Assistant Professor of Sociology Chris Vidmar’s recent paper, “Hybrid Hegemonic Masculinities: Interrogating Men’s Intervention Programming,” has published in in Socius—the open-access journal of the American Sociological Association. Photo by Angela Foster.
Changing behavior is hard. Changing identity—especially the deeply ingrained ideas of what it means to “be a man”—is even harder.
Dr. Chris Vidmar, assistant professor of sociology at the University of Tennessee at Chattanooga, explored that challenge in a recent ethnographic study of court-mandated intervention programs for abusive and controlling men.
Vidmar, who joined the UTC faculty at the start of this academic year, has published a new paper in Socius—the open-access journal of the American Sociological Association.
The study, titled “Hybrid Hegemonic Masculinities: Interrogating Men’s Intervention Programming,” is an ethnographic evaluation of a batterer intervention program (BIP)—a course for men who have engaged in domestic or interpersonal violence. Some men are state-sanctioned to courses like this as an alternative to incarceration, while others attend voluntarily.
Vidmar said that these programs are widespread—thousands exist across the U.S. and globally—but their success rates are inconsistent.
Vidmar’s research explores one possible reason rooted in sociological theory: there are many different ways of being a man—and programs often don’t account for this variation in their design.
“All of these programs address manhood in some way, explicitly or implicitly,” Vidmar explained, “but what we often fail to consider is that there are different ways to be a man shaped by culture, community and lived experience.
“Treating all men as if they come into these programs with the same background or beliefs is part of the problem.”
Vidmar embedded into a community-based BIP, observing interactions over time and capturing the nuances of how men reacted to the curriculum and each other. While some participants made genuine transformations, others disengaged or resisted the material altogether, and some seemed to change—but their abuse continued.
The program, Vidmar said, tried to correct abuse by promoting a liberal, pro-feminist model of masculinity—one “rooted in emotional openness, empathy and respect.” However, many men in the program already held liberal ideologies.
“There’s an assumption in a lot of these programs that abuse stems from patriarchal values—beliefs that men should dominate and control,” Vidmar said. “That’s true for some. But many of the men I studied didn’t hold those views. Their harmful behaviors came more from being socialized into narrow, high-pressure roles—being the provider, never showing weakness, always being in control.”
For men who supported equal rights for women, the assertion that their behaviors stemmed from patriarchal beliefs “felt foreign and even judgmental.” This was especially true for men from marginalized communities who lacked the resources to accomplish masculine ideals.
Vidmar said the findings also challenge a commonly held belief in intervention circles: that emotional expression is a universal antidote to abusive behavior.
In the study, some of the most emotionally demonstrative men—those who wept openly during sessions—still struggled to change their actions.
“Expressing emotion is important, but it’s not a magic fix,” Vidmar said. “Without also challenging the deeper self-harming aspects of manhood—like stoicism, extreme self-reliance and the idea that you’re only worthy if you’re providing—those emotions won’t necessarily lead to behavioral change.”
Another key finding from the research is that many of these programs are deeply underfunded. Even when facilitators know better approaches exist, they often lack the resources to implement them.
“These programs are frequently run on shoestring budgets,” Vidmar said. “It’s hard to tailor interventions when you don’t have the staff, time or training to do so.”
Vidmar hopes the study will prompt program designers, policymakers and social workers to rethink the structure of BIPs. One-size-fits-all approaches are less effective, especially for men whose identities intersect with poverty, race, trauma or other marginalizations.
“The solution isn’t just telling men to be better fathers or more sensitive partners,” Vidmar said. “That advice might land with some, but for others, the pressure of those roles is part of what’s driving their behavior in the first place.”
Ultimately, Vidmar’s research calls for a more flexible, culturally responsive way of understanding masculinity—one that doesn’t assume uniformity but instead recognizes the diversity of men’s experiences.
“This article grapples with deep theoretical debates in masculinity studies,” Vidmar said. “I tried to reconcile some of those complexities and synthesize emerging ideas around hybrid masculinities and caring masculinities.
“These aren’t just academic debates. They matter for real people trying to do real healing.”
While the research was based on one program, the implications are global. Vidmar noted that one of the article’s peer reviewers does similar work in South Africa.
The universal thread? Understanding a person’s sense of self and their cultural narrative of what it means to be a man and using that as a foundation for change.
At UTC, Vidmar has found a place to continue growing this line of inquiry. A new project underway explores how social media algorithms influence public understanding of gender. Another upcoming study will examine how artificial intelligence platforms reinforce dominant narratives around gender roles.
“We’re increasingly outsourcing our thinking to AI,” Vidmar said. “When you ask AI how to talk to your crush or what to wear to a job interview, the answers it gives you are based on aggregated patterns of what’s been said before—usually centrist, traditional and often gendered. That has consequences.”
Even in the classroom, Vidmar’s work is shaping conversations. Though careful not to overwhelm students with graphic content, Vidmar introduces concepts from the research to illustrate how sociological thinking applies to real-life problems.
“One of the hardest things to teach is that understanding someone’s behavior doesn’t mean excusing it,” Vidmar said. “You can still hold people accountable while considering the structures and pressures that led them to act a certain way. That kind of empathy and nuance is what I try to bring into every class.”
While publishing in an ASA journal is a career milestone, Vidmar said that the impact goes far beyond an academic line on a CV.
“It’s a little surreal,” Vidmar said, “but I’ve had people reach out to tell me the article resonated. That’s the goal: doing work that’s meaningful, that helps programs improve and helps people change.”
Learn more
“There’s an assumption in a lot of these programs that abuse stems from patriarchal values—beliefs that men should dominate and control,” Dr. Chris Vidmar said. “That’s true for some. But many of the men I studied didn’t hold those views.”
