Maschilità: identificazioni, ruoli e soggetti

Titolo Rivista PSICOTERAPIA E SCIENZE UMANE
Autori/Curatori Adriano Zamperini, David Primo, Ines Testoni
Anno di pubblicazione 2018 Fascicolo 2018/3
Lingua Italiano Numero pagine 28 P. 399-426 Dimensione file 207 KB
DOI 10.3280/PU2018-003004
Il DOI è il codice a barre della proprietà intellettuale: per saperne di più clicca qui

Qui sotto puoi vedere in anteprima la prima pagina di questo articolo.

Se questo articolo ti interessa, lo puoi acquistare (e scaricare in formato pdf) seguendo le facili indicazioni per acquistare il download credit. Acquista Download Credits per scaricare questo Articolo in formato PDF

Anteprima articolo

FrancoAngeli è membro della Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA)associazione indipendente e non profit per facilitare (attraverso i servizi tecnologici implementati da CrossRef.org) l’accesso degli studiosi ai contenuti digitali nelle pubblicazioni professionali e scientifiche

Nelle ultime decadi, lo studio del maschile è entrato a far parte delle scienze sociali come un tema di ricerca centrale. In particolare, i Critical Studies on Men & Masculinities (CSMM) offrono una proficua direzione per studiare sia il ruolo della maschilità nel sostenere le asimmetrie di potere nelle relazioni di genere, sia l’eterogeneità dei modi in cui i soggetti arrivano a definirsi come uomini. Ciononostante, restano delle rilevanti aporie teoriche aperte al dibattito. Questo articolo perseguirà due scopi: tracciare gli snodi centrali dei dibattiti sulle maschilità e valutare il contributo che un dialogo tra i CSMM e il linguaggio psicoanalitico può portare allo studio delle soggettività maschili. Verrà avanzata l’ipotesi che un punto di contatto promettente per questo dialogo può essere ritrovato nella riformulazione post-strutturalista che Judith Butler ha proposto delle opere di Freud e Lacan sullo sviluppo dell’identità di genere.;

Keywords:Studi critici sugli uomini e sulle maschilità; Teoria della maschilità egemone; Judith Butler; Teorie sulla soggettivazione/assoggettamento; Identità di genere

