Masculinities
Matter! Men, Gender and Development
Frances Cleaver, ed.
London & New York: Zed Books, 2002.
$22.50, 242 pages, ISBN 1-84277-065-9 (paperback).
Gilbert
Pham-Thanh
Université de Paris 13
This
collection of papers comes out as the third volume in a new series
entitled "Global Masculinities"—a series from Zed
Books edited by Michael S. Kimmel. The first two volumes were Changing
Masculinities in a Changing Society: Men and Gender in Southern
Africa (Ed. Robert Morrell) and A Man’s World? Changing
Men’s Practices in a Globalized World (Bob Pease and
Keith Pringle, eds.).
As
indicated by the title of the series, Masculinities Matter!
is set within the epistemological framework of emerging critiques
which address the problem of social relationships between men and
women. In the wake of feminist and cultural studies, but with a
view to deconstructing the reduction of gender to women in current
debate, it aims at drawing a picture of economic, social and political
parameters such as weigh upon the individual male and shape his
posture when dealing with females and fellow males. It accounts
for recent developments in local policies and the organisation of
workshops for some target communities, eventually preparing for
new channels of action.
The
nine essays which make up the nine chapters of the book come from
contributors with very different backgrounds—a senior lecturer
at Bradford Centre for International Development (Frances Cleaver),
a behaviour change communication consultant (Neil Doyle), a Research
Officer with the International Service for National Agricultural
Research with a PhD from the Faculty for Environmental Studies (Helen
Hambley Odame), a field worker who developed participatory methods
for communities to come to terms with the legacies of apartheid
(Niki Kandirikirira), a reader in sociology (Janet Bujra), to name
but a few. Their geographical zones of interest mark a change of
perspective by steering away from Eurocentric analyses as they study
India, Northern Uganda, Cuba, South Africa, Kenya, Vietnam, Africa
at large, while the United Kingdom is only examined within one survey
of miscellaneous countries. Not so for the theoretical tools in
use, and the selective bibliographies reveal how much the approach
relies on western lines of thought. The index (235-242) proves very
helpful and details the critical apparatus employed in the volume.
What
ties the whole together, apart from the general intent of the book,
is the Foreword by Michael Kimmel, who underlines the complementary
dimension of the collected essays as conceptual contributions and
practical cases fitting onto a pragmatic agenda. The same unifying
agent is to be found in Frances Cleaver’s opening study (“Men
and Masculinities: New Directions in Gender and Development”,
1-27), where she mainly synthesizes what can now be considered as
standard knowledge. In this first chapter, exploded is the well-rooted
prejudice that men should only be seen as obstacles in the way of
women’s development, that “women can only become empowered
by men giving up power” (1). In her next move, Cleaver reminds
us of the fact that the ground-breaking studies in masculinities
focused on northern industrialized countries, thus calling for extra
research in different contexts. Then, as a hint to the main spring
of the whole book, she states that “through empowerment processes
both men and women can be liberated from the confines of stereotyping,
resulting in beneficial outcomes for both genders” (2), in
accordance with Gender and Development (GAD) theories. This approach
partly relies on the discarding of the old conception of men as
selfish, violent, tyrannical beings, allowing room for the notion
of men’s vulnerabilities due to the “’demasculinizing’
effects of poverty and economic change” (3), and a resulting
need for compensation. Of course, the crisis of masculinity stems
from the increasing difficulty to act out the threefold role of
man in the fields of heterosexual activity and biological fatherhood,
economic support and social status.
Stress
is laid on “the relational nature of gender” (4), and
statistics show that although people tend to identify the differences
between the sexes in anatomical terms, they focused on behavioural
differences, a view that will support much of the subsequent argumentation
of the volume, and questions the institutional dichotomies opposing
man and woman, more or less explicitly contributing to the essentialist
approach that can so easily turn into a political dead end. In response
to this risk, Cleaver refers to “positive deviancy”
(12) and calls for the necessary reinterpretation of masculinity
in terms of age, race, class and nationality, to take the different
cultural concepts of manliness into account. She rather alludes
to current issues than offers in-depth analyses, thus mention is
made of equitable work-sharing in households; the role of the state
in men’s violence and the shaping of aggressive masculinity,
both on domestic and societal levels; post-colonial reproduction
of colonial habits, tension between a global conception of masculinity
and an over-ethnocentric outlook.
