No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
Sometimes (but Not This Time), a Gun Is Just a Gun: Masculinity Threat and Guns in the United States, 1999–2018
Abstract
Today, despite national campaigns and mass shootings, gun sales continue to rise. The majority of gun owners in the United States are men, and prior research has documented the complex relationship between masculinity and gun ownership. However, a majority of the research has remained on the micro level. In this article, we look at the effects of men’s unemployment on gun ownership. Using both national‐ and state‐level Federal Bureau of Investigation background‐check data as well as economic indicators, we find that worsening economic conditions for men (relative to women) lead to increases in gun sales. Moreover, this effect is exacerbated by the prevalence of guns in an area. We supplement these analyses with nationally representative survey data showing a strong relationship between perceptions of threat to men’s gender identities and opposition to laws limiting access to guns.
... Quantitative work that examines the impact of gender threats on public opinion about gun control is more limited. [4] Most notably, Cassino and Besen-Cassino (2020) recently linked a measure of hostile sexism to opposition to gun regulation generally. Additionally, macro-level work suggests a connection between men's relative economic standing and gun sales (Cassino and Besen-Cassino 2020). ...
... [4] Most notably, Cassino and Besen-Cassino (2020) recently linked a measure of hostile sexism to opposition to gun regulation generally. Additionally, macro-level work suggests a connection between men's relative economic standing and gun sales (Cassino and Besen-Cassino 2020). More broadly, guns appear to have significant symbolic meaning to white men in economic distress (Mencken and Froese 2019). ...
... The resulting measure is a ten-point scale ranging from extremely strong feelings that all the attention to harassment is appropriate to extremely strong feelings that it has gone too far. This measure is different from that used by Cassino and Besen-Cassino (2020), though taps into similar themes (their measure captures, for instance, whether women are easily offended and interpret innocent comments as sexist). The average respondent was just about exactly in the middle-not feeling strongly that there was either too much or too little attention being paid to sexual harassment (Table 1). ...
... As an example, research by Carian and Sobotka (2018) finds that men who think that men's group position is threatened are more likely to express favorable opinions of more masculine presidential candidates. Similarly, Cassino and Besen-Cassino (2020) find that a threat of unemployment is interpreted and framed as a gendered threat. Men express attitudes and engage activities laden with gendered symbolism to augment their masculinities (Cassino & Besen-Cassino, 2020). ...
... Similarly, Cassino and Besen-Cassino (2020) find that a threat of unemployment is interpreted and framed as a gendered threat. Men express attitudes and engage activities laden with gendered symbolism to augment their masculinities (Cassino & Besen-Cassino, 2020). These meaning systems do not exist apart from actions; instead, meaning and action are better thought of as related (Norton, 2014). ...
... These meaning systems do not exist apart from actions; instead, meaning and action are better thought of as related (Norton, 2014). Cassino and Besen-Cassino (2020) find, for instance, that worsening economic conditions for men increased gun sales. ...
This article examines a case of internet posts discussing social issues affecting men and masculinity. Analysis of 500 posts containing masculine coded language on the subreddit r/unpopularopinion suggests that masculinity, especially when intersected with straightness and whiteness, is discursively constructed in an imagined social hierarchy where the plight of straight white men is invisible. By framing opinions as “unpopular,” these posts suggest that while the poster’s view may be objectively true, it is disvalued in mainstream discourses. Three key findings emerged from this analysis: First, regardless of the particular social issue discussed, efforts to reduce social inequality were negatively evaluated on average. Second, negative posts were more popular on the site; thus, amplifying the visibility of grievances. Third, masculine coded language is structured on Reddit, such that certain issues are bundled together to generate salient, interlocking themes indicating a robust meaning system. Overall, these findings suggest that criticisms of social equality are embedded within a discourse of threatened masculinity, straightness, and whiteness. This research extends past work on internet discursive practices related to masculinity and gender by showing the pervasiveness and intersectional nature of masculinity threat in digital forms.
... When an individual feels that their group is being threatened by outside forces or that their standing within the group is in jeopardy, they commonly "hyperconform" to the attitudes and ideologies of the threatened group (Blumer 1958;Branscombe et al. 1999). Threats to masculinity have been empirically linked to numerous violent attitudes and outcomes, such as gun sales, mass shootings, homophobia, endorsement of war, and excusing perpetrators of sexual assault (e.g., Bridges and Tober 2018;Cassino and Besen-Cassino 2020;Munsch and Willer 2012;Willer, et al. 2013). Given the masculine nature of gun control discourses and clear gender differences in the use of guns, we ask: Are men who believe the status of traditional masculinity is threatened or who exhibit stress in their gender role more attracted to guns? ...
... To dominate others, men are trained to rely on "masculine resources" like aggression, bullying, fighting, or sexually overpowering women, especially in the face of disrespect or status challenges (e.g., Bosson et al. 2009;Campbell 1993;Messerschmidt 2019, 12). For instance, some gun-owning men believe stricter gun laws, immigration policies, feminism, and so on are to blame for societal decline, ultimately threatening the traditional moral values tied to their masculine identities (Cassino and Besen-Cassino 2020;Petrin 2018;Warner 2020). In the face of such status threats, gun ownership offers a sense of "identity, morality, and patriotism," of power and control (Mencken and Froese 2019, 24). ...
... Men, particularly male gun owners, mitigate class or instability anxieties by invoking the threat of violence with their families to bolster their own sense of utility. This insecurity is reflected in the finding that men's increase in unemployment rates is correlated with higher gun sales (Cassino and Besen-Cassino 2020). When men are unable to fulfill the "male breadwinner" expectation by providing for their families economically, they may turn to other means in order to do so, particularly if men endorse stereotypical masculine ideals (Warner et al. 2021). ...
Using an original self-report survey of 18- to 30-year-old men, this study aims to understand gendered processes underlying men’s attitudes toward guns and aggressive behavior through two types of threats. We find that acceptance threat, a threat to an individual man’s sense of masculinity, and status threat, the belief that societal changes disadvantage men as a group, are positively associated with both men’s attraction to guns and their aggressive reactions to perceived disrespect. The effect of acceptance threat is amplified when a strong sense of status threat is also present, including attraction to guns and aggressive reaction to disrespect. These patterns are more pronounced among economically advantaged white men due to their precarious position in the race, class, and gender hierarchies. The racial and classed intersections amplify beliefs of status and acceptance threat for white men, channeling these threats into aggression and attraction to guns. We discuss how men’s economic and racial locations shape their responses to threats, and ultimately the consequences for men’s violence.
... For instance, the more men experienced stress for not being able to comply with the societal norms for masculinity, the more attraction to guns they reported (Scaptura and Boyle, 2022; also see Ray et al., 2021). Other evidence shows that in areas where larger numbers of households contain unemployed husbands married to employed wives, firearm background check inquiries increase (Cassino and Besen-Cassino, 2020). This perhaps indicates that men who feel threatened by their inability to play the traditional "breadwinner" role compensate, in part, by purchasing guns, thus stressing their family-protector role. ...
... With respect to causality, due to the experimental design any change with respect to one of the dependent variables theoretically should be caused only by the experimental manipulation. Thus, the two existing experimental tests of the relationship between masculinity threat and attraction to guns are highly valuable additions to the existing correlational studies (Mencken and Froese, 2019;Cassino and Besen-Cassino, 2020;McDermott et al., 2021;Scaptura and Boyle, 2022). Taken together, both experiments suggest that attraction to guns can be an overcompensatory reaction by men after a masculinity threat (Bosson and Vandello, 2011;Willer et al., 2013). ...
Gun violence is a serious problem in the United States and elsewhere and more so among men than women. We conducted an experiment to examine if men whose masculinity was threatened are more attracted to guns than non-threatened men, presumably to compensate for the threat. After completing a gender knowledge test, men (N = 168) randomly received either false masculinity threatening (experimental condition) or masculinity affirming (control condition) feedback. Subsequently, we measured men’s attitudes toward guns and their choice of a gun-range voucher. Men whose masculinity was threatened (vs. affirmed) showed more positive attitudes toward guns and were more likely to choose the voucher. Both effects were statistically significant when the whole sample was analyzed and when very strict exclusion criteria were applied. However, when data exclusions were based on a suspicion check, effects were statistically significant only when a covariate was included (i.e., social dominance orientation, patriotism, or experience with guns). We discuss reasons for this mixed evidence, including the possibility that suspicion regarding the masculinity feedback could itself be a compensatory reaction to threat.
... 4 Most notably, Cassino and Besen-Cassino (2020) recently linked a measure of hostile sexism to opposition to gun regulation generally. Additionally, macro-level work suggests a connection between men's relative economic standing and gun sales (Cassino and Besen-Cassino 2020). More broadly, guns appear to have significant symbolic meaning to white men in economic distress (Mencken and Froese 2019). ...
... The resulting measure is a ten-point scale ranging from extremely strong feelings that all the attention to harassment is appropriate to extremely strong feelings that it has gone too far. This measure is different from that used by Cassino and Besen-Cassino (2020), although it taps into similar themes (their measure captures, for instance, whether women are easily offended and interpret innocent comments as sexist). The average respondent was just about exactly in the middlenot feeling strongly that there was either too much or too little attention being paid to sexual harassment (Table 1). ...
Guns are highly visible in the news, in politics, and in American culture more broadly. While most Americans support some gun control, a significant and vocal minority of Americans are firmly opposed. Drawing on work from the recently developing sociology of modern gun culture, we propose an intersectional threat model—wherein perceived threats to multiple privileged identities provoke a distinct response—for understanding the positions Americans take on gun policies. Using data from a 2018 national survey conducted by the American National Election Survey, we find a robust role for perceived threats along gender, race, and citizenship lines in opposition to background checks for private sales and an assault weapons ban as well as support for arming teachers. Interactions reveal multiplicative effects: that gender threats matter more when racial and immigrant threats are also felt. We discuss implications for the prospect of policy and for understanding the pro-gun alt-right movement and other potential applications of intersectional threat.
