Abstract
This study explores how men in precarious employment in Surabaya navigate the intersection of masculinities, vulnerability and cultural expectations. Taking a feminist approach to social practice theory, this study situates men's lived experiences within the broader structural and cultural conditions that shape their everyday realities. Our analysis of three precarious male workers’ personal narratives reveals how masculinities are performed through endurance, responsibility and silence in the space of instability. Javanese moral values such as wibawa (authority), rukun (harmony), sabar (patience) and nrimo ing pandum (acceptance of fate) are central to these responses, legitimating endurance while discouraging open expressions of vulnerability. These cultural ideals, intertwined with structural precarity, shape how men maintain dignity and masculine identity despite unstable livelihoods. The study contributes to feminist psychology's concern with social justice, intersectionality and marginalised voices by demonstrating how masculinities and vulnerability are not fixed traits but dynamic practices embedded within local moral worlds and the broader structures of precarious labour.
Precarious work arrangements are increasingly prevalent globally, posing significant challenges to workers’ well-being and identity (Hodgetts & Rua, 2010; Pyöriä et al., 2021; Schröder-Butterfill et al., 2023; Zheng et al., 2021). Precarious workers often face heightened levels of job insecurity, economic vulnerability and lack of access to benefits compared to permanent employees (Weber, 2020), which amplifies stress (Bhattacharya & Ray, 2021; Mensah & Williams, 2022), disrupts work–life balance (Projo & Pontoh, 2022) and exposes them to fluctuating work schedules and unstable income (Allan et al., 2021). They also often experience blurred boundaries between work and personal life, which can amplify stress levels (Projo & Pontoh, 2022). These findings demonstrate the urgency of researching the complex, dynamic and multifaceted challenges in precarious work arrangements. Although these economic and contractual aspects of precarious work have been widely examined (e.g., Silaban et al., 2021), less attention has been paid to the gendered dimensions of precarious labour, particularly in relation to men and masculinities and especially in different cultural contexts.
In this article, we explore how precarious workers in Surabaya, Indonesia navigate the intersection of masculinity and vulnerability in their daily lives, highlighting the interwoven nature of economic pressures, gender norms and cultural expectations that shape men's experiences of precarious work (Pellini, 2021). Drawing on social practice theory (explained below), we integrate the realms of everyday working practices, masculinity and precariousness to illustrate the experiences of precarious workers in navigating everyday vulnerability at work and beyond. By examining how masculinity is constructed and enacted within the context of precarious employment, we aim to unravel the complex interactions between gender identity and socioeconomic conditions. We seek to shed light on the coping mechanisms, challenges and resilience strategies employed by individuals navigating the precarious labour market through an exploration of their everyday realities.
Our research responds to and expands Rickett's (2016, p. 324) call in this journal for intersectional feminist research that attend to ‘issues of social justice, class, privilege, and access to resources, and to the need to listen to poor women’ by focusing on poor men's experiences within intersecting structures. Feminist scholars have long championed the study of masculinities as socially constructed and sustained within patriarchal relations of power. By foregrounding these dynamics, feminist scholarship has opened critical spaces to challenge gender hierarchies and to create more equitable ways of being men (Connell, 2005; Connell & Messerschmidt, 2005; Malinga, 2024). Our findings provide a nuanced understanding of how Indonesian men perform masculinities under precarious employment conditions within a broader patriarchal gender order. In this context, protest masculinity emerged as an alternative performance of masculinity involving resistance to traditional labour expectations and the reassertion of power in other domains (McDowell et al., 2014). By situating these performances within intersecting structures of class precarity and cultures, our study contributes to class-based inquiry in psychology and advances feminist psychological scholarship concerned with social justice, structural inequalities and the lived experiences of marginalised groups.
Precarious Work, Masculinity and Vulnerability
Research on gender dynamics in the labour market largely focuses on women, given that they disproportionately bear the burdens of precarious employment, and does not consider the role of culture. The findings from this work highlight the intersection of gender and cultural norms in relation to precarious work. For example, studies show that precarious work contributes to heightened parenting stress among Mexican immigrant women, with job instability, low wages and lack of benefits exacerbating stress and affecting both work and family life (León‐Pérez et al., 2021). Similarly, research in Uganda documents that women in low-skilled, informal factory jobs experience not only job insecurity and low pay but also pervasive sexual harassment and systemic exploitation, which significantly undermine their physical and mental well-being (Oosterom et al., 2023). Together, these findings underscore the intersection of labour conditions and gendered vulnerabilities in relation to women. There is, however, a need for more such research on how precarious employment differently affects men, especially given the emphasis on paid labour in contemporary constructions of hegemonic masculinity in many cultures (Nayak, 2023).
