Guest editorial: In search of entrepreneurial masculinities: exploring accomplishments, social constructions, ideals and hegemonies

Most importantly, this Special Issue (SI) is dedicated to our friend Robert Smith, who was a guest editor for this special issue and whom we all loved.This SI builds on an expanding literature looking at entrepreneurial masculinities (see Smith, 2010; Hechavarria and Ingram, 2016; Giazitzoglu and Down, 2017; Jernberg et al., 2020; Smith, 2021; Smith, 2022; Balkmar et al., 2024; Hytti et al., 2024; Forster-Holt and Davis, 2025). This literature shows the heterogeneity that defines entrepreneurial masculinities. There are multiple configurations of masculinities that are expressed by men (and women) within entrepreneurial processes, as entrepreneurs develop enterprises in particular contexts.Often entrepreneurial masculinities are enacted by entrepreneurial actors in order to overcome structural-level barriers they face. For example, in the cases of Nathan Rothschild, who had to “manage” his entrepreneurial masculinity in a culture of antisemitism (Giazitzoglu and Wilson, 2023); the Black African immigrant entrepreneurs discussed by Giazitzoglu and Korede (2023), who tried to grow businesses in white geographies where Black masculinities can be stigmatised; and the gay entrepreneurs discussed by Rumens and Ozturk (2019), whose gay male masculinities had to be balanced with prevailing cultural ideals that position “legitimate” entrepreneurial actors as heterosexual men. Entrepreneurial masculinity, as a culturally performed ideal, also orients specific aspects of entrepreneurship, such as business networking (Giazitzoglu and Whittle, 2025). Concurrently, female entrepreneurs are also confronted by culturally constructed notions of entrepreneurial masculinity, and they navigate the masculine landscape of entrepreneurship by either embracing or rejecting masculine norms while engaging with entrepreneurial practices and constructing an entrepreneurial identity (see, for example, Yousafzai et al.'s (2025) article “Masquerade of power: women entrepreneurs reshaping gender norms in Kazakhstan's male-dominated sectors” published in this SI, as well as previous studies like Ahl and Marlow (2012), Lewis (2006) and Bruni et al. (2004). Studies such as these show how and why entrepreneurial masculinities are relevant to all scholars looking at the intersection of gender and entrepreneurship, not just those with a focus on masculinities.As guest editors, we (Giazitzoglu et al., 2025) are delighted to introduce and outline an SI titled “In Search of Entrepreneurial Masculinities: Exploring Accomplishments, Social Constructions, Ideals, and Hegemonies.” The response we received to our call for papers (Giazitzoglu et al., 2023) was beyond our wildest expectations both in terms of the international reach of the topics and authors and also in relation to the high quality of the deeply qualitative submissions that made it through the review process. In response to our call, we expected to receive a small number of studies focusing mainly upon the topic of “Hegemonic Masculinity” (Connell and Messerschmidt, 2005). This is because the concept of hegemonic masculinity has become the eminent theory used to understand masculinity and its associated power implications across the social sciences (Hopkins and Giazitzoglu, 2024) and has also been utilised in studies looking at entrepreneurial masculinities as a distinct typology of masculinities. We were pleasantly surprised by the way hegemonic masculinity has been utilised in many of the submissions we received, in erudite and creative ways that both develop the theory and allow the theory to develop how we conceptualise entrepreneurial masculinities. What unites the studies in this SI is the fact that the authors dare to extend the research paradigm on entrepreneurial masculinities beyond the traditional business and finance sector (e.g., in the context of the controversial site OnlyFans, where particular types of entrepreneurial masculinities are engaged with). In turn, the SI captures a masculinity that is enterprising, infused with notions of dominance, a cut-throat disposition and corporate acumen. We present studies from various geographies, including England, Indonesia, Kazakhstan, Norway, Scandinavia and Hungary, showing how relative cultural geographies shape the forms entrepreneurial masculinities take. We were also impressed by the level of methodological innovation shown, for example in the proclivity to use interpretive phenomenological analysis, observations, analysis of media sources and interview data to understand how aspects of entrepreneurial masculinity are lived and experienced subjectively, by specific actors in distinct cultural contexts.Below we present and discuss the papers that make up this SI. Being accepted papers, they are already