A CRISIS IN MASCULINITY,
OR NEW AGENDAS FOR MEN?
FOR SYLVIA WALBY (ED.)
NEW AGENDAS FOR WOMEN, MACMILLAN, LONDON, 1999.
References
Publications:
Professor Jeff Hearn
INTRODUCTION
Recent years have seen the naming of men as men. Men have become the subject of growing political, academic and policy debates; in some respects this is not new; there have been previous periods of debate on men, and then, in a different sense, much of politics, research and policy has always been about men, often overwhelmingly so. What is new, however, is that these debates are now more explicit, more gendered, more varied and sometimes more critical. At their base is the assumption that men, like women, are not ‘just naturally like this’ or ‘just bound to be that way’, but rather are the result of historical, political, economic, social and cultural forces.
One social change that is now in place is that men and masculinities can at least be talked about as problematic. We can now ask such questions as: What is a man? How do men maintain power? Is there a crisis of masculinity? Or is there a crisis of men in a more fundamental way? Do we know what the future of men looks like or should be? What policy and practice implications follow both in relation to men and boys, and for men and boys? Importantly, there has also been a process of internal critique and auto-critique (Hearn, 1994) within these discussions. For example, the idea of crisis may well be overstating what is happening (Brittan, 1989), not least because for many men life may continue very much the same as before.
So what form do these changes take? In what ways do these changes mean significant and substantial change in relations between men, women and children? And what are their policy implications for government, policy-making and polity? Indeed just as there are new agendas for women, are there new agendas for men?
FEMINISM, ’NEW SEXUAL MOVEMENTS’ AND MEN
Several influences have brought this renewed focus on men and masculinities. First and foremost is impact on men of Second, and now Third (or 1000th?), Wave Feminisms. Questions have been asked of all aspects of men and men’s actions by feminists and feminisms. Different feminist initiatives have focused on different aspects of men, and have suggested different analyses of men and different ways forward for men. Feminism has also demonstrated many theoretical and practical lessons for men, though most men seem to to be able to ignore or forget most of them. One is that the understanding of gender relations, women and men has to involve attention to questions of power. Another is that to transform gender relations, and specifically men’s continued dominance of much social life, means not only changes in what women do and what women are but also that men will have to change too. This may be hard for many men to hear, and even harder to act on. These are vital issues for politics, policy development and personal practice.
Other forces for change include the gay movements, queer politics, other ’new sexual movements’ and the proliferation of sexual discourses more generally. While it is difficult to generalise about the form and direction of these critiques, they have often emphasised the desirability of (some) men to each other, the more public recognition of men through same-sex desire, and the associated or implied critique of heterosexual men’s practices. However, the exact directions of these ’new sexual movements’ remains diverse and difficult to predict.
Men’s responses to feminism have also been various. Since the early Seventies there have been ’anti-sexist men’ and ’pro-feminist men’, to be followed in the Eighties by ’wild men’ and ’mythopoetic men’, and the media creation of ’new men’. The Nineties have brought ’newish man’, ’new lads’, ’men’s rightists’ (some now very confusingly called The Men’s Movement, as opposed to the anti-sexist and the mythopoetic ones), and now ’post new men’ too. In the US there are extremely worrying moves to gender-conscious, more or less anti-feminist, political organising by men, such as the Coalition of Free Men (men’s rights), the Million Man March (Nation of Islam), and the Promise Keepers (Christian) (Minkowicz, 1995). In different ways, other, often composite, groups of men have been more willing and able to identify themselves as men, for example, as ’older men’ or ’black gay men’.
THEORY AND ACADEMIA
Something similar has happened in academia. In some senses there are as many ways of studying men and masculinities as there are approaches to the social sciences. They range from examinations of ’masculine psychology’ and psychodynamics (Craib, 1987) to broad societal, structural and collective analyses of men (Hearn, 1987); they have interrogated the operation of different masculinities – hegemonic, complicit, subordinated, marginalised, resistant (Carrigan at el., 1985; Connell, 1995) – and the interrelations of unities and differences between men (Hearn and Collinson, 1994); they have included detailed ethnographic descriptions of particular men or men’s activity as well as investigations of the constructions of specific masculinites in specific discourses (Edley and Wetherell, 1995). The International Association for Studies on Men has been established as a research network for several years and is currently co-ordinated from Norway.
The study of men and masculinities, whether critical or otherwise, is no longer considered so esoteric. It is now established, if rather tentatively, for teaching and research. While it has examined boys’ and men’s lives in schools, families, management, the military and elsewhere, many aspects remain unexplored. As research has progressed, it has become more complex, less concerned with just one ’level’ of analysis, and more concerned to link together previously separated fields and approaches. These kinds of critique of men also imply drastic rewritings of academic disciplines themselves, and their frequently pre-scientific ignoring of the fact that their ’science’ has been dominantly done by men, for men, and even primarily about men (Morgan, 1981).
The irony is that it is men’s general social power that may underwrite the choice of some boys and young men not to devote themselves to schooling and learning. In the past this may not have been a special problem for young men because of the structure of the labour market; that is no longer the case in many localities. More generally, with such difficulties around education and employment, as well as father absence/distance, crime, violence and so on, young men have been increasingly defined in recent years as a problem category (see Hearn, 1998).
CULTURE, MEDIA, AND REPRESENTATION
Contemporary namings of men have been accompanied by greater interest in men in the global worlds of consumption, advertising, journalism, and popular culture. New global technology have created the possibility of more powerful images of men and women that can be transferred around the world. Imaging men is now a matter of both fiercely reaffirming boring old Rambos and their like, in film, computer games, and comics, and presenting ever more ambiguous homo-het, man-woman pictures of ’men’ in both mainstream and alternative media. An increasingly important feature of media is the portrayal of men in sport. At the present rate of change, there are likely to be all manner of surprising associations to be drawn in the future in image and text around the sign of men or masculinity as signs (Saco, 1992). The critical examination of images can also be used as a powerful way of informing discussion of men in political, educational and other practical settings.
ECONOMIC, SOCIAL AND CULTURAL CHANGE
If we compare women and men in the nineteenth century and in the twentieth century, both major changes and major continuities are obvious. While changes abound in law, work, citizenship, personal relations and so on, there has been a widespread, stubborn persistence in men’s dominance – in politics, business, finance, war, diplomacy, the state, policing, crime, violence generally, heterosexual institutions and practices, science, technology, culture, media, and many other social arenas. What is perhaps most interesting is that while men’s general power as a (the) dominant social category remains virtually unchanged and may even have become intensified in some respects, men’s power is constantly being challenged, fragmented, and even transformed. Men are more than ever being affirmed as ‘men’; whilst at the same time the experience of being a man is subject to questioning and acute fracturing (Hearn, 1992a). Men’s situation, and particularly men’s power, is a complex mixture of change and no-change. Indeed the presence of change for men should not be confused with any general assertion of a so-called ‘crisis in masculinity’.
Specific changes, or potential changes, of individual men and groups of men should be contextualised by social change more generally. The current talk in the U.K may all be of ’boys’ underachievement’ but social contexts and social changes that affect men are very much much wider. In the U.K. there has been the End of Empire and men’s sense of a certain place in the world (Tolson, 1977); rapid transformations of capitalism and capitalist enterprises; and huge losses of men’s manufacturing jobs and growing service employment. Individual fathers’ authority, no longer automatic, is in possible tension with the state. Separations, divorces and remarriages have increased. There is now an growing recognition that ways of being men are culturally and ethnically variable. All of these changes not just affect but actively construct ordinary men in myriad ways. Furthermore, whatever change in men and men’s power occurs, or indeed is advocated, can affect all areas of social life. These include: education, class, work, employment, race, sexuality, violence, the family, childcare, the state, personal and private life, sport, care, health and illness, age and ageing, birth and death, the body, and so on. To put this another way, all the various changes addressed elsewhere in this book with regard to women can be re-read as suggesting both social changes and possible policy changes in relation to men.
Just as men’s relationships to feminism is likely to remain problematic (Hearn, 1992b), so change in men is likely to be problematic and uneven (Walby, 1986, 1990). It is highly unlikely that a radically new ‘sexual contract’ (Pateman, 1988) or ‘gender contract’ (Hirdmann, 1988, 1990) will suddenly arrive; rather we can expect a series of temporary ‘settlements’ or ‘truces’ within a difficult long-term process, burdened by the weight and oppressions of history.
There is also the need to increasingly consider the changing global context for men’s lives and power. While for most men life remains local in the way it is lived, the forces that affect it are certainly becoming more transnational in character; globalisation is in place and becoming ever more developed. This is a very complex and often contradictory picture. At its simplest it means that the fate of men and women is increasingly in the hands of economic, social and cultural processes that transcend the nation. These processes often involve racialisation, sexualisation, and the reproduction of other massive inequalities between ‘North’ and ‘South’ and between various ‘cores’ and ‘peripheries’ (see, for example, Human Development Report, 1995). The idea of the self-contained ‘unit’, be it the nation or indeed the individual man, is breaking down (Hearn, 1996).
In thinking about the future of men, there is, however, a need for some gendered caution. Many of the ’grand narratives’ of the future – globalisation, environmental destruction, population growth, food and water scarcity, information explosion, reproductive engineering, technological advance generally – typically remain presented as inevitable and strangely rather genderless, rather than largely controlled by relatively small groups of men: the real ’men of the world’ (Hearn, 1996), with their own brand of ’transnational business masculinity’ (Connell, 1997). These global and international changes have major implications for men and masculinities. The well-charted shift from private patriarchy to public patriarchy (Walby, 1989, 1990; Hearn, 1992a) is itself being superseded by a another shift, this time towards what might be conveniently called global patriarchy, which is itself likely to be a diffuse and multi-centred social formation (Hearn, 1996). Any would-be crisis in masculinity needs to be considered within that context, and the loss of both immediate, and even national, control and power that men may be experiencing.
Having said that future change will probably be relatively mundane for most men. Some of men’s future is likely to follow existing trends; other aspects are difficult to discern, unpredictable or unknown; much, short of global catastrophe, will not change. Many men will probably still find ways of holding onto various powers; of being violent, threatening, shouting, seeking to get their own way, whilst leading rather circumscribed lives, working less total hours and getting paid more than women, living less healthily, dying younger, and ’hanging out’ with other men. Meanwhile, changes are inevitable. Much of the way men are will necessarily change, in terms of specific conjunctions of age, body, class, culture, (dis)ability, dress, ethnicity, kinship, language, nationality, race, religion, sexuality and other social divisions that make someone a man, and some people men. Being a man is historically and culturally contingent.
WORK, EMPLOYMENT AND UNEMPLOYMENT
The central importance of ‘work’, still usually meaning specifically paid work, for many men has been well established (for example, Cockburn, 1984, 1991; Collinson and Hearn, 1996b). Work is a source of power and resources, a central life interest, and a medium of identity, as well as being a source of worry and concern. When men are unemployed or are inappropriately employed, extra problems may follow for men, such as for men’s health, and indeed for women too. Gender segregation persists, and much of men’s activity at work is homosocial: why do so many (heterosexual) men seem to prefer men, and their cosy company?
The recent transformation of work, through major structural change in employment and unemployment, has been extremely significant for many men. The twenty years from 1973 to 1993, the number of men in employment shrank from 13.1 million to 10.7 million. The shift in the sectoral makeup was even more dramatic: with changes from 39.7% to 27.9% in manufacturing; from 12.4% to 17.9% in retail, wholesale, consumption, catering and leisure; and from 5.4% to 11.9% in finance, insurance, estate agency and business services. Women’s employment is also changing with more women joining the labour market; there are already more young women than young men in the 16-19 age range in employment. Particularly significant increases in women’s employment, especially part-time employment, have occurred in the financial sector and in community, social and personal services (see Chapter XX; Dickens, 1995). Work changes for women also necessarily impact on men.
These structural changes mean that many men have experienced personal change in their working lives. No longer is lifelong security of employment guaranteed, not even for the relatively successful and well qualified; so-called ‘traditional’ working class-based masculinities, most obviously around heavy manufacturing and mining, can no longer be easily sustained unchallenged (Dicks et al., 1998, Waddington et al., 1998); meanwhile corporate reorganisation is commonplace; post-Fordist flexibility demands flexibility of men. In the first 5 years of the Nineties 44 percent of the male workforce experienced unemployment at some point. And of course for many men, especially young, less qualified men, the prospect of unemployment remains. This is a particularly urgent problem in certain inner city localities and large city-edge ‘council estates’, and for some young black men, especially in London and other urban centres. Policies for work generation remain a particularly high priority for young, working class and black men.
Men’s work and (un)employment also interact closely with domestic and family life. Despite and perhaps because of the transformations in men’s work, men who are in employment tend to work longer hours than almost all other men in the EU. The phenomenon of presentism is a serious problem in some sectors, and difficult to resist for men whose jobs remain insecure. There are urgent needs for government and employers to facilitate ways and means for men to reconcile (un)employed life and family life in a much more positive way – in employment and income support policies, and in managerial practices. These include attention to more job-sharing, voluntary reduced work time (whilst being ‘full-time’), flexible working hours, term time working, working from home, and other approaches promoted by New Ways to Work (1993, 1995) and similar initiatives. It also means men adjusting socially and psychologically to not necessarily being the ‘breadwinner’. Indeed greater equality in employment depends on greater equality in unpaid work in the home. There is thus a need to consider how men can contribute to both overall levels of household income and a more equal gendered division of labour both in and outside the home.
While employment changes have transformed many men’s relation to work, men remain in control of most powerful organisations, whether state, capitalist or third sector. This is especially so in terms of men’s continued domination of top management (Collinson and Hearn, 1996a) in capital and the state. Men in management are important political actors; while management certainly can be a facilitating process, managers may reproduce uncaring, sexually oppressive and even violent and abusive actions, without much comeback. They also have the task of overseeing and underwriting the behaviour of other men in their charge. Equal opportunities policies can themselves be a way of both implementing greater equality and containing more radical demands for change. It is in organisations that the public doing of gender is predominantly done and re-done. Furthermore, organisations and their control are fundamentally important, and becoming even more so, with the development of globalisation through multi-nationals, transnational governmental institutions, worldwide media and information networks, and so on. These are also vital in the changing men’s relationship to the personal and ‘the private’. Men in management have a special responsibility to facilitate men’s caring for others, as do men in government.
FAMILIES, FATHERS AND CARE
Although patriarchy has certainly changed in form over the last century or more, especially through the growth of the state, men’s power still resides at least in part in the family and the institution of fatherhood (Hearn, 1987). Historically, fatherhood is both a means of possession of and care for young people, and an arrangement between men. It has also been and still is a way for some men of living with, being with, being violent to, sexually abusing, caring for and loving particular young people (those that called ‘your own’), and a way of avoiding connection, care and contact with other young people more generally. Even nice fathers can switch to become nasty ones. Fatherhood has often involved getting something for nothing, an assumption of rights and authority over others, principally women and children, rather than responsibilties for them. The problems of both father absence and father distance are now recognised more than ever (Williams, 1998). For some men, becoming fathers can and obviously does involve major changes in responsibilities and more work.
State intervention in the rights and responsibilities of fatherhood - most obviously through the Child Support Agency and the Children Act of 1989, but also more subtly through state control of reproductive technology, such as IVF – has increased. The last few years have also and paradoxically seen signs of a growth in the rights of fathers, as well as in the assumption that such power and authority are ‘natural’ and ‘normal’. Even a glance through history and across cultures will show this to be extremely problematic. These issues become more complicated as men’s relationships to families develops over time - how to be positive and responsible to others in families, without asserting the power and authority of the father. This is especially important in long-term relationships, whether with or without marriage, and with the increasing number of men involved in separation, divorce and reconstituted families of various kinds. The number of women petitioning for divorce has doubled in the last twenty years. There is a clear need for a ‘post-marriage’ ethics for men. In addition there are long term changes in the number of men living alone.
So a challenge for men is how is to respond to these difficult questions - to love, care for and be friends with young people without drawing on the power of the father. This may even involve working toward the abolition of that power of fatherhood whilst recognising the reality of responsibilities in men’s lives (Hearn, 1983, 1984, 1987). Social and educational policies need to be directed towards assisting those who are carers, and not the so-called ‘rights’ of ‘natural fathers’, just by virtue of biological fatherhood. Such policies should support carers and encourage boys and men to participate much more fully in the activity of caring. One primary way of doing this is for a massive increase in state funding of support for child carers. Provision of publicly-funded child care in the U.K. remains derisory; at present it is available for only two percent of children under three (Daycare Trust, cited in Toynbee, 1998), one of the lowest rates in Europe. As such, this lack of funding is a clear governmental underwriting of the dominant system of unpaid care, largely by women.
Questions of care and caring are central in how boys and men change their practice in relation to others, both physically and emotionally. So often men’s avoidance of caring has been the defining feature of ‘being men’. This is very much a structural question in terms of women doing more caring work, both in private and in public. There have been some increases in men’s active participation in childcare and domestic work, but the baseline from which change is beginning is low. In addition, specific changes of this kind need to be placed against other changes – for example, women’s employment, domestic technology, and women’s leisure. Men’s activity may be focused on particular tasks, such as weekly shopping, or at particular periods, such as around childbirth. However, fathers with young children are particularly likely to work long hours in employment (Fagan, 1996). This could be for a variety of reasons, including compensation for loss of women’s earnings, the contribution of extra working to help establish men’s careers, avoidance of childcare, and the reproduction of gender divisions in the family.
There is some evidence of a tendency for men with more education to do more housework, but again this broad trend should be treated with caution, not least because of the impact of ‘greedy occupations’ (see Moyes, 1995; Lunneberg, 1997). There are also gradually growing numbers of lone fathers – from about 70,000 in 1970 to about 110,000 by 1990. On the other hand, the increase in men’s unemployment in the 1980s did not generally lead to increases in men’s work in the home, and may well have involved disproportionately negative effects for wives and other women partners (for example, McKee and Bell, 1985, 1986).
The 1996 British Social Attitudes Survey found that in 79% of households women did the washing and ironing alone, and in 48% women looked after sick family members alone while men never did so alone (Lunneberg, 1997). The Mintel 2000 Survey found only two percent of men did all the household tasks or shared them equally (Mintel, 1994). Men with wives who are in employment may be changing, but only slowly. Men with wives in full-time employment may in some cases take on more household work, but this may more likely involve a shift in the tasks that they are doing rather than devoting more time in total to housework (Anderson et al., 1994).
Boys and men learn not to care for others, and changing this is an important part of the project of socialisation, for example, in the education of boys at home and in school. This should be a major policy development - in nurseries and schools, by government and education authorities, and in higher education - not as an afterthought or something left to the whims and wishes of individual teachers. Like fatherhood and the family, caring is both a very personal issue and one built into wider societal structures and political institutions. It is not ‘solved’ by increasing day care provision, vital as that is - the problem goes to the very structuring of how men behave, feel, are. It is an area of life that can bring fundamental change in men’s experience of themselves; it can also bring about both direct antagonisms (deciding who will stay in or look after someone who is ill) and direct improvements in the quality of relationships. The question of caring also raises the challenge of how men become and do more caring, without just taking over.
A special challenge is how to encourage boys and young men to become more used to the bodily care of others in a way that does not lead to further dominance. This has to be attempted, yet with great care and caution - perhaps initially by the encouragement of care in their own families and in schools by the teaching of safety and first aid, and the care of pets and animals, and then moving on, under supervision, to the care of babies, young children, older people, those with disabilities elsewhere. Nurturing can be redefined as normal for boys, young men and men. More specifically, it involves teaching to boys gentleness and non-erotic forms of touch. However, throughout we need to be alive to the problems with this scenario, for example, in terms of potential abuse. It is not enough to just leave the dominant forces to define boys and men and then pick up the urgent need for positive initiatives that assist the redefinition of boys and men towards care and nurture as central defining features (Salisbury and Jackson, 1994). Educational policy and practice should be directed towards teaching boys how to care; boys’ caring should be expected, valued and indeed rewarded.
EDUCATION
In the last few years education has had a high profile in public debates about boys and young men. In considering this it is important, however, to remember that men’s general domination of education persists. This is clear in the occupation of headships and other senior staff positions in upper schools, in national and local educational policy-making, and in the universities and academia. Meanwhile many boys, particularly poor working class boys, are not achieving well at school. In 1994 43 percent of girls gained five or more GCSEs at grades A to C, compared with 34 percent of boys (Pratt, 1996). More specifically, a recent report for the Equal Opportunities Commission found that girls outperformed boys at GCSE in English, Modern Languages, Technology, History, and Art; and at A level in Geography, Social Studies, art, Chemistry and Biology (Arnot et al., 1996).
Boys’ performance in schools is a complex issue. This policy issue of boys’ (under)achievement can be understood in many different ways. The issue can be framed in terms of human capital, class inequality, equal opportunities or social justice. Links can be drawn between the low educational attainment of some boys and the low employment rates of some young men. There is also for some boys an antagonism between educational attainment, even attentiveness, and the performance and achievement of particular and valued masculinities. But most importantly, it should not be seen as a problem of girls doing too well; rather as boys not doing well enough. As Madeleine Arnot, one of the leading researchers in this field, has put it: ‘We have a success story here. This is an excellent sign of the work schools have done to improve girls’ performance. So that they are now catching up’ (quoted in Judd, 1996, p.1).
The way forward on this question is certainly not by way of any kind of backlash against girls’ achievements. Nor, in the long run, are boys likely to be encouraged to take education more seriously by trying to involve them through resort to further officially sanctioned use of competitive and aggressive methods and materials. Instead formal attention needs to be given to the very basis of how boys are meant to be. Boys are considerably more likely to damage themselves through risk-taking behaviour than are girls (see p. XXX). Just as the problem of ‘normal manhood’ remains a problem for many men, so does that of ‘normal boyhood’. Perhaps it is in fact more accurate to speak of a crisis in boyhood than it is to assert a crisis in masculinity. Schools and other educational arenas are major sites for the possible reinforcement or challenge to dominant and subordinated ways of being boys. There thus a need for thoroughgoing strategies on all aspects of gender relations in those institutions that assist the fostering of less oppressive ways of being boys and thus men (Connell, 1996). There is great scope here for more focused ‘boyswork’, youthwork and educational work with boys and young men, not only on educational questions, but also on all the issues raised here. Such work needs to be undertaken within a pro-feminist framework if it is not to merely reproduce some of the inequalities of past single-sex education.
The irony is that it is men’s general social power that may underwrite the choice of some boys and young men not to devote themselves to schooling and learning. In the past this may not have been a special problem for young men because of the structure of the labour market; that is no longer the case in many localities. More generally, with such difficulties around education and employment, as well as father absence/distance, crime, violence and so on, young men have been increasingly defined in recent years as a problem category (see Hearn, 1998a).
SEXUALITY
Men’s sexuality has often been neglected as a focus for change, except as a reaction to the initiatives of the Right. Dominant forms of ‘normal male sexuality’ – characterised as power, aggression, penis-orientation, separation of sex from loving emotion, objectification, fetishism, and supposed ‘uncontrollability’ (Coveney at al., 1984) – have been described and critiqued as highly problematic. For some, perhaps most, men, the connection of sexuality and violence is fundamental, as violence is eroticised, most obviously in pornography. This is not the way men’s sexuality is or has to be all the time.
Sexuality may feel to be that which is the most personal, the most ‘one’s own’; yet it is also structural. For example, heterosexuality is as much a social institution as marriage. Heterosexist culture and homophobia continue to abound. Men’s domination of sex and sexuality, and the reduction of sex to intercourse, to ejaculation, to orgasm are still represented as "just normal, aren’t they?" Heterosexual men may often be misogynist: the object of love can be the object of hate. Gay men are not necessarily pro-feminist. Homophobic men may inhabit homosocial pubs, clubs, organisations and workgroups - so what exactly are these sexual loyalties between men?
More broadly, it is important to emphasise that the pressures on the construction of men’s sexuality seem to be diverging more and more - the forces of reaction, of the glorification of sexual violence, of Internet sex, of anti-gay politics (most obviously around HIV/AIDS) are ever stronger - while at the same time there is a gathering public confidence around sexual progressivism, queer politics, lesbian and gay rights, ‘outing’ (Reynolds, 1999), and even a small anti-sexist politics of heterosexuality. There is of course a specific and urgent need for law reform, to abolish discriminatory legislation against young gays (around age of consent), same-sex sexuality more generally (Local Government Act 1988, Section 28), and older gays (around pensions, tenure and property rights, and so on).
Furthermore, anti-gay politics can damage both gay men and heterosexual men. They can be physically dangerous and personally undermining for gay men. Heterosexual men may come out or change to being gay; less obviously to some, there is the gay part or gayness of heterosexual men. So heterosexual men need to support gay men, partly for political principles of equality and justice, and partly for self-interest (Hearn, 1992a).
In all of this, there is a need to develop an important educational debate and practice around sex and sexuality – not least around what is understood by sex and sexuality, and the practice of safe(r) sex. This has to affirm different sexualities, work towards non-oppressive sexualities, support young gays, and engage with the real dilemmas that young people face in their everyday lives. For young men, this means promoting, in schools and elsewhere, intimate and sexual relationships that are non-threatening, non-oppressive and responsible (Salisbury and Jackson, 1996). Men’s and boys’ sexuality is as much a matter for public debate, policy development and social change as is violence. A major challenge is how men to acknowledge their sexuality, and even be proud of it, without being oppressively sexual or sexually oppressive. What chance is there for real change in men without that?
VIOLENCE AND CRIME
As will already be apparent from the previous discussion, it is not possible to make a strict separation between men’s sexuality and men’s violence, in this society at least. A lot of what men do needs to be re-labelled as violence. This would include, child abuse, child sexual abuse, domestic violence, rioting, crime, policing, soldiering, wars, football hooliganism, public disorder. It might seem hard to talk about crime and violence without talking about men, and yet this has been done quite successfully for a long time (see Cordery and Whitehead, 1992; Newburn and Stanko, 1994; Collier, 1995). Crime and violence are very largely a problem for men, and they are also resources to show certain masculinities to others (Messerschmidt, 1993). Furthermore, debates on crime, violence and indeed punishment and imprisonment need to be conducted carefully in relation to not just gender but also age, class, locality and racialisation (Gilroy, 1987; Jefferson, 1991).
Much of men’s violence needs to be understood as conscious, deliberate actions and as forms or examples of particular masculinities (Hearn, 1998b). Men’s violence to women, children, young people, and each other needs, indeed demands, not just patching up the problem, but the changing of men and ‘normal masculinity’ (Hearn, 1990). Examples here might include what is seen as the ‘normal’ behaviour of certain men and boys, as fathers, teachers, workmates, school mates and so on, in reproducing ordinary, everyday violence to others and each other.
Men’s violence is thus about both violence to women, children and young people, and often less obviously, violence to the self - in self-brutalisation and the denial and ‘victory over’ the non-violent parts of ourselves (Kaufman, 1987). Violence may bring power and dominance, but it may also bring unhappiness and self-destruction. Men who are violent are generally not happy men (Maiuro et al., 1988), even if they ‘enjoy’ the violence..
This suggests the need for men to both recognise men’s own violence and potential violence, whilst opposing and stopping men’s violence - in war, armies, initiation ceremonies, bullying, unsafe working conditions, personal relationships, and being on the street. Campaigns against such initiations, lack of safety in workplaces, bullying and violence at work are all good ways of bringing together men concerned to work against sexism, trade unions, and anti-racist and other interested groups. These are thereby necessary concerns of equal opportunities policies and responsibilities of managements.
In reducing and opposing men’s violence, a necessary first thing to do is to make a national commitment against violence. This should be an absolutely central plank of the policies of government and the political parties. The recent Gulbenkian Foundation Commission Report (1995), Children and Violence made as its first priority recommendation: ‘Individuals, communities and government all levels should adopt a ‘Commitment to non-violence’, of similar standing, to existing commitments to ‘equal opportunities’. The Report continued: ‘The aims of the commitment are to work towards a society in which individuals, communities and government share non-violent values and resolve conflict by non-violent means. Building such a society involves in particular reducing and preventing violence involving children, by developing:
· understanding of the factors which interact to increase the potential for violence involving children, and those which prevent children from becoming violent
· action to prevent violence involving children in all services and work with families and children
· consistent disavowal of all forms of inter-personal violence - in particular by opinion-leaders’ (p. 18)
Thus governmental and other policies and strategies should take a clear position that opposes violence, should tell boys and men not to be violent, should advocate policies that encourage men to behave in ways that facilitate women’s equality, and make it clear that the realisation of such changes depends partly on men in politics and policy-making, and their own understanding of their gendered actions. So the vision here is a world without men’s violence, without men as we know them.
