Hegemonic Masculinities: State and Nationalism
The concept of hegemonic masculinity provides a powerful lens to understand how states and nationalism are constructed, legitimized, and sustained in International Relations (IR). Feminist scholars argue that nationalism and state power are not gender-neutral phenomena; rather, they are deeply shaped by dominant ideals of masculinity that privilege strength, control, sacrifice, and aggression. These masculinized norms define who can legitimately speak for the nation, how threats are imagined, and how political authority is exercised.
This unit examines how hegemonic masculinities operate within the state and nationalist projects, shaping political identities, security practices, and ideas of belonging.
Understanding Hegemonic Masculinity
The term hegemonic masculinity refers to the dominant and socially privileged form of masculinity that legitimizes male dominance and subordinates alternative masculinities and femininities. It does not describe all men but rather an idealized model of manhood associated with authority, toughness, rationality, and heterosexuality.
Drawing on the work of R. W. Connell, feminist scholars emphasize that hegemonic masculinity is historically produced and politically sustained. It operates through institutions such as the military, the state, and nationalist movements, shaping norms of leadership and citizenship.
In IR, hegemonic masculinity becomes embedded in how states define power, security, and legitimacy.
The State as a Masculinized Institution
The modern state is often imagined as a masculine entity—strong, autonomous, and capable of defending its borders. Political authority is associated with decisiveness, emotional restraint, and the capacity for violence, all traits culturally coded as masculine.
Feminist scholars argue that state institutions—bureaucracies, armed forces, and diplomatic establishments—privilege masculine norms of behavior. Leadership styles emphasizing toughness and control are rewarded, while qualities such as care, empathy, and cooperation are marginalized.
This masculinization of the state renders alternative forms of politics—centered on welfare, care, and social reproduction—less visible and less legitimate within nationalist discourse.
Nationalism and Masculine Identity
Nationalism relies heavily on gendered symbolism. Nations are often feminized—as motherlands or territories to be protected—while the role of defender is masculinized. Men are positioned as warriors and citizens willing to sacrifice for the nation, while women are associated with reproduction, cultural preservation, and moral purity.
These narratives naturalize gender hierarchies by presenting them as essential to national survival. Masculine sacrifice in war becomes a marker of true citizenship, while dissent or pacifism is feminized and delegitimized.
Nationalist projects thus depend on hegemonic masculinity to mobilize loyalty, discipline populations, and justify violence.
Militarism, Masculinity, and National Honor
Militarism is a central site where hegemonic masculinity and nationalism converge. Military institutions cultivate ideals of bravery, discipline, and endurance, linking masculinity to national honor and security.
Cynthia Enloe demonstrates how nationalist cultures rely on militarized masculinities, portraying soldiers as protectors of the nation and equating military strength with national pride. These narratives legitimize high defense spending and normalize violence as a necessary means of preserving sovereignty.
At the same time, militarized nationalism marginalizes those who do not conform to dominant masculine ideals, including women, sexual minorities, and men who reject militarism.
Hegemonic Masculinity and Exclusion
Hegemonic masculinities produce boundaries of inclusion and exclusion within the nation. Only those who embody dominant masculine traits are recognized as full political subjects. Minority groups, dissenters, and non-normative masculinities are often portrayed as weak, disloyal, or threats to national unity.
This dynamic is particularly evident in times of crisis, when nationalist rhetoric intensifies. Political leaders invoke masculine strength to suppress opposition, justify authoritarian measures, and silence alternative visions of the nation.
Thus, hegemonic masculinity not only structures gender relations but also shapes the limits of democratic participation.
Postcolonial Perspectives on Masculinity and Nationalism
Postcolonial feminist scholars highlight how hegemonic masculinity in nationalist projects is shaped by colonial histories. Anti-colonial movements often constructed nationalism through hypermasculine ideals as a response to colonial emasculation.
While such masculinities served as tools of resistance, they also reproduced patriarchal hierarchies in postcolonial states. Women’s contributions to nationalist struggles were often erased once independence was achieved, as masculine leadership became normalized.
These critiques reveal nationalism as a gendered project that simultaneously challenges external domination and reinforces internal inequalities.
Challenging Hegemonic Masculinities
Feminist and critical scholars argue that hegemonic masculinities are neither natural nor inevitable. Alternative masculinities—based on care, cooperation, and nonviolence—offer possibilities for reimagining the state and nationalism.
Social movements, peace activism, and feminist politics challenge militarized nationalism by questioning the association between masculinity, violence, and national strength. These interventions open space for more inclusive and democratic forms of belonging.
Conclusion: Masculinity, Power, and the Nation
Hegemonic masculinities are central to understanding how states and nationalist ideologies function in International Relations. They shape political authority, legitimize violence, and define the boundaries of citizenship.
By exposing the gendered foundations of the state and nationalism, feminist IR challenges the assumption that these institutions are neutral or universal. Understanding nationalism through the lens of hegemonic masculinity reveals it as a political and cultural project sustained by gendered power relations.
This analysis not only deepens our understanding of global politics but also points toward alternative futures grounded in inclusion, care, and justice.
References
- Connell, R. W. Masculinities.
- Enloe, Cynthia. Bananas, Beaches and Bases.
- Hooper, Charlotte. Manly States.
- Tickner, J. Ann. Gender in International Relations.
- Nagel, Joane. “Masculinity and Nationalism.”
