Masculinities in the Criminological Field

Control, Vulnerability and Risk-Taking

Ingrid Lander, Signe Ravn

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2016
• Print ISBN:
  9781472410139
• eBook ISBN:
  9781317099932
• Topic: Social Sciences
• Subtopic: Criminology
• Index: Social Sciences

Over recent decades criminological research has changed from a gender-blind discipline which equated crime with men and thus ignored questions about gender, to an approach that studied gender by showing statistical differences between men and women, and then finally to a more inclusive and elaborate gender-theoretical approach to crime and crime control. However, despite this development, research on gender - and in particular research on gendered norms and the construction and enactment of masculinities - within the criminological field has been unable to keep up with developments in gender research. Since 1990, only a few anthologies with a gender-theoretical orientation focusing on masculinities within the criminological research field have been published. Many of the theoretical developments in gender research still have difficulties in reaching into mainstream criminology, partly because such developments are often published in feminist and/or gender theoretical journals. This volume both problematizes and renders visible conceptions and norms regarding male behaviour and masculinities and shows how these affect the criminological field through providing a theoretically sound and clear gender perspective to this field of research. With sections based around the following three themes: negotiations of masculinity in institutional settings, vulnerable masculinities and risk-taking and masculinities, this volume will be of interest to scholars of criminology, sociology, social work and gender studies, as well as policy-makers, and law enforcement professionals.

Part I Negotiating Masculinities in Institutional Settings

1 Transforming Cowboy Masculinity into Appropriate Masculinity¹

Nina Jon

DOI: 10.4324/9781315594132-1

¹ I want to thank Lina Tordsson for translating the chapter from Norwegian to English.

Introduction

Criminological enquiry commonly overlooks the gendered aspects of the social control of men. By studying a protective school for boys with a gender perspective, I have found that controlling boys to a great extent means controlling masculinity. In my study, I have analysed empirical material from Foldin protective school (1953–70). Through an analysis of the narratives about the boys employed by the school and other social support and control systems, I aim to uncover the masculinity discourses that shaped the school’s work. Is a well-documented fact in criminology that those who are registered as criminals and subjected to social control in the form of court orders and custody by the child welfare services predominantly are working-class boys (Willis 1977, Christie 1982, Mattsson 2005). My analysis of Foldin’s effort to form a proper boy is therefore also an analysis of a class-specific masculinity discourse.

Whereas studies of the social control of men and boys typically are void of any gender analysis, the social control of women and girls is frequently equated with control of femininity (Chesney-Lind 1973, Barton 2005, Ericsson and Jon 2006). In her study of Bjerketun protective school for girls, Kjersti Ericsson (1997) outlines how the institution in the 1950s constituted a ‘sexual social protection’ service. For girls, the most common pathways into the institution were ‘indecency’, ‘immorality’ and ‘street walking’. The aim was to save the girls from themselves and the consequences of the lives they were living; the ‘slut’ stamp and the children born out of wedlock. They were regarded as being in danger. But they were also regarded as dangerous; by enticing men to commit the crime of having sex with them while they were underage, by tempting married men and thereby threatening the family, and by spreading sexually transmittable diseases. Ericsson writes that: ‘girls are being “treated” and “punished” not because they harm society – but because their behaviour diverges from traditional gender norms’ (Ericsson 1997: 53). Even today, sexuality is the main cause of girls being institutionalized by the child welfare services (Falck 2006).

My study concerns Bjerketun’s counterpart, Foldin protective school for boys. During the 1950s and 1960s, the two institutions occupied parallel positions in the Norwegian control network for juveniles considered problematic and deviant. Both had a long history as correctional institutions for young people (dating back to around 1900). Both were renamed in 1953 and called ‘protective schools’, and placed in a new administrative context. They were now to receive the ‘most difficult’ youngsters in the country, young people who were deemed to need psychiatric or psychological treatment. Neither for Bjerketun nor Foldin was the new name nor the new administrative context accompanied by notable qualitative changes compared to the institutional regime before 1953. At Foldin, the boys were to be socialized into an accepted form of masculinity; they were to become ‘proper boys’. As in Ericsson’s study of Bjerketun, my starting point is the institutional gaze. To paraphrase Aaslestad (1997: 32), it is the narratives about the boys, not the boys themselves, which will be the object of enquiry. As pointed out by Ericsson, the institution draws its own self-portrait in its descriptions, reports and evaluations of its students (1997: 20). This portrait is the main focus of my study.

