially the wife. Lelaurain et al. (2018) argue that the sexist constructions of romantic heterosexual love and the romance narrative that portrays men as women's rescuers who are strong, and powerful, contributes to domestic violence. Specifically, the marriage institution has been found to support patriarchal ideas about gender role norms by promoting male privilege ( Lelaurain et al., 2018 ).

Research from all over the world shows that domestic violence in heterosexual relationships is a consequence of men's desire to exercise power and control over their female partners ( Dobash and Dobash, 2017 ; Mazibuko, 2017 ). Sikweyiya et al. (2020) , argues that addressing domestic violence has proven challenging because wife beating was historically legitimized through policies that positioned women as minors while allowing men to exercise power over them ( Sikweyiya et al., 2020 ). Women were subjected to cultural and social acceptance of domestic violence with no policies to protect them. Although the protection of women through policies has improved over the years, however, domestic violence continues to be a persistent problem, especially in contexts where culture and traditions are dominant ( Akangbe Tomisin, 2020 ; Mshweshwe, 2018 ). Culture has been found to legitimize patriarchy and preserve male supremacy through embracing and promoting hegemonic masculinity, a configuration of gender practices which guarantees the dominant position of men and the subordination of women ( Tonsing and Tonsing, 2019 ).

Hegemonic masculinity has been defined as a set of values that serves to organize society in gender unequal ways ( Jewkes and Morrell, 2012 ). Further, it involves a hierarchy of masculinities, and unequal access to power, as well as the interplay between men's identity, ideals, and power. Hegemonic masculinity is built on the negative ideology of what it means to be a man, usually imposed upon boys during the socialisation process; it is characterized by physical strength, sexual conquest [of women], and financial success (Ehrmann, 2013). These conditions create the dominant understanding of an ideal man that has influenced and shaped the society for generations. They serve to exclude men who fail to meet the criteria and the standards set by which men compare themselves (Ehrmann, 2013).

The adoption of the concept of hegemonic masculinity within the feminist work helps to locate the problem of men's violence in the broader social inequalities in which some men are marginalized ( Morrell et al., 2013 ). Further, the hegemonic masculinity theory helps to unpack the relationship between domestic violence and the weak position that some men occupy in the society because of unfair distribution of wealth and power ( Connell, 2013 ; Morrell et al., 2013 ). One of the debates within the hegemonic masculinity theory has been the question of whether masculinity of men who are structurally subordinated in society, for example, men from economically disadvantaged groups, could be considered 'hegemonic', as these men do not see themselves to be in power. In this respect, it has been suggested that there can be more than one hegemonic masculinity within a society, which refer to sub-groups ( Jewkes et al., 2015 ). These sub-groups of hegemonic masculinity often develop among marginalised men and emphasise power and force ( Hearn et al., 2012 ). Further, they tend to be violent in nature, reflecting the powerlessness that marginalised men experience because of inability to meet the standard of hegemonic masculinity that is based on power, and income.

Studies show that poorer unemployed men are more likely to perpetrate violence due to powerlessness associated with unemployment and lack of economic resources ( Knabe et al., 2016 ; Sikweyiya et al., 2020 ). Men who have been affected by unemployment have been found to have low self-esteem, insecurities, and higher levels of anger, which are all risk factors to perpetrating domestic violence ( Myers and Demantas, 2016 ; Schneider et al., 2016 ). Also, lack of control over financial matters have been found to influence domestic violence in intimate relationships ( Afkhamzadeh et al., 2019 ; Demantas and Myers, 2015 ; Dery and Diedong, 2014 ). Studies report a high prevalence of domestic violence amongst couples where a man is unemployed ( Bhalotra et al., 2020 ; Dastjerdehei et al., 2020 ).

Domestic violence perpetration by unemployed men has been argued to be a problem especially in traditional contexts where men are expected to adopt the breadwinner role ( Jewkes and Morrell, 2018 ; Knabe et al., 2016 ). The breadwinner model is a paradigm of family centred on the belief that a man must work outside the home and earn income to provide for the family while a woman stays at home and takes care of the household duties and family ( Myers and Demantas, 2016 ; Schneider et al., 2016 ). Since many men secure masculinity identity through breadwinner status, therefore, inability to achieve this status have been found to disempower unemployed men and make them feel that they are not men enough ( Cools and Kotsadam, 2017 ; Knabe et al., 2016 ; Lynch et al., 2016 ). Research shows that men who feel that they have lost their manhood identity tend to use violence as their only way of demonstrating masculinity ( Connell, 2017 ; Jewkes and Morrell, 2018 ; Morrell et al., 2012 ). This is particularly the case in most South African cultures where men and women have distinct traditional gender roles, with emphasis on male breadwinner role ( Mshweshwe, 2018 ; Sikweyiya et al., 2020 ).

Similarly, perpetrating domestic has been argued to be a consequence of cultural values and norms that emphasise on viewing 'proper' masculinity through the lens of men's ability to dominate and have control over a female partner ( Dery, 2019 ; Bassey and Bubu, 2019 ). These ideals of masculinity associated with assertiveness, strength, and sexual conquest (of women) have been linked to domestic violence ( Bassey and Bubu, 2019 ; Breger, 2017 ). They are based on the patriarchal conceptions of masculinity and femininity which encompass characteristics, and behaviours that have traditionally been considered relatively typical of women and men, respectively ( Bassey and Bubu, 2019 ). These constructions of masculinity and femininity continue to be strongly promoted in many African cultural contexts ( Ajayi and Soyinka-Airewele, 2018 ; Akangbe Tomisin, 2020 ). They serve to provide the framing of gender inequality, male entitlements and unequal power relations between husbands and their wives ( Akangbe Tomisin, 2020 ; Sikweyiya et al., 2020 ).

Studies show that in many African cultural contexts' husbands continue to be viewed as leaders of the home who are entitled to exercise power over wives ( Mshweshwe, 2018 ; Sikweyiya et al., 2020 ). For example, the use of violence by men is considered culturally appropriate in situations where a wife has transgressed gender norms since husbands are entitled to lead the family, maintain order, gender hierarchy which is a key characteristic of a functioning marriage ( Akangbe Tomisin, 2020 ; Tonsing and Tonsing, 2019 ). In this sense, men tend to believe that they are entitled to special marriage privileges, for example, unlimited sex, that they can claim by using systematic violence and coercion ( Mshweshwe, 2018 ; Sikweyiya et al., 2020 ). Thus, perpetrating domestic is a demonstration of masculinity and a way of proving that a man is in control of his households ( Adjei, 2016 ; Breger, 2017 ).

