Exploring the Social Constructs of Masculinity

What does it really mean to be “masculine”? Most of us grow up absorbing certain ideas – men should be strong, assertive, decisive, unemotional. But where do these ideas come from? Are they hardwired into biology, or are they products of the culture we live in? The concept of masculinity, far from being a natural given, is one of the most powerful social constructs shaping how men behave, how they see themselves, and how societies function. Understanding this construct is essential for anyone studying gender – and for anyone interested in building a more equal world.

What is masculinity? 🔗

At its simplest, masculinity refers to the set of qualities, behaviours, and roles that a given society associates with men and boys. These typically include traits like physical strength, assertiveness, ambition, emotional restraint, and dominance. The word itself has deep linguistic roots – it traces back to the Latin masculus, meaning “male” or “worthy of a man,” which is a diminutive of mas, meaning “male person.” Over centuries, the meaning expanded from a simple biological descriptor to carry a dense set of social expectations about how men should think, feel, and act.

But here is the crucial point: masculine traits and identities are not inherent or biological – they are culturally created, learned, and therefore changeable. What counts as “masculine” in one era or society may be considered irrelevant or even undesirable in another. A Spartan warrior’s idea of manhood would look very different from that of an 18th-century European gentleman, and both would differ from the expectations placed on a young man in urban India today.

Masculinity as a social construct 🔗

The idea that masculinity is socially constructed means that it is not something men are born with. Instead, it is a set of learned behaviours and attitudes shaped by cultural norms, family expectations, peer groups, media, and institutional structures. Society teaches boys from a very early age what is “appropriate” male behaviour and punishes deviation from those norms.

In the Indian context, gender discrimination is promoted within families through the process of socialisation. From a young age, boys are taught that expressing sorrow or crying is not a trait of “real men.” The male child is conditioned to suppress normal human feelings like fear or sadness. Activities like playing with dolls or helping in the kitchen are projected as outside a boy’s domain, and those who engage in them may be labelled “effeminate” – not just by elders, but also by their own peers.

This conditioning is not accidental. It serves a purpose within patriarchal systems: it creates men who are oriented toward control, dominance, and emotional suppression – traits that sustain existing power hierarchies. Gender norms are part of a larger system that includes gender roles, gender socialisation, and gendered power relations. In patriarchal systems, masculinity is generally given greater value and power across most domains of social, economic, and political life.

Raewyn Connell and the theory of masculinities 🔗

No discussion of masculinity as a social construct is complete without the work of Raewyn Connell, an Australian sociologist widely regarded as the founder of masculinity studies. Connell’s theory of masculinity is the most influential in the field of men and masculinities, with her landmark 1995 book Masculinities translated into multiple languages.

Connell’s most important contribution was demonstrating that masculinity is not a single, fixed identity. Instead, there are multiple masculinities – different ways of being a man – and these exist in hierarchical relationships with one another. Some forms of masculinity dominate and are socially celebrated, while others are marginalised or subordinated.

Hegemonic masculinity 🔗

The concept at the heart of Connell’s work is hegemonic masculinity. This refers to the culturally dominant form of manhood that holds the highest status in any given society. Hegemonic masculinity represents the idealised version of masculinity that holds power over other forms, marginalising those that do not conform to its standards. It is not necessarily the most common way men actually behave – rather, it is the idealised standard against which all men are measured.

In contemporary India, hegemonic masculinity often takes the form of being the family’s primary breadwinner, exercising decision-making authority in the household, displaying physical toughness, and maintaining emotional control. In India, the construction of masculinity is deeply influenced by historical legacies, patriarchal traditions, and contemporary nationalist discourses, creating a rigid framework that marginalises those who do not conform to its ideals.

The role of sports in building masculine identity 🔗

Connell gave special attention to the role of sports as a key site where masculine identity is produced and reinforced. Sports settings, especially those involving physical combat or martial arts, continue to be central sites of gender socialisation for boys, ensuring they internalise the principles of hegemonic masculinity.

Research participants in studies on masculinity and sports frequently identify physical activity and sports participation as central to their sense of manhood, often reporting that they were expected to play sports from a young age. Through competitive sports, boys learn values like dominance, suppression of pain, aggression, and team loyalty – all traits closely associated with conventional masculinity.

In a study of boys at an English school, the dominant form of masculinity was the “sporty boy,” which was sanctioned by the school and given powerful cultural and social authority. Boys were classified and ranked by their physical abilities, limiting opportunities for those who did not fit this model. In India, traditional sports like kushti (wrestling) and kabaddi have historically served a similar function – building physical resilience and reinforcing collective masculine identity.

Key traits associated with masculinity and how they are constructed 🔗

While specific expectations vary across cultures, certain traits recur in dominant constructions of masculinity worldwide. Let us look at some of the most common ones and how they are socially produced.

Aggression and dominance 🔗

Men are widely expected to be assertive, competitive, and, when necessary, aggressive. This expectation is not natural – it is trained into boys through rewards for toughness and punishment for gentleness. Through sports participation, boys learn behaviours considered proper for men, including domination, aggression, and competition. These learned dispositions, as French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu argued, become part of a man’s habitus – a deeply internalised set of dispositions that feel natural even though they are socially produced.