When analysing Foldin’s control of the young boys with a gender perspective, it is evident that just as controlling girls means controlling femininity, controlling boys means controlling the boys’ gender and their deviations from accepted forms of masculinity. In this chapter, I will make the case that a masculinity perspective is a useful for understanding both why young boys commit crime and why their custodians react so strongly to even relatively trivial forms of crime. I will present my concept of cowboy masculinity, and show why this is useful term for understanding young boys’ masculinity projects. The chapter will also discuss the impact of gender on the day-by-day interactions and routines of the institution, and I will argue that Foldin’s lacking awareness of this impact ultimately undermined its efforts.

Cowboy Masculinity

Instead of viewing criminal activities as a matter of deviancy, I will approach them as part of boys’ identity formation. To conceptualize this, I draw on Messerschmidt’s influential work (1993, 1997, 1999) on the connections between crime and masculinity. Messerschmidt argues that crime can be a strategy for ‘doing masculinity’ (Messerschmidt 1993, Jon 2007). For boys and men with low income, limited education and low societal status, it may be difficult to feel and be perceived as ‘a real man’. Boys and men in this situation may instead achieve status, self-respect and notoriety through violence and a willingness to fight. By committing crime, marginalized boys and men uphold their identity as ‘real men’. They are utilizing the one instrument available to them: their bodies. Young criminal boys have at all times presented themselves and been regarded by others as tough guys (Whyte 1981, Cohen 1955, Ericsson et al. 1985).

Committing to such a masculinity project involves a cohesive identity ‘package’. One cannot be ‘hard-boiled’ and yet ‘chicken out’ when it comes to breaking a rule. Neither is one allowed to be tough and steal cars, while at the same time eagerly raising one’s hand to answer the teacher’s questions. The crime that young marginalized boys commit, which in Messerschmidt’s analysis is a resource for doing masculinity, should be regarded as part of a more holistic masculinity project. This project is the cause of concern for the boys’ custodians – not the individual acts of crime. As such, even trivial acts of crime warrant disquiet.

Messerschmidt (1993) uses the term ‘oppositional masculinity’ to describe the masculinity project of young criminal boys, and highlights that opposition towards the school develops when the school represses important characteristics of hegemonic masculinity. In the same vein, Connell suggests the term ‘protest masculinity’ to denote the masculinity project of poor, marginalized men, building on Adler’s work on ‘the masculine project’ (Connell 1995: 111). Connell emphasizes that protest masculinity uses elements of hegemonic masculinity, and alters them to fit a context of poverty.

However, both Messerschmidt’s oppositional masculinity and Connell’s protest masculinity exaggerate the importance of opposing or protesting against something. These two concepts imply that young criminal boys develop a separate subculture, which constitutes an aberration from mainstream society. Yet not all masculinity projects are focused on opposition against a mainstream culture. To allow for the fact that the masculinity project of young criminal boys could be about protest and opposition, but also simply about ‘going all the way’, I suggest another concept that emphasizes the working-class cultural resources that the boys are drawing on in constructing a masculine identity. I term this masculinity project cowboy masculinity.

In this concept, the cowboy represents a plethora of mythical heroic figures of cultural importance, especially to the working class. This concept does not preclude that resistance can be a key element of such a masculinity project, but shows that it is one of several aspects. In addition to accentuating what young criminal boys are inspired by and not merely what they are opposing, one of the strengths of the term ‘cowboy masculinity’ is an emphasis on the boys’ style. This emphasis is in line with the so-called ‘Birmingham school’ (Hall and Jefferson 1975, Willis 1977, Hebdige 1979). I will also argue that the concept of cowboy masculinity is well suited to describe the masculinity projects of other groups than young criminal boys, for instance that of their very counterparts: police officers, as discussed by Lander in Chapter 4 of this book. In this vein Finstad (2000: 100) highlights how some young police officers are known to emphasize their ‘style’ with ‘not just one set of handcuffs, but at least two, both worn at maximum visibility. The bulletproof vests are not discreetly tucked in underneath a summer shirt, instead they wish for the outside world to see that they are prepared for the risk … They glimmer in steel and strength.’ Finstad acknowledges that those who ‘style’ themselves in this fashion explain it with reference to risk and safety, but adds that ‘the most obvious explanation when looking at the “inner city riggers” from the outside, is that “that little extra” makes you tough’ (ibid.).