Research shows how traditional masculine norms often link men's value to breadwinning and resilience (Mensah & Williams, 2022), and precarious work makes these dominant norms increasingly difficult to sustain (Standing, 2011). Traditional masculine ideals – both colonial and Javanese – emphasise strength, stoicism and self-reliance (Hess et al., 2016; Nugraha et al., 2023), presenting vulnerability as weakness or femininity and encouraging emotional suppression from an early age (Halim et al., 2022; Malonda-Vidal et al., 2021). Yet very little research considers how men express and negotiate vulnerability. This is especially relevant to the performance of masculinities within precarious employment (Underhill & Quinlan, 2011). Under precarious working conditions, work is not only a site for expressing strength but also a vulnerable space where men must confront unmet expectations, financial insecurity and self-worth, particularly in relation to their struggles to maintain their traditional breadwinner roles under financial strain.
Vulnerability here refers to the ways men experience and respond to insecurity through their dependence on an unstable income, their anxieties about failing family obligations and their tactics to negotiate these struggles. We understand vulnerability as a form of ambivalence, acknowledging that precarious workers may simultaneously exhibit resilience and adaptation while experiencing heightened anxiety and uncertainty due to job insecurity (Valenzuela et al., 2023). This ambivalence reflects the dynamic negotiation of self-worth, coping strategies and sociocultural expectations within precarious work contexts. It is therefore important to consider how men's experiences of precarity and vulnerability are shaped by culturally embedded gender expectations.
Such research remains limited, however. While some masculinities research has considered cultural nuance (e.g., Connor et al., 2021; Gattario et al., 2015), there has been little focus on precarious work settings. Some notable exceptions are recent studies taking intersectional and Indigenous-informed approaches. In Aotearoa New Zealand, Martin et al.'s (2025) and Rua et al.'s (2023) studies of the Māori precariat highlight the importance of considering how ethnicity, socioeconomic status and cultural values shape experiences of precarious labour and the performance of masculinities. Complementing these studies, Malinga's (2024) study of Black South African day labourers highlights how men's experiences of precarity are deeply shaped by material conditions such as unemployment and class inequality, and how the inability to provide financially affects their sense of dignity and moral worth, as participants articulated these struggles through everyday idioms of shame and responsibility. Malinga's (2024) findings demonstrate how racialised and classed structures of precarity intersect with idioms of provision, shame and dignity, underscoring how masculinities are socially and materially situated and illustrating the value of intersectional analyses of men's vulnerabilities. Building on these insights and responding to the need for intersectional feminist analyses of class and socioeconomic instability, our research explores how men navigate the interaction between precarious work dynamics, gender norms and expressions of vulnerability in the context of broader sociocultural expectations.
Our Study
Our research was conducted in Surabaya, which serves as an ideal research location due to its significant role in the urbanisation of workers from the surrounding suburban areas. As the economic centre of East Java, Surabaya attracts rural migrants seeking better income and employment prospects (Kristyanto et al., 2023; Rachmawati et al., 2021). This migration contributes to a diverse and competitive labour market, where precarious workers continuously negotiate economic insecurity and social belonging. Whilst there is no specific data on the number of precarious workers in Surabaya alone, the National Statistics Bureau (Badan Pusat Statistik, 2019) estimated that East Java is among the provinces with the highest rate of precarious workers in Indonesia (29%).
In the Indonesian context, expressions of masculinity are shaped by local cultural norms, ethnic identities and kinship expectations. Within this context, dominant notions of masculinity have been shaped by both historical and cultural forces. During Dutch colonial rule, capitalist ideologies reinforced the figure of the male breadwinner as central to economic and social order, while in Javanese society, hegemonic masculinities emphasised responsibility, social harmony and relational authority (Geertz, 1961; Nilan, 2009; Wiryomartono, 2020). These ideals have continued into the postcolonial era, interacting with the spread of global capitalism to reinforce expectations that men embody resilience and provide materially for their families. Over time, shifts in economic structures, from colonial plantation economies to contemporary informal and precarious labour markets, have continually reshaped how masculinities are practiced, often amplifying pressures on men to appear strong while coping with instability.
In Indonesia, and specifically in Surabaya, the hegemonic Javanese culture of the country's largest ethnic group shapes masculine norms. While men from other ethnic groups, such as Chinese Indonesian, may emphasise entrepreneurial or independent economic achievement, Javanese masculinities are often associated with ideals of tanggung jawab (responsibility), rukun (harmony) and sabar (patient) rooted in long-standing Javanese moral and hierarchical orders (Geertz, 1961; Nilan, 2009; Wiryomartono, 2020). These may resonate with aspects of Western hegemonic masculinities, such as the breadwinner role, but also diverge in many ways, including prioritising community obligations and indirect negotiation of power (Magnis-Suseno, 1997). An intersectional lens highlights how gendered privilege is neither uniform nor secure. Men may occupy a structurally advantaged position within patriarchy while simultaneously experiencing socioeconomic marginalisation under conditions of precarious work (Rickett, 2016). In this context, precarious employment intersects with culturally specific gender norms, shaping how men negotiate identity, vulnerability, authority and masculine ideals.
Precarious workers, often burdened by job instability and financial insecurity, must find balance between work-related stress and culturally and socially informed expectations of masculinities. For example, Javanese men may prioritise maintaining family harmony and fulfilling social obligations even when facing economic precarity, reflecting culturally specific ways of performing masculinities under pressure. Local cultural frameworks, particularly Javanese norms of masculinities, shape how men interpret and respond to precarity. Javanese masculinities may encourage men to display resilience and emotional restraint while simultaneously constraining the expression of vulnerability. Thus, the intersection of economic precarity and Javanese cultural expectations provides a rich site for examining how men in Surabaya navigate work instability, dignity and masculine identity.
Methodology
We use social practice theory (Blue, 2017; Halkier et al., 2011) as the primary conceptual framework to analyse how masculinities are enacted in everyday life under conditions of precarious work. We approach these practices through a feminist intersectional analytic lens (Rickett, 2016), which sensitises our analysis to how gender, class, generation and cultural context shape men's access to stability, dignity and recognition. This allows us to examine masculinity not as a fixed identity but as a set of situated practices through which men navigate vulnerability, responsibility and endurance within specific moral and structural conditions.
Social practice theory posits that human action is shaped by ingrained patterns of action embedded within social structures and gendered and classed cultural norms shaped by local moral worlds and broader structural inequalities (Blue, 2017). In this study, ‘social practices’ refer to socially shared and historically shaped ways of doing things, sustained through repeated performance and recognised as ‘normal’ or ‘proper’ within a community. Rather than focusing on abstract roles or identities, social practice theory directs attention to how everyday activities are enacted in situated contexts. For example, in our analysis, performing breadwinner responsibility does not simply mean ‘being a breadwinner’, but refers to how provision is enacted in daily life under conditions of precarious work. This practice of provision includes (a) actions, such as prioritising family expenses or working extended hours; (b) sayings and cultural idioms, such as ‘a father must remain self-reliant’; (c) meanings, including dignity, authority and moral worth; and (d) structural conditions, such as class position, age and the postpandemic economy, which shape how these practices are made possible or constrained (Carolan, 2005).
In this way, social practice theory recognises that societal norms and cultural expectations do not merely influence behaviour at an individual level but are reproduced through everyday practices themselves (Campbell & Price, 2016). For instance, the cultural expectations of a ‘good man’ or worker are deeply shaped by varying community narratives and perspectives, including traditional gender norms and culturally informed values that unconsciously compel individuals to reproduce societal systems through their seemingly trivial daily routines, perpetuating norms of masculinity and work culture (Halkier et al., 2011).
Additionally, alongside cultural expectations, structural forces and individual experiences shape social practices. In dealing with everyday vulnerability in the context of precarious work and masculinity, for example, the precariousness of work arrangements, characterised by contractual instability and lack of guarantees, impacts motivation for work as individuals feel too pressured and unsafe to even think about work motivation (e.g., Martin et al., 2025). This approach enabled an in-depth analysis of how precarious male workers navigate their circumstances and negotiate masculinity and vulnerability within their sociocultural surroundings. By analysing social practices, we can elucidate how precarious workers negotiate their daily routines, interpersonal interactions and identity performances amid conditions of instability (Blue, 2017).
Participants
We recruited participants via snowballing. We initially selected participants who met the recruitment criteria and then asked them to refer us to others who also met those criteria: married, heterosexual, cisgender, residing in Surabaya and currently experiencing precarious employment within Surabaya's labour market and Javanese-Islamic cultural frames. Thus, we approached the first participant through our local community networks and he referred us to other men who met these criteria. Three men agreed to participate in the study. We refer to them using the pseudonyms: Andre, Bambang and Candra. We present three case studies drawn from their personal narratives, which often emphasise how precarious employment intersects with Javanese cultural expectations of masculinity. To protect confidentiality, we removed identifying details to ensure that participants not be recognised. Andre is a man in his 40s living with his family. He completed formal education at the Madrasah Tsanawiyah (equivalent to junior high school). After a period of unemployment in the early 2000s, a friend introduced him to salon work, where he trained as a hairstylist. He started as an assistant and eventually transitioned to serving clients on his own. He now works on a commission basis at a local salon and supplements his income with occasional freelance jobs. His work remains precarious, with no formal contract, no insurance and no long-term financial security. His daily earnings fluctuate depending on client flow. Sometimes stable, other times nonexistent. His day typically begins early, assisting his wife with household tasks before long hours at the salon. On rare days off, he relaxes with leisure activities such as fishing or playing futsal (a small-sided indoor form of football). Bambang is a man in his early 60s from Surabaya. Married for decades, he has adult children with their own families. He currently works in a quality inspection role at a mining-related company, a position without formal employment benefits. Having worked since adolescence, his career has included roles in sales, pharmacy management and running a small repair business. However, the COVID-19 pandemic forced the closure of his business, leading to significant financial losses. His current income is modest, resulting in a fragile financial situation. Yet, Bambang continues to refuse help from his children, believing a father should remain self-reliant. He works long hours with little rest, and he has struggled with persistent sleep difficulties since his youth. At home, he sees himself primarily as a provider and moral guide for his family. Candra is a man in his late 20s. He was born outside Java but later moved to Surabaya. He is the sixth of 10 siblings, with a Balinese mother and a Chinese-Indonesian father. After a long period of study, he completed his undergraduate degree in early 2023. He recently married and has a young daughter. Candra's work history is diverse, spanning logistics, finance, insurance and most recently, freelance debt collection. His monthly income is low and irregular, but he supplements it with various ‘side hustles’ in the informal and creative sectors. He frequently travels between Surabaya and a nearby town to spend time with extended family. While others are sometimes judged for not having a ‘real job’, he values his personal freedom and remains confident in his unconventional choices.