in the public domain via the Ahead of Print mechanism. Indeed, they are already receiving citations and downloads. This shows how exciting the area of masculinities is becoming – no longer a niche area in entrepreneurial scholarship but a burgeoning one with a genuine, kind and open-minded collection of scholars contributing to it.The first study/paper by Haryono and Hartanto (2025) is entitled “Dynamics of male makeup artists in Indonesia: navigating entrepreneurship in the middle hegemonic masculinity”. It documents the trials and tribulations of male make-up artists in the highly patriarchal society of Indonesia. The study is an exploration of how Indonesian males who are entrepreneurs/make-up artists navigate their businesses in a society that relies on hegemonic masculinity. This empirical study adopts a “Qualitative Phenomenological Approach” [QPA] to analyse in-depth interviews and observations with 28 informants in five Indonesian provinces. The findings indicate that the counter-hegemonic entrepreneurs actively rewrite their gender and inherent vocations by societal norms. In this process, they are supported by friends and family members in the face of societal rejection. The key trait to emerge was that of persistence in battling for their fate against an establishment that seeks to erase them. The study contributes to the gender and entrepreneurship literature by providing a broader exploration of male entrepreneurs working in the field of female make-up artists in a society that still adheres to hegemonic masculinity.The “conceptual” study by Stahl and Zhao (2025), “Entrepreneurial working-class masculinities and curating the corporeal: social media influencers, porntrepreneurs and the case of OnlyFans”, covers the topic of working-class masculinities in the porn industry. Stahl and Zhao (2025) focus their research attention on the reproduction of masculinities and monetized body work in digital forms of entrepreneurship. Utilising a novel methodological approach, they explore some of the entrepreneurial and performative skills utilized by male OnlyFans creators in curating their bodies and sexualities in order to attract subscribers and maximize profits. The findings map the relationship between entrepreneurialism and masculinity on OnlyFans considering the platform's popularity and the changing nature of digital entrepreneurship. Drawing connections to previous research on working-class entrepreneurial masculinities, they highlight how male working-class OnlyFans creators actively practice entrepreneurial skills. The study makes a contribution by foregrounding the work of social media creators as sexualized and aesthetic labour, making connections between digital entrepreneurship, working-class masculinity, sexuality and (idealized) bodies.The next study by Yousafzai et al. (2025) – “Masquerade of Power: Women entrepreneurs reshaping gender norms in Kazakhstan's male-dominated sectors” – articulates the challenges faced by women entrepreneurs in patriarchal Kazakhstan by utilising the concept of “positionality” to navigate and redefine gender norms and by refocusing on their engagement with entrepreneurial masculinities and femininities. The study explores the transformative potential of their strategic actions on gender dynamics within the entrepreneurial ecosystem. Like most of the other studies in this SI, they employ a deeply empirical methodology by conducting 27 in-depth interviews using a constructivist grounded theory to delve into how women entrepreneurs interact with gender norms within their entrepreneurial context – thus highlighting the dynamic interplay between gender norms and the strategies employed by women entrepreneurs to navigate these challenges. The findings reveal that women entrepreneurs actively employ and navigate entrepreneurial masculinities and femininities as strategies to challenge traditional gender roles. These include conforming to, challenging and creatively redefining the gendered expectations encountered in their entrepreneurial journey. This demonstrates active agency. The study makes a contribution by foregrounding the concept of positionality to enrich the dialogue on gender dynamics within entrepreneurship. It offers fresh perspectives on the agency of women entrepreneurs in male-dominated sectors, illustrating how gender identities and performances are not fixed but are actively and socially constructed and negotiated, contributing to the evolving landscape of entrepreneurial masculinities and femininities.The paper by Schoonmaker et al. (2025) – “Beyond bars: the confining nature of hegemonic masculinity in venture accelerators” – investigates the intersectionality of entrepreneurial masculinity within the context of venture accelerators to shed light on how intersecting factors influence the construction and expression of masculinity among male