Emotion, Space and Society 1 (2008) 127–134

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Emotion, Space and Society

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/emospa

Men, masculinities and firefighting: Occupational identity, shop-floor culture and

organisational change
Thomas Thurnell-Read a, *, Andrew Parker b, **
a
Department of Sociology, University of Warwick, Coventry CV4 7AL, UK
b
Faculty of Sport, Health and Social Care, University of Gloucestershire, Gloucester GL2 9HW, UK

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: As an occupation, firefighting is replete with images of maleness operating around a series of highly
Received 20 August 2008 masculinised codes and values most notably comprising: risk/danger, heroism, fearlessness/courage,
Received in revised form physicality, and bodily strength. This qualitative study of the UK Fire Service seeks to uncover the ways in
10 March 2009
which these masculine codes and values were evident amidst the daily working lives of a group of full-
Accepted 15 March 2009
time, male firefighters. Placing respondent views at the centre of the research, findings suggest that
occupational identities were based primarily upon notions of emotional strength, physical and technical
Keywords:
competence and collective understandings of risk and responsibility. A commitment to group solidarity
Firefighting
Masculinities was also central to the masculine identities of respondents, with colleagues in administrative and
Heroism managerial positions being distanced on account of their non-manual occupational roles.
Risk/danger Ó 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Emotional labour

1. Introduction to analyse the way in which a variety of masculinities emerged in

Like a host of male dominated occupations, the UK Fire Service
has traditionally functioned along heavily gendered lines; its
organisational structures, workplace practices and daily routines
are steeped in images of maleness. Throughout popular culture the
iconic image of the male firefighter is one of quintessential bravery
incorporating notions of heroism, danger and courage (Baigent,
2001; Childs et al., 2004; Tracy and Scott, 2006). Such perceptions
have arguably become more powerful in the wake of the September
2001 terrorist attacks in the US and related events in the UK (see
Boon, 2005; Yarnal et al., 2004).1 Set against this contextual back-
drop, how, we might ask, do fire service personnel construct their
identities within this highly masculinised occupational setting?
Moreover, to what extent do such masculine values and ideals
manifest themselves amidst the everyday activities of workplace
interaction? This small-scale qualitative study of the members of
one UK Fire Service ‘watch’2 seeks to address these issues in order
and through the everyday lives of respondents. Firefighting
provides fertile ground for the study of gendered identities both
because of the popular cultural imagery within which it is situated
and because of the relative scarcity of sociological research into its
occupational locales. A common theme within those studies which
do exist is the production of clearly demarcated occupational
identities where a distinctly masculine aura pervades (see for
example, Baigent, 2001; Desmond, 2006, 2007).
Focusing on the key aspects of masculine construction within
the lives of 16 full-time, male firefighters at one UK fire station, this
paper portrays how a specific set of norms, standards and expec-
tations influenced and informed individual occupational identi-
ties.3 Two main theoretical concepts underpin the overall narrative.
First, Connell’s (1987: 2005) notion of hegemonic masculinity is
used to frame and contextualise discussion surrounding the
construction of divergent respondent masculinities. Second,
working class shop-floor culture is deployed as a conceptual theme

* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ44 (0) 24 765 523 147; fax: þ44 (0) 24 765 523
497.
** Corresponding author. Tel.: þ44 (0) 1242 715 387; fax: þ44 (0) 1242 715 222.
E-mail addresses: t.p.thurnell-read@warwick.ac.uk (T. Thurnell-Read), aparker@
glos.ac.uk (A. Parker).
1
For a critique of the heroic masculinisation of 9/11 see Dowler (2002).
2
‘Watch’ is a commonly used term in the UK Fire Sevice denoting a particular
group of firefighters who work together as a unit on a cyclical, shift-work basis.
3
Whilst we focus specifically on the occupational experiences of male fire-
fighters it is worth noting that, within the UK at least, firefighting is an occupation
open to both males and females with the first full-time female firefighter being
recruited to the London Fire Brigade in 1982. Subsequent research has highlighted
the heavily gendered nature of recruitment patterns since that time (see Baigent,
2001). In 1999 the then Home Secretary Jack Straw advocated that by 2009 15% of
UK firefighters should be women (see Straw, 1999). The Audit Commission (2008)
has more recently reported that the attainment of such a target is unlikely.

1755-4586/$ – see front matter Ó 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.emospa.2009.03.001
128 T. Thurnell-Read, A. Parker / Emotion, Space and Society 1 (2008) 127–134
against which this range of masculinities and their specific
emotional requirements can be located (see Clarke, 1979; Collinson,
1988, 1992; Willis, 1977). What transpires is a theoretically
informed analysis within which respondents are categorised
according to their workplace behaviours, their commitment to
occupational duties, and the masculine traits which they choose to
exhibit. In turn, the paper highlights the numerous spaces where
the emotional aspects of firefighting become evident and are made
explicit.
2. Men, masculinity and work
Notwithstanding the wider changes that have taken place in more
recent years with regard to the reconfiguration of gender relations in
work and employment in line with new manufacturing processes,
fluctuating labour markets, and the expansion of the service sector
industries (Walby, 1997), it is well established within sociological
literature that images of maleness have historically dominated the
structures, practices and routines of working class occupational
settings (Acker, 1990; Cross and Bagilhole, 2002; McDowell, 1998;
Whitehead, 2002). Likewise, ideals surrounding notions of physi-
cality, danger, aggression and competence have often been cited as
prime factors in the construction of working class, masculine occu-
pational identity. For Morgan (1992), the values and beliefs under-
pinning such ideals remain central to the way in which modern-day
work processes are organised. In his study of nightclub security staff,
for example, Monaghan (2002: 334, 337), clearly identifies the way in
which physicality, strength and violence are seen as: ‘‘. attributes
associated with traditional working class masculinities’’. Monaghan
also asserts that ‘bodily capital,’ that is, the possession of a strong and
competent body, is ‘‘. intimately related to gendered, working class
constructions of occupational competency.’’ From this, and a plethora
of earlier research (see for example Cockburn, 1983; Collinson, 1992),
we are reminded that the ability to meet the physical challenges of
particular types of work is central to the construction of certain
occupational identities.