In
Chapter 2, “Nationalism, Masculinity and the Developmental
State: Exploring Hindutva Masculinities” (28-56), Prem Vijayan
presents “a distinction between patriarchy as masculine hegemony,
and the individual hegemonic forms of masculinity that constitute
that patriarchy” (28) in post-Independence India, to conclude
that the understanding of development and modernity in terms of
industrialisation, a model inherited or borrowed from the affluent
“West”, had devastating consequences on the construction
of gendered identities. While the blurring of the line of divide
between public and private proved beneficial to women, who could
then claim for more social recognition, it also spurred men to relocate
masculinism into new domains, for instance in technological and
scientific knowledge and know-how. However, many men were left out
from this preserve—the young, the old, the infirm and all
sorts of oppressed individuals from specific castes, races or classes,
demonstrating that male hegemonic dominance is not universal. Still,
for the proto-Hindutva (Hindu nationalism), gaining access to power
meant re-colonizing the country, at the expense of some communities.
Backed up by the British legacy which divided the legislative and
judicial fields into common-law and personal-law spheres, they also
managed to control women by relegating them to the private sphere,
thus achieving a patriarchal system founded on the warrior code.
To conclude, Vijayan notes that the conception of Hinduism as a
modern religion attracted many young Indians who could then feel
contemporary to the western world without renouncing their roots.
In
“Collapsing Masculinities and Weak States—a Case Study
of Northern Uganda” (57-83), Chris Dolan examines how a violent
context combines with a traditional model of masculinity to repress
any attempt at defining alternative masculinities. In Northern Uganda,
the weakness of the state government and the endemic state of ethnic
war have led to the creation of a culture of violence, where the
dividing lines run between victims and perpetrators of acts of cruelty.
Soldiers are in a position of domination over both males and females
and their financial superiority secures them free access to women,
when they do not choose to resort to rape. The government ignores
their crimes and encourages young civilians to resort to violence
in order to assert themselves in a society which denies them most
ways to social recognition. Indeed, in such a situation, ordinary
citizens fail to offer protection to their wives and could no longer
guarantee that some children are theirs. To make matters worse,
they are unable to support their families as work is scarce, thus
they fail to answer the hegemonic definition of masculinity, and
see their lived experiences in terms of failure. Dolan points out
that all this violence serves the purpose of the state by justifying
military presence everywhere, thus exerting physical as well as
psychological control over both civilians and soldiers.
In
“Lenin, the Pinguero, and Cuban Imaginings of Maleness
in Times of Scarcity” (84-111), David Forrest shows the impact
of tourism on “Cuban Imaginings of Maleness” (84), by
relating the itinerary of young Cuban males who have to adapt to
their socio-political “subjects positions” (88), thus
opening a case study that once more comes as a denial of definite
male identity. Dealing with virility, Forrest refers to the bugarrón,
a male figure with irresistible sexual urges involving active penetrative
sex with other men and animals, when no woman can be obtained—so-called
homosexuals view him rather as an example of latent homosexuality
or bisexuality. This local figure has been turned into an asset
in Cuba’s prosperous tourist industry, and many poor males
act out the bugarrón part in order to attract rich
Americans’ eyes and much-coveted dollars, a phenomenon called
jineterismo (referring to the riding of a horse—here,
the tourist). Because this performance does not automatically imply
sexual intercourse, it is seen as a palatable alternative for prostitution
by locals, tourists and the state, even though US dollars evade
collection by the state tourist industry. It is significant that
jineterismo emphasizes the tourists’ passiveness,
thus their victimization and the Cuban possibility to claim for
unimpaired masculinity, though set in a specific context where square
machismo seems a complete impossibility.