There is increasing interest in policies that try to stop men’s violence directly, such as programmes for men who have been violent to known women (Gondolf, 1985; Pence and Paymar, 1986; Adams, 1988; Caesar and Hamberger, 1989; Edelson and Tolman, 1992; Lees and Lloyd, 1994). Such programmes remain controversial in terms of underlying philosophy, methods of change and resource basis. In recent years there has been a developing critique of approaches that are narrowly psychological or focused on anger management, and instead a movement towards those based on ‘power and control’ model that is pro-feminist in orientation. The latter kinds of programmes can be a significant and effective initiative, especially when linked to wider educational and political change (Dobash et al., 1996). A crucial and current issue is whether such programmes should become court-mandated and a responsibility of the probation service rather than accessed on a voluntary basis. Any such development needs to carefully screen out men who have no interest whatsoever in change and who may even use programme to learn new forms of violence and control. Even more important, any innovations for men have to be supplements to broaden major public policy changes - including, consistent police prosecution policy and practice; inter-agency work for women experiencing violence; improved housing provision for women; and full state support for Women’s Aid and other projects for women.
Finally, discussion of violence would be incomplete without a mention of sport, itself often a major public arena of legitimated violence, often of a severe kind. Sport also remains a major point of influence in creating and changing boys and young men, and thus men. It can also be a source of considerable anxiety since it is still often a pre-eminent activity for establishing masculine identity. And ‘retirement’ from sport can bring further difficulties for men and others around them. Sporting events and loyalties could be effective places to oppose men’s violence, perhaps through a modified version of the Zero Tolerance campaigns, just as they have been to counter racism in professional football in the ‘Kick Racism Out Of Football’ campaign.
HEALTH
If there is one policy arena that has attracted attention from a wide range of constituencies and interests in recent years, it is that of men’s health. The concern for men’s health has been mobilized as if it is a common, cross-generational concern - perhaps a kind of mythical consensus. ‘Men’s health’ can be represented as an issue for all men, and indeed women too. For different reasons, the question of men’s health has attracted involvement from government, employers, trade unions, pharmaceutical and medical industries, medical professionals, and health educators and activists. Significantly, in the last few years there have been a number of conferences bringing together such diverse groups; in some cases these have been high status occasions with sponsorship from the financial and industrial sectors. The concern with men’s health can be appealing both to men promoting a backlash against feminism and who are insistent on the disadvantages of being male and to men who wish to develop a pro-feminist politics and change their relationship to women and children (see, for example, HFA 2000 News, 1994; Bruckenwell et al, 1995; Bradford, 1995; also see Sabo and Gordon, 1995). In particular, discussions of men’s health should not be read as necessarily antagonistic to those on women’s health.
The central issue that has attracted concern is the fact that at every stage of the life of a boy or man, he is more likely to die than a girl or woman of equivalent age. At different stages different hazards affect boys and men, and different risks are taken by them - accidents as a child, suicide and motor vehicles as young men, and the effects of diet, smoking, drinking and sexual habits later in life. For example, in the 15-34 year old male age group, 21 per cent of deaths are from road vehicle accidents, 20 per cent are from other causes of injury and poisoning, and 17 per cent are from suicides (OPCS, 1992, quoted in Calman, 1993, p212). Life expectancy for those born between 1985 and 1990 is 78.1 years for women, and 72.4 years for men. Throughout most of this century, there has been at least a five year difference between men and women. The EU difference is slightly higher still at 7.1 years (OHE Compendium of Health Statistics, 1992). One part of this discrepancy comes from men’s higher level of suicide, which stands at more than three times the rate of women’s suicide. Furthermore, over the last ten years there has been an 80 per cent increase in suicide by males. Particular concern has been the increase in the suicide of young men (Charlton et al, 1993; Befrienders International, 1995).
These issues of the health, mortality and suicide of young men are not peculiar to the UK, and indeed similar trends are attracting attention in France and elsewhere in Europe (Jougla, 1994). Furthermore, the physical health debate has recently been extended into the realm of mental health. For example, the Royal College of Psychiatrists’ (1996) report publicised the relatively hidden question of men’s depression, and the lack of recognition of this problem both amongst men, as evidenced in their low levels of help-seeking, and more generally in medical and policy development. The Samaritans have reported an 80 per cent increase in male suicide in the last ten years (Cohen, 1996).
The problem of men’s health has now been recognised in the statements of the Chief Medical Officer, Kenneth Calman (1993, p6, 106):
‘Although some diseases, such as prostatism, are obviously unique to men, the main differences in mortality and morbidity relate to variations in exposure to risk factors. Thus, there should be great potential for improvement in health in many areas, for example CHD and accidents. Further work is particularly needed on targeting health messages to men. Women seem to be more aware of their own bodies and pay more attention to health messages. Health messages for men may be more effectively transmitted through mothers or sisters, wives or girlfriends, but men must now be brought up to be more aware of their own bodies and not be reluctant to seek help ... . It is to be hoped that Regions and Districts will investigate ways to promote the health of men over the next few years.’
‘Despite an apparent difference, if not resistance, to health promotion messages among men it must be brought home to them that many of the risk factors to their health - such as smoking, physical inactivity, poor diet, excess alcohol consumption, unsafe sexual practices and risky behaviour likely to lead to accidents - are preventable. Thus the scope for men to improve their health, and to prolong active, healthy life, is considerable.’
Despite these kinds of observations, the policy debate on men’s health has not dwelt extensively on the social divisions between men, by class, race, locality, sexuality and so on. These divisions are important, for the state of men’s health is subject to a range of social influences - some associated with power and control, and some with attempts to extend (or appear to extend) power and control by those with relatively less power and control but who are still members of a powerful social category.
Many men in relatively less powerful social positions may survive, attempt to survive or fail to survive by passive coping, for example, in depression, social withdrawal, watching television, drinking or whatever. Yet active assertions of power, especially over women and children, and passive resistance can go hand in hand. Real uncertainties remain on how some men may actively resist capitalist, managerial and other men’s oppressions without perpetuating practices that oppress women: how to be tough on men who are oppressive to women and men, without at the same time oppressing women. Similarly, improving men’s health involves developing policies and practices that support men without further oppressing women. For example, boys and men frequent learning that it is socially desirable to ignore pain and avoid doctors (Briscoe, 1989) needs to be demystified and unlearnt.
CONCLUSION: POLITICS AND PRACTICE
Men’s societal dominance continues; yet at the same time certain groups of men are facing considerable change from previous social patterns and arrangements - at home, work and elsewhere. Despite the extent of the changes and challenges outlined, it is premature to talk of a widespread ‘crisis of masculinity’. Individual men and certain groups of men may be facing, even confronting, change, like it or not, and they may indeed be changing, but this has to be put in the context of the stubborn stability of men’s structural power. For some relatively less powerful groups of men, the combination of lack of educational success, reduction in traditional jobs, avoidance of ‘women’s’ work, and their own more damaging actions (to both themselves and others) may indeed constitute a material crisis for them and others around them. But this generally may not (yet) match closely with an ideological crisis in how men are assumed to be. The contradictions between the material and the ideological state of men and masculinities may be growing but are not yet at crisis point for most men, and certainly not for men in general.
All of the issues that I have discussed here are important for what it means to be a ‘man’ in this society. They have, however, all often remain neglected in what is generally defined as ‘politics’. Transforming what is understood by politics is part of transforming men. All of these issues are also both profoundly structural and intensely personal. Each can also prompt great depths of negativity - feelings of hopelessness, terribleness, desperation - as well as being arenas of possible positive change and hope. Each is a way of unifying men as a class, with different interests to women and dividing men from each other - old from young, heterosexual from gay, healthy from unwell, and so on. Each is a way of oppressing women, children and young people, and a way of relating to other men. And each represents an avenue for men opposing oppression, supporting feminist initiatives, and changing men.
Policies and practices are needed that address these issues in all policy arenas; they need to name men and the persistence of men’s powers, without stereotyping men. In doing this, there are dangers that an increased focus on men may divert attention from women and women’s agendas by arguing that men should have even more resources for solving these problems. So vigilance is necessary in this respect. However, it is useful to bear in mind that a critical focus on men is not in men’s general interest, just as it is not in the interests of other dominant groups to focus critically on them. This will involve debate, clear policy statements, publications and other materials, education and teaching, professional interventions, pro-feminist ’menswork’ and ’boyswork’, and research. It is time that government had a strategy on changing men away from power and oppression as part of its strategy for women and gender justice. In particular a distinction needs to be drawn between support between and for men that encourages domination and support between and for men that diminishes domination. The latter kind on initiatives are necessary not only in the state but throughout all areas of social life society, in business, community, media, religion, sport and other public and indeed private forums.
Finally, one further likely and paradoxical implication of the naming of men is that the deconstruction of men may be opened up more fully. Changing future agendas for women involves changing men; changing men involves deconstructing men and reducing men’s power; and, in the longer term still, this may even involve the abolition of ’men’ as such a ubiquitously important social category. Is it time at last for men to change, and both to develop and be subject to new agendas?
Adams, David (1988) ‘Treatment models of men who
batter: a profeminist analysis’ in Kersti Yllö and Michelle Bograd (eds.) Feminist
Perspectives on Wife Abuse, Newbury Park, Ca. and London: Sage.
Anderson, Michael, Bechhofer, Frank and Gershuny, Jonathan (1995) The Social and
Political Economy of the Household, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Arnot, Madelaine, David, Miriam and Weiner, Gaby (1996). Educational Reforms and Gender
Equality in Schools, Manchester: Equal Opportunities Commission.
Befrienders International (1995) Study of Suicide Prevention within the European
Community, London: Befrienders International.
Bradford, Nicki (1995) Men’s Health Matters, London: Vermilion.
Briscoe, M. E. (1989) ‘Sex differnces in mental health’, Update, 1
November, pp. 834-839.
Brittan, Arthur (1989) Masculinity and Power, Oxford: Blackwell.
Bruckenwell, Peter, Jackson, David, Luck, Mike, Wallace, Jim, Watts, Jonk (1995) The
Crisis in Men’s Health, Bath: Community Health UK.
Caesar, Peter L. and Hamberger, L. K. (eds) (1989) Treating Men who Batter, New
York: Springer.
Calman, Kenneth (1993) On the State of the Public Health 1992, London: HMSO.
Carrigan, Tim, Connell, R. W. and Lee, John (1985) ‘Toward a new sociology of
masculinity’, Theory and Society, 14(5), pp. 551-604.
Charlton, John et al (1993) ‘Suicide deaths in England and Wales: trends in factors
associated with suicide deaths’, Population Trends, No 71, Spring, pp. 34-43.
Children and Violence (1995) Report of the Gulbenkian Foundation Commission,
London: Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation.
Cockburn, Cynthia (1983) Brothers, London: Pluto.
Cynthia Cockburn (1991) In the Way of Women, London: Macmillan.
Cohen, David (1996) ‘Its a guy thing’ The Guardian Weekend, May 4, pp
26-30.
Collier, Richard (1995) Masculinity, Law and the Family, London: Routledge.
Collinson, David and Hearn, Jeff (eds.) (1996a) Men as Managers, Managers as Men,
London and Thousand Oaks, Ca.: Sage.
Collinson, David L and Hearn, Jeff (1996b) ‘Men’ at ‘work’: multiple
masculinities/multiple workplaces’ in Mairtin Mac an Ghaill (ed) Understanding
Masculinities. Social Relations and Cultural Arenas, Buckingham: Open University
Press, pp. 61-76.
Connell, R.W. (1995) Masculinities, Cambridge: Polity.
Connell, R.W. (1996) ‘Teaching the boys: new research on masculinity, and gender
strategies for schools’, Teachers College Record (USA), Vol. 98(2), pp.
206-235.
Connell R.W. (1997) ‘Arms and the man: using the new research on masculinity to
understand and promote peace in the contemporary world’, paper at Norwegian National
Commission for UNESCO, Expert Group Meeting, Oslo, September. Mimeo., University of
Sydney.
Cordery, Jack and Whitehead, Antony (1992) ‘ "Boys Don’t Cry":
Empathy, Warmth, Collusion and Crime’ in Paul Senior and David Woodhill (eds) Gender,
Crime and Probation Practice, Sheffield: Sheffield City Polytechnic, PAVIC
Publications.
Coveney, Lal, Jackson, Margaret, Jeffreys, Sheila, Kaye, Linda and Mahoney, Pat (1984) The
Sexuality Papers, London: Hutchinson.
Craib, Ian (1987) ‘Masculinity and male dominance’, Sociological Review,
35(4), pp. 721-743.
Dickens, Linda (1995) ‘UK, Part-time employees and the law - recent and potential
developments’, Gender, Work and Organization, Vol. 2(4), pp. 207-15.
Dicks, Bella, Waddington, David and Critcher, Chas (1998) ‘Redundant men and
overburdened women: local service providers and the construction of gender in ex-mining
communities’ in Jennie Popay, Jeff Hearn and Jeanette Edwards (eds) Men, Gender
Divisions and Welfare, London: Routledge, pp. 287-311.
Dobash, Russell, Dobash, Rebecca, Cavanagh, Kate and Lewis, (1996) Research Evaluation
of Programmes for Violent Men, Edinburgh: Scottish Office.
Edelson, Jeffrey L. and Tolman, Richard M. (1992), Intervention for Men who Batter,
Newbury Park, Ca. and London: Sage.
Edley, Nigel and Wetherell, Margaret (1995) Men in Perspective, Hemel Hempstead:
Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Fagan, Colette (1996) ‘Gendered time schedules: paid work in Great Britain’, Social
Politics, 3(1), pp. 72-106.
Gilroy, Paul (1987) There Ain’t No Black in the Union Jack, London:
Hutchinson.
Gondolf, Edward W. (1985), Men who Batter, Holmes Beach, Fl.: Learning
Publications.
Hearn, Jeff (1983) Birth and Afterbirth: A Materialist Account, London: Achilles
Heel.
Hearn, Jeff (1984) ‘Childbirth, men and the problem of fatherhood’, Radical
Community Medicine, 15, 1984, pp. 9-19.
Hearn, Jeff (1987) The Gender of Oppression, Brighton: Wheatsheaf; New York: St
Martin’s Press.
Hearn, Jeff (1990) ‘Men’s violence and ‘child abuse’’ in Violence
Against Children Study Group, Taking Child Abuse Seriously, London: Unwin Hyman,
pp. 63-85.
Hearn, Jeff (1992a) Men in the Public Eye, London and New York: Routledge.
