Masculinities and Femicide

James W. Messerschmidt

doi:10.18778/1733-8077.13.3.05

Authors

James W. Messerschmidt University of Southern Maine, U.S.A.

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18778/1733-8077.13.3.05

Keywords:

Hegemonic Masculinity, Dominant Masculinity, Dominating Masculinity, Positive Masculinity, Intimate Partner Femicide, “Honor” Femicide, Patriarchy

Abstract

The relationship between masculinity and femicide has been virtually ignored in the literature on both masculinities and femicide. The aim of this paper then is to concentrate on the relationship between masculinities and femicide by first briefly summarizing feminist theorizing in the 1970s and 1980s and its relation to the emergence of Raewyn Connell’s concept of “hegemonic masculinity.” Following that, new directions in scholarly work on hegemonic and non-hegemonic masculinities are discussed, with particular attention directed to the recent work of the author on the relationship among hegemonic, dominant, dominating, and positive masculinities. Finally, the paper concludes by briefly illustrating how this new conception of masculinities can be applied to two types of femicide: intimate partner femicide and so-called “honor” femicides.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

James W. Messerschmidt, University of Southern Maine, U.S.A.

James W. Messerschmidt is a Professor of Sociology in the Sociology, Criminology, and Economics Department at the University of Southern Maine. In addition to over fifty articles and book chapters, he has authored eleven books, most recently Masculinities in the Making (Rowman & Littlefield 2016) and Crime as Structured Action: Doing Masculinities, Race, Class, Sexuality, and Crime (Rowman & Littlefield 2014). In 2011, he received the “Outstanding Feminist Faculty Award” from the Women and Gender Studies Program at the University of Southern Maine for his notable contributions to scholarship in gender studies, and in 2012, he received the “Outstanding Alumni Award” from San Diego State University for his distinguished scholarly contributions to sociology, criminology, and gender studies. His current projects include a historical examination of the transition from patriarchy to gender in feminist theory and the relation among reflexivity and habit/routine in gender practice.

References

Acker, Joan. 1989. “The Problem with Patriarchy.” Sociology 23:235-240. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038589023002005

Adams, David. 2007. Why Do They Kill? Men Who Murder Their Intimate Partners. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv16755mq

Beasley, Christine. 2008. “Re-Thinking Hegemonic Masculinity in a Globalizing World.” Men and Masculinities 11:86-103. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1097184X08315102

Beechey, Veronica. 1987. Unequal Work. London: Verso.

Begikhani, Nazand, Aisha K. Gill, and Gill Hague. 2015. Honour-Based Violence: Experiences and Counter-Strategies in Iraqi Kurdistan and the UK Kurdish Diaspora. Burlington, VT: Ashgate.

Campbell, Jacquelyn C. et. al. 2007. “Intimate Partner Homicide: Review and Implications of Research and Policy.” Trauma, Violence, and Abuse 8(3):246-269. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1524838007303505

Connell, Raewyn. 1985. “Theorizing Gender.” Sociology 19:260-272. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038585019002008

Connell, Raewyn. 1987. Gender and Power. Sydney: Allen and Unwin.

Connell, Raewyn. 1995. Masculinities. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Connell, Rawyn and James W. Messerschmidt. 2005. “Hegemonic Masculinity: Rethinking the Concept.” Gender & Society 19:829-859. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243205278639

Dobash, R. Emerson and Russell P. Dobash. 2015. When Men Murder Women. New York: Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199914784.001.0001

Dogan, Recep. 2016. “The Dynamics of Honor Killings and the Perpetrators’ Experiences.” Homicide Studies 20(1): 53-79. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1088767914563389

Dworkin, Andrea. 1979. Pornography: Men Possessing Women. New York: Plume.

Dworkin, Andrea. 1987. Intercourse. New York: Free Press.

Eisenstein, Zillah, (ed.). 1979. Capitalist Patriarchy and the Case for Socialist Feminism. New York: Monthly Review Press.

Gill, Aisha K., Carolyn Strange, and Karl Roberts, (eds.). 2014. “Honour” Killing and Violence: Theory, Policy and Practice. New York: Palgrave. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137289568

Goussinsky, Ruhama and Dalit Yassour-Borochowitz. 2012. “‘I Killed Her, But I Never Laid a Finger on Her’ — A Phenomenological Difference between Wife-Killing and Wife-Battering.” Aggression and Violent Behavior 17(6): 553-564. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2012.07.009

Grzyb, Magdalena A. 2016. “An Explanation of Honour-Related Killings of Women in Europe through Bourdieu’s Concept of Symbolic Violence and Masculine Domination.” Current Sociology 64(7):1036-1053. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0011392115627479

MacKinnon, Catherine. 1979. Sexual Harassment of Working Women. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

MacKinnon, Catherine. 1989. Toward a Feminist Theory of the State. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Martin, Pat. 1998. “Why Can’t a Man Be More Like a Woman? Reflections on Connell’s Masculinities.” Gender and Society 12(4):472-474. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/089124398012004008

Messerschmidt, James W. 1993. Masculinities and Crime. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

Messerschmidt, James W. 2012. “Engendering Gendered Knowledge: Assessing the Academic Appropriation of Hegemonic Masculinity.” Men and Masculinities 15: 56-76. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1097184X11428384

Messerschmidt, James W. 2016. Masculinities in the Making. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

Radford, Jill and Diana E. H. Russell, (eds.). 1992. Femicide: The Politics of Woman Killing. New York: Twayne.

Rowbotham, Sheila. 1981. “The Trouble with ‘Patriarchy.’” Pp. 364-373 in People’s History and Socialist Theory, edited by R. Samuel. Boston: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Schippers, Mimi. 2007. “Recovering the Feminine Other: Masculinity, Femininity, and Gender Hegemony.” Theory & Society 36:85-102. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11186-007-9022-4