Hegemonic Femininities and Intersectional Domination

Abstract

We examine how two sociological traditions account for the role of femininities in social domination. The masculinities tradition theorizes gender as an independent structure of domination; consequently, femininities that complement hegemonic masculinities are treated as passively compliant in the reproduction of gender. In contrast, Patricia Hill Collins views cultural ideals of hegemonic femininity as simultaneously raced, classed, and gendered. This intersectional perspective allows us to recognize women striving to approximate hegemonic cultural ideals of femininity as actively complicit in reproducing a matrix of domination. We argue that hegemonic femininities reference a powerful location in the matrix from which some women draw considerable individual benefits (i.e., a femininity premium) while shoring up collective benefits along other dimensions of advantage. In the process, they engage in intersectional domination of other women and even some men. Our analysis re-enforces the utility of analyzing femininities and masculinities from within an intersectional feminist framework.

Hybrid Femininities: Making Sense of Sorority Rankings and Reputation

“…We examined interviews with 53 women in historically white sororities at "Central," a pseudonymous North American university. Building on past research on hegemonic femininities (Connell 1987;Hamilton et al 2019), we ask how women make sense of a sorority ranking and reputation system that aligns with traditional models of hierarchical and complementary gender relations (Ispa-Landa 2013;Schippers 2007). Within this context, women must contend with sexist discourses that circulate about sorority women, including media characterizations of sorority women as "displaying too much femininity" (Graber and Whipple 2019: 8).…”

“…Much of our current theorizing about femininities grew out of Connell's (1987) Gender & Power. Following Connell (1987, scholars have argued that affluent, white, heterosexual women can draw on hegemonic femininities, rooted in traditional gender complementarity models, to dominate others, including other women and men (e.g., Bettie 2003;Collins 2000;Connell 1987;Hamilton et al 2019;Myers 2014). Although they remain in a subordinate position vis-à-vis elite men, elite women with hegemonic femininities, or "the most celebrated cultural ideals of womanhood in a given time and place" (Hamilton et al 2019: 322), enjoy a "femininity premium" (316).…”

“…Another femininity tax involves knowing that one's advantages are accumulated along axes that disadvantage the group (e.g., a young, thin blonde woman benefits from a system that disadvantages women as a collective). In sum, the femininity premium confers unique advantages and comes with particular costs, and it is inextricable from high-status women's subordinate relationship to elite men (Hamilton et al 2019). The concept improves understanding of why high-status women consent to participate in systems where they are disadvantaged vis-à-vis men.…”

“…As with relational theories of gender (e.g., Ispa-Landa 2013; Schippers 2007), the concept of intersectional domination posits that femininities are numerous and hierarchical, creating a social system in which many women struggle to achieve hegemonic femininity. However, while relational theorists attend to how femininities exist in a complementary and hierarchical relationship to masculinities, Hamilton et al (2019) place analytic attention on how femininities exist in relation to one another.…”

“…As noted above, Hamilton et al (2019) describe the advantages that amass to those who can skillfully perform hegemonic femininity as a "femininity premium" (p. 3; p. 20), and the costs a femininity tax. Because the matrix of domination (Collins 2000) does not place hegemonic femininity in the highest position, a femininity ceiling limits the benefits associated with performing it.…”