... When one of these pillars is threatened or unavailable, men may 'repackage the deal' (J. Carlson 2015b ;Stroud 2012;Townsend 2002), renegotiating their masculine identities by doubling down on attainable aspects of masculinity via a number of compensatory behaviors, ranging from increased parental engagement to increased gun acquisition (Cassino and Besen-Cassino 2020). Work examining non-gun owners supports this as well -e.g., adherence to traditional masculine ideals (e.g., a man should be physically tough) was linked with openness to future protective gun ownership among both men and women (Warner 2020). ...
... For some Americans -men, in particular -gun ownership is a central part of their identity, morality, and patriotism (J. Carlson 2015a; Lacombe, Howat, and Rothschild 2019;Mencken and Froese 2019;Stroud 2016;Warner and Ratcliff 2021); it is an indicator of masculinity threats in action (Cassino and Besen-Cassino 2020;. In our revisiting and extending of the 'fear and loathing' hypothesis we illustrate that a wide range of gun behaviors and attitudes cannot be solely attributed to criminal victimizations fears, nor devoid from cultural or economic anxieties (nor should the connection between fears and loathing be ignored). ...
Given notable recent spikes in gun purchases in the U.S., we revisit the ‘fear and loathing’ hypothesis of firearm demand by (1) establishing how crime/victimization fears are shaped by broader economic, cultural, and racial status anxieties (those emerging from group status threats [loathing]) and (2) illustrating how both fear and loathing matter for protective gun ownership and gun carry (among owners), and openness to future protective ownership among non-owners.
Using data from a nationwide survey of adults in the U.S. (n = 2,262) collected in 2019, we find that fears of crime and victimization are often more strongly associated with status anxieties than with safety threats. Both status anxieties and victimization are associated with protective ownership and carry. Among non-owners, those higher in cultural anxiety are especially likely to be open toward future protective gun ownership. This study illustrates the multidimensional fear-guns link, wherein both status-related threats and victimization-related fears shape why individuals own guns, and how they use guns.
... The second proposition is that guns are symbols of masculinity. In U.S. culture, guns are associated with masculinity because they are primarily used by men (Azrael et al., 2017;Dowd-Arrow et al., 2019;Goss, 2017;Hepburn et al., 2007;Parker et al., 2017;Smith & Smith, 1995;Smith et al., 2019) and because they can be used to project power, strength, and a capacity to engage in violent and lethal forms of aggression (Cassino & Besen-Cassino, 2020;Cukier & Sheptycki, 2012;Cukier & Eagen, 2018;Diener & Kerber, 1979;Kahan & Braman, 2003;Nathenson, 2020;Neville-Shepard & Kelly, 2020;Pfaffendorf et al., 2021;Potts, 2000;Stroud, 2012;Tonso, 1982). Stroud (2012, p.221) explains that "because guns are so lethal, they imbue their users with traits associated with masculinity-control and power." ...
... The idea is that men with SD are initially attracted to guns because they have been socialized to see guns as symbols of male genitalia and masculinity. With this ingrained cultural knowledge, men may seek guns through processes that are either unconscious (because the loss of virility is too painful) or conscious (to communicate manliness to themselves and to others) to overcome their impotence, to somehow make themselves "hard" again (Blum, 2019;Cassino & Besen-Cassino, 2020;Cooke & Puddifoot 2000;Hall, 1953;Nathenson, 2020;Pfaffendorf et al., 2021;Potts, 2000;Stroud, 2012). By allowing men "who have felt disempowered to engage with an archetypal symbol of power" (Nathenson, 2020, p.210), guns may provide some men with the "virility" that their "aging body has surrendered" (Stroud, 2012, pp. ...
Although there has been no direct empirical evidence linking sexual dysfunction (SD) with gun ownership, speculation has been widespread and persistent for decades. In this paper, we formally examine the association between SD and gun ownership. Our primary hypothesis, derived from the psychosexual theory of gun ownership, asserts that men experiencing SD are more likely to personally own guns than other men. To test this hypothesis, we used recently collected data from the 2021 Crime, Health, and Politics Survey (CHAPS), a national probability sample of 780 men, and binary logistic regression to model gun ownership as a function of SD. Our key finding is that men experiencing SD are no more likely to own guns than men without SD. This interpretation was supported across several indicators of SD (performance anxiety, erection trouble, and ED medication) and gun ownership (personal gun ownership, purchasing a gun during the pandemic, and keeping a gun in one's bedroom). To our knowledge, we are the first to have directly tested the association between SD and gun ownership in America. Our findings are important because they contribute to our understanding of factors associated with gun ownership by challenging the belief that phallic symbolism and masculinity somehow drive men with SD to purchase guns. Our results also remind us of the perils of gun culture rhetoric, which, in this case, function to discredit gun owners and to further stigmatize men with ED. We conclude by calling for more evidence-based discussions of SD and guns in society.
... Only a small handful of researchers (mostly sociologists) have examined the links between firearm ownership and masculinity. Of the limited research available, most investigators have focused on the symbolism of firearm ownership (Carlson, 2015;Cassino & Besen-Cassino, 2020;Cukier & Eagen, 2018;Mencken & Froese, 2019;Stroud, 2012). Early investigators, for example, highlighted the historical and cultural events that helped turn firearms into a symbol of hypermasculinity, particularly with respect to the glorification of gun violence in movies (e.g., the Rambo series), television shows, and an increasing militarization of gun culture (e.g., the advent of paintball; Gibson, 1994). ...
... Supporting these qualitative findings, sociological data suggested that worsening economic conditions for men were associated with greater firearm purchases. Specifically, some men may be drawn to firearms, in part, because they provide a tangible way of reestablishing masculinity when economic pressures threaten their ability to fulfill other masculine roles (Cassino & Besen-Cassino, 2020). ...
Many of the problems linked to rigid adherence to traditional masculine role norms, such as violence and suicide, are exponentially more dangerous when a firearm is involved. Despite men being disproportionately more likely to own a firearm compared to women, however, comparatively few researchers have examined the links between masculinity and firearm ownership. Understanding the common characteristics of the typical firearm owner beyond established demographic qualities (e.g., White, male, and politically conservative) may provide important information to inform harm reduction programs revolving around reducing firearm access. Accordingly, the present study tested the relative contributions of conformity to nine masculine norms as predictors of the likelihood of owning a firearm in a sample of men and women: Emotional Control, Winning, Playboy, Violence, Self-Reliance, Risk-Taking, Power Over Women, Primacy of Work, and Heterosexual Self-Presentation. A total of 665 U.S. participants (206 men and 459 women) were recruited through Amazon’s Mechanical Turk system. The mean age of the total sample was 20.91 (SD = 7.61), and 20% reported currently owning one or more firearms. A negative binomial regression revealed that firearm ownership was best explained by a combination of being White, a man, politically conservative, and reporting more conformity to masculine role norms emphasizing violence, risk taking, and power over women, as well as (for women only) less conformity to playboy norms. These results suggest that owning a firearm may be a behavioral manifestation of a broader traditional gender role identity. Implications for harm reduction programs centered on firearms access are discussed.
... Although historically sociologists often conceded such discussions to economists (Ayres and Donohue 2003;Ghent and Grant 2015;Gius 2015;Lott 1997), criminal justice scholars (Costanza and Kilburn 2004), political scientists (Stucky, Miller, and Murphy 2008), and epidemiologists (Metzl and MacLeish 2015;Siegel et al. 2019), sociologists are increasingly carrying out scholarship on guns and society. For example, some sociologists have explored the social dynamics of firearms possession, linking people's race, gender, socioeconomic status, and political party affiliation to their attitudes about firearms and desires to possess them (Carlson 2015;Cassino and Besen-Cassino 2020;Mullins and Kavish 2017;Shapira, Jensen, and Lin 2018;Stroud 2015). Other sociologists have explored the links between gun ownership and people's personal health and well-being, including their personal happiness (Hill, Dowd-Arrow, Davis, and Burdette 2020b), fears (Dowd-Arrow, Hill, and Burdette 2019), and sleep habits (Hill, Dowd-Arrow, Burdette, and Hale 2020a). ...
... The sociology of guns literature is still in its infancy. Over the past several years, sociologists have carried out research on topics such as the social characteristics of gun owners (Carlson 2015;Cassino and Besen-Cassino 2020;Mullins and Kavish 2017), the association between gun ownership, health, and well-being (Dowd-Arrow et al. 2019; Hill, Dowd-Arrow, Burdette, and Hale 2020a; Hill, Dowd-Arrow, Davis, and Burdette 2020b), the characteristics of U.S. gun culture (Mencken and Froese 2019;Yamane 2017;Yamane et al. 2020), and the political expansion of gun rights in the United States (Malone and Steidley 2019;Steidley 2018). However, little research has explored pro-gun initiatives in U.S. schools, a salient topic given public concern over gun violence in schools. ...
Although the general public often thinks of schools as "gun-free zones," a growing number of U.S. colleges and universities recognize shooting sports organizations, enabling students to participate in rifle, pistol, shotgun, skeet, and trap sporting events. Building on recent scholarship that employs political opportunity and resource mobilization theories to analyze sports, we assess the roles that states' political characteristics and schools' resources play in the presence of student shooting sports organizations. Drawing on a comprehensive database of 1,953 four-year colleges and universities in the United States, and employing logistic regression analyses, we show that Republican-leaning states, schools with larger, mostly white, and majority men student bodies, and schools with Republican student organizations serve as conducive environments for shooting sports organizations. This article represents the most comprehensive study to date of shooting sports in U.S. schools and contributes to literatures on the sociology of guns, the sociology of sports, and social movements.
