Abstract The relationship between the law and masculinity has not been as thoroughly examined as the relationship between the law and feminism or, more generally, between the law and gender. Yet, the reach of masculinity stretches deep into the very fiber of the law. Masculinity has for too long served as an invisible bedrock on which the law founded both its substance and method. The struggle for formal equality during the last half century sought the elimination of the masculinist bias, but has only exposed the extent of the entrenchment. The popular idea is that the law exists in a removed and exalted position where it sits in judgement of a pre-existing and fully formed masculinity. Indeed, much of the internal coherence of the law is premised on the integrity of the subject and the propagation of sexual difference. Thus, the law is precluded from acknowledging or engaging with its own productive power and vacuously characterizes itself as a neutral arbiter. Today, while significant changes occur in sex and sexuality, the study of masculinity appears theoretically stagnant. Part I of this paper distinguishes between masculinity studies and the men's movement and explains the relationship of each to feminist theory. Part II looks at how the power of the law works and how masculinity studies is an effective tool to help understand how that power manifests and is employed. Part III examines the relationship between feminist legal theory and masculinity studies with a particular focus on two areas where I view masculinity studies as having successfully employed insights from feminist theory. Finally, Part IV considers four areas where I suggest masculinity studies could better incorporate certain insights from feminist theory, which would result in a more rigorous understanding of the relationship among power, masculinity, and law, and point masculinity studies in a more nuanced direction. To advance this critique, the paper analyzes underlying arguments that support the power of law based in classic liberal political theory. It employs recurrent critiques of the law, and of liberalism more generally, found in Feminist Legal Theory, Critical Race Theory, Queer Theory, and Critical Legal Studies to reveal the law as always already intertwined with masculinity.

中文翻译：

---

研究男子气概的方向：超越毒性，经验和异化

摘要法律与男子气概之间的关系尚未像法律与女性主义之间或更普遍的法律与性别之间的关系那样得到彻底研究。然而，男子气概的影响深深地延伸到法律的本质。男性气质长期以来一直是隐形的基石，法律为其实质和方法奠定了基础。在过去的半个世纪中，为争取形式上的平等而进行的斗争试图消除男性主义的偏见，但只暴露了纠缠的程度。普遍的看法是，法律处于一种已被移走和高举的位置，在此地位下，它是对已经存在且完全形成的男性气概的判断。的确，法律的许多内部连贯性以主体的完整性和性差异的传播为前提。因此，法律被禁止承认或参与其自身的生产能力，并虚假地将自己定性为中立的仲裁人。如今，尽管性别和性行为发生了重大变化，但对男性气质的研究在理论上似乎停滞不前。本文的第一部分区分了男子气概研究和男性运动，并解释了每种理论与女性主义理论的关系。第二部分着眼于法律权力的运作方式以及男性气质研究是一种有效的工具，可以帮助理解该权力的表现形式和运用方式。第三部分探讨了女性主义法律理论与男性气概研究之间的关系，特别着重于两个领域，在这些领域中，我认为男性气概研究已成功地运用了女性主义理论的见解。最后，第四部分考虑了四个方面，我建议男性气概研究可以更好地结合女性主义理论的某些见解，这将导致对权力，男性气概和法律之间关系的更加严格的理解，并在更细微的方向上指出男性气概的研究。为了推进这种批评，本文分析了支持经典自由主义政治理论中法律效力的基本论点。它采用对女性主义法律理论，批判种族理论，酷儿理论和批判法律研究中反复出现的对法律以及更广泛的自由主义的批判，以揭示出一向与男性气质交织在一起的法律。点男性气质研究则朝着更细微的方向发展。为了推进这种批评，本文分析了支持经典自由主义政治理论中法律效力的基本论点。它采用对女性主义法律理论，批判种族理论，酷儿理论和批判法律研究中反复出现的对法律以及更广泛的自由主义的批判，以揭示出一向与男性气质交织在一起的法律。点男性气质研究则朝着更细微的方向发展。为了推进这种批评，本文分析了支持经典自由主义政治理论中法律效力的基本论点。它采用对女性主义法律理论，批判种族理论，酷儿理论和批判法律研究中反复出现的对法律以及更广泛的自由主义的批判，以揭示出一向与男性气质交织在一起的法律。