In
“Deconstructing Domination: Gender Disempowerment and the
Legacy of Colonialism and Apartheid in Omaheke, Namibia” (112-137),
Niki Kandirikirira examines the “legacy of systemic societal
discrimination based on race and ethnicity” (112) in a Namibian
community, where “hunting” (the storming of school hostels
and subsequent rape of girl residents by young males) was condoned
and considered as a sign of masculinity, as young males regularly
got drunk and fought to assert themselves while adult men’s
promiscuity, including with young girls, was a current fact. Thus,
the exploitation of women turned into a sign of masculinity, and
violence—domestic or not—directed against women tended
to be seen as normative. This, Kandirikirira argues, may be seen
as a case of patriarchy “manipulated by systems of exclusion
such as racism, ethnocentrism and class” (116) and reinforced
by apartheid experience, so that adults try to refrain the young
males’ claim for new rights, and the Herero rank higher than
the Tswana, who in their turn enjoy a higher status than the San.
It is through understanding how much this system affects males’
identity and works against social progress and human rights that
people eventually demand equal relations “not only between
women and men, but between races, ethnicities, classes and ages”(116).
This deconstruction aims at showing how relative gender identities
are, which is now a well-established fact. By attending forum theatre
camps, people realized to what extent economic pressures induced
by the state finally resulted in irresponsible, destructive behaviour,
laying the foundations for more problems. Kandirikirira however
notes that the situation has been much improved, thanks to this
“mass therapy” (135).
In
“Men in Women’s Groups: a Gender and Agency Analysis
of Local Institution” (138-165), Helen Hambly Odame considers
the presence and power of males within the 23,614 rural women’s
self-help groups in Kenya engaged in the purchase and resale of
grains and vegetables, crop production, tree nursery and tree planting
in the mid-1990s. The women’s groups organize at local level
but also have to deal with larger structures—governmental
and non-governmental—so they often rely on men to brief them,
represent them and carry out negotiations or file requests with
the authorities. The 20 per cent male membership, supposedly more
educated and defter negotiators, mainly consist of farmers who try
to derive some personal profit from the projects, and often prove
to be the chairladies’ husbands, showing a more or less humble
profile as “shadow executive[s]” (155). In other words,
the group duplicates the general patriarchal pattern, encouraged
to do so by the idea that men are so to speak the natural interlocutors
and representatives for the group. Yet, the influence of males has
proved counter-productive in a number of occasions, at times resulting
in the abandonment of the group by some women, or worse, by all
members.
In
“Boys will be Boys: Addressing the Social Construction of
Gender” (166-185), Marilyn Thomson tackles the problem of
the construction of masculinity through education, the media, the
family and the peer group, seen as coherent factors of socialization
throughout the world. She takes up the little-disputed idea that
“gender stereotypes begin from the moment we are born and
are identified as either a boy or a girl” (168). Then, she
stresses the emergence of new patterns of behaviour as socio-historical
changes take place, including the introduction of the feminist paradigm,
making former models irrelevant or inaccessible. In consequence,
due to contradictory messages, males sometimes seem “fragile”,
and may turn to violence to reinstate their former domination. What
seems more striking is that when asked to differentiate between
men and women, most children will refer to anatomy first, but quickly
turn to conflicting behavioural and psychological patterns. Once
more, conducted workshops set out to challenge gender stereotypes
and fight the biased models boys find at home or in the street.
Children also received information and became aware of the negative
impact of their behaviour on themselves and on others while they
were taught to improve their ability to communicate. Of course,
the rampant epidemic of AIDS remains one of the major targets of
the organisers, but so are drug use and delinquency. Thomson concludes
by listing some solutions to gender bias, such as the reconfiguration
of the media within a gender equality framework, dialogue with both
boys and girls, involvement of parents and teachers, avoiding frustration
and encouraging free speech, particularly concerning feelings. She
finally underlines the need to face the construction of masculinity,
and not to focus exclusively on ways to empower girls and women.
