Читать книгу Violent Manhood - J. E. Sumerau - Страница 10

1.

For further elaboration and examples of my autoethnographic writing about sexualities, gender, violence, and health over time, see Nowakowski and Sumerau, “Out of the Shadows”; Nowakowski and Sumerau, “Aging Partners Managing Chronic Illness Together”; Nowakowski and Sumerau, “Reframing Health and Illness”; Nowakowski and Sumerau, “Should We Talk about the Pain?”; Sumerau, “I See Monsters”; Sumerau, “Embodying Nonexistence”; and Sumerau and Mathers, America through Transgender Eyes. See also my posts on the academic blog www.writewhereithurts.net, such as Sumerau, “Experiencing Gender Variation.”

2.

I use this term because, due to pervasive cisnormativity in society (i.e., a social world wherein people are taught to see only cisgender women and men), people are trained to only see cisgender people and thus often read others as members of cisgender groups whether the said others ever identify in such a way themselves. Thus, although I do not identify as a man, people may read me or interpret me as such based on their determination of what it means to be a man in a cisgender social order (see also West and Zimmerman, “Doing Gender”).

3.

For background in these research areas see, for example, Connell, “Doing, Undoing, or Redoing Gender?”; Connell and Messerschmidt, “Hegemonic Masculinity”; Goffman, “The Arrangement between the Sexes”; Moon, Tobin, and Sumerau, “Alpha, Omega, and the Letters in Between”; Ridgeway, Framed by Gender; West and Fenstermaker, “Doing Difference”; and West and Zimmerman, “Doing Gender.”

4.

For discussion of this element in the social sciences and humanities, see Butler, Gender Trouble; Serano, Whipping Girl; and Smith, The Everyday World as Problematic. For such discussion in the physical sciences, see Fausto-Sterling, Sexing the Body.

5.

For my scholarship to date on men and masculinities, see Cragun and Sumerau, “No One Expects a Transgender Jew”; Cragun and Sumerau, “Men Who Hold More Egalitarian Attitudes”; Sumerau, “That’s What a Man Is Supposed to Do”; Sumerau, Barringer, and Cragun, “I Don’t Need a Shotgun”; Sumerau, Cragun, and Mathers, “Contemporary Religion and the Cisgendering of Reality”; Sumerau, Cragun, and Mathers, “I Found God in the Glory Hole”; Sumerau, Cragun, and Smith, “Men Never Cry”; Sumerau, Padavic, and Schrock, “Little Girls Unwilling to Do What’s Best.” For reviews and collections of other scholarship on men and masculinities see, for example, Connell, Gender and Power; Connell, Masculinities; Connell, The Men and the Boys; Connell and Messerschmidt, “Hegemonic Masculinity”; Pascoe and Bridges, Exploring Masculinities; Schrock and Padavic, “Negotiating Hegemonic Masculinity”; and Schrock and Schwalbe, “Men, Masculinity, and Manhood Acts.”

6.

For work on the social production of what we call manhood or masculinities, see, for example, Barber and Bridges, “Marketing Manhood in a ‘Post-Feminist’ Age”; Carrigan, Connell, and Lee, “Toward a New Sociology of Masculinity”; Connell, Gender and Power; Connell, Masculinities; Connell, The Men and the Boys; Connell and Messerschmidt, “Hegemonic Masculinity”; Eastman and Schrock, “Southern Rock Musicians’ Construction of White Trash”; Evans and Davies, “No Sissy Boys Here”; Ezzell, “I’m in Control”; Ezzell, “Pornography, Lad Mags, Video Games, and Boys”; Ferguson, Bad Boys; Goffman, “The Arrangement”; Johnson, The Gender Knot; Linneman, “How Do You Solve a Problem Like Will Truman?”; Martin, “Mobilizing Masculinities”; Martin, “‘Said and Done’ versus ‘Saying and Doing’”; Messerschmidt, “Becoming ‘Real Men’”; Messner, “Boyhood, Organized Sports, and the Construction of Masculinities”; Messner, Out of Play; Messner, Power at Play; Pascoe, Dude, You’re a Fag; Pascoe and Bridges, Exploring Masculinities; Prokos and Padavic, “There Oughtta Be a Law against Bitches”; Schrock and Padavic, “Negotiating Hegemonic Masculinity”; Schrock and Schwalbe, “Men, Masculinity, and Manhood Acts”; and West and Zimmerman, “Doing Gender.”

7.

See also Acker, “Inequality Regimes”; Buggs, “(Dis)Owning Exotic”; Buggs, “Does (Mixed-)Race Matter?”; Butler, Gender Trouble; Collins, Black Feminist Thought; Collins, Black Sexual Politics; Crenshaw, “Mapping the Margins”; Martin, “Gender as a Social Institution”; Padavic and Reskin, Women and Men at Work; Ridgeway, Framed by Gender; Serano, Whipping Girl; and Sumerau and Mathers, America through Transgender Eyes.

8.

For discussion on the “becoming” of identities that exist within a given social world, and the processes whereby people draw on existing cultural archetypes to fashion identities, see Berger and Luckmann, The Social Construction of Reality; Garfinkel, Studies in Ethnomethodology; Goffman, Frame Analysis; Goffman, Interaction Ritual; Goffman, The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life; Loseke, “The Study of Identity”; McCall and Simmons, Identities and Interactions; and Schwalbe and Mason-Schrock, “Identity Work as Group Process.”

9.

For reviews of this literature, see, for example, Schrock, Sumerau, and Ueno, “Sexualities”; Schwalbe and Mason-Schrock, “Identity Work”; and Wolkomir, Be Not Deceived.

10.