The participants’ narratives are shaped by their particular social location and cultural context – precarious masculinities may manifest differently for sexually and gender diverse men or for those from other Indonesian regions or in transnational contexts. It is worth noting, however, that our analytic focus on three participants enabled an in-depth engagement with their narratives, allowing us to examine how precarious employment intersects with culturally specific expectations of masculinity in everyday life. Rather than aiming for representativeness, our approach prioritises depth and interpretive richness. The detailed cases make visible how structural economic precarity interacts with Javanese cultural ideals of masculinity, including expectations of responsibility, emotional restraint and breadwinning. Our focus on heterosexual married men also provides a useful analytic vantage point. By examining men who might ordinarily be assumed to embody socially sanctioned forms of masculinity, the study highlights how dominant masculine expectations are reproduced and enforced in everyday life, and how precarious labour conditions can destabilise these expectations. In this sense, the findings reveal the often-hidden vulnerabilities that emerge when men who are expected to fulfil breadwinner roles encounter structural barriers to doing so.
Empirical Material Generation and Analysis
The concept of the researcher-as-bricoleur (Lévi-Strauss, 1966) emphasises the creative and adaptive nature of our research approach. To handle the complexity of the research setting, a bricoleur assembles and improvises using a variety of research tools and techniques. This method recognises that social phenomena are complex and dynamic, necessitating creative and adaptable scientific approaches. In this research, the researcher-as-bricoleur strategy entailed combining traditional narrative interviews with a research journal in which researchers document detailed insights, emotions, biases, sketches and observational notes (Allport, 1942). The data comprised primarily interview transcripts, which we interpreted in dialogue with the researchers’ personal journals. This comprehensive recording method ensures that the richness of the participants’ experiences and the researchers’ reflexive observations are both thoroughly documented.
We used semistructured interviews to allow an in-depth exploration of the participants’ experiences. The first author conducted the interviews in Bahasa Indonesia. We translated the interview excerpts presented in this article into English. Interviews started with the participants’ biographical information, which serves as the foundation for understanding their life history and background. This phase was followed by some open-ended questions designed to elicit detailed narratives about the participants’ personal and professional experiences, which influence their current perspectives on masculinity and vulnerability. The questions cover topics such as, but not limited to, personal background and family history, educational and career trajectory and significant life events and their impacts. This phase is grounded in narrative inquiry, which focuses on collecting and analysing stories to comprehend how individuals make sense of their experiences (Yulianto et al., 2024). Alongside the interviews, the diary serves as a critical tool for capturing the researcher's subjective experiences and reflections, which are essential for apprehending how personal biases and emotions might influence the interpretation of the data. This approach enables a richer and more holistic analysis of how precarious workers navigate everyday vulnerability.
We analysed these data using an abductive analytic approach (Brinkmann, 2014) involving an iterative movement between participants’ narratives and relevant theoretical literature. Initial patterns we noticed in the interviews were repeatedly refined through engagement with scholarship on masculinities, precarity and social practice theory, allowing us to deepen our understanding of how precarious workers manage everyday vulnerabilities associated with masculinity. The first author conducted the initial reading and coding of the interview transcripts and research journal, identifying recurring patterns in participants’ narratives. The authors then engaged in a collaborative analytic process in which we discussed the preliminary interpretations, revisited the transcripts and refined the emerging themes through dialogue with relevant theoretical frameworks. Through this iterative process, we developed the four themes presented below. Rather than treating masculinity as a fixed trait, we approach it as a dynamic practice shaped by cultural expectations and structural constraints. In particular, we highlight key Javanese concepts in the participants’ narratives – such as wibawa (authority), rukun (harmony), sabar (patience) and nrimo ing pandum (acceptance of fate) – that inform how these precariously employed men negotiate identity, endurance, economic instability and vulnerability.
Through this process, we surfaced four main themes, each capturing a different aspect of how the participants negotiate and practice masculinities under precarity: (a) how men define what it means to ‘be a man’ through ideals of responsibility and authority; (b) how endurance becomes the central coping strategy under precarious work; (c) how economic instability reshapes family roles and material dignity; and (d) how vulnerability is silenced through both cultural stigma and structural precarity. By moving across these four dimensions, the analysis connects micro-level accounts of daily life to broader cultural scripts and structural forces, demonstrating how precarious masculinities are both reproduced and reshaped in Indonesia today. This analytic approach allowed us to develop interpretations that accounted for both lived experience and broader structural and cultural contexts.
Exploring Masculinities, Vulnerabilities and Cultural Expectations
The analysis is organised into the four themes (as described above) capturing how the participants, as men in precarious work settings in Surabaya, understand and navigate masculinities: (a) what does it mean to be a man?; (b) endurance as masculinity: navigating precarity; (c) living with or navigating economic instability; and (d) masculinity and vulnerability.
What does it mean to be a man?
For the men in this study, being a man was primarily understood as fulfilling cultural and moral expectations tied to responsibility, dignity and harmony. In Indonesia, and particularly in Javanese society, masculinity is anchored in values such as wibawa (authority and dignity), rukun (harmony) and tepa selira (self-restraint and consideration for others). These ideals intersect with religious teachings, colonial legacies and contemporary capitalism, creating layered expectations of men to provide for and guide their families while embodying composure and authority in public and private life.
For example, Andre, a hair stylist working on commission, described how he suppresses his emotions to avoid burdening his wife: Men can’t cry, lah. They must always be strong, right? When there are problems, umm, I usually just keep them inside and stay quiet [sigh]. I never tell my wife about these worries because I don’t want her to feel anxious too! Sometimes the burden feels heavy [sigh], but I remind myself that this is what it means to be a husband and a father. Even if I am struggling, I have to show strength so that my family not lose confidence in me.
Andre's account illustrates how masculinity is closely tied to the Javanese value of tepa selira (self-restraint and consideration for others), where men are expected to restrain their own emotions to maintain family harmony. His silence also reflects wibawa (authority), as authority is maintained by projecting stability and strength. Rather than vulnerability being a space for dialogue, it becomes something to be hidden in order to uphold rukun (harmony) within the household.
Bambang, an older father who lost his business during the COVID-19 pandemic, described his sense of responsibility in terms of self-reliance: Since I was young, I have always worked hard, you know … and even now at 60, I still cannot stop. Even when I feel tired, I think it is better to keep going than to sit around [drinking his coffee]. For me, a father must remain self-reliant until the end. If I showed weakness or depended on my children, then I feel I would lose face. A man has to be strong so that his family respect him.
For Bambang, masculinity is equated with the value of wibawa (authority), the dignity and respect a father commands through endurance and independence. His statement also reflects how the colonial breadwinner ideal, where men were positioned as economic anchors of the household, has persisted into the postcolonial present. By refusing to depend on his children, Bambang emphasises the intergenerational responsibility of men to remain authoritative figures, even under fragile financial conditions.
Candra, the youngest participant, reframed masculinity around autonomy and personal freedom while still aligning with family responsibilities: For me, being a man means, umm, being able to stand on my own. I don’t want to be tied down by a company or follow what others tell me to do. People may say I don’t have a stable job, but I feel more confident when I can decide for myself. As long as I can provide for my wife and child, I feel I am doing my duty as a husband and father. Freedom and responsibility together make me feel like a man.
Candra's perspective reflects the influence of urban youth culture and kebebasan pribadi (personal freedom), showing how younger generations reinterpret masculinities. Yet his account also aligns with rukun (harmony) and wibawa (authority), as his sense of freedom is still tied to providing for and maintaining harmony within his family. Unlike older men who emphasise composure and self-reliance, Candra situates his reflection on masculinity in entrepreneurial flexibility and independence.
The narratives of our three participants show how masculinity in Indonesia is understood as a set of historical and cultural expectations that men must embody. Wibawa (authority), rukun (harmony) and tepa selira (self-restraint and consideration for others) provide Javanese moral frameworks through which men understand their duties as providers, husbands and fathers (Geertz, 1961). At the same time, colonial and capitalist legacies reinforce the breadwinner role, while Islamic teachings strengthen ideals of male authority and responsibility. Generationally, while older men emphasise authority through silence and independence, younger men like Candra highlight autonomy and freedom but still in relation to family obligations. Masculinity, then, is both culturally specific and historically layered, shaping how men in precarious work settings understand what it means to ‘be a man’.
Endurance as Masculinity: Navigating Precarity
Beyond ideals of responsibility and authority, the men in this study described endurance (tahan banting) as the defining way of coping with precarious work. In Javanese contexts, endurance is moralised through values of sabar (patience) and nrimo ing pandum (acceptance of fate), which normalise hardship as part of life. These cultural scripts encourage men to persist without complaint, aligning endurance with masculinity. At the same time, structural precarity, temporary contracts, unstable income and absent welfare support render endurance less a choice than a survival strategy. This is illustrated in Andre’s description of how endurance structured his everyday life at the salon: Sometimes I work from morning until midnight, but if no clients come, then I earn nothing. On those days, I tell myself just to be sabar (patient) and wait for tomorrow. I cannot depend on anyone else, so I keep working even if my body feels tired. My wife asks me to rest, but as a man, I feel isin (ashamed) if I don’t keep going. For me, it is better to push myself than to show weakness.
Andre's endurance reflects the Javanese values of sabar (patience) and nrimo ing pandum (acceptance of fate), where hardship is endured as fate, and strength is proven through silence. His reference to isin (shame) at resting shows how cultural ideals discipline men into constant labour. Yet his statement also reveals the structural fragility of his work: without a contract or benefits, even a single day without clients threatens his livelihood. Endurance, therefore, becomes both a culturally validated masculine virtue and an imposed necessity of precarious employment.
Bambang, having lost his business and material assets during the COVID-19 pandemic, expressed endurance as a moral imperative tied to fatherhood: Even after everything collapsed, I told myself to just keep going. I sold my house, my motorbikes, everything, but I still work every day. It is not about earning much, because I know my income is small now. But for me, what matters is that I don’t stop. If I gave up, then I would feel isin (ashamed) in front of my children. A father must continue, no matter how hard.
Bambang's words illustrate nrimo ing pandum (acceptance of fate) coupled with sabar (patience) in persisting through decline. His emphasis on not ‘giving up’ reflects wibawa (authority), the dignity of continuing to provide guidance and example for his children. Structurally, however, his story exposes the long-term effects of the pandemic on small businesses in Indonesia and the lack of safety nets for older workers. His endurance naturalises systemic failures as personal responsibility, reinforcing the link between masculinity and unending work. By contrast, Candra approached endurance differently, framing it as flexibility and creativity: For me, endurance is about adapting. Sometimes my main job pays little, but then I make up for it with side hustles. I sell cards, modify motorbikes or rent out my car. I don’t see it as a problem, because it is just how life is now. Even if it is uncertain, I feel stronger knowing that I can manage in my own way. Endurance today is not about holding back but about finding different paths.
Candra reframes tahan banting (resilience) not as passive patience but as adaptive resilience. His entrepreneurial hustling reflects youth ideals of kebebasan pribadi (personal freedom), contrasting with older men's reliance on nrimo ing pandum (acceptance of fate). While endurance for Andre and Bambang meant silence and persistence, for Candra it meant flexibility and improvisation. Yet, structurally, his ‘adaptability’ reflects the absence of stable graduate employment, pushing him into informal hustles. His narrative resonates with Martin's et al. (2025) work on ‘precarious leisure’, where precarity is not only endured but reimagined as an opportunity for creativity and self-expression.
These accounts show how endurance functions as both a cultural expectation and a structural necessity. For older men, sabar (patience) and nrimo ing pandum (acceptance of fate) legitimate silence and persistence, reinforcing dignity through acceptance of hardship. For younger men, endurance is reframed as entrepreneurial flexibility, aligning masculinity with autonomy and improvisation. Across generations, endurance remains central to masculinity under precarity but its expression shifts according to cultural values and structural conditions.
Living with or Navigating Economic Instability
Precarious work not only demands endurance but also reshapes men's material responsibilities and their sense of dignity within family and community life. In Indonesia, economic instability is lived through a cultural emphasis on gotong royong (mutual aid), illustrated by the famous Javanese proverb urip iku urup (life should bring light or benefit to others). Yet these ideals exist alongside structural conditions such as debt, unemployment and pandemic collapse that often limit men's ability to fulfil these obligations. Masculinity is therefore negotiated at the intersection of cultural responsibility and material scarcity, where men strive to provide and maintain dignity despite fragile economic foundations. Andre described how daily financial uncertainty influenced his responsibilities at home: My income depends on clients, so some days are good, but other days there is nothing. Still, school fees must be paid, food must be bought and electricity must be covered. I never want my wife or children to feel the stress, so I just make sure the needs be met, even if it means I not have anything left for myself. I would rather stay quiet about my own struggles than make them worried. For me, the most important thing is that the family can continue normally, even if behind the scenes I have to juggle everything.
