David Mayeda - The Sociology of MMA: Hegemonic Masculinity Unleashed

The other day, I posted an article about how male MMA fighters can suppress fear, anxiety, and most other emotions, as well as compassion and empathy.  The author of that article spent two years interviewing more than 100 MMA fighters about how they manage fear - here are some of the conclusions:

"Putting on a convincing manhood act requires more than using language and the body; it also requires emotion work. By suppressing fear, empathy, pain, and shame and evoking confidence and pride, males signify their alleged possession of masculine selves," Vaccaro said.

 "By signifying masculine selves through evoking fear and shame in others, such men are likely to more easily secure others' deference and accrue rewards and status. Managing emotional manhood, whether it occurs in a locker room or boardroom, at home or the Oval Office, likely plays a key role in maintaining unequal social arrangements."

This would seem to lead naturally to the analysis of MMA culture offered by David Mayeda at the Sociology in Focus blog.

However, I want to make a disclaimer and admission. I watch UFC from time to time and enjoy the "sport" of mixed martial arts. I do not believe that all men who participate in this sport are violent toward women or violent in general.

That said, the sport likely appeals to violent men in that it provides a socially acceptable venue for them to act out their tendencies. And this may be where the study mentioned above becomes relevant - some men may not leave their suppressed empathy in the ring or the gym. It's likely that some men adopt that social role in all areas of their lives, which makes violence toward women (and others) much more likely.

Sociology of MMA: Hegemonic Masculinity Unleashed

December 21, 2011

Imagine if it was common place for prominent members of a billion dollar company to use glaringly sexist language in public. That would be crazy, right? Except over the last few months this is exactly what we’ve seen from the Mixed Martial Arts league called the UFC. In this post David Mayeda uses the sociological concept of hegemonic masculinity to help us understand what is going on with the men of the UFC.

In a sport so male driven, it is hardly surprising that some Mixed Martial Arts (MMA) athletes publicly express opinions reflecting a violent male dominance. Recently, MMA fighter Miguel Torres tweeted: “If a rape van was called a surprise van more women wouldn’t mind going for rides in them. Everyone likes surprises” (December 7, 2011). Torres was subsequently fired by UFC President, Dana White.


Torres’s comment came off the heels of other controversial comments made at a UFC press conference, former light heavyweight UFC champ, Rashad Evans, taunted his future opponent, Phil Davis, by saying, “I’m going to put my hands on you worse than that dude on those kids at Penn State,” referencing former Penn State assistant football coach, Jerry Sandusky, who faces 40 counts related to the sexual assault of children.

And back in November, UFC star, Forrest Griffin, tweeted, “Rape is the new missionary.” What on earth is going on here? The answer, for sociologists lies within an idea called “hegemonic masculinity.”

Hegemonic masculinity helps to outline the plurality of masculinities existing and shifting within a culture’s hierarchal structure. Which is a fancy way of saying that men within a given culture engage in a variety of practices which give them masculine currency and power over other men and women. These practices may include (among other behaviors) taking risks, dominating other men and/or women, flaunting wealth, or showcasing athleticism.

Additionally, hegemonic masculinity requires men to police one another, that is, punish and stigmatize men who engage in so-called feminine behaviors. And perhaps it also goes without saying that hegemonic masculinity acknowledges the general degradation women, girls, and so-called feminine behaviors (see Connell & Messerschmidt, 2005, for a thorough discussion). We can find nearly countless examples of hegemonic masculinity in sports. The world of MMA is no exception.

As I discussed previously, MMA’s most prominent organization is the Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC). One clear example of hegemonic masculinity in this particular organization (and to a lesser degree the entire MMA industry) is the absence of female fighters. Women in the UFC when spotlighted, instead serve as ring card “girls.” Or, as seen in the picture above of five prominent MMA athletes, women emphasizing their feminine features may serve as sexualized visuals alongside the male fighters for the predominantly male crowd.

Returning to the concept of hegemonic masculinity, what these comments illustrate are first, the degradation of women. Torres and Griffin both make light of sexual assault in a type of locker room-based dialogue now widely disseminated via the internet. Secondly, the comments by Evans demonstrate how sexual assault victims can be used symbolically to denigrate others. Specifically, Evans works to disparage his opponent (Davis) by feminizing him – by comparing him to boys who (allegedly) have been sexually molested.

