Overdoing Gender*

This paper explores the empirical validity of the masculine overcompensation thesis, which asserts that men react to masculine insecurity with extreme demonstrations of masculinity. Overcompensation, an often-cited popular account for exaggerated masculine-typed behaviors, is supported by theoretical work in the masculinities and identity theory literatures. I tested the masculine overcompensation thesis in an experiment in which men and women were given feedback on a gender identity survey suggesting that they are either masculine or feminine. While women showed no change as a result of the type of feedback received on the gender identity survey, men showed a variety of exaggerated masculine-typed behaviors and attitudes. Compared to men given masculinity-confirming feedback, men given feedback threatening their masculinity, 1) expressed greater homophobia, including greater support for a ban on same-sex marriage, 2) showed greater support for the Iraq war, including President Bush’s handling of it, and 3) expressed greater interest in purchasing a Sport Utility Vehicle (SUV), relative to other vehicles. Masculinity-threatened men also reported feeling more ashamed, guilty, upset and hostile than did masculinity-confirmed men. Results of the study offer strong support for the masculine overcompensation thesis. TESTING THE MASCULINE OVERCOMPENSATION THESIS INTRODUCTION In the 1964 film Dr Strangelove, Or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb, the initiation of World War III is depicted as a great act of overcompensation by a sexually impotent general. This line of reasoning is not unusual. Masculine overcompensation is invoked as an explanation for a variety of behaviors from the small (men purchasing sportscars at the onset of mid-life crises) to the world-changing (as in Franz Neumann’s analysis of the rise of the Third Reich as a reaction to post-WWI German emasculation). Even though this notion is pervasive in popular culture its empirical validity remains in question. The masculine overcompensation thesis asserts that men who feel insecure about their masculinity enact extreme masculine behaviors in an effort to achieve masculine status in their eyes and others. The masculine overcompensation thesis further suggests that extreme, caricatured demonstrations of masculinity by men may thus be rooted in masculine insecurity. Masculine overcompensation is an idea rooted in Freudian psychology but which has grown to have a life of its own. It has been cited as an explanation for a wide variety of behaviors ranging from war and homophobia to the purchase of powerful sports cars and SUVs. In this paper I review the theoretical basis for the masculine overcompensation thesis and lay out specific hypotheses regarding the role of masculine overcompensation in men’s behavior. I report the results of an experiment in which I gave men and women feedback suggesting they had either masculine or feminine gender identities and measured the effects on a variety of masculine behaviors. Finally, I discuss implications of the study for the validity of the masculine overcompensation thesis, addressing possible alternative explanations for the results. THEORY The masculine overcompensation thesis is originally derived from Freudian theory, specifically Freud’s notion of “reaction formation” (1894). A recent review of Freudian defense mechanisms by Baumeister and colleagues (1998) found substantial and diverse support for reaction formation in the contemporary social psychology literature. In their analysis, reaction formation “involves converting a socially unacceptable impulse into its opposite.People respond to the implication that they have some unacceptable trait by behaving in a way that would show them to have the opposite trait. ” Masculine overcompensation could be seen as a special case of reaction formation, with the implication of femininity or deficient masculinity being the unacceptable trait motivating men’s overcompensating behavior. In perhaps the most famous empirical demonstration of reaction formation, Adams, Wright, and Lohr (1996) found that more homophobic men actually showed greater sexual arousal while watching videos of homosexual intercourse, despite selfreporting low levels of arousal. This finding suggests that homophobia may be a case of reaction formation for men with homosexual urges, but stronger concerns about the social implications of homosexuality. The masculine overcompensation thesis follows a similar line of reasoning: men who suspect themselves to have insufficient masculinity overcompensate by enacting extreme masculine behaviors and attitudes designed to create the impression that they are in fact quite masculine. In modern social science, the masculine overcompensation thesis is most clearly related to the expansive gender literature on masculinity. Connell’s conception of “hegemonic masculinity” describes the ever-changing, manifold meaning of masculinity the content of which varies substantially across cultures (1987). Femininity and other masculinities are less powerful and respected than hegemonic masculinity. Hegemonic masculinity exerts a strong conformity pressure on men, though it is not normative in the sense that total conformity is possible. Rather, true masculinity is an unattainable ideal (Connell 1987; 1995). Thus, for Connell, masculine insecurity is not an occasional event, although various events may be more emasculating than others. Instead, masculine insecurity, feelings of emasculation, and the suspicion of femininity are ubiquitous for men. These concerns and feelings of deficiency instigate the enactment of masculinity in everyday life. Through this lens, because true masculinity is idealized and unattainable, a strain always exists, and the result of that strain is overcompensation and striving for ever greater masculinity. Kimmel also emphasizes the nearly constant threat to men that they may be revealed as insufficiently masculine (2000). Kimmel refers to “homophobia” as the fear of other men detecting one’s insufficient masculinity. However, this fear is itself a source of shame and must be covered up, along with any possible unmasculine or feminine characteristics, with bold demonstrations of strength and masculinity. From the perspective of Kimmell, and Connell, masculine overcompensation is not an occasional phenomenon, but is instead the fundamental process through which masculinities are enacted, What we call masculinity is often a hedge against being revealed as a fraud, an exaggerated set of activities that keep others from seeing through us, and a frenzied effort to keep at bay those fears within ourselves.the reigning definition of masculinity is a defensive effort to prevent being emasculated. (p. 103-6, 2000) Theories of identity converge on the general claim that individuals often exhibit overcompensation-type behaviors in an effort to protect identities that are central to them, as gender identities are assumed to be for most individuals. In Identity Theory, gender identification as masculine or feminine motivates behavior related to gender, such as men who identify as masculine behaving in a more dominant or competitive fashion (Stets and Burke 2000a, Burke 1989). Research in identity theory shows that much may be at stake for individuals perceived to have gender-inappropriate identities, including insults and resulting low self-esteem (Burke and Tully 1977). Individuals who have adopted an identity enact behaviors meant to maintain that identity, even in the face of threat (Stets and Burke 2000b). Social identity theory (Tajfel and Turner 1986; Abrams and Hogg 1990) asserts that group identification relies on being simultaneously prototypical of one’s own social group and distinctive from the out-group. Thus, in the case of gender identity, men typically find it essential to project masculinity and avoid appearing feminine. Social identity theory also suggests a number of threats to one’s group identification, and behaviors individuals enact in response to these threats. Environmental stimuli suggesting that one’s group is not distinctive from the out-group, that one’s group is not as good as the out-group, that one is not a valuable member of the group, and that one is more similar to the out-group than to one’s own group all present unique threats to group identity motivating behaviors to restore group identity. In the case of gender identity, this identity defense may take the form of masculine hostility and violence against women. In a recent experiment conducted in Italy, men were given feedback on a gender identity survey suggesting that they were either typical or atypical men (Maass et al. 2003). Next, participants worked with a woman on a computer-mediated image-sharing task where sexual harassment behavior was made possible by including pornographic materials among the images that could be sent back and forth. Researchers tracked the number of participants who chose to send uninvited, explicit pornographic materials to women co-workers; the rate of men engaging in this behavior was 23% when they had been given feedback suggesting they had typical levels of masculinity, but more than doubled to 50% among men told that they were feminine. A striking result, the study suggests that men may react to the implication that they lack masculinity with extreme masculine behaviors, in this case sexual harassment of women. MEASURING OVERCOMPENSATION According to the masculine overcompensation thesis, men will become more likely to enact extremely masculine behaviors after a threat to their masculinity. In order to test this assertion I follow Maass et al.’s (2003) research strategy of experimentally manipulating feedback to study participants, suggesting that they are either typical or atypical of their gender, then assessing a wide variety of attitudes and behaviors to see if men exposed to masculinity threat behave in more extreme