Automobile Manufacturers’ Corporate Governance Essay Example


The automotive sector comprises various businesses and institutions engaged in developing, manufacturing, producing, advertising, and selling automobiles. The automobile marketplace is an oligopoly in a supersaturated field with a few influential players, which explains the lower profitability. Given the automobile industry’s size and importance to many local economies, most nations are developing legal instruments that incentivize production, particularly export assembly (Saidani et al., 2018). Thus, these and other prospective regulation changes are extremely crucial for global car industry participants, and there is much discussion about the potential effect. Corporate governance examines how a firm employs rules and procedures to influence business choices, adhere to the law, and fulfill stakeholder duties (Bhagat & Bolton, 2019). Internal control failings, such as aggressive tax evasion, corruption, exorbitant CEO compensation, or persistent lobbying, destroy reputations and erode confidence (Bhagat & Bolton, 2019). Therefore, this paper aims to conduct a performance analysis of three automobile manufacturers, Ford, BMW, and Toyota Motors, focusing on regulatory frameworks and corporate governance.

Firm Backgrounds and Performance Overview

Ford Motors Corporation

Henry Ford and 11 partner entrepreneurs started the Ford Motor Company in 1903. Based in Dearborn, Michigan, the corporation produces passenger vehicles and tractors and automobile components and equipment. In 1896, Henry Ford developed his first experimental automobile in a workshop outside his Detroit house (Fetzer, 2017). In July 1903, after creating the Ford Motor Corporation, the first Ford automobile, the actual Model A, was constructed at the Mack Avenue facility (Fetzer, 2017). In 1908, Ford produced the first trendy Model T vehicle. The need for this vehicle was so enormous that Ford had to create new mass manufacturing techniques to make enough of it.

In 1911, Ford created the firm’s first subsidiary assembly factory in the USA in Kansas City, Missouri, and the institution’s first international manufacturing facility in Manchester, England. In 1913, Henry Ford established the world’s first production line for automobiles, and in 1914, he instituted the $5 daily salary for an eight-hour day, replacing the $2.34 regular wage for a nine-hour function (Fetzer, 2017). Assembly-line manufacturing enabled the Model T touring-car edition’s cost to be reduced from $850 in 1908 to less than $300 in 1925 (Fetzer, 2017). In 1908, the business created its first overseas business department in Paris. By mid-1914, there were over 500,000 Model Ts on the road worldwide, and by 1923, the company was manufacturing more than half of all vehicles sold in the United States (Ford, 2019). By the late 1920s, Ford had established more than twenty assembly factories throughout Latin America, Asia, Australia, Europe, Canada, and South Africa.

With 15 million Model Ts built, Ford became the globe’s most recognized automobile manufacturer. The final Model T and the first novel Model A were created in 1927, succeeded by the new Ford V-8 in 1932 (Ford, 2019). In 1922, Ford purchased the 1917-founded Lincoln Motor Company, which would manufacture Ford’s premium Lincolns and Continentals (Britannica, 2021). Ford developed the first Mercury in 1938, a vehicle priced between Lincoln and Ford. Henry Ford had already purchased 58.5% of the enterprise’s equity in 1906. The business created such variants as the Mustang (1964) and the Thunderbird (1954) under Henry Ford II’s stewardship. Ford purchased Jaguar, a British premium automobile company, in 1989–90, while I n 1993, Aston Martin became a wholly-owned branch. Subsequent purchases include Hertz Ltd in 1994, Volvo’s automotive business in 1999, and the Land Rover trademark of sport utility vehicles (SUVs) in 2000 (Ford, 2019). Ford also acquired a sizable stake in Mazda Motor Corporation.