This recent rash of comments is an indication that hegemonic masculinity still pervades our society and that male privilege is perpetuated in sporting institutions. Even though males are in conflict with one another, what we see is a culture that depreciates women and all considered feminine. Whether or not sanctions against these athletes will change MMA’s hegemonically masculine culture remains to be seen, but in an organization where men are paid to engage in violent conflict, such change is highly unlikely.

Dig Deeper:

1. Thinking about the concept of hegemonic masculinity, identify other institutions in society where men (or boys) compete with and put down one another by feminizing each other.
2. What behaviors do you notice males engage in to display their masculine superiority over each other and over females? Explain how these behaviors change in different situations.
3. How can sporting institutions change so that they are more egalitarian along gender lines and alter their current hegemonically masculine culture?

Reference: Connell, R. W., & Messerschmidt, J. W. (2005). Hegemonic masculinity: rethinking the concept. Gender and Society, 19 (6), 829–859. DOI: 10.1177/0891243205278639. 

Posted by David Mayeda

Mixed Martial Arts Fighters Manage Fear While Exhibiting Confidence

This is interesting. Dr. Christian A. Vaccaro, lead author on this study, and his colleagues call the ability to feel fear and show confidence "managing emotional manhood," which they see as both an interactional strategy for managing emotion and a means for conveying a social identity to others.

I wonder if this is something specific to MMA or if athletes in other sports (not just combat sports) also have this skill or capability. And I wonder how these men score on emotional skills outside of the ring.

Exploring Men's Ability To Manage Fear In Ways That Allow Them To Exhibit Confidence

An Indiana University of Pennsylvania sociologist's study of mixed martial arts competitors found that these men have unique ways of managing fear that actually allow them to exhibit confidence.

This ability, which Dr. Christian A. Vaccaro and colleagues call "managing emotional manhood," is both an interactional strategy for managing emotion and a means for conveying a social identity to others. The study finds that successful management of fear by men in contact sports such as mixed martial arts may "create an emotional orientation that primes men to subordinate and harm others."

Vaccaro's co-authored article, "Managing Emotional Manhood: Fighting and Fostering Fear in Mixed Martial Arts" appears in the December 2011 issue of the American Sociological Association's Social Psychology Quarterly.

"Putting on a convincing manhood act requires more than using language and the body; it also requires emotion work. By suppressing fear, empathy, pain, and shame and evoking confidence and pride, males signify their alleged possession of masculine selves," Vaccaro said.

"By signifying masculine selves through evoking fear and shame in others, such men are likely to more easily secure others' deference and accrue rewards and status. Managing emotional manhood, whether it occurs in a locker room or boardroom, at home or the Oval Office, likely plays a key role in maintaining unequal social arrangements."

Vaccaro's research included two years of fieldwork and interviews with more than 100 mixed martial arts fighters, analyzing how they managed fear and adopted intimidating personas to evoke fear in opponents.

"We conceptualize this process as 'managing emotional manhood,' which refers to emotion management that signifies, in the dramaturgical sense, masculine selves," Vaccaro said.

"Whereas most scholarship on gendered emotion work focuses on how women manage emotions at work and home in ways that reinforce their subordination, we show how men do emotion work aimed at facilitating domination," he continued.

Reference:

American Sociological Association. (2011, December 25). "Exploring Men's Ability To Manage Fear In Ways That Allow Them To Exhibit Confidence." Medical News Today. Retrieved from
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/239183.php.

Matt Morin - The Confessions of a Cage Fighter: Masculinity, Misogyny, and the Fear of Losing Control

This is an interesting first-person perspective on MMA and masculinity issues (with a foundation of faith-based life meaning). The author is a former "cage fighter," so mcuh of what he is looking at here involves embodiment and masculinity, seen through a Biblical lens, but there is also much more to his article.

This comes from a site called The Other Journal: An Intersection of Theology and Culture.

The Confessions of a Cage Fighter: Masculinity, Misogyny, and the Fear of Losing Control

by Matt Morin on Tuesday, June 28, 2011

Before enrolling in divinity school, I was a cage fighter—not a full-time cage fighter, not a world-famous cage fighter, not even a person for whom cage fighting paid the bills, but a cage fighter nonetheless. Now, before I go any further, I need to be more careful with my vocabulary or else I’ll risk losing credibility. You see, real cage fighters don’t like to be referred to as such; we prefer the term mixed martial artist. And we prefer that our sport go by the name mixed martial arts or MMA instead of “cage fighting.” There is a long, sordid history behind the sport’s various name changes, and it has everything to do with public perception, influential politicians, and corporate cash (Amy Silverman, Phoenix New Times, February 12, 1998). (But then again, what doesn’t?) Given my history of participation in and love for the sport, my ears perked up last year when MMA arose as a topic of conversation in my theological ethics class.

