I am a bull! The construction of masculinities in a group of men permasculinities, violence, bull, domination, subjectivity (original) (raw)
Related papers
Universitas Psychologica, 2015
A B s t r A C t The relationship between violence and masculinity warrants special attention in intervention work with men who inflict violence against their partners. In this article we sought to explore this connection drawing upon the metaphor of ‘being like a bull’ used by a member of a group of men held in Spain. We reflected on the patriarchal system that legitimises the constant proof expected of the ‘bull’, of its masculinity in an ‘arena’ made up of an audience of spectators who reflect the traditional male image. In conclusion, we highlighted the importance of psychosocial interventions in this sector with a more committed political/policy and gender perspective, focusing on cultural and macro-social aspects in interventions with those who inflict violence.
MEN, MASCULINITIES AND PHYSICAL VIOLENCE IN CONTEMPORARY EUROPE
The aim of the paper is to present and analyse the intersection between men, masculinities and physical violence in the comparative, European dimension as this issue is still too rarely raised in the existing literature dealing with issues on both violence, and men and masculinities. The presented findings result to a large extent from research conducted by an international team of researchers within the PROGRESS The Role of Men in Gender Equality project (2011-2012). The paper presents analysis regarding connections between perpetration of violence and the character of traditional, hegemonic masculinity; data on the scale and types of violence perpetrated and experienced by men from different European countries; analysis of the position of men as a victims of (physical) violence; and a presentation of the forms of men's (social) activism against (male) violence.
The New Alternative Masculinities and the Overcoming of Gender Violence
International Multidisciplinary Journal of Social Sciences, 2013
Research about masculinities gathers different topics from diverse disciplinary perspectives. One of the topics has been the analysis of the effect of the perpetuation of the traditional heterosexual model of masculinity upon gender violence. Recent scientific evidence about the reproduction of this social problem has shown the existence of three different types of masculinities (in the sense of the weberian ideal types): Dominant Traditional Masculinities (DTM), Oppressed Traditional Masculinities (OTM), and New Alternative Masculinities (NAM). The first two types contribute to perpetuate violence against women, while the latter allows preventing it and, consequently, leads to its overcoming. This article approaches the existence of these three types of masculinities and analyses both their characteristics and the consequences they have for the prevention of violence against women. It presents evidence about the link between language of ethics and language of desire that is found in NAM and which is the key element that explains its preventive effect regarding violence against women.
Toward an Anthropological Understanding of Masculinities, Maleness, and Violence
Current Anthropology, 2021
Boys will be boys. And so will monkeys. At least that's the impression one gets from popular depictions of the relationship between masculinity and violence, which have spread like weeds in recent years. Cherry-picked findings from studies of nonhuman primates provide fodder for "biobabble," the marshaling of pseudoscientific explanations for behavior that equate gun-toting soldiers, say, with border-guarding chimpanzees (see Gutmann, Nelson, and Fuentes 2021). The relentless proliferation of research on testosterone, prehistory, and the supposed differences between men's and women's brains adds other ingredients to the mix. Biobabble has been given a respectable face in best sellers by elite scholars like Steven Pinker (2012) and Richard W. Wrangham (2019), who draw on archaeological events and primate studies to present people in simple societies, past and present, as in urgent need of domestication. But it has not stopped there. The naturalness of male violence justifies everything from the claims of men's rights defenders to modern policing; the powers that be are the only thing saving us from a life that is nasty, brutish, and short. In the age of Me Too, human nature once again has come to the rescue of the status quo. As Matthew Gutmann, Robin G. Nelson, and Agustín Fuentes point out in their illuminating introduction to this special issue, when it comes to masculinity, maleness, and violence, we are facing an epidemic of errors. Anthropologists have for the most part been silent on the misleading claims being made. That is, until now. From March 15 to 21, 2019, a group of 17 biological anthropologists, archaeologists, medical anthropologists, and cultural anthropologists, along with a research neurologist, gathered in Sintra, Portugal, to discuss the problem. They developed a shared tool kit on the basis of their research on a broad range of topics: from the behavioral ecology of primates, to the bioarchaeology of early empires and small-scale societies, to the necropolitics that leads to slow death for people who don't adhere to gender norms. The participants dined together, debated together, and, in the course of five days, arrived at a shared understanding of the complexity of male violence-an understanding that discounted neither the affordances of human bodies, in all their variety, nor the importance of cultural values and social institutions in determining human behavior. Neither masculinity nor violence emerged from this symposium meaning just one thing.
Masculinity and the social violence against women
Ars Educandi
Men’s violence against women and persons of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) identity is a phenomenon that is rarely discussed in the mainstream media except in its Most horrendous and sensational forms. Even rarer is a discussion of a culture of mascul- inity in U.S. society for example that condones and in large part perpetuates men’s violence against women and LGBT persons. In the media, men’s violence is invisible or assumed as “natural” and thus inevitable. While the media’s debate on masculinities and violence has been relatively silent or superficial, the scholarly debate on men’s violence is vibrant, and a growing men’s movement is challenging misogynistic discourses and violent aspects of masculine cultures.
(Re)Gendering violence: Men, masculinities and violence.
G. Mason, S. Milivojevic & M. Lee (Eds) The Australian and New Zealand Critical Criminology Conference Proceedings 2010., 2011
This paper focuses on constructions of violence, in particular the ways in which violence is constructed as a social problem in and through policy discourses. Inspired by an earlier study into the ways in which practitioners, engaged in work with men who are violent towards their female partners, construct and understand violence, this paper highlights the extent to which societal/cultural beliefs regarding gender and violence are embedded at the levels of policy, ‘expert’ knowledge(s), and practices. Illustrating the exercise of (gendered) power through knowledge in shaping Australian government/agency responses and initiatives, it is argued that this has critical implications for the ways in which ‘gender(ed) violence’ is conceptualised, named and addressed.