Cited by 9,367Gender Roles and Identity StudiesGender and Feminist StudiesGender, Sexuality, and Education

Hegemonic Masculinity: Rethinking the Concept

Open access
Connell, R. W., Messerschmidt, James W.·2005·Gender & Society

Abstract

The concept of hegemonic masculinity has influenced gender studies across many academic fields but has also attracted serious criticism. The authors trace the origin of the concept in a convergence of ideas in the early 1980s and map the ways it was applied when research on men and masculinities expanded. Evaluating the principal criticisms, the authors defend the underlying concept of masculinity, which in most research use is neither reified nor essentialist. However, the criticism of trait models of gender and rigid typologies is sound. The treatment of the subject in research on hegemonic masculinity can be improved with the aid of recent psychological models, although limits to discursive flexibility must be recognized. The concept of hegemonic masculinity does not equate to a model of social reproduction; we need to recognize social struggles in which subordinated masculinities influence dominant forms. Finally, the authors review what has been confirmed from early formulations (the idea of multiple masculinities, the concept of hegemony, and the emphasis on change) and what needs to be discarded (onedimensional treatment of hierarchy and trait conceptions of gender). The authors suggest reformulation of the concept in four areas: a more complex model of gender hierarchy, emphasizing the agency of women; explicit recognition of the geography of masculinities, emphasizing the interplay among local, regional, and global levels; a more specific treatment of embodiment in contexts of privilege and power; and a stronger emphasis on the dynamics of hegemonic masculinity, recognizing internal contradictions and the possibilities of movement toward gender democracy.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0891243205278639

Cites

131 of 131 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 133 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Connell, R. W., & Messerschmidt, J. W.
Affiliations
  • The University of Sydney (AU)
  • University of Southern Maine (US)
Venue
Gender & Society
Published
2005-12
Volume
19
Issue
6
Pages
829-859
ISSN
  • 0891-2432 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-3977
OpenAlex
W2129749811
Cited by
9,367
References
133
Citations by year
2026: 830 · 2025: 781 · 2024: 605 · 2023: 658 · 2022: 639 · 2021: 658 · 2020: 646 · 2019: 620 · 2018: 561 · 2017: 548 · 2016: 467 · 2015: 482 · 2014: 436 · 2013: 385 · 2012: 289
FWCI
150.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Gender & Society (publishedVersion)
  • Intellectum (Universidad de La Sabana) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender Roles and Identity Studies
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender and Feminist Studies
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender, Sexuality, and Education
Keywords
hegemonic masculinity, masculinity, gender hierarchy, subordinated masculinities, multiple masculinities, hegemony, social reproduction, gender democracy, embodiment, women's agency, social change

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review