During the course of our class discussion, one of my divinity school colleagues referred to a recent New York Times article that describes the way a number of churches throughout the United States are turning to mixed martial arts as a way to draw men into their buildings (R. M. Schneiderman, February 1, 2010). Some churches train fighters to compete, while an even greater number of churches host gatherings for men at live fights. On top of this, clothing companies such as Jesus Didn’t Tap and websites like AnointedFighter.com market themselves to a crowd of Christian fight fans—a crowd that might be called a niche if it weren’t already so big.

To some Christians, this new MMA movement represents an expression of real, natural, God-given masculinity. One captain for this team is Seattle megachurch pastor Mark Driscoll, who in the film Fighting Politics says, “I don’t think there is anything purer than two guys in a cage. [. . .] As a pastor and as a Bible teacher, I think that God made men masculine. [. . .] Men are made for combat, men are made for conflict, men are made for dominion. [. . .] That’s just the way men are made.”

And yet, not all Christians are so keen to adopt MMA as a spiritual discipline. Many people are repulsed by Driscoll’s comments yet respond to his sophomorism in kind. Take for example, the responses I heard from some fellow students during the course of our class conversation. “That’s the church of the rich,” one person stated from behind his Apple laptop. Not to be outdone in terms of ersatz answers, another student chimed in, “I’d say it’s the church of the bored.” That is the way these conversations tend to go—like two pugilists past their prime, both sides dance around one another, trading harmless jabs and failing to deliver a decisive blow.

In this essay, I hope to take a different tack altogether. I do not intend to make a case for MMA Christianity but neither do I seek to dismiss its representatives as unworthy dialogue partners. I do not think that mixed martial artists must be transformed into good Christian hipsters before they can teach us something about masculinity. Rather, I believe that MMA can make a substantial contribution to the conversation on masculinity. Therefore, in what follows I am going to consider MMA on its own terms; I am going to take its self-descriptions at face value. I am—in all charity—going to attempt a sympathetic reading of MMA.

In doing so, moreover, I will engage selections from The Confessions of Saint Augustine in order to ground my sympathetic reading of MMA theologically. By putting MMA in conversation with the Bishop of Hippo, I hope it will become clear that the sport does not shore up the particular notion of masculinity that Driscoll and others like him imagine it does.

The Fighter’s Body

According to MMA fans, masculinity is deeply connected to the body. For example, in the video clip, Driscoll makes disparaging remarks about the “fat guys” who sit on the sidelines and critique the sport. The implication, of course, is that the fit guys in the cage are the real men; true masculinity is revealed in the fighter’s body. A simple glimpse of a boxer or a wrestler—these guys are extraordinary physical specimens—reveals thick necks, tree trunk legs, v-shaped backs, even strong jaw lines. No doubt about it, so the argument goes, these are the archetypes to which all men ought to conform.

Furthermore, this emphasis on the relation between masculinity and embodiment seems to be a Christian one. After all, flesh and blood are central to our faith.

And yet, for all of MMA Christianity’s insistence on the centrality of the body for adequate conceptions of masculinity, my experience as a fighter taught me something entirely different. You see, far from acknowledging myself as a living body, success in MMA required that I ignore this fact, that I (somehow!) try to forget that I am a body.

It started in training. I had dozens of training partners who never competed. Their only job was to beat me up as I prepared for the fight. I would spar for a nonstop, ten-minute round, where every minute, a fresh, rested training partner would come in and lay a beating on me. Though exhausted, I would try to give one back. The point, of course, was that when fight night came, the real thing would actually be easier than the hell I had put myself through at practice. And after each training session, far from feeling angry with the people who had just pummeled me, I sincerely thanked them for helping me train, for making me a better fighter.

What was happening along the way, however, was nothing less than being schooled in how to ignore my body. Perhaps you’ve seen the T-shirt slogans that bark with false bravado, “Pain is just weakness leaving the body.” That was my attitude toward training: ignore the pain, redefine it, explain it away—it’s not real, it’s for my own good, it’s not a message from my body; it is just something in my “mind” (whatever that means).