Ford, nevertheless, started selling these trademarks in the early twenty-first millennium as it deteriorated. Ford sold Hertz in 2005 and Aston Martin in 2007. Ford (2019) enumerates that, in 2008, it sold Jaguar and Land Rover to India’s Tata Motors Ltd. Ford began divesting its Mazda holdings in 2008 and completed the process in 2015 (Ford, 2019). In December 2008, US President George W. Bush proposed an urgent financial intervention initiative to assist the nation’s Big Three automakers, General Motors, Chrysler LLC, and Ford, to avert the state’s ailing auto sector from collapsing (Ford, 2019). The proposal made $13.4 billion in USA loans instantly accessible from the Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP), a $700 billion fund established by Congress to rescue the banking sector after the subprime mortgage issue (Cooper et al., 2019). The loans would enable the automakers to operate until March 2009, at which point they would be expected to show financial sustainability or repay the money

BMW Group

BMW, or Bayerische Motoren Werke AG, is a German automobile manufacturer known for its high-quality sports cars and motorbikes. It started in 1916 as BMW, a manufacturer of aviation engines (BMW Group, 2022). BMW AG manufactures and distributes vehicles and motorbikes in Germany. It functions in four categories: automotive, motorcycles, banking sector, and other businesses. Automotive designs produce, integrate, and market automobiles and off-road machines under the BMW, Rolls-Royce, and MINI trademarks and spare components (BMW Group, 2022). Motorcycles are a niche that concentrates on the premium market.

The consumer banking section provides retail clients with credit lending, leasing, and other financial instruments. The different entities sector comprises operations related to shareholding and group finance. BMW started manufacturing automobiles in 1928. The R32 motorbike produced by the business achieved a global maximum speed that stood until 1937 (Hansen, 2017). By 1959, the company was on the edge of bankruptcy, and its executives were considering a sale to Daimler-Benz.

On the other hand, BMW emerged from its financial crisis that year with German industrialist Herbert Quandt purchasing a majority stake in it. BMW debuted the 700 series, which the similarly popular 1500 model quickly followed (Lewin, 2021). At approximately the same time, the business produced a new motorbikes line especially renowned in the United States. BMW was entrenched as a luxury vehicle manufacturer by the end of the twentieth century. In an unsuccessful effort to increase market dominance as a sport-utility vehicle firm, BMW bought the Rover Group in 1994 but lost about $4 billion before relinquishing the Land Rover trademark to Ford in 2000 (Donnelly et al., 2017). BMW found considerable success with the reintroduction of the British MINI in 2001; another British company, Rolls-Royce, became a component of BMW in 2003 (Donnelly et al., 2017). Representatives of the Quandt family remained to have a considerable interest in the corporation.

Toyota Motors Company

Toyota Metropolis, Japan’s industrial zone east of Nagoya, is home to the primary office. In 2008, it surpassed General Motors to become the world’s biggest automotive maker for the first time. Numerous of over 1,000 branches and affiliate firms are engaged in manufacturing cars, automotive components, and residential and retail vehicles (Toyota Motor, 2022). In 1933, Toyoda Kiichiro established what would become the Toyota Motor Corporation as a branch of the Toyoda Automatic Loom Works, Ltd., afterward renamed Toyota Industries Company, of which it is currently a part (Toyota Motor, 2022). Its first mass-produced automobile, the Model AA sedan, was introduced in 1936. The segmentation was established as the Toyota Motor Company, Ltd. the subsequent year, with Kiichiro as president. Toyota later founded other subsidiary enterprises, namely Toyoda Machine Works, Ltd. (1941) and Toyota Auto Body, Ltd. (1945) (Profiroiu et al., 2020). During World War II, the business discontinued passenger automobile manufacture in favor of truck manufacturing.

Confronted with destroyed facilities and a destabilized market after World War II, the business did not begin consumer automobile production until 1947, with the debut of the Model SA. By the 1950s, Toyota’s vehicle manufacturing plants were fully operational, and the business launched a thorough study of American automakers to regain competitiveness, due to the United States’ perceived technological and economic supremacy. Toyota officials visited the manufacturing plants of firms like Ford Motor Company to examine cutting-edge automobile assembly techniques. They then adopted them in their operations, resulting in a near-instant boost in productivity. Toyota Motor Sales, USA, Inc. was founded in 1957, and in the subsequent year, the business introduced the Toyopet sedan, its first design offered in the USA (Profiroiu et al., 2020). It got terrible reviews due to its exorbitant price and absence of horsepower. The Land Cruiser, a four-wheel-drive utility vehicle introduced in 1958, was a more prosperous model (Profiroiu et al., 2020). The Toyopet was modified for American customers and reintroduced as the Toyota Corona in 1965, becoming the firm’s first significant accomplishment in the USA.