Hearn, Jeff (1992b) ‘The personal, the political, the theoretical: the case of
men’s sexuality and sexual violence’ in David Porter (ed.) Between Men and
Feminism, London and New York: Routledge. Pp. 161-181.
Hearn, Jeff (1994) 'Researching men and masculinities. Some sociological issues and
possibilities', Australian and New Zealand Journal of Sociology, Vol.30(1),
pp. 40-60.
Hearn, Jeff (1996) ‘Deconstructing the dominant: making the one(s) the
other(s)’, Organization, Vol. 3(4), pp. 611-626.
Hearn, Jeff (1998a) ‘Troubled masculinities in social policy discourses: young
men’ in Jennie Popay, Jeff Hearn and Jeanette Edwards (eds) Men, Gender Divisions
and Welfare, London: Routledge, pp. 37-62.
Hearn, Jeff (1998b) The Violences of Men, London: Sage.
Health 2000 News (1994) Special Issue ‘Men’s Health’, No 29, Winter,
ed David Marks.
Hirdman, Yvonne (1988) ‘Genussystemet - reflexioner kring kvinnors sociala
underordning’, Kvinnovetenskaplig Tidskrifgt, 3, 49-63.
Hirdman, Yvonne (1990) ‘Genussystemet’ in Demokrati och Makt i Sverige,
Stockholm: Statens Offentliga Utredningar.
Human Development Report 1995 (1995) New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press for
the United Nations Development Programme.
Jefferson, Tony (1991) ‘Discrimination, Disadvantage and Police Work’ in Ellis
Cashmore and E McLaughlin (eds) Out of Order? Policing Black People, London:
Routledge, pp. 166-88.
Jougla, Eric, Hatton, Francoise and Le Toullec, Alain (1994) ‘The increase in
mortality for young males in France between 1981 and 1991’, HFA 2000 News No
29, Winter, pp. 6-8.
Judd, Judith (1996) ‘Girls sweep past boys in exam race’, The Independent,
22 April, p.1.
Michael Kaufman (1987) ’The triad of men’s violence’ in Michael Kaufman
(ed)
Beyond Patriarchy, Toronto: Oxford University Press.
Lees, John and Lloyd, Trefor (1994) Working With Men Who Batter Their Partners,
London: WWM/The B Team.
Patricia Lunneberg (1997) OU Men: Work through Lifelong Learning, Cambridge:
Lutterworth.
McKee, Linda and Bell, Colin (1985) ‘Marital and Family Relations in Times of Male
Unemployment’ in Bryan Roberts, Ruth Finnegan and Duncan Gallie (eds) New
Approaches to Economic Life, Manchester: Manchester University Press.
McKee, Linda and Bell, Colin (1986) ‘His Unemployment: Her Problem. The Domestic and
Marital Consequences of Male Unemployment’ in Sheila Allen, Kate Purcell, Alan Waton
and Stephen Wood (eds) The Experience of Unemployment, London: Macmillan.
Maiuro, R. D., Cahn, T. S., Vitiliano, P. P., Wagner, B.C. and Zegree, J. B. (1988)
’Anger, hostiity and depression in domestically violent versus generally assaultive
men and nonviolent control subjects’, Journal of Consulting and Clinical
Pyschology, 56, pp. 17-23.
Messerschmidt, James (1993) Masculinities and Crime, Lanham, Md.: Rowman and
Littlefield.
Donna Minkowitz (1995) ’In the name of the father’, Ms.
November/December, pp. 64-71.
Mintel (1994) Men 2000, London: Mintel.
Moyes, Jojo (1995) ‘Long hours culture hits productivity’, The Independent,
26 October, p. 4.
Newburn, Tim and Stanko, Elizabeth (eds) (1994) ‘Just Boys Doing Business’
Men, Masculinities and Crime, London: Routledge.
New Ways to Work (1993) Change at the Top: Working Flexibly at Senior and Managerial
Levels in Organisations, London: NWTW.
New Ways to Work (1995) Balanced Lives: Changing Work Patterns for Men, London:
NWTW.
OHE Compendium of Health Statistics (1992), 8th Edition.
OPCS (1992) cited in Calman (1993) On the State of the Public Health, London: HMSO.
Carole Pateman (1988) The Sexual Contract, Cambridge: Polity.
Pence, Ellen and Paymar, M. (1986) Power and Control: Tactics of Men Who Batter. An
Educational Curriculum, Duluth, Mn.: Minnesota Program Development.
Pratt, Simon (1996) ‘ Could Do Better’, Achilles Heel, No 20, pp. 20-1.
Reynolds, Paul (1999) ‘In defence of outing’ in Paul Bagguley and Jeff Hearn
(eds) Transforming Politics: Power and Resistance, London: Macmillan.
Royal College of Psychiatrists (1996) Depressed Men: Why Don’t They Speak Out,
London, April.
Saco, Diana (1993) ‘Masculinity as signs’ in Steve Craig (ed) Men,
Masculinity and the Media,
Sabo, Don and Gordon, David Frederick (eds) (1995) Men’s Health and Illness.
Gender, Power and the Body, Thousand Oaks, Ca: Sage.
Salisbury, Jonathan and Jackson, David (1996) Changing Macho Values. Practical Ways of
Working with Adolescent Boys, Basingstoke: Falmer.
Tolson, Andrew (1977) The Limits of Masculinity, London: Tavistock.
Toynbee, Polly (1998) ‘Mothers in the moral maze’, The Guardian, March
11, p. 10.
Waddington, David, Critcher, Chas and Dicks, Bella (1998) ‘’All jumbled
up’: employed women and unemployed husbands’ in Jennie Popay, Jeff Hearn and
Jeanette Edwards (eds) Men, Gender Divisions and Welfare, London: Routledge, pp.
231-56.
Walby, Sylvia (1986) Patriarchy at Work, Cambridge: Polity.
Walby (1989) ‘Theorizing patriarchy’, Sociology, Vol 23(2), pp. 213-34.
Walby (1990) Theorizing Patriarchy, Oxford: Blackwell.
Williams, Fiona (1998) ‘Troubled masculinities in social policy discourse:
fatherhood’, in Jennie Popay, Jeff Hearn and Jeanette Edwards (eds) Men, Gender
Divisions and Welfare, London: Routledge, pp. 63-97.
Jeff Hearn has been involved in men’s groups and anti-sexist activities and in researching and writing on men since 1978. His publications include ‘Sex’ at ‘Work’ (with Wendy Parkin), The Gender of Oppression, Men in the Public Eye and The Violences of Men, and he has co-edited The Sexuality of Organization, Taking Child Abuse Seriously, Men, Masculinities and Social Theory, Violence and Gender Relations, Men as Managers, Managers as Men, Consuming Cultures, Transforming Politics and Children, Child Abuse and Child Protection. He is Professorial Research Fellow in the Faculty of Economic and Social Studies, University of Manchester, based in the School of Social Policy, and Donner Visiting Professor in Sociology with particular reference to Gender Research, Åbo Akademi University, Finland.
------------------------------------
CURRICULUM VITAE
Name: HEARN, Jeffery Richard
---------------------------------------------
Publications: Professor Jeff Hearn
b) Edited Books
Co-editor The Sexuality of Organization with G. Burrell, D. Sheppard, P.
Tancred-Sherriff, Sage, London/Beverly Hills, Ca., 1989 215pp.
Guest Editor Men, Masculinities and Leadership. Changing Patterns and New Initiatives
Special Issue Equal Opportunities International Vol.8(1) 1989.
Co-editor with The Violence Against Children Study Group Taking Child Abuse Seriously,
Unwin Hyman, London, 1990; Routledge; London, 1993, 257pp.
Co-editor with D.H.J. Morgan Men, Masculinities and Social Theory, Unwin Hyman,
London/Boston Mass. 1990 260pp.
Co-editor with D.Quill, J.Wynne, W.Lacy, T.Myers, H.Riches and M.Wright Offender Victim
Mediation Handbook , Care and Justice/West Yorkshire Probation Service, Leeds, 1993,
196pp.
Co-editor with B.Fawcett, B.Featherstone and C.Toft Violence and Gender Relations:
Theories and Interventions, Sage, London, 1996, 207 pp.
Co-editor with D.L.Collinson Men as Managers, Managers as Men. Critical Perspectives on
Men, Masculinities and Managements, Sage, London, 1996, 285 pp.
Co-editor with J. Edwards and J. Popay, Men, Gender Divisions and Welfare,
Routledge, London, 1998, 347 pp.
Special Issue Editor, ‘Qualitative Studies on Ambiguity, Contradiction and
Paradox’, Gender, Work and Organization, Vol.5(1), 1998.
Contracted and in preparation
Consuming Cultures: Power and Resistance with S. Roseneil (British Sociological
Association Conference Volume), Macmillan, London, 1999 (in press).
Transforming Politics: Power and Resistance with P. Bagguley (British Sociological
Association Conference Volume), Macmillan, London, 1999.
Co-editor with The Violence Against Children Study Group Children, Child Abuse and
Child Protection: Placing Children Centrally, John Wiley, London, 1999.
c) Other Editorships
General Series Editor Critical Studies on Men and Masculinities, Routledge, London
(1988-1994).
Associate Editor Gender, Work and Organization, Blackwell, Oxford.
Member of Editorial Advisory Boards of:
Research on Men and Masculinities Series, Sage, Thousand Oaks, Ca.
Journal of the History of Sexuality, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
(1990-94)
Journal of Gender Studies, Humberside Centre for Gender Studies, Carfax, Oxon..
Masculinities. Interdisciplinary Studies on Gender, Guilford Press, New York
(1993-97)
Men and Masculinities, Sage, London and Thousand Oaks, Ca.
International Review of Women and Leadership, Edith Cowan University, Australia.
Sexualities, Sage, London.
d) Chapters in Books
'Planning under difficulties: the move to decrementalism' with I. Roberts in K. Jones (ed)
The Yearbook of Social Policy in Britain 1975, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London,
1976 pp. 3-18.
'Decrementalism: the practice of cuts and the theory of planning' in P. Healey, G.
McDougall and M. Thomas (eds) Planning Theory in the 80s, Pergamon, Oxford, 1982,
pp. 161-179.
'Revision games for social science teaching' in R. Gomm and D. McNeil (eds) Handbook
for Sociology Teachers, Heinemann, London, 1982, pp. 251-254.
'Planning the personal social services' with N. Small in C. Jones and J. Stevenson (eds) The
Yearbook of Social Policy in Britain 1983 , Routledge and Kegan Paul, London
1984, pp. 140-155.
'Men's sexuality at work' in A. Metcalf and M. Humphries (eds) The Sexuality of Men,
Pluto, London, 1985, pp. 110-128.
'Patriarchy, professionalisation and the semi-professions' in C. Ungerson (ed) Women
and Social Policy, Macmillan, London, 1985, pp. 190-206.
'Frauen, Männer und Führung' (Women, Men and Leadership) with P.W. Parkin in A. Kieser,
G. Reber and R. Wundurer (eds) Handwörterbuch der Führung (The
Handbook/Encyclopaedia of Leadership) C.E. Poeschel, Stuttgart, 1987, pp. 326-340.
'Women, men and leadership: a critical review of assumptions, practices and change in the
industrialized nation' with P.W. Parkin in N. Adler and D. Izraeli (eds) Women in
Management Worldwide, M.E. Sharpe, New York, 1988, pp. 17-40.
'Policy-formation through simulation and communication' with J. Klabbers in D. Crookall
and D. Saunders (eds) Communication and Simulation; From Two Fields to One Theme, Multilingual
Matters, Clevedon, 1988, pp. 236-246.
‘The sexuality of organization’ with G. Burrell in J. Hearn, D. Sheppard,
P.Tancred-Sheriff and G. Burrell (eds) The Sexuality of Organization,, Sage,
London,/Newbury Park, Ca., 1989.
'The sexuality of organization: a postscript' with D. Sheppard, P. Tancred-Sheriff and G.
Burrell(eds) The Sexuality of Organization, Sage, London/Newbury Park, Ca., 1989,
pp. 178-181.
'Child abuse, social theory and everyday state practices' with W. Parkin in J. Hudson and
B. Galaway (eds) The State as Parent. International Research Perspectives on
Interventions with Young Persons Kluwer, Dordecht, Netherlands, 1989, pp. 229-236.
'Introduction' with The Violence Against Children Study Group in The Violence Against
Children Study Group Taking Child Abuse Seriously. Contemporary Issues in Child
Protection Theory and Practice, Unwin Hyman, London/Boston, Mass., 1990,
Reprinted Routledge, London, 1993, pp. 1-6.
"Child abuse' and men's violence' in The Violence Against Children Study Group. Taking
Child Abuse Seriously. Contemporary Issues in Child Protection Theory and Practice,
Unwin Hyman, London/Boston, Mass., 1990, Reprinted Routledge. London, 1993, pp. 63-85.
'State organisations and men's sexuality in the public domain 1870-1920' in L. Jamieson
and H. Corr (eds) The State, Private Life and Political Change, Macmillan, London,
1990. pp. 50-72.
'Men, masculinities and social theory' with D.H.J. Morgan in J. Hearn and D.H.J. Morgan
(eds) Men, Masculinities and Social Theory, Unwin Hyman, London/Boston,
Mass., 1990, pp. 1-17.
'The critique of men' with D.H.J. Morgan in J. Hearn and D.H.J. Morgan (eds) Men,
Masculinities and Social Theory, Unwin Hyman, London and Boston, Mass., 1990,
pp. 203-205.
'Gender: biology, nature and capitalism' in T. Carver (ed) Marx. Cambridge Companions
to Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, New York, 1991, pp. 222-245.
'The Transatlantic gaze: masculinities, youth and the American Imaginary' with A. Melechi
in S. Craig (ed) Men, Masculinity and the Media, Sage, Newbury Park, Ca./London,
1992, pp. 215-232.
'The personal, the political, the theoretical: the case of men's sexualities and sexual
violences' in D. Porter (ed) Between Men and Feminism, Routledge, London/New York,
1992, pp. 161-181.
'Gender and organizations: a selective review and a critique of a neglected area' with
P.W. Parkin in A. Mills and P. Tancred (eds) Gendering Organizational Analysis,
Sage, Newbury Park, Ca., 1992, pp. 46-66.
'Sexuality and social work organisations' with E. Harlow and P.W. Parkin in P. Carter, T.
Jeffs and M. Smith (eds) Changing Social Work and Social Welfare 1991 Open
University Press, Milton Keynes, 1992, pp. 131-143.