Technical competency too can act as a measure of masculine
prowess at work. In his study of the US Navy, Barrett (2001) utilises
Connell’s (1987, 2005) conceptualisation of the hierarchical framing
of masculine identities in order to analyse three categories of
military personnel whose distinct occupational duties determined
informal peer group understandings of masculine status. In terms
of the gender order evident within this particular research setting,
Barrett (2001: 84–85) argues that Naval Aviators (jet fighter pilots)
were regarded as epitomising masculine ideals in their represen-
tation of ‘‘. aggressiveness, technical mastery of complex
machinery, courage, and autonomy .’’ and, in so doing, held sway
in terms of the informal occupational hierarchy in place. Subordi-
nate to aviators were Surface Warfare Officers (those operating
surface ships such as destroyers and aircraft carriers). These men
secured their position in the masculine hierarchy largely as
a consequence of the harsh living and working conditions which
they often endured and the significant levels of technical compe-
tence which they possessed, the central hallmark of which was the
ability to demonstrate a disciplined and calm rationality under
pressure. Against such powerful masculine norms, it is perhaps not
surprising that Supply Officers (non-operational support
personnel) were afforded least status in terms of occupational
identity. With fewer opportunities to ally themselves to the hege-
monic ideals so revered in military contexts, (and despite attempts
to establish their own forms of competence, indispensability and
status), these men were located in a somewhat lowly, feminised
role as a consequence of their purely administrative function.
Like Barrett (2001), Fitzpatrick (1980) argues that occupational
understandings of masculine identity may be refined and
developed when placed within the context of ‘dangerous work’. In
his study of underground mining in the US, Fitzpatrick (1980: 132)
highlights danger as related ‘‘. to conceptions of the masculine
role and associated norms which require the management of fear’’.
As in the work of Barrett (2001), the importance of psychological
(as much as physical) strength in the face of dangerous circum-
stance can be seen here as integral to the construction of workplace
competency.
Perhaps not surprisingly, just as physical and psychological
strength have traditionally been seen as key constituents of
masculine occupational identity, the perceived possession of more
‘feminine’ (or simply ‘non-masculine’) behaviours has lead to
a marginalisation of those concerned (Whitehead, 2002). As Miller
et al. (2003: 360) observe: ‘‘. any suggestion of traditionally
‘feminine’ traits, such as gentleness or sensitivity, encourages
colleagues to brand men ‘sissies’ or ‘fagots’. Such inferences are not
uncommon in male dominated settings. That said, there is evidence
to suggest that, in recent years, a feminisation of working practice
has come to be seen in a more positive light in some occupational
spheres’’ (see Adkins, 2001; Haywood and Mac an Ghaill, 2003;
McDowell, 1998).
3. Masculinity, firefighting and emotional labour
How then might existing research findings allow us to make
sense of the construction of masculine identity in the modern-day
UK Fire Service? Certainly, notions of physicality, strength, risk/
danger and competence are evident amidst the heavily gendered
ideals which shape the occupational expectations of male fire-
fighters at the public level. Representing the epitome of heroism,
rationality and safety, firefighting has, at its very core, a series of
popular cultural beliefs and values which draw heavily upon key
facets of hegemonic masculinity (Baigent, 2001; Cooper, 1995; Hall
et al., 2007).4 Studies of the occupational conditions of fire service
personnel both in the UK and elsewhere have borne out this
presumption. Yarnal et al. (2004) for example, allude to the
connection between firefighting and military practice, emphasising
notions of heroism, bravery, valour and morality, alongside a more
general commitment to community welfare.5 Desmond (2006,
2007), too has identified the masculine occupational terrain of rural
‘wildland’ firefighters as that which demonstrates elements of
extreme risk and danger. In a similar vein, Tracy and Scott (2006: 18)
articulate the powerful nature of such hegemonic ideals which, they
note, appear to over-ride the socially and physically ‘undesirable’
aspects of firefighting (i.e. ‘dirty work’ often carried out in difficult
conditions); this acting as some kind of protection mechanism
against occupational derogation at a more public level. The prestige
(social, moral, sexual) associated with firefighting, they argue, ‘‘. is
more iconic . than realistic, reified in larger macro discourses more
than in everyday micro practices’’; a scenario which, they suggest,
serves to shield firefighters from ‘‘tainted characterisations of their
work.’’
What such findings reveal is something of a contradiction
between the way in which firefighting as a job is conceptualised by
those outside, as opposed to those inside, of its everyday routines.
Moreover, recent research has also uncovered what might be
regarded as equally contradictory evidence in relation to the
4
As Hall et al. (2007) note, such beliefs and values can be located within the
context of what Whitehead (2002: 122) has described as the ‘heroic male project’;
the imagery surrounding the publicly assertive, self-disciplined, male who exhibits
a strong sense of militarism, conquest and physical endurance.
5
For more on the specific connection between the fire service and military
contexts, see Baigent (2001).
 T. Thurnell-Read, A. Parker / Emotion, Space and Society 1 (2008) 127–134
emotional make-up of firefighters. In their investigations into the
ways in which traditional definitions of masculinity might be
challenged within the lives of volunteer firefighters in the US,
Yarnal et al. (2004), outline how emotional labour featured as a key
constituent of their respondents’ lives, noting the wide range of
emotions which firefighters might experience and exhibit during
the course of their duties. Two issues are of particular interest to
these authors. The first is the emotional burden which public
perceptions of heroism and masculinity might bring to bear upon
firefighters. Relevant here are the social norms which have histor-
ically curtailed the public expression of male emotion. Given that
traditionally such expression has been regarded as a sign of femi-
ninity, Yarnal et al. (2004: 689) argue that any such ‘‘. display of
emotions by male firefighters would show a crack in the armour of
masculinity that would be out of place in a moral landscape that
precludes expression of masculine weakness’’. Second, and relat-
edly, is the emotional work involved in the formation of intimate
attachments with colleagues in the private/domestic sphere of the
firehouse (or fire station). This setting, the authors state, is one
where male firefighters can escape the pressures of public heroism
and concentrate instead on their ‘‘emotional needs and well being
as men’’ nurturing camaraderie, friendship, and solidarity. Thus, the
privacy of the firehouse, they argue:
. provides not only a site for expression of emotions that might
be unacceptable in the outside world but also a place for engaging
in practices that strengthen male bonding and friendships. In this
space men feel they can counter the burden and rigidity of
heroism, receive and give comfort and solace to each other, and
experience a deep sense of belonging that transcends their
outward constructions of masculinity.