The firm developed rapidly throughout the 1960s and 1970s and started exporting considerable quantities of vehicles to other marketplaces. Toyota purchased Hino Motors, Ltd., a producer of minibusses and big trucks, in 1966; Nippondenso Corporation, Ltd., a designer of electric auto parts; and Daihitsu Motor, Ltd., a developer of automobiles (1967) (Profiroiu et al., 2020). The firm thrived in the American economy, earning a reputation for affordable, fuel-efficient, and dependable vehicles like the Corolla, introduced in the USA in 1968. The corporation adopted its current name in 1982, after the merger of Toyota Motor Sales Group, Ltd and Toyota Motor Company (Profiroiu et al., 2020). Two years later, Toyota joined with General Motors to establish New United Motor Production, Inc., a dual-brand assembly facility in California, where Toyota started US operations.

The firm continued to develop significantly well into the twenty-first century. It invented its premium brand, Lexus (1989), and the world’s first surplus-produced hybrid car, the Prius (1997) (Profiroiu et al., 2020). The business continued to grow into new areas, launching the Scion brand (2003) and introducing the world’s first premium hybrid car, the Lexus RX 400h, in 2003 (Profiroiu et al., 2020). Nevertheless, the organization has since encountered severe financial difficulties, including declining sales due to the 2008 great recession and a global safety recall of more than eight million automobiles in 2010 (Profiroiu et al., 2020). All these eventually forced the entity to stop production and supply numerous of its supermodels temporarily.

Regulatory Frameworks

Environmental Regulations

Environmental protection has generated considerable speculation regarding its impact on the automotive sector. The USA requires automakers to create light-duty cars that utilize less than 4.1 liters of gasoline per 100 kilometers and 3.6 liters of diesel per 100 kilometers (Jing et al., 2020). By 2020, car fuel’s carbon dioxide concentration should be reduced by 10% to enhance fuel quality (Jing et al., 2020). As a result, by 2035, Ford intends to cut scope 1 and 2 pollutants from processes by 76%, based on 2017 pollution, and scope three emissions from all of the firm’s merchandise by 50%, based on 2019 carbon output (Jing et al., 2020). Strict emission rules in significant trade areas such as the EU would compel global manufacturers to develop technology to meet them even if their home markets are not as stringent. Following this legislation, BMW Group specifically emphasizes raw materials deemed to be so-called conflict commodities as part of its sustainability tactic.

Tungsten illustrates this as it is employed in smartphone resonance alarms and light bulb electrodes and drill and grinding bits for commercial gear used in the automobile manufacturing process. Additionally, compared to primary tungsten, this lowers energy usage by 70% and CO2 emissions by more than 60% (Bharadwaj, 2018). On the other side, in Japan, cars less than ten years old are permitted to produce no more than 1% carbon monoxide and 300ppm automobile exhaust (Barrett & Therivel, 2019). Cars that are more than ten years old may generate up to 4.5% combustion products and up to 1200 parts per million of unburned hydrocarbons (Barrett & Therivel, 2019). This law has compelled Toyota Motors to reduce CO2 emissions from their automobiles via increased fuel economy, hybridization, and automation. Thus, the firm’s cars have culminated in a 627,939 metric ton reduction in total CO2 emissions and a 64.8 million gallon reduction in gasoline use in 2021 (Barrett & Therivel, 2019). Therefore, independent environmental legislations imposed by the various nations regulating gas emissions affect the daily operations of Ford, BMW, and Toyota organizations.

Free Trade and International Distribution Networks

Several nations have established policies to incentivize and expand their domestic vehicle manufacturing facilities. As a result, this will be a substantial transformation that will shape logistics services. There has been much discussion in the United States of America over the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) on the car industry (Hernandez-Trillo, 2018). NAFTA has benefited from the global auto sector’s linked structure, allowing manufacturers such as Ford to strengthen their distribution networks and produce more automobiles for the North American economy and export. As a consequence of the increased market, Ford Motors has raised its overall manufacturing, increasing sales.

