Studying constructions of aging manhood: Methodological considerations

The study of aging masculinity benefits from theories of intersecting inequality and attention to context, and also from methodological care. Theory can help to avoid reification of naturalized distinctions by age and by sex; and methodological rigor can avoid imputations of old masculinity to activities that other people do just as much. We revisit published research to outline theory and methods that minimize risk of reification and false distinction. We review theories of intersecting inequalities (age and gender) as well as institutional context; and we focus on methods that require either explicit mention of gender by those studied or direct comparison of old men to others. We offer several examples of how we can distinguish aging masculinities by using these methods, from interview research to the study of popular culture. Comparisons of white, middle-aged men in Finland to men in the U.S., and contrast of the U.S. men to U.S. women, reveal patterns in their constructions of manhood in later life, in realms of health, anti-aging, and caregiving. We point to the importance of both intersectionality and attention to contexts, such as welfare states, which shape aging manhood. • Studies of the intersection of age and gender inequalities focus on old manhood, the production of old age and masculinity. • Much of this scholarship fails to demonstrate that the behavior under analysis is distinct to manhood. • We review scholarship that is methodologically disciplined to demonstrate gender distinction and thus masculinity. • We find that old men maintain hegemonic standards of youth and manhood, which sustains inequalities of age and gender.