Emotional suppression 🔗

Connell argues that in contemporary society, men may be so emotionally disconnected that they are not even conscious of their own emotional states, such as depression. Phrases like “boys don’t cry” or “man up” are not just casual expressions – they are instruments of gender socialisation that teach boys to equate vulnerability with weakness. Over time, this creates adults who struggle to identify and express their emotions, with significant consequences for mental health.

Ambition and the provider role 🔗

Indian society has historically defined masculinity through power, strength, aggression, control, and dominance. Men are expected to be “protectors” and “providers” for their families. A man’s worth is frequently measured by his economic success, his career achievements, and his ability to financially support his household. This places enormous pressure on men, especially in contexts of economic uncertainty.

Analytical ability and rationality 🔗

The association of masculinity with reason and logic – as opposed to emotion and intuition, which are coded “feminine” – is another socially constructed binary. This dichotomy has real consequences: it shapes career expectations, educational streaming, and even how men and women are perceived in professional settings.

Masculinity in the Indian context 🔗

Masculinity is not a unitary and monolithic construct. It is shaped by socio-cultural forces like caste, class, urban-rural divide, geopolitical divisions, family, and other environmental factors. In India, this means that what counts as “masculine” differs significantly between an upper-caste urban professional in Mumbai and a Dalit agricultural labourer in rural Bihar. Yet certain common threads persist across these differences, largely because of the pervasive influence of patriarchy.

For men in India, gender norms are constructed around masculinity, and a man’s sense of self often hinges on his ability to control women. A father’s honour and masculinity may be tied to his daughter’s protection and chastity until she is married. These expectations link masculinity directly to control over women’s bodies and choices – a connection with serious implications for women’s empowerment and autonomy.

Urbanisation, modernisation, and globalisation further complicate the landscape of Indian masculinity. Indian men today face the challenge of reconciling deeply entrenched patriarchal norms with rapidly changing social expectations. Social media plays a dual role – on one hand, it enables exploration of non-traditional identities; on the other, it can perpetuate toxic masculinity and online misogyny.

The cost of rigid masculinity 🔗

It is important to recognise that rigid constructions of masculinity harm men as well as women. Research in psychology has documented that men who strongly adhere to traditional masculine norms often exhibit higher rates of depression, anxiety, and substance abuse, yet are less likely to seek help because they perceive help-seeking as conflicting with masculine self-reliance.

The exploration of hegemonic masculinity and its impact on boys and men reveals a complex interplay of cultural norms, institutional practices, and systemic inequalities that perpetuate discrimination against men, leading to adverse outcomes in physical health, mental well-being, and social standing. Men who do not conform to dominant masculine ideals – those who are gentle, emotionally expressive, or uninterested in competition – face ridicule, ostracism, and social marginalisation.

Challenging and redefining masculinity 🔗

The good news is that because masculinity is socially constructed, it can be socially reconstructed. Programmes using gender-transformative strategies have targeted young men, encouraging them to reflect on and question established masculine behaviour, traditional gender norms, and roles that may have adverse effects. Well-designed programmes have been shown to change men’s gender attitudes and their idea of masculinity.

In India, several organisations are working to promote healthier forms of masculinity. The India Development Review has documented efforts that engage boys and men as agents in deconstructing patriarchy, preventing violence, and raising gender-equitable young men. Connell herself worked with UNESCO and UN agencies on initiatives relating men and boys to gender equality and peacemaking.

Education plays a critical role in this transformation. Children learn at an early age, mostly through educational and peer interactions, what it means to be a boy and what it means to be a girl. By intervening early – through gender-sensitive curricula, teacher training, and inclusive school cultures – it is possible to offer boys a wider range of acceptable masculine identities that include emotional intelligence, caregiving, and cooperation.

From singular masculinity to plural masculinities 🔗

One of Connell’s most enduring insights is the shift from thinking about masculinity (singular) to masculinities (plural). There is abundant evidence that masculinities are multiple, with internal complexities and even contradictions; also that masculinities change in history, and that women have a considerable role in making them. Recognising this plurality is liberating – it means there is no single “right” way to be a man.

Indian masculinity is not a singular or fixed category but a dynamic and contested site of cultural production, shaped by an ongoing negotiation between tradition and change, between hegemonic norms and subversive practices. As conversations about mental health, gender equality, and LGBTQ+ rights gain momentum in India, the space for alternative and healthier expressions of masculinity is gradually expanding.

Understanding masculinity as a social construct does not mean dismissing the real challenges men face. Rather, it provides a framework for addressing those challenges at their root – by questioning the norms that create them in the first place, rather than accepting them as inevitable.

What do you think? How have the expectations of masculinity shaped the lives of men you know – and are those expectations changing in your community or family?

References

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hegemonic_masculinity
2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raewyn_Connell
3. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11633985/
4. https://idronline.org/addressing-masculinity-in-india/