The EU and Japan approved the Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA), an extensive trade treaty covering goods, offerings, and investments. This contract eliminates tariffs and non-tariff impediments and addresses other trade-related concerns such as procurement processes, legal requirements, competition, and sustainability. The EU-Japan EPA creates new prospects for EU businesses interested in exporting automobiles and components to Japan (Frenkel & Walter, 2017). EU exports of automobiles and components, such as BMW, have been deregulated and now enter Japan duty-free. Due to fewer protectionist measures resulting from this deal, the company has realized increased profitability. Similarly, Toyota Motors benefits from the same deal by being able to freely sell its automobiles and replacement parts throughout the EU, expanding its client base and so boosting earnings.

Corporate Governance

Company law is one of three pillars that comprise the environmental, social, and governance (ESG) sectors. Corporate governance examines how a firm employs rules and procedures to influence business choices, adhere to the law, and fulfill stakeholder duties. Each year, Ford is confronted with about 1,000 legislative proposals in state capitals that have the potential to affect Ford Company’s operations and bottom line (Karpoff, 2021). Its rivals often attempt to amend state legislation to acquire an unfair edge in the sale and service of automobiles; at other times, they propose new technology and innovative solutions. As a result, an unbalanced playing field exists, affecting the institution’s revenues. Ford works directly with state legislators to help design solutions and guarantee that all manufacturers compete on an equal footing.

Internal control is a cross-cutting concern for the BMW Group, including all facets of the business. Transparent disclosure and a company governance strategy oriented toward the needs of shareholders are long-standing BMW Group norms. Based on mutual trust and accountability, a collaboration between the management committee and the steering council has long been the bedrock of BMW Group’s executives. BMW’s corporate approach is founded on the ideals of openness, confidence in others, and accountability for one’s conduct (BMW Group, 2017). The BMW Group thinks that the German Corporate Governance Code’s rules and proposals contribute to the attractiveness of the German banking system, particularly for foreign investors.

Toyota Industries believes that the essential management duty is to win the complete societal trust and sustainably and long-term increase the company’s corporate value. The business intends to accomplish this mission by following its Fundamental Philosophy and diligently performing its social duties (Toyota Motor Corporation, 2021). The primary objective is to contribute to the enrichment of society via commercial operations, and the company feels it is critical to creating positive connections with all parties, including investors, clients, company associates, lenders, community groups, and workers. The business aims to strengthen its internal control to preserve and promote administrative effectiveness, fairness, and openness. Toyota, for instance, has built a structure that enables it to adapt swiftly and dynamically to transformations in the business context and has been trying to strengthen management supervision and guarantee prompt information sharing.


Automobiles are developed, manufactured, produced, advertised, and sold by various enterprises and agencies. Given the scale and significance of the car industry to many local economies, most governments are establishing legislative mechanisms to encourage manufacture, especially export assembly. Corporate governance is the study of how a corporation uses rules and processes to influence business decisions, comply with the law, and meet stakeholder responsibilities. Environmental protection has sparked substantial discussion about the car industry’s influence. Ford expects to reduce its carbon emission due to the enforcement of such strict laws by the USA legislators. BMW Group places a premium on so-called conflict minerals in its sustainability strategy. Tungsten is an excellent example since it is utilized in cellphone vibration alarms, light bulb conductors, and drill and cutting bits for commercial equipment used in the vehicle production process. Toyota Motors has been pushed by Japanese environmental rules to cut CO2 emissions from their cars via better fuel efficiency, electrification, and robotics.


Barrett, B. F., & Therivel, R. (2019). Environmental policy and impact assessment in Japan. Routledge.

Bhagat, S., & Bolton, B. (2019). Corporate governance and firm performance: The sequel. Journal of Corporate Finance, 58, 142-168.

Bharadwaj, A. (2018). Environmental regulations and innovation in advanced automobile technologies: Perspectives from Germany, India, China and Brazil. Springer.

BMW Group (2017). Corporate governance code: Principles of corporate governance. Web.  

BMW Group. (2022). Forbes. Web.

Britannica, T. Editors of Encyclopedia (2021). Ford Motor Company. Encyclopedia Britannica. Web.

Cooper, E., Henderson, C., & Kish, A. (2019). Corporate social responsibility and financial stability: Evidence from the Troubled Asset Relief Program. Managerial Finance, 45(8), 1111-1128.

