One more last working class hero

More documents

Recommendations

Info

clear where I stand), I have no notion that masculinity is ‘pre-given’ in any biological, natural or psychological sense, nor that it can actually be defined in any fixed way. However, this is not how most firefighters see it. Many believe that their masculinity is pre-given and they may currently find it difficult to understand a life without such a word. It may even be that male firefighters (like Calvinists) set out to ‘prove’ their ‘calling’ (see Weber 1971). As an example of why I say this (as some proof of why I believe firefighters’ masculinity is social and not given), this report will suggest that there is a pattern to firefighters’ behaviour. This pattern involves firefighters testing and proving to themselves that they can achieve the ‘false monolith,’ (possibly even their ‘special’ status above ‘other’ men). Firefighters also appear to need to prove this image to their watch and the community they serve. The most common way firefighters prove themselves is by getting-in at a fire: a time they test themselves against their image of a good firefighter. Arguments about social construction become even more persuasive when held against evidence suggesting that firefighters peer group, the watch, use a Foucaultian gaze (and harassment when necessary) to help them and their colleagues achieve their masculinity. Crucial in this process is the way firefighters perform their operational duties, which can involve firefighters working in a dangerous and a risk-laden environment (see Chapter 3). Moreover, the way firefighters prove their masculinity also continues at the station, where working environments are more relaxed and firefighters temporarily live together: a place where the gaze is no less stringent (see Chapter 4). Paradoxically, firefighters’ informal hierarchy also develops as a resistance to what Weber (1971) might call an ‘iron cage’: the formal, bureaucratic and authoritarian hierarchy, which officers would have you believe controls the fire service (see Chapter 5). Firefighters’ resistance may appear as a classic case of revolutionary consciousness to protest against their economic disadvantage (see Giddens 1982: 163-164). However, firefighters’ resistance is probably more to do with the action of a group of workers acting conservatively to defend the way they prove their masculinity against officers who may wish to prevent this: a situation which improves firefighters’ ability to resist their officers, because firefighters believe they are only proving what is given; part of their uniform so to speak: a belief that becomes real in its consequences (see Thomas 1909; Janowitz 1966: 301). However, firefighters’ masculinity and the metaphorical uniform they wear to ‘prove’ it, is similar to the Emperor’s new suit, it is an illusion. 2 1.1.2 Research questions I became interested in the construction of gender during my first degree, which focuses on equality issues. My final dissertation about female firefighters (Baigent 1996) indicates that the majority white male workforce were harassing their female colleagues 2 and I resolved to continue my research at PhD level to see if I could assist the fire service with this ongoing difficulty. Initially I started my doctoral research with two questions in mind. First, how did my 30-year in the fire service influence my gender construction (masculinity) at that time? Second, can a study of firefighters throw any light on the argument that gender labels as masculine/feminine are social applications and not determined by biological/physiological sex (MacKinnon 1979: 154-155)? However, during the course of this research it became clear to me that I might best answer these two questions and support the fire service with its difficulties over equal opportunities, by focusing on how firefighters construct their masculinity. As a result of these thoughts, the two questions were replaced by ‘new’ questions, about four specific areas. These are: Firefighting: Relations at the station: Class: Gender: how do firefighters develop the protocols and skills necessary for firefighting? what does ‘getting-in’ 3 mean to firefighters? why, given the apparent danger involved, do firefighters ‘get-in’ at a fire? how do firefighters organise their social relations at the station? can the dynamic between class, hierarchies and resistance help explain how firefighters construct their masculinity? how do firefighters construct their masculinity and what does this tell us about gender debates? In the event, all these areas are interrelated, but to make some sense of what I have found I provide a chapter for each of the first three. The fourth area, gender construction, is a consideration throughout the report and in particular I produce a reflexive view of firefighters’ actions looking for what sociology calls the unacknowledged conditions and unintended consequences of these actions (see Giddens 1979: 56) 4 . In simple terms, this means I was looking at how people acted and what were the hidden outcomes of these actions. 2 The formal structures of the fire service and the FBU have adopted a generic term of firefighters. This replaces what was the single sex term fireman. When it is necessary for me to differentiate between women firefighters and men firefighters, I shall refer to them as male firefighters and female firefighters. I shall do this to avoid any possibility of supporting the terms firewoman and fireman, which I consider have become political terms that frequently default to the term firemen. The media, in particular, are prone to do this and in so doing not only reduce the visibility of women in the fire service, but provides succour for those misogynist firefighters who still resist the term firefighter. 