Jeff Hearn and David L. Collinson
David L. Collinson and Jeff Hearn
Jeff Hearn, Keith Pringle and Dag Balkmar
This chapter surveys men’s presence, and sometimes absence, in social policy and the role of social policy in the construction, enactment and embodiment of men and men’s practices. There are numerous ways in which social policy concerns men and masculinities, in its formulation, implementation, delivery and inclusions/exclusions. Different men have variable relations to social policy, and are involved and implicated in social policy in a wide variety of ways, as users, family members, practitioners, managers, policy-makers, members of social organizations and so on. Likewise, the explicit gendering and naming of men is uneven in different social policy arenas. At the same time, social policies always at least partially reflect the specific societies within which they are located. Consequently, the chapter explores some comparative variations that occur across societies in the relationship of men with social policy. Such a comparative approach also highlights that a number of relatively enduring features of that relationship seem to exist across space and time. Finally, this discussion identifies some such as transnational policy development that impact upon gendered social policy configurations across many or most societies in a variety of ways.
Jeff Hearn, Sofia Aboim and Tamara Shefer
Social justice and sexuality have characteristically been difficult bedfellows. Dominant approaches to social justice, whether liberal or radical, have often been located within modernist framings. These have characteristically emphasized the remedying of material inequality and disadvantage, and/or the assertion of human rights, conceived in more or less universalistic terms, sometimes more individualistically, sometimes more collectively. In this situation, even when gender inequalities and the gendered nature of social justice are highlighted, these framings do not always attend to questions of sexuality. In some structural power analyses, sexualities are seen as secondary to and derivative of class position and relations. Gender and sexuality, are intimately, indeed often if not always definitionally, interrelated with each other. Gender occurs along with sexuality, and vice versa. It is rather difficult to conceive of gender and sexuality without the other: without a concept of gender there could be, quite simply, no concept of homo- or hetero- sexuality.