Articlepdf.pdf

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Drug Policy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/drugpo

Young men’s alcohol consumption experiences and performances of
masculinity
Samantha Wilkinson (Conceptualisation Data curation Formal analysis Investigation
Methodology Writing – original draft Visualisation)a,!, Catherine Wilkinson (Visualisation
Original draft Writing – review & editing)b
a Brooks Building, Manchester Metropolitan University, 53 Bonsall St, Manchester M15 6GX, United Kingdom
b IM Marsh Campus, Liverpool John Moores University, Barkhill Road, Liverpool L17 6BD, United Kingdom

A R T I C L E I N F O

Keywords:
Alcohol
Care
Gender
Masculinity
Performance

A B S T R A C T

Background: By creating a dichotomy between those who are ‘out-of-control’ ‘binge drinkers’ and those for
whom alcohol contributes to friendship fun, academic and alcohol policy literature often fail to acknowledge the
nuances in the diverse drinking practices of men.
Methods: This paper engages with findings from a multiple qualitative method research project (comprising of
individual and friendship group interviews; diaries; and participant observation), conducted with 16 young men,
aged 15–24: eight living in the middle-class area of Chorlton, and eight living in the working-class area of
Wythenshawe, Manchester, United Kingdom.
Results: This paper provides fine-grained insights into the doings, complexities and contradictions of masculi-
nity in the context of drinking. Young men are shown to tap into di!erent co-existing versions of masculinity,
one of which is based on the exclusion of femininity (i.e. they act as tough guys), while another version is more
inclusive (i.e. it allows for displays of care).
Conclusion: This paper shows a much more complex image of young men’s drinking practices than has hitherto
been conceptualised in the existing literature, and brings to the fore doings of alternative masculinities. This has
important implications for alcohol policy interventions targeting men, in that the complexities and contra-
dictions of masculinity in relation to drinking must be taken seriously.

Introduction

Young people and alcohol consumption has received a significant
amount of attention in popular and policy press, and academic work.
The treatment of young people in academic and policy literature is,
however, contradictory. Public debate in the UK is permeated by a
rhetoric of anxiety relating to ‘out-of-control’ young people (Parkes &
Conolly, 2011), who are positioned as lacking capacities of/for self-
regulation (Kelly, 2003). Pickard (2014) accuses the British press of
creating a ‘moral panic’ surrounding young people’s alcohol consump-
tion in public space. Young people who drink tend to be presented as
“folk devils”- a bad influence on society (Oswell, 1998:36). The de-
monisation of young people as ‘binge drinkers’ gives the impression that
they are anti-social, dangerous and lack a moral compass (Smith, 2013).

On the other hand, academics such as Hunt and Frank (2016) have
moved away from an approach to intoxication as a problematic activity,
instead bringing to the fore pleasurable features of intoxication in terms

of sociability. Likewise, Thurnell-Read (2016) departs from a simplistic
discourse of deviance, highlighting the social pleasures of alcohol
consumption, in terms of camaraderie, intimacy and mutual support.
With a specific focus on men and alcohol consumption,
Men’s Health (2017) reported that men are more likely to become
friends with other men if they consume alcohol with them.

By creating a dichotomy between those who are ‘out-of-control’
‘binge drinkers’ and those for whom alcohol contributes to friendship
fun, the nuances in the diverse drinking practices of men fail to be
acknowledged. This paper goes some way towards rectifying this, by
engaging with the complexities of the alcohol consumption practices
and experiences of young men, aged 15–24, living in the suburban case
study locations of Chorlton and Wythenshawe, Manchester, UK. These
case study locations were chosen due to their di!erent socio-economic
make up (Chorlton being more middle-class, and Wythenshawe more
working-class), and their di!erent spaces and places for drinking (e.g.
parks, streets, bars, clubs). In doing so, this paper provides fine-grained

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2019.08.007

! Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: [email protected] (S. Wilkinson), [email protected] (C. Wilkinson).

,QWHUQDWLRQDO�-RXUQDO�RI�’UXJ�3ROLF�����������������

������������������(OVHYLHU�%�9��$OO�ULJKWV�UHVHUYHG�

7

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/09553959

https://www.elsevier.com/locate/drugpo

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2019.08.007

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2019.08.007

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2019.08.007

http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1016/j.drugpo.2019.08.007&domain=pdf

insights into the doings, complexities, and contradictions of masculinity
in the context of drinking. Young men in this paper are shown to tap
into di!erent co-existing versions of masculinity, one of which is based
on the exclusion of femininity (i.e. they act as tough guys), while an-
other version is more inclusive (i.e. it allows for displays of care).

This paper is structured as follows, first: we engage with key theo-
retical understandings of masculinity. We then bring together literature
on performing drinking identities to highlight that drinking identities
are not fixed and static, but take di!erent forms, at di!erent times, and
in di!erent spaces. Afterwards, we discuss performances of masculinity
and alcohol consumption, to highlight a move towards more pluralistic
interpretations of masculinity. Following this, we provide an overview
of the case study locations, and discuss the methods used to conduct the
research. After this, we present two themes surrounding young men’s
drinking practices: performing orthodox masculinity; and performing
inclusive masculinity, respectively, before drawing the paper to a close.

Theorising masculinity

In this section, we first bring together key theoretical under-
standings of masculinity. According to Connell (1995), there is a hier-
archy of masculinities. At the top of this hierarchy is hegemonic mas-
culinity, with qualities including heterosexuality, whiteness, physical
strength, and the suppression of emotions, such as sadness. Below this,
is complicit masculinity. This phrase refers to men who may not fit all
of the characteristics of hegemonic masculinity, but equally they do not
challenge it, as they receive some of the benefits of being male. We then
have marginalised masculinity, in which men cannot access all the
features of hegemonic masculinity, due to factors such as their race or
disabilities, but still withhold emotions and may display physical
strength (Connell, 1995). At the bottom of Connell’s (1995) hierarchy of
masculinity is subordinate masculinity, in which men exhibit qualities
that are oppositional to hegemonic masculinity, such as being physi-
cally weak, and showing sadness. E!eminate and gay men are con-
sidered exemplars of subordinate masculinity (Connell, 1995).

Likewise, David and Brannon (1976) outline four types of mascu-
linity that they believe are guidelines for male sex roles, and which men
must perform in to be considered hegemonic males. First, “no
sissy stu!”, which suggests a distanced self from femininity, homo-
phobia, and avoidance of emotions, appreciating the stigma of all ste-
reotyped e!eminate characteristics and qualities, including openness
and vulnerability. Second, “be a big wheel”, where an individual strives
for achievement and success and focuses on competition. Third, “be a
sturdy oak”, which is concerned with avoiding vulnerability, staying
composed and in control and being tough. Fourth, “give ‘em hell”,
where an individual acts aggressively to become dominant. David and
Brannon (1976) presented these themes in recognition of the role so-
ciety encourages men to play; that is, men are required to perform a
false front in to ‘make it’. A critique of both Connell’s (1995) and
David and Brannon’s (1976) work is the suggestion that deviation from
the traits of hegemonic masculinity is considered a failure.

Some practices undertaken by young men (e.g. caring / displaying
emotion) may, from the perspective of Connell (1995) and David and
Brannon (1976), be interpreted as constituting a threat to dominant
notions of masculinity, and in turn result in a loss a loss of masculine
status and self-esteem (Harder & Demant, 2015). However, this is not
entirely adequate to fully understand/interpret the doings of masculi-
nity. Anderson (2005), in the context of the construction of masculinity
amongst heterosexual male cheerleaders, should be praised for pro-
moting a more inclusive understanding of masculinity. Rather than
interpreting young men’s engagement in practices, such as care, as a
failure to comply with the tenets of orthodox masculine construction,
Anderson (2005) contends that they are enacting, what he terms, ‘in-
clusive masculinity’. That is, an alternative form of masculinity, that is
not based on the exclusion of femininity, and related symbols and
practices (i.e. the model of masculinity presented by Connell, 1995),

but rather open to (inclusive of) enactments and practices traditionally
associated with femininity, including: displays of care, brotherly love,
and emotions. This paper thinks in line of a co-existence of multiple and
di!erently configured masculinities, in to engage with the im-
portant complexities in how young men do masculinity while drinking.

In to explore how drinking identities are performed, we now
draw on Butler (1990) and Go!man (1959), in to understand
these as complex, multiple and plural, rather than singular, fixed and
static.

Performing drinking identities

Writing in the context of class in the 1950s, Go!man (1959:79)
deploys the perspective of “theatrical performance”; that is, the ways in
which people present themselves and their activity to others, with a
focus on the means by which people guide and control the impression
others form. According to Go!man (1959:17), people sometimes act in
“thoroughly calculating” manners, projecting versions of themselves in
to communicate a certain impression to others, to provoke a
desired response. Go!man (1959) argues that the impression of ‘reality’
fostered by a performance is delicate and fragile, and can come under
discredit because of minor mishaps. Go!man (1959:109;114) distin-
guishes between a “front region” and a “back region”. ‘Front region’
refers to the space in which the performance takes place. ‘Back region’
is where performances are openly constructed, and where performers
can relax and drop their fronts (Go!man, 1959).

According to Johnson (2013), teenage drinking activities are si-
multaneously backstage performances, secluded from the adult gaze,
and frontstage performances, in which young people stage an im-
pression for the audience of their peers. The author advances three
forms of performance authenticity bound up with the consumption of
alcohol: “over-claiming”, “pretending”, and “acting hard”
(Johnson, 2013:747). By the phrase ‘performance authenticity’,
Johnson (2013) is interested in whether or not young people deem that
the drinking performances of their peers are genuine representations of
an individual’s wider social profile. Regarding “over-claiming”,
Johnson (2013:747) argues that young people in his study heavily
criticised those who exaggerated their alcohol consumption, or em-
bellished alcohol-related activities. When discussing “pretending” to be
drunk, Johnson (2013:747) notes that this performance was viewed as
much more socially damaging than attempting to ‘pass’ as a drinker
(e.g. by consuming non-alcoholic drinks which share a visual resem-
blance to alcoholic drinks, in to present oneself as a drinker).
Finally, Johnson (2013:747) describes acting “hard”, as an example of
performance authenticity. Acting ‘hard’ can refer to acting ‘older’,
‘mad’, ‘nuts’, or ‘cool’. For the specific group of young people
Johnson (2013) was researching with, he claims that drinking alcohol
in an attempt to gain the approval of others, or as a means of replicating
the behaviour of ‘older’ young people, is a major transgression to peer
group norms. However, it is worth recognising that in other friendships
groups, such practices may indeed act as a confirmation of peer group
norms.

In the 1990s, queer theorist Judith Butler deployed a linguistic
definition of performativity, departing from Go!man’s (1959) theatrical
account of performance, in an attempt to disrupt the dominant under-
standings of sex, gender, and sexuality (Gregson & Rose, 2000).
Butler (2011) argues that gender is not innate or natural; instead, we
are assigned a gender at birth, and gender is continually (re)produced.
Butler (2011) claims that the ways in which people act, walk, speak and
talk consolidate an impression of being a man or being a woman
(Butler, 2011). The body becomes its gender through such bodily ges-
tures, movements and enactments, which are renewed, revised, and
consolidated over time (Butler, 1988).

Butler (1990:viii) considers how gender is performed, in relation to
a “heterosexual matrix”. The author uses this term to designate that
normative gender identities are inextricably embedded, and produced

S. Wilkinson and C. Wilkinson ,QWHUQDWLRQDO�-RXUQDO�RI�’UXJ�3ROLF�����������������

�

within hegemonic representations of heterosexuality (Renold and
Ringrose, 2008); this is not a ‘choice’, it is learned behaviour in relation
to socially constructed ‘norms’. Butler (1990:25) argues, “there is no
‘being’ behind doing…the deed is everything”. By this, Butler (1990)
means that there is no gender identity behind the expressions of gender,
identity is constituted performatively by such ‘expressions’. Unlike
Butler (1990), for Go!man (1959:142) performance is not conscious;
this can be seen through her assertion that “there need not be a ‘doer
behind the deed,’ but that the ‘doer’ is variably constructed in and
through the deed”.

Gender then, is not a stable identity; it is culturally constructed
through the “repeated stylization of the body, a set of repeated acts…
that congeal over time to produce the appearance of substance, of a
natural sort of being” (Butler, 1990:33). As these acts are continually
repeated, there is space for transgressions and “slippage”
(Butler, 1993:122). In other words, gender transformations are possible
due to the likelihood of a failure to repeat certain acts, or deformities in
performances (Butler, 1990). This performative conceptualisation of
gender is a useful means of moving away from an understanding of
gender as prescribed, fixed and static, to a reconceptualisation of
gender as “a constituted social temporality” (Butler, 1990:141, emphasis
in original).

Whilst Go!man (e.g. 1959) and Butler’s (e.g. 1990) approaches to
performance have typically been deployed individually in the alcohol
studies literature, Demant and Järvinen (2006:590) combine their
theoretical perspectives when seeking to show how alcohol experience
and positive attitudes towards drinking are used to symbolise maturity;
the teenagers who consume the most alcohol construct themselves as
“socially older” than others. Further, Malbon (1999), with a focus on
clubbing, fuses Go!man’s (e.g. 1959;1967) recognition of the role for
territorialisations and regionalisations, with Butler’s (e.g. 1990;1993)
understanding that social identity and self are concurrently performed.
Malbon (1999) suggests that utilising both approaches can enhance
understandings of how the consuming experience of the crowd can si-
multaneously be expressive (Go!man), and constructive (Butler).
Having explored how drinking identities are performed, we now engage
with performances of masculinity bound up with the consumption of
alcohol; this is important, as from a Butlerian perspective, alcohol
consumption can facilitate slippages in performances of gendered
drinking identities.

Performances of masculinity and alcohol consumption

Drinking has typically been labelled a “male domain”; that is, male
dominated, male identified, and male-centred (Capraro, 2000:307).
Handling the e!ects of alcohol without showing signs of intoxication is,
from this perspective, an expression of male identity (Mullen, Watson,
Swift & Black, 2007). The consumption of beer with male friends is a
means through which men enact standard hegemonic masculinity
(Willott & Lyons, 2012), and being noisy, urinating in the streets, and
passing out on the street are often deemed acceptable behaviours for
men, by men (Mullen et al., 2007).

Drawing on Butler’s (1990) theory of gender as constituted perfor-
matively, Campbell (2000), in the context of rural New Zealand, ex-
amines how hegemonic masculinity may be achieved in the context of a
pub. The author contends that, through the public performance of
masculinity, dominant understandings of legitimate masculine beha-
viour are both reinforced and defended. Campbell (2000:562) coins the
term “pub(lic) masculinity” to recognise the specificities of the per-
formance as it relates to pub drinking, and the ways in which the
practice is display-orientated and under constant public observation.
The performative enactment of pub(lic) masculinity contains theatrical
elements, which Campbell (2000:565, emphasis in original) terms
“conversational cockfighting”. The author argues that, at such times,
hierarchies of knowledge and legitimacy are established, in which other
drinkers scrutinise men’s performances. Furthermore, Campbell (2000)

contends that, for male drinkers, it is important to have discipline when
consuming large quantities of alcohol, in to ensure the appear-
ance of self-control is maintained. The performance thus requires that a
man controls both the social and bodily aspect of pub(lic) masculinity.

Moreover, authors, such as Graham et al. (2011), have explored
how drinking establishments are common settings for aggression and
injury, particularly amongst young men. Tomsen (1997), along similar
lines, explores issues of male honour in the social interaction leading to
much violent behaviour. The author undertakes ethnography of assaults
in public drinking venues, and brings to the fore the subjective ex-
perience of participation in acts of dis and violence.
Tomsen (1997) highlights that violence is interpreted by many drinkers
as providing a sense of release, group pleasure, and carnival.