3 One particular way that I shall use my experiential knowledge will be to use firefighters’ in-house language. When this occurs the text will be placed within quotation marks in the recognised way that metaphors or other colloquial language is used, for example ‘fitting-in’. Some words such as ‘gettingin’, ‘fitting-in’, and ‘The Job’ are so important to firefighters that I shall also italicise them thus ‘getting-in’, ‘fitting-in’ and ‘The Job’. However, once the term has become recognisable, normally after its second use, I shall drop the ‘ … ’. 4 Whilst it was Collinson (1992) that sent me back to reread Giddens (1979), there is some strange sense of deja vu in how Giddens uses a hands-on approach to explain the notions of ‘unintended consequences'. His use of the example of how hydrogen and oxygen combine to produce (an unintended
1.2. METHODOLOGY Before coming to academia, I was a firefighter for over 30 years and as my research is about firefighters’ masculinity, I wanted to develop a methodology that would make best use of my experiences. I also had to consider that my PhD had a political aim, which was to assist the fire service with its difficulties over equal opportunities and therefore should be available to firefighters themselves. Consequently, my methodology had to be flexible enough to enable me to respond to any leads, use my experiential knowledge of the fire service with academic rigour and provide a report firefighters could understand. Chapter 2 will describe in detail the development of my methodology, but for now let it be understood that I collected the bulk of my data using qualitative methods of interview, observation and auto-critique, and some data was collected through quantitative/qualitative questionnaires. Collation and analysis of this data took place using grounded theory (Glaser and Strauss 1967) to provide a considerable ethnography of the fire service, which became especially revealing because the actual analysis took place using Hearn’s (1994) notion of pro-feminist auto-critique 5 . My use of pro-feminist auto-critique allows me to reveal much about the fire service from my own experiences, including some of the previously hidden joint understandings that firefighters use to perpetuate their power 6 (see Chapters 2-6). Section 3 is an example of how I use pro-feminist auto-critique and involves an experiential view of the fire service that my fieldwork influences. This is produced at this time to provide some context for those whose knowledge of the fire service is limited, and to separate it from the remainder of the report, which is fieldwork led and influenced by my experiential knowledge. As a warning, it may appear that the report moves away from debates about gender. However, I am trying to develop a more complex understanding of gender by listening to how firefighters actually explain firefighting and their social arrangements on the station. From this understanding, I hope to show that firefighters’ working arrangements are influential in how firefighters socially construct their identity/masculinity. Chapters 3-5 are the outcome of this practice. In Chapter 6, I shall conclude the whole report in a critique of the social/political construction of gender amongst firefighters and move this discussion to wider debates about gender. However, gender is about power and any understanding of how firefighters construct their masculinity first needs a prior explanation of some important structures/traditions in the fire service, how the fire service works and some important features concerning firefighting 7 . This explanation follows and I recognise right from the onset that this explanation is a subjective view. This is done with academic rigour, but I know that my surroundings and knowledge influence the way I think, therefore for me so called objectivity (the ability to think impartially) is not a reality. 1.3. THE FIRE SERVICE 1.3.1. History The Great Fire of London (1666) was the dynamic for establishing the fire service, but the fire-insurance brigades that sprung up after the fire was part of the wealth creation process and not a humanitarian response 8 . In origin each brigade had a distinctive uniform, mainly as an advertisement for their insurance company (see Appendix 2) and firefighters only fought fires in the property insured by their company—they had no life saving role. As cities expanded, fire-insurance companies (and brigades) increased. In London, the first economic rationalisations occurred in the fire service (1827) as fire-insurance companies started to amalgamate their brigades to eventually pool their resources in forming the ‘General Fire Engine Establishment’ (1833). In 1866, the responsibility for providing a fire service in London passed to local government who formed the London Fire Engine Establishment. This forerunner of the London Fire Brigade (LFB), under the command of Massey Shaw, experienced immediate financial restrictions. The budget was less than Shaw wanted 9 : a problem that still exists today (see Chapter 5). Large cities followed London’s lead, but parish arrangements remained haphazard. Not until the country prepared for war (1938), did the government require local authorities to organise a fire service. The fire service was nationalised 3 consequence) water provides exactly the same sort of grounding to knowledge as I hope to provide for firefighters. It is almost ironic that firefighters’ main medium for firefighting is water; in fact the whole scenario I explain here is a further example of an unintended consequence. 5 I shall return to Hearn’s (1994) notion of pro-feminist auto-critique in Chapter 2. However, it needs to be understood that pro-feminism is a politically charged approach to sociology that attempts to enlighten men about how their behaviour damages society, women and themselves. 