Donnelly, T., Begley, J., & Collis, C. (2017). The West Midlands automotive industry: The road downhill. Business History, 59(1), 56-74.

Fetzer, T. (2017). Paradoxes of internationalization: British and German trade unions at Ford and General Motors 1967–2000. In Paradoxes of internationalization. Manchester University Press.

Ford, H. (2019). Today and tomorrow: Commemorative edition of Ford’s 1926 classic. Routledge.

Frenkel, M., & Walter, B. (2017). The EU-Japan economic partnership agreement: Relevance, content and policy implications. Intereconomics, 52(6), 358-363.

Hansen, A. (2017). Hanoi on wheels: Emerging automobility in the land of the motorbike. Mobilities, 12(5), 628-645.

Hernandez-Trillo, F. (2018). Mexico, NAFTA, and beyond. The International Trade Journal, 32(1), 5-20. Web.

Jing, R., Yuan, C., Rezaei, H., Qian, J., & Zhang, Z. (2020). Assessments on energy and greenhouse gas emissions of internal combustion engine automobiles and electric automobiles in the USA. Journal of Environmental Sciences, 90, 297-309. Web.

Karpoff, J. M. (2021). On a stakeholder model of corporate governance. Financial Management, 50(2), 321-343.

Lewin, T. (2021). BMW M: 50 years of the ultimate driving machines. Motorbooks International.

Profiroiu, M., Kaneko, H., Vlad, C., Dutescu, A., & Ishida, H. (2020). Toyota Motor Corporation’s culture strategy. Management Comparat International Magazine, 21(4), 458-489. Web.

Saidani, M., Yannou, B., Leroy, Y., & Cluzel, F. (2018). Heavy vehicles on the road towards the circular economy: Analysis and comparison with the automotive industry. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 135, 108-122.

Toyota Motor Corporation (2021). Corporate governance at Toyota Motor Corporation. Web.

Toyota Motor. (2022). Forbes. Web.

Eating Habits And Dietary Acculturation

Food and culture are closely related, as every nation looks first at what is valuable to their body. Food habits are fixed based on environment and values and can be changed in unfamiliar conditions. Acculturation and acceptance of other people’s experiences affect how cultural patterns develop in society. The purpose of this paper is to identify cases of acculturation and to establish the conditions for the formation of initial food habits.

Food, Culture, and Acculturation

Food is a term that reflects both the objects suitable for human consumption that replenish one’s energy and chemical reserves and the object of cultural heritage. The first definition is relatively straightforward and may include beverages and foods people like by taste or other characteristics (Kittler et al., 2016). Food as cultural heritage is ideas about why food is valuable and its role in the community.

Culture encompasses social characteristics – linguistic features, behavior, religion, food habits, and history. Culture refers to the lived experience of a nation or society accumulated throughout its existence (Kittler et al., 2016). A community has nurtured its habits, developed its language, transformed its behavior and religion, and lived its history, seeking to preserve and accumulate as much knowledge as possible.

Acculturation is a process that describes the introduction of one culture into another and the adoption of specific habits or behaviors. Acculturation can also be a positive phenomenon in which original cultural patterns are preserved (Kittler et al., 2016). It occurs when peoples move or visit other countries or areas. Alakaam and Willyard (2020) report that the eating habits of international students at colleges in the US change after relocation. It is found that many students are forced to move to standard American buffet-type diets and large portions. Students concerned about not fully following traditional eating habits (Alakaam & Willyard, 2020). After some time and growing opportunities, they learned to combine their own culture’s American tradition and patterns.

Food Habits of East Asians (Japanese)


East Asians are primarily Buddhists or a mixture of Shinto. These religions refer to simple foods that are natural, enough to bring satiety. Everyday eating habits usually do not include meat products because they are messy but focus more on fish and plant ingredients. Nevertheless, eating etiquette is strictly enforced because food is a tool for communication and bonding, as spelled out in religious beliefs.


Religion has influenced the role food plays in the family. It is common for families to have at least one meal together to strengthen bonds and pray together. East Asians prefer to share meals with loved ones in a foreign environment to show respect and bond. Japanese families’ traditions in the art of serving food allow them to bring relatives together and share the goods.