A similar thing would happen on the night of the fight. The adrenaline dump that you get before a fight is incredible. Even after having fought for years, including for a number of large promotions, on fight night the same thing always happened: I got jittery, and my jaw would chatter. When that adrenaline first hit me, I found it difficult to make a tight fist or take a deep breath—both of which are somewhat important for a fighter to do. Early in my career, I came to dread this feeling before the fight. But over time, I learned how to deal with my hormones, how to talk myself out of the message they were trying to send me.

During the fight, I had to ignore not only my body but my opponent’s body as well—which is to say I had to ignore him. After taking an opponent down to the ground, I would hit him until he decided it wasn’t worth it anymore and gave up by tapping out. Some opponents were more stubborn than others and thus needed more convincing than others, but I always vowed to never hit them any more than I needed to in order to get them to tap out—witness the triumph of rational morality, or to use the language of Jus In Bello, “proportionality”!

After the fight, my whole body ached. If it were a quick fight, I would usually feel better in a few days. But if the fight lasted all five rounds, it would be a good week before I felt like getting out of bed. To cope with the pain, I would drink at night—not a lot, just enough to take some of the sting out. On the really bad days, I would pop a few pain pills—again not a ton, just enough to mute some of the pain.

In all these ways—in my training, in the moments leading up to the fight, in the fight itself, and especially in the days following the fight—the way to excel as a fighter was not by living as an integrated human body, but rather by (somehow!) detaching my “self” from my body. So I agree with the MMA Christians in their insistence that any account of masculinity must also offer an account of embodiment. And yet, I simply observe that the successful mixed martial artist must subscribe to a false account—one in which pain is not real and in which human beings are somehow outside of or apart from the body.

And now it seems appropriate to ask what account of masculinity requires a man to forget his body? The answer can only be that it is not a Christian masculinity but a Manichean masculinity. The Manichees, a sect founded in the third century by Mani and depicted by Augustine in his Confessions as a popular movement during the mid-fourth century, believed that this world was a fusion of divine spirit and evil matter. By this account, it was only through the spirit’s escape from the vile material realm that it was able to reach the transcendent world. Augustine describes his time among the Manichees like so:

I fell among a set of proud madmen, exceedingly carnal and talkative people in whose mouths were diabolical snares and a sticky mess compounded by mixing the syllables of your name, and the names of the Lord Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit, who is our Paraclete and Consoler. These names were never far from their mouths, but amounted to no more than sound and the clacking of tongues, for their hearts were empty of the truth.”[1]

Having joined their ranks, Augustine soon subscribed to a variety of otherworldly philosophies:

I derided your holy servants and prophets. Even as I laughed at them I deserved to be laughed at by you, for gradually, little by little, I was being lured into such absurdities as the belief that a fig wept when plucked, and its mother tree too wept milky tears. Then, I was told, if one of the saints ate the fig, it would be absorbed by his digestive system and then when he belched or groaned in prayer he would spew out angels, or even particles of God [. . .] I believed, poor wretch, that it was accordingly a higher duty to show mercy to the fruits of the earth than to human beings.”[2]

Now if that didn’t make much sense to you—and it shouldn’t—Augustine’s experience as a Manichee can be described as follows: after falling in with a crowd whose hyperspirituality caused them to paradoxically become “exceedingly carnal,” Augustine developed a disregard for the human creature that was ultimately evidenced in some rather absurd practices. Or again, as a result of accepting a false description of the human body—one that mistakenly taught the separation of human spirit and flesh rather than their interwoven and mutually constitutive nature—Augustine also came to adopt a false way of being in the world. Thus, both his flesh and spirit suffered, or in his own words, he became “misshapen.” This description rings as true of some twenty-first-century hypermasculine Christianists as it did of fourth-century Manichaeism.

Any Christian account of masculinity must take our embodiment seriously. Violence will result whenever we forget that God created us as flesh and blood, that God came to earth in flesh and blood, and that the flesh and blood of Jesus is now present to the world in the church’s sacraments.

Go read the whole article.

Tags: Matt Morin, Confessions, Cage Fighter, Masculinity, Misogyny, Fear of Losing Control, MMA, Bible, Christianity, faith, embodiment, psychology, culture, violence, aggression, men, traditional masculinity, The Other Journal, theology, religion