Andre's story shows how instability reshapes provision, where he sacrifices personal needs to preserve rukun (harmony) in the family. His silence reflects tepa selira (self-restraint and consideration for others), or placing others’ comfort above his own; and his juggling of expenses reflects how precarity forces constant adaptation. Structurally, the commission-based nature of his job places the burden of instability squarely on him, with no institutional buffer. His masculinity is performed not only through endurance but through ensuring his family remain insulated from instability. Bambang, whose financial decline was dramatic, framed his instability through loss and dignity: When the business failed during the pandemic, I had to sell my house and vehicles to cover debt. Now, I earn very little, maybe just enough for food and basic needs. It feels very different from before, when I could provide comfortably. I tell myself to accept this fate, but I also feel ashamed because I cannot give my family the stability they once had. Still, I don’t want to ask my children for help, because I want them to see me as strong. Even with little, I try to keep going so they know I am still their father.
Bambang's narrative reveals the deep material consequences of instability, where loss of assets restructured his role as provider. His reliance on nrimo ing pandum (acceptance of fate) reflects cultural legitimation of decline, while his refusal of help reflects isin (shame) about dependence. Structurally, his experience demonstrates the systemic fragility of small businesses during the pandemic and the absence of state support. Yet his persistence also highlights how class adaptation is moralised: even with reduced income, masculinity is maintained through wibawa (authority), ensuring his children continue to view him as dignified. Candra, in contrast, described instability as an opportunity for entrepreneurial experimentation. When discussing how he manages his monthly income, he explained: For me, income that goes up and down is just part of life now. One month I might earn little from debt collection, but then I sell cards or rent out my car to cover the gap. I don’t see this as a failure but as freedom to try different things. People may say it is unstable, but I feel proud that I can still provide for my wife and child in my own way. Even with little money, I make sure we can live and enjoy time together. That way, I feel I am still a good husband and father.
Candra reframes instability as an expression of agency, situating masculinity in kebebasan pribadi (personal freedom) while still anchoring it in provision. Candra's narrative demonstrates that accountability is not only endured but embraced as an opportunity for creativity. Structurally, however, his reliance on side hustles reflects the limited graduate job market and systemic informalisation of labour. His narrative thus blends a generational redefinition of masculinity with the structural normalisation of instability.
These narratives illustrate how economic instability reshapes not only men's work but also their family roles and class positioning. Older men, like Andre and Bambang, draw on nrimo ing pandum (acceptance of fate), isin (shame) and tepa selira (self-restraint and consideration for others) to preserve dignity and shield their families from precarity. Younger men, like Candra, reinterpret instability through flexibility and entrepreneurial experimentation, aligning masculinity with autonomy and creativity. Structurally, all three men remain bound by fragile employment and absent safety nets, yet culturally, their masculinity is performed through fulfilling obligations to others. In this way, instability is not simply economic but moral, as men seek to sustain dignity and responsibility in contexts of scarcity.
Vulnerability and Masculinity
While men described endurance and responsibility as central to their masculinity, vulnerability was consistently depicted as dangerous and undesirable. In the Javanese and broader Indonesian context, men risk isin (shame) if they openly express fear, weakness or emotional distress. The Javanese saying, ajining diri saka lathi (one's dignity is tied to speech), further pressures men to control words and expressions, reinforcing silence as a masculine ideal. Culturally, vulnerability is coded as weakness or even femininity, while structurally, precarious work leaves little room for acknowledging fragility as instability demands constant displays of resilience. Andre reflected on how he concealed his emotional struggles: Sometimes I feel very heavy inside, but I cannot let it out. If I tell my wife, she will feel worried, and then the children will know. So, I just stay quiet. I think if I cry or complain, it will make me look weak, and then people will lose respect for me. Better to keep it inside and try to solve the problems myself.
Andre's account highlights how vulnerability is silenced by tepa selira (consideration for others) and policed through isin. Structurally, his silence also reflects how precarious work leaves no margin for emotional breakdown: showing weakness risks destabilising both family harmony and income. Vulnerability, therefore, is both culturally stigmatised and materially costly. Bambang also emphasised how revealing distress would undermine his role as a father: I don’t like to talk about feeling stressed. If I say that I am weak, then what kind of father would I be? A father should be a guide, not someone who complains. I think it is better to stay quiet and keep problems to myself. That way, my children will still respect me, even if inside I sometimes feel very tired.
Here, wibawa (authority) is tied directly to emotional suppression, where silence becomes proof of masculine reliability. His reluctance to acknowledge distress also reflects the structural violence of precarity: years of unstable work have normalised hardship as ‘just part of life’. By framing silence as dignity, Bambang obscures the systemic conditions that produce his fatigue, locating the problem in himself rather than in wider structures. Candra, while more open in some respects, also resisted framing his struggles as vulnerability: Of course, sometimes it is stressful when income is low, but I don’t see it as weakness. For me, it is just part of life. If I start complaining, then it means I am not grateful for what I have. I prefer to focus on what I can still do, even if the situation is not perfect. Maybe others think it is unstable, but for me it is a way to prove that I can stand on my own.
