When Is Masculinity “Fragile”? An Expectancy-Discrepancy-Threat Model of Masculine Identity

Abstract

Academic Abstract Manhood is a precarious social status. Under perceived gender identity threat, men are disproportionately likely to enact certain stereotype-consistent responses such as aggression to maintain their gender status. Yet less is known regarding individual variation in men’s threat responsiveness—that is, the psychological conditions under which one’s masculine identity is more or less “fragile.” We propose a novel model of masculine identity whereby masculine norm expectancy generates discrepancy within the self to the extent that rigid norms are internalized as obligational (actual-ought discrepancy) versus aspirational (actual-ideal discrepancy), which predict extrinsic versus intrinsic motivations to reduce these discrepancies, respectively. Under threat, then, extrinsic motivations predict externalized responses (e.g., aggression), and intrinsic motivations elicit internalized responses (e.g., anxiety, shame, self-harm). We also consider the conditions under which masculinity may be less fragile—for example, in contexts with less rigid expectations and among men who reject expectations—as pathways to mitigate adverse masculinity threat-related outcomes. Public Abstract In many cultures, men prove their manhood by engaging in behaviors that harm themselves and others (e.g., violence, sexism, homophobia), particularly people from marginalized groups. Yet less is known about why some men are more likely than others to enact these masculinity-proving behaviors. The goal of our model is to specify certain conditions under which masculinities become “fragile” and elicit these responses when under threat. We start by describing the rigid expectations men experience—for example, that they are strong and tough. We propose that these expectations cause men to experience different forms of discrepancy within themselves that produce corresponding motivations to reduce these discrepancies. Under threat, motivations driven by others’ expectations elicit outward attempts to restore masculine status (e.g., aggression), whereas motivations driven by self-ideals cause internalized responses (e.g., shame, self-harm). We conclude by discussing how to reduce these discrepancies, such as mitigating the rigidity of and encouraging men’s resistance to masculinity expectations.

‘If She Can, All of You Can’: Violence as a Restoration of the Male Mandate in Vocational Education Training

“…Nevertheless, we believe that using violence, in any of its forms, as a strategy to reinforce the male mandate in VET in Transport and Vehicle Maintenance points to the very fragility of masculinity [52][53][54], spurred by the arrival of the bodies of women who prove to have automotive skills and knowledge. Nonetheless, just as we have emphasized throughout these pages, these women exercise their agency and resistance against this violence.…”

Are beliefs about “being a man” associated with White men’s self-perceptions about confronting racism?

“…Men in the United States are socialized to conform to masculinity norms from a young age (Stanaland et al, 2023). In the current U.S. cultural context, masculinity norms demand that men be dominant, aggressive, and stoic, stringently heterosexual and nonfeminine, and restrict their expression of emotion (Stanaland et al, 2023).…”

“…Men in the United States are socialized to conform to masculinity norms from a young age (Stanaland et al, 2023). In the current U.S. cultural context, masculinity norms demand that men be dominant, aggressive, and stoic, stringently heterosexual and nonfeminine, and restrict their expression of emotion (Stanaland et al, 2023). These normative standards are not easily met by most men, and as a result, men often enact behaviors intended to “prove” their masculinity (Connell & Messerschmidt, 2005; Vandello & Bosson, 2013).…”

Traditional masculinities and men’s sexism: A meta-analysis.

“…On the other hand, the expectancy–discrepancy–threat model of masculine identity (Stanaland et al, 2023) allows one to consider different forms of TM as links in the same chain that connects the presence of rigid masculine norms in society with psychological reactions to the threat of masculinity. According to this model, sexism is a direct response to gender role stress; therefore, it can be assumed that gender role stress would be more strongly associated with sexism than TMI and conformity to masculine norms would.…”

“…Researchers theorize that TM has an impact on men’s beliefs, emotions, and behavior. For example, the authors of the expectancy–discrepancy–threat model of masculine identity (Stanaland et al, 2023) consider communities where rigid masculinity norms are common. They make a distinction between men who reject these norms and men who see them as self-guides.…”