This article addresses some aspects of the "Man Question" in feminism, by way of the analysis of men"s diverse gender-conscious positionings in relation to gender, gender equality and feminism. It builds on earlier work, making use of theoretical models in feminist literature combined with the micro-sociological concept of passing.The article is primarily concerned with the theoretical and empirical complexities, contradictions and ambiguities of men"s positionings, as when they are self-defined as "feminists" (or similar identifications) in radical or deconstructive ways. In this, a Swedish interview data is used. Sweden is considered particularly interesting, with a qualified societal consensus on gender equality and a broadly positive place accorded to men"s relations with feminism.The authors argue in the final section that there is a need to further dialogue between analyses of men/masculinities and the multidimensionality of feminisms, as well as a need for more empirical studies of men"s different (pro)feminist positionings in order to elaborate the theoretical implications of different social contexts. The framing presented seeks to provide greater possibilities for such complex, nuanced and situated understandings of men"s relation to feminism, theoretically, analytically and politically.Keywords: Feminism; Gender Equality; Men; Masculinity; Passing; Positioning IntroductionThe "Man Question" in feminism -men as both objects and men as subjects of critique -has been addressed variously. While, according to some interpretations, feminist theory has not attended sufficiently to this (Hebert 2007), feminism has always been partly about men and what to do about men (see Friedman & Sarah, 1982;Hanmer, 1990;Gardiner, 2001). Moreover, the "Man Question" is not static or unified; it develops historically and differentially, partly as some men slowly become more interested in gender equality, albeit from diverse positionings. There is now a considerable critical academic literature analysing men"s broadly positive positionings (Jardine and Smith 1987, Christian 1994, Digby 1998, Schacht and Ewing 1998, Pease 2000, Goldrick-Jones 2002, Ashe 2004. However, situated constructions of male feminist positions and men"s dealing with the complicity of men would benefit from further theoretical, conceptual and empirical enquiry.

The article is located within research on cross-gender interviewing and concerns methodological and analytical challenges in a study of (pro)feminist men and seeks to contribute to the literature on interview interaction and the knowledge to be gained from such research experiences. The article discusses the negotiation of interviewer/interviewee interaction, practices of gender and theoretical knowledge along with how this might influence the coconstruction of interview performances. Interviewees reflexively turned narratives into theoretical analysis which turned out to be important aspects of presentation of self and in the doings of gender and feminism. The concept of "cofielding" is introduced to address these interview performances but is suggested to have a wider applicability to studies of researcher/researched relationships characterized by discursive closeness and overlapping positions. Cofielding practices point to how the doings of interviewer/interviewee and power relationships can be performed and negotiated-even played with in the speech act of interview interaction.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract