This article was downloaded by: [Umeå University Library]On: 03 October 2014, At: 21:54Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Women & TherapyPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wwat20
Feminist Therapy for Men: ChallengingAssumptions and Moving ForwardJack S. Kahn aa Curry College , Milton, MassachusettsPublished online: 11 Jan 2011.
To cite this article: Jack S. Kahn (2010) Feminist Therapy for Men: Challenging Assumptions andMoving Forward, Women & Therapy, 34:1-2, 59-76, DOI: 10.1080/02703149.2011.532458
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02703149.2011.532458
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Feminist Therapy for Men: ChallengingAssumptions and Moving Forward
JACK S. KAHNCurry College, Milton, Massachusetts
Feminist therapy has a unique history in counseling andpsychotherapy. This unique history has had an impact on the devel-opment of the modality which includes combining methods andideologies from diverse therapeutic frameworks while still maintain-ing a core set of principles. While intended originally for women,feminist therapy is argued here also to be a useful resource formen. The traditional masculinist perspective, assumed to be appro-priate for men, is argued to not address diverse experiences menbring to therapy, but rather to support dominant prescriptive desiresof a patriarchal culture. Utilizing tenets from various feministtheories, this article will argue how men can benefit from feministtherapy when practitioners reject essentializing men, recognizediversity in men’s gender identity, help male clients understandthe effects of normative masculine conformity and assist them inunderstanding their varying engagements with male privilege.
KEYWORDS feminist therapy, gender identity, men, privilege
Feminist theory has been a very influential paradigm on the practice ofcounseling and psychotherapy (Ballou, 2005; Dworkin, 1984; Enns, 2004;Finfgeld, 2001). Used in multiple disciplines all over the world, feministtherapy has had a wide impact on the overall understanding of gender andhuman behavior and the applied practice of psychology (Enns, 2004;Kahn, 2009). It has provided diverse methodologies to assist clients’ (a) overallempowerment, (b) problem solving, (c) behavior change and (d) their
The author wishes to thank Lynsey Goddard, who helped with the literature review andbrainstorming for this project.
Address correspondence to Jack S. Kahn, Curry College, Department of Psychology,Kennedy Building, South Campus, 1071 Blue Hill Avenue, Milton, MA 02186. E-mail: [email protected]
Women & Therapy, 34:59–76, 2011Copyright # Taylor & Francis Group, LLCISSN: 1064-6175 print=1096-4649 onlineDOI: 10.1080/02703149.2011.532458
59
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
eå U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
21:
54 0
3 O
ctob
er 2
014
awareness of self (Ballou, 2005; Enns, 2004). However, when discussing feministtherapy, it is not always clear what practitioners mean by ‘feminist therapy.’
Definitions for feminist therapy can be vague and seemingly discon-nected from one another (Corey, 2005; Thomas, 1977). Rather than repre-senting a meta-theory with one particular framework, feminist therapy isan eclectic collage of diverse therapeutic theories and methods that sharecommon themes (Corey, 2009; Evans, Kincade, Marbley, & Seem, 2005).These common themes allow for diverse approaches while connecting thesemethodologies through some shared tenets.
One common theme feminist therapies share is a presumption thatgender is a primary construct that guides identity and impacts negotiatingrelationships with others (Ballou, 2005; Good, Gilbert, & Scher, 1990;Yokoyama, 2007). Gender is also seen as something that is flexible, ratherthan determined by biology (Dworkin, 1984). Feminist therapies have tendedto focus on deconstructing the impact of gender and empowering women tolive to their potential, and to address them as equals in a safe therapeuticrelationship (Dworkin, 1984; Enns, 1987; Finfgeld, 2001; Negy & McKinney,2006; Rader & Gilbert, 2005; Thomas, 1977).
An additional theme in the practice of feminist therapy is validating themany contextual issues that affect women. The investigation into these issuesbegan in the general consciousness-raising of the civil rights, social changeand women’s movements of the late 60s and early 70s (Contratto & Rossier,2005; Evans et al., 2005; Hill, 2005). Some of the major themes beinggrappled with within the helping professions were not just borne of theoreti-cal interest, but rather came from direct experiences in women’s lives. Issuessuch as racism, rape, discrimination, heterosexism, transphobia, inequality,and violence were being considered as significant issues impacting the psy-chology of women and therefore demanding new approaches to assistwomen in changing themselves and their worlds (Contratto & Rossier,2005; Hill, 2005).
In recognizing the impact of gender and the context of women’s lives,feminist therapists were largely responsible for recognizing and exploringthe psychology of women (Contratto & Rossier, 2005). This revolutionary ideasuggested that the inner worlds of women were often not known, misunder-stood, or outright neglected by mental health practitioners. In advancing thisacknowledgement and incorporating the famous Oedipal myth, Kaschak(1992) focuses on the plight of Antigone as a metaphor for the negotiationof women’s psychology. Terming women’s struggle as the ‘Antigone com-plex,’ she explains how women in patriarchal cultures necessarily deny anddistort their own experiences and needs in order to be meet criteria forwomanhood as defined by the masculinist epistemology (Kaschak, 1992).
A daughter in a patriarchal society, however, cannot live outside theworld of her fathers. She cannot resolve the Antigone complex as long
60 J. S. Kahn
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
eå U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
21:
54 0
3 O
ctob
er 2
014
as the world of adulthood is a man’s world, as long as she is extensionof her father or some other man, as long as she is constantly subject todefinition by even strange men in public. (Kashak, 1992, p. 77)
While men can theoretically become independent from the constraintsof their constructed boyhoods through addressing the Oedipal complex byrejecting their mother and femininity and eventually engaging in the adultworld, women by definition cannot, since under patriarchy they are alwaysin a dependent position. Prior to the emergence of feminist therapy, womenstruggling with the Antigone complex were often treated with traditionaltherapeutic modalities (and unfortunately still are) that did not recognize thiscomplex nor protest its existence. These traditional methodologies wereviewed by feminist therapists as not just ineffective, but potentially damagingto women, in blaming women for predicaments in which oppressive systemsattempt to place and define them (Contratto & Rossier, 2005; Hill 2005;Thomas, 1977).