Among the eating habits of East Asians is the consumption of green tea, which has a positive effect on health. Health in East Asia is presented as a value attainable through nutrition and the social bonds achieved while eating together. Gabriel et al. (2018) suggest that principle characteristics of the Japanese diet have influenced Japanese longevity. The authors identify rationality and understanding food as the primary habit for health.


Although the food of East Asians is simple and usually wholesome, severe illnesses are common among them. In particular, this is blamed on irregular schedules and the prevalence of smoking and alcoholism due to the need to work very long hours per week (Ishida et al., 2020). In addition, the general workaholic atmosphere forces the Japanese to abuse fast carbohydrates, and obesity is common among them. Although the general perception of food is quite aesthetically pleasing, many people do not follow healthy eating habits.


Food and culture are related, and people can adopt food habits from each other. This change translates into a different behavior toward food: a change in portion size and its components. Food habits are influenced by environment: the Japanese are sensitive about food intake, but workloads lead to alcoholism and obesity. The connections between food and culture are dense, and it is impossible to study them in isolation.


Alakaam, A., & Willyard, A. (2020). Eating habits and dietary acculturation effects among international college students in the United States. AIMS Public Health, 7(2), 228–240.

Gabriel, A. S., Ninomiya, K., & Uneyama, H. (2018). The role of the Japanese traditional diet in healthy and sustainable dietary patterns around the world. Nutrients, 10(2), 173.

Ishida, Y., Yoshida, D., Honda, T., Hirakawa, Y., Shibata, M., Sakata, S., Furuta, Y., Oishi, E., Hata, J., Kitazono, T., & Ninomiya, T. (2020). Influence of the accumulation of unhealthy eating habits on obesity in a general Japanese population: The Hisayama study. Nutrients, 12(10).

Kittler, P. G., Sucher, K. P., & Nelms, M. (2016). Food and culture (7th ed.). Cengage.

Impact Of Hegemonic Masculinity On Life Chances In Australia


The concept behind hegemonic masculinity explains how society accepts and helps shape the culturally dominant behavior of men. Not only is it hegemonic to other masculinities, but the idea is a privileged representation and collective leverage that men have over women. The outcome of such models leads to the creation of social structures responsible for gender discrimination and helps define feminism and masculinity conduct patterns. In 1949, Simon de Beauvoir explained the binary sex understanding by implying that man’s superiority over others helped demarcate the gender idea and sex (Enloe, 2017). In his argument, de Beauvoir (1949) stated that no one is born a woman; instead, they become women, a notion that represents the social role of gender (Enloe, 2017). The historical masculinities formation results in the construction of two separate dimensions and gendered power relations that appear fixed, regular, and static. In Australia, hegemonic masculinity dimensions are embedded in power, ensuring that males dominate in the economic and political domains resulting in the need for social change movements.

The Theoretical Perspective of Hegemonic Masculinity

Raewyn Connell developed the notion that hegemonic masculinity is an analytical instrument that helps identify the practices and attitudes men use to perpetuate gender inequality (Connell, 1978). The attitudes and practices involve women’s domination by men and the power some men exercise over others. Over the years, the concept has been subject to debate. In 2005, Connell and Messerschmidt refined it to incorporate a culturally idealized form, a collective and personal project. Further, Connell and Messerschmidt (2005, p. 848) argue that gender is and has always been relational. Masculinity patterns are socially defined in contradistinction from some femininity models, whether imaginary or real.

Most recently, Jewkes and Morrell (2012) conceptualized hegemonic masculinity as a set of values created by powerful men, which function to exclude, include, and organize unequal gender in society. The recent concept ‘combines several features; a masculinity hierarchy, the interplay between men’s identity, interaction, patriarchy, and ideals, and differential access among men to power’ (Jewkes & Morrell, 2012, p. 40). Several masculinities exist and are dynamic, fluid, and hegemonic in every community. Moreover, masculinities are positions that are situationally occupied in such a way that the values one society practices and occupies are different from those in another society.

In the construction of hegemonic masculinity, heterosexuality is a core element. To a lesser or greater extent, hegemonic masculinity is constructed as a gender position where being gay or female has less difference. The consensus on hegemonic masculinity is developed to benefit those who promote it and most of those oppressed by it, mainly women (Yang, 2020). Hegemonic masculinity is a cultural manhood ideal for women, where women’s interests are rewarded with their efforts and attention when replicating the relationship women hold relative to their male counterparts.

Hegemonic Masculinity’s Impact on Life Chances in Australia

In Australia and other societies that have been Westernized, hegemonic masculinity is synonymous with identity and is broadly considered macho, which is aggressive, assertive, and courageous. Further, the identity incorporates being stoic in adversity and invulnerable to challenges and threats (March 2021). Therefore, hegemonic masculinity is perceived with behaviors and attitudes that display strength and courage, which includes the refusal to acknowledge weakness. In Australia and most Western communities, this is best manifested by men holding positions of power in economic and political domains (Elliott, 2019). Moreover, by understanding gender representation in Australia, where men make up less than half of the population, hegemonic masculinity is a normative standard by which men aspire and against which they access their identities.

Masculinity is intertwined with privilege and power despite the relationship being less straightforward or discernible. The argument raised on the reason men in Western societies are invisibly privileged and in power domains is that patriarchy needs serious contemplation in feminist thought (Kachtan, 2019). Despite being less than half the population, hegemonic masculinity has allowed Australian men to posit themselves as axiomatic. They socially develop systems that make them privileged over women, who are more in society. Enloe (2017, p. 22) shows that the crux of masculinity is the design that privileges men over despised masculinities and every femininity form, which makes patriarchy a dynamic web of men-based relationships and ideas. However, through social change movements, such a system is subject to modernization and updates, which take longer to be accomplished.

In Australia, hegemonic masculinity revolves around portraits of strong white men, who are explorers, lifeguards, bushrangers, and convicts linked to settler colonization. In an earlier investigation of hegemonic masculinity in Australia, Donaldson (2003) found the country’s ruling class elite could develop societal systems that made them authoritative. Further, due to their influence in the community, the elites raised their children in formal environments that lacked affection and intimacy to ensure they were hard, strong, stiff, disciplined, and challenging. The elite established class boundaries to distinguish their children from the rest and achieved this through strict policing (Donaldson, 2003). The key hegemonic component in Australian society is attributed to mateship identification, which helps define how Australian men relate to and hold domain positions even though their number is less.

Contextual requirements in economic and political domains have enabled Australian men to have the ability to maneuver in and out of varying masculine attitudes and expressions. Further, Elliott (2019) shows that due to societal structure-enabled abilities, Australian men have autonomy, which gives them the privilege to hold economic and political domains over women. Moreover, men continue to draw from reworked hegemonic masculinity that allows them to maintain liberty and autonomy.

Therefore, hegemonic masculinity impacts Australia’s life chances by setting specific behavior codes employable by men to conform to their masculinity. The desire to prove masculinity and the quest for manhood through power demonstration over women and other men from the central societal mechanism in Australia, enables men to hold economic and political domains (Elliott, 2019). However, Australian men remain oblivious to the gender inequality bred by their masculinity while the hegemonic masculinity challenge remains invisible. Due to this, Whiting et al. (2019) show that social change movements have been inevitable for women and minority men to challenge the gendered power relations in political and economic domains. The demanded social change movements aim to transform the existing social structures and asymmetric power balances (Whiting et al., 2019).

Why Social Change Movements

Historical masculinities formations are linked to two different gendered power relations and dimensions, which go unnoticed. The constituents of hegemonic masculinity, homophobia, racism, and sexism are rooted in the power dimensions that people often fail to see as an issue in Australia (March 2021). Social change movements are critical to challenging hegemonic masculinity alongside the constituents that allow gender discrimination, which mainly focuses on overcoming women’s oppression. The impact of stereotypical male standards in Australian society, responsible for male domination in political and economic domains, has resulted in a flawed system (Kachtan, 2019). Social change movements make it possible to question and, where possible, change the implied stereotypical male standards in society. The actions ensure the roots of the flawed societal norms practiced in homes and the public spheres are challenged (Kachtan, 2019). Further, the movements ensure the established distinctions between men and women, which are categorized into two, and their associated subordinates, making social constructions typically replaced.

Similarly, social change movements are at the center of challenging the rare yet existing hegemonic masculinities that make women and minority men experience a singular vision, which is not easy. The movements enable men, considered weak, and women to subordinate and stabilize the issue of gender dominance, which are harmful practices that make Australian men dominate the economic and political domains (Elliott, 2019). Hegemonic masculinity is responsible for producing specific benchmarks that ensure women and heterosexual men comply with and follow toughness and dominance ethos (March 2021). The adherence to such ethos makes social change movements critical in a male-dominated society.

Social change movements are contributed to by the defining and historic social work feature that focuses on individual well-being and that of society. Therefore, the National Association of Social Workers (NASW) (n.d.) shows that the fundamental requirement of social work is founded on environmental forces that address, contribute to, and create problems among the living, like hegemonic masculinity-related challenges. Social change movements, therefore, work using NASW set core values like social justice, service, integrity, competence, a person’s worth and dignity, and human relationship importance (NASW, n.d.). With such values, it becomes possible for social change movements to challenge hegemonic masculinities in society by cultivating behavior codes that do not restrict people from adhering to gender oppression. The activities ensure that how men perceive their role, relative to masculinity-femininity relationships, is changed or at least challenged.


Hegemonic masculinity is responsible for how society accepts and helps shape the culturally dominant behavior of men. The notion behind it makes the attitudes and practices involve women’s domination by men and the power some men exercise over others. The consensus established on the idea of hegemonic masculinity is developed to benefit those who promote it and most of those oppressed by it, mainly women. Based on this notion, men in Australia and most Western societies are comfortable holding positions of power in economic and political domains. Hegemonic masculinity is established as a normative standard that enables men to aspire against which they access their identities. However, social change movements are essential since they help challenge hegemonic masculinity alongside the constituents that allow gender discrimination. Moreover, as established, the activities contribute to gender dominance stabilization and subordination to minimize, if not eliminate, the harmful practices that make Australian men dominate the economic and political domains. At the center of the movements are the set core values; social justice, service, integrity, competence, a person’s worth and dignity, and human relationship importance.


de Beauvoir, S. (1949). The Second Sex. Paris: Éditions Gallimard, Paris Translation copyright.

Connell, R. (1987). Gender and Power: Society, the Person and Sexual Politics. Palo Alta: University of California Press.

Connell, R. W., and Messerschmidt, J. (2005). “Hegemonic Masculinity: Rethinking the Concept.” Gender & Society 19 (6): 829–859.

Donaldson, M. (2003) ‘Studying Up: The Masculinity of the Hegemonic’, in S. Tomsen and M.

Donaldson (eds) Male Trouble: Looking at Australian Masculinities. Melbourne: Pluto Press Australia.

Elliott, K. (2019). Negotiations between progressive and ‘traditional’ expressions of masculinity among young Australian men. Journal of Sociology, 55(1), 108–123.

Enloe, C. H. (2017). The Big Push: Exposing and Challenging the Persistence of Patriarchy, Oakland, CA: University of California Press.

Jewkes, R., and Morrell, R. (2012). “Sexuality and the Limits of Agency among South African Teenage Women: Theorizing Femininities and Their Connections to HIV Risk Practices.” Social Science & Medicine 74 (11): 1729–1737.

Kachtan D. G. (2019). Challenging hegemonic masculinity by performance of ethnic habitus. Gender Work and Organization 1489–1505. Web.

March E. (2021). Hegemonic masculinity gender and social distance: the mediating role of perceived dangerousness. Journal of Gender Studies 306–316. Web.

National Association of Social Workers & Oxford University Press. (n.d.). Encyclopedia of social work. Web.

Whiting, S., Klimentou, P., and Rogers, I. (2019), “‘We’re Just Normal Dudes’: Hegemonic

Masculinity, Australian Identity, and Parkway Drive”, Hoad, C. (Ed.) Australian Metal Music: Identities, Scenes, and Cultures (Emerald Studies in Metal Music and Culture), Emerald Publishing Limited, Bingley, pp. 55-70. Web.

Yang Y. (2020). What’s hegemonic about hegemonic masculinity? legitimation and beyond. Sociological Theory 318–333. Web.

error: Content is protected !!