CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 217Gender and Feminist StudiesHistorical Gender and Feminism StudiesGender Roles and Identity Studies

The Limits of “The Male Sex Role”: An Analysis of the Men's Liberation and Men's Rights Movements' Discourse

MESSNER, MICHAEL A.·1998·Gender & Society
DOI 10.1177/0891243298012003002
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Some feminists have seen sex role theory as limited, even dangerous; others see it as useful mid-range theory. This article sheds light on this debate through an examination of the discourse of the men's liberation movement of the 1970s. Men's liberation leaders grappled with the paradox of simultaneously acknowledging men's institutional privileges and the costs of masculinity to men. The language of sex roles was the currency through which they negotiated this paradox. By the late 1970s, men's liberation had disappeared. The conservative and moderate wings of men's liberation became an anti-feminist men's rights movement, facilitated by the language of sex roles. The progressive wing of men's liberation abandoned sex role language and formed a profeminist movement premised on a language of gender relations and power. The article ends with a discussion of the implications of this case for debates about sex role theory, and urges the study of contemporary organizations whose discourse is based on the language of sex roles.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0891243298012003002

Cites

38 of 38 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

  • The Men's Rights Movement started in the 1970s.

    “Among the most prominent examples of organized misogynist groups is the Men's Rights Movement (MRM), which started in the 1970s (Michael A. Messner 1998).”

    From “Victims of feminism”: exploring networked misogyny and #MeToo in the manosphere (2023) · cites this paper as Michael A. Messner 1998

  • Feminist advances in gender equality, and progressive social movements are blamed for the unjust sexual market, women's privilege and men's supposed oppression and diminished status.

    “Thus, feminist advances in gender equality, and progressive social movements are blamed for the unjust sexual market, women's privilege and men's supposed oppression and diminished status (Ging, 2017; Messner, 1998).”

    From Mainstreaming the Blackpill: Understanding the Incel Community on TikTok (2023) · cites this paper as Messner, 1998

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 39 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
MESSNER, M. A.
Affiliations
University of Southern California (US)
Corresponding author
MESSNER, MICHAEL A.
Venue
Gender & Society
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
1998-06
Volume
12
Issue
3
Pages
255-276
ISSN
  • 0891-2432 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-3977
DOI
10.1177/0891243298012003002
OpenAlex
W1980606485
Cited by
217
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 17 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 2
FWCI
11.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
Gender & Society (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender and Feminist Studies
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Historical Gender and Feminism Studies
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender Roles and Identity Studies
Keywords
sex-role theory, men's rights movement, masculinity, gender relations, middle-range theory, institutional privilege, gender and power, 1970s counterculture, organizational discourse

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