One of the driving forces motivating the creation of feminist therapy wasa need to address the unique and diverse psychology of women. This beganwith a questioning of the assumptions of traditional methodologies. Thisquestioning was based on a premise that psychology and other socialsciences had (a) examined theories about the nature of abnormality,(b) made claims about diagnostic categories and the results of psychologicaltesting, and (c) argued for acceptable methods of counseling through amasculinist lens that was either not acknowledged as a lens or argued to be‘‘neutral’’ (Contratto & Rossier, 2005; Jensen, 2004; Kaschak, 1992; Lupenitz,1988; Prilleltensky, 1994; Thomas, 1977). This masculinist lens evaluateshuman behavior through the norms, expectations, values and desires ofthe masculinist paradigm (Kaschak, 1992; Lupenitz, 1988; Prilleltensky,1994; Thomas, 1977).
Through the diverse voices of feminist practitioners, researchersand scholars, this masculinist perspective has been evaluated, critiquedand transformed, resulting in a new paradigm for feminist therapies andfeminist-influenced therapies (Contratto & Rossier, 2005; Kaschak, 1992;Thomas, 1977). These various perspectives reflect many strands of thewomen’s movement including: liberal, cultural, women of color, lesbian,transnational, radical, postmodern, and queer feminist contributions(Enns, 2004).
In addition, the general premise of therapy was reconsidered as a resultof these concerns. Therapy has often been regarded as a way to cope withone’s own problems or the environmental aspects of one’s life that makelife difficult (Kaschak, 1992; Luepnitz, 1988). The over-reliance on the medi-cal model and medication as a therapeutic method is an example of thediscipline-sanctioned enacting of that philosophy (Contratto & Rossier,2005; Kaschak, 2001). Feminist therapy turned the role of the therapist on
Feminist Therapy, Men, and Masculinities 61
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
eå U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
21:
54 0
3 O
ctob
er 2
014
its head by suggesting that in addition to individual change that therapistsand clients must be engaged in political activism to end social and emotionaloppression (Hill & Anderson, 2005; Thomas, 1977). In other words, socialchange must become part of the work of the feminist psychologist and theirclients (Ballou, 2005; Negy & McKinney, 2006; Thomas, 1977; Yokoyama,2007).
As a function of these concerns (and others), feminist therapy wascreated by and understandably primarily intended for women (Evanset al., 2005). While others have been impacted by the ideas and practice offeminist therapy, historically it was originally a collection of perspectivesand methodologies intended to improve the lives of women (Dworkin,1984; Evans et al., 2005; Finfgeld, 2001; Ganley, 1989; Walrond-Skinner,1987). While the original intention was to assist in the psychosocial emanci-pation of women, scholars have grappled with whether feminist therapy canbe relevant with other genders (Brown, 1988; Dworkin, 1984; Ganley, 1989;Good et al., 1990; Negy & McKinney, 2006). Specifically, this article willaddress whether feminist therapy can be beneficial with men.
In order to see the specific application of feminist therapy for men,this article will highlight strategies and concerns as offered by variousperspectives in feminist theory and therapy (Enns, 2004). The utilization offeminist methodologies that embrace a socially constructed view of diversemasculinities will be argued to have more potential of reaching and workingwith men than traditional essentialist masculinist perspectives. Masculinistepistemologies will be argued to not only be problematic for women but alsofor all genders that seek to construct and value their own diverse genderedexperiences.
FROM SEX TO GENDER: FROM MEN TO MASCULINITIES
One of the major revolutionary ideas to come from feminists was to empha-size gender as it is differentiated from sex. Gender has been a major constructfor feminist psychologists to explore (Ballou, 2005; Good et al., 1990; Kahn,2009; Yokoyama, 2007). It has been viewed as an important identity-variablethat is not predetermined by one’s sex (Ballou, 2005; Dworkin, 1984,Kallivayalil, 2007). This has been an extremely important perspective forliberal feminism in emphasizing changing social structures to allow womenequal institutional access, since women exhibit a wide range of humancharacteristics and are not determined to follow specific roles as a functionof their sex (Enns, 2004).
Following this critique with influence by radical and post-modern fem-inists, gender has often been described as socially constructed (Brown, 1994;Finfgeld, 2001; Jensen, 2004; Kahn, 2009; Kallivayalil, 2007). Understandinghow gender is expressed differently (a) at different periods of history,
62 J. S. Kahn
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
eå U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
21:
54 0
3 O
ctob
er 2
014
(b) by different cultures, and (c) in different situations, has turned the focusto understanding ways in which gender is negotiated (Brown, 1994; Finfgeld,2001; Kahn, 2009; Kallivayalil, 2007). This negotiation occurs as individualsstruggle to find their own gender uniqueness in the face of dominant dis-courses about gender in their culture (Connell, 1995). Power becomes animportant moderating construct to consider, as the way in which those withpower construct gendered possibilities affects and often hinders this negoti-ation process (Connell, 1995; Evans et al., 2005; Kallivayalil, 2007; Kaschak,1992). Gender is viewed as not essentially determined by one’s sex, butrather as complexly negotiated through both conforming to and resistingdominant paradigms (Addis & Mahalik, 2003; Addis & Cohane, 2005;Connell, 1995; Kimmel, 1998). This negotiation is ongoing, as change occursculturally and individually as the meanings of gender shift in situations,places, and over time (Addis & Mahalik, 2003; Connell, 1995; Kimmel, 1998).
Men also negotiate with gender although they are not always viewed inthis light. For example, in an article arguing in good spirit for androgynousviews of mental health and that men can be profeminist therapists but notfeminist therapists, Ganley (1989, p. 7) suggests ‘‘Since he does not havethe phenomenological experience of being female, he uses his experienceas a male and particularly as a male whose understanding of himself, ofall men, and of women has been transformed by feminist analysis’’(Highlight, mine).
If gender is phenomenological, then any human could experiencegender in a myriad of ways. There isn’t a phenomenological experience of‘‘being female’’ since being female is an essentialized assumption determin-ing gender experiences by sex. What is likely meant here is that there arecertain experiences men may have difficulty relating to, not having lived ina female body (lack of body privilege, for example, which is discussedbelow). However, if gender is diverse, socially constructed and ultimatelyphenomenological, there is no way to know what any individual’s experi-ence with gender is without knowing them. When men are viewed as allsharing the same experience or being incapable of having certain psychoso-cial human experiences (particularly those that are essentialized as female orfeminine), we run the risk of reinforcing the masculinist paradigm, ratherthan challenging it.
This is a problematic feature of early attempts at applying feminist ther-apy for men. In the 20th century, feminist therapy was at times thought aseither (a) not for men because they are ‘‘not women’’ (b) helpful for gaymen presumably since they are more ‘‘like women’’ or (c) helpful to makemen more like women (Brown, 1988; Dworkin, 1984; Jensen 2004). Giventhe damage of patriarchy to women, the revolutionary work women havedone in this area, and the diverse prosocial characteristics women display,this approach makes a lot of sense. However, these three statements areironically all embracing the masculinist paradigm, not challenging it.
Feminist Therapy, Men, and Masculinities 63
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
eå U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
21:
54 0
3 O
ctob
er 2
014
The masculinist paradigm as a dominant discourse is not a represen-tation of the diverse ways in which men negotiate with gender, but ratherit reflects the voice of dominant masculinity seeking conformity to dominantmasculine norms (Addis & Mahalik, 2003; Whitehead, 2001). The Masculinistperspective is represented by those with social power expressing prescriptivedesires for men, rather than reflecting the real lived and diverse experiencesof men (Addis & Mahalik, 2003; Connell, 1995; Kahn, 2009). The ability todefine, dominate, and control (a) who gets to define a man, (b) who getsto be counted as a man, and (c) what a man should do and experience haveall been aspects of past masculinist perspectives on gender (Kahn, 2009;Connell, 1995; Kimmel, 1998). This Masculinist paradigm has led to verynarrow views of masculinity often at the subjugation of diverse masculinitiesas function of other identity factors (race, culture, class, gender expression,sexual orientation, personal experiences, etc.).
Feminists have been at the forefront of recognizing the limiting definitionsof ‘woman’ imposed on them by the masculinist paradigm (Brown, 1994;Kahn, 2009; Kallivayalil, 2007; Kaschak, 1992). They have also struggled witha hegemonic white-middle class feminist discourse and continue to negotiateand recognize diverse voices within the feminist movement (Brown, 1994;Sinacore & Enns, 2005). International feminisms, womanism, lesbian feminismand queer feminism have pushed feminism to see the dynamic intersections ofcontextual multiple identity variables (Barrett, Chin, Diaz, Espin, Greene, &McGoldrick, 2005; Ballou, 2005; Hill, 2005; Kallivayalil, 2007). The first step inapplying feminist therapy to men is to continue to apply and embrace thissame analysis with the category of ‘‘man’’ (Connell, 1995; Whitehead, 2001,Kimmel, 1998). Rather than essentializing men and viewing them as a mono-lithic entity, we must move to explore masculinities as represented by a diversegroup of men as they negotiate with gender as it relates to their mental health,relationships, and overall well-being (Addis & Mahalik, 2003).
Feminist therapy with men must begin with an appreciation for theindividual ways in which each client will negotiate gender for themselves.This will mean that therapists will need to challenge their own notions ofthe ways in which they believe men ‘‘are’’ or ‘‘should be’’ and rather focuson the ways in which individually male-identified clients understand them-selves. This means that gay men, transmen, straight men, bi-men, queermen, etc. will all share the common identity of ‘‘man’’ and will also haveunique intersecting identities expressed through other social group identifi-cations (race, ethnicity, etc.) and their own diverse personal histories, values,and aspirations much like any diverse subculture in which one might engagein feminist therapy (Hill & Anderson, 2005; Kallivayahil, 2007). It also meansthat traditional diagnostic categories, and psychological assessment methodsbased on a masculinist paradigm argued to be harmful in empoweringwomen (Contratto & Rossier, 2005; Good et al., 1990; Kaschak, 2001) mayalso miss phenomenological experiences of diverse men.
64 J. S. Kahn
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
eå U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
21:
54 0
3 O
ctob
er 2
014
Literature in liberal feminist therapies and masculinities have specificsuggestions already in place for this kind of exploration. Gender awarenesstherapy is proposed to help clients understand the role of gender in shapingtheir identity and relationships (Corey, 2005). By exploring gender in thisway, clients can examine if they have been constrained by gender roleexpectations (by themselves or others) and make empowering choices aboutthe kind of person they want to be (Contratto & Rossier, 2005; Corey, 2005;Lee, 2004). Gender awareness proposes a kind of ‘adaptive androgyny’assuming that all human choices are available, representing the diversityacross people (Dworkin, 1984; Ganley, 1990). Gender awareness work linkswell to areas such as body image, relationships, and other arenas in whichclients can link gendered expectations to their lives (Yokoyama, 2007). Thisapproach emphasizes the feminist tenets of choice and empowermentthrough a gender resocialization process (Contratto & Rossier, 2005;Dworkin, 1984; Finfgeld, 2001; Ganley, 1990).
Gender awareness work must also be done in a therapeutic context thatprovides a safe space for clients (Rader & Gilbert, 2005). This will be parti-cularly helpful for male clients who may struggle with what Addis & Mahalik(2003) refer to as the double jeopardy of men’s help seeking. Double jeopardysuggests that due to gender-role socialization, asking for assistance may adddiscomfort to some men’s already existing difficulties, thus creating a paradoxfor them in seeking help (Addis & Mahalik, 2003). Strategies that can helpnormalize concerns will ultimately aid in reaching out to diverse men withvarying mental health issues (Addis & Mahalik, 2003).
Feminists have advocated that the therapeutic relationship be equal andcollaborative and that it should encourage therapist disclosure of values, pro-cedures, theoretical perspective and expectations (Dworkin, 1984; Evanset al., 2005; Negy & McKinney, 2006; Thomas, 1977). This process can be avehicle to engage men and address any potential double jeopardy. By beingupfront about the process and intent of counseling, the feminist therapist canbe an ally in working with men. Certainly, some men will be defensive aboutthe process and perhaps have concerns working from a feminist perspective(or with a woman, if that is the case). Because the feminist process encouragesquestions and challenges, it is ripe for this kind of dynamic (Evans et al.,2005). Ultimately, if the therapeutic alliance is difficult to establish, this canbe fodder for therapeutic exploration, process, and insight, as it would bewith any client who struggles with issues of trust and power (Corey, 2009).
FROM SOPHISTICATED STEREOTYPES TO NORM NEGOTIATION
The tendency to essentialize human groups can lead us to what Kaschak callssophisticated stereotypes of group behavior (Kaschak, 1994). This type ofanalysis includes social grouping as part of a framework for understanding
Feminist Therapy, Men, and Masculinities 65
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
eå U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
21:
54 0
3 O
ctob
er 2
014
human behavior, but results in generic facts about those groups from whichwe draw inferences about individuals (Kaschak, 1994). In other words,whereas the social sciences used to often ignore the effects of context andculture, we now at times include it in a very superficial and generic way thathomogenizes human groups into lists of typically traditional behaviors(Native Americans need X in therapy, Asian Americans need Y, etc.). Thisapproach (reminiscent of the medical model) is in stark contrast to feministperspectives and has been viewed as damaging and neglectful of thedynamic, fluid, and diverse possibilities within social groups (Contratto &Rossier, 2005; Kaschak, 1992, 2001). This method will not allow for an under-standing of the diversity amongst men.
This does not suggest that there are not shared interests and experiencesamongst those that identify as belonging to a social group (Evans et al., 2005;Good et al., 1990). Cultural feminists have been at the forefront of this recog-nition, arguing for the need to bring women together for purposes of com-mon understanding, solidarity, support and consciousness raising (Enns,2004; Evans et al., 2005; Yokoyama, 2007). But how do we recognize individ-ual uniqueness and shared experiences amongst men? Taking the next stepin gender awareness, examining hegemonic norms for masculinity has beenone way in which researchers in the field of masculinities have found aframework to balance these concerns.
One example of this approach is Mahalik’s Conformity to HegemonicMasculine Norms model (Addis & Mahalik, 2003; Mahalik, 2003; Mahalik,Locke, Ludlow, Diemer, & Scott, 2003). Mahalik and colleagues suggestthat all cultures have norms in which all men try to negotiate masculinity(Mahalik, 2003; Mahalik & Rochlen, 2006; Mahalik, Talmadge, Lockhe, &Scott, 2005). In Mahalik’s model, dominant norms include: winning, emotionalcontrol, risk-taking, violence, dominance, playboy, self-reliance, primacy ofwork, power over women, disdain for homosexuals, and pursuit of status(Mahalik, 2003). These are argued to be norms common in Western culture(Addis & Mahalik, 2003; Mahalik, 2003).
The norms are viewed as potentially adaptive and=or maladaptive inthat conformity to norms comes with benefits and costs to the individualand these can change situationally, culturally, and over time (Kahn, 2009).Influenced by Pleck and O’Neil’s models of male role strain and genderrole conflict, the model recognizes that conformity (and nonconformity) toinstitutionalized dominant male norms can be a major contributor to men’smental health problems and existential pain (Garnets & Pleck, 1979; O’Neil,2008; Pleck, 1995). As feminist writers Ballou, Hill & West suggested whenworking with a male client struggling with resisting dominant male norms‘‘Individuals-in this case a child-who do not conform to these stereotypes,may experience varying degrees of rejection and marginalization, includingverbal and physical harassment, victimization, isolation, and potentially trau-matic wounding of their sense of self’’ (2008, p. 158).
66 J. S. Kahn
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
eå U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
21:
54 0
3 O
ctob
er 2
014
In addition, other researchers have argued that norm negotiationexists both with dominant norms and norms within other non-dominantcommunities in which a person identifies (Levant, Cuthbert, & Richmond,2003; Liu & Iwamoto, 2007). These may include normative differences asa function of race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, religion, peer group, etc.(Levant, Cuthbert & Richmond, 2003; Liu & Iwamoto, 2007). The model alsoallows for an investigation of the healthy benefits of nonconformity tomasculine norms and in fact has found that nonconformity to traditionalmasculine norms can be associated with several markers of mental andphysical health (Addis & Cohane, 2005; Kahn, 2009; Mahalik et al., 2005).Ultimately one’s own personal values and gendered meaning are derivedthrough a complex and dynamic negotiation process between these variousnormative prescriptions and one’s own understanding of their own identities(Addis & Mahalik, 2003; Liu & Iwamoto, 2007; Mahalik, 2003; Mahalik &Rochlen, 2006).
This complex model allows for understanding how people that identifyas male can (a) have common experiences, (b) have unique experiences and(c) can at times react differently to different situations, depending on a hostof factors. This has been a standard tenet of feminist therapy in assistingclients develop a gender systems awareness and to help them understandthe possible gaps between what their culture prescribes and how they under-stand themselves. Feminist therapy has advocated that in addition to genderawareness, clients must also learn about social context and how that shapesand is being shaped in their lives (Corey, 2005; Negy & McKinney, 2006).Feminist therapy can assist men in identifying the impact of conformingand nonconforming to hegemonic norms on their relationships and mentalhealth. Helping men tease out the way they have been essentialized and con-structed from the ways in which they have tried to adapt and negotiate theirunique human selves to the various cultural norms that affect their identitiesfits quite well with feminist therapies.
Group and community work can be two places where both genderawareness and contextual learning can take place. O’Neil’s gender rolejourney workshops (O’Neil, 1996), The Mankind Project’s range of activitiesthat emphasize challenging gender role conflict and developing emotionalsensitivity (The Mankind Project, 2010), violence prevention awarenesscommunity youth groups (Close to Home, 2010; Kahn, 2009), queer youththeater (The Theater Offensive, 2010), and educational workshops and train-ings (Lee, 2004; Newton, 2005) are a few examples of places where peoplecan find commonalities with others, and learn to (a) understand and respecttheir uniqueness, (b) challenge dominant norms, (c) evaluate social contextand (d) form relationships. Of course, not all community groups for men willemphasize feminist principles (and some will, but unfortunately won’t creditthe feminist origins of their analysis), but many exist and more and more aredeveloping.