Yarnal et al. (2004: 696, original emphasis).
Similarly, Scott and Myers (2005), in their investigations into
emotional management by firefighters, and, more specifically, the
socialisation of new workers into the ‘emotional rules’ of the fire
service, have argued that one of the central challenges faced by their
respondents was to prevent strong negative sentiments from
encroaching upon their work. As a safeguard against potential losses
of concentration and the demonstration of frustration or negativity
to members of the public during exposure to traumatic events and
circumstances, respondents spoke of compartmentalising or ‘buff-
ering’ their emotions thereby exerting an element of psychological
control over both themselves and those around them, and main-
taining a sense of rationality during the performance of their duties:
Firefighters acknowledged a range of negative emotions such as
fear, disgust and stress that could potentially interfere with their
abilities to administer medical care or fight fires. If they allowed
themselves to feel these natural human emotions, they would
not be capable of focusing on their job responsibilities . In
another sense, firefighters need to manage their own emotions
on scene in order to avoid exposing their frustrations to clients
and other members of the community. Rather than controlling
one’s emotions to focus on the task, firefighters need to manage
negative emotions in a manner that prevents them from being
exposed to the client, preventing the escalation of negative
client emotions.
Scott and Myers (2005: 73–74).
Collectively what these findings offer is further insight into the
complexities of identity construction for male firefighters, whilst, at
the same time, providing a basis upon which hegemonic masculine
norms might be questioned. Following Gramsci (1971), Connell’s
(1987, 2005) notion of hegemonic masculinity infers a situation
whereby a distinct cultural grouping occupies a dominant (albeit
129
continually contested) position within social relations. This concept,
Connell argues, is central to our understanding of the social
construction of gender relations in that it accounts for historical
changes and contemporary challenges to the dominant discourse(s)
that are evident within society at any one time. Through the uti-
lisation of this concept, it is possible to consider how cultural norms
and expectations and common-sense assumptions surrounding
gender relations emerge as definitive expressions of everyday situ-
ations. As we have already seen, the definitive expressions of
normality surrounding firefighters are those concerning a particular
kind of male figure whose iconic representation has become
synonymous with hegemonic masculine ideals.6
4. Context and method
The research discussed here was carried out between December
2003 and April 2004 at Middleton Fire Station, one of 19 stations
comprising the Fire and Rescue Service facilities of Caldwell County,
in the English Midlands.7 Opened in July 1962, Middleton is a full-
time fire station which also houses the county’s fire service head-
quarters. In total Caldwell County Fire Service employs 550 staff.
Around 60 of these are stationed at Middleton, a town of approx
45,000 people comprising a relatively well established retail and
commercial hub with suburbs mainly to the north and to the south
and a number of peripheral towns stretching into the surrounding
countryside. The station is located at the corner of a busy intersec-
tion in the centre of the town and comprises a six-bay garage and
a courtyard used for ‘drilling’ (exercising) and training as well as for
staff and visitor parking. Adjacent to the garage is the station control
centre, and the station manager’s office. The accommodation above
the garage bays houses a large common room with a kitchen,
training room (with multi-media facilities), TV lounge, changing
rooms with locker areas, and dormitory sleeping areas for night shift
workers. Elsewhere on the ground floor of the building are further
training rooms, a gymnasium and equipment servicing and storage
spaces. The attached headquarters primarily comprises office space.
As is the case with other full-time UK fire stations, the Mid-
dleton firefighters were divided into four ‘watches’ (or groups of
shift workers) each comprising around 16 personnel. Watches are
categorised by colour: Red, White, Blue and Green, each operating
on a rolling rota of duty to provide continuous emergency cover.
This rota equates to a standard shift pattern (or ‘tour’) of: two
9-hour day shifts (0900–1800), followed by two 15-hour night
shifts (1800–0900) which, in turn, is followed by 4 days of rest. It
was felt that focusing all observations on the activities of one single
watch would provide a more in-depth account of the everyday
occupational lives of respondents. Accordingly access was granted
to Green Watch by the Middleton Station Manager and research
visits took place so as to coincide with their duty rota.
Throughout the study, the primary source of data collection was
via observation, a record of which was made by the taking of
detailed fieldnotes both within the research setting and as soon as
possible following fieldwork visits. Observations were primarily
conducted within the station yard, the fire truck bays, and the
station training room, staffroom and kitchen. Following the initial
research visit, access to fire trucks was granted allowing research to
be conducted with firefighters ‘on call.’ However, it was during
‘downtime’ at the station, between calls and the fulfilment of
formal work tasks, where conversations with members of the
watch primarily took place. So in-depth were the some of these
6
For a more recent and thorough critique of hegemonic masculinity, see Connell
and Messerschmidt (2005).
7
Pseudonyms have been used throughout this paper.
130 T. Thurnell-Read, A. Parker / Emotion, Space and Society 1 (2008) 127–134
conversations that at times they effectively comprised informal
interviews. Indeed, in some instances it was possible to take notes
during these interactions, achieving near verbatim records of dia-
logue. During informal discussion distinctions were often drawn by
firefighters between their own skilled-manual competence and the
academic and intellectual basis of the research. To this end,
respondents often went to great lengths to empahise the
complexity and intensity of their work especially in relation to the
occupational processes which they were required to master and
the levels of danger they were expected to endure. Following each
fieldwork visit all recorded notes were transferred to electronic
files at which point emerging themes and issues were identified.
