ABSTRACT
As mentioned in the introduction of this book, there are a number of ways to approach the study of gender. Recently, Addis and Cohane (2005) discussed several paradigms related to the study of the psychology of men. These include psychodynamic, social learning, and social constructionist theories. While not an exhaustive list, this sampling represents current voices within the gender-related discussion. These theoretical perspectives also reflect what is considered an essential versus a constructed, and/or learned and reinforced reality concerning gender identity. The essentialist models emphasize masculinity (and gender) as a set of attributes or traits. Psychoanalytic and biological theories are often associated with this approach. Social learning and social constructionist theories emphasize in varying degrees how social forces (re)construct and reinforce social views regarding gender. While traditionally held as theoretical rivals, it is argued in this chapter that one can take steps toward finding common ground between these approaches in discussing the psychology of men and masculinity. For instance, one can attend to the dynamic process (e.g., the emotional and psychological gender role strain and conflict) that is the product of ill-fitting socially constructed gender roles. One also becomes aware of the fundamental psychoemotional conditions at the individual and social levels that allow for the development of self and even the construction of a pluralistic identity that enjoys flexibility across various role demands.