... Work conducted over the past 2 decades has provided evidence that supports this theory, in that the gender role stress that men often face is directly associated with interpersonal violence (Feder et al., 2010;O'Neill, 2007). Speaking directly to the role of gender role stress in gun violence, epidemiological research on gun ownership indicates that in addition to reasons such as self-protection, men often own guns as a way for them to reassert their masculine gender status in the face of threats to their masculinity, such as financial stress (Carlson, 2015;Cassino & Besen-Cassino, 2020;Warner et al., 2022). ...
Men commit 86% of all gun-related homicides in the United States. Increased rates of gun violence among men have been partly explained by a precarious manhood model, suggesting that men are prone to react with physical aggression following a gender status threat. The aim of this study was to test if high conformity to masculine norms and/or a gender status threat would elicit increased gun violence-related behaviors. Using a police training simulator, the present study tested whether conformity to masculine norms interacts with a masculinity threat manipulation in predicting increased and faster use of a replica Glock rearm during potentially dangerous simulated scenarios. As predicted, high conformity to masculine norms in the context of threat to masculinity predicted both increased and quicker rearm use in a sample of 90 heterosexual, cisgendered men in the United States. Results of this study point to a potential mechanism that may help explain gun violence among men.
... The analysis for this study proceeds in four parts. In part one, we draw on experimental data from our Team Content questionnaire to compare a conventional personal measure of gun ownership and a conventional household measure on a wide array of theoretical predictors of firearms ownership, including childhood gun socialization (Cao et al., 1997;Schutten et al., 2023), fear of crime (DeFronzo, 1979), racial resentment (Filindra et al., 2021;O'Brien et al., 2013), sexism (Cassino & Besen-Cassino, 2020), past criminal victimization (Hauser & Kleck, 2013;Marciniak & Loftin, 1991), political ideology and party identification (Cao et al., 1997;Warner & Thrash, 2020), Protestantism (Vegter & Kelley, 2020;Young, 1989), religiosity (Yamane, 2016), urbanicity, and southern residence (Dixon & Lizotte, 1987;Ellison, 1991). ...
... Additionally, we did not assess how unemployment-a major consequence of the pandemic-affected firearm purchasing and purchase intentions. Cassino and Besen-Cassino (2020) found that worsened economic conditions for men were associated with greater firearm purchases. It may be that the increase in unemployment and unstable economic times led honor-endorsing individuals to feel a need to purchase a firearm to maintain their reputation. ...
The surge in firearm sales from the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic have been linked to increases in firearm violence, which is of public concern given that having firearms in one’s home is associated with increased risk for domestic violence and suicide. Consistent with pre-pandemic trends, individuals tended to purchase firearms for self-protection during COVID-19. Prior work indicates that protective firearm ownership is motivated not only by perceptions that the world (and one’s local environment) is dangerous, but also by one’s endorsement of masculinity norms found in U.S. cultures of honor (primarily southern and western states). Honor-based masculinity norms emphasis reputation defense, toughness, and an absolute intolerance of disrespect. The present research examined the relative motivating influences of various threat perceptions and masculine honor endorsement in predicting reasons for non-COVID-19 firearm ownership, firearm purchasing during COVID-19, and purchase intentions. Three separate samples (total N = 2,483) of mostly White U.S. men completed online surveys during different months of the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Participants completed measures of their endorsement of masculine honor norms, factors associated with firearm purchasing (e.g., dangerous world beliefs, intolerance of uncertainty), and firearm purchasing behaviors. Results indicated that masculine honor endorsement was higher among (1) protective firearm owners compared to non-owners and non-protective owners, (2) firearm owners who purchased a firearm during COVID-19 compared to non-owners and non-purchasing owners, and (3) firearm owners with intentions to purchase firearms in the next year compared to those without intentions and undecided owners. Relative to other predictors (e.g., COVID-19 concerns, dangerous world beliefs), masculine honor endorsement was consistently the strongest predictor of these outcomes. Findings add to the literature by highlighting the strength of masculine honor endorsement in motivating (protective) firearm ownership. Implications for interpersonal violence and suicide are discussed.
... The second proposition is that guns are symbols and instruments of masculinity because they are primarily used by men (Azrael et al., 2017;Burdette et al., 2024;Dowd-Arrow et al., 2019;Ellison, 1991;Goss, 2017;Hepburn et al., 2007;Hill, Wen, et al., 2021;Parker et al., 2017;Smith et al., 2019;Smith & Smith, 1995) and because they can be used to project power and aggressive behavior (Cassino & Besen-Cassino, 2020;Cukier & Eagen, 2018;Cukier & Sheptycki, 2012;Diener & Kerber, 1979;Kahan & Braman, 2003;Nathenson, 2020;Neville-Shepard & Kelly, 2020;Pfaffendorf et al., 2021;Potts, 2000;Stroud, 2012;Tonso, 1982). Stroud (2012, p. 221) explains that ''because guns are so lethal, they imbue their users with traits associated with masculinity-control and power.'' ...
In this study, we formally examine the association between penis size dissatisfaction and gun ownership in America. The primary hypothesis, derived from the psychosexual theory of gun ownership, asserts that men who are more dissatisfied with the size of their penises will be more likely to personally own guns. To test this hypothesis, we used data collected from the 2023 Masculinity, Sexual Health, and Politics (MSHAP) survey, a national probability sample of 1,840 men, and regression analyses to model personal gun ownership as a function of penis size dissatisfaction, experiences with penis enlargement, social desirability, masculinity, body mass, mental health, and a range of sociodemographic characteristics. We find that men who are more dissatisfied with the size of their penises are less likely to personally own guns across outcomes, including any gun ownership, military-style rifle ownership, and total number of guns owned. The inverse association between penis size dissatisfaction and gun ownership is linear; however, the association is weakest among men ages 60 and older. With these findings in mind, we failed to observe any differences in personal gun ownership between men who have and have not attempted penis enlargement. To our knowledge, this is the first study to formally examine the association between penis size and personal gun ownership in America. Our findings fail to support the psychosexual theory of gun ownership. Alternative theories are posited for the apparent inverse association between penis size dissatisfaction and personal gun ownership, including higher levels of testosterone and constructionist explanations.
... Studies have shown that sexism shapes people's views on the gender income gap (Connor and Fiske 2019). Sexist attitudes predict opposition to gun restrictions (Cassino and Besen-Cassino 2020;Filindra 2023;Filindra et al. 2021) and hesitation about women in the military (Young and Nauta 2013). Sexists are also less likely to support reproductive rights (Huang et al. 2016). ...
We offer a theory that links sexism to economic threat from immigrants and immigration-related policy preferences. Sexism has generally been associated with vote choice and other policy preferences but has not been studied in the context of immigration. We argue that because sexists are concerned with maintaining gender hierarchies, they tend to be threatened by the perceived effects of immigrants on jobs, which can upset native men’s breadwinning ability and social status. Therefore, we expect that individuals scoring high on sexism are more likely to believe that immigrants are an economic threat and to support policies that make immigration harder and thus alleviate such a threat. We specify regression analyses and lagged dependent variable (LDV) models using data from two national datasets, the 2016 ANES, and the 2016–2018 Voter Study Group (VSG) panel. We find that controlling for known predictors, sexism is a significant driver of immigrant economic threat and support for immigration restrictions among white Americans. Results among nonwhites are mixed but tend to support our theory. We also find that the effect of sexism is not conditional upon the respondent’s gender. Lagged dependent variable models further strengthen our inferences, alleviating endogeneity concerns. Our analyses suggest a link between sexism and immigrant economic threat, suggesting that sexist Americans may perceive immigration as a threat to the economic status of men.
... Education and income have been found to increase levels of support for gun control, so I control for participants' educational degree (Celinska 2007). Since men experiencing unemployment may use gun ownership as a way to maintain their masculine identities or reestablish a sense of power, I control for household income and participants' employment status (0-unemployed, 1-employed) (Carlson 2015b;Cassino and Besen-Cassino 2020;Mencken and Froese 2019). Since participants' exposure to IPV would likely affect concern and support for interventions, two binary variables accounted for this. ...
Social movements pushed to reconceptualize intimate partner violence (IPV) as a social problem deserving of intervention rather than a private family matter. However, little work has examined which interventions the public is likely to support. How and where do personal politics affect perceptions of and responses to a social problem? To address these questions, 739 participants read a victim’s narrative from a court case and indicated their concern for the victim and support for issuing a protection order, prohibiting the abuser from owning a gun, or the victim owning a gun to protect herself. Concern for the victim and support for issuing a protection order was widespread, regardless of political leaning, with minor variations driven by role-taking and attitudes towards IPV. Similarly, support for the victim receiving a protection order was high, with political ideology and political affiliation having no direct effects. While concern increased support for each intervention, it held less explanatory power for gun-related interventions. Instead, political ideology and affiliation shaped support for disarming the abuser or arming the victim. Support for these interventions seemed to filter through a political lens. Thus, one’s personal politics drive divergent intervention attitudes, even when concern for a social problem is shared.
... These men reported more aggression-related words in the word-completion task and endured more painful pressure than men whose masculinity was not threatened. Relatedly, Cassino and Besen-Cassino (2020) found in two studies strong relationships between perceptions of threat to men's masculine identities and opposition to laws limiting access to guns. Perceptions of threat were measured by items from the Hostile Sexism Scale. ...
