Men’s anxieties and defences regarding gender (in)equality in the workplace: An object-relations psychoanalysis of organisational masculinities

IF 4.5 2区 管理学 Q1 MANAGEMENT Human Relations Pub Date : 2024-09-23 DOI:10.1177/00187267241279385
Darren T Baker, Nick Rumens
{"title":"Men’s anxieties and defences regarding gender (in)equality in the workplace: An object-relations psychoanalysis of organisational masculinities","authors":"Darren T Baker, Nick Rumens","doi":"10.1177/00187267241279385","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article explores men’s psychic attachments to organisational masculinities in the context of gender equality initiatives in the UK finance sector. Deploying an object-relations psychoanalysis and generating interview data with 30 male executives and non-executives, it unpacks why and how men outwardly support but unconsciously repudiate workplace gender equality. We explain how this conflict indicates the presence of what Melanie Klein terms the paranoid-schizoid position. We examine two key unconscious processes of the paranoid-schizoid position in men’s accounts: gender-splitting, when men dissociate undesirable aspects of organisational masculinity, and projection, when repressed, negative parts of their masculine ideals are instead attributed to women. This article’s contributions demonstrate how the paranoid-schizoid position is defensive, enabling men to articulate support for gender equality, but also protect paranoid constructions of organisational masculinity when it is threatened by women. Empirically and theoretically, this article shows how organisational masculinities are ambivalent, which in Kleinian terms underscores how masculinity has ‘good’ and ‘bad’ components that are constituted unconsciously through its relationship with the object world. This article concludes by drawing out the implications for (re)positioning men within workplace gender equality debates and activities.","PeriodicalId":48433,"journal":{"name":"Human Relations","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Relations","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00187267241279385","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article explores men’s psychic attachments to organisational masculinities in the context of gender equality initiatives in the UK finance sector. Deploying an object-relations psychoanalysis and generating interview data with 30 male executives and non-executives, it unpacks why and how men outwardly support but unconsciously repudiate workplace gender equality. We explain how this conflict indicates the presence of what Melanie Klein terms the paranoid-schizoid position. We examine two key unconscious processes of the paranoid-schizoid position in men’s accounts: gender-splitting, when men dissociate undesirable aspects of organisational masculinity, and projection, when repressed, negative parts of their masculine ideals are instead attributed to women. This article’s contributions demonstrate how the paranoid-schizoid position is defensive, enabling men to articulate support for gender equality, but also protect paranoid constructions of organisational masculinity when it is threatened by women. Empirically and theoretically, this article shows how organisational masculinities are ambivalent, which in Kleinian terms underscores how masculinity has ‘good’ and ‘bad’ components that are constituted unconsciously through its relationship with the object world. This article concludes by drawing out the implications for (re)positioning men within workplace gender equality debates and activities.
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
男性对工作场所性别(不)平等的焦虑和防御:对组织男性特征的客体关系心理分析
本文以英国金融业的性别平等倡议为背景,探讨了男性对组织阳刚之气的心理依恋。文章运用客体关系心理分析法,通过对 30 名男性高管和非高管的访谈数据,揭示了男性在外表上支持工作场所性别平等,却在无意识中否定性别平等的原因和方式。我们解释了这种冲突如何表明存在梅拉妮-克莱因(Melanie Klein)所说的偏执-分裂立场。我们研究了男性叙述中偏执-分裂立场的两个关键无意识过程:性别分裂,即男性将组织中男性气质中不受欢迎的方面分离出来;投射,即男性理想中被压抑的负面部分被归因于女性。本文的贡献在于证明了偏执狂-分裂型立场是如何具有防御性的,它既能使男性表达对性别平等的支持,又能在组织男性气质受到女性威胁时保护偏执狂构建的组织男性气质。本文从经验和理论两方面展示了组织男性气质的矛盾性,用克莱因的术语来说,这强调了男性气质具有 "好 "和 "坏 "的成分,这些成分是通过其与客体世界的关系在无意识中构成的。最后,本文总结了男性在工作场所性别平等辩论和活动中(重新)定位的意义。
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
Human Relations
Human Relations Multiple-
CiteScore
12.60
自引率
7.00%
发文量
82
期刊介绍: Human Relations is an international peer reviewed journal, which publishes the highest quality original research to advance our understanding of social relationships at and around work through theoretical development and empirical investigation. Scope Human Relations seeks high quality research papers that extend our knowledge of social relationships at work and organizational forms, practices and processes that affect the nature, structure and conditions of work and work organizations. Human Relations welcomes manuscripts that seek to cross disciplinary boundaries in order to develop new perspectives and insights into social relationships and relationships between people and organizations. Human Relations encourages strong empirical contributions that develop and extend theory as well as more conceptual papers that integrate, critique and expand existing theory. Human Relations welcomes critical reviews and essays: - Critical reviews advance a field through new theory, new methods, a novel synthesis of extant evidence, or a combination of two or three of these elements. Reviews that identify new research questions and that make links between management and organizations and the wider social sciences are particularly welcome. Surveys or overviews of a field are unlikely to meet these criteria. - Critical essays address contemporary scholarly issues and debates within the journal''s scope. They are more controversial than conventional papers or reviews, and can be shorter. They argue a point of view, but must meet standards of academic rigour. Anyone with an idea for a critical essay is particularly encouraged to discuss it at an early stage with the Editor-in-Chief. Human Relations encourages research that relates social theory to social practice and translates knowledge about human relations into prospects for social action and policy-making that aims to improve working lives.
期刊最新文献
Fifty years of fighting sex discrimination: Undermining entrenched misogynies through recognition and everyday resistance Men’s anxieties and defences regarding gender (in)equality in the workplace: An object-relations psychoanalysis of organisational masculinities Expression of Concern: “Understanding social responsibility and relational pressures in nonprofit organisations” Not just one woman at a time: Re-radicalizing a feminist project at work in a postfeminist era Creating ‘safe’ spaces through exclusionary boundaries: Examining employers’ treatment of domestic workers during the COVID-19 pandemic in India
×
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