These subsequently informed future observations. A manual
method of data coding and analysis was adopted, whereby a series
of themes were identified as being central to the working lives of
respondents. The theorisation of emotion was not part of the
original research design yet emotional management emerged as an
strong underlying feature of respondent accounts. Accompanying
this were a series of more specific themes comprising: ‘occupa-
tional competence,’ ‘workplace humour’, ‘mutual responsibility’,
‘group solidarity’ and ‘organisational change’ all of which are
addressed, in turn, below.
5. Masculinity, firefighting and occupational competence
As we have seen during the previous discussion, competence
often features as a constituent of masculine identity within male
oriented occupations. Competence, be it technical, emotional or
physical, is an indicator of masculine prowess, a measure of
personal worth; a behavioural yardstick by which one’s individual
value is examined and, perhaps more importantly, by which one’s
contribution to the collective cause might be assessed. Such
powerful norms and expectations were certainly evident amongst
the members of Green Watch at Middleton fire station, where, from
the outset, it was apparent that firefighters took pride in their levels
of skill as professionals and their value, both to each other and to
the wider community. To this end, a recurrent theme which
emerged throughout the research was the way in which fire-
fighters’ work was seen as inherently valuable in terms of its
‘protective’ ethos and how, as competent professionals, respon-
dents derived a sense of self-worth from their occupational posi-
tion. In particular, these issues were made manifest in line with
notions of physical competence, technical proficiency and reci-
procity between watch members. For example, the ability to meet
the physical demands of service was implicit to the identity of
Green Watch members. This was apparent during the initial
research visit when, in describing the layout of the station at
Middleton, Rich, a firefighter of 13 years, stressed the importance of
physical fitness and conditioning to everyday work:
Rich: Down there we’ve got a gym. We all stay in shape and put
the time in to keep up with what’s needed from us. When you’re
going into a building in full BA [breathing apparatus] you can’t
be complaining of the weight [of the equipment].
Previous research into the UK Fire Service has suggested that, in
terms of the masculine values attached to specific occupational
practices, the use of breathing apparatus by firefighters has, in itself,
been something of a contested issue (see Baigent, 2001).8 That said,
8
Baigent (2001: 7) has argued that, prior to the amendment of UK Health and
Safety legislation in the 1970s, the non-use of breathing apparatus by fire service
personnel (and the subsequent practice of ‘smoke-eating’), was regarded histori-
cally as a hallmark of respect amongst peers, the use of such equipment being ‘‘.
frowned on as sissy’’.
it was apparent that, alongside the importance of physical profi-
ciency, a technical mastery of the extensive equipment used in
operations was key to a firefighters sense of self-worth and his value
to the team. This was apparent when Rich outlined the full equip-
ment inventory carried by each of the two main fire trucks:
Rich: We carry equipment for all sorts of call-outs and you need
to know how to use the lot. It’s not just for fires. We do RTA’s
[road traffic accidents], chemical clean ups, flooding . all sorts.
It all stays on the truck as you don’t know what job you’ll get
called to next and when you get there you need to have the right
gear and know how to use it.
The above incident exemplifies the value placed on a fire-
fighter’s training, knowledge and ability to use a range of tech-
nical equipment proficiently in the course of his/her work. Like
physical ability, technical application and ‘know how’ is con-
structed as part of the identity of a competent worker (see also
Hall et al., 2007). This was further reinforced during observation
of a conversation between Eddie, (a firefighter in his mid-50s
with nearly 20 years service), and a 14-year-old local secondary
school pupil on a week-long ‘work experience’ placement at
Middleton. Here Eddie describes the checking of hydraulic cutting
equipment and pumps:
Eddie: Different from school isn’t it? Not stuck behind a desk but
getting your hands on this gear. These cutters go through metal
and they’re heavy too, you need to be strong to use them. That
could be you, 16 years from now.
Evident from these comments is the clearly articulated
distinction between mental and manual labour via which, in
typically working class style, Eddie demeans the ‘non-productive’
nature of the former whilst championing the physical appropri-
ation of the latter (see Willis, 1977). In turn, this extract serves
to evidence the notion of ‘body capital’ with respect to the
importance of physicality to the working life of firefighters
(see Monaghan, 2002a). Yet the nature of the equipment being
used meant that Eddie placed emphasis on both the physical and
technical aspects of his work. Further still, the tone of Eddie’s
presentation was distinctly paternal with his notable differentia-
tion between ‘school’ and ‘work’ and his explicit reference to
a potential career in the fire service. This latter point is indicative
of a general sense that members of Green Watch propagated an
image of firefighting as a worthy and worthwhile career, a belief
which they also sought to reinforce through various informal
workplace practices.
6. Masculinity, firefighting and workplace humour
The constituent elements of the occupational culture
surrounding working class shop-floor life have been well rehearsed
in the sociological literature over the years (Clarke, 1979; Cockburn,
1983). Within these accounts manual labour is cited as a collective
whirlpool of informal interaction predominantly comprising;
a strict male chauvinism, a ‘breadwinner’, manual production
mentality, and a coarse (often sexist) humour constructed around
jokes, gestures and connotation (Beynon, 1975; Collinson, 1988).
Likewise, humour has been identified as featuring large amidst
the daily routines of the fire service (see for example, Baigent, 2001;
Desmond, 2006, 2007; Tracy et al., 2006; Ward and Winstanley,
2006). Humour was certainly a key component of everyday exis-
tence for Green Watch members at Middleton predominantly
taking the form of the previously well documented process of ‘piss
taking’; a ‘test’ of one’s ability to withstand verbal castigation from
others whilst maintaining peer group credibility (Collinson, 1988,
 T. Thurnell-Read, A. Parker / Emotion, Space and Society 1 (2008) 127–134
1992; Willis, 1979). What this, and other research, has highlighted
is that within working class occupational spheres at least, there
seems to be a special significance placed upon the ability to with-
stand personal derision to the extent that part of the labour process
in these settings is the production of a level of emotional control
and restraint which allows those concerned to cope, not only with
the day-to-day interactional aspects of working life but, in turn, to
function competently amidst a range of other psychological
tensions and distractions.
