A discursive psychological framework for analyzing men and masculinities.

Abstract

This paper aims to describe and promote a Discursive Psychological approach to studying men and masculinity. It begins by showcasing some of our own research in this area, before moving on to compare and contrast the central tenets of this approach with those underpinning one of the mainstays of North American scholarship on men and masculinity: the Gender Role Strain Paradigm. We argue that, despite significant points of overlap, Discursive Psychology differs from the Gender Role Strain Paradigm in several key respects; including its treatment of variability, its theory of ideology and its model of the social actor. We claim that, in line with the precepts of Discursive Psychology, gender researchers need to pay closer attention to the nuances of men's talk and to see masculinities as practical accomplishments, rather than the (inevitable) playing-out of particular role prescriptions.

Barriers to Sexual Expression and Safe Sex Among Mexican Gay Men

“…This analysis is described as a method that allows the comprehension of realities as understood by each individual according to their social conditions, thus centering attention on power relations expressed through discourse, how they affect subjectivity (Van Dijk, 2002, and allows the researcher to understand the fluidity of how masculinity mandates are put into practice in relation to other forms of identity within particular cultural contexts (Wetherell & Edley, 2014).…”

“…Mexican masculinity researchers such as Amuchástegui (2006) and Salguero (2012), following the lines of discursive psychology for men's studies (Wetherell & Edley, 2014), affirm that men's experiences and practices are a result of said model but, regardless of it, does not neatly reflect on all of the model's mandates, showing that what these men express verbally usually contradicts their actions (Fernández & Vargas, 2012).…”

Love and looks: A discourse of romantic love and consumer culture

“…This relates to the idea that subjectivity is constructed through discourse so subject positions are not parts to perform but selves to be. These subject positions are variable and can change multiple times depending on the context (Wetherell & Edley, 2014). …”

“…The concerns men have in relation to ideal body image are not exactly the same as those of women; for example, Hatoum and Belle (2004) as well as Diedrichs (2012 as cited in Grogan, 2016) postulate that men's anxieties revolve less around a desire to be thin and are linked to anxieties around being underweight or under-muscular. This may be related to power dynamics between the genders, as noted in Wex's (1970, as cited in Wetherell andEdley, 2014) series of photographs illustrating the tendency for men to be allowed to take up more space in the world as opposed to women who seek to make themselves smaller. Although men and women might differ in the particular ways they are dissatisfied with their bodies, media images of ideal bodies seem to lead to an increased sense of body dissatisfaction (Michaels, Parent and Moradi, 2013) and a lowered selfesteem in both genders (Cafri et al, 2006 andGrieve, 2007 as cited in Martin & Govender 2011;Hawkins, Richards, Granley & Stein 2004).…”

Stå upp för orten. Ungdomar, utanförskap och förortsdrömmar

“…Diskurs ses här som det medel genom vilket både jaget och världen artikuleras. Utifrån denna ansats har uppmärksamhet ägnats åt de olika möjligheter som olika diskurser erbjuder människor när det gäller att skapa olika representationer av sig själva, världen och sitt hand lande i världen (Wetherell & Edley 2014).…”