Within the traditional context, hegemonic masculinity is enforced during the socialization of boys through ascribing behaviours and attitudes that are ‘perceived’ appropriate for men ( Kachel et al., 2016 ). They tend to be transferred from one generation to another through using specific traditions, for example, rituals like traditional male circumcision, often practised by many tribes in South Africa serve as a vehicle to reproduce masculinities ( Bhana, 2010 ; Mshweshwe, 2020 ). Traditional male circumcision is a custom whereby boys transition to manhood is marked not only by circumcision but also a training period that involves teaching young men the culturally acceptable ways of doing masculinity ( Magodyo, 2013 ; Moolman, 2017 ). These teachings focus on traditional gendered expectations, assertiveness, dominance over women, family leadership, breadwinner role.

The notion of traditional circumcision has been found to contribute to the problem of patriarchal domination that affects women ( Kangethe and Nomngcoyiya, 2016 ; Siweya et al., 2018 ). For example, a qualitative study conducted by De Wet et al. (2016) on the behaviour of male learners who underwent traditional initiation schooling find that high school male leaners who have gone through traditional initiation demonstrate dominance and sexist attitudes towards their female teachers whom they perceive inferior because of their status as women. This study concludes that the sexist attitudes of male learners who have gone through traditional circumcision may be influenced by the traditional teachings that emphasize on superior status of men. Such teachings include the idea that men are superior to women; therefore, they are entitled to respect, as well as the notion that men must reject women's leadership ( Mshweshwe, 2020 ). These teachings demonstrate how dominant masculinity identity is legitimised in traditional discourses which tend to be reconstituted through customs and cultural practices ( Hamlall, 2018 ; Moolman, 2017 ).

Although, some men divert from their earlier notions of cultural masculinity construct, especially when they have other ways through which they can define themselves, for example, education ( Magodyo, 2013 ; Naidoo, 2018 ). Magodyo (2013) noted that formal education has a significant influence in helping men redefine what it means to be a man and adopt positive masculinity. Further, Magodyo argues that formal education plays a crucial role in influencing positive masculinity behaviour by instilling positive values that help men reject cultural stereotypes such as aggression and entitlement to exclusive rights over women. Instead, they adopt the gender equality approach in negotiating family life and in rejecting violence.

The positive attitude towards gender equality has been found to increase based on the level of education, the higher the level of education acquired, the more liberal and favourable men's attitudes are towards gender equality ( Kyoore and Sulemana, 2019 ). These ideas are also expressed in the work of Naidoo (2018) , who draws on the life story of Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela, a prominent former president of South Africa to illustrate the role of education in shaping masculinity. Naidoo argues that although Mandela's initial masculinity socialization was shaped by the notion of Xhosa culture where manhood is inextricable with patriarchy, yet Mandela rejected gender stereotypes and instead adopted gender equality. Despite his socialization into traditional masculinity, which involved traditional teachings, Mandela evolved and became a phenomenal gender activist because of his academic stature. Given this, attempts to address gender inequalities and encourage men to engage in expressions of healthy masculinity must recognize the role of culture in the masculinity construct. The interventions aimed at transforming masculinities need to be culturally relevant.

5. Findings and conclusion

The goal of this article was to highlight a relationship between culture, constructions of masculinity, and domestic violence in South Africa. The African feminist perspective has enabled this research to gather valuable knowledge that can be used as evidence for the development of interventions to address domestic violence. The dominant feminist discourses on domestic violence have often focused on the concept of patriarchy as an explanation for domestic violence, however, this research is different because it recognises the role of cultural norms and the social environment in which domestic violence occurs in South Africa. This research acknowledges the distinct nature of South Africa as a society that has been affected by apartheid, which produced violence that continue to be transferred across generations. Therefore, to address domestic violence this research argue that the cycle of violence needs to be broken through implementation of interventions that promote humanity.

The findings of this study show that domestic violence is not only a consequence of men's desire to demonstrate power over women but also a result of the complex interplay of culture and the masculinity construct centrally to patriarchy. The concept of hegemonic masculinity illuminates how gender power operates at various levels while also offers an overarching framework for understanding ways in which gender inequalities are produced and reproduced. We argue that gender hierarchy and normative masculine and feminine roles prevalent in the South African society have implications for domestic violence. The findings demonstrate an inflexible gender hierarchy, which is enforced through culture and the dominant position of men in the home. The traditional teachings that emphasise assertiveness and domination of women seem to influence domestic violence.

These findings suggest that the patriarchal cultural norms that promote male dominance need to be recognized in attempts to address domestic violence. While this analysis acknowledges the significance and symbolic nature of African cultural systems, but we argue that there is a need to deconstruct traditional practices and to critically engage with its patriarchal tendencies that promote gender inequality and domestic violence. These findings are a significant contribution to the literature of domestic violence as they highlight how some structures of patriarchy inform the constructions of hegemonic masculinity within the cultural context in which many South African men construct and perform their masculinity and the embodied meaning attached to it.

6. Recommendations

The paper recommends that attempts to address domestic violence in South Africa must focus on changing patriarchal cultural norms and promote peaceful masculinity.

Declarations

Author contribution statement.

L. Mshweshwe developed and wrote this article.

Funding statement

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Declaration of interests statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Additional information

No additional information is available for this paper.

• Adjei S.B. Masculinity and spousal violence: discursive accounts of husbands who abuse their wives in Ghana. J. Fam. Violence. 2016; 31 (4):411–422. [ Google Scholar ]
• Afkhamzadeh A., Azadi N.A., Ziaeei S., Mohamadi-Bolbanabad A. Domestic violence against women in west of Iran: the prevalence and related factors. Int. J. Hum. Rights Healthc. 2019 [ Google Scholar ]
• Ajayi L.A., Soyinka-Airewele P. Key Triggers of domestic violence in Ghana: a victim centered analysis. Afr. Popul. Stud. 2018; 32 (1) [ Google Scholar ]
• Akangbe Tomisin A. Culture, religion and help-seeking for intimate partner violence victims in Nigeria : a narrative review. Culture. 2020; 3 (2):56–62. [ Google Scholar ]
• Amadiume I. Zed Books; London: 2015. Male Daughters, Female Husbands: Gender and Sex in an African Society. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bassey S.A., Bubu N.G. Gender inequality in Africa: a re-examination of cultural values. Cogito: Multidiscip. Res. J. 2019:11–21. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bhalotra S., Kambhampati U., Rawlings S., Siddique Z. 2020. Intimate Partner Violence: the Influence of Job Opportunities for Men and Women. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bhana D. “Here in the rural areas they don't say that men and women are equal!” Contesting gender inequalities in the early years. Agenda. 2010; 24 (84):9–18. [ Google Scholar ]
• Boonzaier F.A., van Niekerk T.J. “I’m here for abusing my wife”: South African men constructing intersectional subjectivities through narratives of their violence. Afr. Saf. Promot.: A J. Inj. Violence Prev. 2018; 16 (1):2–19. [ Google Scholar ]
• Breger M.L. Reforming by re-norming: how the legal system has the potential to change a toxic culture of domestic violence. J. Legislation. 2017:44–170. [ Google Scholar ]
• Burchardt M. Saved from hegemonic masculinity? Charismatic Christianity and men’s responsibilization in South Africa. Curr. Sociol. 2018; 66 (1):110–127. [ Google Scholar ]
• Clark J.N. Youth violence in South Africa: the case for a restorative justice response. Contemp. Justice Rev. 2012; 15 (1):77–95. [ Google Scholar ]
• Connell R.W. Wiley; New York: 2013. Gender and Power: Society, the Person and Sexual Politics. [ Google Scholar ]
• Connell R.W. Crime, Criminal Justice and Masculinities. Routledge; 2017. On hegemonic masculinity and violence: response to Jefferson and Hall; pp. 57–68. [ Google Scholar ]
• Cools S., Kotsadam A. Resources and intimate partner violence in Sub-Saharan Africa. World Dev. 2017; 95 :211–230. [ Google Scholar ]
• Dastjerdehei R.K., Khosravi B., Manesh N.I., Mohammadi M., Bahabadi H.S., Tosanloob M.P. Factors affecting domestic violence: a qualitative study. Health (SBRH) 2020; 4 (1):471–479. [ Google Scholar ]
• Demantas I., Myers K. “Step up and be a man in a different manner”: unemployed men reframing masculinity. Socio. Q. 2015; 56 (4):640–664. [ Google Scholar ]
• Dery I. “Give her a Slap or Two... She Might change”: negotiating masculinities through intimate partner violence among rural Ghanaian men. J. Interpers Violence. 2019 [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Dery I., Diedong A.L. Domestic violence against women in Ghana: an exploratory study in Upper West Region, Ghana. Int. J. Humanit. Soc. Sci. 2014; 4 (12):228–244. [ Google Scholar ]
• Dobash R.E., Dobash R.P. Handbook on Homicide Wiley-Blackwell; Oxford: 2017. When Women Are Murdered; pp. 131–148. [ Google Scholar ]
• Graaff K., Heinecken L. Masculinities and gender-based violence in South Africa: a study of a masculinities-focused intervention programme. Dev. South Afr. 2017; 34 (5):622–634. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hamberger L.K., Larsen S.E., Lehrner A. Coercive control in intimate partner violence. Aggress. Violent Behav. 2017; 37 :1–11. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hamlall V. Heterosexual relationships among young black men in the construction of masculinity at a South African university. Soc. Dynam. 2018; 44 (2):306–321. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hearn J., Nordberg M., Andersson K., Balkmar D., Pringle K., Forsberg L., Klinth R., Hegemonic Sandberg L. Masculinity and beyond: 40 Years of research in Sweden. Men Masculinities. 2012; 15 :31–55. [ Google Scholar ]
• Jewkes R., Morrell R. Sexuality and the limits of agency among South African teenage women: theorising femininities and their connections to HIV risk practices. Soc. Sci. Med. 2012; 74 (11):1729–1737. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Jewkes R., Morrell R. Hegemonic masculinity, violence, and gender equality: using latent class analysis to investigate the origins and correlates of differences between men. Men Masculinities. 2018; 21 :547–571. [ Google Scholar ]
• Jewkes R., Fulu E., Roselli T., Garcia-Moreno C. Prevalence and risk factors for non-partner rape perpetration: findings from the UN Multi-country cross-sectional study on men and violence in Asia and the Pacific. Lancet Global Health. 2013 2214-109 (13) [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Jewkes R., Morrell R., Hearn J., Lundqvist E., Blackbeard D., Lindegger G., Quayle M., Sikweyiya Y., Gottzén L. Hegemonic masculinity: combining theory and practice in gender interventions. Cult. Health Sex. 2015; 17 :112–127. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kachel S., Steffens M.C., Niedlich C. Traditional masculinity and femininity: validation of a new scale assessing gender roles. Front. Psychol. 2016; 7 :956. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kangethe S.M., Nomngcoyiya T. An exploration of subjugation of women among the communities practising traditional male circumcision rite in Eastern Cape, South Africa. J. Hum. Ecol. 2016; 54 (2):124–130. [ Google Scholar ]
• Knabe A., Schöb R., Weimann J. Partnership, gender, and the well-being cost of unemployment. Soc. Indicat. Res. 2016; 129 (3):1255–1275. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kyoore J.E., Sulemana I. Forum for Social Economics. Routledge; 2019. Do educational attainments influence attitudes toward gender equality in sub-Saharan Africa? pp. 311–333. (48) [ Google Scholar ]
• Lau U., Seedat M. Enlarging the Scope of Peace Psychology. Springer; Cham: 2017. Structural violence and the struggle for recognition: examining community narratives in a post-apartheid democracy; pp. 203–220. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lelaurain S., Fonte D., Giger J.C., Guignard S., Lo Monaco G. Legitimizing intimate partner violence: the role of romantic love and the mediating effect of patriarchal ideologies. J. Interpers Violence. 2018 [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lynch K.R., Jewell J.A., Golding J.M., Kembel H.B. Associations between sexual behavior norm beliefs in relationships and intimate partner rape judgments. Violence Against Women. 2016; 23 (4):426–451. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Magodyo T.C. 2013. The Role of Ulwaluko in the Construction of Masculinity in Men at the University of the Western Cape. A Mini-Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts in Research Psychology in the Department of Psychology at the University of the Western Cape. [ Google Scholar ]
• Mazibuko N.C. Checkmating the mate: power relations and domestic violence in a South African township. South Afr. Rev. Sociol. 2017; 48 (2):18–31. [ Google Scholar ]
• Mazibuko N.C., Umejesi I. “Domestic violence as a ‘class thing’: perspectives from a South African township. Gender Behav. 2015; 13 (1):6584–6593. [ Google Scholar ]
• Moolman B. Rethinking ‘masculinities in transition’in South Africa considering the ‘intersectionality’of race, class, and sexuality with gender. Afr. Ident. 2013; 11 (1):93–105. [ Google Scholar ]
• Moolman B. Negotiating masculinities and authority through intersecting discourses of tradition and modernity in South Africa. Norma. 2017; 12 (1):38–47. [ Google Scholar ]
• Morrell R., Jewkes R., Lindegger G. Hegemonic masculinity/masculinities in South Africa: culture, power, and gender politics. Men Masculinities. 2012; 15 (1):11–30. [ Google Scholar ]
• Morrell R., Jewkes R., Lindegger G., Hamlall V. Hegemonic masculinity: reviewing the gendered analysis of men's power in South Africa. South Afr. Rev. Sociol. 2013; 44 (1):3–21. [ Google Scholar ]
• Mshweshwe L. University of Johannesburg; 2018. Support for Abused Rural Women in the Eastern Cape: Views of Survivors and Service Providers. Doctoral dissertation. [ Google Scholar ]
• Mshweshwe L. 2020. Boys Transition to Manhood; Culture, Masculinity, and Domestic Violence. www.youthandpolicy.org/articles/domestic-violence-in-south-africa/ Available at: [ Google Scholar ]
• Mudau T.J., Obadire O.S. The role of patriarchy in family settings and its implications to girls and women in South Africa. J. Hum. Ecol. 2017; 58 (1-2):67–72. [ Google Scholar ]
• Myers K., Demantas I. Breadwinning and bread-losing: exploring opportunities to rework manhood. Sociol. Compass. 2016; 10 (12):1119–1130. [ Google Scholar ]
• Naidoo K. Tracing Gender in the Personal, Familial and Socio-Political History of Nelson Mandela. AFFRIKA J. Polit. Econom. Soc. 2018; 8 (2):47–66. [ Google Scholar ]
• Oyewumi O. Palgrave Macmillan; Basingstoke, UK: 2011. Gender Epistemologies in Africa: the Gendering of African Traditions, Spaces, Social Identities, and Institutions. [ Google Scholar ]
• Patil V. From patriarchy to intersectionality: a transnational feminist assessment of how far we've really come. Signs: J. Women Cult. Soc. 2013; 38 (4):847–867. [ Google Scholar ]
• Quek K. Handbook on Gender and Violence. Edward Elgar Publishing; 2019. Patriarchy. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ratele K. Working through resistance in engaging boys and men towards gender equality and progressive masculinities. Cult. Health Sex. 2015; 17 (2):144–158. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Schneider D., Harknett K., McLanahan S. Intimate partner violence in the great recession. Demography. 2016; 53 (2):471–505. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sikweyiya Y., Addo-Lartey A.A., Alangea D.O., Dako-Gyeke P., Chirwa E.D., Coker-Appiah D.…Jewkes R. Patriarchy and gender-inequitable attitudes as drivers of intimate partner violence against women in the central region of Ghana. BMC Publ. Health. 2020; 20 :1–11. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Siweya T., Sodi T., Douglas M. The notion of manhood embedment in the practice of traditional male circumcision in Ngove village, Limpopo, South Africa. Am. J. Men's Health. 2018; 12 (5):1567–1574. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• South Africa demographic and Health Survey. 2016. https://dhsprogram.com/pubs/pdf/FR337/FR337.pdf#page389 [Online]. Available at:
• Stromquist N.P., editor. Women in the Third World: an Encyclopedia of Contemporary Issues. Garland Pub; New York: 2014. p. 567. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sultana A. Patriarchy and women s subordination: a theoretical analysis. Arts Faculty J. 2010:1–18. [ Google Scholar ]
• Swartz S., Harding J.H., De Lannoy A. Ikasi style and the quiet violence of dreams: a critique of youth belonging in post-Apartheid South Africa. Comp. Educ. 2012; 48 (1):27–40. [ Google Scholar ]
• Tonsing J.C., Tonsing K.N. Understanding the role of patriarchal ideology in intimate partner violence among South Asian women in Hong Kong. Int. Soc. Work. 2019; 62 (1):161–171. [ Google Scholar ]
• De Wet N.C., Mohlaloka S.M.B., Jacobs L. Insights from traditional initiation teachers (Basuwe) on the influence of male traditional initiation (lebollo) on the behaviour of schoolboys. Perspect. Educ. 2016; 34 (2):19–31. [ Google Scholar ]

