Die Bedrohung der Männlichkeit von Männern macht sie nicht politisch konservativer, so das Ergebnis einer neuen Studie. Bei der Untersuchung Tausender Teilnehmer in den gesamten Vereinigten Staaten fanden die Forscher keine konsistenten Beweise dafür, dass die Verunsicherung von Männern hinsichtlich ihrer Geschlechtsidentität ihre politische Einstellung verändert.
Threatening men’s masculinity does not make them more politically conservative, new study finds
21 Kommentare
Threatening men’s masculinity does not make them more politically conservative, new study finds
A recent study published in the Journal of Experimental Political Science suggests that threatening a man’s sense of masculinity might not cause him to adopt more conservative or stereotypically masculine political beliefs. By testing thousands of participants across the United States, researchers found no consistent evidence that making men feel insecure about their gender identity changes their political attitudes.
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-experimental-political-science/article/replication-and-extension-of-willer-et-al-2013-overdoing-gender-a-test-of-the-masculine-overcompensation-thesis/345C42C2B43871D567BF61B0BAA3B309
Perhaps the next relevant study would be if certain political ideologies were more susceptible to feeling insecure about their gender identity.
[removed]
Huge difference between threatening one’s masculinity not making you shift your ideology and the idea you generate your ideology partially based on your insecurities LIKE gender and sexuality.
I don’t think most men who become conservative do it out of insecurity despite the memes. Rather it’s the perception that masculinity is not valued in left of center politics.
>“In both popular culture and politics, many commentators assert that society is experiencing a crisis of masculinity. Some politicians have even made this idea a central part of their campaign platforms, suggesting that traditional men are under attack. Sociologists and psychologists sometimes attribute the growth in far-right extremism and resistance to women’s equality to a concept known as masculinity threat. Masculinity threat is the theory that manhood is a precarious, unstable status that men must constantly earn and defend.“
I feel like this fundermentally misunderstands what the ‚crisis of masculinity‘ is? Men aren’t worried they aren’t being masculine enough, they’re worried that the ‚traditional‘ role men have had in society no longer exists. Fairly sure you’d have to pretty damn insecure to constantly worry about being seen as masculine. But every man is experiencing a situation where the traditional role of men in society has changed, and become much harder to achive. When men traditionally were framed as sucessful by being a provider, is it any wonder after 2 decades of repeated economic trouble and ‚once in a lifetime events‘, that has become unachiveable? Especially with women having taken up a role in society to become independent, and also as rivals to men in this role, but without the societal baggage to go with it (of course women experience their own baggage in other areas so as parenting, etc.)
>“The researchers measured their support for the Iraq War, their views on gay rights, and their desire to purchase a sports utility vehicle.“
I’m not exactly sure how this equates to being right wing?
IMO, the most important thing to highlight: **This study is a replication study**, disproving previous research that claimed such relationship.
>Specifically, the (previous) authors observe in two lab experiments (N total 100–110, N men 40–51) conducted on a convenience sample of university students that inducing masculinity threat increases support for war, homophobic attitudes, and support for dominance hierarchies among male participants. We conduct a pre-registered replication of this foundational work with a large, nationally representative probability sample from the University of Chicago NORC AmeriSpeak Panel (N total 2,774, N men 2,095).
This saves time to avoid discussing if the methods are the correct ones to address the question, as it just nullifies/puts into question, previous research that claimed so.
Conservative men feeling that their masculinity is under threat has nothing to do with reality.
Just to be clear, when the study refers to „masculinity threat“, they mean they had subjects take an inventory about stereotypically male and female characteristics, and then the study runners „manipulated“ the results by faking more „feminine“ results for the men, they found that men didn’t gravitate towards conservative values as a result. I’d argue that „masculinity threat“ as thought of in the general public discourse is a much more malignant experience than that, so I feel like the study’s setup is too „mild“ to necessarily have results meaningful in the modern world that is inundated with the extremes found in social media. Below is a quick summary of the setup from the study:
„The goal of the experimental manipulation was to induce a sense of masculinity threat, which was predicted to lead to the adoption of more stereotypically masculine attitudes. In both Study 1 (n = 111) and Study 2 (n = 100),Footnote 2 the authors had university students fill out the Bem Sex Role Inventory (BSRI), a measure of stereotypically masculine and feminine traits. After completing the inventory, men and women were randomly assigned to receive feedback that they scored either in a masculine or feminine range. When men [women] received feedback that they scored in the feminine [masculine] range, this constituted the gender threat condition. When men [women] received feedback that they scored within the average masculine [feminine] range for their gender, this constituted the non-gender threat (control) condition.“
I feel like it would take a lot to make me feel insecure about my gender identity.
My guess is conservatives have more fragile gender identities (dependent on external validation that they are manly/womanly), while liberals are more likely to view gender identity as dependent more on self-image.
Given that the test is psychological, it would also matter how much stock the men put in it.
I took one of these tests for therapy that concluded I am insecure about my gender because I don’t like traditional masculine pasttimes. My psychologist and I just laughed at it. She had known me long enough by then to know that my problem was not that I don’t like football, regardless of what the test said.
Basically I don’t think you can ask somebody 20 questions and then say, „this test says you’re a girl“ and get a consistent response from them.
All I hear is „bully the chuds harder“.
Yes, telling someone they scored in the feminine bucket on an online quiz is totally indicative of real life. Let’s draw broad sweeping conclusions from this!
But telling men constantly they are toxic and the only ones that need to grow and change and take therapy does.
I’m not going to read this entire study. I only wonder this, how exactly did researchers „threaten men’s masculinity?“ If they genuinely attempted to do such a thing, is that even ethical?
In the short term. What about someone who becomes increasingly insecure over time?
It depends on the context of threatening isnt it? At least from person experience, as a straight man, I’ve had my masculinity „threatened“ on occasions where I’m percieved as feminine for taking care of my skin, feminine for knowing how to cook, and been called gay or have some woman project their yaoi fanfic fetish onto me having a normal, polite interaction with another man. Like… just a normal convo on a call and hearing a woman say you two should kiss.
Thats not necessarily a threat in the way we think of threats but isnt it threatening to be percieved or assumed to be that way? I can imagine some men might get annoyed if they are seen as feminine for their hobbies and behavior and move to the right to avoid that sort of fetishization altogether, as no one enjoys being told they are something they arent by a complete stranger.
What is the point of this study? Bit alarming, as it seems like they are fishing for ways to manipulate men.
To me, it’s not a question of threatening men’s masculinity. It’s the effect of men feeling inadequate. No relationships, no career, no hope of future success in a world that is changing quickly.
That’s Trump’s base in many respects.
Holy Y causes X. Could it be that those who feel most insecure in their masculinity are already the most conservative? Might as well say “Researchers found that wetness does not turn things into water.”
Ah, yes, the tried and true, „Insult people to make them agree with you“ tactic. Works everytime.
Turns out it was just good ole propaganda but with a level of personalization never before seen.