6 During my education as a working class man, I learnt that there were understandings and forms of behaviour that men support and test themselves against, what I will later generalise as ‘masculine standards’. The fact that these standards had to be achieved, rather than that they were natural, is something that men do not publicise, nor particularly discuss, but nonetheless the groups they form do police these standards. As an example when I joined the fire service I was expected to conform to the way the experienced firefighters operated (what I later explain as conforming to firefighters’ hierarchy), this was in effect a very similar situation to that I had accepted as a working class boy, but these standards were rarely, if ever, discussed, they were just policed. Keeping to these standards and yet not publicising them is what Goffman (1959: 216) identifies as dramaturgical loyalty. 7 Later in this chapter and in Chapter 2 I will explain that this thesis will not be another ritual discovery of harassment in the fire service that produces simple to find examples of how firefighters harass women (see Howell 1994; Baigent 1996; Lee 1996; Richards 1996; Archer 1998; HMI 1999). 8 Segars (1989) argues that the financial revolution saw the provision of fire-insurance companies as a response to a need by merchants to protect their properties from fire (particularly in the aftermath of the Great Fire of London). Having provided the insurance, it then made economic sense for the fireinsurance companies to protect the risk by establishing their own individual fire brigades. 9 The insurance companies contributed 30% of the cost, which represents a saving to them of about 50%, but this did not prevent them complaining about having to contribute towards the fire service’s ‘new’ role of saving life from fire (see Segars 1989).
Page 1: ONE MORE LAST WORKING CLASS HERO: A
Page 4 and 5: ii ONE MORE LAST WORKING CLASS HERO
Page 6 and 7: Acknowledgements. ii Firefighters a
Page 9: 1 1. CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION These
Page 13 and 14: who increasingly prioritise other a
Page 15 and 16: image they set of themselves. Firef
Page 17 and 18: skilled firefighters should also re
Page 19 and 20: 1.4.6. Cutting the fire service In
Page 21 and 22: firefighters’ priorities mostly f
Page 23 and 24: 1.8.1. Conflict Occasionally the un
Page 25 and 26: Jefferson 1990; Fielding 1991 1999;
Page 27 and 28: They have struggled for a long time
Page 29 and 30: o equal opportunities; o deskilling
Page 31 and 32: or being forced to accept men’s s
Page 33 and 34: collect. Then I will make visible s
Page 35 and 36: 2.3.3. Marginal natives: auto-anthr
Page 37 and 38: particular not to challenge sexism
Page 39 and 40: other firefighters policing their m
Page 41 and 42: 33 • conduct three focus groups i
Page 43 and 44: verified my more formal data collec
Page 45 and 46: 37 3. CHAPTER THREE: FIREFIGHTING:
Page 47 and 48: 39 • the need to ‘fit-in’ and
Page 49 and 50: Initial-training teaches firefighte
Page 51 and 52: could not overcome the heat and rea
Page 53 and 54: 3.3. WHAT DOES ‘GETTING-IN’ MEA
Page 55 and 56: 47 Cliff: It’s got to be your pri
Page 57 and 58: Colin: We couldn't see the fire and
Page 59 and 60: Roger: You want to go out and do st
Page 61 and 62:
Alf: We are going to get two guys o
Page 63 and 64:
55 DB: Dominic: What did the watch
Page 65 and 66:
ecognise that some of those standar
Page 67 and 68:
59 4. CHAPTER FOUR RELATIONS AT THE
Page 69 and 70:
Alf has a difficulty relating his p
Page 71 and 72:
make the officer’s life a misery
Page 73 and 74:
At this point in the data collectio
Page 75 and 76:
Terri’s watch played a waiting ga
Page 77 and 78:
males. In common with other masculi
Page 79 and 80:
4.5. OFFICERS 71 4.5.1. Leaving the
Page 81 and 82:
Now with nine categories that might
Page 83 and 84:
1. Accepters: Ken, Roger and Ray ac
Page 85 and 86:
77 5. CHAPTER FIVE THE GAP BETWEEN
Page 87 and 88:
1999: 158-161). Third, if officers
Page 89 and 90:
5.2.5. Respect From Chapter 3 came
Page 91 and 92:
Pete: Norman: Pete: You hope that t
Page 93 and 94:
Captains of industry consistently p
Page 95 and 96:
Many leaders often emerge who are n
Page 97 and 98:
There are strict rules that lay dow
Page 99 and 100:
Lionel: The employers recognise tha
Page 101 and 102:
93 Colin: Firemen they are always s
Page 103 and 104:
However, my fieldwork suggests that
Page 105 and 106:
to control the workplace in such a
Page 107 and 108:
Gender: how do firefighters constru
Page 109 and 110:
Spoiling The Job: a chance to ‘pr
Page 111 and 112:
firefighters’, such as Ricky, wer
Page 113 and 114:
firefighters a formal education is
Page 115 and 116:
the buildings as they go in. These
Page 117 and 118:
question is (if it is possible to a
Page 119 and 120:
6.7. THOUGHTS ABOUT FURTHER RESEARC
Page 121 and 122:
REFERENCES Abu-Lughod, L. (1991)
Page 123 and 124:
Darlington, R. (1998) ‘Workplace
Page 125 and 126:
Henwood, K. L. and Pidgeon, N. F. (
Page 127 and 128:
National Fire Data Center (2000) ht
Page 129 and 130:
Willis-Lee, R. (1993a) ‘Dr, Willi
Page 131 and 132:
123 1999-2000 Establish Actual Male
Page 133 and 134:
125 NUMBER OF WHOLETIME STAFF IN PO
Page 135 and 136:
APPENDIX THREE: RISK ATTENDENCES 12
Page 137:
129 APPENDIX FIVE: STATISTICS FOR N
Page 140 and 141:
132 LFB percentile stations: for al
Page 142 and 143:
134 FA Malicious 1999/00 FA Malicio
Page 144 and 145:
136 E31 FOREST HILL 7 . . . . . 7 E
Page 146 and 147:
138 APPENDIX SEVEN: ARTISTIC IMPRES
Page 148 and 149:
Gay News, November 1998. 140
show all

One more last working class hero

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?