Masculinities, hegemony, and structural violence

Paul Crawshaw, Alex Scott-Samuel, and Debbi Stanistreet discuss masculinity and harm

Health inequalities continue to be a pressing issue for governments and communities in the Western developed nations. Recent evidence continues to highlight the prevalence of inequities in morbidity (experience of illness over the lifecourse) and mortality (death rate) and suggest that, despite significant improvement in health and wellbeing for large sections of populations, there continues to be a gap between the health of the most affluent and the poorest. These discussions are particularly pertinent to the UK, which, as Professor Marmot (2010) has documented in detail in his recent report, continues to experience significance health inequalities which are largely the outcome of differentials in socio-economic status. It is the strong recommendation of the Marmot report, and one that we would echo, that reduction in health inequalities can only be achieved by addressing their fundamental causes, as opposed to the diseases through which they are manifest at any given time, or their immediate antecedents. This fact explains both the persistence of health inequalities over time and the failure of policies which only target their immediate manifestations to have any lasting impact. Fundamental causes include unequal distribution of power, money, resources, and social status.

At face value the theme of this discussion may seem removed from more mainstream issues of crime and criminal justice. Criminologists have long known, however, that crime and inequality go hand in hand and sit cheek by jowl in communities facing deprivation and disadvantage. Health inequalities, like crime, are associated with high levels of social and economic deprivation, low levels of social capital, disorganised and fragmented communities, low levels of education, and high levels of worklessness. Further, crime and fear of crime have a direct impact on the health of individuals and communities, exacerbating inequalities, and further compounding the social miseries experienced by the already disadvantaged.

Thus, it is widely acknowledged that structural factors, largely determined by the economic organisation of nation states and the wider global community, are unequivocally implicated in the perpetuation of inequalities in health and the relationship between these and crime is clear. In this discussion we draw attention to a further, fundamental and yet equally remediable structural cause of health inequalities which is rarely acknowledged in mainstream discussions; hegemonic masculinity. Most significantly, we argue that hegemonic masculinity is inextricably linked with structural violence, a concept that allows us to understand institutionalised forms of discrimination, repression and legitimation of inequalities.

