Working within a gender relations paradigm, the voluntary same-sex relationships of white, middle-class, middle-aged men are theorized to conform to two separate and distinct patterns; friendship and comradeship. Complicity with both the current manifestation of dominant masculinity as well as the underlying epistemological structure is seen to determine the interactional choices, friendship or comradeship, of men. A Web-based survey is used to gather data from a sample of the target population. Data are analyzed through exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis, multiple regression, and structural equation modeling. Statistical findings support the hypothesis that complicity with hegemonic masculinity tends to predict comradeship while resistance to hegemonic complicity predicts the practice of friendship.
AllanG.A. (1989). Friendship: Developing a sociological perspective. Boulder, San Francisco: Westview Press.
2.
BankB.J. (1995). Friendships in Australia and the United States: From feminization to a more heroic image. Gender and Society, 9(1), 79–98.
3.
BennettC. (1998). Men online: Discussing lived experiences on the Internet. Townsville, Australia: James Cook University.
4.
BlumsteinP. (1991). The production of selves in personal relationships. In HowardJ.A. & CalleroP.L. (Eds.), The self-society dynamic (pp. 305–322). New York: Cambridge.
5.
CaldwellM., & PeplauL. (1982). Sex differences in same sex friendships. Sex Roles, 8(7), 721–732.
6.
CancianF.M. (1986). The feminization of love. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 11, 692–709.
7.
ChodorowN. (1978). The reproduction of mothering. Berkeley: University of California Press.
8.
CohenT. (1992). Men's families, men's friends: A structural analysis of constraints on men's social ties. In NardiP.M. (Ed.), Men's friendships (pp. 115–131). Newbury Park: Sage.
9.
ConnellR.W. (1995). Masculinities. Berkeley: University of California Press.
10.
ConnellR.W. (2000). The men and the boys. Berkeley: University of California Press.
11.
DeauxK., & MajorB. (1990). A social-psychological model of gender. In RhodeD.L. (Ed.), Theoretical perspectives (pp. 89–99). New Haven: Yale University Press.
12.
DillmanD.A. (1978). Mail and telephone surveys. New York: Wiley and Sons.
13.
DolginK.G. (2001). Men's friendships: Mismeasured, demeaned, and misunderstood? In CohenT.F. (Ed.), Men and masculinity (pp. 103–117). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
14.
DonaldsonM. (1993). What is hegemonic masculinity?Theory and Society, 22, 643–657.
15.
FarrellM.P., & RosenbergS.D. (1981). Men at midlife. Boston: Auburn House.
HodkinsonP. (2000). The goth scene as translocal subculture. Birmingham, U.K.: Centre for Urban and Regional Studies, University of Birmingham, U.K.
19.
KehoeC., & PitkowJ. (1996). Surveying the territory: GVU's Five WWW User Surveys. The Worldwide Web Journal, 1(3), 77–84
20.
KendallL. (1999). Nerd nation: Images of nerds in U.S. popular culture. International Journal of Cultural Studies, 2(2), 260–283.
21.
KimmelM.S. (2000). The gendered society. New York: Oxford University Press.
22.
KlineR.B. (1998). Principles and practices of structural equation modeling. New York: The Guilford Press.
23.
LevinsonD.J.DarrowC.N.KleinE.B.LevinsonM.H., & McKeeB. (1978). The seasons of a man's life. New York: Ballantine.
24.
LewisR.A. (1978). Emotional intimacy among men. Journal of Social Issues, 34(1), 108–121.
25.
MaasJ. (1985). Speaking of friends. Berkeley: Shameless Hussy Press.
26.
MannC., & StewartF. (2002). Internet interviewing. In GubriumJ.F. & HolsteinJ.A. (Eds.), Handbook of Interview Research: Context and Method (pp. 603–628). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.
27.
MeadG.H. (1934). On social psychology. Chicago: The University of Chicago.
28.
MessnerM.A. (1995). Boyhood, organized sports, and the construction of masculinities. In KimmelM.S. & MessnerM.A. (Eds.), Men's lives (pp. 88–99). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
29.
MillerS. (1983). Men and friendship. San Leandro: Gateway Books.
30.
O'NeilJ.M. (1981). Male sex-role conflict, sexism, and masculinity: Implications for men, women and the counseling psychologist. The Counseling Psychologist, 9, 61–80.
31.
ParsonsT. (1956). Family socialization and interaction process. London: Routledge.
32.
PleckJ.H. (1981). The myth of masculinity. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
33.
SchaeferD.R., & DillmanD.A. (1998). Development of a standard e-mail methodology: Results of an experiment. Public Opinion Quarterly, 62(3), 378–397.
34.
SchmittR. (1999). Profeminist men and their friends. In DigbyT. (Ed.), Men doing feminism (pp. 81–98). New York: Routledge.
35.
SchwalbeM.L., & WolkomirM. (2002). Interviewing men. In GubriumJ.F. & HolsteinJ.A. (Eds.), Handbook of interview research (pp. 203–220). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
36.
SimmelG. (1950). The sociology of Georg Simmel. London: The Free Press.
37.
StearnsP.N. (1990). Be a man!New York: Holmes and Meier.
38.
StrikwerdaR.A., & MayL. (1992). Male friendship and intimacy. Hypatia, 7(3), 110–125.
39.
SwainS. (2001). Covert intimacy: Closeness in men's friendships. In CohenT.F. (Ed.), Men and masculinities (pp. 131–145). Australia: Wadsworth.
40.
ThorneB. (1993). Gender play. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.
41.
TigerL. (1969). Men in groups. New York: Random House.
42.
WeberM. (1946). Essays in Sociology: Oxford University Press.