Perhaps not surprisingly, humour was used at Middleton as
a medium through which various hegemonic masculine ideals
could be both articulated and policed. An on-going example of
this was provided by the rather unfortunate circumstances of
Green Watch member, Simon Hughes. With less than 5 years
service as a firefighter, Simon was a relative newcomer to the job
and, following a hernia operation at the beginning of 2004, had
been downgraded to ‘light-duties’ at the station for a period of
4 months. He was thus restricted from attending call-outs and
from riding the fire trucks with the rest of the watch. As
a consequence it was not unusual for light-hearted jokes to be
aimed at Simon in relation to his state of infirmity. It was
particularly common for Simon’s allocation to light-duties to be
exploited in terms of the more domestic and feminised nature of
his temporary workplace role. In one such instance, Bill, an
experienced member of the watch with over 15 years service,
ordered Simon to make tea and toast for the other watch
members in the station staffroom, as ‘‘. he wasn’t doing any real
work’’. In conceptual terms, what Bill attempted to do here was to
‘other’ Simon in relation to his perceived ‘weakness’, allocating
alternative duties to him as a consequence of the fact that he did
not possess the physical strength required to perform the kind of
work that ‘real’ men do. This reinforced the emasculation which
Simon’s lack of physical competence necessarily inferred within
this workplace setting. As Barrett (2001) has noted, the reification
of masculine ideals depends upon contrasting images of the
feminised ‘other’. Simon’s allocated role as the subordinate,
domestic servant fulfilled this feminised status, thereby reinforc-
ing the pre-eminence of physical strength as a highly valued
aspect of masculinity. As is often the case in such workplace
settings, inferences of this nature are delivered via informal
repartee. Yet this kind of interaction reveals a much more
embedded form of masculine prejudice which, in drawing upon
hegemonic ideals, makes clear that there are informal expecta-
tions and norms in play with regard to the level of physical
strength and resilience amongst male firefighters, and that it is
simply unacceptable for watch members to be anything other
than competent in this area.
In a similar manner, light-hearted interaction between John
(a respected Lead Firefighter with 15 years experience) and Lenn
(Green Watch Supervising Officer, and a very large man) informally
reinforced the expectation for physical conditioning. On one occasion
during a day-shift, John joked, (while describing the use of a training
room where firefighters were required to manoeuvre through tight
spaces in full breathing apparatus) that Lenn ‘‘. wouldn’t go into
a job like that [because] [h]e knows his pie-belly would get him
stuck’’. Making fun of colleagues’ levels of fitness and strength was
a common way in which expectations regarding physical competence
could be articulated amongst peers. In this sense, humour was used
as a means by which certain masculine values could be reinforced and
protected. For sure, there was a derogatory edge to such interaction,
but at the same time comments of this nature largely remained
free from serious personal castigation, the reason for this being that
over-riding this aspect of workplace relations were a series of codes
and values concerning the importance of peer group responsibility
and solidarity, the details of which we now explore.
131
7. Masculinity, firefighting and mutual responsibility
Issues of physical and technical skill were clearly ingrained in the
work ethic and occupational identity of Green Watch members, but it
was a sense of a collective obligation and reciprocity to the team that
best epitomised the masculine ethos in play at Middleton. Whilst
reflecting on a below-par performance by the watch during a weekly
training exercise, about which he expressed intense disappointment,
Lenn (18 years service and Watch Supervisor) drew a clear analogy
between life in the fire service and his previous experience of being
a professional rugby player:
Lenn: If you’re a professional, you put the hours in at training,
stay in shape and in form. You’ve got to be a team player. If
you’re not up to scratch, you don’t get to play . You’ll only let
yourself down and the team down. That’s not fair to the lads, the
rest of the team, who do put the effort in.
In identifying not only the need to perform at a personal level
but also the need to be a valued and reliable member of the team,
here Lenn plays on the collective consciousness of (and emotional
attachments between) watch personnel in order to stress the
importance of an underlying current of reciprocity amongst the
group. Evident also in this extract is an awareness of the dangers
inherent in the occupation itself, and how personal failure could
hold fatal consequences both for watch members and for the
general public. A strong team ethic was fostered amongst Green
Watch who, in sharing risk and responsibility for each others safety,
valued their roles as ‘team players’. Towards the end of the
research, Alan expressed the way in which watch members took
great pride in the sense of team unity that existed among them:
Alan: It’s a real shame you didn’t get out to any proper jobs
(fires). You missed that one last week. You would have really
seen the lads at work then. It’s impressive. We all look out for
each other and really get the job done.
Alan’s choice of the term ‘proper (real) jobs’ to describe those
involving larger, more dangerous, incidents is particularly telling,
echoing, as it does, Holdaway’s (1983) sentiments on issues of occu-
pational action and danger, whereby higher risk call-outs, which offer
danger and excitement, are seen as more important and worthy than
the other types of work concerned with what are largely regarded as
more mundane incidents. However, implicit within this notion of
‘real’ work is the potential for these incidents to allow crew members
to prove their individual and collective competence. Indeed, it
seemed that it was only through meeting the challenges of the
toughest emergency incidents that one’s credentials in terms of
physical and technical proficiency could be validated.
8. Masculinity, firefighting and group solidarity
Common to the literature on male dominated workplaces are
inferences concerning the generation of group cohesion and
worker solidarity (see for example Collinson, 1992; Willis, 1979).
The UK Fire Service is no exception in this respect (see Baigent,
2001; Darlington, 1998; Hall et al., 2007). As Salaman (1986) noted
in his study of the London fire-brigade, the watch shift structure is
well recognised as the fulcrum around which occupational soli-
darity is based amongst fire service personnel.
In terms of the dynamics of everyday working relationships
between members of Green Watch at Middleton, group solidarity
was key to occupational life. Watch members were well aware of
and, indeed, protective of, each others confidence in their work.
