Hegemony has his hand up again : examining masculinities and resistance when teaching about gender

This paper outlines interview based, qualitative research that was conducted with six male youth who were previously students in my Social Studies 11 class. Within two separate, semi-structured interviews, participants were asked to discuss student resistance to anti oppressive pedagogy that focused...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Moore, Shannon Dawn Maree
Format: Others
Language:English
Published: University of British Columbia 2009
Subjects:
Online Access:http://hdl.handle.net/2429/5031
Description
Summary:This paper outlines interview based, qualitative research that was conducted with six male youth who were previously students in my Social Studies 11 class. Within two separate, semi-structured interviews, participants were asked to discuss student resistance to anti oppressive pedagogy that focused on gender, and their understanding of masculinities. The initial purpose of this research was to find a relationship, if any, between acts of student resistance and the construction of masculinities. Participant perceptions of masculinities evolved as the dominant theme within the interviews. These discussions revealed that student understandings of masculinity were often entrenched in hegemonic language, yet contradictions were exposed between their rote definitions and personal narratives. Further, the use of media as a discourse became a venue for complicating essentialist understandings of masculinity, and for exposing multiple, fluid, versions of masculinities. Within these discussions of multiplicity, race and sexuality became two intersections of identity that took precedence. Also the intersection of teacher identity and the reading of identity terms emerged as a salient interpretation for gender discussions in the classroom. Throughout this write-up of the research are methodological considerations surrounding power, the construction of masculinity and race, and the further entrenching of heteronormativity, in the form of methodological interludes. Finally, within the conclusion, I consider the implications for practice and future directions for research in masculinities.