Feminist Therapy, Men, and Masculinities 67
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
eå U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
21:
54 0
3 O
ctob
er 2
014
FROM HAVING PRIVILEGE TO STRUGGLING WITH PRIVILEGES
One of the major concerns of radical feminist analysis is to understand therole of patriarchy as it has affected people’s lives (Connell, 1995; Enns,2004; Johnson, 1997; Kahn, 2009; Kaschak, 1992). In most of the modernworld, men as a social group have privilege and power over others in themajority of social institutions in most modern cultures (including political,familial, religious, etc.,) (Goodman, 2001; Hooks, 2003; Johnson, 1997; Kahn,2009; Owen & Glass, 2009). Being embodied as a man comes with access toprivileges over others which affect men’s place in the world and the ways inwhich they understand themselves and others (Connell, 1995; Finfgeld, 2001;Ganley, 1989; Johnson, 1997; Kimmel, 2003; Whitehead, 2001). The nature ofthese privileges differ in different societies, but generally include havingmore cultural access and choices, higher salaries, more representation, moreauthority, and having been the group that prohibited others from establishingthe rules and structures of that society since its inception (Connell, 1995;Hooks, 2003; Johnson, 1997). Feminist analysis (particularly radical andpost-modern) has provided much insight into the oppressive nature of patri-archy as a system of social organization and on the deleterious effects ofpatriarchy (predominantly on the social and psychological lives of women;Enns, 2004).
Having male privilege also affects the psychology of men. It can con-tribute to a overarching framework of entitlement in which men’s expecta-tions of justice, fairness, equality etc. are based in a masculinist lens thatemphasize a belief in an essentialized male superiority (Jensen, 2004;Owen & Glass, 2009; Kimmel, 2003). This kind of male posturing oftenargues for the necessary gains of men’s needs over others. This plays itselfout in a myriad of ways and can affect institutional and political decisions(such as the enactment of sexist public policy and decisions about accessto cultural resources) (Connell, 1995; Kimmel, 2003). In addition, it canaffect every level of interpersonal relationships (such as whose last nameis taken in a relationship, the potential for violence, sexual abuse, wherepeople live, who has access to finances etc.) (Hill, 2005; Rader & Gilbert,2005).
However, not every man has access to the same kinds of male privilege.Raewyn Connell’s Hegemonic Masculinity model is a very useful model forexploring this issue (Connell, 1995). Connell emphasizes that while allmen have some privilege as a function of being embodied as men, accessto male privilege will differ as a function of other characteristics such as race,class, age, disability status, gender identity and expression, etc. (Connell,1995). In this hegemonic system, men compete with others for dominanceand access to privilege. Men are involved in a vicious cycle in which theyharm others in hopes of gaining more power and access.
68 J. S. Kahn
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
eå U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
21:
54 0
3 O
ctob
er 2
014
This becomes something very important to understand as a feministtherapist. In addition to understanding how accessing male privilegehas impacted men’s lives and relationships, it is equally important to under-stand that men have historically oppressed one another for access to thisprivilege and the denial of that access for individual men impacts the waysin which men live their lives and the ways in which they think aboutthemselves and others (Connell, 1995). ‘‘Many of the values associated withfeminist therapy can be applied judiciously to other clients, who, likewomen, have experienced historical or ongoing oppression’’ (Negy &McKinney, 2006, p. 67). Men experience this ‘ongoing oppression’ fromone another as they struggle within patriarchy (Connell, 2005). Feministconsciousness needs to shift from viewing patriarchy as ‘men’s power overwomen’ and rather as a complex system of dominant masculinity thatseeks homeostasis (Connell, 1995). This not only allows for a moresophisticated understanding of the concern, but also for an understandingof (a) the impact of patriarchy (b) the negotiation of privilege and(c) interventions that can assist men in therapy and include men and allgenders as allies in ending it.
In the field of masculinities, there is also a recognition that patriarchyultimately destroys men who conform to its requirements (Connell, 1995;Kahn, 2009; Kimmel, 1998). Men’s entitlement, dominance, and privilege(particularly as it affects relationships) has been a source linked to bothphysical and mental health concerns. While male dominance comes withsocial advantages for some men, it also takes its toll on those who receivethose benefits including higher rates of depression (Mahalik & Rochlen,2006), poorer body image and self-concept (Benjamin, 2001; Kimmel &Mahalik, 2005; Light & Kirk, 2000; Mahalik, Pierre & Wan, 2006), problemswith alcohol use (Peralta, 2007), loneliness (Blazina Settle, & Eddins,2008), poorer nutritional choices (Levi, Chan & Pence, 2006) and overallpsychological distress (Mahalik et al., 2006) amongst several others.
Simultaneously, some men are aware of this damaging system and tryto resist their privilege (Kahn, 2009; Kimmel, 1998; Whitehead, 2001).Historically, there have always been men who have understood the damag-ing effects of patriarchy on humanity. Men like Frederick Douglas, HarryHay, and John Stuart Mill, actively sought to assist women and others throughsupporting institutional choices that increased cultural access for women(Kimmel, 1998).
Privilege is also not a static human benefit. This means that men’s privi-lege will change throughout their lives as they and their cultures change. Italso means that in any one individual man’s life, there are likely instancesin which privilege was questioned or not utilized as a benefit. This is notto suggest that resistance of privilege eradicates its existence, but it doespresent a more complicated aspect of identity and behavior.
Feminist Therapy, Men, and Masculinities 69
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
eå U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
21:
54 0
3 O
ctob
er 2
014
In summary, men as a social group have male privilege. Access tothat male privilege is not the same for all men. It is important for feministtherapists to understand how access to and=or lack of access to privilegehas played a role with their clients’ sense of self, behavior, and relationships.It is also important to understand how this process has been a part of men’smental health status and to help them become aware of this connection. Menneed to understand how participating in this never-ending game of domi-nance may be impacting them and their relationships with others (Owen &Glass, 2009).
