Men, Masculinities and Difference

Student should be interested in the issue of gender roles, relations and power dynamics between men and women. Students who already participated in other courses in gender studies, feminist theories or sociology are highly welcomed.

przedmiot fakultatywny

Contact hours with teacher:

- participation in classes – 20 hrs

- consultations – 2 hrs

Self-study hours:

- reading literature – 30 hrs

- preparing presentation – 43 hrs

Altogether: 100 hrs (4 ECTS)

Student

W1: has basic knowledge of terms and concepts used in critical studies on men and masculinities – K_W01

W2: has a basic knowledge about the relations between micro-, mezzo- and macrostructures in the context of gender relations, relations between different models of masculinities and other social dimensions such as: class, race, age, ethnicity, sexuality – K_W03

W3: is acquainted with different types of social bond characteristic for men of different social class, race, age, ethnicity, sexuality – K_W04

W4: possesses knowledge about gender order characteristic for the contemporary Western societies, knows about sources and functioning of dominant models of masculinity – K_W07

Student

U1: is able to identify and interpret men’s behaviours and how they are connected with prevailing masculinity models and gender order – K_U01

U2: is capable of indicating the links between different social processes and phenomena in the context of hierarchies of masculinity models and changing gender order – K_U03

U3: has a skill of diagnosing social problems in the context of theories about men and masculinities and can formulate recommendations for changing patriarchal order– K_U07

Student

K1: is open to new ideas and new ways of thinking about contemporary social reality – K_K07

K2: is eager to constantly broad his/her knowledge – K_K06

Expository teaching methods:

- participatory lecture

- problem-base lecture

- discussion

Exploratory teaching methods:

- classic problem-solving

- brainstorming

- pogadanka
- wykład konwersatoryjny
- wykład problemowy

- giełda pomysłów
- klasyczna metoda problemowa
- referatu

The course aims to introduce students to the field of critical studies on men and masculinities (CSMM). CSMM should be seen as a part of the broader field of gender studies, in which the primary research subjects are men as gendered human beings and changing masculinities models. During the course, we will try to answer the questions: what it means that men have gender, how men’s gender is constructed and reconstructed in the social processes, what kinds of models of masculinities dominate today and what consequences different models of masculinity have for men in the contemporary social reality.

Critical Studies on Men and Masculinities (CSMM) has been a rapidly growing area of research within gender and feminist studies over recent decades. CSMM are based on feminist theories and methodologies. This course aims to acquaint students with CSMM and show them how to analyse men as gendered individuals. Men’s gender is often invisible and consequently ignored in social research. Men’s experiences are seen as ungendered and universal, whereas men are as much gendered as women. They must follow particular gender roles and behave in line with societal expectations. This has enormous social consequences. Traditional models of masculinity are often connected with violence and risky behaviour; in these models, men are expected not to show emotional engagement and to be tough. The male identity is usually presented in contrast to the female identity. Yet, in times of women’s emancipation and changing gender roles, there is a need for critical reflection on prevailing masculinity models. The questions should be asked: are masculinity models changing? If yes, in which direction? If not, why not?

During this course, we will look more carefully at different aspects of men’s lives and masculinity models in contemporary social reality. We will try to answer the questions of how the male body is constructed in social processes, what consequences the dominant models of masculinity have on men’s health, why men are dying earlier than women, why they are more eager than women to engage in violence and risky behaviours and less eager to be involved parents and caregivers. Many questions can be answered without using biological explanations. Additionally, it should be remembered that men are different, and there are various models of masculinities. Masculinity intersects with various social dimensions; thus, we will analyse men and masculinities in the context of other social classes, races, ethnicities, ages, and sexualities.

Anderson, E. (2009a). Inclusive Masculinity: The Changing Nature of Masculinities. Abingdon: Taylor & Francis.

Anderson, E. (2009b). The Maintenance of Masculinity Among the Stakeholders of Sport. Sport Management Review, 12(1), 3–14.

Blankenhorn, D. (1996). Fatherless America: Confronting Our Most Urgent Social Problem. Harper Perennial.

Bly, R. (2004). Iron John: A Book About Men. Da Capo Press.

Carrigan, T., Connell, B., & Lee, J. (1985). Toward a new sociology of masculinity. Theory and Society, 14(5), 551–604.

Connell, R. (1987). Gender and power: society, the person, and sexual politics. Stanford University Press.

Connell, R. W. (2005). Masculinities (Second Edition.). Berkeley, California: University of California Press.

Connell, R. W., & Messerschmidt, J. (2005). Hegemonic Masculinity: Rethinking the Concept. Gender & Society, 19(6), 829–859.

Courtenay, W. (2002). A Global Perspective on the Field of Men’s Health: An Editorial. International Journal of Men’s Health, 1(1), 1.

Doucet, A. (2004). “It’s Almost Like I Have a Job, but I Don’t Get Paid”: Fathers at Home Reconfiguring Work, Care, and Masculinity. Fathering: A Journal of Theory, Research, and Practice about Men as Fathers, 2(3), 277–303.

European Commission. (2012). The Role of Men in Gender Equality - European Strategies and Insights. Vienna/Berlin/Gratz. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/justice/gender-equality/files/gender_pay_gap/130424_final_report_role_of_men_en.pdf

Flood, M, (Ed.). (2007), International Encyclopedia of Men and Masculinities London ; New York: Routledge.

Hearn J. & K. Pringle, (Eds.). (2006), European Perspectives on Men and Masculinities. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Hearn, J. (2004). From Hegemonic Masculinity to the Hegemony of Men. Feminist Theory, 5(1), 49–72.

Hearn, J. (2015). Men of the World: Genders, Globalizations, Transnational Times. Sage, London, UK.

Katz, J. (2006). The macho paradox: why some men hurt women and how all men can help. Naperville, Ill: Sourcebooks, Inc.

Kimmel, M. S. (Ed.). (1995). The politics of manhood: profeminist men respond to the mythopoetic men’s movement (and the mythopoetic leaders answer). Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

Kimmel, M. S. & J. Hearn (Eds.). (2005), Handbook of Studies on Men and Masculinities, SAGE.

Lamb, M. E. (2000). The History of Research on Father Involvement. Marriage & Family Review, 29(2-3), 23–42.

Lamb, M. E. (2010). The Role of the Father in Child Development, 5th Edition, Hoboken, N.J.: Wiley.

Miller, T. (2011). Making Sense of Fatherhood. Gender, Caring and Work, New York: Cambridge University Press.

O’Brien, M., Brandth, B., & Kvande, E. (2007). Fathers, Work and Family Life. Community, Work & Family, 10(4), 375–386.

Suwada, K & L. Plantin. (2014). On Fatherhood, Masculinities and Family Policies: A Comparative Analysis of Poland and Sweden, Polish Sociological Review, (3), 509-524.

Suwada, K. (2015). Naturalisation of the Difference. The Experience of Fatherhood in Sweden and Poland, Studia Humanistyczne AGH, No 14(2), 141-155.

Titkow, A. (2010). Do Men Have Their Own Glass Ceiling? Polish Sociological Review, (172), 391–409.

Wojnicka, K. (2011). (Re)constructing Masculinity à la Polonaise. In E. Ruspini, J. Hearn, B. Pease, & K. Pringle (Eds.), Men and masculinities around the world: transforming men’s practices (Palgrave Macmillan., pp. 71–83). New York, NY.

Wojnicka, K. (2012). The Polish profeminist movement. GENDER Heft, 3, 25–40.

1. Attendance

2. Student Presentation

3. Activity

Grades:

fail- less than 60%

satisfactory- 60-70%

satisfactory plus-70-75%

good – 75-80%

good plus- 80-90%

very good – 90-100%

Not applicable.