Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Men, Masculinity and Gender in Development': Andrea Cornwall
Men, Masculinity and Gender in Development': Andrea Cornwall
rticles and train ing materials difference, and which return to the basic
cultures (see, for example, MacCormack Woman, the mainstream feminism was
and Strathern 1980, Moore 1988). disregarding differences between women:
In development, `gender’ came to refer black, non-Western, working-class and
to the socially constructed relations lesbian women had their own struggles
between women and men. The concept of and faced other prejudices (see, for
GAD offered a new approach to including example, Moraga and Anzaldua, 1981).
women in the develop ment process; Western feminism and its category `woman’
gender training became a `means by which was of relevance only to particular kinds
feminist advocates and practitioners... of women and, some writers argued, failed
{sought} to de-institutionalise male to take account of the context of women’s
privilege within development policy and situations (see, for example, Mohanty, 1987).
plannin g’ (Kabeer 1995:264). `Gender On the other hand, if one cou ld no
analysis’ offered tools for investigating longer talk of universals such as `male
the material bases of difference between dominance’ or `women’s oppression’, and
women and men. Yet, gender analysis if it was philosophically unsound to
tells us very little about how gender continue to assert broad-ranging theories
identities and roles are experienced by about women’s experience, then it seemed
in dividual women and men within that there was little space left for feminist
communities. Rather, it is used to politics. While in the early 1980s, some
delineate distinctions between what feminist writers had began to question the
women-in-general and men-in-general sex/gender distinction that had become
do, in order to guide planners. Sexual so fashionable (see, for example, Gatens
difference is taken as the starting point for 1983), by now, debates about the
analysis, and gross commonalities among usefulness of a category `woman’ and the
women and men are presumed. This concept of `gender’ for activism raised
cru de and sim plistic form of analy sis further thorny questions (see, for example,
offers little in the way of understanding Scott 1989).
the dynamics of difference in commu-
nities. It tells us nothing of relationships
among women and among men, nor of the
U s e fu l n e w c o n ce p ts
in tersection of gender with other The gulf between the academic world and
differences such as age, status and wealth. those working in applied or activist fields
has widened as complex theoretical
language and concepts have come to
B r in g in g n e w th in k in g in to dominate feminist writing. Dressed up in
d e v e lo p m e n t p ra c tice complicated terms and swathed in
While feminist theory has moved on and obscure language, much theoretical work
become more sophisticated, the impact of on gender has become almost completely
new thinking on development practice inaccessible to a casual ou tsider. In
has been limited. Tracking the ideas that essence, however, a lot of recent gender
have influenced GAD back to academia theory seems like common sense. We all
offers some insights into the shortcomings know from our own experience that how
of current practice. we feel or behave as women or men is
By the early 1980s, there was consid- influenced by the many different
erable unease in feminist circles about the messages we receive from others about
ways in which `women’ were being what is acceptable or appropriate; that
constructed in feminist writing. It became over our lives, being a woman or man has
apparent that by focusing on Universal different dimensions and that in different
10 Gender and Development
associated with masculinity could men femininity. Not all men benefit from and
reprieve themselves. It is hardly any wonder subscribe to dominant values. `Hegemonic
that many men found this difficult. Not masculinity’ can be just as oppressive for
only were they told that they should give those men who refuse, or fail, to conform.
up positions that put them at an advan- Yet, these men are often im plicitly
tage, they were left without anything to excluded from being part of processes of
value about being men. changing and confronting gender inequality
Writings on men and on questions of because they are male.
masculinity are relatively recent, reflect- Gender and Development work currently
ing a belated recognition that men also offers little scope for men’s involvement.
have gender identities. Over the last Resistance to messages about what may
decade, however, a great deal has been be interpreted as `women’s issues’ makes
written on and by men. Some of this work more sense if the failure to adequately
could be seen as rather self-seeking, and analyse and address men’ s experiences
lacks the critical edge evident in feminist and gender identities is taken into account.
work. There are, however, a number of Without an approach to difference that
excellent contributions to this field that moves beyond static generalisations and
have much to offer practitioners, such as works with and from personal experience
Connell’s (1987, 1995) work. In an influential to open up spaces for change, men will
early article, Carrigan, Connell and Lee continue to be left on the sidelines and
(1985) outlined a theory of masculinity remain `the problem’.
that drew on some of this recent thinking
to argue that although there are many
ways of being a man, some are valued
Im p lic a tio n s f o r p ra c tic e
more than others and men experience So how can these theoretical tools be
social pressure to conform to dominant useful to practitioners dealing with the
ideas about being a man. They termed this concrete everyday problems of develop-
`hegemonic masculinity’ . Not all men ment work? Firstly, they offer ways to
conform to the `hegemonic’ version; those build greater awareness of the challenges
who do not may find themselves disadvan- that men may face in coming to terms with
taged, and even discriminated against. changing identities and practices. If certain
W here the concept of `hegemonic ways of being a man are culturally valued,
masculinity’ is most valuable is in showing then asking men to abandon these identities
that it is not men per se, but certain ways altogether without having anything of
of being and behaving, that are associated value to hold on to is clearly unreasonable.
with dominance and power. In each cultural But if men become aware that in their own
context, the ways in which masculinity is everyday lives they are already behaving
associated with power varies (Cornwall differently in different settings without
and Lindisfarne 1994). Some ways of being losing a sense of their own identities, then
a man are valued more than others. But it may be easier to recognise some of the
this is not to say that all men behave in this implications of `hegemonic masculinity’
way. Attributes that are associated with without feeling attacked or threatened.
masculinity are not always associated with Secondly, by demonstrating that many
men: women too can possess some of these men do not actually match up to idealised
attributes. Not all men, then, have power; forms of masculinity, spaces can be
and not all of those who have power are men. opened up for reflection about how men
In each cultural context there is a range can be disempowered or marginalised.
of available models of masculinity or Rather than tarring all men with the same
12 Gender and Development