Main Article Content
This paper aims is to demonstrate how Bourdieu’s conceptual tools of habitus, capital and field can facilitate the operationalisation of intersectionality. Following an appreciation of the methodological issues arising from the practical application of intersectionality, we introduce data from an Australian study of husbands caring for wives with dementia. With care often being constructed as a feminine practice, men’s caregiving experiences are frequently said to be in tension with many hegemonic masculine practices. However, men are not homogenous, rather their experiences are shaped by intersections of gender, age, class and other identity-defining categories. To help explore some of these intersections, 16 interviews, six of which were enhanced by photo-elicitation methods, were undertaken with a purposive sample of retired husbands caring for a spouse with dementia. Thematic analysis was then employed. In this paper, we present data and themes relating to the husband’s experiences around independence and self-sufficiency and coping strategies and emotional autonomy. However, the main purpose of the paper is not to focus on these empirical findings per se. Rather, we draw on these data to illustrate how Bourdieu’s work was utilised to help address some of the concerns that have been encountered when applying intersectional theory to empirical research; that is to say, this is primarily a methodological paper. The empirical findings highlight the complex and class influenced ways that husband carers look to sustain independence and autonomy. They further illustrate how the cultural capital accrued through past experiences facilitates or restrains coping mechanisms and associated emotional autonomy during their caregiving journeys. Methodologically, we use these empirical data to demonstrate how Bourdieu’s notions of habitus, capital and field can overcome three specific criti-cisms when applying intersectionality in research studies: (1) its supposed inability to adequately address agency and privilege; (2) its apparent lack of a heuristic device illustrating how time, location and context constrain and empower social actors; and (3) an alleged lack of methodological tools to illustrate the interrelated and generative nature of structure and agency.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Copyright of articles published in all DPG titles is retained by the author(s). The author(s) grants DPG the rights to publish the article and identify itself as the original publisher. The author grants DPG exclusive commercial rights to the article. The author grants any party the rights to use the article freely for non-commercial purposes provided that the original work is properly cited.
2. ABS. Survey of disability aging and carers: Summary of findings 2015. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics; 2015.
3. Australian Bureau of Statistics. Disability, ageing and carers: Australia: Summary of findings 2018. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics; 2018.
4. ONS. Change in the value and division of unpaid care work in the UK: 2000 to 2015; 2016 [Internet]. Available from: https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/nationalaccounts/satelliteaccounts/articles/changes-inthevalueanddivisionofunpaidcareworkintheuk/20 00to2015.
5. Australian Bureau of Statistics. Table 34.4: Relationship of carer to main carer recipient by age and sex. In: Survey of disability and carers. Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics; 2018.
6. Cahill S. Elderly husbands caring at home for their wives diagnosed with Alzheimer’s disease: Are male carers really different? Aust J Soc Issues. 2000;35(1):53–72. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/j.1839-4655.2000.tb01303.x
7. Hellström I, Håkanson C, Eriksson H, Sandberg J. Development of older men’s caregiving roles for wives with dementia. Scand J Caring Sci. 2017;31(4):957–64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/scs.12419
8. Ribeiro O, Paul C. Older male carers and the positive aspects of care. Age Ageing. 2008;28:165–83. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0144686X07006460
9. Large S, Slinger R. Grief in caregivers of persons with Alzheimer’s disease and related dementia: A qualitative synthesis. Dementia. 2015;14(2):164–83. http://dx.doi. org/10.1177/1471301213494511; PMid: 24339095.
10. Harris PB. The misunderstood caregiver? A qualitative study of the male caregiver of Alzheimer’s disease victims. Gerontologist. 1993;33(4):551–6. http://dx.doi. org/10.1093/geront/33.4.551; PMid: 8375686.
11. Kirsi T, Hervonen A, Jylha M. Always one step behind: Husbands’ narratives about taking care of their demented wives. Health. 2004;8(2):159–81. http://dx.doi. org/10.1177/1363459304038798; PMid: 15068635.
12. Russell R. The work of elderly men caregivers: From public careers to an unseen world. Men Masculinities. 2007;9(3):298–314. http://dx.doi. org/10.1177/1097184X05277712
13. Siriopoulos G, Brown Y, Wright K. Caregivers of wives diagnosed with Alzheimer’s disease: Husband’s perspectives. Am J Alzheimer’s Dis Other Dement. 1999;14(2):79–87. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/153331759901400209
14. Thompson EH. Men as caregivers. What’s unique about men’s caregiving? New York: Springer; 2002.
15. Baker KL, Robertson N, Connelly D. Men caring for wives or partners with dementia: Masculinity, strain and gain. Aging Ment Health. 2010;14(3):319–27. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1360786090322878; PMid:20425651.
