Emphasized and Non-Emphasized Femininities: A Structured Action Perspective

Raewyn Connell’s concept of “emphasized femininity” remains foundational to gender scholarship, yet it is often treated as a static or singular formation. In this article, we revisit and extend the concept using structured action theory, highlighting the contextual, reflexive, and routinized nature of gendered structured action. We reanalyze a collection of published qualitative studies to illustrate how femininities—emphasized and non-emphasized—are variably constructed through accountability, femmephobia, and the relational and discursive structures that shape gendered practice. Through this reanalysis, we demonstrate how emphasized femininities are contextually fluid configurations that are essential to the legitimation of hegemonic masculinities and reinforce gender inequality. By contrast, non-emphasized femininities are defined primarily through the construction of intragender hierarchies among femininities. This highlights the analytic value of structured action theory for theorizing femininities as diverse, relational, and embedded within systems of power.

Authors

Publication Details

Published
2025-09-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/ts64q_v1
Primary Topic
Gender Politics and Representation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Emphasized and Non-Emphasized Femininities: A Structured Action Perspective

James W. Messeschmidt, Tristan Bridges
Gender Politics and Representation
article

Emphasized and Non-Emphasized Femininities: A Structured Action Perspective

James W. Messeschmidt, Tristan Bridges
article en

Abstract

Raewyn Connell’s concept of “emphasized femininity” remains foundational to gender scholarship, yet it is often treated as a static or singular formation. In this article, we revisit and extend the concept using structured action theory, highlighting the contextual, reflexive, and routinized nature of gendered structured action. We reanalyze a collection of published qualitative studies to illustrate how femininities—emphasized and non-emphasized—are variably constructed through accountability, femmephobia, and the relational and discursive structures that shape gendered practice. Through this reanalysis, we demonstrate how emphasized femininities are contextually fluid configurations that are essential to the legitimation of hegemonic masculinities and reinforce gender inequality. By contrast, non-emphasized femininities are defined primarily through the construction of intragender hierarchies among femininities. This highlights the analytic value of structured action theory for theorizing femininities as diverse, relational, and embedded within systems of power.

Openalex Percentile: Top 67%
Gender Politics and Representation
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.