Warriors in suits: A Bourdieusian perspective on the construction and practice of military masculinity of Korean men

Abstract

Within masculinity scholarship, there is a gap about how masculinity carries over from a broad social context to an organizational context. This article explores the construction and capitalization of masculinity through a series of experiences in social fields such as the military and college, and the transfer of militaristic masculinity into the workplace. Drawing on grounded theory methods, we conducted in‐depth interviews with 20 Korean men who completed their mandatory two‐year military service and subsequently joined large corporations in Korea. We uncovered a four‐phase model that depicts how Korean men's masculinity is constructed during military service and transferred to their organizational positions characterizing them as warriors in suits. Informed by a Bourdieusian perspective, this study shows how masculinities are constructed, reinforced and legitimatized by the structural influences of society, and how masculinity becomes the desired image of men at work, which perpetuates the gender and power gaps among organizational members.

Identifying latent profiles based on three components of organizational commitment: multi-sample investigations in Korea

“…Koreans who are used to the culture of Confucian-based collectivism have learned to be loyal to their organization (Hong et al , 2016). In particular, Korean men have internalized the image of militaristic masculinity formed through mandatory military service (Lee et al , 2019), and this militaristic masculinity is considered a desirable attitude in organizations. In South Korean organizations, male leaders are the majority, so the male-centered and vertical organizational culture remains.…”

Pandemic and macho organizations: Wake‐up call or business as usual?

“…Historically, hegemonic masculinity has been strongly tied to social institutions such as the family, religion and work (Connell, 1993). Similar to the military (Karazi‐Presler, 2020; Lee, Shirmohammadi, Baumgartner, Oh, & Han, 2019) and fire departments (Perrott, 2019), hegemonic masculinity is distinctively prevalent in police organizations (see O’Neill, Mars, & Singh, 2007). This makes police organizations an ‘overwhelming masculine institution’ (Willis, 2013, p. 80) where the cult of masculinity is the defining characteristic of the police occupational culture (Fielding, 1994; Smith & Gray, 1985), even though there are places of resistance (Dick, 2015).…”

Migration, service work, and masculinity in the global South: Private security guards in post‐socialist China

“…Another body of research has explored men in masculinized occupations such as the military, policing, and firefighting (Lee et al, 2019;Perrott, 2019;Reid et al, 2018). The focus of this body of research is on the way in which wider social contexts shape the masculine subculture of work, and how this subculture in turn is being maintained and reproduced by individuals through social interactions and institutional practices.…”

“…For example, studies have explored the experience of men in women-dominated occupations such as nursing, clerical work, domestic work, and low-paid interactive service work (Näre, 2010;Solari, 2006). Other studies have examined the construction of masculinity in "sexualized, celebrated, and elevated" male-dominated occupations such as firefighting, the military, and private military security contractors (Higate, 2007(Higate, , 2012; Lee, Shirmohammadi, Baumgartner, Oh, & Han, 2019;Perrott, 2019;Reid, O'Neill, & Blair-Loy, 2018). Unlike these celebrated maledominated occupations, low-status, and low-paid private security guarding, while male-dominated, is heavily stigmatized (Sefalafala & Webster, 2013).…”

“…Seeley, (2017) presented a four‐part typology of hegemonic masculinity, alternative masculinity, critical masculinity and male femininity to understand how male administrative assistants performed their token status. Another body of research has explored men in masculinized occupations such as the military, policing, and firefighting (Lee et al., 2019; Perrott, 2019; Reid et al., 2018). The focus of this body of research is on the way in which wider social contexts shape the masculine subculture of work, and how this subculture in turn is being maintained and reproduced by individuals through social interactions and institutional practices.…”