The impact of gender inequality on women and girls is well documented, with the deleterious effects of patriarchy being the subject of more than 40 years of feminist scholarship. The specific impacts of gender inequity on men are a newer concern both more generally and in terms of the study of how dominant (hegemonic) forms of masculinity and patriarchal social relationships may be harmful to not only women and girls, as is well documented, but to men themselves. Crime has long been identified as a predominantly, although not exclusively, male phenomena, with men typically identified as the majority of perpetrators and victims. Here men are presented as risky and at risk, with masculinity playing a significant role in both the construction of criminal identities and subcultures, and the positioning of men within roles, spaces, and places which make them vulnerable to becoming victims.

The contention of this discussion is that hegemonic masculinity as a form of power which profoundly determines social and political relations can be approached as a fundamental underlying cause of inequalities in health. In other words, there is a case to be made that one globally dominant or hegemonic form of masculinity is responsible for unhealthy and antisocial characteristics which are prevalent in many, if not most societies worldwide.

Hegemonic masculinity

The concept of hegemonic masculinity has had an inestimable impact upon gender studies specifically and the social sciences more generally over the past two decades. It is said to be characterised by (arguably) negative attributes such as toughness, aggressiveness, excessive risk-taking, and ‘emotional illiteracy’, alongside ‘positive’ attributes like strength, protectiveness, decisiveness, and courage; and features of more debatable value like individualism, competitiveness, rationality, and a practical orientation. These are played out in diverse ways at both a macro and micro level; both in the actions and dispositions of individual men (although, as discussed below, hegemonic masculinity does not necessarily operate in a deterministic way upon individual behaviours) and, as is the key contention of this discussion, in the wider political and ideological machinations of governments and nation states.

Hegemony refers to the cultural dynamic by which a group (in this case, men) sustains a leading position in social life. Hegemonic masculinity is not therefore an isolated object, rather it is an aspect of a larger structure of gender, and definitions of masculinity are deeply enmeshed in the history of institutions and of economic structures. In this sense, gender and its ideologies are always relational. Connell (2005) suggests that hegemonic masculinity can be stabilised and destabilised by other types of power relations such as social class and ethnicity. Hence, if the construction of hegemonic masculinity impacts on other power relations it has clear significance for the wider study of inequality.

The dominance of this type of masculinity is not surprising given its overlaps with the kind of competitive behaviour dictated by the equally dominant neoliberal economic model of the free market, themselves implicated in the acting out of structural violence and health inequalities. Of particular concern are the clear links between the hegemony of this form of manhood, the resulting encouragement of power inequalities between individuals and social groups, and ultimately, how these are reflected and reproduced in power inequalities between classes, ethnicities, genders and social institutions. The impact of this subtle process is such that even the social relations and public policies of countries which have explicitly rejected patriarchal forms of governance continue to be undermined. To summarise this phenomenon in simple language: tough, aggressive, and unemotional models of manhood generate tough, aggressive, and unemotional politics and public policies. It is too simplistic, however, to suggest that such hegemonic masculinity is the outcome of the actions of individual men. Rather, masculinity operates as a gender ideology which works to determine both relationships between men and women and men and other men.

These discussions illuminate the complexities of understanding how hegemonic masculinities operate in ways which may work to shape social relations at both a micro and macro level. The contention of this discussion is the potential of hegemonic masculinity to operate as a process (rather than merely a set of attributional traits (Jefferson, 2002)) which comes to profoundly shape social relations, potentially having a deleterious effect upon both men and women within consumer capitalist societies through playing an important role in the perpetuation of forms of structural violence which continue to construct inequity and disadvantage in health and wellbeing.

Structural violence

The term structural violence refers to discrimination, oppression, and suffering caused by structural relationships such as the civil, social and economic relations of public policy. It brings together in a single concept issues as diverse as poverty and income inequality, unacceptable living and working conditions, aggressive economic and trade policies, institutionalised forms of discrimination, denial of human rights, sickness or disability caused by unaffordable health care, and the suffering resulting from war and genocide, and significantly for this discussion, likelihood of exposure to crime and fear of crime and insecurity. Like hegemonic masculinity, the operation of structural violence is thus abstracted from the direct actions of individuals, and rather, is part of a wider set of processes and practices which act upon individuals, communities, and societies alike.

The linkages between hegemonic masculinity and structural violence may almost be self-evident. Both refer to institutionalised forms of social, cultural, and political dominance which work to systematically oppress those groups who find themselves powerless in the face of both patriarchal and economic domination. A good example of the kind of evidence suggesting that such linkages are causal comes from the field of international relations (Caprioli and Boyer, 2001). A worldwide study linking levels of female representation in national parliaments and duration of female suffrage with governmental use of political violence found that ‘States that are characterised by higher levels of gender equality use lower levels of violence during international crises than those with lower levels of gender equality’. Whilst of course it is overly simplistic to suggest that the presence of women as political decision makers inevitably leads to the implementation of more egalitarian policies, it is possible that challenges to dominant masculine ideologies are potentially beneficial to the wider governance of states. While much remains to be done in terms of identifying precise linkages, it is clear that such findings carry substantial implications for how we manage our societies – including of course how we manage the health inequalities caused by the many forms of structural violence.

What is to be done?

It is tempting to be fatalistic about endemic and deeply rooted issues such as hegemonic masculinity. If, as discussed earlier, challenging such hegemony is not limited to addressing the attitudes and behaviours of individual men, but rather involves a systematic assault on embedded sets of ideologies and practices which lie at the heart of political and social systems there are clearly significant challenges ahead. However, it is also important to acknowledge causes for optimism. Firstly, alternatives do exist. Substantial proportions of men in all countries, social classes, ethnic and other social groups do not conform to the stereotypical masculine norms described and, as discussed, it is hopelessly simplistic to use hegemonic masculinity in such an attributional way. Although many religions and other social institutions continue to impose patriarchal governance and social systems on those whom they influence, it is not too difficult to envisage circumstances in which charismatic leaders in a variety of settings could promote social movements aimed at introducing a more socially cohesive norm of masculinity. Secondly, the negative aspects of hegemonic masculinity are – at least in principle – preventable through action at the level of public policy. In Sweden, the previous government's education ministry established a Delegation on Gender Equality in Preschool, which discovered ways in which children in preschool education face policies and practices which systematically reinforce the hegemonic masculinity status quo – for example, through gender stereotyping in the way teachers differentially deal with girls and boys. The delegation made policy recommendations aimed at altering this situation (though unfortunately, the present government has not made the report available in English). Nonetheless, this demonstrates how such matters can legitimately be addressed through public policy – though we would not pretend that this task will be an easy one.