This resonates well with the findings of Hall et al. (2007: 543) who
note that amongst the male firefighters featured in their research:
132 T. Thurnell-Read, A. Parker / Emotion, Space and Society 1 (2008) 127–134
‘[C]ommonsense and the ability to think clearly as part of a team in
dangerous situations .’ were valued more than mere physical
strength. Likewise, Fitzpatrick (1980: 147–151) observed an
expectation for miners ‘‘. to be accommodating and respect the
fears, wishes, and personal idiosyncrasies of others’’, referring also
to an ‘occupational subculture of danger’ which creates a solidarity
amongst the group which is safety minded and, through a mutual
exposure to risk, socially cohesive. The firefighters of Green Watch,
who at any moment may be called to an incident where one of their
number could hold the lives of the entire crew in their hands,
engendered a group unity and collegial respect which sought to
preserve individual confidence levels. Such sentiment was
expressed by Alan:
Alan: We all have a laugh, but we know what we can and can’t
say. It’s better to build your mates up them to knock ‘em down,
especially in this job.
The absence of all but a very light-hearted mockery of other
members of the watch was, then, a product of the strong interde-
pendence of group members. Indeed, a striking feature of watch
interactions was the lack of heavy derogation, ridicule, or humili-
ation which, as we have seen, is often apparent in male dominated
occupational settings.
Where a more typically masculinised form of social derision
and competitiveness did manifest itself was in the interactions
between the different watch units at Middleton, and between
firefighters at Middleton and those at other stations. On several
occasions during the research period, comments were made by
Green Watch members that were directed at colleagues on other
shifts, all of these asserting a degree of competitive animosity. An
example of such comment emerged as a consequence of the
rearrangement of staffroom tables and chairs by Red Watch
during a night shift, so that on entering the station the morning
after, members of Green Watch found their social space somewhat
disrupted. On seeing this Rich (10 years service), expressed his
disgust with the lack of respect demonstrated by such actions:
‘‘It’s that fucking Red Watch, they do this knowing it’ll piss us off’’.
Similarly, lines of group differentiation were drawn by members
of the watch following an incident attended by crews from both
Middleton and nearby City station. The interaction which
occurred between the respective crews was reflected upon, once
back in the station, by the branding of the City Station fire
fighters, by Green Watch members, as ‘miserable buggers’. Thus, it
was apparent that, whilst masculinised competition and social
derision between members of Green Watch were minimised,
tensions were expressed towards other collectives.
9. Masculinity, firefighting and organisational change
By far the strongest point of contention observed amongst the
crew of Green Watch was an antagonism between themselves and
the fire service as an organisation. At the time of the research the
fire service was under-going significant change via a process of
modernisation which generated a significant degree of unrest
amongst firefighting personnel nationwide. Likewise, Green Watch
members articulated their distrust of, and discomfort with, this
process by making frequent references to how their working
conditions had been so much better in the ‘old days’ and how the
job was ‘changing for the worse’. Indeed, a running dialogue of
comparison reflected respondent awareness of both the current
changes to the organisational ethos of the Service and a faint
nostalgia with regard to the previous regime.
A distinct and, at times, unrestrained scepticism of newly
implemented procedures and organisational restructuring high-
lighted the dynamic of change in the Service and the impact that
this was having upon occupational identity. On one occasion
several members of Green Watch listened as Lenn (Supervising
Officer) outlined plans to commit two crew members to permanent
‘community duty’, even though such measures would render one of
the Middleton fire trucks under-staffed and, as such, inoperable.9
These suggested changes were met with open derision from other
members of the watch with Alan sarcastically praising ‘‘. yet
another bright idea from the Administration’’. Similarly, during
a computer-assisted training session conducted in the Station’s
training room, Lenn found fault with the training materials
provided remarking on the futility of his own task which, as Watch
Supervisor, was to instruct other members of the group:
Lenn: This is what comes of working in an office. What a joke.
They haven’t got a clue. And I’m meant to be teaching you all this
stuff. But them [those people] upstairs [managers and admin-
istrative staff] don’t understand what it’s really like.
Thus, the tension between the ‘hands-on’ knowledge of active
service personnel and the managerial ethos of ‘Headquarters
administrators’ can be highlighted as an issue of contention for
respondents. Again, what we see here is the importance of ‘doing’
practical work, as opposed to simply ‘knowing’ how to administer
and manage workplace routine, for those who construct their
occupational identities around the physical and often adversarial
conditions of manual labour. Perhaps even more significant is the
prioritisation of community duties over and above emergency
service cover, an issue which is indicative of the shift in more recent
years towards a more preventative, community focused, method of
firefighting. Within the context of the UK Fire Service, the
Community Fire Service (CFS) agenda has brought with it increased
impetus for the Service to move away from its primary role as an
emergency resource, to one which encompasses broader commu-
nity need (see also Childs et al., 2004; Tracy and Scott, 2006; Worts
et al., 2007).10 These changes were primarily triggered by
The independent review of the fire service (IRFS), which was
carried out by Professor Sir George Bain in 2002 amidst a wave
of industrial action by Fire and Rescue Service personnel (see Office
of the Deputy Prime Minister, 2002). The thrust of this Report
targeted the perceived need to shift the emphasis from attending to
emergency incidents to reducing and managing the risk of fires.
Further, the Bain Report called for legislated reforms which would
modernise the Service, including a greater focus on effective
Human Resource Management and stronger engagements with
the community and stakeholder needs. The Bain Report also
formed the basis of Fire and Rescue Service Act 2004, which leg-
islated for the emphasis on preventative fire safety and community
focus as well as the perceived need for modernisation as a conse-
quence of the inadequacies of its forerunner, the Fire Services
Act 1947. More broadly, the concerns central to the Bain Report and
the Fire and Rescue Services Act 2004 reflected the wider
modernisation agenda of the UK (New) Labour government which
characterised its second term.11
Implicit within this process of organisational modernisation and
change, is the need for Service personnel to be approachable,
communicative and caring to the needs of the general public
(clients). For members of Green Watch, this shift meant the adop-
tion of what were widely perceived to be more ‘feminine’ work-
place qualities which were, in their view, diametrically opposed to
9
Community duties typically involve such activities as door-to-door safety
checks and school visits.
10
For more on the broadening role of the UK Fire Service in line with the Fire and
Rescue Act 2004, see: http://www.fireservice.co.uk/role/index.php.
11
See also Audit Commission (2008).
