Volume 11 Issue 3 was published.
The main theme of the issue: Youth Sociology: Education, and the Vision of the Future
  
The articles are published in the Bulletin of the Institute of Sociology (Vestnik Instituta Sociologii) in Russian with a special supplement in English.
There are some full-text articles translated into English that originally was published in the journal in Russian.
For full-text articles in English please click here
2020. Vol. 11. No 3 published 09/29/2020
2020. Vol. 11. No 2 published 06/29/2020
2020. Vol. 11. No 1 published 03/29/2020
2019. Vol. 10. No 4 published 12/12/2019
All Issue:

2020 ( Vol. 11)  |  3   2   1  
2019 ( Vol. 10)  |  4   3   2   1  
2018 ( Vol.   9)  |  4   3   2   1  
2017 ( Vol.   8)  |  4   3   2   1  
2016 ( Vol.   7)  |  4   3   2   1  
2015 ( Vol.   6)  |  4   3   2   1  
2014 ( Vol.   5)  |  4   3   2   1  
2013 ( Vol.   4)  |  2   1  
2012 ( Vol.   3)  |  2   1  
2011 ( Vol.   2)  |  2   1  
2010 ( Vol.   1)  |  1  

Krzhizhanovskogo Street, 24/35, korpus 5, 117218, Moscow, Russia

Tel.: +7 (499) 128-85-19
Fax: +7 (495) 719-07-40

e-mail: vestnik@isras.ru

Federal Center of Theoretical and Applied Sociology of the Russian Academy of Sciences

web-site: https://www.fctas.org

The construct of masculinity in the culture of modern Russia’s new working class


Tatiana V. Gavrilyuk, Candidate of Sociology, Associate professor, Industrial University of Tiumen, Tiumen, Russia,
mailto: tv_gavrilyuk@mail.ru
The construct of masculinity in the culture of modern Russia’s new working class.
Vestnik instituta sotziologii. 2019. Vol. 10. No. 2. P. 28-44

DOI: 10.19181/vis.2019.29.2.574


This Article is downloaded: 141 times
Topic: Sociology of Youth: attitudes in modern reality

For citation:
Tatiana V. Gavrilyuk. The construct of masculinity in the culture of modern Russia’s new working class. Vestnik instituta sotziologii. 2019. Vol. 10. No. 2. P. 28-44
DOI: https://doi.org/10.19181/vis.2019.29.2.574




Abstract

This article is dedicated to analyzing the construct of masculinity in the culture of modern Russia’s new working class. While leaning on an intersectional perspective, it considers practices of producing its plural forms in everyday interaction, as well as persistent structures of social inequality which secure gender order on an institutional level. The article conducts an analytical overview of relevant foreign studies on the working class’ modes of masculinity in the postindustrial era. An empirical study of young representatives of the new working class residing in the Ural federal district helped determine the most common structures of gender order in domestic life and in the workspace: standard male social roles, stereotypical everyday fulfillment of male gender roles, gender restrictions and privileges. It has been revealed that a persistent structural disproportion between various sectors of the economy, when it comes to wages and the gender composition of the workforce, determines the transmission of the standard tendency for reproducing the pattern of a “man-provider”, who possesses power in the family based on his control over economic resources. Young working class individuals are still interested in preserving and supporting a patriarchal model of distributing household labor. While women are assigned types of activity which require routine execution at a strictly defined time, men assume chores which can be done sporadically, and can be postponed, which provides them with more leisure time. While evaluating the importance of everyday communication rituals, it was established that young women seek to preserve a traditional pattern of gender interaction more so than young men. The results of the study show a distinction between the expectations of young men and women when it comes to standard everyday gender communication: for the most part, young men still lean towards a model of hegemonic masculinity within the working class, while young women, who support the idea of preserving a patriarchic social order, are prepared to assume their gender role within it provided that they receive financial support and protection on behalf of their men. Indirect signs of hegemonic masculinity are not considered by them to be relevant.

Keywords

working class, working-class youth, masculinity, gender, gender regime, hegemonic masculinity

References

Anderson E. Orthodox and inclusive masculinity: Competing masculinities among heterosexual men in a feminized terrain. Sociological Perspectives, 2005; 48:337–355.