Paul Crawshaw is Assistant Dean Teeside University, Alex Scott-Samuel and Debbi Stanistreet are Senior Lecturers, both at the University of Liverpool.

This article is republished from  issue 81, September 2009 of Criminal Justice Matters .

1. Marmot, M. (2010), Fair Societies, Healthy Lives , London: The Marmot Review. 2. Caprioli, M. and Boyer M. (2001), ‘Gender, violence, and international crisis’, Journal of Conflict Resolution , 45, pp.503–518.  3. Connell, R. (2005), Masculinities , Cambridge: Polity.  4. Jefferson, T. (2002), Subordinating hegemonic masculinity, Theoretical Criminology , 6, pp.63–88. 

Hegemonic Masculinity Essay

Introduction, hegemonic masculinity, unlocking men, unmasking masculinities: doing men’s work in prison, a social network analysis, doing hegemony: military, men, and constructing a hegemonic masculinity.

This essay attempts to critically and comprehensively review the concept of hegemonic masculinity. The hegemonic masculinity theory is particularly significant in understanding concepts such as the predisposition of men to violence, the evaluation of social network analysis in relation to hegemonic masculinity and the links between social identity and the occupation that someone belongs to.

The essay begins with an introduction and an analysis of the concept of hegemonic masculinity and proceeds to critically analyze articles that address the concept in relation to gender and social change.

Hegemonic masculinity, an influential theory in gender studies was first advanced by R.W Connell; the phrase is used to describe a social construct that is a benchmark for evaluation of all other forms of masculinity.

(Momsen, 2004 p.81-83) Hegemonic masculinity restricts and defines masculine behavior within a given social context and all other forms of masculinity are seen to be subordinate to it. In the society, hegemonic masculinity is not the prevailing form of masculinity; rather, it is a standard, endorsed by the society, against which, men are measured (Schipper, 2009 p.19-20).

Hegemonic masculinity is a theory that proposes that, there exists a normative standard for male behavior in society; men in the society are meant to attain these set standards of masculinity. The theory is characterized by the inclination of men to dominate other men and to subordinate women. Hegemonic masculinity is characterized by aggression, self reliance, and ambition, attitudes that are encouraged in men but are discouraged in women.

Several criticisms have been leveled against the Hegemonic masculinity theory. Connell, the original proponent of the theory cited his inspiration as being rooted in feminist theories that dealt with the concept of patriarchy and the associated issues about the role of men in altering the concept of patriarchy. Critics contend that the theory is responsible for fostering negative attitudes towards the concept of patriarchy (Howson, 2006 p.64).

It is claimed by critics of the theory that hegemonic masculinity is only a theoretical perspective and it cannot be translated in the real world situation. A critique advanced proposes that the theory can be conceived as a type of projection that deliberately victimizes women instead of men.

This victimization is done either collectively or limited to individuals. This is to say, the theory cannot be closely contrasted or applied in examining the lives of any real men. Furthermore, the critics of the Hegemonic masculinity theory propose that the theory fundamentally misconstrues the mental representation of male identity.

Critics also associate the theory with fostering attitudes of male superiority and negative machismo as manifested by excessive aggression and undue self reliance. (Ibid) The hegemonic theory has also been described as providing inexact, indistinct and inaccurate depiction of the concept of gender and masculinity because it does not take into account the unstable nature of all forms of masculinity (Howson, 2006 p.5-7).

In summation, despite the numerous criticisms that have been advanced against the theory, Hegemonic masculinity was and still is a significant theory that provides an in-depth analysis of the concept of masculinity (Speer, 2005 p.107-109).

To adequately discuss the theory of Hegemonic masculinity, it would be important to review a number of articles that address the concept and critically examining the related concepts of gender and social change.

The article attempts to establish a credible link between hegemonic masculinity and criminality. There has been prior research that has been done to explore this link; however, what makes this approach different is that it seeks to explore the correlation between correctional interventions and the destructive effects of hyper masculinity in prison.

Hyper masculinity refers to the over emphasis on conventional male behavior manifested by strength, virility and aggression. (Kimmel and Aronson, 2004 p.503-507)

The article examines two related programs initiated in men’s prisons in California and Massachusetts. The survey was carried by consultations and observation with volunteer. Essentially, the article illustrates how the program attempts to deconstruct hyper masculinity in correctional facilities and its effects in assisting inmates in redefining the concept in order to produce pro-social outcomes.

These programs applied are branches of the Mankind project, a large voluntary organization that is founded on the philosophy of the mythopoeticmen’s movement that emphasizes psychological self help, therapeutic techniques and personal growth.

Essentially, the aim of the program is to reorient the inmates’ perceptions of masculinity in a manner that will serve them better both in prison and in their lives after being reintegrated into society (Karp, 2010 p.63). The report highlights the relationship between violent crime and gender.

The figures in the article reveal that more men than women get arrested and convicted for violent crimes in contrast to more women than men who get arrested for non-violent crimes such as prostitution and running away from home However, the statistics also indicate that in recent years, there has been an increase in the number of females arrested and convicted for violent crimes.

Research reveals that, this increase that has been witnessed can be attributed to the net-widening of the criminal justice system and not necessarily as a result of an actual increase in the commission of violent crimes by females (Karp, 2010 p.63).

A number of theories have been advanced in an attempt to explain why more women than men commit crimes. The strain theory proposes that criminality is a function of greed and excessive societal emphasis on material possessions. However this theory does not explain why more men than women commit crime seeing as women are subjected to the same strain as men are.

Moreover, the labeling theory proposes that criminality is caused by shame, stigmatization and out casting especially of members of minority groups. However, this theory does not explain why women, who are subjected to the same conditions as men, are not as inclined to commit crimes (Karp, 2010 p.64-65).

The article proposes that the disparate rates of criminality between men and women can be explained by the hegemonic masculinity conceptualization.

This implies that the hegemonic nature of masculinity that emphasizes strength and aggression predisposes men to violence and consequently violent crime (Messerschmitt, 1993 p.27-30). Hegemonic masculinity is the exclusive premise of men and this may explain why more men than women commit violent crimes.

In my opinion, the theory of Hegemonic masculinity as the possible explanation of the disparate rates of violent crime commission by men and women is to a large extent accurate. This is because; all other theories of criminality adequately address the causes of the phenomena but do not consider why more men than women commit violent crimes. The Hegemonic masculinity theory adequately addresses this question.

In recognition of this fact, the article examines the interventions being initiated in the penal system, for instance the mankind project, the inside circle foundation and the Jericho circle project. These initiatives are meant to offer the inmates an opportunity to experience self discovery and personal growth in an attempt to counter the negative effects of hegemonic and hyper masculinity.

The article tries to involve important theory on social life brought forward by Connell’s in two schools. The social theory on gender was developed by Robert Connell to address the prevalent sexual, gender and power inequality between men and women. The theory examines the gender-based division of labor, power and the nature of carthexis (Connell, 1987 p.64-65).

The article uses arithmetical techniques to examine power affairs, violence and social connections in relation to the male supremacy beliefs of the students. In the secondary school in question; one demonstrated the validity of Connell’s theory in the fact that Hegemonic masculinity was placed on top of the hierarchy of other forms of masculinity.

The other secondary school has a different orientation that demonstrates the support for the other viewpoint that gender is relational and that the hypothesized effects are evident, even after considering and accounting for the rest of the explanatory factors. This illustrates the fact that there is considerable empirical evidence to support Connell’s theory (Usher and Robbins, 2010 p.23-25)

The study examines a ruling-class and a middle class school in Australia. The different hierarchical structures are explained by the fact that, the ruling class school fosters attitudes that are based on masculinity. The middle class school has a structural equation modeling (SEM) approach that considers the effects of male dominance, gay-male homophobia, anti-academic attitudes and attitudes of anti-feminism.

The article proposes to establish a relationship between gender and power inequality. The article is significant in that it is the first study undertaken using qualitative research methodology that takes into account the context of the local environment and cultural factors. The study does not work on the assumption that people act independently of the society in which they live.

Essentially, the theory attempts to explain the fundamental relationship between power and violence. This article proposes that, Hegemonic masculinity is an expression of power inequality between men and women. This implies that the power inequality contributes significantly to the commission of violence and the fostering of attitudes of subordination towards women (Usher and Robbins 2010 p.31-35).

This article proposes that Hegemonic masculinity is at the pinnacle of the gender hierarchy. Furthermore, the article proposes that Hegemonic masculinity subordinates all other gender constructs. Conventionally, Hegemonic masculinity is focused on the tenets of self discipline, sadism, belligerence and many other signs of control.

The article is based on a study that involved interviewing 43 men emphasizing the process of establishing Hegemonic masculinity constructs. The interviewees included military officers from different specialties, different rank levels and different levels of ability.

Essentially, this implies that men construct hierarchies that subordinate other people. At the same time, these characteristics show the way men place themselves in supremacy symbolism (Hinojosa, 2010 p.180)

Furthermore, the article examines the ways in which men that are aiming to join military service position themselves on the top of the hegemonic construct of masculinity.

The men present themselves as better placed in terms of intelligence, strength, skills and ability as compared to ordinary civilians. In so doing, this person panning to join the military construct a masculinity that is symbolically dominant over other forms (Hinojosa, 2010 p.181-182)

A critical review of the article establishes a conclusive link between the concepts of social identity and perceptions of the self and their relationship with the institutions that they belong to, in this case, the military. This implies that people who have a career in the military tend to derive a large extent of their personal identity from the occupation that they belong to (Hinojosa, 2010 p.184)

In my opinion, the assertion that people derive a large part of their social identity from the occupation that they belong to is accurate. The article cites conclusive evidence that people planning to join the military have a heightened sense of Hegemonic masculinity. This notion of social change can be directly attributed to their occupation of choice

In conclusion, a critical examination of the three articles establishes a tenable link between hegemonic masculinity, gender and social change. These three concepts are inextricably linked in that the perception of gender is affected by the theory of hegemonic masculinity. On the other hand, both gender and hegemonic masculinity are determined by social change.

Connell, R. (1987) Gender and power: society, the person and sexual politics. California: Stanford University Press. p.64-65

Hinojosa, R. (2010) Doing Hegemony: Military, Men, and Constructing a Hegemonic Masculinity. P.180-185

Howson, R. (2006) Challenging hegemonic masculinity. NY: Routledge Publishing Inc. p.64

Karp, D. R. (2010) Unlocking Men, Unmasking Masculinities: Doing Men’s work In Prison. P.63-65

Kimmel, M. S. and Aronson, A. (2004) Men and masculinities: a social, cultural, and historical encyclopedia, Volume 1. CA: ABC-CLIO Inc. p.503-507

Messerschmitt, J.W.(1993) Masculinities and crime: Critique and reconceptualization Of theory . USA: Littlefield Inc. p.27-30

Momsen, J. (2004) Gender and Development . NY: Routledge Publishing Inc. p.81- 83

Schipper, W. C. (2009) Masculinity, spirituality, and sexuality ; The interpreted, lived experience. MA: Proquest LLC. p.19-20

Speer, S. A. (2005) Gender talk; feminism, discourse and conversation analysis. NY: RoutledgePublishing Inc. p.107-112 p.107-109

Usher, D and Robbins, G. (2010) A Social Network Analysis. nd. P.23-35

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2023, December 4). Hegemonic Masculinity. https://ivypanda.com/essays/hegemonic-masculinity-essay/

"Hegemonic Masculinity." IvyPanda , 4 Dec. 2023, ivypanda.com/essays/hegemonic-masculinity-essay/.

IvyPanda . (2023) 'Hegemonic Masculinity'. 4 December.

IvyPanda . 2023. "Hegemonic Masculinity." December 4, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/hegemonic-masculinity-essay/.

1. IvyPanda . "Hegemonic Masculinity." December 4, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/hegemonic-masculinity-essay/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Hegemonic Masculinity." December 4, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/hegemonic-masculinity-essay/.