 T. Thurnell-Read, A. Parker / Emotion, Space and Society 1 (2008) 127–134
the traditional (hegemonic) ideals of physicality and risk, as Mark,
a firefighter of 11 years experience, pointed out:
Mark: We didn’t join the service to knock on doors and install
fire alarms all day. We’d rather be tackling fires, doing what we
do than this [community work]. It can be boring but it’s got to be
done so it gets done.
Such sentiment reflected a resignation by Green Watch
members to the fact that community-based work had come to
represent a central aspect of their occupational identity. Further,
such work was constructed by Mark as a key element of the
contemporary firefighter’s role and, therefore, a necessary
component of occupational competence. Notwithstanding these
reservations, there was an apparent satisfaction amongst some
respondents with elements of this type of work. In several
instances, firefighters referred to the feelings of self-worth gained
by being well received by the general public and shown apprecia-
tion and respect. In this sense, duties which seemingly downplayed
the masculine identity of service personnel were reconstructed by
some as a valued part of the job. Moreover, increased contact with
the community offered firefighters the chance to further validate
their paternalistic role as community protectors thereby increasing
their sense of individual and collective worth. Whilst the altogether
more ‘public’ aura of this new community-oriented role was seen
by some as a detriment to notions of status, for others it went some
way to making more explicit the multi-faceted nature of modern-
day firefighting, thereby raising the profile of the occupation to the
outside world.
As has been noted previously, there is evidence to suggest that
the traditionally masculinised structures of the workplace have
come under threat and, indeed, have under-gone significant change
in more recent years (see for example Adkins, 2001; Bradley, 2000;
McDowell, 1998). Further, in their study of men in predominantly
feminine occupations, Cross and Bagilhole (2002: 219) have
observed an adaptation by male workers to tasks requiring what
have been historically viewed as feminine traits. They assert that
‘‘. by emphasising traditional masculine traits – pride in one’s
work, doing a proper job, having a career . men maintain a sense of
themselves as men even though they work in non-traditional jobs’’
(original emphasis). While the UK Fire Service remains a predomi-
nantly masculine occupation, these studies highlight how the move
towards seemingly non-masculine qualities in some occupations
and professions may be successfully accommodated within the
context of a masculinised workplace ethic and pride.
What we have attempted to illustrate here are some of
the principles upon which differing masculine identities and
their specific emotional requirements were constructed and
developed amongst Green Watch members at Middleton. Such
discussion goes some way towards highlighting the ambivalence
of masculine construction at an institutional level. Within this
context we may consider further the potential of Connell’s (1987,
2005) notion of hegemonic masculinity. In utilising this concept
Connell (1987) implies an ascendancy of one masculine form over
and above others, which are consequently subordinated. Yet,
with regard to the data presented here we must be careful not to
oversimplify matters and to assume that the dominant form of
masculinity portrayed amongst respondents was of hegemonic
proportion. Rather we must be mindful of the complexities at hand
and, in particular, we must consider also the wider institutional
values in play. To this end, the fire service as an institution must be
seen to be characterised by a gender regime, a constituent element
of which was the predominant (masculine) values imbued within
the day-to-day functioning of the institution itself. This regime may
be defined as the pattern of gendered practices that served to
impact upon the construction of various kinds of masculinities
133
among fire service personnel, and which ordered these practices in
terms of prestige and power. Given the position of power enjoyed
by the administrative and management staff at Middleton in rela-
tion to the everyday activities of firefighting crews, and given the
institutional codes and values symbolised within the daily practices
of the fire service, it may be appreciated that the gender regime in
operation at Middleton comprised a primarily rational, techno-
cratic, white collar/professional hegemonic form, under which
a variety of subordinate firefighter masculinities existed. Although
the masculinities developed by firefighters themselves varied
in accordance with the specific occupational identities which
they exhibited, by and large the dominant form reflected the heroic,
risk-taking, courageous image often portrayed at the public level,
whilst a hands-on, community-based, paternalistic identity
fulfilled a subordinate masculine role. As such, it can be seen that
the vast majority of respondents adopted a traditional working
class approach to their occupational identities constructing
their own ‘manual’ masculinity in opposition to the ‘mental’
manliness advocated by the institution at the administrative and
managerial level.
10. Conclusions
This paper has mapped out the key issues around which occu-
pational identities were constructed amongst male firefighters at
one UK fire station. Within it we have pointed out the way in which
notions of emotional strength, physical and technical competence,
responsibility and solidarity, and organisational change impacted
the everyday lives of the respondent group. These findings suggest
that fire service personnel construct specific identities based on
a range of values and qualities. The importance of the physical
nature of their job is central but there is also a significant emphasis
placed upon technical proficiency (with regard to knowledge of and
familiarity with of a range of specialist equipment) and the
production of emotional control and restraint. It is primarily
through the construction of physical, technical and emotional
competence that self-worth is asserted.
The personal drive for competence in one’s job is supplemented
by a strong team ethic amongst watch members. In the case of
Green Watch, the group unity observed during the research
appeared symptomatic of a pronounced solidarity based on the
interdependence of all members of the watch on each other. As
such, an awareness and sensitivity to the confidence of colleagues
becomes manifest in the notable lack of instances of severe
personal insult and workplace subordination common to other
male dominated occupational settings. However, competition and
antagonism between watches, and between other stations, was
evident.
In the face of marked changes to the ethos of the fire service, (i.e.
a shift towards a more management orientated, community
focused approach), the identity of fire service personnel appears to
be under-going considerable transformation. Observed resistance
to such organisational change, underpinned by a scepticism of
white-collar implementation and a valuing of manual over mental
labour, was key to the working lives of the respondents featured
here. However, there was also evidence that the increasing
requirements of community-based service and the associated
values of communication and customer care were, notably, being
adopted by personnel. Traditionally feminised qualities are not
constructed as part of the value of occupational competence
implicit to the identity of firefighters. In light of these modernising
measures, it is possible that the maintenance of a markedly mas-
culinised occupational identity may change over time. Needless to
say, the emotive reaction to these changes may prove to be of as
much of interest to social scientists as the changes themselves.