  1. Aboim S. (2010). Plural Masculinities: The Remaking of the Self in Private Life. Surrey, UK: Ashgate.
  2. Abraham N. & Torok M. (1972). Deuil ou mélancolie. Introjecter-incorporer. Nouvelle Revue de Psychanalyse, 6: 111-122. Anche in: L’écorce et le noyau [1959-75]. Paris: Flammarion, 1978, pp. 259-275 (trad. it.: Lutto o melanconia. Introiettare-incorporare. In: La scorza e il nocciolo. Roma: Borla, 1993, pp. 252-268; trad. inglese: Mourning or melancholia: Intro-jection versus incorporation. In: The Shell and the Kernel: Renewals of Psychoanalysis. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1994, pp. 125-138).
  3. Adams A. (2011). “Josh wears pink cleats”: Inclusive masculinity on the soccer field. Journal of Homosexuality, 58, 5: 579-596. DOI: 10.1080/00918369.2011.563654
  4. Anderson E. (2005). Orthodox and inclusive masculinity: Competing masculinities among het-erosexual men in a feminized terrain. Sociological Perspectives, 48, 3: 337-355.
  5. Anderson E. (2008). “Being masculine is not about who you sleep with...”: Heterosexual athletes contesting masculinity and the one-time rule of homosexuality. Sex Roles, 58, 1/2: 104-115.
  6. Anderson E. (2010). Inclusive Masculinity: The Changing Nature of Masculinities. New York: Routledge.
  7. Anderson E. & McCormack M. (2018). Inclusive Masculinity Theory: Overview, reflection and refinement. Journal of Gender Studies, 27, 5: 547-561. DOI: 10.1080/09589236.2016.1245605
  8. Anderson E. & McGuire R. (2010). Inclusive masculinity theory and the gendered politics of men’s rugby. Journal of Gender Studies, 19, 3: 249-261. DOI: 10.1080/09589236.2010.494341
  9. Alsop R., Fitzsimons A. & Lennon K. (2002). Theorizing Gender. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
  10. Beasley C. (2005). Gender and Sexuality: Critical Theories, Critical Thinkers. London: Sage.
  11. Beasley C. (2010). The elephant in the room: Heterosexuality in critical gender/sexuality studies. NORA - Nordic Journal of Feminist and Gender Research, 18, 3: 204-209. DOI: 10.1080/08038740.2010.499100
  12. Bly R. (1990). Iron John: A Book about Men. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing.
  13. Bonnett A. (1996). The new primitives: Identity, landscape and cultural appropriation in the Mythopoetic Men’s Movement. Antipode, 28, 3: 273-291.
  14. Braidotti R. (2002). Metamorphoses: Towards a Materialist Theory of Becoming. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
  15. Bunnin N. & Yu J. (2004). Masculinism. In: Bunnin N. & Ciment J., editors, The Blackwell Dictionary of Western Philosophy. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing, 2004, p. 411.
  16. Burkhalter T. (2016). Foregrounding masculinities in psychoanalytic psychotherapy. Psycho-analytic Dialogues, 26, 3: 339-351. DOI: 10.1080/10481885.2016.1169042
  17. Butler J. (1990a). Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. New York: Routledge.
  18. Butler J. (1990b). Gender trouble, feminist theory and psychoanalytic discourse. In: Nicholson L., editor, Feminism and Postmodernism. London: Routledge, 1990, pp. 324-351.
  19. Butler J. (1995). Melancholy gender-refused identification. Psychoanalytic Dialogues, 5, 2: 165-180. DOI: 10.1080/10481889509539059
  20. Butler J. (1997). The Psychic Life of Power: Theories in Subjection. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
  21. Butler J. (2004). Precarious Life: The Powers of Mourning and Violence. New York: Verso.
  22. Butler J. & Athanasiou A. (2013). Dispossession: The Performative in the Political. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
  23. Cahill C. (2015). Men’s movement. In: Chapman R. & Ciment J., editors, Culture Wars in America. An Encyclopedia of Issues, Viewpoints, and Voices (2nd Edition). New York: Routledge, 2015, pp. 419-421.
  24. Campbell K. (2001). The plague of the subject: Psychoanalysis and Judith Butler’s psychic life of power. International Journal of Sexuality and Gender Studies, 6, 1/2: 35-48. DOI: 10.1023/A:1010137922835
  25. Carrigan T., Connell B. & Lee J. (1985). Toward a new sociology of masculinity. Theory and Society, 14, 5: 551-604. DOI: 10.1007/BF00160017
  26. Cashmore E. & Cleland J. (2012). Fans, homophobia and masculinities in association football: Evidence of a more inclusive environment. British Journal of Sociology, 63, 2: 370-387.
  27. Chodorow N. (1978). The Reproduction of Mothering: Psychoanalysis and the Sociology of Gender. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
  28. Connell R.W. (1977). Ruling Class, Ruling Culture: Studies of Conflict, Power and Hegemony in Australian Life. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