• Ruairiadh O’Connell ‘Gotham Jubilee’: Retrospect Into Art Deco
• "Little Things Mean a Lot" by O’Connell
• Violence and Justice in The Most Dangerous Game by Richard Connell
• Bullying Behavior and Impact of Hegemonic Masculinity
• Conflict in ‘The Most Dangerous Game’ by Connell
• Hegemonic Masculinity and Gender Variation in Suicide Rates
• “The Most Dangerous Game” a Story by Richard Connell
• The New Insights of Masculinity
• “Mission: Impossible II”: Hegemonic Masculinity and Male Bonding
• Lance Armstrong Gets Dumped by R. Albergotti, V. O’Connell and S. Vranica
• Gender Differences in Communication
• Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Sexuality in the Hispanic Culture
• Compare and contrast Germon's account of intersex in 'dangerous desires: intersex
• Influence of sex roles on the manifestation of leadership
• The Feminist Power and Structure in Canada

• Help & Terms of Use

The connection between masculinity and domestic violence : what young people think

• Melanie J McCarry
• The University of Bristol
• School for Policy Studies

Student thesis : Doctoral Thesis › Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)

File : application/pdf, 20.7 MB

Type : Text

http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.398709

• Persistent link

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Hegemonic Masculinity, Social Imaginaries and Domestic Violence in the Dominican Republic

The culture of hegemonic masculinity is the principal promoter of domestic violence, by today home is the most dangerous place for women, United Nation mentions that the majority of woman's murderer are male relatives and partners.

Related Papers

Josep Armengol

Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Literature

Jacob Brown

This article explores evolving representations of the Dominican colloquialism and concept tíguere in academic scholarship and Dominican national and diasporic culture. Phonetically, the word tíguere is a “Dominicanized” pronunciation—with one extra syllable added in the middle—of tigre, the Spanish word for tiger. Instead of purporting an exhaustive analysis of every utterance of tíguere in the vast archives of Dominican culture (a Quixotic affair for a single encyclopedia entry), this article observes how scholarship in the last forty years has approached the “tíguere” as a Dominican cultural expression. While academic books and articles on Dominican culture vary insofar as their discussions of the origins of the term and to whom it applies (whether they be men or women; “straight” or queer; black, white, or mixed), they also show continuity in reinforcing the basic characteristics of tigueraje (wit, grit, and resourcefulness; cunning, confidence, and showmanship; stoicism, style, and fierce determination) as expressions of dominicanidad, or Dominican-ness. This article does not pretend to be an exhaustive study but rather shows some of the ways in which authors and academics have spotted and studied tígueres in the milieu of Dominican cultural production. While the growing fields of contemporary Dominican scholarship, media, and literature have gradually deconstructed and adapted the tíguere within critical, queer, gender-inclusive, racially conscious, and transatlantic methodologies, in doing so it has also played a role in reinscribing the tíguere’s place in Dominican culture, both at home on the island and across oceans.

Ana Carcedo

Stephen Baffour Adjei

Raquel Sukhu

Domestic violence internationally is a gendered phenomenon. The majority of reported cases are characterized by male perpetrators and female victims. This pattern repeats itself regionally and locally. This paper reports on the findings of a local qualitative study of men against whom there were allegations of domestic violence, and recommendations based on those findings. These men emerged from differing ethnic and religious backgrounds as well as differing family structures however the commonalities in their behavior, attitudes and personal accounts of incidents provide some insight into their actions. The role of gender socialization and the construction of masculinities in propagating domestic violence will be explored to elucidate causes and long term solutions.

Encuentro: Revista académica de la Universidad Centroamericana

Alicia Z Miklos

This article forms part of an inquiry about the reach of legislative changes initiated by Law 779 in Nicaragua, the “Integral Law against Violence towards Women”, passed in February 2012. The primary texts I analyze include the legislative debates for the drafting of Law 779, the body of Law 779, the Reform to the law in October 2013, and the Regulations to Law 779, issued through a presidential proclamation in July 2014. I organize my discussion around the most controversial juridical figure in Law 779: that of mediation. Analyzing the trajectory of Law 779 within the Post-war cultural scene in Nicaragua, I conclude that the reinstatement of mediation represents a regressive reaffirmation of patriarchal authority in the guise of community empowerment. The family centered rhetoric of the Regulation to Law 779 signifies capitulation to the most conservative, religious sectors of society and a dramatic reversal of feminist gains towards recognizing women as subjects with rights. These are in fact battles over the cultural interpretation of women’s place, their autonomy, and the troubled reality of the nuclear family and normative social bonds in twenty-first century Central America. They show that women’s autonomy continues to be symbolically coded as dangerous, even as a threat to the collective interests of the family and the nation.

Patricia Munoz Cabrera (PhD)

Caribbean Journal of Criminology

Gabrielle Hosein

Drawing on themes of women's empowerment, its challenges to masculinist gender ideals, and misogynist resistance through the "frontal assault" of intimate partner violence (IPV), this article proposes a conceptual framework which links masculinism, the myth of male marginalisation and the male backlash model to contemporary intimate partner violence in the Caribbean. Caribbean feminist scholarship has extensively investigated the widespread backlash against women's empowerment, but not previously provided a framework which wrestles with both continuing ideological subordination and emerging institutional and interpersonal empowerment of women as a basis for intimate partner violence. It is argued that women's ideological subordination as well as the backlash to women's empowerment across institutional and interpersonal relations, explain contemporary intimate partner violence in Trinidad and Tobago.

RECEP DOGAN

Lucinda Manda-Taylor

RELATED PAPERS

Gift Masengwe

Julius Gathogo

Critical Arts: South-North Cultural and Media Studies

Joyee S Chatterjee

Natasha Leite de Moura

Francisco Aguayo , Jane Kato

Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding

Charlotte Mertens

Michael Flood

Engaging Men in Building Gender Equality

Veronica P Oxman-Vega

Critical Criminology

Martin Schwartz

Agenda Empowering Women For Gender Equity

Lisa Vetten

nrvijnana patrika 24 Journal of Anthropology 24

Aminur Rahman , Fatama Suvra

Jelke Boesten

Beril Türkoğlu

Violence Against Women

Gwen Hunnicutt

Sara Shaker

Feminist Criminology

Martín H . Di Marco , Dabney P Evans

Antonia Porter

Ramesh Awasthi

Matthew Gutmann , Sylvia Chant

Gender&History

Micah Wright

Evelyn Rose

Darja Schildknecht

Thea Shahrokh

Probation Journal

English and Spanish edition

ServiciosKoinonía - 2 , Pedro CASALDÁLIGA

Mourad Romdhani

Daniela Miranda

Karin Björnberg

Rashmila Shakya

Violence without Borders: paradigm, praxis, policy concerning violence against women

yakin erturk

Allison Petrozziello , Bridget Wooding

Jeff Hearn , Marjut Jyrkinen , Iva Šmídová

Unisa Library

Dhevamoney Mogie Padayachee

Femicide Across Europe: Theory, research and prevention

Maria-José Magalhães

Jacqui True

Baba Amani Olubanjo Buntu

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024