entrepreneurs in venture accelerators. The methodology entailed conducting an in-depth analysis of four distinct accelerator cohort groups, employing a semi-structured interview approach. The approach is deeply empirical and entailed interviewing four accelerator managers and 52 male accelerator participants. The methodology was instrumental in unravelling the nuanced dynamics within accelerator environments and their implications on hegemonic masculinity. The findings elucidate the nuanced ways in which men navigate the venture accelerator landscape and show that the accelerator environment facilitated the reinforcement of traditional masculine behaviours. Paradoxically, whilst diversity was ostensibly valued, its acceptance decreased if it posed a challenge to male dominance or stereotypical masculine traits. Indeed, there was marginalisation of nontraditional expressions of masculinity, leading to a sense of “othering”. This study makes a contribution by integrating intersectionality theory into the examination of masculine dynamics within venture accelerator contexts. It thus expands current understanding of venture accelerator environments and their effects on both traditional and nontraditional forms of hegemonic masculinity. The study highlights the impact of non-intersectional institutional norms on male entrepreneurs who deviate from traditional stereotypes. In doing so, it advances the understanding of venture accelerators by examining how they perpetuate and reinforce traditional masculine norms, even in environments that strive for diversity.The study by Korede (2025) – “Constructing non-hegemonic entrepreneurial masculinity: the case of Black men doing entrepreneurship in a predominantly white context” – adds to work looking at how non-hegemonic males experience and respond to entrepreneurship. The focus of the study is upon how non-hegemonic masculinity is performed by male entrepreneurs who do not fit the dominant and traditional form of masculinity in a specific context. Focusing on a cohort of 9 Black male entrepreneurs living in the Northeast of England who practised entrepreneurship in a predominantly white context, the study explores how non-hegemonic entrepreneurial masculinity is constructed. The study uses the interesting and novel methodology of Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis [IPA] to uncover a strategy of transactional masculinity. The findings demonstrated that the Black male entrepreneurs construct a distinct form of entrepreneurial masculinity by leveraging the identity of White women to construct a respectable entrepreneurial masculinity. The form of masculinity the men engaged in is theorised as transactional masculinity. This is enacted through relationships with White women which are seen as a symbol of respect and social acceptance, and as a “rite of passage” in entrepreneurship. The study presents a model of entrepreneurial masculinity to explain how transactional masculinity is constructed in relation to femininity and other forms of masculinity. The study makes a contribution by theorising how non-hegemonic entrepreneurial masculinity is enacted through the concept of transactional masculinity. It presents a model of entrepreneurial masculinity and gives voice to the experiences of male entrepreneurial actors with non-hegemonic masculinity.The study by Lindvert et al. (2025) – “Technology incubators as local gender regimes: Performing entrepreneurial masculinities” – deals with how men perform their entrepreneurial masculinities within technology incubators as gendered organisations. The study investigates how gender patterns, norms and practices of entrepreneurial masculinities are performed within technology incubators. Although incubators within the same country represent similar types of contexts, they also develop organisational variations. Local gender regimes, norms and actions within an incubator have implications for the type of entrepreneurs who are attracted to and feel included in a particular incubator. Four Norwegian incubators were studied. Data were collected through interviews with incubator managers, and male and female entrepreneurs. The interview data was complemented with observations and analysis of webpages. To analyse data, they used a qualitative, inductive approach, where a thematic analysis helped create a framework of incubators as gendered organisations. The findings build on Connell's (2006) four-dimension framework. The findings indicate that the studied incubators all perform gendered patterns, norms and practices, related to division of labour, relations of power, emotion and human relations, as well as culture and symbolism. They facilitate and perform entrepreneurial masculinities in different ways, expressing both traditional and modern masculine ideals. The study contributes to literature on masculinities by exploring