For those unfamiliar with this reference, Dreadnought is a transgender superheroine and Harry Potter type of character in a young adult series of novels by April Daniels. She is also someone trans girls and women like myself may look up to and emulate and admire, like many people do with other superhero or fantasy characters. I could have utilized any number of characters from literature that children and adults emulate in the formation of identities (e.g., Harry Potter, religious figures in books deemed sacred by a given tradition, Superman), but I chose this one specifically as it is a character people like me admire and emulate but is less known to cisgender audiences.

11.

For examples from this literature, see Smith and Cragun, “Mapping Religion’s Other”; Sumerau and Cragun, “I Think Some People Need Religion”; Zuckerman, “Atheism, Secularity, and Well-Being”; and Zuckerman, Living the Secular Life.

12.

For the importance and relative absence of the topic of sex construction and assignment processes in society, see, for example, Davis, Contesting Intersex; Karkazis, Fixing Sex; Simula, Sumerau, and Miller, Expanding the Rainbow; and Sumerau and Mathers, America through Transgender Eyes.

13.

See again Pascoe and Bridges, Exploring Masculinities.

14.

See Sumerau, Barringer, and Cragun, “I Don’t Need a Shotgun,” for discussion of such scripts and representations in society.

15.

See again Schrock and Schwalbe, “Men, Masculinity, and Manhood Acts,” and Sumerau and Mathers, America through Transgender Eyes, for discussion on this point.

16.

West and Zimmerman, “Doing Gender”; see also Garfinkel, Studies in Ethnomethodology; Goffman, “The Arrangement”; Moon, Tobin, and Sumerau, “Alpha, Omega”; and Ridgeway, Framed by Gender.

17.

Thorne, Gender Play; see also Pascoe, Dude, You’re a Fag.

18.

See again Pascoe and Bridges, Exploring Masculinities, and Schrock and Schwalbe, “Men, Masculinity, and Manhood Acts,” for reviews of this literature. See also the sources in notes 5, 6, and 7.

19.

Goffman, “The Arrangement.”

20.

Schrock and Schwalbe, “Men, Masculinity, and Manhood Acts,” p. 289.

21.

See also Ezzell, “I’m in Control”; Schrock, McCabe, and Vaccaro, “Narrative Manhood Acts”; Sumerau, “That’s What a Man”; and Sumerau, Padavic, and Schrock, “Little Girls,” for more examples.

22.

See again Connell and Messerschmidt, “Hegemonic Masculinity”; Schrock and Schwalbe, “Men, Masculinity, and Manhood Acts”; Sumerau, “That’s What a Man.”

23.

Goffman, Stigma, p. 128.

24.

See, for example, Sumerau, “That’s What a Man”; Sumerau, Barringer, and Cragun, “I Don’t Need a Shotgun”; and Sumerau, Cragun, and Smith, “Men Never Cry.”

25.

Sumerau, “That’s What a Man.”

26.

See Anderson, Code of the Street; Ezzell, “I’m in Control”; Lee, Blowin’ Up; and Sumerau, “That’s What a Man,” for reviews and examples.

27.

Schrock and Schwalbe, “Men, Masculinity, and Manhood Acts.”

28.

See Adams, Narrating the Closet; Goffman, Frame Analysis; Goffman, Interaction Ritual; Goffman, Presentation of Self; Goffman, Stigma; Lee, Blowin’ Up; Martin, “Mobilizing Masculinities”; Mathers, “Bathrooms, Boundaries, and Emotional Burdens”; Schrock and Schwalbe, “Men, Masculinity, and Manhood Acts”; Schrock, Sumerau, and Ueno, “Sexualities”; Sumerau, “Embodying Nonexistence”; Sumerau, “I See Monsters”; and Sumerau, “That’s What a Man,” for similar observations in specific contexts of everyday social life.

29.

For examples and reviews, see Acker, “Inequality Regimes”; Cottom, Lower Ed; Dellinger, “Masculinities in ‘Safe’ and ‘Embattled’ Organizations”; Ezzell, “I’m in Control”; Martin, Rape Work; Ridgeway, Framed by Gender; Schilt and Westbrook, “Doing Gender, Doing Heteronormativity”; Schrock and Schwalbe, “Men, Masculinity, and Manhood Acts”; Schwalbe, Godwin, Holden, Schrock, Thompson, and Wolkomir, “Generic Processes in the Reproduction of Inequality”; West and Zimmerman, “Doing Gender”; and Westbrook and Schilt, “Doing Gender, Determining Gender.”

30.

See, for example, Boyle, “Sexual Assault and Identity Disruption”; Branch and Richards, “The Effects of Receiving a Rape Disclosure”; Browne and Williams, “Gender, Intimacy, and Lethal Violence”; Corzine and Huff-Corzine, “Racial Inequality and Black Homicide”; Dellinger, “Masculinities in ‘Safe’”; Garland, Branch, and Grimes, “Blurring the Lines”; Garland, Policastro, Branch, and Henderson, “Bruised and Battered”; Huff-Corzine, Sacra, Corzine, and Rados, “Florida’s Task Force Approach to Combat Human Trafficking”; Lanier and Huff-Corzine, “American Indian Homicide”; Martin, “Mobilizing Masculinities”; Martin, Rape Work; Navarro and Jasinski, “Going Cyber”; Prokos and Padavic, “An Examination of the Competing Explanations for the Pay Gap”; Richards and Branch, “The Relationship between Social Support and Adolescent Dating Violence”; and Taylor and Jasinski, “Femicide and the Feminist Perspective.”

31.

At present, these fields often operate in isolation from one another, but at the same time they often speak to similar patterns in criminological (see note 30 for examples) and gender studies (see note 6 for examples), terms, and theoretical debates.

32.

See the methodological appendix for more information.

33.

The men I interviewed were equally split (25 each) on religious/non-religious identification.