  29. Connell R.W. (1987). Gender and Power. Society, the Person and Sexual Politics. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.
  30. Connell R.W. (1994). Psychoanalysis on masculinity. In: Brod H. & Kaufman M., editors, The-orizing Masculinity. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1994, pp. 11-38.
  31. Connell R.W. (1995). Masculinities. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
  32. Connell R.W. (2000). The Men and the Boys. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
  33. Connell R.W. & Messerschmidt J.W. (2005). Hegemonic masculinity: Rethinking the concept. Gender and Society, 19, 6: 829-859. DOI: 10.1177/0891243205278639
  34. Dashper K. (2012). “Dressage is full of queens!”. Masculinity, sexuality and equestrian sport. Sociology, 46, 6: 1109-1124. DOI: 10.1177/0038038512437898
  35. de Boise S. (2015). I’m not homophobic, “I’ve got gay friends”: Evaluating the validity of in-clusive masculinity. Men and Masculinities, 18, 3: 318-339. DOI: 10.1177/1097184X14554951
  36. Demetriou D.Z. (2001). Connell’s concept of hegemonic masculinity: A critique. Theory and Society, 30, 3: 337-361. DOI: 10.1023/A:1017596718715
  37. Demetriou D.Z. (2005). “Adventures of a Diasporic Intellectual: R.W. Connell, from Social Class to the Synthetic Turn in Gender Analysis” (Thesis, Ph.D. Doctorate, Faculty of Education and Social Work, University of Sydney, Australia): https://ses.library.usyd.edu.au/handle/2123/9256?mode=full.
  38. Derks B., Ellemers N., van Laar C. & de Groot K. (2011). Do sexist organizational cultures create the Queen Bee? British Journal of Social Psychology, 50, 3: 519-535. DOI: 10.1348/014466610X525280
  39. Derks B., van Laar C. & Ellemers N. (2016). The queen bee phenomenon: Why women leaders distance themselves from junior women. Leadership Quarterly, 27, 3: 456-469.
  40. Derrida J. (1967). De la Grammatologie. Paris: Minuit (trad. it.: Della grammatologia. Milano: Jaca Book, 1969).
  41. Donovan B. (1998). Political consequences of private authority: Promise Keepers and the trans-formation of hegemonic masculinity. Theory & Society, 27, 6: 817-843. DOI: 10.1023/A:1006909132442
  42. Faludi S. (1991). Backlash: The Undeclared War against American Women. New York: Three Rivers Press.
  43. Flax J. (2013). The scandal of desire: Psychoanalysis and disruptions of gender. Contemporary Psychoanalysis, 40, 1: 47-68. DOI: 10.1080/00107530.2004.10747235
  44. Freud S. (1905). Tre saggi sulla teoria sessuale. Opere, 4: 443-546. Torino: Boringhieri, 1970.
  45. Freud S. (1914 [1918]). Dalla storia di una nevrosi infantile (Caso clinico dell’Uomo dei lupi). Opere, 7: 483-593. Torino: Boringhieri, 1975.
  46. Freud S. (1922 [1923]). L’Io e l’Es. Opere, 9: 471-520. Torino: Boringhieri, 1977.
  47. Freud S. (1932 [1933]). Introduzione alla psicoanalisi (nuova serie di lezioni). Opere, 11: 117-284. Torino: Boringhieri, 1979.
  48. Gardiner J.K. (2002). Masculinity Studies and Feminist Theory: New Directions. New York: Columbia University Press.
  49. Gough H. (1952). Identifying psychological femininity. Educational and Psychological Mea-surement, 12, 3: 427-439. DOI: 10.1177/001316445201200309
  50. Gourarier M. (2017). Alpha mâle. Séduire les femmes pour s’apprécier entre hommes. Paris: Seuil.
  51. Gramsci A. (1929-35 [1948-51]). Quaderni del carcere. Torino: Einaudi, 1948-51.
  52. Grosz E.A. (1990). Jacques Lacan: A Feminist Introduction. London: Routledge.
  53. Halberstam J. (1998). Female Masculinity. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
  54. Hearn J. (2004). From hegemonic masculinity to the hegemony of man. Feminist Theory, 5, 1: 49-72. DOI: 10.1177/1464700104040813
  55. Hickey-Moody A. & Rasmussen M. L. (2009). The sexed subject in-between Deleuze and But-ler. In: Nigianni C. & Storr M., editors, Deleuze & Queer Theory. Edinburgh, UK: Edin-burgh University Press, 2009, pp. 37-53.
  56. Howson R. (2008). Hegemonic masculinity in the theory of hegemony. Men and Masculinities, 11, 1: 109-113. DOI: 10.1177/1097184X08315105
  57. Irigaray L. (1974). Speculum. De l’autre femme. Paris: Minuit (trad. it.: Speculum: l’altra donna. Milano: Feltrinelli, 1975).
  58. Kimmel M. S. (1997). Masculinity as homophobia: Fear, shame and silence in the construction of gender identity. In: Gergen M.M. & Davis S.N., editors, Toward a New Psychology of Gender. Florence, KY: Taylor & Frances/Routledge, 1997, pp. 223-242.
  59. Kristeva J. (1980). Pouvoirs de l’horreur. Essai sur l’abjection. Paris: Seuil (trad. it.: Poteri dell’orrore: saggio sull’abiezione. Milano: Spirali, 1981).
  60. Lloyd M. (2007). Judith Butler. From Norms to Politics. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