'Emotive subjects: organizational men, organizational masculinities and the deconstruction
of 'emotions' in S. Fineman (ed) Emotions in Organizations Sage, London/Newbury
Park, Ca., 1993, pp. 148-166.
'Organizations, multiple oppressions and postmodernism' with P.W. Parkin in J. Hassard and
M. Parker (eds) Postmodernism and Organizations, Sage, London/Newbury Park, Ca.,
1993, pp. 148-162.
'Theorizing unities and differences between men and between masculinities' with D.L.
Collinson in H. Brod and M. Kaufman (eds) Theorizing Masculinities, Sage, Newbury
Park, Ca., 1993, pp. 148-162.
'Frauen, Männer und Führung' with W. Parkin in A. Kieser, G. Reber and R. Wundurer (eds)
Handwörterbuch der Führung 2nd Ed., Schaffer- Poeschel, Stuttgart, 1995,
pp.392-408.
'Gendered noise: organizations and the silence and din of domination: the gendered culture
of organisations' with E. Harlow and W. Parkin in C. Itzin and J. Newman (eds) Gender
and Organizational Change: Putting Theory into Practice. Routledge, London, 1995,
pp.89-105.
'Changing men and changing managements: social change, social research and social action'
in M.J. Davidson and R. Burke (eds) Women in Management - Current Research Issues,
Paul Chapman, London, 1994, pp.192-209.
'Men in the public domains' in S. Edgell, S. Walklate and G. Williams (eds) Debating
the Future of the Public Sphere: Transforming the Public and the Private Domains in
Free Market Societies, Avebury: Aldershot, 1994. pp. 199-220.
'Contested discourses on men and masculinities' with D.H.J. Morgan in M. Blair and J.
Holland with S. Sheldon (eds) Identity and Diversity: Gender and the Experience of
Education Multilingual Matters/Open University Press, Clevedon and Philadelphia, 1995
pp.173-185.
Interview in M. Wetherell and C. Griffin ‘Feminist psychology and the study of men
and masculinity: assumptions and perspectives’ in M. Blair and J. Holland, with J.
Sheldon (eds) Identity and Diversity: Gender and the Experience of Education,
Multilingual Matters/Open University Press, Clevedon and Philadelphia, 1995, pp. 81-103.
‘Revision games for social science teaching’ in J. Barter, R. Gomm and N. Madry
(eds) Resources for Sociology: The Best of the Social Science Teacher, Association
of Teachers of Social Science, Bedford, 1995.
‘Imaging the aging of men’ in M. Featherstone and A. Wernick (eds) Images of
Aging: Cultural Representations of Later Life, Routledge: London, 1995, pp. 97-115.
‘‘Men’ at ‘work’: multiple masculinities in multiple
workplaces’ with D.L. Collinson in M. Mac an Ghaill (ed) Understanding
Masculinities: Social Relations and Cultural Arenas, Open University Press, Milton
Keynes, 1996, 61-76.
‘‘Is masculinity dead?’ A critical account of the concepts of masculinity
and masculinities’ in M. Mac an Ghaill (ed) Understanding Masculinities: Social
Relations and Cultural Arenas Open University Press, Milton Keynes, 1996, 202-217.
‘Introduction’ with B.Fawcett, B. Featherstone and C.Toft in B. Fawcett, B.
Featherstone, J. Hearn and C.Toft (eds) Violence and Gender Relations: Theories and
Interventions, Sage, London, 1996, pp. 1-5.
‘The organization(s) of violence: men, gender relations, organizations and
violences’ in B. Fawcett, B. Featherstone, J. Hearn and C.Toft (eds) Violence and
Gender Relations: Theories and Interventions, Sage, London, 1996, pp. 39-60.
‘Men’s violence to known women: historical, everyday and theoretical
constructions’ in B. Fawcett, B. Featherstone, J. Hearn and C. Toft (eds) Violence
and Gender Relations: Theories and Interventions, Sage, London, 1996, pp. 22-37.
‘Men’s violence to known women: men’s accounts and men’s policy
development’ in, B. Fawcett, B. Featherstone, J. Hearn and C. Toft (eds) Violence
and Gender Relations: Theories and Interventions, Sage, London, 1996, pp. 99-114.
‘From rhetoric to reality: historical, theoretical and practical complexities in
educating for anti-discriminatory and anti-oppressive social work’ with E.Harlow in
P.Ford and P.Hayes (eds) Educating for Social Work: Arguments for Optimism,
Avebury , Aldershot, 1996, pp. 97-113.
‘Moving away from power: family, care, sexuality, violence and organisations’ in
T. Lloyd and T. Wood (eds) What’s Next for Men? Working with Men, London,
1996, pp.127-137.
‘Breaking the silence: on men, masculinities and managements’ with D.L.
Collinson in D.L. Collinson and J. Hearn (eds.) Men as Managers, Managers as Men:
Critical Perspectives on Men, Masculinities and Managements, London and Thousand Oaks,
Ca: Sage, 1996, pp.1-24.
‘Making sense of men and men’s violence’ in L.Shipway (ed.) Survivors of
Domestic Violence and Sexual Assualt, Brentwood, Anglia Polytechnic University , 1996,
pp.15-19;
Reproduced in L.Shipway (ed.) Interactive Domestic Violence Package, 1997 at:
http://www.eon.anglia.ac.uk/
‘Masculinity’ with S.Whitehead in J. Bristow (ed.) Gender Studies and Studies
in Sexuality, Volume in R. Clark (ed.) The Annotated Bibliography for English
Studies CD-ROM, Swets & Zeitlinger Publishers, Lisse, the Netherlands, 1997 -
1998.
‘Introduction: the trouble with men’ with J. Edwards, J. Popay and A.Oakley in
J. Popay, J. Hearn and J. Edwards (eds.) Men, Gender Divisions and Welfare,
Routledge, London, 1998, pp.1-7.
‘The welfare of men?’ in J. Popay, J. Hearn and J. Edwards (eds.) Men, Gender
Divisions and Welfare, Routledge, London, 1998, pp. 11-36.
‘Men will be men: the ambiguity of men’s support for men who have been violent
to known women’ in J. Popay, J. Hearn and J. Edwards (eds.) Men, Gender Divisions
and Welfare, Routledge, London, 1998, pp. 147-180.
‘Troubled masculinities in social policy discourses: young men’ in J. Popay, J.
Hearn and J. Edwards (eds.) Men, Gender Divisions and Welfare, Routledge, London,
1998, pp. 37-62.
‘It’s time for men to change’ in J. Wild (ed.) Working with Men for
Change, Taylor and Francis, London, 1998, pp. 5-15.
‘Men who are violent to known women: Violence, Abuse and the Stress-Coping Process,
Project 2’ in J. Seymour and M. Titterton (ed.) The Management of Personal Welfare,
Joseph Rowntree Foundation, York, 1998 (in press).
'Gender and welfare research' with J. Hanmer, in F. Williams, Popay and A. Oakley (eds.) (Re-)Forming
Welfare Research: A Critique of Theory and Method, UCL Press, London, 1998 (in press).
‘Men, managers and management: the case of higher education’ in S. Whitehead and
R.Moodley (eds.) Transforming Managers: Engendering Change in the Public Sector,
Taylor and Francis, London, 1998 (in press).
‘Men, social work and men’s violence to known women’ in A.Christie (ed.) Men
and Social Work, Macmillan, London, 1998 (in press).
‘A crisis in masculinity, or new agendas for men?’ in S.Walby (ed.) New
Agendas for Women, Macmillan, London, 1999 (in press).
‘Introduction’ with The Violence Against Children Study Group in The Violence
Against Children Study Group Children, Child Abuse and Child Protection: Placing
Children Centrally, John Wiley, London, 1999 (in press).
‘Ageism, violence and abuse: theoretical and practical perspectives on the links
between child abuse and elder abuse’ in The Violence Against Children Study Group Children,
Child Abuse and Child Protection: Placing Children Centrally, John Wiley, London, 1999
(in press).
‘Searching for the body: making connections between health, bodies and men’s
violences’ in S. Ervoe and T. Johansson (eds.) Bending Bodies – Moulding
Masculinities Volume 2, Ashgate, Aldershot, 1999 (in press).
‘Gender, power and organizations’ with L. Green and W. Parkin in P. Iles and E.
Wilson (eds.) Organisational Behaviour Reassessed: the Impact of Gender, Paul
Chapman, London, 1999.
‘Men, fatherhood and the state’, in B. Hobson, T. Knijn and J. Lewis (eds.) Fatherhood
and the State (under negotiation with Oxford University Press) 1999.
‘Consuming cultures’ with S. Roseneil in J. Hearn and S. Roseneil (eds.) Consuming
Cultures: Power and Resistance (British Sociological Association Conference Volume),
Macmillan, London, 1999.
‘Transforming politics’ with P. Bagguley in P. Bagguley and J. Hearn (eds.) Transforming
Politics: Power and Resistance (British Sociological Association Conference Volume),
Macmillan, London, 1999.
e) Academic Articles in Refereed Journals
'The Cuts Game' with P. Hitch. Society for Academic Gaming and Simulation in Education
and Training Journal Vol 6(4), December 1976, pp. 3-8.
'Towards a concept of non-career' Sociological Review Vol.25(2), May 1977, pp.
273-288.
'Revision games for social science teaching' The Social Science Teacher, Vol. 9(2),
December 1979, Briefings No.19.
'The potential of gaming and simulation in revision' Simulation/Games for Learning,
Vol.10(1), Spring 1980, pp. 21-25.
'Crisis, taboos and careers guidance' British Journal of Guidance and Counselling,
Vol.9(1), February 1981, pp. 12-23.
'Family sculpting I - some doubts and some possibilities' with M. Lawrence Journal of
Family Therapy, Vol.3, 1981, pp. 341-352.
'Radical social work - contradictions, limitations and political possibilities' Critical
Social Policy, Vol.2(1), April 1982, pp. 19-34.
'Notes on patriarchy, professionalisation and the semi-professions' Sociology Vol.16(2),
May 1982 pp. 184-202.
'The self-directing group: a neglected issue in gaming and simulation' Simulation/Games
for Learning,Vol 12(3), 1982, pp. 113-122.
'The problem(s) of theory and practice in social work and social work education' Issues
in Social Work Education, Vol.2(2), Winter, 1982, pp. 95-118.
'Gender and organisations: a selective review and a critique of a neglected area' with
P.W. Parkin Organisation Studies, Vol.4(3), 1983 pp. 219-242.
'Issues of control in simulation and gaming: a reconsideration' Simulation/Games for
Learning, Vol. 13(3), Autumn 1983, pp. 120-125.
'Childbirth, men and the problem of fatherhood' Radical Community Medicine, No.15,
Spring, 1984, pp. 9-19.
'Progress towards the abolition of corporal punishment?' Forum for the Discussion of
New Trends in Education, Vol 27(2), Spring 1985 pp. 54-56.
'Family sculpting II - some practical examples' with M. Lawrence Journal of Family
Therapy, Vol. 7(2), 1985, pp. 113-131.
''Sex' at 'Work' - methodological and other difficulties in the study of sexuality in work
organisations' with P.W. Parkin Planned Parenthood in Europe/Planning Familial in
Europe/ Familienplanung in Europe, Vol.14(1), Spring 1985, pp. 8-17.
'Women, men and leadership: a critical review of international assumptions, practices and
change in the industrialised nations' with P.W. Parkin International Studies of
Management and Organization, Vol.16(3-4), 1986-7, pp. 33-60.
'Child abuse: violences and sexualities towards young people' Sociology, Vol.22(4),
November 1988, pp. 531-544.
'Leading questions for men: men's leadership, feminist challenges and men's responses'
Equal Opportunities International Vol. 8(1), 1989, pp. 3-11.
'Die Kritik der Mannlichkeit: Grundsatze, Moglichkeiten und Zufunftsperspektiven' Zeitschrift
fur Systemische Therapies, Vol. 7(2), 1989, pp. 95-100 (with Journal of
Strategic and Systemic Therapies).
'Reviewing men and masculinities, or mostly boys' own papers' (Review article on eight
books) Theory, Culture and Society, Vol.6, 1989, pp. 665-689.
'Changing men and changing managements: a review of issues and actions' Women in
Management Review, Vol.7(1), 1992, pp. 3-8.
Interviews in M. Wetherell and C. Griffin (eds) 'Feminist psychology and the study of men
and masculinity' Feminism and Psychology, 'Part I: Assumptions and perspectives'
Vol.1(3), 1991, pp. 361-391.
Part II: 'Politics and practices', Vol.2(2), 1992, pp. 133-168.
'The politics of essentialism and the analysis of the men's movement(s)' Feminism and
Psychology, Vol.3(3), 1993, pp. 405-409.
'Making sense of men and men's violence' Clinical Psychology Forum, No.64, February
1994, pp. 13-17.
'Viz, the naming of the pose' The Journal of Gender Studies, Vol.3(1), 1994,
pp.69-75.
'Naming men as men: implications for work, organizations and management' with D.L.
Collinson Gender, Work and Organization, 1(1), 1994, pp. 2-22.
'Researching men and masculinities. Some sociological issues and possibilities', Australian
and New Zealand Journal of Sociology, Vol.30 (1), April, 1994, pp. 40-60.
'The organisation(s) of violence: men, gender relations, organisations and violences' Human
Relations, Vol.47(6), 1994, pp. 731-754
‘UK public sector organizations - the rise of managerialism and the impact of change
on Social Service Departments’ with J. Lawler International Journal of Public
Sector Management, Vol.8(4), 1995, pp. 7-16.
‘Cultural constructions: contrasting theories of organisational culture and gender
construction’ with E Harlow Gender, Work and Organization, Vol.2(4) 1995, pp.
180-191.
‘Educating for anti-oppressive and anti-discriminatory social work practice’
with E. Harlow Social Work Education, Vol.15(1), 1996, pp. 58-69.
Men managing leadership? Men and Women of the Corporation’ revisited’ with D.L.
Collinson, International Review of Women and Leadership, Vol.1(2), 1995, pp. 1-24.
Heteroseksuaalinen väkivalta lähipiirin naisia kohtaan. Sukupuolistunut väkivalta
miesten kertomuksissa’, Janus (Journal for Social Policy and Social Work
Research) (Finland), Vol.4(1), 1996, pp. 39-55.
‘Deconstructing the dominant: making the one(s) the other(s)’, Organization,
Vol.3(4), November 1996, pp. 611-626.
‘The managers of social work: the experiences and identifications of third tier
social services managers and the implications for future practice’ with J. Lawler, British
Journal of Social Work, Vol.27(2), April, 1997, pp. 191-218.
‘The implications of critical studies on men’, NORA. Nordic Journal of
Women’s Studies, Vol.3(1), 1997, pp. 48-60.
‘Hva innebaerer kritiske studier av menn?’, Kvinneforskning, Vol.21(1),
1997, pp. 76-88.
‘Qualitative results of a randomised controlled trial of specialist nurse support for
stroke patients at home’ with G. Dowswell, J.Lawler, J.Young and A.Forster, Clinical
Rehabilitation, 1998 (forthcoming).
‘The construction of sexual meaning: the sexualization of corporal punishment’
with T.Butt, Sexualities, Vol.1(2), 1998, pp. 203-227.
‘On ambiguity, contradiction and paradox in gendered organizations’, Gender,
Work and Organization, Vol. 5 (1), 1998, pp. 1-4.
‘Men, masculinities, managements and organisational culture’ with D.L.
Collinson, Zeitschrift für Personalforschung, Vol. 12(2), 1998, pp. 210-222.
‘ Theorizing men and men’s theorizing : men’s discursive practices in
theorizing men’, Theory and Society, Vol. 28, 1999 (forthcoming).
‘Men and men’s violence to known women: the ‘lure’ and
‘lack’ of cultural studies approaches’, European Journal of Cultural
Studies (in preparation).
‘Educating men against violence to women’, Women’s Studies Quarterly
(under review).
‘Interprofessional relations between community pharmacists and general medical
practitioners’ with E. Kennedy, A. Blenkinsopp and J. Purvis, International
Journal of Pharmacy Practice (in prepartion).
‘Recovering from stroke: a qualitative view of the role of goal setting’, with
G. Dowswell, J. Lawler, J. Young and A. Forster Journal of Advanced Nursing, (under
revision).
f) Articles in Unrefereed Journals
'Men's politics and social policy', Bulletin on Social Policy, No.5 Spring 1980,
pp. 53-57.
'The social worker as a political operator', Social Work Today, Vol 11 April 1980,
p. 16 (originally entitled 'Social work as politics').
'Anarchist careers rule, OK?', Personnel Management, Vol 12(8) August 1980, pp.
37-39 (originally entitled 'Four other types of career').
'Welfare Ideology and the justification of cuts', Bulletin on Social Policy, No 7
Autumn 1980, pp. 42-50.
'Womb with a view' Social Work Today, Vol 13 March 1982, pp. 12-13 (originally
entitled 'Casework in a car').
'Radical social work and the problems of management' with B. Jones, Community Care,
No 367 July 1981, pp. 13-14.
'The first ten issues, the first ten themes', Bulletin on Social Policy, No 11
Spring 1982, pp. 48-50.
'Agency practice. Office politics', Community Care, No 455 March 1983, pp. 12-13.
'Chipping away at family problems' with M. Lawrence, Social Work Today, Vol 14 June
1983, pp. 8-10.
'Abolishing corporal punishment', Bulletin on Social Policy, No 13 Spring 1983, pp.
54-58.
'Further moves on corporal punishment', Bulletin on Social Policy, No 17 1985, pp.
51-56.
'Planning en patriarchaat: een anti-patriarchaal perspektief', Nieuwsbrief
Mannenstudies, Vol 2(3) 1986, pp. 3-5.
'Changing men's studies', Achilles Heel, No 8 April 1987, pp. 19-22.
'A long weekend in Hamburg' with R. Sterne, Achilles Heel, No 8 April 1987, pp.
26-27.
' "Sex" at "work" ' with W. Parkin, Action on Health, No 5
August 1987, pp. 6-7.
'Uutta miestä etsimässä' (Interview by H. Virtanen), Kauneus ja terveys, No 10,
1988, pp. 50-51.
'Men, Masculinity and Social Theory: Report on Sociological Theory Conference' with D.
Morgan, Network, No 43 January 1989, pp. 6-7.
'Out of the men's room', Manchester Left, No 6 1989, pp. 15-16 (originally entitled
'Men and Socialism - do they mix?').
'New publications on men', Achilles Heel, No 9, April 1990, p. 40.
Men, Masculinities and Socialism Group, 'Changing men, changing politics', Achilles
Heel, No 10, Autumn 1990, pp. 17-21.
'Are men changing?', Achilles Heel, No 10 Autumn 1990, pp. 6-9.
'Grans, nans and other mums', Achilles Heel, No 12 Autumn 1991, pp. 22-24. Also
available on http://www.stejonda.demon.co.uk/achilles/article12_5.html
'Sex, power and work' with E. Harlow and W. Parkin, The Journal: Women in Organizations
and Management, No 2, 1992, pp. 3-6.
Writing: the pain, the pleasure, the practicalities' with E. Harlow, The Journal: Women
in Organizations and Management, No 7, 1993, pp. 16- 20.
`Critical studies on men: past, present, future', International Association for Studies
on Men Newsletter, Vol.l.(1), December 1993, pp. 8-9.
'Supporting roles' with J. Lawler, Community Care, March, 1994, pp. 22-23.
‘Motivating managers’ with J. Lawler, Community Care, April, 1995.
Men moving away from power’, Human Potential, No. 17, Spring 1996, pp.26-29.
‘Current trends and current research’, International Association for Studies
on Men Newsletter, Vol. 3(1), Spring/Summer 1996, pp. 3-4; reprinted in Rundbrief
des Arbeitskreis Kritische Mannerforschung (Newsletter of the German Critical Men’s
Studies Task Group) No. 7, July 1996.
‘Getting organised: the politics and organisation of critical studies on men’, International
Association for Studies on Men Newsletter, Vol. 5(1), 1998.
‘It’s goodbye he-man, hallo she-man’, The Times Higher Education
Supplement, 13 February 1998, (originally entitled ‘The end of men? (as we know
them)’).
‘The implications of critical studies on men’, Mannsforskning: Nyhetsbrev og
Faglig Forum for Netework for Forskning om Menn (Norway), No 1, 1998, pp. 20-32.
‘Policy development and changing men in and outside agencies’, International
Association for Studies on Men Newsletter, Vol. 5(3), 1998.
Also, various interviews in national and regional press, for example, The Times,
The Times Higher Education Supplement, Helsingin Sanomat.
g) Prefaces and Forewords
‘Foreword’, in J. Holt, M. Latham, T. Myers, A. Olliver and D. Quill
(eds) ‘Picking up the Pieces’ Child Sexual Abuse and the Juvenile Justice
System Save the Children Fund/Yorkshire and Humberside Intermediate Treatment
Association, Leeds 1989.
‘Series Editors’s Preface’, Critical Studies on Men and
Masculinities, Unwin Hyman/Routledge, London, five volumes, 1990-95.
‘Preface’, in J. Salisbury and D.Jackson Challenging Macho Values:
Practical Ways of Working with Adolescent Boys, Falmer, London, 1995, pp. ix-x.
‘Foreword’, in D.Potts Why do Men Commit Most Crime? Focusing on Masculinity
in a Prison Group, West Yorkshire Probation Service, Wakefield, 1996, pp.3-4.
h) Letters include:
'Towards and away from radical social work', Critical Social Policy, Vol 2(2),
Autumn 1982 p. 6.
'Changing men's sexist practice in sociology' with D. Morgan, C. Creighton, C. Middleton,
R. Thomas and C. Pearson, Network,No 25, January 1983.
Organisation Studies, Vol 5(2), 1984 p 188.
'Sexist degree titles', with nine others, Times Higher Education Supplement, 2
April 1990.
Organization Studies Vol. 14 (3), 1993, p. 474.
i) Reviews
'The protection of interests' [Who's Watching You? (C. Aubrey)],Bulletin on Social
Policy No 10 Winter 1982 pp 24-27.
'Changing the Nature of Masculinity' (R. Bowl) Issues in Social Work Education Vol
6(2) 1986 pp 167-168.
'Patriarchy and Pub Culture' (V. Hey) Sociology Vol 21(1) February 1987,
pp.142-144.
'Sex, Gender and Care Work' (G. Horobin ed.) Journal of Social Policy Vol 18(1)
1988 pp 145-146.
'Beyond Patriarchy' (M. Kaufman ed.) Changing Men No 20 Winter/Spring 1989 pp
31-32.
'Making a Man of Him. Parents and their Son's Education at an English Public School
1929-50' (C. Heward) Gender and Education Vol 1 1989 pp 96-98.
'Masculinity and Power' (A. Brittan) Gender and History Vol. 2(3), 1990, pp.
351-353.
'Hidden Anxieties, Male Sexuality, 1900-1950' (L.A. Hall) British Journal of Sociology,
Vol 43, June 1992, pp 318-319.
'In the Way of Women: Men's Resistance to Sex Equality in Organisations' (C. Cockburn)
with W. Parkin Sociology, Vol 26(3), August, 1992, pp. 515-517.
'Male Subjectivity at the Margins' (K. Silverman) The Times Higher Education Supplement,
February, 1993, p23.
‘The Making of Maleness’ (P. Tatham) Changes: An International Journal of
Psychology and Psychotherapy, 1995.
'Sexual Science and the Law' (R. Green) International Journal of the Sociology of Law,
Vol. 22 (1), March, 1994, pp. 79-82.
`Masculinities and Crime. Critique and Reconceptualisation of Theory' (J. W.
Messerschmidt) Sociology, Vol. 28(2), May,1994. pp. 632-634.
`Doing "Women's Work". Men in Nontraditional Occupations' (C L Williams ed) Work,
Employment and Society, Vol.8(3) 1994, pp. 480-482.
'Unreasonable Men. Masculinity and Social Theory' (V.J. Seidler) Sociology ,
Vol.29(3) August, 1995. pp. 551-552.
‘The Making of Anti-Sexist Men’ (H.Christian) The Times Higher Education
Supplement, February, 1995, p.27.
"Just Boys Doing Business". Men, masculinities and crime’ (T.Newburn and E.
Stanko) (eds) International Journal of the Sociology of Law, 1996.
‘Masculinity, Law and the Family’ (R.Collier) Social and Legal Studies,
1997.
Gender, Symbolism and Organizational Cultures’ (S. Gherardi) Organization Studies,
1998.
‘The Swimsuit Issue and Sport: Hegemonic Masculinity in Sports Illustrated’
(L.R. Davis) American Journal of Sociology, Vol 103(6), May 1998.
‘OU Men: Work Through Lifelong Learning’ (P. Lunneborg) Work, Employment and
Society, 1998.
j) Research Reports
Acting in the Public Interest. A consideration of British Planners in their
Decision-making Environment, Oxford Polytechnic, 1970.
Organisations and Clients.The Case of Local Government, Department of Management
Studies, Leeds University, 1974.
‘A qualitative evaluation of a detoxification centre’ with P. Bluckert
and H. Rose, First Annual Research Report, DHSS, 1977.
‘Policy Implications for detoxification centres’ with H. Rose and P.
Bluckert, Research and Policy Report, DHSS 1977
‘Getting day and housed in Leeds. An evaluation study of a detoxification
centre’ with H. Rose and P. Bluckert, Final Research Report, DHSS, 1979, 127 pp.
‘Alcoholic homeless people: problems and prospects for the eighties’ with
H. Rose and P. Bluckert, Research and Policy Report, DHSS, 1980.
Theorising Social Planning: Analysis, Critique and Alternatives, Doctoral Thesis,
University of Bradford, 1986, 482 pp.
The Critique of Men: Current Lessons for the Theory and Practice of Men, Hallsworth
Research Fellowship Working Paper No 1, University of Manchester October 1988.
Some Sociological Issues in Researching Men and Masculinities, Hallsworth Research
Fellowship Working Paper No. 2, University of Manchester, 1989.
Gender and the Management of Personal Welfare with J. Hanmer and E. Bruce.
Coordination of E.S.R.C. Initiative on the Management of Personal Welfare, University of
Bradford, May, 1992, 80pp.
Health, Bodies and Men's Violence, Violence, Abuse and Gender Relations Research
Unit, Research Paper No 2 University of Bradford, November, 1992, 26pp..
Gender and the Management of Personal Welfare, with J. Hanmer and E. Bruce,
Violence, Abuse and Gender Relations Research Unit, Research Paper No. 3, University of
Bradford, 1993, 80pp.
Edited Researching Men and Researching Men's Violences Violence, Abuse and Gender
Relations Research Unit Research Paper No 4, University of Bradford 1993, 92pp, including
(i) 'Researching men and researching men's violences: methodological, empirical and
policitical issues', pp. 4-32.
(ii) 'Working Guidelines: Men Interviewing Men', with P. Raws and R. Barford, pp.
33-53 and 10 appendices.
‘Violence, Abuse and the Stress-coping Process Project 2’. End of Award
Report to E.S.R.C., Violence, Abuse and Gender Relations Research Unit, University of
Bradford, July, 1993.
Submission Gender and Secure Accommodation to Social Services Inspectorate,
Department of Health, November, 1993.
Violence, Abuse and Gender Relations Research Strategy Report to the ESRC. edited
with J Hanmer, compiled with 16 others, Violence, Abuse and Gender Relations Unit,
Research Paper No.11, University of Bradford, March 1994.89pp, including ‘Violence by
organizations, violence in organizations, and organizational responses to violence’
with J. Hanmer, M. Maynard and D. Morgan, pp. 76-84.
Submission with J. Hanmer ‘Children and Violence’ to Gulbenkian
Foundation Commission on Children and Violence, Violence, Abuse and Gender Relations
Research Unit, University of Bradford, February 1994.
ESRC Policy Development Implementation Seminar Reports:
I Patterns of Agency Contacts with Men (Voluntary Sector Services for Women),
Violence, Abuse and Gender Relations Research Unit, University of Bradford, January 1994.
II Patterns of Agency Contacts with Men (Housing Agencies) Violence, Abuse and
Gender Relations Research Unit, University of Bradford, March 1994.
III Patterns of Agency Contacts with Men (Social Services Agencies), Violence,
Abuse and Gender Relations Research Unit, University of Bradford, May 1994.
IV Patterns of Agency Contacts with Men (Criminal Justice Agencies), Violence,
Abuse and Gender Relations Research Unit, University of Bradford, July 1994.
V Patterns of Agency Contacts with Men (Health Agencies), Violence, Abuse and
Gender Relations Research Unit, University of Bradford, September 1994, 55pp. Reproduced
as Research Unit Research Paper No.13, 1995
VI Patterns of Agency Contacts with Men (Policy Implications) with J. Hanmer,
Violence, Abuse and Gender Relations Research Unit, University of Bradford, September,
1995 Reproduced in Research Unit, Research Paper No.14, 1995.
"It Just Happened" - a Research and Policy Report on Men's Violence to Known
Women, Violence, Abuse and Gender Relations Research Unit, Research paper No.6,
University of Bradford, 1995, 89pp.
Edited with J. Hanmer ‘Women, Men, Children - Violence and Abuse’,
Violence, Abuse and Gender Relations Reseach Unit, Research Paper No.10, University of
Bradford 1995, including 'Men's Violence to Known Women', pp.14-28.
Patterns of Agency Contacts with Men Who Have Been Violent To Known Women, Research
Unit on Violence, Abuse and Gender Relations, Research Paper No.13, University of
Bradford, 1995, 63pp.
Violence to Women From Known Men: Policy Development, Interagency Approaches and Good
Practice, with J. Hanmer, C. Dillon, T. Kayani and P. Todd, Research Unit on Violence,
Abuse and Gender Relations, Research Paper No.14, University of Bradford, 1995, 59pp
including:
The general patterns of agency contacts’ with J Hanmer, pp.8-10; Policy implications
for agency and interagency working with men’, pp.18-23.
Recovering After Stroke: A Qualitative Study of Patient and Care-Giver Views and the
Impact of Specialist Nurse Intervention, with G. Dowswell, J. Lawler, J. Young and A.
Forster, Research Report to the Northern and Yorkshire Regional Health Authority.
Department of Applied Social Studies, University of Bradford, December 1995, 104pp.
Men and Masculinities, Background Paper for Labour Shadow Minister for Women, Tessa
Jowell MP, November 1995.
Men, Masculinites and Managements: Unities, Differences and their Interrelations, with
D.L.Collinson, International Centre for Labour Studies, University of Manchester, Working
Paper Series, 1997, 35pp.
k) Conference Proceedings
‘The implications of patriarchy for men’s practice’ in Conference of
Socialist Economists Socialist Action for the 80,Policies and Practice, CSE,
London, 1982, pp.96-98.
'The critique of men: current lessons for the theory and practice of men' in Männer in
der Geschlechterforschung. Dokumentation einer Ad-hoc-Sitzung des Soziologentages
1988 in Zurich, Institut fur Sozialokologie Arbeitspapiere 8, Hennef-Wiederschall,
December 1988, pp. 1-19.
‘The Critique of Men: current lessons for the theory and practice of men’ in H.
Hoffman-Nowotny et al. (eds.) Soziologentag Vol II,, Campus Verlag, Frankfurt/New
York, 1989.
'Miehet ja sukupuolistuneet organisaatiot - patriarkaatit, seksualiteetit,
maskuliinisuudet ja johtajat' [Men and gender-divided organisations - or patriarchies,
sexualities, masculinities and managements], in Miehet työelämässä [Men and
Work Life], Council for Equality, Helsinki, Finland, 1992, pp.5-28.
‘Power, culture and gender relations in management’ with E. Harlow, Conference
Papers: Power Masculinity, Culture Through the Glass Ceiling, London, 27pp.
`How men talk about men's violence to known women' in J Kimber & E Stanko (eds.)
Masculinity and Crime: Issues of Theory and Practice. Centre for Criminal
Justice Research, Brunel University, London, 1994. pp. 36-54.
`Men and organizational culture' in J Wadjman (ed.) Organizations, Gender and Power,
IRRU Working Paper No.48, University of Warwick, Coventry, 1994, pp. 26-31
‘Men’s violence to women’ in B. Featherstone, B. Fawcett and C. Toft (eds.)
Gender, Violence and Social Work, Department of Applied Social Studies Publication,
University of Bradford, 1994 , pp.45-58.
‘Theory and research on violence’ with J. Hanmer, in B. Featherstone, B. Fawcett
and C. Toft (eds.) Gender, Violence and Social Work, Department of Applied Social
Studies Publication, University of Bradford, 1994, pp.1-16.
‘Educating for anti-oppressive and anti-discriminatory social work’ with E.
Harlow, in Anti-Discriminatory, Anti-Racist Practice and Education and Cultural
Diversity, IASSW, 1994 Congress, Amsterdam, published by Manchester Metropolitan
University, 1994.
‘Men talking on violence; agency responses to violence’ in Peace at Home,
Institute of Public Policy Research, 1996, pp.10-11.
‘’Men’ at ‘work’: multiple masculinities/multiple
workplaces’ with D. L. Collinson, in Life in Context 1/97, University of
Joensuu, Finland, 1997, pp. 11-19.
‘The ‘invisible’ man in nursing’ with C. Wright, in J. Robinson and
A.M. Rafferty Nursing, Women’s History and the Politics of Welfare, University
of Nottingham, Nursing Policy Studies Series, 1998 (script completed).
l) Conference Papers (in itakics) and Academic Presentations (from
1980)
1980-1981
‘Decrementalism: crisis and planning’, Oxford Polytechnic, November 1980.
‘Patriarchy and the profesionalisation of reproduction’, British Sociological
Association Sociology of Reproduction Study Group, Oxford, March 1981.
‘Decrementalism: planning theory and cuts’, Plenary Speaker, Oxford
International Planning Conference, March 1981.
1981-1982
'The professions and the semi-professions: the control of emotions and the construction of
masculinity' Gender and Society, British Sociological Association, University of
Manchester, April 1982.
'Patriarchy, social policy and men's practice' Socialist Strategies for Welfare, Critical
Social Policy Conference, Sheffield Polytechnic, April 1982.
'The implications of patriarchy for men's practice' Socialist Action for the 1980s,
Bradford, Conference of Socialist Economists, July 1982.
1982-1983
'Conceptualising men' Department of Sociology and Social Administration, University of
Sussex, April 1983.
1983-1984
'Are men a serious issue?' Interdisciplinary Human Studies Forum, University of Bradford,
November 1983.
'Sexuality and organisations: some methodological considerations' with P.W. Parkin,
Department of Organisational Behaviour, University of Lancaster, November 1983.
'"Sex" at "work": methodological and other difficulties in the
study of sexuality in work organisations' with P.W. Parkin, British Sociological
Association Conference on Work, Employment and Unemployment, University of Bradford, April
1984.
1984-1985
'Organisational sociology and the study of sexuality' with P.W. Parkin, Bradford College,
March 1985.
'Sexism, men's sexuality and management: the seen yet unnoticed case of men's sexuality'
International symposium on Power, Sexuality and Organisation Theory, the Academy of
Management Annual Conference, San Diego, California, August 1985.
1985-1986
'The organisational construction of sexuality' Bradford College, January 1986.
'Men's studies: problems, possibilities and promises' Sociology Research Seminar,
University of Bradford, February 1986.
'Changing men's studies: problems, possibilities and promises' British Sociological
Association Conference on the Sociology of the Life Cycle, University of Loughborough,
March 1986.
'Men-women relations in Britain.' Seminar fur Englische Sprache und Kultur, University of
Hamburg, April 1986.
'The social context of men's writing in Britain' and 'The historical development of the
British men's movement' University of Hamburg/Volkschochschule Norderstedt Conference on
The New Man and His Speech, April 1986.
1986-1987
'Men and masculinity: problems for theory; possibilities for practice' Postgraduate Staff
Seminar, Division of Education, University of Sheffield, March 1987.
'Anti-sexist work with boys and young men' with T. Hearn, Sex Equality Conference,
Derbyshire College of Higher Education, June 1987.
'Theorising men and masculinity: specific problems and diverse approaches' and
Convenor of Symposium on 'Men's Responses to the Feminist Challenge: Relationships of
Theory and Practice' Third International Interdisciplinary Congress on Women. Women's
Worlds, Visions and Revisions, Trinity College, Dublin, July 1987.
1987-1988
'Patriarchy, masculinity and psychoanalysis' Free Associations/North East London
Polytechnic Conference on Psychoanalysis and the Public Sphere, October 1987.
Guest Speaker 'Good practice and the Social Strategy' Bradford Metropolitan Council,
October 1987.
'Modern organisations and the construction of men's sexuality in the public domain' Staff
Sociology Seminar, City of Birmingham Polytechnic, December 1987.
'Curricular aspects of men and masculinity Teaching Gender and the Gendered Curriculum
Conference. Association for Teaching of the Social Sciences/British Sociological
Association Women's Caucus. Liverpool Institute of Higher Education, December 1987.
'Studying men and masculinity: Men's sexuality and modern organisations in historical
perspective' York University Staff Sociology Seminar, January 1988.
'Men's violence and child abuse' Child Care and Juvenile Justice Seminars, Centre for
Applied Social Studies, University of Leeds, February 1988.
'Studying men' Dayschool on Men and Masculinity. Centre for Gender Studies, University of
Hull/Humberside College of Further Education, March 1988.
'Speaking the unspeakable: The historical development of organisations and men's
sexuality in the public domain' British Sociological Association Conference, Sociology and
History, Edinburgh University, March 1988.
Organiser with D. Morgan, 'Men, masculinity and social theory', Conference, Sociological
Theory Group, British Sociological Association, University of Bradford, September 1988.
1988-89
'The critique of men: current lessons for the theory and practice of men' Gemeinsamer
Kongress Deutsche, Osterreichische, Schweizerische Gesellschaft fur Soziologie, Kultur und
Gesellschaft, University of Zurich, October 1988.
'Is patriarchy dead yet, daddy?' Men/Masculinities; Past/Present; Theory/Practice', Public
Lecture, School of European Studies, University of Sussex, October 1988.
'Some basic sociological issues in researching men and masculinities', Department of
Sociology, University of Manchester, November 1988.
'Child abuse, social theory, and everyday state practices' with W. Parkin, NATO Advanced
Research Workshop, State Intervention on Behalf of Children and Youth, Aquafredda di
Maratea, Italy, February 1989.
'Masculinity, men and socialism', Socialist Society, Sheffield, February 1989.
''The man question' in Social Policy and Social Work', Department of Social Policy and
Social Work, University of Manchester, March 1989.
'Being in public: men, masculinities and patriarchy', Sociology and Political Sciences,
Cambridge University, March 1989.
'Representations and images of men' with A. Melechi, Centre for the Study of Adult Life/
Theory, Culture and Society International Seminar, Teeside Polytechnic, August 1989.
1989-1990
'Men, sexuality and organisations', Loughborough University of Technology, November
1989.
'Men, violence and child abuse', Department of Social Studies, Leeds Polytechnic, February
1990.
Unities and divisions between men and masculinities: (1) The categories of men and the
case of sociology' with D. Collinson British Sociological Association Annual Conference,
Social Divisions and Social Change, University of Surrey, April 1990.
Unities and divisions between men and masculinities. (2) The fragmentation of
management and the management of fragmentation' with D. Collinson British Sociological
Association Annual Conference, Social Divisions and Social Change, University of Surrey,
April 1990.
'The personal, the political, the theoretical', Men and Feminism Colloquium, St. John's
College, Cambridge University, May 1990.
'Recent developments in the critical study of men and men's bodies' and ‘Images of
men’ (workshop) Gender Relations and the Body Symposium, University of Oslo, June
1990.
1990-1991
'Men, organisations and oppression' Probation Service Northern Region Staff Development,
Working with Male Offenders, Northern Region Staff Development Probation Service, St.
Anne's on Sea, Lancashire, November 1990.
'Gender and health: the contribution of critical studies on men', Health and Community
Studies Seminar on Gender and Health, Chester College, February 1991.
'Managing change, changing men and changing management' Women as Managers in Social
Services Regional Seminar, Association of Directors of Social Services/National Children's
Home, Newcastle, March 1991.
'The organisation of oppressions: age, class, (dis)ability, ethnicity, gender and
sexuality' with W. Parkin, Gender, Sexuality and Power in Organisations Conference,
Newcastle Polytechnic, March 1991.
'Health, bodies and men's violence: making connections', British Sociological
Association Annual Conference, Health and Society, Manchester University, March 1991.
'The narratives of oppression: from paradigms and metaphors to gender and sexuality to
the interrelations of multiple oppression', with W. Parkin, Towards a New Theory of
Organisations Conference, Keele University, April 1991.
'What men say about pornography/what pornography says about men' Invited Written Paper,
Symposium on Pornography and Violence, International Science Festival, Edinburgh, April
1991.
'Managing change, changing men and changing management' Women as Managers in Social
Services Regional Seminar, Association of Directors of Social Services/National Children's
Homes, NCH, London, April 1991.
'Men and gender-divided organisations - or patriarchies, sexualities, masculinities and
managements', Seminar on Men and Work Life, University of Tampere, Finland, May 1991
(paper read in my absence through family emergency).
1991-1992
'Critical Studies on Men?' Department of Sociology, Staffordshire Polytechnic, January
1992.
'Researching men and researching men's violences: methodological, empirical and political
issues and difficulties' British Sociological Association Annual Conference 'Sociology in
Europe', University of Kent, April 1992.
'Keynote address - Theory' Shifting Ground - The Dialetics of Work/Care, Research
School of Social Sciences, Australian National University, Canberra, Australia, July 1992.
1992-1993
'Men, sexuality, violence and organisations' Department of Social Policy and Social Work,
University of Dundee, September 1992.
'Current debates in theorising men and organisations' with D.L. Collinson and M. Collinson
Gender Research Conference, UMIST, September 1992.
'Men and violence', Bradford RELATE, September 1992.
'Men, oppression and management', Women Managers Group Seminar, Sheffield Hallam
University, November 1992.
'Men in the public domains' The Public Sphere International Conference, University of
Salford, January 1993.
'Theorising men and men's theorising: the case of men's violence', Women in Society
Seminar, University of Bradford, January 1993.
'Theoretical overview' Men's Health Workshop, Yorkshire Health Promotion Officers,
Leeds, January 1993.
'Violence to women - social work and organisations', with J. Hanmer British
Association of Social Workers Annual Conference, Keynote Address, Great Malvern, March
1993.
'Gendered research and researching gender: violence, abuse and the stress-coping
process', with J. Hanmer, E.S.R.C. International Seminar 'Welfare: Whose Responsibility?',
London, April 1993.
'Organisational culture: the silence and din of domination' with E. Harlow and W. Parkin,
Leeds Metropolitan University, April, 1993.
'Gendered research and researching gender: women, men and violence' with J. Hanmer,
British Sociological Association Annual Conference, University of Essex, April 1993.
'Men's theorising and theorising men: absence, avoidance, ambivalence, alterity'
Political Studies Association Annual Conference, University of Leicester, April 1993.
'A critique of the concept of masculinity', The Institute of Education, London, May 1993.
'Sexuality, violence and organisations', University of North London Centre for Equality
Research Seminar, May 1993.
'Men's violence to known women' Day Conference on E.S.R.C. Research, Women, Men, Children
- Violence and Abuse, University of Bradford, June 1993.
'Power, culture and gender relations in organisations and management' with E. Harlow.
Through the Glass Ceiling (Women Heads of Departments and Managers in Universities)
'Power, Masculinity and Culture', London, June 1993.
'The 'invisible' man in nursing' with C. Wright Nursing, Women's History and the Politics
of Nursing International Conference. Nottingham University, July 1993.
1993-1994
'How men talk about men's violence to known women' Masculinity and Crime. Issues of
Theory and Practice. Brunel University, September 1993.
'Men's violence to known women: attitudes, beliefs, discourses, practices' British
Psychological Society Social Psychology Section Conference, Jesus College, Oxford,
September 1993.
'Men talking about violence to women: solution or problem? ' Nottingham AGENDA, September
1993.
'Men's violence to women - policy implications', Violence Against Women - Whose Problem Is
It? Cleveland Social Services/Police/Health, Stockton, November 1993.
'Men and organisational culture' Industrial Relations Research Unit Workshop on
Organisations, Gender and Power, Warwick University, December 1993.
'Patterns of agency contacts with men' ESRC Policy and Implementation Seminar with
Voluntary Sector Services for Women, University of Bradford, January, 1994.
'The problem of men' Leeds Metropolitan University, January 1994.
''Emotional stuff': the emotions of men researchers and researched men in studying men's
violence and men in organisations' British Sociological Association Study Group on the
Sociology of Emotions, London, February, 1994.
'Methodological issues in men researching men's violence to know women' Postgraduate
Research Colloquium, Department of Government, University of Strathclyde, February 1994.
'Men's violence to known women: what men say they do and why' Staff Postgraduate Seminar,
Department of Government, University of Strathclyde, February 1994.
'Theoretical approaches to violence' with J. Hanmer, Gender, Violence and Social Work
Conference, Bradford University, March 1994.
`Men's violence to known women' Gender, Violence and Social Work Conference, Bradford
University, March 1994.
'Patterns of men's contacts with housing agencies' ESRC Policy and Implementation Seminar
with Housing Agencies, University of Bradford, March, 1994.
'Sexuality, gender and organisations: acknowledging complexities' with W. Parkin,
British Sociological Association Annual Conference, Sexualities in Social Context,
University of Central Lancashire, March 1994.
'Men's heterosexual violence to known women: the absence and presence of 'sex' in
men's accounts of violence', British Sociological Association Annual Conference,
Sexualities in Social Context, University of Central Lancashire, March 1994.
'Patterns of men's contacts with Social Service Agencies' ESRC Policy and Implementation
Seminar with Social Services Agencies, University of Bradford, May 1994.
'Patterns of men's contacts with criminal justice agencies' ESRC Policy and Implementation
Seminar with Criminal Justice System, University of Bradford, July, 1994.
'What can men do about management?' Sheffield Hallam University, July, 1994.
'Devising and implementing appropriate teaching strategies for the development of
anti-oppressive social work practice' with E. Harlow, 27th Congress of the International
Association of Schools of Social Work, Amsterdam, July 1994.
`The current state of research and theory', Chair of Panel and Presenter on on
Organisations, Professions, Work and Gender . `Backlash or New Horizons?' Studying Gender
and Gender Relations Conference, Faculty of Sociology/Interdisciplinary Women's Studies
Centre, University of Bielefeld, Germany, July 1994.
'Men's heterosexual violence to known women', 'Backlash or New Horizons?' Studying Gender
and Gender Relations Conference, Faculty of Sociology/Interdisciplinary Women's Studies
Centre, University of Bielefeld, Germany, July 1994.
1994-1995
'Patterns of men's contacts with health agencies' ESRC Policy and Implementation Seminar
with Health Agencies, University of Bradford, September 1994.
‘Starting writing again’ Writing for Publication Conference, University of
Bradford, September, 1994.
‘Men’s violence to known women - policy implications for agency and
interagency working work women and with men’ with J. Hanmer, ESRC Conference,
Violence to Women from Known Men: Policy Development, Interagency Approaches to Good
Practice, University of Bradford, September, 1994.
‘Power and change? - Men’s groups, men’s violences and managements’
Levi Strauss Public Lecture, Social and Political Studies, University of Cambridge,
February, 1995.
'What men's violence to known women tells us about men' Department of Psychology,
University of Central Lancashire, February 1995.
Co-deliver three-day doctoral research course with D.H.J. Morgan ‘Critical Studies on
Men’ , Institute of Sociology, University of Oslo, March, 1995.
‘Doing violence/talking violence/ writing violence: the case of organisational
responses to men’s violence to known women’, Organisation/Violence Conference,
Drogheda, Ireland, April 1995.
‘Changing men and changing management: personal, political and research
agendas’ Keynote Men in Management Changing Cultures within Education Conference.
Thomas Danby College, Leeds, May 1995.
Convenor of theme ‘Women, men and organisations: contrasts and contradictions’
EGOS Conference (European Group on Organisation Studies.) ‘Organisations: Contrasts
and ‘Contradictions’ Department of Management, University of Bogazici, Turkey,
July 1995.
1995-1996
Official Faculty Guest, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Helsinki, October 1995,
including ‘Gender, sexuality and organizations: the question of men’ and
‘Men’s violence to known women: questions of gender, sexuality and
organizations’
‘Gender, sexuality and organizations: the question of men’ Work Research
Institute, University of Tampere, October, 1995.
‘Men’s violence to known women: questions of gender, sexuality and
organizations’ Department of Social Policy, and the Unit for Women’s Studies and
Gender Relations, University of Tampere, October, 1995.
‘Reflections on silence and din in organizations’ with E. Harlow and W.
Parkin,
Gender, Culture and Organizational Change: Putting Theory into Practice Conference,
INLOGOV, Birmingham University and Applied Social Studies, University of Bradford,
November, 1995.
‘Violence to women by known men - the research’ with J. Hanmer, Violence to
Women by Known Men Conference. Bradford Community Health. November 1995.
Men talking about violence; agency responses to violence’, Institute of Public
Policy Research Conference ‘Peace at Home’, National Film Theatre, London,
February 1996.
‘Trying to theorise the relationship of violence and organizations’, Department
of Sociology, University of Manchester, April 1996.
‘Men, violence and organisations’ Department of Applied Social Studies,
University of Bradford, May 1996.
‘Key issues for men and for working with men’, Working with Men for Change in
Social Care Conference, The Institute of Education, University of London, May 1996.
‘How do men need to change? Personal, political and other challenges’, Women
and Men Working Together for a Change Conference, Royal Geographical Society, London, June
1996.
‘Men and men’s violence to known women: the ‘lure’ and
‘lack’ of cultural studies approaches’ Crossroads in Cultural Studies
International Conference, Tampere University, July 1996.
1996-1997
‘Methodological issues in doing research on men and violence’ (paper), and
‘Threatened identities’ (workshop) British Sociological Association Summer
School, University of Durham, September 1996.
‘Men’s responses to feminism in the U.K. and the U.S.’ with M.Kimmel,
Christina Institute of Women’s Studies, University of Helsinki, September 1996.
‘Men and gender equality in the U.K. and the U.S.’ with M.Kimmel, The Council
for Equality, The Parliament Building, Helsinki, September 1996.
‘Men and management in the universities: two more challenges for equal
opportunities’, Finnish Universities Equal Opportunities Committees Annual
Conference, University of Tampere, September 1996.
‘The qualitative dimension in health research’ with G. Dowswell, J. Lawler, J.
Young and A.Forster, The Third International Interdisciplinary Conference on Qualitative
Health Research, Bournemouth, October-November 1996.
Convenor and Introduction ‘Doing Critical Empirical Research on Men and Men’s
Practices’ One Day Research Seminar, University of Manchester, November 1996.
‘Men’s politics, men’s programmes and critical studies on men:
connecting men’s responses to men’s violence to women’, Violence, Abuse
& Women’s Citizenship International Conference, Brighton, November 1996.
‘The implications of critical studies on men’, Keynote paper at Nordic
Women’s Studies and Gender Research Today Conference, Frø og Frukter, Oslo
University, November 1996.
‘Men’s violence to known women: questions of history, methodology, the body,
theory’, Nordic Summer University Masculinity Group Winter Seminar, Helsinki, January
1997.
‘Critical studies on men: progress, problems and possibilities’, Department
of Sociology Dayschool on Male Studies, University of Joensuu, February 1997.
‘Men and men’s violence to women: two achilles’ heels for mainstream
sociology?’, Department of Sociology, University of Helsinki, March 1997.
Co-organiser with P. Bagguley, S. Roseneil and J.Seymour, British Sociological
Association Annual Conference, ‘Power/Resistance’, University of York, April
1997.
‘Conferences, power and resistance’, Panel with D. Collinson, M. Collinson and
D.Morgan, British Sociological Association Annual Conference,
‘Power/Resistance’, University of York, April 1997.
‘Research on men, masculinities and managers: some implications for careers and the
lifecourse’, The Gender Viewpoint on the Lifespan and Vocational Careers, Life in
Context Doctoral Course, Department of Psychology, University of Joensuu, April 1997.
‘Searching for the centre of men and men’s power?: historical, geographical
and theoretical perspectives’, International Colloquium on Masculinities, University
of Natal, South Africa, July 1997.
‘Gender equity and policy-making: comparative perspectives’, Masculinity and
Schooling Conference, Department of Education, University of Natal/British Council, South
Africa, July 1997.
1997-98
‘Men, and power: citizenship, welfare, nation and global relations’,
European Sociological Association Conference ‘20th Century Europe:
Inclusions/Exclusions’, University of Essex, August 1997.
‘Critical studies on men’, Brains, Bras and Battles Course, Centre for
Continuing Education, Åbo Akademi University, October 1997.
‘Motherhood, fatherhood and men’, Madonnor och Matronor Course, Centre for
Continuing Education, Åbo Akademi University, November 1997.
‘Gender and organisations’, Department of Economics, Åbo Akademi University,
November 1997.
‘Men and management’, Kompetens-97 Leadership and Communication Conference, Åbo
Akademi University, November 1997.
‘Men’s violence to known women: the ambiguity of men’s support for
men’, Research Centre in Social Sciences, Göteborg University, November 1997.
‘Men’s violence to known women: research, policy and change in the UK’,
Council for Equality between Women and Men, National Conference on Violence to Women,
Helsinki, November 1997.
‘Women managers and men managers in universities’, with H. Silius, Staff
Management Seminar, Åbo Akademi University, November 1997.
‘Men, masculinities and violences’, Departments of Women’s Studies, Applied
Social Studies, Law; Sociology, University College, Cork, December 1997.
‘Men, fathers and the state’, Symposium on Fathers and the State, Advanced
Research School of Comparative Gender Studies, Stockholm University, January 1998.
‘Sexuality and organisations’, SPOL Conference, Annual Conference of the
Association of Finnish Psychology Students, Turku University, January 1998.
‘Why study men?, Faculty of Social Sciences, Masculinities in Motion Programme,
Karlstad University, February 1998.
‘Men, gender relations and organisations: some unresolved questions’, Centre for
Gender Studies, Karlstad University, February 1998.
Interviews on men’s violence to women in programmes 1 – 4, ‘"Ursäkta
blodspåren" – en kurs om våld, makt och kön’, Centre for Continuing
Education, Åbo Akademi University, February – March 1998.
‘Men and masculinities’, Two Day Doctoral Course, Department of Sociology,
Stockholm University, February 1998.
‘Sexuality in and around organisations’, Department of Economics, Åbo Akademi
University, March 1998.
‘The end of men? (as we know them)’, International Women’s Day Marathon,
Institute of Women’s Studies, Åbo Akademi University, March 1998.
‘Gender, power and social theory’, Department of Sociology and Human Geography,
University of Oslo, March 1998.
‘Power and resistance: core issues in sociological inquiry’, Öppet hus,
Department of Sociology, Åbo Akademi University, April 1998.
‘The changing man?’, Åbo Akademi University Staff Association/Gender Equality
Committee/Health and Welfare Committee, April 1998.
‘Methodological reflections on the lastensuojelu/child protection comparative
research project’, with T. Pösö and J. Korpinen, The Scottish-Nordic School on
Qualitative Research – Gender, Welfare and Health, Tampere University, May 1998.
‘The trouble with men – men, gender divisions and welfare’, Institute of
Women’s Studies, Åbo Akademi University, May 1998.
‘Globalisation, new technologies and sexuality’, Sex over the Wire Panel: New
Technology and Sexualisation, TERVE-SOS Conference ‘Well-being from
Technology?’, Oulu, Finland, May 1998.
‘Gender, sexuality, violences and organisational worlds’, Department of
Sociology, Åbo Akademi University, May 1998.
‘Is the critical study of men managers in universities also about women, change
and the culture of universities’, Winds of Change Conference: Women and the Culture
of Universities, University of Technology Sydney, July 1998.
1998-99
‘Fathers and fatherhood: contradictions in a globalising world’, Isän
Jäljillä, Hanasaari, August 1998.
‘Men and gender equality in higher education’, European Conference on gender
Equality in Higher Education, University of Helsinki, August 1998.
‘Gender, sexuality, violence and organisations’, Work, Employment and Society
Conference, University of Cambridge, September 1998.
‘Urgent questions for the men’s movement’, The Men’s Forum,
Miessakit ry, Helsinki, Autumn 1998.
‘Gender, identity and agency: studies in masculinities’, Department of
Sociology, University of Umeå.
Outstanding invitations include:
‘Gender/sexuality/violence in organisations’, Men, Gender Relations and Worklife
Seminar, Work Research Institute, Oslo.
‘Critical studies on men and men’s health’, Department of Family Medicine,
Umeå University, Sweden.
‘The future of the male in the twenty first century’, Parliamentary All Party
Committee on the Social Sciences, the House of Commons, London.
Stockholm School of Economics.
Gender Institute, London School of Economics.
Discourse Research Unit, Manchester Metropolitan University
Women’s Studies, University of Helsinki
Women’s Studies, Umeå University
Sociology, Bielefeld University