In
“Why Do Dogs Lick their Balls? Gender, Desire and Change—a
Case Study from Vietnam” (186-208), Neil Doyle shows “how
the constructions of gender […] facilitate and constrain the
individual agency of women and men” (186), but also how diverse
men’s attitudes can be, to conclude that “if men are
a problem it is certainly not all men all of the time” (186).
Eventually, he insists on the importance of sexual desire outside
the social paradigm and claims that “the fate of men and their
sexed bodies are inextricably linked” (188), putting in perspective
the feminist conception of masculine sexuality seen as a mode of
domination over women. Doyle proceeds to introduce the key notion
of negotiation, since society is ridden with ambiguity and indeterminacy.
He questions the habit of using anatomy as the basis for gender
division, as it introduces a stereotyped dichotomy that leaves no
room to conceive of continuities and discontinuities between individuals.
Of course, women tend to integrate men’s prejudices, to please
them, meet social expectations and build their sense of identity
as women, for instance concerning virginity. However, men are also
under pressure, and qualify as males in proportion as they manage
to satisfy their partners sexually. Furthermore, a sexually active
woman tends to threaten their self-image and self-esteem. In other
words, a man’s masculinity heavily depends on other people’s
judgement. Doyle finally shows that learning more about women’s
sexuality and bodies as well as their own has helped many men working
on the CARE International program for the promotion of safer sex
to improve their relationships with women, as their wives could
confirm.
In
“Targeting Men for a Change: AIDS Discourse and Activism in
Africa” (209-234), Janet Bujra shifts perspectives and analyses
men’s (not women’s) responsibility in the spread of
AIDS epidemic, supporting her analysis on the fact that HIV transmission
in Africa is predominantly heterosexual. She notes that women are
vulnerable to males’ aggression and depend on their willingness
to use condoms and not to be promiscuous, stressing that the situation
may be the outcome of a deep-rooted cultural model. The fact that
men tend to have more partners than women all around the world could
induce the essentialist conclusion that it is in their genes, but
the status attaching to the womanizer comes to blur the issue, reports
Bujra, contrary to what Doyle claims in the previous contribution.
She then proceeds to relate the outcome of the work done in workshops
in Lushoto. First, she notices the relatively low rate of HIV in
a Muslim community. However, men refuse to use condoms, assuming
that it would be proof of the woman’s low life. In the same
way, they couldn’t bear to be made passive or instrumental
to women’s desire, and would soon reassert their authority
in case any of their wives shows too much of her own mind. In Lushoto
too, men identify themselves through their roles in relation to
sex, and “uncontrollable sexual urges” (220) mark them
as men. In such a framework, unplanned, casual sex is of the essence
for them, all the more so as their irresponsibility is generalized
at home, where they leave all the tasks—including the education
of children—to women. Even if males still feel reluctant to
use condoms on the ground that they “reduce pleasure”
(220) and are also rather hard to come by in Africa, mentalities
are changing, and family men now accept to talk about sex with their
children, to protect them from AIDS. Free condoms are given in “guest
houses”, and “peer educators” are trained to offer
advice and information in bars, leaving the thorny subject of gender
relationships aside, though. Bujra finally remarks that men’s
status can easily be reoriented without a loss in status if the
stress is laid on their roles as “custodians of family welfare,
as fathers secure in the birth of healthy offspring” (229).
This would amount to a change in paradigms, from the conquering
playboy to the mature father figure. Bujra ironically adds that
condoms can never solve the problems of hegemonic masculinity at
home, and that further work needs to be done.
Strongly
relying on existing critique, noticeably Gramsci’s work on
hegemony, the collection unsurprisingly does not attempt to build
heavy theoretical material. It offers a new set of data that complement
previous studies by changing perspectives and focusing on new areas
of the world. This is not altogether new either, but the contributions
still prove mind-stimulating and well-documented. The variety of
the contributors' backgrounds is a major asset and comes as a refreshing
change. No doubt Masculinities Matter! adds to the corpus
available to gender studies students and research workers, and the
approach will testify to the specific way research was carried out
during the early twenty-first century in gender and cultural studies.