16. Calasanti T, King N. Taking ‘women’s work’ ‘like a man’: Husbands’ experiences of care work. Gerontologist. 2007;47(4):516–27. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ geront/47.4.516; PMid: 17766672.
17. Eriksson H, Sandberg J. Transitions in men’s caring identities: Experiences from home-based care to nursing home placement. Int J Older People Nurs. 2008;3(2):131–7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-3743.2007.00092.x; PMid: 20925902.
18. Hanlon N. Masculinities, care and equality: Identity and nurture in men’s lives. Palgrave C, editor. Hound-mills, Basingstoke, Hampshire, New York: Palgrave Macmillan; 2012.
19. Ribeiro O, Paúl C, Nogueira C. Real men, real husbands: Caregiving and masculinities in later life. J Aging Stud. 2007;21(4):302–13. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j. jaging.2007.05.005
20. Russell R. Men doing “women’s work”: Elderly men caregivers and the gendered construction of care work. J Men’s Stud. 2007;15(1):1–18. http://dx.doi. org/10.3149/jms.1501.1
21. Hankivsky O. Women’s health, men’s health, and gender and health: Implications of intersectionality. Soc Sci Med. 2012;74(11):1712–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j. socscimed.2011.11.029; PMid: 22361090.
22. Collins PH, Bilge S. Intersectionality. Cambridge, UK; Malden, MA: Polity Press; 2016.
23. Smooth WG. Intersectionality from theoretical frame-work to policy intervention. In: Wilson AR, editor. Situating intersectionality: Politics, policy and power. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan; 2013. p. 11–41. http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/9781137025135_2
24. Christensen AD, Jensen SQ. Combining hegemonic masculinity and intersectionality. NORMA: Nordic J Masculinity Stud. 2014;9(1):60–75. http://dx.doi.org /10.1080/18902138.2014.892289
25. Martinez Dy A, Martin L, Marlow S. Developing a critical realist positional approach to intersectionality. J Crit Realism. 2014;13(5):447–66. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1179/1476743014Z.00000000043
26. Bowleg L. When black +lesbian + woman ≠ black lesbian woman: The methodological challenges of qualitative and quantitative intersectionality research. Sex Roles. 2008;59(1):312–25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/ s11199-008-9400-z
27. Anthias F. Hierarchies of social location, class and intersectionality: Towards a translocational frame. Int J Sociol. 2013;28(1):121–38. http://dx.doi. org/10.1177/0268580912463155
28. Prins B. Narrative accounts of origins: A blind spot in the intersectional approach? Eur J Women’s Stud. 2006;13(3):277–90. http://dx.doi. org/10.1177/1350506806065757
29. Winker G, Degele N. Intersectionality as multi-level analysis: Dealing with social inequality. Eur J Women’s Stud. 2011;18(1):51–66. http://dx.doi. org/10.1177/1350506810386084
30. Boogaard B, Roggeband C. Paradoxes of intersectionality: Theorizing inequality in the Dutch Police Force through structure and agency. Organization. 2010;17(1):53–75. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1350508409350042
31. Bourdieu P. Distinction: A social critique of the judgement of taste. London: Routledge; 1984.
32. Bourdieu P. The logic of practice. Cambridge: Polity; 1990.
33. Bourdieu P, Wacquant L. An invitation to reflexive sociolgy. Cambridge: Polity; 1992.
34. Maton K. Habitus. In: Pierre Bourdieu (key concepts) [Internet]. 2nd ed. Durham, UK: Acumen.; 2012. p. 48–64. Available from: http://ebookcentral.proquest. com/lib/uwsau/detail.action?docID=3061159
35. Thomson P. Field. In: Pierre Bourdieu (key concepts) [Internet]. 2nd ed. Durham, UK: Acumen; 2012. p. 65–78. Available from: http://ebookcentral.proquest. com/lib/uwsau/detail.action?docID=3061159.
36. Rampersad R. Operationalizing Bourdieu, interrogating intersectionality and the under achievement of primary level of Afro-Trinidadian boys. In: Theory as method in research: On Bourdieu, social theory and education [Internet]. Florence, UK: Taylor and Francis; 2015. Available from: http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/ uwsau/detail.action?docID=4014848.
37. Bryman A. Social research methods. 5th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2016.
38. Houde SC. Methodological issues in male caregiver research: An integrative review of the literature. J Adv Nurs. 2002;40(6):626–40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/ j.1365-2648.2002.02423.x; PMid: 12473041.
39. Emslie C, Hunt K, O’Brien R. Masculinities in older men: A qualitative study in the West of Scotland. J Men’s Stud. 2004;12(3):207–26. http://dx.doi.org/10.3149/ jms.1203.207
40. Denzin NK, Lincoln YS. Entering the field of qualitative inquiry. In: Denzin NK, Lincoln YS, editors. Strategies of qualitative inquiry. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 1998. p. 1–34.
41. Wengraf T. Qualitative research interviewing biographic narrative and semi-structured methods. London, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2001.
42. Creighton GM, Brussoni M, Oliffe JL, Han C. Picturing masculinities: Using photoelicitation in men’s health research. Am J Men’s Health. 2017;11(5):1472. https//dx.doi.org/10.1177/1557988315611217; PMid: 26483294; PMCid: PMC5675207.
43. Oliffe JL, Bottorff JL. Further than the eye can see? Photo elicitation and research with men. Qual Health Res. 2007;17(6):850–8. http://dx.doi. org/10.1177/1049732306298756; PMid: 17582026.
44. Glaw X, Inder K, Kable A, Hazelton M. Visual methodologies in qualitative research: Autophotography and photoelicitation applied to mental health research. Int J Qual Methods. 2017;16(1):1–8. http://dx.doi. org/10.1177/1609406917748215
45. Glaser B, Strauss A. The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press; 1967. http://dx.doi. org/10.1097/00006199-196807000-00014
46. Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol. 2006;3:77–101. http://dx.doi. org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.
47. Bazeley P, Jackson K. Qualitative data analysis with NVivo. 2nd ed. Jackson K, editor. London: Sage; 2013.
48. Meyer SB, Lunnay B. The application of abductive and retroductive inference for the design and analysis of theory-driven sociological research. Sociol Res Online. 2013;18(1):1–11. http://dx.doi.org/10.5153/sro.2819
49. Connell RW. Masculinities. St Leonards: Allen & Unwin; 1995.
50. Coles T, Vassarotti T. Ageing and identity dilemmas for men. J Relig Spiritual Aging. 2012;24(1–2):30–41. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15528030.2012.633425
51. Sparkes A. Ageing and embodied masculinities in physical activity settings: From flesh to theory and back 2015. In: Physical activity and sport in later life: Critical perspectives. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire; New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan; 2015. p. 137–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-137-42932-2_13
52. de Visser R, McDonnell L. “Masculine capital” and men’s health-related behaviour. J Men’s Health. 2011;8(3):234. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jomh.2011.08.079
53. Tannenbaum C, Frank B. Masculinity and health in late life men. Am J Men’s Health. 2011;5(3):243–54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1557988310384609; PMid: 20937737
54. Nixon D. Yearning to labour? Working-class men in post-industrial Britain. In: Masculinity, labour, and neoliberalism: Working-class men in international perspective. 2017. http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/ lib/uwsau/detail.action?docID=5050084http://dx.doi. org/10.1007/978-3-319-63172-1_3; PMid: 30155971; PMCid:PMC5924389.
55. Greenwood N, Smith R. Barriers and facilitators for male carers in accessing formal and informal support: A systematic review. Maturitas. 2015;82(2):162–9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.maturitas.2015.07.013; PMid: 26271710.
56. Milligan C, Morbey H. Care, coping and identity: Older men’s experiences of spousal care-giving. J Aging Stud. 2016;38:105–14. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j. jaging.2016.05.002; PMid: 27531457.
57. Nixon D. ‘I just like working with my hands’: Employment aspirations and the meaning of work for low-skilled unemployed men in Britain’s service economy. J Educ Work. 2006;19(2):201–17. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1080/13639080600668051
58. Robertson S, Gough B, Robinson M. Masculinities and health inequalities within neoliberal economies. In: Walker C, Roberts S, editors. Masculinity, labour, and neoliberalism: Working-class men in international perspective. Online: Springer International Publishing; 2017. p. 311–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63172-1_14; PMid: 29463521.
59. Anthias F. Intersectional what? Social divisions, intersectionality and levels of analysis. Ethnicities. 2013;13(1):3–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1468796812463547
60. Thompson EH. Men, masculinities, and aging: The gendered lives of older men. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield; 2019.
61. Robertson S, Monaghan LF. Embodied heterosexual masculinities, part 2: Foregrounding men’s health and emotions. Sociology Compass. 2012;6(2):151–65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9020.2011.00443.x
62. Seidler VJ. Masculinities, bodies, and emotional life. Men Masculinities. 2007;10(1):9–21. http://dx.doi. org/10.1177/1097184X07299636
63. Meuser TM, Marwit SJ. A comprehensive, stage-sensitive model of grief in dementia caregiving. Gerontologist. 2001;41(5):658–70. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ geront/41.5.658; PMid: 11574711.
64. Robertson S, Williams B, Oliffe JL. The case for retaining a focus on “Masculinities” in men’s health research. Int J Men’s Health. 2016;15(1):52–67.