Cockburn C. Brothers: Male dominance and technological change. London, Pluto Press: 1983. 264 p.

Coltrane S., Shih K.Y. Gender and the division of labour. In: Handbook of Gender Research in Psychology. Vol. 2: Gender Research in Social and Applied Psychology. Ed. by J. C. Chrisler and D.R. McCreary. Springer: 2010: 401–422.


Connell R. W. Live fast and die young: The construction of masculinity among young working-class men on the margin of the labour market. Journal of Sociology.1991; 27:141–171.

Craig L. Does father care mean fathers share? A comparison of how mothers and fathers in intact families spend time with children. Gender & Society. 2006; 20(2):259–281.


Demetriou D. Connell’s concept of hegemonic masculinity: A critique. Theory & Society. 2001; 30:337–361.

Donaldson M. Labouring men: love, sex and strife. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Sociology. 1987; 23(3):165–184.

Gill R. Power and the production of subjects: A genealogy of the new man and the new lad. In: Masculinity and Men’s Lifestyle Magazines. Ed. by B. Benwell. Oxford (UK): Blackwell, 2003:34–56.

Hancock A. M. When multiplication doesn’t equal quick addition: Examining intersectionality as a research paradigm. Perspectives on Politics. 2007; 5(1):65–79.

Lindsay C., McQuaid R. W. Avoiding the “McJobs”: Unemployed job seekers and attitudes to service work. Work Employment and Society. 2004; 18(2):297–319.

Lipasova A. Fatherhood in the Russian provinces: a theoretical and empirical analysis. The Journal of Social Policy Studies. 2017:15(4):629–642 (In Russ.).

Lippert J. Sexuality as Consumption. In: For Men Against Sexism. Ed. by J. Snodgrass. Albion: Times Change Press, 1977:207–213.

Lupton R. Explaining men’s entry into female-concentrated occupations: Issues of masculinity and social class. Gender, Work & Organization. 2006; 13(2):108–128.

McDowell L. Masculinity, identity and labour market change: Some reflections on the implications of thinking relationally about difference and the politics of inclusion. Geografiska Annaler, Ser. B Human Geography. 2004: 86(1):5–56.

Meshcherkina E. Y. The existance of male consciousness: the experience of reconstructing the masculine identity of the middle and working class. In: O muzhe(n)stvennosti = On Mascul(Femn)ity. Ed. S. Ushakin. Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie, 2002:268–288 (In Russ.).

Nixon D. “I can’t put a smiley face on”: Working-class masculinity, emotional labour and service work in the “new economy”. Gender, Work & Organization. 2009; 16 (3):300–322.

Roberts S. Boys Will Be Boys ... Won’t They? In: Change and Continuities in Contemporary Young Working-class Masculinities. Sociology. 2013; 47(4):671–686.

Segal L. Slow motion: Changing masculinities, changing men. London, Virago, 1990. 396 p.

Tartakovskaya I.N. Men in the labour market. Sociologicheskiy zhurnal = Sociological Journal. 2002; 3:112–125 (In Russ.).

Thébaud S. Masculinity, bargaining, and breadwinning. Gender & Society. 2010; 24(3):330–354.

Tolson A. The Limits of Masculinity, London: Tavistock, 1977. 158 p.

Vanke A. The corporeality of working-class men in labour regimes and the private sphere. Summary. Laboratorium. 2014; 6(1):154–158.

Whitehead S. Men and masculinities: Key themes and new directions. Cambridge: Polity, 2002. 288 p.

Willis P. Shop floor culture, masculinity and the wage form. Working Class Culture. Ed. by J. Clarke, C. Critcher and R. Johnson. London: Hutchinson, 1979:185–198.

Zaslavskaya T. I. The social structure of modern Russian society. Obshhestvennye nauki i sovremennost`, 1997:5–23 (In Russ.).

Zdravomyslova E., Temkina A. The crisis of masculinity in the late Soviet discourse. In: O muzhe(n)stvennosti = On Mascul(Femn)ity. Ed. S. Ushakin. Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie, 2002:432–452 (In Russ.).


Content 2019' 29