Most gun violence is committed by males, yet most males do not commit acts of gun violence, indicating that some aspect of masculinity that varies among males might account for this incongruence. I proposed that masculine gender role discrepancy strain, in combination with acquired capacity for gun violence, might account for why some boys and men commit acts of gun violence. The evidence for the role of discrepancy strain in the perpetration of violence was reviewed, with support coming from correlational studies, experiments, and qualitative studies in four social science disciplines: psychology, sociology, criminology, and cultural anthropology. This research suggested that males who feel that they do not measure up to their own standards for masculinity, or who are induced to feel that way after their masculinity is threatened, are likely to react violently. Furthermore, additional evidence linked discrepancy strain to three forms of actual gun violence: school shooters, mass shooters, and murder-suicides. I next examined the plausibility of the construct of acquired capability for gun violence, reviewing work on gun ownership, gun carrying, and gun enthusiasm. I concluded by providing recommendations for research and public education. In regard to the latter, I recommended that psychologists speak with parents, teachers, coaches, and other professionals who interact with boys to persuade them to carefully consider the messages that they are sending to boys.
... This research further points to the centrality of gender equality for understanding political systems, which plausibly touches on a range of policy issues including those that are not explicitly about gender but are nonetheless affected by it. For example, this approach could explore the gender-based influences of other policy domains that could have roots in masculinity culture, including military policy (Cockburn, 2007) and gun control (Cassino & Besen-Cassino, 2020). Parallel research on racism in the social sciences has shown that racial beliefs are associated with many not-explicitly racial policies including welfare, social security, and the death penalty (Mendelberg, 2001), and there have been calls for more research investigating the centrality of gender as a similarly powerful, group-based, political force (Winter, 2008). ...
Cross-nationally, attitudes toward abortion laws and laws affecting the lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) community covary in how progressive they are; the more legal rights one believes the LGB community should have, the more legal access to abortion one believes women should have. Based on these findings, we test the coexistence of the progressiveness of actual laws at a cross-national level of analysis. We also explore what could be some of the dominant predictors of the covariance of these laws, which include (1) fertility demands that work against individual freedoms to behave in ways counterproductive to fertility, and (2) religiosity, which can affect cultural prohibitions of both abortion and same-sex sexual activity, based on interpretations of scripture. We propose a third perspective, (3) gender equality, which could link to both abortion laws and LGB laws. Furthermore, we propose that gender equality may mediate how fertility demands and religiosity influence these laws, given knowledge that fertility demands and religiosity both assume traditional roles for women. Using archival data (N = 194 countries) obtained through publicly available reports, we analyzed the relationship between laws concerning abortion and laws concerning LGB rights and predicted their covariance using variables representing fertility-freedom, religiosity, and gender equality. The results show that gender equality is a robust predictor of the abortion-LGB link cross-nationally, and helps mediate the effects of the fertility-freedom and religiosity models. These data contribute to an understanding of the centrality of gender equality as an influential political factor for both sexual and reproductive rights.
... Our childhood socialization findings are important for two reasons. First, there is a growing body of research that attributes the gap in male and female gun ownership to masculinity, economic precarity, and the link between the two (Carlson, 2015b;Cassino & Besen-Cassino, 2020;Stroud, 2012;Warner & Ratcliff, 2021;. However, this line of research has largely ignored childhood socialization and thus may be subject to omitted variable bias. ...
The gun ownership literature is vast, with dozens of studies seeking to explain who owns guns and why. We build on this literature in two key ways. First, we introduce a new variable into the fold: sensitivity to harm. We theorize that this concern actively inhibits gun ownership. Second, we direct theoretical and empirical attention to a predictor that has frequently been overlooked in the contemporary gun literature even though its timing makes it the proverbial confounder: childhood gun socialization. Using data from a national sample of 1,100 adults and controlling for other known predictors, we find that sensitivity to harm is negatively related to gun ownership, whereas childhood socialization is positively related to it. Furthermore, we find that childhood socialization is not only the strongest predictor of owning guns, but also confounds the relationship between racial resentment and gun ownership, and fully mediates the effect of gender.
... Backlash could entail several related psychological mechanisms. Members of dominant social identity groups tend to view outgroups' gains in 'zero-sum' terms, implying ingroup losses [59]; threats to identity and status can trigger fear and feelings of loss of control, as well as behaviors to reassert perceived dominance [77,78]. Such behaviors are likely more common among individuals high in social dominance orientation (SDO) [57]. ...
Research indicates that increasing diversity in doctoral programs can positively affect students’ academic success. However, little research examines students’ responses to female scholars’ representation. The two studies presented here examine how students’ exposure to female academic role models shapes students’ attitudes toward their own academic success (i.e. self-efficacy). Such attitudes are critical because they predict student retention rates. In our first study, we randomly exposed 297 Ph.D. students in one academic discipline to either a gender-diverse (i.e. 30% female authors) or non-diverse syllabus in research methods (i.e. 10% female authors). We examined the effect of the intervention on students’ perceived likelihood of succeeding in the hypothetical course. Contrary to expectations derived from the literature, we found that increasing women’s representation in syllabi did not affect female students’ self-efficacy. Rather, male students expressed lower self-efficacy when evaluating the more gender-diverse syllabus. We also found that students’ attitudes toward diversity in academia predicted their reactions more strongly than did their own gender: gender-diverse syllabi reduced self-efficacy among those students unsupportive of diversity. In our second study, we analyzed non-interventional survey questions to examine the relationship between female role models and long-term academic self-efficacy. Analysis was observational and thus did not assess causality. We found that students with more role models have higher academic self-efficacy, irrespective of student and role model gender. Nonetheless, results also suggested that some students actively seek female role models: namely, female students, and particularly those valuing diversity. Our results ultimately suggest that exposure to female role models relates in surprising ways to Ph.D. students’ self-efficacy. Having more female role models correlates with greater expectations of academic success among certain groups of students, but with diminished expectations of academic success among other groups.
... 26 Men prefer to keep their feelings of shame or guilt to themselves rather than challenging their masculine identity, which also makes them more at risk of a suicide death. 27 Ultimately, because guns and other weapons are cultural symbols of masculinity, 28,29 men are more likely than women to have access to them and use them to die by suicide. ...
Suicides were identified from the underlying causes of death. Joinpoint regression examined the distribution and shift in suicide age-adjusted death rates overall and by age groups, race/ethnicity, method of suicide, and urbanicity. Analyses were conducted in 2020. Results: Between 1999 and 2018, a total of 106,861 male adults aged ≥65 years died of suicide (age-adjusted rate=31.4 per 100,000 population, 95% CI=31.2, 31.6). Suicide rates showed a V-shaped trend. They were declining annually by 1.8% (95% CI= À2.4, À1.2); however, starting in 2007, there was a shift upward, increasing significantly by 1.7% per year for the next decade (95% CI=1.0, 1.6). Suicide rates were highest among those aged ≥85 years (48.8 per 100,000 population with an upward shift in 2008), Whites (35.3 per 100,000 population with an upward shift in trend in 2007), and the most rural communities (39.0 per 100,000 population). Most suicides were due to firearms (78.3% at a rate of 24.7 per 100,000 population), especially in rural areas, and shifted upward after 2007. Conclusions: Increases in suicide rates among male older adults in the U.S., particularly after the 2007−2008 economic recession, are concerning. Tailored suicide prevention intervention strategies are needed to address suicide-related risk factors. Am J Prev Med 2021;000(000):1−10.
... The marketing of firearms is particularly gendered. The National Rifle Association (NRA) has traditionally marketed firearms to men, with advertisements emphasizing the importance of firearms to achieving and maintaining masculinity (Cassino and Besen-Cassino 2020;Melzer 2012). However, marketing strategies also evoke specific gendered messaging that targets women. ...
An abusive partner’s access to a firearm is one of the strongest predictors of intimate partner homicide, and there is evidence that laws limiting abusers’ access to firearms are associated with fewer fatalities. Yet, there is a movement to increase access to firearms as a strategy for self‐protection among intimate partner violence (IPV) victims. The present study describes both firearm‐related and non‐firearm‐related protective actions among victims of IPV, and further examines which factors (e.g., pro‐gun attitudes) are associated with engaging in firearm‐related protective actions. Questionnaires were administered to women recruited from six domestic violence shelters in Texas from December 2017 to September 2018. Nearly 13 percent of victims in the analytic sample (N = 197) engaged in one or more forms of firearm‐related protective actions in the past year. Multivariate analyses revealed that participants were more likely to have engaged in firearm‐related protective actions if they experienced higher firearm‐related IPV and if they held stronger pro‐gun attitudes. The results highlight the importance of basing firearm policy on empirical evidence as firearms can have deadly consequences.
... One approach to answering this question has relied on identity politics or political positions based on pre-conceived categories that define oneself, leading to the transformation of partisan attachments into cultural identities. Owning a gun has also been linked to gender and racial identities, particularly helping white men construct their masculinity (Cassino and Bensen-Cassino 2019). As Harel notes, "guns are never just about the gun. ...
We explore patterns and correlates of gun ownership in the United States, with a particular focus on differentiating those who will never own a gun (“nevers”) and those who are open to ownership in the future (“maybes”) from current‐owners. We use the Guns in American Life Survey (GALS), collected in September of 2018 (n = 3,103), to explore the role of several classes of factors in shaping experiences and attitudes, including socialization, fear and victimization, ideology (confidence in the police, punitiveness, justifiable violence, and gun “science” research), and preparedness. Descriptive findings suggest that maybe‐owners are similar to never‐owners in some ways in background factors (e.g., tending to be women, lower‐income, and not living in a rural area) and more like owners in other ways (e.g., conservative, Republican, and with children in the home). Regression results reveal some anticipated patterns and other unexpected ones. For example, past victimization differentiates the maybes from the nevers but not from the owners. Worry about mass and school shootings leads one away from gun ownership, while worry about terrorist attacks leads toward it. Curiously, greater confidence in the police is highest for the maybes. They are solidly in the middle on other ideological issues, including beliefs in justifiable violence and gun “science” research. We find different ideological issues come together as a continuum of gun ownership status. Finally, those most likely to buy a gun have owned one previously and cycle in and out of gun ownership. They have also used agency by taking other steps to protect themselves. Our findings identify a new subset of occasional owners and illuminate the process of moving toward gun acquisition.
