ABSTRACT

This article argues for a revised understanding of 'complicity' as a undertheorised position and relationship within the social organisation of gender. The concept of ‘hegemonic masculinity’, developed by R.W. Connell and others, has been influential for understanding masculinities as shared ideals embedded within gender power relations, but scholars have paid less attention to Connell’s attendant concept of ‘complicity’, which does not require a shared ideal to be honoured or emulated. To develop a critical account of complicity, this article draws on Iris Marion Young’s distinction between series and groups and considers ways that persons with diverse relationships to masculinities may nevertheless contribute to collective forms of domination. Young’s approach is placed in dialogue with studies of mateship and violence in contemporary Australian cinema, noting the ways that complicity and coercion can be masked through the language of mateship. As key examples, the article considers two Australian true crime films that explore the complicity of adolescent boys with the collective violences of men: David Michôd’s Animal Kingdom (2010) and Justin Kurzel’s Snowtown (2011).

摘要

本文主张对“同谋”作为性别社会组织中理论不足的立场和关系进行修订的理解。由 RW Connell 和其他人提出的“霸权男性气质”概念对于将男性气质理解为嵌入性别权力关系中的共同理想具有影响力，但学者们对康奈尔随之而来的“同谋”概念的关注较少，该概念不需要被尊重或效仿的共同理想。为了对同谋进行批判性描述，本文借鉴了 Iris Marion Young 对系列和群体的区分，并考虑了与男性气质有着不同关系的人可能对集体统治形式做出贡献的方式。Young 的方法与当代澳大利亚电影中的伴侣关系和暴力研究进行对话，并指出通过伴侣关系的语言可以掩盖同谋和胁迫的方式。作为关键的例子，这篇文章考虑了两部澳大利亚真实的犯罪电影，这些电影探讨了青春期男孩与男性集体暴力的共谋：大卫米乔德的动物王国（2010）和贾斯汀库泽尔的雪城（2011）。