What’s Right With Men? Gender Role Socialization and Men’s Positive Functioning

Abstract

This study explored relations between conformity to masculine norms, gender role conflict, hope, and psychological well-being among a sample of 389 men from a university, with a predominantly White student body, located in the Midwestern United States. Bivariate correlations revealed that men’s conformity to masculine norms and gender role conflict were positively correlated. Bivariate correlations revealed no significant relations between conformity to masculine norms, trait hope, and psychological well-being. Gender role conflict was associated with decreased hope and psychological well-being. Results of path analysis explained relations between conformity to masculine norms, gender role conflict, trait hope, and psychological well-being. This indicates that gender role conflict may contribute to lower trait hope and psychological well-being for college men. Although several aspects of conformity to masculine norms had positive associations with hope, these relations were significant and negative when men experienced gender role conflict. This work fills an important gap in the literature by examining the unique relations of conformity to masculine norms and gender role conflict to men’s positive functioning. Results are discussed within the context of positive psychological theories including Frederickson’s broaden and build theory of positive emotions, hope theory, Ryff’s model of psychological well-being, and self-determination theory. Implications and future directions are discussed.

Psychology of Men and Masculinities’ focus on positive aspects of men’s functioning: A content analysis and call to action.

“…Efforts to identify positive masculine role norms have been successful in identifying themes related to positive masculinity (e.g., male service, bravery, and being a provider; McDermott et al, 2019). These findings are consistent with past research indicating that moderate expressions of traditional masculinity may be perceived as positive and adaptive (e.g., Cole et al, 2018; Hammer & Good, 2010; McDermott et al, 2019).…”

“…It is noteworthy that the highest frequency of articles with a positive focus (i.e., by total number and not by percentage) have occurred in 5 of the last 6 years reviewed in this analysis (see Table 2). Collectively, these results suggest that, despite recent calls that greater research and clinical attention be given to positive dimensions of masculinity (Cole et al, 2018; Englar-Carlson & Kiselica, 2013; Hammer & Good, 2010; Kiselica et al, 2016; Kiselica & Englar-Carlson, 2010; O’Neil, 2012), positive psychology is underrepresented in the men and masculinities scholarship…”

Mitos del amor romántico en adolescentes: relación con el sexismo y variables procedentes de la socialización

“…Más de la mitad de la muestra estaba de acuerdo con el mito de la pasión eterna, y más de un tercio, con los mitos de la media naranja y de la omnipotencia. Las diferencias entre chicos y chicas evidencian la influencia de la socialización diferencial en la transmisión de normas de género (Bonilla-Algovia y Rivas-Rivero, 2018;Cole et al, 2019;McCarthy et al, 2018). Las chicas estaban más de acuerdo con que el amor es ciego y con que la pasión inicial debería durar siempre, mientras que los chicos consideraban en mayor medida que los celos son una prueba de amor, que se puede amar a quien se maltrata y que se puede maltratar a quien se ama.…”

“…Las personas aprenden a adaptarse al entorno en la medida en la que adquieren normas culturales a través del aprendizaje social (Cole et al, 2019;García-Pérez et al, 2016) y, en este proceso, pueden desarrollarse valores desigualitarios. El sistema sexo-género mantiene y refuerza la desigualdad entre hombres y mujeres a través de distintas herramientas, prácticas institucionales e interacciones sociales, en las que intervienen distintos agentes en contextos muy diversos, como la familia, la escuela, la religión, las relaciones sociales y la comunidad, entre otros (Bonilla-Algovia y Rivas-Rivero, 2018;McCarthy et al, 2018).…”

Masculine contingency and rape myth acceptance in heterosexual men: Hope as a moderator?

“…Specifically, masculine threat negatively predicted self-esteem, whereas masculine boost positively predicted self-esteem (Burkley et al, 2016). In the absence of gender role conflict, adherence to masculine norms may be adaptive and increases hope (Cole et al, 2018). Contingencies of self-worth can also provide motivation during confirmations of self-esteem but distress during self-esteem threats (Crocker et al, 2006).…”