Abstract
Media studies reveal that popular culture often objectifies, sexualizes, and degrades women more than men. In song lyrics, these portrayals frequently stem from men’s use of slang and nicknames. But what happens when men artists sing about a particular, named woman? Does this differ from how men artists sing about a particular, named man? This study draws on four domains of power conceptualized by Patricial Hill Collins—structural, disciplinary, hegemonic, and interpersonal—to explore how men artists attribute power to named men and named women in song lyrics. Analyzing 373 songs over 60 years, we find that named men are more likely to hold and wield diverse forms of power than named women, whose power is typically tied to interpersonal relationships. These findings not only illustrate how men artists’ attribute power to named men and named women in popular music but also demonstrate how various forms of power are used to reinforce hegemonic masculinities.
What’s in a Name? Gender & Power in Popular Music, 1960-2019
Over the past two decades, many studies have analyzed how various artifacts of popular culture, such as magazine covers (Graff, Murnen, and Krause 2013; Hatton and Trautner 2011), films (Wellman, Meitl, and Kinkade 2021), and music videos (Aubrey and Frisby 2011; Emerson 2002; Jhally 2007; Wallis 2011) portray women. Generally, this work finds that women are objectified, sexualized, and degraded in the media at far higher rates than men (Ward 2016). Moreover, this negative treatment of women typically occurs alongside the use of slang and nicknames such as baby, pie, or kitten (Rodríguez 2007). Many content analyses have demonstrated how these linguistic metaphors, most frequently used by artists who identify as men, play a role in denigrating women (Couto et al., 2022; Ramlee and John 2023; Rasmussen and Densley 2017; Smiler et al., 2017; Weitzer and Kubrin 2009). This motivates a unique question: If nicknames are a vehicle for objectifying women, what happens when men sing about a particular, named woman? Does this differ from how men sing about a particular, named man? The inclusion of a person’s name in a song title suggests the individual is special, exceptional, or powerful in some way. Consequently, analyzing song lyrics with this lens provides the opportunity to build upon studies on the objectification and sexualization of women by more closely investigating how men artists convey the relationship between gender and power in popular music.
We compare popular songs with a named man in the title to songs with a named woman in the title to understand how men sing about different kinds of power and how these distinct forms of power construct hegemonic masculinities. To start, we consider Patrica Hill Collins’ (2000) conceptualization of the U.S. matrix of domination, in which four domains of power—structural, disciplinary, hegemonic, and interpersonal—interconnect to subjugate Black women. We use these domains as a framework for understanding how power and hegemonic masculinity are related in popular songs. We then review previous research on portrayals of men and women in song lyrics, summarizing important findings on the objectification of women and masculinization of men. These studies are not overtly concerned with how these domains of power are portrayed in song lyrics, providing a unique opportunity to investigate the kinds of power men and women hold more closely. Analysis of 373 songs by men artists from 1960 to 2019 reveals that named men are more likely to hold various forms of power, and employ this power over more people, than named women. In addition, named men possess multiple kinds of power, whereas named women mostly hold interpersonal power. Finally, named women’s power decreases over time, with a slow increase in the most recent decades. In contrast, named men’s power steadily increased from the 1960s–2010s. Our findings demonstrate several ways that power is used in song lyrics to reinforce hegemonic masculinities.
Power and Masculinities
Collins describes four domains of power—structural, disciplinary, hegemonic, and interpersonal—that create unique experiences of oppression (2000). Her theorizing on this matrix of domination, which she uses to understand the experiences of Black women, has been central to scholars’ understanding of intersectionality, subjugation, and power. When considering this framework in other contexts, these domains of power also reify hegemonic masculinities. Hegemonic masculinity, in simplified terms, is defined as the most culturally valued form of masculinity. Therefore, hegemonic masculinity is not always the most prominent type of masculinity within a given time and space (Connell and Messerschmidt 2005). Still, hegemonic masculinity demonstrates how gendered inequalities are maintained through the hierarchization of masculinities and femininities to one another. In this analysis, we consider how hegemonic masculinities are constructed in song lyrics by various portrayals of power.
Structural power arises in “the policies and procedures of the U.S. legal system, labor markets, schools…and other social institutions” (Collins 2000:277). A variety of works have demonstrated how masculinities are embedded in the operation of the workplace (Acker 1990; Giazitzoglu and Muzio 2021), politics (Messner 2007), military (Hinojosa 2010), and legal system (Hatton 2022). While the masculinities discussed in these studies overlap in many ways (e.g., they emphasize toughness, emotional regulation, and devaluation of women), each is also situated within a specific structure and consequently possesses its own unique qualities and practices, despite relating to the hegemonic ideal of masculinity in the United States. To uphold this structural domain, disciplinary power institutes surveillance and punishment for those who resist institutional order (Collins 2000).
Unlike structural and disciplinary power, which operate through policies and penalties, Collins describes hegemonic power as “ideology, culture, and consciousness” (Collins 2000:284). In this case, hegemonic power emerges through cultural acts that legitimize and reinforce men’s hierarchy over women (Connell and Messerschmidt 2005; Yang 2020). These include gender norms such as dress codes, speech patterns, body language, and other personal attributes that reinforce a hegemonic ideal (Butler 1990). Lastly, interpersonal power surfaces in the “routinized, day-to-day practices of how people treat one another” (Collins 2000:287). For example, hegemonic masculinities could promote homophobia (Pascoe 2005), violence (Ferrales, Brehm, and Mcelrath 2016), and control over the household, (Dunatchik et al., 2021). Still, hegemonic masculinities are not fixed, can take on many configurations, and are not only comprised of negative traits.
Since these domains of power arise in specific contexts, some are more evident than others and seemingly impact a greater number of people. For example, interpersonal power may be wielded more frequently in private. In contrast, structural, disciplinary, and hegemonic power hinge on their public visibility. Nonetheless, the public and private spheres of U.S. society, as feminist scholars have come to understand them, are mutually reinforcing (Collins 2000; Connell and Messerschmidt 2005; West and Zimmerman 1987). Moreover, structural, disciplinary, hegemonic, and interpersonal power are not bound to one sphere. Still, considering the context in which the four domains of power arise in song lyrics provides insight on how men artists assign value to the public and private sphere.
Portrayals of Men and Women in Popular Music
Popular music since 1960 has broadly focused on love, relationships, and sex (Christenson et al., 2019). However, the frequency of songs about sex has increased over time (Dukes et al., 2003; Madanikia and Bartholomew 2014; Smiler et al., 2017), coinciding with higher levels of sexualization and objectification toward women, especially in songs by men (Hall, West, and Hill 2012), and across a number of genres (Flynn et al., 2016; Primack et al., 2008). Weitzer and Kubrin (2009), for instance, find that rap music is particularly graphic in its portrayal of women, with men most likely to degrade women through terms such as “bitch,” “whore,” and “slut,” claim women are only useful for sex, and condone violent punishment. In their study on the co-occurrence of sexual content, violent content, and use of degrading terms toward women, Couto et al. (2022) find that sexual content and violence often appear simultaneously in song lyrics. Rasmussen and Densley (2017) find that women are also objectified in country music, and increasingly so in recent years. Even major celebrities like Dolly Parton can sustain stereotypical images that portray women as sex symbols, despite challenging a number of gender norms along the way (Edwards 2018).
Analyzing representations of masculinity in country music, Leap (2020) finds that men achieve masculinity by providing women with alcohol, transportation, and places to hook up. In rap music, power, aggression, and violence are often interconnected to reinforce societal expectations of Black masculinity (Kubrin 2005). When considering Black femininity in popular music, scholars have noted many complexities. For instance, Hunter and Cuenca (2017) find that Nicki Minaj complicates the boundary between empowerment and sexualization in her own music by referring to herself as a “Black Barbie.” This relationship between objectification and agency is also complex in music videos, which can reproduce stereotypical images of Black women while simultaneously portraying them as strong and independent (Emerson 2002). Many scholars, in fact, find that women are more likely to sexualize themselves than men are to sexualize themselves (Aubrey and Frisby 2011; Flynn et al., 2016; Hall, West, and Hill, 2012).
Previous findings on the sexualization and objectification of women are not totally surprising. As Johnson suggests, in patriarchal culture, women are often portrayed as “along for the ride” (2014:8). These portrayals may be especially likely in songs where women are unnamed or not the main subject. Fleeting references to women’s appearance and/or claims of their submissiveness, while certainly problematic and important to understand, make sense within a sexist society. An exploration of songs with a named woman in the title will help us see if women are still subordinated when they fulfill a main character position. Moreover, by comparing these portrayals to men’s songs with a named man, we can take a more detailed look at how singers portray the relationship between gender and power.
Data and Methods
We analyze themes related to power and gender of named people in the most popular songs in the United States over a 60-year period, from 1960 to 2019, the full range of time for which complete data for each decade is available. We obtained the list of the 100 most popular songs by men and women as recorded by the Billboard “Hot 100.” Published weekly since 1958, the “Hot 100” list uses data about songs’ weekly airplay and sales to determine the 100 most popular songs for every week in every year and is a commonly used source to determine culturally relevant or important songs (Bretthauer, Zimmerman, and Banning 2007; Hall, West, and Hill, 2012; Hatton and Trautner 2013; Madanikia and Bartholomew 2014). 1 Using a python script, we scraped the Billboard site for all unique songs that appeared at least once in the Hot 100 within each decade. If a song was in the Hot 100 in December 1979 and stayed on the list through January 1980, it appears in our dataset in both the 1970s and the 1980s, but only one time per decade, rather than the number of weeks it was on the list. We count the occurrence of appearance on the charts rather than the number of weeks it appears to ensure our dataset reflects a broad representation of gender and power in popular music and is not skewed by a few exceptionally long-charting songs (see Leap 2020 for an alternative approach).
To identify songs that included a person’s name, we first used a python script to compile a list of all first names given to an individual born in the US since 1880, using the publicly available Social Security Administration (SSA) website. We then dropped all names that were never given to more than 100 people a year (such as “Monday,” “Raindrop”), since leaving those rare names returned a high number of false positives in the song title scan. We also dropped common names from the SSA that resulted in high numbers of false positives, such as “Love,” “Angel,” “Summer,” and “Paradise.”
We then developed additional exclusion criteria for songs whose names did not actually refer to a person in a common way. For example, we eliminated songs in which the named person referred to an animal or fictional character (e.g., Rudolph, Alvin the Chipmunk, etc.), a dance style (e.g., the Dougie), a place rather than a person (e.g., Flo’s Kitchen, Sam’s Place), a brand (e.g., John Deere), or a religious figure (e.g., Jesus). Some songs included a person’s name, but were instrumental with no lyrics (e.g., “The James Bond Theme”), thus we eliminated these. We also eliminated songs that used only a nickname or term of endearment (e.g., honey, candy, etc.), songs that used a name as an adjective (e.g., Fergalicious), and songs with generic or non-specific names in the title (Miss Movin’ On, Mr. Know it All, etc.). Finally, we eliminated songs performed by the cast of the Glee television series (2009-15), because they were most often “mashups” or shortened versions of full songs.
The resulting dataset included 467 songs from the 1960s, 303 from the 1970s, 128 from the 1980s, 79 from the 1990s, 69 from the 2000s, and 102 from the 2010s. Given the heavy skew towards songs in the 1960s and 70s, we took a random sample of 95 songs from these two decades (the average of the other decades), creating a set of 568 songs. We then collected lyrics for each of these songs from Lyrics.com, using Genius.com or Google when lyrics were missing from Lyrics.com.
Coding and Analysis
In order to understand how power is represented in songs, we coded every song’s lyrics for the type and scope of power referred to for each named person in the title using binary codes for the measures described below. We began by having each author code a random sample of the same twelve songs to test our codes. For this set of songs, 74 percent of the binary codes were coded identically between coders. We then revised our coding scheme and coded another random sample of ten songs to establish intercoder reliability and achieved 98 percent agreement on the binary codes. Each author then coded about half the dataset, frequently flagging songs for discussion or deletion, resulting in a final dataset of 373 songs by men and 72 by women. Since the number of songs by women artists is significantly smaller, we discuss these songs in a supplemental analysis at the end of this article. To be clear, our main findings reflect the sample of songs by men artists (n = 373). We later included a categorical variable related to scope of power to identify if an individual’s power was over a single man, a single woman, multiple men and women, multiple men, or multiple women.
Measures
Since our primary intent is to understand portrayals of individuals who are signaled as special, exceptional, or powerful in some way, we only coded the person(s) named in the title of the song. Other named or gendered characters who appear in the song lyrics but were not named in the title are not included in this analysis. Additionally, because we also aim to understand how gender and power are conceptualized in song lyrics, we do not include other subjects like vulnerability or subordination in this analysis. Our coding scheme includes multiple codes that comprise three of the four domains of power we have discussed. We did not find any instances of disciplinary power in our coding. Named individuals were coded based on the types of power they held (if any), and our coding was not mutually exclusive. If song lyrics referenced multiple domains of power, the named person was coded for all relevant types rather than assigned a single category.
Interpersonal Power
We found three forms of interpersonal power in song lyrics: relationship power, sexual power, and physical power, including violence. Using a binary coding scheme, named people were coded as having relationship power if there was indication that the person had control or influence over another person’s (or multiple people’s) emotions, thoughts, and/or behavior. In our analyses, relationship power implies an existing or desired relationship that may be sexual but is not only sexual. Named people were coded as having sexual power if there was evidence that they had control or influence over another person’s (or multiple people’s) emotions, thoughts, and/or behavior related to sexual activity, sexual desire, including implied or explicit behaviors that act as a source of power or control. Sexual power could be found in the context of a relationship, or not. When a named person’s body or weapons controlled or influenced other people, including physical threats and acts of violence, they were coded as having physical power.
Hegemonic Power
Two forms of hegemonic power were prevalent in the song lyrics: celebrity and financial power and power based on skills and talents. Named people were coded for celebrity power if they were outright famous, or if they were famous in their social circles (e.g., the popular kid at school). We combined this category with financial power, as these two forms of power often overlapped and function in similar ways. In our sample, displays of wealth, such as having expensive clothing or luxury vehicles, did not always provide control over others. Instead, financial resources were typically described in conjunction with celebrity power to signal cultural influence, shape perceptions, or reinforce certain ideologies of masculinity. For this reason, celebrity power and financial power are analyzed together and operate as hegemonic power. Lastly, named people were coded for skill- or talent-based power if their control, power, or influence of another person (or multiple people) was based on their skills, abilities, or talents.
Structural Power
Few songs in our dataset referenced structural power such as power derived from military, legal, or organizational positions, thus this form of power is not included in our analyses, along with other forms of power that were neither interpersonal nor hegemonic (such as magical power or power over animals; n = 15).
In the sections that follow, we analyze how named men and women hold and wield different forms of power in popular songs. We first discuss important trends identified by the characteristics of our sample. Next, we consider scope: whether the named person has power over multiple people or a single individual, and whether that power is exerted over a single man, a single woman, multiple men and women, multiple men, or multiple women. We then analyze the occurrence of hegemonic and interpersonal forms of power and how these distinct kinds of power vary amongst named men and named women in song lyrics. Lastly, we briefly consider songs by women artists, noting suggestive evidence of increases in women’s power in recent decades. While our findings summarize song lyrics, and not real-world dynamics, they help us understand how portrayals of power symbolically construct and reproduce hegemonic masculinity.
Findings
Sample characteristics
n = per decade total number of songs by men artists.
Scope of Power
Scope of power over time
n = per decade total number of songs by men artists with powerful men or women.
Changes in women’s scope of power coincides with changes in the frequency of women’s relationship power, which we will later discuss in greater detail. Since relationship power was most common from the 1960s to the 1990s, we saw high levels of women’s power over an individual during those decades. As relationship power decreased in the 2000s and 2010s, we saw a decline in women’s power over one individual during those years. This parallels with women’s increase in celebrity power in the 2000s and 2010s, and their subsequent increase in power over multiple people. In other words, changes in women’s scope of power can be attributed to the kinds of power that men assign to named women in their songs. Taking a closer look at descriptive examples of both men and women’s power will further unpack important dynamics in how men sing about gender and power.
Hegemonic Power
Hegemonic power refers to the symbolic influence and social recognition that is demonstrated in public spaces via dress, language, and other norms. In our analysis, we also discuss forms of hegemonic power that derive from status, possessions, and other attributes that construct hegemonic masculinity.
Celebrity & