Contemporary gender debates have examined the role of men and masculinity in creating equality and/or reinforcing inequality. Popular narratives often situate masculinity as inherently âtoxicâ, powerful and damaging to both women and men. In contrast, masculinity is frequently claimed to be fragile, under siege, and in urgent need of reclamation. These polarised, oppositional perspectives replicate the idea of âmasculinity in crisisâ, of masculinity as at a critical juncture where âoldâ masculinity must either be dismantled, or, alternatively, defended in the face of a hostile, man-hating culture. The âcrisis of masculinityâ is often represented as new, the result of unprecedented social change. However, such representations are as old as masculinity itself, suggesting that âcrisisâ, instability and fragmentation, is built into the very concept of masculinity. Debates around the role of feminism in modern society also continue. A resurgence of interest in feminist activism, and the increased visibility of online feminist resistance, has been accompanied by a seemingly inevitable conservative anti-feminist âbacklashâ. At the same time, dominant postfeminist discourses position feminism as obsolete, denying persistent gender inequalities and depoliticising gender.
In this context, there is increased awareness and scrutiny of menâs âpolitical choicesâ, as Raewyn Connell puts it, both within academia and beyond:
The vast changes in gender relations around the globe produce ferociously complex changes in the conditions of practice with which men as well as women have to grapple. No one is an innocent bystander in this arena of change. We are all engaged in constructing a world of gender relations. How it is made, what strategies different groups pursue, and with what effects, are political questions. Men no more than women are chained to the gender patterns they have inherited. Men too can make political choices for a new world of gender relations. Yet those choices are always made in concrete social circumstances, which limit what can be attempted; and the outcomes are not easily controlled. (Connell, 2005: 86)
Feminists have raised concerns about the apparently ubiquitous âMRAâ (Menâs Rights Activist) who seems constantly poised to pour vitriolic scorn on any (social) media intervention deemed âtoo feministâ. On the other hand, the idea of men as feminist âalliesâ is being valorised, with high-profile celebrity-led campaigns emphasising the importance of men to feminism, and of feminism to men. Menâs roles as allies are, however, contested. Some worry that male feminists re-inscribe the invisibility of womenâs voices or, worse, that in extreme cases, their apparent feminist politics is used as a screen for problematic behaviour towards women. Finally, the purported innocence of the âbystanderâ subject, of the majority of men who eschew gender politics altogether, has come into the spotlight. âOrdinaryâ menâs complicity through subtle (and not-so-subtle) everyday sexism is consistently challenged in mainstream public arenas.
This heightened visibility of menâs politics and gender identities is not, however, evidence that men are the ânew gender victimsâ as some conservative commentators would claim. Although there are costs of masculinity for men (and, importantly, for some men more than for others), the benefits outweigh these harms. Gendered structures continue to disadvantage women as a group more than men as a group. One of the key concerns of this book is to map and critically interrogate contemporary constructions of masculinity and of the changing gender world.
Specifically, this book examines the contemporary politics of gender through an analysis of menâs movements, their politics and the identities they (re)construct. Investigating menâs explicit mobilisations around masculine identities and âmenâs issuesâ is an important aspect of interrogating menâs political choices, and the varying ways in which a politics of masculinity has been invoked. Whilst my primary focus is on the under-researched UK context, the book draws on and extends broader international research on menâs movements. Examining movements from diverse positions (categorised as broadly âfeministâ, âpostfeministâ and âbacklashâ perspectives), I explore the following research questions: How do different menâs movements represent masculinity and gender ? What is their perception of current gender relations? How do they construct feminism ? What forms of gender politics do they employ? How far are postfeminist ideas (alongside feminist and backlash perspectives) present in their discourses? Do they invoke âcrisis of masculinityâ narratives? How does âcrisisâ thinking constrain or enable critical scrutiny of masculinity? What are the likely effects of these representations of gender, gender relations, and gender politics? Crucially, overall, does each movement reinforce or destabilise dominant gender identities and the hierarchical relations they foster? I also tentatively consider the cumulative politics of menâs movements, as well as contemporary constructions of crisis of masculinity in other arenas.
There is a substantial body of research on menâs movements in some contexts. Landmark studies which examine menâs movements from different perspectives include the work of Kenneth Clatterbaugh (1997), Michael Messner (2000), and Judith Newton (2005) in the USA (see Chapter 4). As yet, there is no similar in-depth study mapping diverse menâs movements in the UK. In addition, there is only a small literature examining feminist menâs movements. Prominent examples including a recent in-depth history of US feminist menâs movements by Michael Messner et al. (2015; see also Messner 2016) and Fidelma Ashe âs (2007) book on academic male feminist perspectives on masculinity, which touches on UK menâs movements. In contrast, there is a burgeoning literature on menâs and fathersâ rights groups covering a number of national (and international) contexts (see, amongst others: Basu 2016; Behre 2015; Bertoia and Drakich 1993; Blais and Dupuis-DĂ©ri 2012; Boyd 2008; Busch et al. 2014; Burman 2016; Crowley 2008; Dragiewicz 2011; Flood 2012; Gavanas 2004; Ging 2017; Gotell and Dutton 2016; Hacker 2016; Halperin-Kaddari and Freeman 2016; Hoddap 2017; Kaye and Tolmie 1998; Menzies 2007; Messner 2016; Nicholas and Agius 2018; Salter 2016; Seymour 2018; TrÓbert 2017; Wojnicka 2016). There is, however, still very little written on menâs and fatherâs rights groups in the UK. Notable exceptions include research by Richard Collier (2006, 2010, 2013, 2014; Collier and Sheldon 2006), who has written about UK fathersâ rights groups from a socio-legal perspective. However, this work did not draw on empirical research with fathersâ rights groups and did not address UK menâs movements beyond fathersâ rights. This book draws on and extends my previous work on menâs movements and fathersâ rights groups which examined: constructions of masculinity and fatherhood by fathersâ rights groups (Jordan 2009, 2014, 2018); diverse responses to feminism in menâs rights groups (Jordan 2016); and the political uses of crisis-of-masculinity narratives by menâs groups and others (Jordan and Chandler 2018).
The main empirical contribution of the book is in the analysis of interviews with members of well-known fathersâ rights group, (Real) Fathers 4 Justice [(R)F4J]. Fathersâ rights groups have been understood as part of an anti-feminist âbacklashâ (see Chapter 6). The identity of âfatherâ has always been political as power-laden gendered identities are implicit within the constructions of fatherhood . However, what is sometimes referred to as a ânewâ politics of fatherhood has seen the identity of âfatherâ become more explicitly and publicly a site of contestation over rights, resources and subjectivities. Globally and in the UK, debates surrounding fatherhood including over paternity leave, absent fathers and fathersâ rights, have all commanded attention from the media, politicians and policymakers. This book extends understandings of the complex nature of these issues, offering a nuanced, empirically grounded, account of fathersâ rights perspectives to explore the (gendered) implications of the politics of fatherhood and fathersâ rights. It will be of interest to those who study: the contemporary politics of gender and feminism ; men and masculinity; identity and cultural aspects of social movements ; and, more specifically, to readers who want to know more about menâs movements, fathersâ rights groups and fatherhood politics.
The interview analysis reveals multiple, complex narratives around masculinity, fatherhood and gender politics. Aspects of these narratives express caring masculinity and ideas of ânewâ, nurturing fatherhood which partially destabilise dominant constructions of gender and gendered binaries. Others, however, replicate problematic, conservative notions which seek to reinstate âtraditionalâ forms of masculinity and to demonise women/mothers. Overall, the cumulative effect of the d...