  61. Masling J., Bornstein R.F., Fishman I. & Davila J. (2002). Can Freud explain women as well as men? A meta-analytic review of gender differences in psychoanalytic research. Psychoana-lytic Psychology, 19, 2: 328-347. DOI: 10.1037/0736-9735.19.2.328
  62. Maynard M. (1990). The reshaping of sociology? Trends in the study of gender. Sociology, 24, 2: 269-290. DOI: 10.1177/0038038590024002007
  63. McCormack M. & Anderson E. (2014). Homohysteria: Definitions, context and intersectionality. Sex Roles, 79, 3: 152-158.
  64. McNey L. (1999). Subject, psyche and agency. The work of Judith Butler. Theory, Culture & Society, 16, 2: 175-193. DOI: 10.1177/02632769922050467
  65. McWilliams N. (1994). Psychoanalytic Diagnosis. Understanding Personality Structure in the Clinical Process. New York: Guilford (Second Edition: 2011) (trad. it.: La diagnosi psicoanalitica: struttura della personalità e processo clinico. Roma: Astrolabio, 1999; Seconda edizione: 2012).
  66. Meloni M. (2009). Una impossibile intimità: Gramsci, Freud, la Psicoanalisi. Sassari: EDES.
  67. Messerschmidt J.W. (2012). Engendering gendered knowledge: Assessing the academic appro-priation of hegemonic masculinity. Men & Masculinities, 15, 1: 56-76. DOI: 10.1177/1097184X11428384
  68. Messner M.A. (1991). Politics of Masculinities: Men in Movements. Lanham, MD: AltaMira Press.
  69. Messner M.A. (1998). The limits of “the Male Sex Role”. An analysis of the Men’s Liberation and Men’s Rights Movements’ discourse. Gender & Society, 12, 3: 255-276. DOI: 10.1177/0891243298012003002
  70. Mitchell J. (1974). Psychoanalysis and Feminism: Freud, Reich, Laing and Woman. New York: Pantheon (trad. it.: Psicoanalisi e femminismo: Freud, Reich, Laing e altri punti di vista sulla donna. Torino: Einaudi, 1976).
  71. Negy C. (2014). Homohysteria: Useful construct? Or an unnecessary splitting of hairs? Sex Roles, 71, 3-4: 137-140.
  72. Parsons T. & Bales R.F. (1955). Family, Socialization and Interaction Process. Glencoe, IL: Free Press (trad. it.: Famiglia e socializzazione. Milano: Mondadori, 1974).
  73. Peters M.A. & Appel S. (1996). Positioning theory: Discourse, the subject and the problem of desire. Social Analysis, 40 (September): 120-145.
  74. Peterson K.W. (2015). Promise Keepers. In: Chapman R. & Ciment J., editors, Culture Wars in America. An Encyclopedia of Issues, Viewpoints, and Voices (2nd Edition). New York: Routledge, 2015, pp. 524-525.
  75. Pleck J. (1984). The theory of male sex role identity: Its rise and fall, 1936 to the present. In: Miriam L., editor, In the Shadow of the Past: Psychology Portrays the Sexes. New York: Columbia University Press, 1984, pp. 205-225.
  76. Sayers J. (1987). Freud revisited: On gender, moral development and androgyny. New Ideas in Psychology, 5, 2: 197-206. DOI: 10.1016/0732-118X(87)90015-8
  77. Terman L.M. & Miles C.C. (1936). Sex and Personality. Studies in Masculinity and Femininity. New York: McGraw-Hill.
  78. Tosh J. (1994). What should historians do with masculinity? Reflections on nineteenth-century Britain. History Workshop Journal, 38, 1: 179-202.
  79. Traister B. (2000). Academic Viagra: The rise of American masculinity studies. American Quarterly, 52, 2: 274-304.
  80. Walker Mechling E. & Mechling J. (1994). The Jung and the restless: The mythopoetic men’s movement. Southern Communication Journal, 59, 2: 97-111. DOI: 10.1080/10417949409372929
  81. Wedgwood N. (2009). Connell’s theory of masculinity – Its origins and influences on the study of gender. Journal of Gender Studies, 18, 4: 329-339. DOI: 10.1080/09589230903260001
  82. Wetherell M. & Edley N. (1999). Negotiating hegemonic masculinity: Imaginary positions and psycho-discursive practices. Feminism & Psychology, 9, 3: 335-356. DOI: 10.1177/0959353599009003012.
  83. Wetherell M. & Edley N. (2015). A discursive psychological framework for analyzing men and masculinities. Psychology of Men & Masculinities, 15, 4: 355-364.
  84. Whitehead S. (2001). The invisible gendered subject: Men in education management. Journal of Gender Studies, 10, 1: 67-82. DOI: 10.1080/095892301300050591
  85. Whitehead S. (2002). Men and Masculinities. Key Themes and New Directions. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
  86. Zamperini A., Testoni I., Primo D., Prandelli M. & Monti C. (2016). Because moms say so: Narratives of lesbian mothers in Italy. Journal of GLBT Family Studies, 12, 1: 91-110, DOI: 10.1080/1550428X.2015.1102669

Adriano Zamperini, David Primo, Ines Testoni, Maschilità: identificazioni, ruoli e soggetti in "PSICOTERAPIA E SCIENZE UMANE" 3/2018, pp 399-426, DOI: 10.3280/PU2018-003004