Chan, P W (2011) Queer(y)ing construction: Exploring sexuality and masculinity in construction. In: Egbu, C and Lou, E C W (eds.) Proceedings of 27th Annual ARCOM Conference, 5-7 September 2011, Bristol, UK.
Abstract
The macho image of the construction industry often denotes negative aspects of male dominance and female subordination. These have been used to explain the problem of gender imbalance in construction. Proponents of the diversity agenda have sought to tackle structural characteristics of the industry by embracing perspectives of visible minorities in the industry such as women. Thus, the macho image is usually treated as a problem, and rarely problematised. To better understand what the macho image of the industry really entails, there is a need to divert attention away from gendered perspectives of construction towards understanding sexuality as a means of reproducing social relations at the construction workplace. Through life stories of two homosexual men engaging in construction work, hegemonic masculinity and misogyny are explored. Preliminary analysis suggests the potential for a more inclusive notion of masculinity in construction, and a research agenda to rethink gender categories in construction employment.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | equality and diversity; gender; queer theory; sexuality; social relations |
| Index terms: | sexuality, employment, equality and diversity, research agenda, masculinity, construction industry, women, construction work, minority |
| Subjects: | operations management, research management, sociology, industry analysis, management |
| Topics: | Project Management, Research Practice, Human Resources, Ethics |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here