Macro Cultural Psychology

Ratner, Carl

doi:10.1007/978-1-4614-5583-7_413

Cited by 7 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In psychology and related disciplines, masculinity is often used to reflect intrapersonal characteristics that are possessed, internalized, or considered to reflect the essence of individual men (Gough, Robertson, & Robinson, 2016; Robertson et al, 2016), but gender and other structural forces operate at local, regional, and global levels to shape psychological factors, identities, and responses (Ratner, 2014). A purely psychological approach to conceptualizing masculinity has failed to recognize how gender practices are shaped by social and cultural factors (Creighton & Oliffe, 2010), and this individual-level method of operationalizing and measuring masculinity has been critiqued for reducing masculinity to a few measurable traits that are presumed to govern the lives and experiences of all men (Connell, 1995; Griffith, Gunter, & Watkins, 2012; Hearn, 2004).…”

Section: Masculinity Versus Masculinities Versus Manhoodmentioning

confidence: 99%

“What defines a man?”: Perspectives of African American men on the components and consequences of manhood.

Cornish¹

2018

Psychology of Men & Masculinity

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

What it means to be man is shaped by racial, ethnic, and cultural factors. In this paper, we explore what determines and comprises middle-aged and older African American men's definitions of manhood. Using a thematic approach, we examined the semantic differences noted in the verbs chosen to define a man, the characteristics that were most important to how they saw themselves, and the characteristics that were most important to them to portray to others. Analyzing data from 64 interviews with urban African American men 35-76 from the Southeastern United States, we found that manhood was a concept that reflected key characteristics and traits, demonstrated deeper qualities or attributes, and revealed their inherent nature or character. While previous research sought to identify attributes of manhood that defined adult African American males, the current study was conducted to characterize how middle-aged and older African American men defined manhood and its key components through exploring how they wanted to see themselves and what traits they wanted to portray to others. What a man is or should be was defined by attributes that reflected a foundation of character that not only exemplified gendered values, goals, and roles, but that also demonstrated religious and cultural values and beliefs. For these men, manhood was more than a compilation of traits but a reflection of who they were at a deeper level. These ideals were rooted in an amalgamation of gendered ideals, cultural norms, religious doctrine and beliefs, and age-related priorities.

show abstract

Section: Masculinity Versus Masculinities Versus Manhoodmentioning

confidence: 99%

“What defines a man?”: Perspectives of African American men on the components and consequences of manhood.

Cornish¹

2018

Psychology of Men & Masculinity

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The social institutions, cultural concepts and cultural artefacts remain in dialectic relationship to form the origins and characteristics of multiple psychological phenomena such as emotions, maternal love, sexuality, memory, reasoning, anger, perception, development process, love or hatred for any country and mental illness. (Ratner, 2012).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perceiving the Enemy Differently: A Psycho-cultural Analysis of Pakistan–India Conflict

Kadir

2019

Journal of Asian Security and International Affairs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

By using an interdisciplinary approach, this article seeks to examine Pakistan–India partition and their on-going rivalry which is a permanent threat to the South Asian regional security. This article analyses the Pakistan–India conflict through a fresh psycho-cultural framework to explain both states’ endless competitive urge to outpace each other. I will describe the attributes of the indigenous ‘culture of conflict’ in both countries and use them as an ‘analogy’. This article develops a conflict theory to explain the rationale behind such an emotion-laden rivalry between the two nations. The conflict theory presented in this article (which can be termed as Sharike-Bazi [Culture of Conflict]) explains that peoples’ conflict behaviours in Pakistan and India are rooted in their earliest socialisation within primary kinship institutions. In Pakistan and India, the indigenous ‘culture of conflict’ emanates from the segmentation of the most pervasive and influential institutions, the kinship institutions. The moralities of conflict behaviour learned within these institutions are extrapolated to every other institution in the outside world. Therefore, psychologically, the indigenous ‘culture of conflict’ creates certain moral views affecting the conflict behaviour of people as well as policymakers. It provides them with cultural moralities to pursue this zero-sum interstate conflict.

show abstract

Communal Self: A Central Reconceptualization to Dismantle Colonial Structures and Practices of Mental Health and Wellness

Lacerda-Vandenborn

2023

The Palgrave Encyclopedia of Critical Perspectives on Mental Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Macro Cultural Psychology

Cited by 7 publications

References 22 publications

“What defines a man?”: Perspectives of African American men on the components and consequences of manhood.

“What defines a man?”: Perspectives of African American men on the components and consequences of manhood.

Perceiving the Enemy Differently: A Psycho-cultural Analysis of Pakistan–India Conflict

Communal Self: A Central Reconceptualization to Dismantle Colonial Structures and Practices of Mental Health and Wellness

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About