the pluralities of masculinity within incubators as gendered regimes and to our understanding of incubators as gendered organisations.The study by Virágh (2025) – “Capitalist messiahs fighting small-mindedness: hegemonic startup masculinity in a semi-peripheral context” – is an exploration of constructions of startup masculinity as a cultural ideal in a Hungarian context. The study is based on Connell's concept of hegemonic masculinity and examines how the construction of startup masculinity, considered hegemonic in a given space and time, subordinates “others”. The study employs a critical discourse analysis of 143 media articles published in the Hungarian print and online Forbes magazine and builds upon the concepts and theoretical models of hegemonic masculinity, entrepreneurial masculine identities, discursive identity construction and semi-peripherality. The findings highlight two key points. Firstly, it reveals that the normative figure of the successful startup founder is not gender-neutral but is a discursively constructed masculine identity, which excludes women. Secondly, it emphasises the hierarchical relationship between hegemonic startup masculinity and other masculinities rooted in a semi-peripheral, Hungarian context, which are subordinated in the discourse. It discursively reproduces the hierarchical gendered relations in society and the symbolic hierarchical relations between the core and the semi-periphery. This study contributes by examining hegemonic startup masculinity as a subordinating concept within a particular entrepreneurial and geographical context by illuminating the significance of semi-peripheral locationality in hegemony construction. It also contributes to both the understanding of masculinity in entrepreneurship literature and the decolonisation of masculinity studies.The study by Green and Wraight (2025) – “Willy Wonka and the boy-entrepreneur archetype: the changing faces of entrepreneurial masculinity, 1971–2023” – utilises the fictional cultural figure of “Willy Wonka” to explore the archetype of the “boy-entrepreneur”, and what the various film manifestations of Wonka (1971–2023) say in entrepreneurial masculinity. The study an of as socially and gender the entrepreneurial archetype using and a novel of and masculinity to cultural analysis of in The methodology a analysis of the film of Wonka and the literature on in entrepreneurship with and the study the that the Wonka and a framework that thematic across the in terms of the social and gender of boy-entrepreneur The findings from the interpretive analysis reveal a in expressed through from a of masculinity a embracing with female and and with the influence of non-hegemonic entrepreneurial gender and to venture The study contributes to the area of the its in and The study also an in-depth to attention to ways of entrepreneurial whilst also expanding the methodological of research on entrepreneurial masculinity beyond study and masculinities in entrepreneurial entrepreneurial perspectives on gender by and (2025), examines how male entrepreneurial and with gender It as a study of a technology startup in one of leading startup reveal a of among male entrepreneurial gender previous research has the of the in entrepreneurial this study the focus to how to the and its inherent gender study impact of masculinities on to in and social by et al. (2025) examines there are between male and female in public and in in and masculinity, considering male and to be et (2025) titled the to entrepreneurial a study of deeply engaged entrepreneurs for explores a specific entrepreneurial that of deeply engaged entrepreneurs entrepreneurial is the of and beyond The paper the research in the social environment of challenge and shape entrepreneurial The paper makes four It explores entrepreneurial masculinity”. it an model of hegemonic masculinity by showing that the in entrepreneurship is not that of a but can also a for the it the concept of entrepreneurial masculinity. it the of women and the in the social environment as they in in entrepreneurial the study by and (2025) – Utilising to entrepreneurial an as a through which to a analysis of a of as an entrepreneurial The methodological focus is upon the its and to and analyse the entrepreneurial identities of with and successful from from To we on the and aspects of their study is in its but they form an even of the and of entrepreneurial masculinity on the entrepreneurial and it is our that this SI a of research into entrepreneurial identity and SI a contribution to the of masculinity in the context of entrepreneurship. from masculinity as a or of entrepreneurial identity, the of this SI on its and These studies challenge the of a entrepreneurial by showing masculinity as and the to Hungary, from incubators to masculinities are as and as by power and as by and innovation (Connell and