As suggested by feminist humanism, utilizing a strength-based modelthat looks toward the strength and potential of clients can help peopleaccept themselves and accept the responsibility for what must change toimprove their current life situation (Enns, 1987; Finfgeld, 2001; Rader &Gilbert, 2005; Thomas, 1977). For men, as suggested by Owen and Glass(2009), this must include a genuine connection for the strengths menbring and support in helping them confront male privilege. It is equallyimportant to look for men’s strengths and the ways in which menhave challenged their own privileges and have resisted male dominance(Owen & Glass, 2009). These instances of privilege exceptions are notalways obvious and may also be connected to shame and guilt, since reject-ing male privilege can come with humiliation for men since it is in directcontrast to the hegemonic system of maintaining patriarchy (Connell,1995). It is through these instances (even if small) that men can begin tore-examine how they view themselves and the world. Helping men seetheir privilege exceptions can be first steps in re-examining themselvesand viewing the possibilities for masculinities that exist rather than theprescribed one they may be attempting to be. Re-examining privilegemust take place within the safety of the therapeutic relationship and alsobe connected to the community.
Encouraging women to engage in social change has a been a very impor-tant tenet for feminist therapy, particularly for radical feminists (Hill &Anderson, 2005; Negy &McKinney, 2006; Yokoyama, 2007). We must encour-age the same for male clients. Fortunately, today, men are actively trying tounderstand the role of privilege and its negative impact in their lives. Thereare numerous opportunities for social organization, community spirit, andfor meeting other men engaged in this work. A few of the many examplesinclude: campus and community based youth and adult violence preventionprograms, (Close to Home, 2010; Escuela Equinoccio, 2010; Men Can StopRape, 2010) community organizations that provide support (Men’s ResourcesInternational, Men’s Resource Center for Change, 2010; European Men Profe-minist Network, 2010), and trainings and discussion groups on the effects ofmale privilege (NOMAS Boston, 2010). In addition, there are workshops andpresentations representing a growing movement of diverse men exploring thelinks between privilege and masculinities and the ways in which men can
70 J. S. Kahn
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
eå U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
21:
54 0
3 O
ctob
er 2
014
engage and change themselves and their relationships (Hurt, 2010; Johnson,2010; Kahn, 2009; Voices of Men, 2010).
SUMMARY
In the 20th century, feminism was an important force in challengingtraditional notions of psychotherapy. In incorporating diverse feministideologies, practitioners have been able to examine their roles in engagingin diagnosis, assessment, relationship building, and therapeutic change. Inparticular, by understanding the Antigone complex, the impact of inequality,masculinist constructions of womanhood, and intersectionality with otheridentities, a psychology of women has emerged that not only speaks towomen’s genuine experiences, but is embedded with an empowered spiritand sense of community change and responsibility.
For feminism to benefit men in the 21st century, we have to continue todo a few things that will likely result in anxiety. First, we have to let menbenefit from feminism in all the same ways that all genders must benefit.We must let go of the gender binary and essentialized notions of the waymen ‘‘are.’’ We must let diverse men (cisgendered, transmen, queer, etc.)redefine manhood and be able to see themselves beyond what dominantmasculinity requires. We mustn’t influence men to be more ‘‘like women’’(particularly since we know that women are very diverse in their identities),but rather help diverse men construct diverse masculinities. We must assumethat we don’t know what men are genuinely like, nor capable of, because wehave viewed them for so long through the lens of a dominant masculinistperspective. This work has already begun and there is much available tolearn about this framework for understanding masculinities.
Men must be viewed as unique people with unique and diverse identi-ties, histories, values and aspirations for themselves. The meaning of genderfor men should not be based on essentialized assumptions nor sophisticatedstereotypes, but rather on the real lived experiences of men. Feminist therapycan be a tool for understanding the meaning of gender and the gender socia-lization system that often constrains and obscures the diverse ways in whichall people understand themselves.
Second, in learning from the Antigone complex, if we recognize thatwomen have defined themselves in relation to men in patriarchy, we mustalso examine the problematic flipside of this equation and understand thatmen often define themselves by the ways in which they are able to subjugatewomen and phenomenon associated with femininity. We must help menunderstand themselves in ways that do not depend on this patriarchalrelationship. This means helping men see that their own definitions of mas-culinity are constrained by dominant masculinity as well. In the 20th century,women primarily helped women to see how masculinist perspectives
Feminist Therapy, Men, and Masculinities 71
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
eå U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
21:
54 0
3 O
ctob
er 2
014
dominated their own experiences, in the 21st we must continue to under-stand how they constrain all genders as well.
In taking this one step further, we must understand that not all men havethe same access to or desire to participate in male dominance. We mustn’tthink of men as a category of people with the same access to privilegesnor desires to enact them. Rather, we must understand the negotiation of pri-vileges for individual men and help them understand how these negotiationshave impacted their relationships and mental health.
This is not to suggest that we abandon our understanding of the damagethat men’s social privilege (or any social privilege) contributes to others lives,but rather than we understand that it is a problem for everyone. With femin-ism’s emphasis on egalitarianism (in the culture and in the therapeutic office)and with an acknowledgment of balancing an appreciation for both theunique strengths and diverse access to privilege men have, feminists helpmen understand the complex ways in which male privilege and genderidentity has played a role in the their lives. Feminism can be a tool to supportand transform men into redefining themselves and their relationships withoutrelying on the subjugation of women and femininity.
Finally, we must continue to share the perspectives of feminist therapy.We must encourage male-identified people to further ideologies and techni-ques associated with feminism. We must train male feminists. We must alsocontinue to look for ways in which men are already engaging with theseideas and learn from them. Perhaps, like many cultural groups for whomfeminism was originally viewed as ‘‘foreign,’’ men will continue to contributeideas to forward the relevance of feminism in the 21st century.
Sharing feminism in this way means that men that engage in it areresponsible for the ways in which it is enacted. It suggests that men in theirwork as psychologists, researchers, clinicians, etc. must be responsible, asother genders are, to both examine their own contributions to sexism andto participate in community and global activism that will assist in genderemancipation for all.