134 T. Thurnell-Read, A. Parker / Emotion, Space and Society 1 (2008) 127–134

References Gramsci, A., 1971. Selections From The Prison Notebooks. Lawrence and Wishart,
London.
Hall, A., Hockey, J., Robinson, V., 2007. Occupational cultures and the embodiment
Acker, J., 1990. Hierarchies, jobs, bodies: a theory of gendered organisations. Gender
of masculinity: hairdressing, estate agency and firefighting. Gender. Work and
and Society 4, 139–158.
Organisation 14 (6), 534–551.
Adkins, L., 2001. Cultural feminization: money, sex and power. Signs 26 (30),
Haywood, C., Mac an Ghaill, M., 2003. Men and Masculinities. Open University
669–695.
Press, Buckingham.
Audit Commission, 2008. Rising to the Challenge: Improving Fire Service Efficiency.
Holdaway, S., 1983. Inside the British Police: A Force at Work. Blackwell, Oxford.
Community Safety. National Report. Audit Commission, London.
McDowell, L., 1998. Capital Culture: Gender at Work in the City. Blackwell, London.
Baigent, D. (2001), One More Last Working Class Hero: A Cultural Audit of the UK
Miller, S., Forest, K., Jurik, N., 2003. Diversity in blue: lesbian and gay police officers
Fire Service. Available at: http://www.fitting-in.com.
in a masculine occupation. Men and Masculinities 5 (4), 355–385.
Barrett, F.J., 2001. The organizational construction of hegemonic masculinity: the
Monaghan, L., 2002. Hard men, shop boys and others: embodying competence in
case of the US Navy. In: Whitehead, S.M., Barrett, F.J. (Eds.), The Masculinities
a masculinist occupation. Sociological Review 50 (3), 334–355.
Reader. Polity Press, Cambridge, pp. 77–99.
Morgan, D., 1992. Discovering Men. Routledge, London.
Beynon, H., 1975. Working for Ford. EP Publishing, Wakefield.
Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM), 2002. The Future of the Fire Service:
Boon, K.A., 2005. Heroes, metanarratives, and the paradox of masculinity in
Reducing Risk, Saving Lives – The Independent Review of the Fire Service
contemporary western culture. The Journal of Men’s Studies 13 (3),
December 2002. HMSO, London.
301–312.
Salaman, G., 1986. Working. Tavistock, London.
Bradley, H., 2000. Myths of Work. Polity Press, Cambridge.
Scott, C.W., Myers, K.K., 2005. The socialization of emotions: learning emotion manage-
Childs, M., Morris, M., Ingham, V., 2004. The rise and rise of clean, white-collar (fire-
ment at the fire station. Journal of Applied Communication Research 33 (1), 67–92.
fighting) work. Disaster Prevention and Management 13 (5), 409–414.
Straw, J., 1999. Race Equality: The Home Secretary’s Employment Targets. Home
Clarke, J., 1979. Capital and culture: the post-war working-class re-visited. In: Clarke, J.,
Office, London.
Critcher, C., Johnson, R. (Eds.), Working Class Culture. Hutchinson,, London, pp.
Tracy, S.J., Scott, C.W., 2006. Sexuality, masculinity and taint management among
238–253.
Cockburn, C., 1983. Brothers. Pluto Press, London. firefighters and correctional officers: getting down and dirty with ‘‘America’s
heroes’’ and the ‘‘scum of law enforcement’’. Management Communication
Collinson, D.L., 1988. Engineering humour: masculinity, joking and conflict in shop
Quarterly, August 20 (1), 6–38.
floor relations. Organization Studies 9 (2), 181–199.
Tracy, S.J., Myers, K.K., Scott, C.W., 2006. Cracking jokes and crafting selves:
Collinson, D.L., 1992. Managing the Shop Floor. DeGruyter, London.
sensemaking and identity management among human service workers.
Connell, R.W., 1987. Gender and Power. Polity Press, Cambridge.
Communication Monographs 73 (3), 283–308.
Connell, R.W., 2005. Masculinities, second ed. Polity Press, Cambridge.
Walby, S., 1997. Gender Transformations. Routledge, London.
Connell, R.W., Messerschmidt, J., 2005. Hegemonic masculinity: rethinking the
Ward, J., Winstanley, D., 2006. Watching the watch: the UK Fire Service and its
concept. Gender and Society 19 (6), 829–859.
impact on sexual minorities in the workplace. Gender, Work and Organisation
Cooper, R., 1995. The fireman: immaculate manhood. Journal of Popular Culture
13 (2), 193–219.
28 (4), 139–170.
Whitehead, S.M., 2002. Men and Masculinities. Polity Press, Cambridge.
Cross, S., Bagilhole, B., 2002. Girls jobs for the boys? Men, masculinity and non-
Willis, P. 1977. Learning to Labour. Saxon House, Farnborough.
traditional occupations. Gender. Work and Organization 9 (2), 204–226.
Willis, P.E., 1979. Shop floor culture, masculinity and the wage form. In: Clarke, J.,
Darlington, R., 1998. Workplace union resilience in the Merseyside fire brigade.
Critcher, C., Johnson, R. (Eds.), Working Class Culture. Hutchinson,, London, pp.
Industrial Relations Journal 29 (1), 58–73.
185–198.
Desmond, M., 2006. Becoming a firefighter. Ethnography 7 (4), 387–421.
Worts, D., Fox, B., McDonough, P., 2007. Doing something meaningful: gender and
Desmond, M., 2007. On the Fireline: Living and Dying with Wildland Firefighters.
public service during municipal government restructuring. Gender. Work
University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
and Organisation 14 (2), 162–184.
Dowler, L., 2002. Women on the frontlines: rethinking war narratives post 9/11.
Yarnal, C.M., Dowler, L., Hutchinson, S., 2004. Don’t let the bastards see you sweat:
GeoJournal 58, 159–165.
masculinity, public and private space, and the volunteer firehouse. Environ-
Fitzpatrick, J., 1980. Adapting to danger: a participant observation study of an
ment and Planning A 36, 685–699.
underground mine. Sociology of Work and Occupations 7 (2), 131–158.