... A growing body of scholarship has explored the degree to which whiteness and masculinity are implicated in the social meanings of firearms. In a context of economic decline in which it is increasingly difficult to satisfy traditional notions of masculinity, some men are turning to guns (Carlson, 2015;Cassino and Besen-Cassino, 2020), objects that allow them to be "good guys", figures who are noble, prepared, and willing to confront the world's dangers to protect the innocent, especially women and children (Stroud, 2016). Elisabeth Anker (2019) argues that gun use has to be understood within a larger context of political and economic precarity beyond one's own economic well-being. ...
Building on literatures that examine why firearms are appealing and to whom and employing Weber’s concept of “legitimate violence”, this paper utilizes an online concealed carry forum to critically analyze how firearm proliferation is rationalized in the U.S. The analysis focuses on three specific examples of violence—the Parkland, Florida, and Philando Castile shootings, and stories of children who find guns and shoot themselves and/or others. This work is a critical examination of the social construction of “legitimate violence” that deconstructs the discourses embedded in the “pro-gun” notion that the answer to gun violence is more guns.
The United States is a global leader in estimated rates of civilian gun ownership, and over the past few years—as the country grappled with a struggling economy exacerbated by a global pandemic—gun‐buying surged. We argue that the COVID‐19 pandemic's economic impact has implications for gun purchasing interest, and this intersects with gendered expectations about familial roles. Integrating sociological scholarship on gender and families with consumer behavior research, and using a preregistered online survey of over 8000 American adults collected in the early months of the pandemic's emergence in the United States (May 2020–June 2020), we hypothesize that men in familial roles may express greater gun interest in response to financial instability, and theorize why such a process may also be observed among women. Analyses show that men's gun interest is unaffected by family roles or financial distress. Women in family roles—mothers, in particular—who experience financial stress, however, are significantly more amenable toward guns than other women and express interest at levels approaching those of men. We discuss how such findings increase our understanding of the heterogeneity of gun owners.
This paper situates current social psychological research on the symbolic use of firearms (e.g., as a source of personal safety) in broader historical context to motivate a more thorough consideration of collective power motives. Historically, firearms have been used to dominate racial outgroup members (e.g., White Americans use of firearms and firearm laws to dispossess indigenous people of land or control free and enslaved Black people) or, at times, attempt to resist group-based oppression (e.g., Black Americans use of firearms to struggle against White Jim Crow terrorism). Given most gun owners report self-protection as their primary reason for firearm ownership and yet anti-Black attitudes are still a consistently important predictor of firearm ownership among dominant group members (e.g., White Americans), this paper examines how guns may function as a perceived source of personal safety and collective power. I center the persistent role of White supremacy and anti-Blackness in original U.S. firearm psychology and policy to illuminate the interrelatedness of personal safety and collective power perceptions, and how perceived threats to in-group power may motivate the use of guns and policies that selectively regulate gun access to mitigate associated safety concerns. Seeking to nudge social psychology to more thoroughly examine firearms' potential function as a symbolic source of collective power, I end by discussing how considering collective power can help us better understand how historically dominant and historically marginalized groups view firearms today while also illuminating some barriers to the pursuit of gun safety for all.
Affluent White rural men have the highest rates of gun ownership in the United States. However, few studies have specifically examined reasons and motivations for gun ownership and gun behaviors in this population. Therefore, this study sought to examine the relationship between stress variables, namely masculine gender role stress, adverse childhood experiences (ACEs), and income level, and subsequent pro-gun beliefs and amount of time an individual carried a gun within this population. Results indicated that only two measures of pro-gun beliefs (i.e., believing guns keep one safe, believing guns are present in one’s social sphere) were correlated with percentage of time an individual carried. Additionally, ACEs were positively correlated with believing guns influence how others perceive oneself, levels of masculine gender role stress, and income. These results suggest that White rural gun owners who have increased ACEs have decreased income and tend to believe that owning guns impacts their social status with peers. However, increased ACEs do not influence belief about guns keeping one safe, believing guns are present in one’s social sphere, or gun carriage. Instead, White rural gun owners without childhood adversity may be more susceptible to believing their safety depends on guns and belongingness within their social sphere. Future research should assess reasons why affluent White rural men find it important to maintain their safety in the context of gun ownership.
This essay underscores the importance of public sociology and the critical and policy outcomes it encourages. The work also notes the importance of translating sophisticated theory and high quality, intricate methods for public consumption. The essay concludes by reviewing the growth of public sociology in the field at large and the special focus Sociological Forum has built in this area since 2015.
Introduction
This research integrates literature on masculinity stress—the distress experienced as the result of a perceived discrepancy with male gender norms—with research on goal conflict to examine preferences for plant-based meat alternatives (PBMAs). Men experiencing masculinity stress are likely to hold salient a goal of being masculine, which should lead to less preference for PBMAs. However, many of these men simultaneously hold competing goals, such as making ethical food choices, which remain inhibited in favor of the focal masculinity goal. We argue that once men experiencing masculinity stress highlight their masculinity through the selection of a manly product, they satisfy that higher-order goal and are then free to pursue previously inhibited goals, such as making an ethical choice through the selection of PBMAs.
Methods
We present the results of three studies supporting these expectations. Study 1 tests the link between masculinity stress and meat (alternative) consumption using consumer search behavior collected from Google Trends, showing that masculinity stress is positively (negatively) correlated with searches for red meat (PBMAs). Study 2 shows that men experiencing masculinity stress are more inclined to choose PBMAs, provided they are presented within a masculine product context. Study 3 presents a parallel mediation model, showing that ethical considerations (as opposed to masculine goals) shape the choice of PBMA preference.
Results and discussion
We conclude with a discussion of theoretical implications for the impression management strategies utilized by men experiencing masculinity stress and practical implications for the growing PBMA industry.
From the earliest days of the British North American colonies, violence permeates American society. At the political-economic level, violence established and expanded the nation through slavery and military conquest. At the inter-personal level, people chose violence to resolve disputes, and for entertainment. The one consistent element has been the ‘masterless men’, white males who feel that whiteness and divinely endowed liberty entitle them to more than they currently have in property, employment, or status. Endowed with the right of self-determination and cultural reinforcement for feelings of inherent superiority, they have embraced fantastical conspiracies and restorative violence as personal gratification and cultural terror management whenever they feel that perceived social inferiors are succeeding beyond their appropriate social position, especially through military service, economic entrepreneurship, and election victory. Conspiracy and violent fantasy promise to restore racial-masculine hierarchy from an allegedly ideal past to fulfill God’s divine purpose for the United States.
Objectives: Bridge the gap between feminist scholarship and sociological literature on gun utility by examining the correlates of gun usage in heterosexual intimate partner homicide by offender gender. Methods: Using data on 7,588 incidents from the National Violent Death Reporting System (NVDRS) from 2003 to 2018, logistic regression models examined the odds of using a firearm during intimate partner homicide for both male and female offenders. Results: Men disproportionately employed guns to regain control when their dominance and/or masculinity was threatened, whereas women used firearms in self-defense against an armed partner. Conclusions: The results suggest that gender-based motivations distinguish whether or not a firearm is used in intimate partner homicide.
Conformity to western socialized norms of masculinity has been associated with negative mental health outcomes and is considered to be a factor in negative social, political, and environmental impacts. Encouraging men to engage in help-seeking behaviors is a frequently noted solution, however, there has been limited prior research identifying methods to achieve this. To fill this research gap, this study consists of two phases; 1). The development and initial validation of the Anchored Interdependent Masculinity Scale (AIMS), 2). Exploring whether a nature-based intervention may prove effective in engaging masculine-identified individuals in help-seeking behaviors. Phase 1 of this project involved testing the AIMS with two studies distributed via Facebook advertising to recruit a geographically representative sample (n1= 186; n2=155) across the United States. Initial analysis found that the AIMS was an effective metric to gauge individual association with masculinity norms compared to current psychometric scales. The second phase involved an initial feasibility study that engaged five participants in a week-long nature-based mindfulness retreat. The second phase used a mixed methods case study assessing a nature-based retreat for teen boys. Findings suggested that a nature-based intervention may; 1.) Shift participant anchoring of masculinity to one of interdependence, 2.) Reduce symptoms of depression anxiety and stress, and 3.) Enhance connectedness to nature. Though initial results are promising, future research is required to further understand the relationship between interdependent masculinity, nature-connectedness, and positive mental health outcomes.
Objective
Using theories of group threat and research on the political dynamics of gun ownership, this article examines two research questions: To what extent does the political affiliation of the president of the United States shape gun ownership? Moreover, how does the president of the United States’ political affiliation intersect with individuals’ political alignments to impact gun ownership patterns?
Methods
This study utilizes repeated cross‐sectional data from the General Social Survey (1980–2018). Specifically, it uses logistic regression to examine the intersection of the political affiliation of the U.S. president in a given survey year and respondents’ individual political identities.
Results
Although there is no independent effect of the president's political affiliation on gun ownership, the results indicate there is an increase in reported gun ownership among Republicans when a Democrat was in office. A similar increase is observed for Democrats when a Republican is in office.
Conclusion
These results demonstrate the linked macro–micro dynamics of gun ownership, specifically for political contexts.