It is likely that proactively bringing feminism to men in the 21st centurywill not be easy. As a function of the masculinist paradigm, men are con-structed in many ways to resist attempts at feminist engagement. This isnot much different than defenses that any client possesses to protect themfrom seeing the larger truths that limit their lives. Resistance as a concept,whether used analytically or just to refer to the difficulty clients have withunderstanding the contextual issues that contribute to their concerns andthe change that will be necessary to move in the direction of health anempowerment, happens at some level with all clients in therapy. Somemen will resist feminism much like clients resist therapists’ attempts to formcaring connections with them, to gently confront them, or to provide difficultto hear interpretations. But this resistance does not suggest that it is not aworthwhile pursuit, it suggests its absolute necessity. And we may find
72 J. S. Kahn
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
eå U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
21:
54 0
3 O
ctob
er 2
014
that in many cases, the resistance may not be nearly as difficult as wethought, and we may find that many are quite welcoming of the invitation.
REFERENCES
Addis, M. E., & Cohane, G. H. (2005). Social scientific paradigms of masculinityand their implications for research and practice in men’s mental health. Journalof Clinical Psychology, 61, 633–647.
Addis, M. E., & Mahalik, J. R. (2003). Men, masculinity, and contexts of help seeking.American Psychologist, 58, 5–14.
Ballou, M. (2005). Threats and challenges to feminist therapy.Women & Therapy, 28,201–210.
Ballou, M., Hill, M., & West, C. (2008). Putting it all together: Application. InM. Ballou, M. Hill, & C. West (Eds.), Feminist therapy theory and practice(pp. 151–163). New York: Springer Publishing Company.
Barret, S. E., Chin, J. L., Diaz, L., Espin, O., Greene, B., & McGoldrick, M. (2005).Multicultural feminist therapy: Theory in context. Women & Therapy, 28, 27–61.
Benjamin, S. (2001). Challenging masculinities: Disability and achievement in testingtimes. Gender and Education, 13, 39–55.
Brown, L. S. (1988). Feminist therapy with lesbians and gay men. In M. A. Dutton-Douglas & L. E. A. Walker (Eds.), Feminist psychotherapies: Integration oftherapeutic and feminist systems (pp. 206–227). Westport, CT, US: AblexPublishing, 1988.
Close to Home (2008). Close to home in action. http://www.c2home.org/c2home_in_action.html. Retrieved January 7, 2010.
Connell, R. W. (1995). Masculinities. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Contratto, S., & Rossier, J. (2005). Early trends in feminist therapy. Women &
Therapy, 28, 7–26.Corey, G. (2009). Feminist Therapy. In G. Corey (Ed.), Theory and practice counsel-
ing and psychotherapy (pp. 340–378). 9th edition, Belmont, CA: ThompsonHigher Education.
Dworkin, S. (1984). Traditionally defined client, meet feminist therapist: Feministtherapy as attitude change. Personnel & Guidance Journal, 62, 301–305.
Enns, C. Z. (1987). Gestalt therapy and feminist therapy: A proposed integration.Journal of Counseling and Development, 66, 93–95.
Enns, C. (2004). Feminist theories and feminist psychotherapies. Binghamton, NY:The Haworth Press.
Esquela Equinnocio, (2010). Programa de Masculinidades. Retrieved from http://www.escuelaequinoccio.org/
European Men Profeminist Network, 2010. Main page. Retrieved January 10, 2010,from: http://www.europrofem.org/
Evans, K. M., Kincade, E. A., Marbley, A. F., & Seem, S. R. (2005). Feminism andfeminist therapy: Lessons from the past and hopes for the future. Journal ofCounseling & Development, 83, 269–277.
Finfgeld, D. L. (2001). New directions for feminist therapy based on social construc-tionism. Archives of Psychiatric Nursing, 15, 148–154.
Feminist Therapy, Men, and Masculinities 73
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
eå U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
21:
54 0
3 O
ctob
er 2
014
Ganley, A. (1989). Feminist therapy with male clients. In M. Douglas & L. Walker(Eds.), Feminist Psychotherapies: Integration of therapeutic and feministsystems (pp. 1–23). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
Garnets, L., & Pleck, J. H. (1979). Sex role identity, androgyny, and sex role transcen-dence: A sex-role strain analysis. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 3, 270–283.
Good, G. E., Gilbert, L. A., & Scher, M. (1990). Gender aware therapy: A synthesis offeminist therapy and knowledge about gender. Journal of Counseling andDevelopment, 68, 376–380.
Goodman, D. J. (2001). Promoting diversity and social justice: Educating peoplefrom privileged groups. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Hill, M. (2005). Feminist therapy’s roots and wings. Women & Therapy, 28, 1–5.Hill, M., & Anderson, G. (2005). Feminist therapy practice: Visioning the future.
Women & Therapy, 28, 165–176.hooks, b. (2003). Class and race: The new black elite. In M. Kimmel & A. Ferber
(Eds.), Privilege: A reader (pp. 243–252). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Hurt, B. (2010). Main page. Retrieved from: http://www.bhurt.com/Jensen, R. (2004). Homecoming: The relevance of radical feminism for gay men.
Journal of Homosexuality, 47, 75–81.Johnson, A. G. (1997). The gender knot. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.Johnson. A. G. (2010). Unraveling the knot of privilege, power, and difference.
Retrieved from: http://www.agjohnson.us/Kahn, J. (2009). An introduction to masculinities. Malden, MA: Blackwell=Wiley.Kallivayalil, D. (2007). Feminist therapy: Its use and implications for South Asian
immigrant survivors of domestic violence. Women & Therapy, 30, 109–127.Kaschak, E. (1994). Gender and ethnicity. Lecture notes.Kaschak, E. (1992). Engendered lives: A new psychology of women’s experience.
New York: BasicBooks.Kaschak, E. (2001). Preface: The invisible alliance: Spiritual and Psychological prac-
tice reunited. In E. Kaschak (Ed.), The invisible alliance: Psyche and spirit infeminist therapy (pp. xv–1). New York: The Haworth Press.
Kimmel, M. S. (1995). The politics of manhood: Profeminist men respond to themythopoetic movement. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
Kimmel, M. S. (1998). Who’s afraid of men doing feminism? In T. Digby & S. Bartky(Eds.), Men doing feminism (pp. 57–68). New York: Routledge.
Kimmel, M. S. (2003). Masculinity as homophobia: Fear, shame, and silence in theconstruction of gender identity. In M. Kimmel & A. Ferber (Eds.), Privilege: Areader (pp. 51–74). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Lee, R. B. (2004). Filipino men’s familial roles and domestic violence: Implicationsand strategies for Community-based intervention. Health and Social Care inthe Community, 12, 422–429.
Levant, R. F., Cuthbert, A., & Richmond, K. (2003). Masculinity ideology amongRussian and U.S. young men and women and its relationship to unhealthylifestyle habits among young Russian men. Psychology of Men and Masculinity,4, 26–36.
Levi, A., Chan, K. K., & Pence, D. (2006). Real men do not read labels: The effects ofmasculinity and involvement on college students’ food decisions. Journal ofAmerican College Health, 55, 91–98.
74 J. S. Kahn
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
eå U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
21:
54 0
3 O
ctob
er 2
014
Light, R., & Kirk, D. (2000). High school rugby, the body and the reproduction ofhegemonic masculinity. Sport, Education and Society, 5, 163–176.
Liu, W. M., & Iwamoto, D. K. (2007). Conformity to masculine norms, Asian values,coping strategies, peer group influences and substance use among AsianAmerican men. Psychology of Men and Masculinity, 8, 25–39.
Luepnitz, D. A. (1988). The family interpreted: Psychoanalysis, feminism, and familytherapy. New York: BasicBooks.
Mahalik, J. R., Locke, B. D., Ludlow, L. H., Diemer, M. A., Scott, R. P. J., Gottfried, M.,et al. (2003). Development of the conformity to masculine norms inventory.Psychology of Men and Masculinity, 4, 3–25.
Mahalik, J. R., Pierre, M. R., & Wan, S. S. C. (2006a). Examining racial identity andmasculinity as correlates of self-esteem and psychological distress in blackmen. Multicultural Counseling and Development, 34, 94–104.
Mahalik, J., & Rochlen, A. (2006). Men’s likely responses to clinical depression: Whatare they and do masculinity norms predict them?. Sex Roles, 55, 659–667.
Mahalik, J. R., Talmadge, W. T., Lockhe, B. D., & Scott, R. P. J. (2005). Using the con-formity to masculine norms inventory to work with men in a clinical setting.Journal of Clinical Psychology, 61, 661–674.
The Mankind Project (2010).What we stand for. Retrieved from http://mankindproject.org/content=what-we-stand).
Men Can Stop Rape (2010). Main Page. Retrieved from http://www.mencanstoprape.org/
Men’s Resources International (2010). About us. Retrieved from: http://www.mensresourcesinternational.org/about.php
Men’s Resource Center for Change (2010). Main page. Retrieved from http://www.mrcforchange.org/
Negy, C., & McKinney, C. (2006). Application of feminist therapy: Promotingresiliency among lesbian and gay families. Journal of Feminist Family Therapy,18, 67–83.
Newton, J. (2005). From panthers to promise keepers: Rethinking the men’smovement. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
NOMAS Boston (2010). Main page. Retrieved from: www.nomasboston.org(Facebook group link).
O’Neil, J. M. (1996). The gender role journey workshop: Exploring sexism and gen-der role conflict in a coeducational setting. In M. P. Andronico (Ed.), Men ingroups: Insights, interventions, and psychoeducational work (pp. 193–213).Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
O’Neil, J. M. (2008). Summarizing 25 years of research on men’s gender role conflictusing the gender role conflict scale: New research paradigms and clinical impli-cations. The Counseling Psychologist, 36, 358–445.
Owen, J., & Glass, J. (2009). Counseling Caucasian fathers: Affirming cultural strengthswhile addressing White male privilege. In C. Z. Oren & D. C. Oren (Eds.),Counseling fathers (pp. 141–161). NewYork: Routledge=Taylor & Francis Group.
Pease, B. (2000). Beyond the father wound: Memory-work and the deconstructiuonof the father-son relationship. A. N. J. Z. Family Therapy, 21, 9–15.
Peralta, R. L. (2007). College alcohol use and the embodiment of hegemonicmasculinity among European American men. Sex Roles, 56, 741–756.
Feminist Therapy, Men, and Masculinities 75
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
eå U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
21:
54 0
3 O
ctob
er 2
014
Pleck, J. H. (1995). The gender role strain paradigm: An update. In R. F. Levant &W. S. Pollack (Eds.), A new psychology of men (pp. 11–32). New York:BasicBooks.
Prilleltensky, I. (1994). The morals and politics of psychology: Psychologicaldiscourse and the status quo. Albany, New York: SUNY Press.
Rader, J., & Gilbert, L. A. (2005). The egalitarian relationship in feminist therapy.Psychology of Women Quarterly, 29, 427–435.
Robertson, J. M., & Fitzgerald, L. F. (1992). Overcoming the masculine mystique:Preferences for alternative forms of assistance among men who avoid counsel-ing. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 39, 240–246.
Sinacore, A. L., & Enns, C. Z. (2005). Diversity feminisms: Postmodern, womenof-color, antiracist, lesbian, third-wave, and global perspectives. In C. Z. Enns &A. L. Sinacore (Eds.), Teaching and social justice: Integrating multicultural andfeminist theories in the classroom (pp. 41–67). Washington, DC: APA.
The Theater Offensive (2010). Programs. Retrieved from http://www.thetheateroffensive.org/programs.html
Thomas, S. A. (1977). Theory and practice in feminist therapy. Social Work, 22,447–454.
Voices of Men (2010). Main page. Retrieved from: http://www.voicesofmen.org/Walrond-Skinner, S. (1987). Feminist therapy and family therapy. In S. Walrond-
Skinner & D. Watson (Eds.), Ethical issues in family therapy (pp. 71–86).London: Routledge.
Whitehead, S. M. (2001). Man: The invisible gendered subject. In S. M. Whitehead &F. J. Barrett, The masculinities reader (pp. 351–368). Cambridge, UK: Blackwell.
Yokoyama, K. (2007). The double-binds of our bodies: Multiculturally-informedfeminist therapy considerations for body image and eating disorders amongAsian American women. Women & Therapy, 30, 177–192.
76 J. S. Kahn
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Um
eå U
nive
rsity
Lib
rary
] at
21:
54 0
3 O
ctob
er 2
014
