Between Structure and Practice: A Theory-Based Framework for Masculinities in Armed Conflict

The analysis of masculinities during and after armed conflicts has been on the rise during the last ten years. For this endeavour, authors mainly use the terms ‚militarised masculinity’, ‘military masculinity’, and ‚hypermasculinity’. However, most of these contributions lack a clear-cut conceptualisation of those terms as well as a coherent theoretical foundation. This constitutes a waste of analytical potential. Our paper aims to tackle both these issues by using practice theory to inspire a framework that includes different levels of analysis and, at the same time, enables us to assess the co-constitutive relationship between the different levels. For this, we will use Giddens’ structuration theory as well as Reckwitz’ approach to practice theory. In order to account for the specificities of gender as socially constructed category, we will integrate Butler’s understanding of gender as performance and Connell’s concept of hegemonic masculinity into the above theories. As a result emerges a practice-oriented multi-level approach to gender relations in armed conflict. Based on these theoretical considerations we suggest a conceptual framework, which includes all three terms mentioned initially. Accordingly, hypermasculinity can be used to analyse identities on the individual and small group level. Military masculinity enables us to capture gender constructions promoted within the military or armed groups. Lastly, militarised masculinity defines gender constructions on the macro level – meaning the entire society that is affected by armed conflict. With this theoretically elaborated conceptualisation we hope to contribute to a more structured research on violent masculinities in armed conflict and their impact on post-conflict peace processes.