Men are more likely than women to harm themselves and others with firearms. Central to this problem is men’s interest in owning firearms. The precarious manhood paradigm (PMP; Vandello et al., 2008) suggests that masculinity is tenuous and must be outwardly displayed. We conducted a PMP-informed experiment to test whether threats to masculinity were associated with increased interest in owning firearms. Community participants in the United States (Men n=388, Women n=243) completed an online “marketing survey” and were then given false personality feedback profiles. All feedback was standardized with exception of the masculinity/femininity profile. Men were randomly assigned to a masculinity threat (masculinity reported as below average; MThreat, n=131), boost (masculinity reported as above average; MBoost, n=129), and control (masculinity reported as average; MControl, n=128) conditions. Women were randomly assigned to a femininity threat (n=84), boost (n=87), and control (n=72) conditions (conditions were identical except women received femininity threats/boosts). Participants were then asked about their interest in owning various firearms. MThreat participants reported significantly higher interest in owning every firearm shown compared to MControl participants, and significantly more interest than MBoost participants for half of the firearms. No differences in firearm interest were evident between MBoost and MControl conditions. No differences in firearm interest were evident across all conditions in the women sample. All participants were then debriefed. Results suggest men’s desire to own firearms maybe connected to masculine insecurities. Efforts should be made to socially defuse the masculinity-firearm connection. Further research implications and limitations are discussed.
Past work has shown that men’s gender identities often lead them to eschew household labour in an attempt to shore up threatened masculinity. As the COVID-19 pandemic has lead to both enormous financial disruption and high levels of stress among the population, we expect these patterns to be exacerbated. We focus on the helping children with virtual school activities, as it is a uniquely stressful form of household labour, and use two studies, using different techniques and datasets, to show that among men subjected to economic stress, higher levels of stress are associated with a lower likelihood of helping with virtual school activities. Ramifications of this for both individual stress levels and for societal outcomes are discussed, as are the disproportionate impact of these effects on members of racial and ethnic minority groups, who are already subject to high stress levels. Keywords: COVID; masculinity; household labour; childcare; stress
In this article, I use the 2018 Guns in American Life Survey (GALS) to investigate the relationship between feminist identity, gun ownership, gun carrying, and women’s empowerment. Notably, while identifying as a feminist lessens the likelihood that a woman will own a gun, of women who own handguns, feminists are more likely to carry their guns all or most of the time. Past victimization is associated with ownership and carrying, confirming genuine concern by women about their safety. Finally, findings reveal that women are more empowered by guns than are men and the relationship is moderated by age. Results are discussed in light of the current American gun culture focused on self-defense and a carry mindset that some women develop as feminist culture in action.
Protection is now the modal motivation for gun ownership, and men continue to outnumber women among gun owners. While research has linked economic precarity (e.g., insecurity and anxiety) to gun ownership and attitudes, separating economic well-being from constructions of masculinity is challenging. In response to blocked economic opportunities, some gun owners prioritize armed protection, symbolically replacing the masculine role of “provider” with one associated with “protection.” Thus, understanding both persistently high rates of gun ownership in the United States (in spite of generally declining crime) alongside the gender gap in gun ownership requires deeper investigations into the meaning of guns in the United States and the role of guns in conceptualizations of American masculinity. We use recently collected crowdsourced survey data to test this provider-to-protector shift, exploring how economic precarity may operate as a cultural-level masculinity threat for some, and may intersect with marital/family status to shape gun attitudes and behaviors for both gun owners and nonowners. Results show that investments in stereotypical masculine ideals, rather than economic precarity, are linked to support for discourses associated with protective gun ownership and empowerment.
Macro-level forms of inequality work intersectionally to establish democracy normatively, as well as shape its institutions. Liberal democracies, once revolutionarily new political formations, rest on an equally revolutionary understanding of male domination based not on descent, but on economic arrangements (the new ‘breadwinner’ role) and political institutions (the ‘brotherhood’ national state). Over time, social movements have diminished liberal democracy’s original exclusions of women and minority ethnic men so that many citizens’ daily lives now contradict this once hegemonic normative order. The US party binary pushes contemporary movements to transform or restore this understanding of democracy under the political umbrellas of the competing Democratic and Republican parties. This polarisation then contributes to the gendering of movement claims and political representation. Gendered polarisation creates opportunities for cohesion among movements on both sides and yet blocks more fundamental reforms of US democracy.
Key messages
Gendered democracy is undergoing transition from breadwinner-brotherhood.
The binary US parties have become gendered antagonists.
Agendas are restoration vs transformation of the brotherhood-breadwinner model.
Social movements clustered under Democratic or Republican party umbrellas align with each other. </ul
There is a fairly well‐established demographic profile of gun owners in the United States, yet much less is known about the meaning and importance individuals attach to guns, their right to own them, or the varying facets of gun owner identity. Unknown is if and/or how the attitudes, fears, concerns, and anxieties that influence gun ownership also shape the significance of guns in individuals’ lives. To that end, we examine three assessments of gun meaning: the importance of the right to own guns for one’s sense of freedom; the importance of being a gun owner to one’s personal identity; and the extent to which owners find guns emotionally and morally empowering (e.g., guns making one feel confident, important, in control). Using data from an original Mechanical Turk survey (n = 876), we show that diffuse political, social, and cultural anxieties shape gun meaning more so than do instrumental fears around crime and victimization.
Gun ownership is a key predictor of gun policy preferences, political advocacy on behalf of gun rights, and political engagement. Theories have linked both racial and gender ideologies to gun ownership among white Americans, but the evidence is spotty. Statistical analyses provide some limited confirmation that racial resentment is a key predictor of gun ownership, but the role of sexism has not been tested quantitatively especially in conjunction with racial resentment. We use the 2004–2016 ANES and a 2015 Gun Survey to statistically test the relative importance of racial resentment and sexism in predicting gun ownership, rationales for owning firearms, and NRA membership among whites. We find strong evidence that racial resentment is associated with gun ownership, rationales for owning firearms, and NRA membership, but the results for sexism are generally not consistent with expectations.
Issues arising from the measurement of gender identity on surveys have received scant attention from survey methodologists. We make use of three studies (two in the US and one in Mexico) to look at the effects of asking about gender identity on downstream measurements of political party affiliation. In all three studies, we show a significant impact of priming respondents to think about gender identity on expressed political identity. In two of the studies, we also find conditional effects based on the predispositions of respondents, and we find throughout that these effects are much stronger for men than for women.
Key messages
Asking about their gender identity leads to significant shifts in men’s reported partisanship.
In the US, saying that they are more masculine leads men to say that they are more Republican.
While they are needed to bring our analyses in line with our theories, researchers need to be careful about how they use sexual orientation and gender identity items in surveys. </ul
The mobilized masculinity of democracies today is often presented as either a natural way for men to respond to the economic and political challenges of globalization or as a return to the patriarchal style of politics of the past. This article argues instead for an understanding of liberal democracy itself as gendered, being the collective masculinity of brotherhoods representing rivalrous nations. The first great transition from patriarchies and monarchies to brotherhoods and democracies is not being unmade now but facing a second transition to a different understanding of gender and power. This normative rise of a partnership model in families and politics is incomplete and highly contested everywhere. In the United States, it has become a partisan conflict expressed in gender terms. The Republican defense of the brotherhood state and its exclusive version of national good is countered by a newer but increasingly institutionalized vision of democracies as representing women and men equally. By more explicitly demasculinizing family headship and political leadership, social justice movements and the Democratic Party symbolically resist the restoration of gender norms privileging breadwinners and brotherhoods.
Exploring the symbolic meaning of guns in the United States may be one the best ways to approach theoretical questions concerning the effect of "culture in action" because it focuses on a single object-the gun-which brims with symbolic power far beyond its physical utility. Using data from the Baylor Religion Surveys (Wave 4), we investigate the extent to which guns empower gun owners morally and emotionally. We also investigate the diversity of gun owners. We find a wide range of gun empowerment among gun owners , and that this relationship is related to gender, race, religiosity, political views, gun use, and economic distress. Our findings also indicate that Americans' attachment to guns is not explained entirely by regional, religious, or political cultures. Instead, we demonstrate that white men in economic distress find comfort in guns as a means to reestablish a sense of individual power and moral certitude. Gun empowerment, in turn, affects opinions about gun action and policy. K E Y W O R D S : gun control; gun culture; culture in action; gun empowerment; race and guns. In 1970, historian Richard Hofstadter explained America's exceptionally high rates of gun ownership and violence as the result of a deep-seated "gun culture." While we often reference this uniquely American phenomenon, the explanatory value of Hofstadter's (1970) assessment is unclear. To call distinctive social and political outcomes the result of "culture" leaves much to be desired. It also raises a host of difficult questions concerning what constitutes culture, what produces culture , and how do we demonstrate the effects of culture in action. Exploring the meaning of guns in the United States may be one the best ways to approach these issues because it focuses on a single object-the gun-which brims with symbolic power far beyond its physical utility. Ann Swidler (1986) argues that "symbolic forms are the means through which 'social processes of shared modes of behavior and outlook with a community' take place." (p. 273). As such, the moral and emotional meaning of firearms provides a case study in how symbolic elements of cultural meaning are socially constructed and influence strategies of action. "Our job as cultural analysts is to discern what the shapes and consistencies of local meanings actually are, and to determine how, why, and to what extent they hang together." (Sewell 2005:174). To that end, we focus on the perceived meaning of guns among gun owners in order to examine variation in gun symbolism along with the social sources of the gun's semiotic power. Using original data The authors would like to thank Lindsay Wilkinson, Christopher Pieper, and three anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments.
Given the importance of work to the male gender role, the recent U.S. economic recession (in which men accounted for over 70 % of jobs lost; Boushey 2009) provided a window into the role of employment in men’s identities. We examined men’s and women’s beliefs about the effects of involuntary unemployment on others’ evaluations of them (i.e., metaperceptions). Specifically, participants evaluated targets (other people or themselves) on prescriptive and proscriptive traits linked to gender (see Rudman et al. 2012), and on gender status loss (e.g., whether one is “not a real man”). Using a nationally representative sample of participants from the United States (N = 816) with an equal number of men and women (Ns = 408), we found that, compared with women, men estimated lower appraisals of their own gender status by others after either an imagined or a recalled job loss. However, men’s gendered metaperceptions following job loss were more negative than the evaluations that others actually gave a hypothetical male victim of job loss. Thus, men may believe that others will evaluate them more negatively than others would actually evaluate them following job loss. We discuss these results in light of the current economy and shifting cultural norms regarding employment.
