Undermining the Moral Obligations of Manhood Acts

Abstract

Hybrid masculinities—men's integration of previously marginalized characteristics into acceptable performances of manhood—are emergent in contemporary gender studies. While some scholars see egalitarian promise in these configurations of manhood, their utility in improving gender equality is contested. Drawing from an ethnography of a profeminist Batterer Intervention Program (BIP), I utilize prominent symbolic interactionist theories to explore how men in the program were resocialized to a hybrid hegemonic masculinity. I position defining the situation as fundamental to manhood acts and show how rules in the BIP alter establishment of the working consensus, prompting resocialization even when participants reject ideological or educational program content. The process of resocialization is bolstered by masculinity affirmations deployed when men exhibit desired traits, but undermined by false indicators of change and protective practices deployed by other men. At their most severe, these patterns resulted in symbolic egalitarians—men who promptly adopt the progressive sign‐equipment of the hybrid masculinity, but actively shore up their gendered power. I conclude that awareness of these processes can improve men's interventions, and demonstrate the effectiveness of symbolic interactionism for explaining how hybrid masculinities result in various fields of egalitarian outcomes informed by other theories of masculinity.