Advertisement

Pastoral Psychology

, Volume 67, Issue 6, pp 689–706 | Cite as

The interplay between Korean men’s movements and hegemonic masculinity: Identity, complicity, and resistance

  • Myounghun YunEmail author
Article
  • 251 Downloads

Abstract

This article examines the three representative forms of Korean men’s groups and movements, including men’s rights, conservative evangelical, and profeminist groups. By analyzing how the discourses and practices of each group relate to hegemonic masculinity, this paper will demonstrate how hegemonic masculinities are expressed, enacted, renegotiated, or challenged in public and political spheres and how each of these three groups is complicit with, reinforces, or resists the politics of hegemonic masculinity. Based on the critical evaluation of these three forms of masculinity politics in Korean society, some of the challenges and prospects for profeminist politics of masculinity are discussed.

Keywords

Masculinity Hegemonic masculinity Men’s identities Men’s movements The father school Profeminist men Men’s rights group 

References

  1. Ashe, F. (2007). The new politics of masculinity: Men, power, and resistance. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Choi, H. (2012). Ilyosisa. http://www.ilyosisa.co.kr/news/articleView.html?idxno=26241. Accessed 15 August 2015.
  3. Chung, C. (2002, March). Men’s movement: The self-reflection of changing men. Yonsei Chunchu. http://chunchu.yonsei.ac.kr/news/quickViewArticleView.html?idxno=4936.
  4. Clatterbaugh, K. (2000). Literature of the U.S. men’s movements. Signs, 25(3), 883–894.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Connell, R. (Ed.). (1983). Which way is up? Essays on sex, class and culture. Sydney: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
  6. Connell, R. W. (1987). Gender and power: Society, the person and sexual politics. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  7. Connell, R. W. (1995). Masculinities. Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  8. Connell, R. W., & Messerschmidt, J. W. (2005). Hegemonic masculinity: Rethinking the concept. Gender & Society, 19(6), 829–859.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Donovan, B. (1988). Political consequences of private authority: Promise keepers and the transformation of hegemonic masculinity. Theory and Society, 27(6), 817–843.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fathers Loving Daughters. (n.d.). www.daughterlove.org.
  11. Hagan, K. L. (Ed.). (1992). Women responds to the men’s movement. New York: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
  12. Howson, R. (2006). Challenging hegemonic masculinity. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kim E. (2005). Men for Cultivating a Culture of Equality. Junggunews. Retrieved from http://www.junggunews.com/news/articleView.html?idxno=290.
  14. Kim, N. (2011). “Lord, I am a father!” the transnational evangelical men’s movement and the advent of “benevolent” patriarchy. Asian Journal of Women’s Studies, 17(1), 100–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kimmel, M. (2010). Misframing men: The politics of contemporary masculinity. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Kimmel, M. (2013). Angry white men: American masculinity at the end of an era. New York: Nation Books.Google Scholar
  17. Lee, J. (1995 April 30). The foundation of the men for cultivating a culture of equality. DongaIlbo.Google Scholar
  18. Men for Cultivating a Culture of Equality. (n.d.). http://www.ohmynews.com/NWS_Web/view/at_pg.aspx?CNTN_CD=A0000261051.
  19. Messner, M. A. (1993). Sport, men and the gender order. Champaign: Human Kinetics Europe.Google Scholar
  20. Messner, M. A. (2000). Politics of masculinity: Men in movements. Oxford: Altamira Press.Google Scholar
  21. Miller-McLemore, B. (2007). Generativity, self-sacrifice, and the ethics of family life. In J. Witte Jr., M. C. Green, & A. Wheeler (Eds.), The equal regard family and its friendly critics: Don Browning and the practical theological ethics of the family (pp. 17–41). Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans.Google Scholar
  22. NGO for Equality. (n.d.). http://www.ngoforeq.org.
  23. Reis, B., & Grossmark, R. (2009). Heterosexual masculinities: Contemporary perspectives from psychoanalytic gender theory. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  24. Ruether, R. (1992). Patriarchy and the men's movement: Part of the problem or part of the solution? In K. L. Hagan (Ed.), Women responds to the men’s movement (pp. 13–18). New York: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
  25. The Father School. (n.d.). “About.” http://www.father.or.kr/eng/index.action.
  26. The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (n.d.). The 2017 OECD Report: The pursuit of gender equality, https://www.oecd.org/korea/Gender2017-KOR-en.pdf
  27. United Nations Development Program. (n.d.). Gender inequality index 2015 (GII), http://hdr.undp.org/en/composite/GII.
  28. Visano, L. A. (1998). Crime and culture: Refining the traditions. Toronto: Canadian Scholars Press.Google Scholar
  29. Walby, S. (1997). Gender transformations. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  30. White, S. M. (2002). Men and masculinities: Key themes and new directions. Malden: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  31. Whitehead, S., & Barrett, F. J. (Eds.). (2001). The masculinities reader. Cambridge: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  32. Witte Jr., J., Green, M. C., & Wheeler, A. (Eds.). (2007). The equal-regard family and its friendly critics: Don Browning and the practical theological ethics of the family. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.New Brunswick Theological SeminaryNew BrunswickUSA

Personalised recommendations