O conceito de masculinidade hegemônica tem influenciado os estudos de gênero em vários campos acadêmicos, mas ao mesmo tempo tem atraído um sério criticismo. Os autores traçam a origem do conceito a uma convergência de ideias no início dos anos 1980 e mapeiam as formas através das quais o conceito foi aplicado quando os estudos sobre homens e masculinidades se expandiram. Avaliando as principais críticas, os autores defendem o conceito de masculinidade como fundamental, uma vez que, na maioria das pesquisas que o opera, seu uso não é reificador nem essencialista. Entretanto, as críticas aos modelos assentados em características de gênero e às tipologias rígidas são sólidas. O tratamento do sujeito em pesquisas sobre masculinidades hegemônicas pode ser melhorado com a ajuda dos recentes modelos psicológicos, mesmo que os limites à flexibilidade discursiva devam ser reconhecidos. O conceito de masculinidade hegemônica não equivale a um modelo de reprodução social; precisam ser reconhecidas as lutas sociais nas quais masculinidades subordinadas influenciam formas dominantes. Por fim, os autores revisam o que foi confirmado por formulações iniciais (a ideia de masculinidades múltiplas, o conceito de hegemonia e a ênfase na transformação) e o que precisa ser descartado (tratamento unidimensional da hierarquia e concepções de características de gênero). Os autores sugerem a reformulação do conceito em quatro áreas: um modelo mais complexo da hierarquia de gênero, enfatizando a agência das mulheres; o reconhecimento explícito da geografia das masculinidades, enfatizando a interseccionalidade entre os níveis local, regional e global; um tratamento mais específico da encorporação1 em contextos de privilégio e poder; e uma maior ênfase na dinâmica da masculinidade hegemônica, reconhecendo as contradições internas e as possibilidades de movimento em direção à democracia de gênero.
Scholars see the gendered division of household labor as a stronghold of gender inequality. We explore changes in household labor and gender relations when conservative, working-class families experience employment disruptions. Using data from 49 qualitative interviews conducted with men and women following the forced unemployment of breadwinning husbands, we observe some change in gendered household labor but conclude that a significant degendering of housework is thwarted by institutional-, interactive-, and individual-level processes. At the institutional level, the lack of well-paying jobs and the persistent gendering of household tasks discourage change. At the individual level, challenges to gendered identities encourage a reinforcement of traditional gender ideologies. At the interactional level, women’s responsibility for care work and the meaning of paid work for unemployed husbands forestall the adjustment of tasks.
Two laboratory experiments investigated the hypothesis that threat to male identity would increase the likelihood of gender harassment. In both experiments, using the computer harassment paradigm, male university students (N=80 in Experiment 1, N=90 in Experiment 2) were exposed to different types of identity threat (legitimacy threat and threat to group value in Experiment 1 and distinctiveness threat and prototypicality threat in Experiment 2) or to no threat and were then given the opportunity to send pornographic material to a virtual female interaction partner. Results show that (a) participants harassed the female interaction partner more when they were exposed to a legitimacy, distinctiveness, or prototypicality threat than to no threat; (b) this was mainly true for highly identified males; and (c) harassment enhanced postexperimental gender identification. Results are interpreted as supporting a social identity account of gender harassment.
If men can respond to a threat to their masculinity by refusing to do the dishes, doing push-ups, or going to a more fundamentalist church, why not respond by espousing certain political views or favoring certain candidates?
This chapter sketches out some of the ways in which hegemonic constructions of masculinity in mainstream advertising normalize (White) male violence and point to some new developments and continuities in the way this is achieved. Several recurring themes in advertising that targets men help support the equation of White masculinity and violence: these include the angry, aggressive, White, working-class male as anti-authority rebel (21st-century version); violence as genetically programmed male behavior; the use of military and sports symbolism to enhance the masculine appeal and identification of products; and the association of muscularity with ideal masculinity. In addition to examining some of the ways in which advertising links violence with White masculinity, this chapter makes a call to study other cultural sites where violent masculinities are produced and legitimated: video games, comic books, toys, the sports culture, professional wrestling, comedy, popular music, and pornography. More media literacy education is needed to help us understand better the connection between interpersonal violence and the construction of gender in media texts and other cultural representations and narratives, which might then contribute to more sophisticated and effective antiviolence interventions.
Background:
In 1994, 40% of U.S. gun owners who had recently acquired a firearm did so without a background check. No contemporary estimates exist.
Objective:
To estimate the proportion of current U.S. gun owners who acquired their most recent firearm without a background check, by time since and manner of acquisition, for the nation as a whole and separately in states with and without legislation regulating private sales.
Design:
Probability-based online survey.
Setting:
United States, 2015.
Participants:
1613 adult gun owners.
Measurements:
Current gun owners were asked where and when they acquired their last firearm; if they purchased the firearm; and whether, as part of that acquisition, they had a background check (or were asked to show a firearm license or permit).
Results:
22% (95% CI, 16% to 27%) of gun owners who reported obtaining their most recent firearm within the previous 2 years reported doing so without a background check. For firearms purchased privately within the previous 2 years (that is, other than from a store or pawnshop, including sales between individuals in person, online, or at gun shows), 50% (CI, 35% to 65%) were obtained without a background check. This percentage was 26% (CI, 5% to 47%) for owners residing in states regulating private firearm sales and 57% (CI, 40% to 75%) for those living in states without regulations on private firearm sales.
Limitation:
Potential inaccuracies due to recall and social desirability bias.
Conclusion:
22% of current U.S. gun owners who acquired a firearm within the past 2 years did so without a background check. Although this represents a smaller proportion of gun owners obtaining firearms without background checks than in the past, millions of U.S. adults continue to acquire guns without background checks, especially in states that do not regulate private firearm sales.
Primary funding source:
Fund for a Safer Future and the Joyce Foundation.
Nothing conjures up images of the American frontier and a pick-yourself-up-by-the-bootstraps view of freedom and independence quite like guns. Gun Crusaders is a fascinating inside look at how the four-million member National Rifle Association and its committed members come to see each and every gun control threat as a step down the path towards gun confiscation, and eventually socialism. Enlivened by a rich analysis of NRA materials, meetings, leader speeches, and unique in-depth interviews with NRA members, Gun Crusaders focuses on how the NRA constructs and perceives threats to gun rights as one more attack in a broad liberal cultural war. Scott Melzer shows that the NRA promotes a nostalgic vision of frontier masculinity, whereby gun rights defenders are seen as patriots and freedom fighters, defending not the freedom of religion, but the religion of individual rights and freedoms.
Young's essay draws attention to practices of citizenship that can arise under a government at war and explores the logic of the masculine role of protector. A government at war, which Young calls a "security regime," protects its members in an overly aggressive fashion from external dangers as well as from internal dissension. A state acting as a security regime, however, threatens to undermine democratic practice by expecting uncritical obedience and submissiveness from its population. This role toward its citizens is analogous to the role a protective family patriarch plays toward the women and children of his family. Young argues that, even from a protective government, what adult citizens want instead are relationships that respect their autonomy and equality.
This study uses in-depth interviews and participant observation with gun carriers in Michigan to examine how socioeconomic decline shapes the appropriation of guns by men of diverse class and race backgrounds. Gun carriers nostalgically referenced the decline of Mayberry America—a version of America characterized by the stable employment of male breadwinners and low crime rates. While men of color and poor and working-class men bear the material brunt of these transformations, this narrative of decline impacts how both privileged and marginalized men think of themselves as men because of the ideological centrality of breadwinning to American masculinity. Using Young’s (2003) “masculine protectionism” framework, I argue that against this backdrop of decline, men use guns not simply to instrumentally address the threat of crime but also to negotiate their own position within a context of socioeconomic decline by emphasizing their role as protector.
In the 1996 overhaul of federal welfare legislation, Congress included provisions to promote employment, marriage, and responsible fatherhood to prevent poverty among low-income families. Little previous research has focused on how marriage promotion policies construct paternal identity. Drawing on data from an 18-month study of a federally funded relationship skills program for low-income, unmarried parents, I analyze how responsible fatherhood policies attempt to shape ideas of successful fatherhood and masculinity in the service of the government’s pro-marriage, antipoverty agenda. The program promoted a class-specific version of what I call marital masculinity, one that seeks to redefine marriageability for low-income men by claiming that marriage comes before financial success and encourages fathers to earn more. It did this by targeting fathers’ masculine identities in two ways: first, by emasculating fathers who only provide financially for their children, and second, by promoting a highly gendered conception of paternal caregiving. By analyzing how this strategy can be understood as both empowering and controlling for low-income men, this research adds to the sociological literature on how welfare policies shape paternal identity and gendered family practices.
In Black Sexual Politics, one of America's most influential writers on race and gender explores how images of Black sexuality have been used to maintain the color line and how they threaten to spread a new brand of racism around the world today.
The masculine overcompensation thesis asserts that men react to masculinity threats with extreme demonstrations of masculinity, a proposition tested here across four studies. In study 1, men and women were randomly given feedback suggesting they were either masculine or feminine. Women showed no effects when told they were masculine; however, men given feedback suggesting they were feminine expressed more support for war, homophobic attitudes, and interest in purchasing an SUV. Study 2 found that threatened men expressed greater support for, and desire to advance in, dominance hierarchies. Study 3 showed in a large-scale survey on a diverse sample that men who reported that social changes threatened the status of men also reported more homophopic and prodominance attitudes, support for war, and belief in male superiority. Finally, study 4 found that higher testosterone men showed stronger reactions to masculinity threats than those lower in testosterone. Together, these results support the masculine overcompensation thesis, show how it can shape political and cultural attitudes, and identify a hormonal factor influencing the effect.
