Skip to main content

Being the “Go-To Guy”: Fatherhood, Masculinity, and the Organization of Work in Silicon Valley

Abstract

Based upon in-depth interviews with fathers who are employed as knowledge workers in Silicon Valley, this article argues that a newly constituted masculinity has emerged that coincides with the new way work is organized in the new economy. The article examines the relationship among this gendered subjectivity, processes of labor control, and fathering. It finds that the new masculinity functions as a key mechanism of control in high-tech workplaces that rely on identity-based forms of control and that the enactment of this new masculinity impacts the way fathers think about, experience, and manage their work and family lives.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

REFERENCES

  • Acker, J. (1990). “Hierarchies, Jobs, Bodies:ATheory of Gendered Organizations.” Gender and Society 4:2 139–158.

    Google Scholar 

  • Acker, J. (1992). “Gendered institutions: From sex roles to gendered institutions.” Contemporary Sociology 21: 139–158.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alvesson, M. and Billing, Y. D. (1997). Understanding Gender and Organizations. London: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alvesson, M. (1998). “Gender Relations and Identity at Work: a Case Study of Masculinities and Femininities in an Advertising Agency.” Human Relations 51:8 969–1006.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Association of University Women. (2000). “Tech-Savvy: Educating Girls in the New Computer Age.” Washington, DC: American Association of University Women. Retrieved May 28, 2000 (http://www.aauw.org/2000/techsavvybd.html).

    Google Scholar 

  • Braverman, H. (1974). Labor and Monopoly Capital. New York: Monthly Review Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brod, H. and Kaufman, M. (1994). Theorizing Masculinities. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burawoy, M. (1979). Manufacturing Consent. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burawoy, M. (1985). The Politics of Production. London: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burris, B. (1998) “Computerization of the Workplace.” Annual Review of Sociology 24: 141–157.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carrigan, T., Connell, R. W. and Lee, J. (1985). “Towards a New Sociology of Masculinity.” Theory and Society 14: 551–604.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chatman, J. and O'Reilly, C. (1986). “Organizational Commitment and Psychological Attachment: The Effects of Compliance, Identification, and Internalization on Prosocial Behavior.” Journal of Applied Psychology 71:3 492–500.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cockburn, C. (1988). Machinery of Dominance: Women, Men, and Technical Know-how. Boston: Northeastern University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collinson, D. L. (1992). Managing the Shopfloor. New York: Walter de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collinson, D. L. and Hearn, J. (1994). “Naming Men as Men: Implications forWork, Organization and Management.” Gender, Work and Organization 1:1 2–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collinson, D. L. and Hearn, J. (Eds.)(1996a). Men as Managers, Managers as Men. London: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collinson, D. L. and Hearn, J. (1996b). Breaking the Silence on: On men, masculinities and managements. In D. L. Collinson & J. Hearn (Eds.), Men as managers, managers as men (pp. 1–24). London: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conlin, M. (2000). “Valley of No Dolls.” Business Week, March 6, pp.

  • Connell, R. W. (1987). Gender and Power. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Connell, R.W. (1995). Masculinities. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daly, K. J. (1998). “Reshaping fatherhood.” Pp. 384–399 in Shifting the Center, edited by S. Ferguson. Mountain View, CA: Mayfield Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daly, K. J. (1992). “The Fit Between Qualitative Research and the Characteristics of Families.” Qualitative Methods in Family Research, edited by J. Gilgun, K. Daly, and G. Handel. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davies, S. (1990). Inserting gender into Burawoy's theory of the labour process. Work, Employment and Society 4: 391–406.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, R. (1979). Contested Terrain. USA: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Faludi, S. (1999). Stiffed. New York: William Morrow and Company, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hacker, S. (1990). “Doing it the Hard Way”: Investigations of Gender and Technology. Boston: Unwin Hyman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hochschild, A. (1989). The Second Shift. New York: Avon Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hochschild, A. (1997). The Time Bind. New York: Metropolitan Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kanter, R. M. (1977). Men and Women of the Corporation. New York: BasicBooks.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kendall, L. (2000). “'Oh no! I'm a Nerd!' Hegemonic Masculinity on an Online Forum.” Gender and Society 14:2 256–275.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kendall, L. (1999). “'The NerdWithin': Mass Media and the Negotiation of Identity Among Computer-Using Men.” Journal of Men's Studies 7:3 353.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knights, D. (1990). Subjectivity, power and the labour process. In D. Knights & W. Willmott, Labour process theory (pp. 297–335). London: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kunda, G. (1992). Engineering Culture. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kunda, G. and Van Maanen, J. (1999). “Changing Scripts at Work: Managers and Professionals.” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 561: 64–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, C. K. (1998). Gender and the South China Miracle. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leidner, R. (1993). Fast Food, Fast Talk. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levine, J. A. and Pittinsky, T. L. (1997). Working Fathers. San Diego: Harcourt Brace & Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mac An Ghaill, M. E. (1996). Understanding Masculinities. Philadelphia: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mumbly, D. K. (1998). “Organizing Men: Power, Discourse, and the Social Construction of Masculinity(s) in the Workplace.” Communication Theory. 8:2 164–179.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perlow, L. (1995). “Putting theWork Back IntoWork /Family.” Group and Organization Management. 20:2 227–239.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pierce, J. L. (1996). “Reproducing Gender Relations in Large Law Firms: The Role of Emotional Labor in ParalegalWork.”Working in the Service Society, edited by C. Macdonald and C. Sirianni. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pleck, J. (1993). “Are 'Family-Supportive' Employer Policies Relevant to Men?” Men, Work, and Family, edited by J. C. Hood. Newbury Park: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plotnikoff, D. (1999). “Running on Valley Time.” SV Magazine, October 31, pp. 6.

  • Turkle, S. (1984). The Second Self: Computers and the Human Spirit. New York: Simon and Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turkle, S. (1988). “Computational Reticence: Why Women Fear the Intimate Machine.” Pp. 41–61 in Technology andWomen's Voices: Keeping in Touch, edited by C. Kramarae. New York: Routledge Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • Willis, P. (1977). Learning to Labour: How Working Class Kids Get Working Class Jobs. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright, R. (1996). “The Occupational Masculinity of Computing.” Pp. 77–96 in Masculinities in Organizations, edited by C. Cheng. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Cooper, M. Being the “Go-To Guy”: Fatherhood, Masculinity, and the Organization of Work in Silicon Valley. Qualitative Sociology 23, 379–405 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005522707921

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005522707921

  • fatherhood
  • masculinity
  • labor process
  • Silicon Valley