Messerschmidt, Giazitzoglu and Down, of the key across the is a of hegemonic as a ideal, but as a and construct that and in (2025) study of startup discourse in or Schoonmaker et (2025) analysis of venture we how the figure of the successful to ideals of and These ideals even in that diversity or What is that hegemonic entrepreneurial masculinity is it is not a of identity or – entrepreneurial agency a in challenging and rejecting the masculine ideal – but a by broader and and et al., the same time, the SI offers by to and from of entrepreneurial Stahl and (2025) exploration of the OnlyFans the in the of the masculine while Green and (2025) study of the evolving figure of Wonka adds a cultural and in how masculine entrepreneurship is and These studies on the of and performances of masculinity, challenging as the of entrepreneurial In doing so, they with broader that the and of dynamics of entrepreneurial masculinities are also in this Yousafzai et al.'s (2025) work on women entrepreneurs and (2025) study of Black male entrepreneurs in the into how gendered and power shape entrepreneurial studies the concept of positionality to understand how actors navigate and dominant norms. (2025) of entrepreneurial men social by with white the kind of innovation that can emerge from analysis and These that masculinity is constructed in but is through its with sexuality and also is the of space cultural and discursive in the making of entrepreneurial masculinities. Studies such as Lindvert et (2025) work on technology incubators and Haryono and (2025) exploration of male makeup artists in highlight the that gendered entrepreneurial in are to as gender regimes that masculinities while These findings reinforce the that entrepreneurial identity is not a of disposition or but is deeply by institutional and and Wilson, the SI also a and to entrepreneurship. through analysis, phenomenological interviews or discourse analysis, these studies make a case for research that and This is methodological an from research and a critical and understanding of entrepreneurial et al., 2016; and Giazitzoglu et al., the to this SI the for a framework that entrepreneurial masculinities as and discursively This framework is of there is the diversity of masculine hegemonic to aesthetic and these masculinities are and culturally by the specific norms and institutional of like incubators and digital masculinities are performed and through aesthetic and that ideals of entrepreneurship. they are by power relations, sexuality and shape who can perform entrepreneurial masculinity and entrepreneurial masculinities are not but time, by cultural and of from the articles in this a critical engagement with gender and entrepreneurship. It the focus from entrepreneurs by gender to how and in entrepreneurial In doing so, the SI the of entrepreneurship studies by for engaging with the gendered dynamics of power, and in (see studies in this SI a for what entrepreneurial masculinity how it is performed and in what it is their contribution also the for research that challenge the of the field critical the decolonisation of entrepreneurial masculinities. like those by Virágh and this work by masculinity in and contexts, to be in challenging the dominance of studies have ideals of and that with a of masculinity. This subordinating or other cultural of entrepreneurial research thus how and what as entrepreneurial and who to this et al., is the to the beyond and gender some of the papers in this SI with gay masculinities or gender there to and perspectives into of entrepreneurial masculinities, entrepreneurial experiences and from the dominant as do the forms of and that such actors in navigating the deeply gendered of venture and theory offers for the between masculinity and entrepreneurship, space for and is the exploration of and masculinities within entrepreneurial The of in the evolving figure of the boy-entrepreneur in Green and (2025) contribution the cultural in gendered ideals of entrepreneurship. the entrepreneurial is no longer by and what of masculinities are made the face of social and to or practices how masculinities are through entrepreneurial how men experience and make sense of and within entrepreneurial the dominant to and the of how these are or through masculine theorised studies the and of entrepreneurship, not as but as of entrepreneurial masculinities. In doing so, a and understanding of the entrepreneurial the methodological of research on entrepreneurial masculinities The to this SI the of discourse and but there is for and that can the and of gendered entrepreneurship. such as or even to and that traditional to and not the research but also the field to what is and who to SI not an but a critical the of the entrepreneurial it to to and Entrepreneurial masculinity, from a identity or as a site of institutional and It is through this of and that the field