The concept of hegemonic masculinity has influenced gender studies across many academic fields but has also attracted serious criticism. The authors trace the origin of the concept in a convergence of ideas in the early 1980s and map the ways it was applied when research on men and masculinities expanded. Evaluating the principal criticisms, the authors defend the underlying concept of masculinity, which in most research use is neither reified nor essentialist. However, the criticism of trait models of gender and rigid typologies is sound. The treatment of the subject in research on hegemonic masculinity can be improved with the aid of recent psychological models, although limits to discursive flexibility must be recognized. The concept of hegemonic masculinity does not equate to a model of social reproduction; we need to recognize social struggles in which subordinated masculinities influence dominant forms. Finally, the authors review what has been confirmed from early formulations (the idea of multiple masculinities, the concept of hegemony, and the emphasis on change) and what needs to be discarded (onedimensional treatment of hierarchy and trait conceptions of gender). The authors suggest reformulation of the concept in four areas: a more complex model of gender hierarchy, emphasizing the agency of women; explicit recognition of the geography of masculinities, emphasizing the interplay among local, regional, and global levels; a more specific treatment of embodiment in contexts of privilege and power; and a stronger emphasis on the dynamics of hegemonic masculinity, recognizing internal contradictions and the possibilities of movement toward gender democracy.
The purpose of this article is to advance a new understanding of gender as a routine accomplishment embedded in everyday interaction. To do so entails a critical assessment of existing perspectives on sex and gender and the introduction of important distinctions among sex, sex category, and gender. We argue that recognition of the analytical independence of these concepts is essential for understanding the interactional work involved in being a gendered person in society. The thrust of our remarks is toward theoretical reconceptualization, but we consider fruitful directions for empirical research that are indicated by our formulation.
Since 1982, there have been 28 cases of random school shootings in American high schools and middle schools. The authors find (a) that the shootings were not a national problem but a series of local problems that occurred in “red states” or counties (places that voted Republican in the 2000 election); (b) that most of the boys who opened fire were mercilessly and routinely teased and bullied and that their violence was retaliatory against the threats to manhood; (c) that White boys in particular might be more likely than African American boys to randomly open fire; and (d) that the specific content of the teasing and bullying is homophobia. A link between adolescent masculinity, homophobia, and violence is proposed. Finally, the authors offer a few possible explanations as to how most boys who are teased and bullied achieve the psychological resilience that enables them to weather adolescence without recourse to random school violence.
Since 1926, the National Rifle Association's (NRA) flagship publication has without pause featured “The Armed Citizen,” a column that reports instances in which law-abiding citizens have successfully defended their property, person, and/or family with firearms. These reports are brief (100 to 200 words) and have remained remarkably untouched over the past 80 years with regard to style, diction, and narrative structure. Their rhetorical effect, however, has not. In 1977, the year the NRA became a social movement, these narratives began to contribute to the production of a terror-filled, deeply masculine (and surprisingly biblical) NRA discourse that led (and continues to lead) to the mobilization of its members to defend the right to keep and bear arms in the face of extraordinary public opposition: to perpetuate what has come to be known as the “gun-control paradox.”
In most states in the U.S. it is legal to carry a concealed handgun in public, but little is known about why people want to do this. While the existing literature argues that guns symbolize masculinity, most research on the actual use of guns has focused on marginalized men. The issue of concealed handguns is interesting because they must remain concealed and because relatively privileged men are most likely to have a license to carry one. Using in-depth interviews with 20 men, this article explores how they draw on discourses of masculinity to explain their use of concealed handguns. These men claim that they are motivated by a desire to protect their wives and children, to compensate for lost strength as they age, and to defend themselves against people and places they perceive as dangerous, especially those involving racial/ethnic minority men. These findings suggest that part of the appeal of carrying a concealed firearm is that it allows men to identify with hegemonic masculinity through fantasies of violence and self-defense.
Drawing on Connell's notion of gender projects, the authors assess the degree to which contemporary evangelical ideals of men's headship challenge, as well as reinforce, a hegemonic masculinity. Based on 265 in-depth interviews in 23 states across the country, they find that rather than espousing a traditional gender hierarchy in which women are simply subordinate to men, the majority of contemporary evangelicals hold to symbolic traditionalism and pragmatic egalitarianism. Symbolic male headship provides an ideological tool with which individual evangelicals may maintain a sense of distinctiveness from the broader culture of which they are a part. At the same time, symbolic headship blunts some of the harsher effects of living in a materially rich, but time poor, culture, by defusing an area of potential conflict, creating a safe space within which men can negotiate, and strengthening men's material and emotional ties to their families.
Using life history interviews with 40 noncustodial fathers in Chicago and 37 incarcerated fathers in Indiana, I explore the construction of paternal provider roles in low-income and working-class families. Fathers with stable jobs retained high expectations for providing but found that employment could limit and even harm paternal involvement. Underemployed fathers, or fathers out of work, lowered expectations for providing and crafted a version of involvement that was more than just providing. The study suggests that a focus on context and process can expand theoretical frameworks of work/family decisions for non-middle class families. Implications for policies include increasing opportunities for fathers to attain stable employment and restructuring work/family policies to alter expectations for men’s success as providers.
Presents a theory of sexism as ambivalence, not just hostility, toward women. Ambivalent Sexism Theory distinguishes between hostile and "benevolent" sexism (each addresses issues of power, gender differentiation, and sexuality). Benevolent sexism encompasses subjectively positive attitudes toward women in traditional roles: protective paternalism, idealization of women, and desire for intimate relations. Hostile sexism encompasses the negative equivalents on each dimension: dominative paternalism, derogatory beliefs, and heterosexual hostility. It is argued that both forms of sexism serve to justify and maintain patriarchy and traditional gender roles. The validity of a measure of these constructs, the Ambivalent Sexism Inventory (ASI), is reviewed. Comparisons are offered between the ASI and other frequently used scales of attitudes toward women, with suggestions for the proper domains of different scales. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
Progressive Black Masculinities?
- Patricia Hill Collins
Angry White Men: American Masculinity at the End of an Era
- Michael Kimmel
Kimmel, Michael. 2013. Angry White Men: American Masculinity at the End of an Era. New York:
Nation Books.
Gun Ownership and Use in America
- Carroll Joseph
Carroll, Joseph. 2005. "Gun Ownership and Use in America." Gallup Poll, November 22.
There’s a Gun for Every American. But Less than a Third Own Guns
- Enten Harry
The Context of Workplace Sex Discrimination: Sex Composition, Workplace Culture, and Relative Power
- Kevin Stainback
- Thomas N Ratliff
- Vincent J Roscigno
Stainback, Kevin, Thomas N. Ratliff, and Vincent J. Roscigno. 2011. "The Context of Workplace Sex
Discrimination: Sex Composition, Workplace Culture, and Relative Power." Social Forces 89: 4:
1165-1188. https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/89.4.1165.
Who Suffers During Recessions?” NBER Working Paper 17951
- Hoyner Hillary Douglasmiller Andjessamynschaller
Symbolic Traditionalism and Pragmatic Egalitarianism
- Gallagher Sally
Gun Culture in Action
- F Mencken
- Paul Carson
- Froese
Mencken, F. Carson and Paul Froese. 2017. "Gun Culture in Action." Social Problems 66: 1: 3-27.
https://doi.org/10.1093/socpro/spx040.
The Hamilton Project
- Schanzenbach Diane Whitmore Ryannunn Laurenbauer
- Andaudreybreitwiser
Breadwinner Moms”. Pew Research Center
- Wang Wendy Kimparker Andpaultaylor
Division of House Chores and the Case of Cooking: The Effects of Earning Inequality on House Chores Among Dual-Earner Couples
- Yasemin Besen-Cassino
- Dan Cassino
Besen-Cassino, Yasemin and Dan Cassino. 2014. "Division of House Chores and the Case of Cooking:
The Effects of Earning Inequality on House Chores Among Dual-Earner Couples." AG About Gender
3: 6: 25-53. https://doi.org/10.15167/2279-5057/ag.2014.3.6.176.
A Telling Difference: Dominance Strength and Black Masculinities
- Patricia Collins
- Hill
Collins, Patricia Hill. 2006. "A Telling Difference: Dominance Strength and Black Masculinities." In A.
Mutua (ed.), Progressive Black Masculinities? pp. 73-97. New York: Routledge.
Who Suffers During Recessions
- Hillary Hoyner
- Douglas Miller
- Jessamyn Schaller
Hoyner, Hillary, Douglas Miller, and Jessamyn Schaller. 2012. "Who Suffers During Recessions?"
NBER Working Paper 17951. Retrieved October 3, 2019 (https://www.nber.org/papers/w17951)
The Hamilton Project
- Diane Schanzenbach
- Ryan Whitmore
- Lauren Nunn
- Audrey Bauer
- Breitwiser
- Patricia Collins
- Hill
Collins, Patricia Hill. 2004. Black Sexual Politics. New York: Routledge.
- R W Connell
Connell, R. W. 1995. Masculinities. Cambridge, UK: Polity.
There's a Gun for Every American
- Harry Enten
Enten, Harry. 2018. "There's a Gun for Every American. But Less than a Third Own Guns." CNN,
February 15. Retrieved September 25, 2019 (https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/15/politics/guns-dontknow-how-many-america/index.html)
Armed Citizens and the Stories They Tell
- Kevin O'neill
O'Neill, Kevin. 2007. "Armed Citizens and the Stories They Tell." Men & Masculinities 9: 4: 457-475.
https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1097184X05281390.