Response to commentaries on masculinity ideologies.

Abstract

We respond to the separate commentaries by Cuthbert, Isacco, and Wade to our original article, again drawing attention to our critique of masculinity ideologies. There are important conceptual matters that the field of the psychology of men needs to confront when considering the construct of masculinity ideology, and we maintain that our distinction between “masculinity ideologies” and “masculinity beliefs” is an important one. We argue that the context of men’s lives is crucial and largely uncharted, consequently there is need to extend research attention to ideologies other than “traditional.” We agree with the commentaries that qualitative studies and mixed-methods are needed to refine measurement and understanding of the impact of masculinities on men.