Candra reframes vulnerability through nrimo ing pandum (acceptance of fate), presenting acceptance not as fragility but as gratitude and independence. His narrative reflects a younger generation's blending of kebebasan pribadi (personal freedom) with culturally rooted ideals of composure. Structurally, however, his minimisation of distress reveals how deeply precarity is normalised among youth, who frame instability as lifestyle choice rather than systemic failure.
Together, these accounts illustrate how vulnerability in men is silenced both culturally and structurally. Culturally, values of isin (shame), wibawa (authority) and ajining diri saka lathi (one's dignity is tied to speech) demand that men show strength and composure, framing emotional openness as weakness. Structurally, precarious work leaves no space for fragility, as constant instability demands relentless resilience. This dual silencing not only suppresses individual coping but also obscures the oppressive systems, such as unstable labour markets, absent welfare and capitalist precarity, that intensify vulnerability. Addressing vulnerability, therefore, requires attention to both cultural expectations and structural violence, revealing the hidden emotional costs of precarious masculinities.
Discussion
Although precarious work has been widely studied in relation to stress, health and instability (Allan et al., 2021; Pyöriä et al., 2021; Weber, 2020), less is known about how men in Indonesia live and negotiate masculinity under such conditions. This research contributes to the literature by showing how men's experiences of precarious work are intertwined with (Javanese) cultural expectations of wibawa (authority) and rukun (harmony) ideals, and Islamic values of sabar (patience) and nrimo ing pandum (acceptance of fate). While mainstream psychological models tend to treat job stress and vulnerability in reductionist, individualistic ways (Bhattacharya & Ray, 2021; Yamaguchi et al., 2022; Zheng et al., 2021), our findings suggest that stress, vulnerability and resilience cannot be separated from these cultural values. Rather than being fixed traits, masculinity and vulnerability are lived practices, continuously reshaped at the intersection of structural precarity and cultural expectations.
Our analysis demonstrates how the masculinities of men in precarious employment are simultaneously constrained and reproduced through daily practices. Consistent with Standing's (2011) formulation of the precariat as both an economic and cultural class, we saw how participants negotiated identity through emotional suppression, endurance and the breadwinner ideal, but also through emerging forms of flexibility and self-expression. The narratives of Andre and Bambang illustrate how stoicism and self-reliance remain hegemonic, with endurance framed as sabar, and financial responsibility as proof of masculine worth. In contrast, Candra's narrative reflects generational shifts where flexible work choices and emotional openness coexist with the stigma of not having a ‘real job’. Importantly, these dynamics cannot be understood solely through Western tropes such as ‘men don’t cry’. They are mediated by Indonesia's historical legacies of colonial capitalism, postcolonial informal labour and global economic restructuring, which intensify expectations that men remain providers even under conditions of uncertainty.
This contextualised reading builds on class-based inquiry in applied social psychology by advancing a practice-based and culturally grounded account of how masculinity and vulnerability are negotiated under precarity. As shown in emerging work on Indigenous precariat experiences (Malinga, 2024; Martin et al., 2025; Rua et al., 2023), precariousness is not only about insecurity but also about the cultural logics and communal responses that shape everyday survival. For example, the reliance on gotong royong (mutual aid) and the ethic of not being a burden to one's children, evident in Bambang's story, mirror findings that precariat classes often develop pro-social practices of cooperation and reciprocity. In this sense, masculinity in precarious Indonesia is less about autonomous self-sufficiency than sustaining dignity within networks of family and community, even if this dignity is maintained through self-denial. Our study provides useful insights for feminist psychological scholarship concerned with social justice, structural inequalities and the embodied, lived experiences of marginalised groups; and it is in line with Rickett's (2016) call for feminist research that examine issues of class, privilege and resource access from an intersectional perspective.
By situating precarious masculinities in Surabaya within Javanese cultural scripts, Islamic moralities and broader structures of informal labour, this study moves beyond cognitive–behavioural framings of coping (Azam et al., 2021; Goel & Verma, 2020). Job stress here is not merely an internal imbalance of demands and resources, it is a socially constructed and culturally informed experience shaped by beliefs such as ‘rezeki pasti ada’ (provision will always come). This perspective also highlights the paradox of masculinity in precarity: men are compelled to embody resilience and self-control while their very conditions of work intensify vulnerability.
Footnotes
Acknowledgements
The authors acknowledge the support of Dr. Stefani Virlia and Ms. Kuncoro Dewi Rahmawati for providing feedback on an earlier version of this manuscript. We are also grateful for the proofreading support provided by the Language Centre at Universitas Ciputra.
Funding
The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.