According to Sykes and Matza (1957), the early subculture scholars overemphasize the subcultural dimensions of the masculinity projects of young criminal boys. While ‘the hunt for excitement and new experiences, the contempt of ordinary labour combined with the dream of fast success, and the emphasis on aggression as a distinctly masculine trait’ (Hauge 1968: 153, my translation) are indeed central to the criminal subculture, Sykes and Matza argue that these values are also central to Western mainstream culture. Everybody dreams of a break from their day-to-day lives, but most keep the search for excitement and experiences to their spare time. And who does not dream of winning the lottery and earning the big bucks?, Sykes and Matza ask (in Hauge 1968: 154).

Similar to Sykes and Matza, I wish to emphasize the mainstream cultural goods that young criminal boys are drawing on, and, in my view, the crime they commit as a part of their masculinity project seem to be influenced by important Western masculinity myths (Ambjörnsson 2001). Such myths are available to young boys largely through popular culture – cartoons, books, film and music (Bjurström 1982, Sernhede 2001, Moshuus 2004). Popular culture in general and film in particular possesses great ‘power to order social space’ (Neumann 2004: 7). When crime is used as a resource for ‘doing masculinity’, the repertoire used is constantly repeated in the heroic tales of our culture. As Søndergaard (2000a: 87) highlights, the most easily accessible narrative for young boys is ‘hegemonic culture’s storyline for masculinity, found in tales of dangerous missions, courage, individuality, hierarchy, and the possibilities for gaining the respect of other men’ (my translation). These masculine myths are continuously repeated in different wrappings. ‘In films, television programmes, advertising, newspapers, popular songs and novels, in narratives and images that press in from every side, men are invited to recognize themselves in the masculine myth’ argues Easthope (1990: 166). Boys who commit crime and who have limited access to other masculine resources, appear to accept that invitation.

Methodology, Sources and Ethical Considerations

This study is based on the rich and diverse archive material from Foldin protective school, which I have analysed in two rounds. In addition to case records, the Foldin archive contains correspondence between the institution and the Ministry of Social Affairs, the local child welfare committee and the boy’s next of kin. The archive also contained internal memos, reports and plans regarding the treatment of the boys.

In the first round of analysis I went through every item in the archive, collecting a great volume of material about the protective school itself. During this round, I also briefly examined the case records of the 419 boys who had been registered at the institution during its period as a protective school. Based on this first study, I selected a number of cases that both covered a cross-section of the Foldin students, and dealt with certain relevant topics such as sexuality (in the form of indecency, homosexuality and masturbation) and discussions of gender. The 100 selected cases were subjected to comprehensive scrutiny.

The focus of my analysis is the ways in which the Foldin boys were described by the staff and others affiliated with Foldin and its students. Through the descriptions of the boys as found in the archive material, I aim to analyse the masculinity discourse that framed the institution’s work with the boys. I mainly use a thematic analysis (Widerberg 2001: 137). I have also drawn on textual analysis and concepts as I find them inspiring and useful, in particular concepts deriving from positioning theory (Andenæs 1995, Davies and Harré 1990, Søndergaard 2000b). I focus on how the staff viewed and categorized the boys, what they were emphasizing in their descriptions of the boys, what they considered to be the boys’ problems and finally what they highlighted in the characterizations of the boys who were doing well. Through this analysis, I aim to make explicit the implicit masculinity discourse and the subject position allocated to the boys within this discourse.

I consider the Foldin material as particularly well suited for an analysis of category constructing processes (Søndergaard 2000a), as it contains detailed descriptions of lived lives ...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Half Title Page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Contents
• Notes on Contributors
• Acknowledgments
• Introduction: Why a Nordic Anthology on Masculinities and Crime?
• PART I NEGOTIATING MASCULINITIES IN INSTITUTIONAL SETTINGS
• PART II  VULNERABLE MASCULINITIES
• PART III ON THE EDGE OF CONTROL: RISK TAKING AND MASCULINITIES
• Index