Men, masculinities and the material(-)discursive

Abstract

This article addresses the relations of materialist and discursive analyses of men and masculinities. More specifically, it argues for a materialist-discursive, material/discursive or even a materialdiscursive approach to men and masculinities. In the first part, some of the intellectual and political influences on the development of this approach are outlined. These include elaborations on materialism towards discourse, elaborations on discourse towards materialism, and attempts to work across that boundary. This is followed by focusing on, first, the example of men and violence, second, the topic of men, and, third, men's and males' materialdiscursive bodies. The concluding section discusses the importance of situatedness of knowledge, and the possibility of working towards the abolition of the social category of ‘men’. To deal with this complex problematic, a concept that speaks across the non-equivalence of males, men, masculinity is needed, and for this I suggest ‘gex’, rather than sex or gender.

Keywords:

• discourse
• feminism
• masculinities
• materialism
• material-discursive
• men

Notes on contributor

Jeff Hearn is Guest Research Professor in the Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, based in Gender Studies, Örebro University, Sweden; Professor Management and Organisation, Hanken School of Economics, Finland; Professor of Sociology, University of Huddersfield, UK; and a UK Academician in the Social Sciences. His latest books, in 2013, are: Men and Masculinities in Europe (updated 2nd edition), with K. Pringle et al. (Whiting & Birch); Men's Violences in Europe: Towards a Research Framework, with I. Novikova et al. (Örebro University CFS Report); and Rethinking Transnational men: Beyond, Between and Within Nations, edited with M. Blagojević and K. Harrison (Routledge).

Notes

1. This approach might be compatible with, for example, rethinking hegemonic masculinity as an empty signifier, in the context of ‘ascendancy and authority within a particular hegemony of the hegemonic principles that set out the rules for men as well as women and the points for the expansion of meaning and practice’. (Howson, 2013, p. 18; also see Howson, 2009)