In the context of American urban nightlife, Grazian (2007) draws on
Go!man’s (1959) notion of dramaturgical performances to explore how
young heterosexual male students perform sexual competence and
masculine identity through ‘girl hunting’. By ‘girl hunting’,
Grazian (2007) is referring to a practice by which young men aggres-
sively seek out female sexual partners in commercialised nightlife
spaces, such as bars and clubs. Grazian (2007) highlights the perfor-
mative nature of flirtation rituals, through an analysis of how male-
initiated games of heterosexual pursuit work as strategies of impression
management, in which adolescent heterosexual men sexually objectify
women, in to enhance their own performances of masculinity. In
the context of a Danish nightclub, Harder and Demant (2015) examine
the risks of losing masculinity in a club. The authors note that mascu-
linity becomes invested in the fantasy of the drug and the utopian party,
and when the party does not work out as planned, young men can be
perceived as failing masculinity.

According to Mullen et al. (2007), the social context of male
drinking is changing, and masculinities are being redefined. Recent
changes to the drink industry, alcohol advertising, marketing and the
retail trade have contributed to a movement towards “female-friendly”
alcohol products, such as flavoured gins, and drinking spaces, such as
bars (Bailey, Gri”n & Shankar, 2015:747). Mullen et al. (2007) assert
that the increasing diversity of drinking locations and alcohol products
are instrumental in achieving new expressions of male identity amongst
young men.

Moreover, findings from de Visser and Smith’s (2007) study show
that men can have strong masculine identities that are characterised by
an explicit reference to not drinking, or drinking in moderation (for
instance, if they are successful at playing sports). Moreover, the authors
contend that men can drink excessively without endorsing traditional
masculinity. In Mullen et al. (2007) study, most participants preferred
drinking in mixed-sex groups, which contrasts with the experiences of
their fathers and grandfathers. This leads Mullen et al. (2007:162) to
assert that there is a shift away from the conventional hegemonic
masculinity to a more “pluralistic interpretation”. Having cohered lit-
erature surrounding the performances of masculinities when bound up
with the consumption of alcohol, this paper now outlines the metho-
dology.

Methodology

In this section, we first provide an overview of the case study lo-
cations, before detailing the methods deployed in this study.

Wythenshawe was created in the 1920s as a Garden City in an at-
tempt to resolve Manchester’s overpopulation problem and ‘deprava-
tion’ in its inner-city slums. Wythenshawe continued to develop up to
the 1970s. However, the 1980s and 1990s saw steady decline, high
unemployment, decaying infrastructure, crime and drug abuse pro-
blems (Atherton, Baker & Graham, 2005). Wythenshawe was the out-
door filming location for the Channel 4 series Shameless, which showed
various shots of the local tower-blocks and housing estates. However, in
2007 production moved following disruption to filming caused by local
young people (Manchester Evening News, 2007). The town centre –

S. Wilkinson and C. Wilkinson ,QWHUQDWLRQDO�-RXUQDO�RI�’UXJ�3ROLF�����������������

�

known as the Civic Centre – was built in the 1960s, and was renovated
between 1999–2002 to include new stores. The main shopping area
now includes gates that are locked at night to prevent vandalism. The
Forum centre, which opened in 1971, has a library, leisure centre,
swimming pool, and cafe. Wythenshawe is a district eight miles south of
Manchester city centre, and faced with relatively poor transportation
links (Lucas, Tyler & Christodoulou, 2009).

Chorlton is a residential area approximately five miles from
Manchester city centre. Chorlton is a cosmopolitan neighbourhood with
traditional family areas alongside younger, vibrant communities. The
area has good road and bus access to, and from, the city centre, and is
situated within easy access to the motorway network. Drawing on
Manchester City Council’s (2012) data, from close to when data col-
lection took place, Chorlton has a higher proportion of minority ethnic
residents in comparison to Wythenshawe, and compared to the national
average (19.1%, compared to the national average of 11.3%). As of
November 2011, private residential property in Chorlton accounted for
90.3% of all property in the ward, much higher than the city average of
68.7%. Chorlton has three secondary schools; a shopping precinct; li-
brary; and is home to Chorlton Water Park – a local nature reserve
comprising of a lake surrounded by grasslands and woodlands.

These case study locations were chosen due to their di!ering socio-
economic status, and their varying drinking micro-geographies; that is,
di!erent spaces and places for alcohol consumption. The analysis teases
out similarities and di!erences in how class matters in relation to
drinking practices, the doing of masculinity, and displays of a!ec-
tionate care for young men in this study.

Sampling / recruitment

This paper draws on findings from a larger study, conducted by the
first author, which aimed to explore young people’s (aged 15–24) al-
cohol consumption practices and experiences (see Wilkinson 2015).
This paper engages with findings from 16 young men, eight who live in
the middle-class area of Chorlton, and eight who live in the working-
class area of Wythenshawe (six aged 15–17; five aged 18–21; five aged
22–24). All participants were able-bodied, and all identified as het-
erosexual. Moreover, all participants bar one identified as White. All
participants were either in education (ranging from secondary school to
University), or employed in some capacity, at the time of the study. The
findings from this study thus derive from a specific group of young
people. The first author recruited the majority of participants through
non-coercive gatekeepers at local schools, community organisations,
youth clubs and universities. In to recruit participants, the first
author also distributed flyers and business cards to houses and busi-
nesses in both case study locations; posted on discussion forums con-
cerning both areas; used Twitter and Facebook to promote the study to
locals from each area; and arranged to be interviewed by the host of a
local radio station in Wythenshawe.

Methods

The first author had a ‘palette of methods’ to utilise (see Wilkinson
and Wilkinson, 2018) and made it clear to the young people that they
could ‘opt in’ to whichever method(s) they wished. The methods we
draw on in this paper include: in-depth individual and friendship group
interviews; diaries; and participant observation of young people’s nights
in/out involving alcohol.

Individual and friendship group interviews
14 young men opted into the interview method; 11 young men in-

dividually, and three young men as part of friendship group interviews.
Individual interviews enabled us to gain insight into the participants’
perceptions, which are subjective in nature (Kaar, 2007). Questions
asked included: what are you motivations for drinking?; how do you
feel when you drink?; where do you drink?; what would a typical night

in / out entail? Whilst the individual interview has its benefits, there
are also drawbacks. Despite the first author’s relative closeness in age to
participants, some young people did not feel comfortable participating
in a one-to-one interview with an adult researcher, and asked to be
interviewed with their friends. To address this, the first author allowed
a friendship group style of interviewing. She had not intended to use
this method; this illustrates the agency of participants to shape the re-
search design, and the need for researchers to be flexible.

There are advantages to conducting interviews in friendship groups
for substance use research. Friendship group interviews create a non-
threatening and comfortable atmosphere for participants to share
drinking experiences (Renold, 2005). Moreover, friendship group in-
terviews provide access to interaction between participants
(Miller, Strang & Miller, 2010) – this helped tease out the importance of
friendship and care to young men’s drinking practices. Overall,
friendship group interviews allowed the first author to collect data that
otherwise may not have been accessible (Miller et al., 2010).

Diaries
Five young men opted into the diary method. Diaries are a method

through which young people can express themselves, perhaps with less
embarrassment, or fewer feelings of being judged, than in interview
scenarios. The first author asked participants to complete unstructured
solicited written diaries, regarding their alcohol consumption experi-
ences, over a minimum of three weeks. Leyshon (2002) contends that
utilising a written diary method with young people is challenging, as
they perceive it to be time-consuming. and it may feel like a form of
homework. However, far from a tedious homework-like task, for some
young men in the study, keeping a diary was novel and exciting.

Diaries yield considerable benefits for substance use research. First,
as the diary method was not undertaken face-to-face, it made it easier
for young men to be more candid about their drinking practices and
experiences than in …