Stoicism (as Emotional Compression) Is Emotional Labor

O. Táíwò
{"title":"Stoicism (as Emotional Compression) Is Emotional Labor","authors":"O. Táíwò","doi":"10.5206/fpq/2020.2.8217","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The criticism of “traditional,” “toxic,” or “patriarchal” masculinity in both academic and popular venues recognizes that there is some sense in which the character traits and tendencies that are associated with masculinity are structurally connected to oppressive, gendered social practices and patriarchal social structures. One important theme of criticism centers on the gender distribution of emotional labor, generally speaking, but this criticism is also particularly meaningful in the context of heterosexual romantic relationships. I begin with the premise that there is a gendered and asymmetrical distribution in how much emotional labor is performed, but I also consider that there might be meaningful and informative distinctions in what kind of emotional labor is characteristically performed by different genders. Specifically, I argue that the social norms around stoicism and restricted emotional expression are masculine-coded forms of emotional labor, and that they are potentially prosocial. Responding to structural and interpersonal asymmetries of emotional labor could well involve supplementing or better cultivating this aspect of male socialization rather than discarding it.","PeriodicalId":387473,"journal":{"name":"Feminist Philosophy Quarterly","volume":"23 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-06-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"13","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Feminist Philosophy Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5206/fpq/2020.2.8217","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 13

Abstract

The criticism of “traditional,” “toxic,” or “patriarchal” masculinity in both academic and popular venues recognizes that there is some sense in which the character traits and tendencies that are associated with masculinity are structurally connected to oppressive, gendered social practices and patriarchal social structures. One important theme of criticism centers on the gender distribution of emotional labor, generally speaking, but this criticism is also particularly meaningful in the context of heterosexual romantic relationships. I begin with the premise that there is a gendered and asymmetrical distribution in how much emotional labor is performed, but I also consider that there might be meaningful and informative distinctions in what kind of emotional labor is characteristically performed by different genders. Specifically, I argue that the social norms around stoicism and restricted emotional expression are masculine-coded forms of emotional labor, and that they are potentially prosocial. Responding to structural and interpersonal asymmetries of emotional labor could well involve supplementing or better cultivating this aspect of male socialization rather than discarding it.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
斯多葛主义是一种情绪劳动
学术界和大众对“传统的”、“有毒的”或“父权的”男性气质的批评承认,在某种意义上,与男性气质相关的性格特征和倾向在结构上与压迫性的、性别化的社会实践和父权的社会结构联系在一起。一般来说,批评的一个重要主题集中在情绪劳动的性别分布上,但这种批评在异性恋爱关系的背景下也特别有意义。我首先提出的前提是,在进行多少情绪劳动方面存在性别和不对称分布,但我也认为,在不同性别的情绪劳动中,可能存在有意义和信息的区别。具体来说,我认为围绕禁欲主义和限制情绪表达的社会规范是男性编码的情绪劳动形式,它们可能是亲社会的。应对情绪劳动的结构和人际不对称,很可能需要补充或更好地培养男性社会化的这一方面,而不是抛弃它。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Mary Daly’s Philosophy: Some Bergsonian Themes Hope, Solidarity, and Justice If “Ifs” and “Buts” Were Candy and Nuts Mansplaining as Epistemic Injustice How Not to Watch Feminist Pornography
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1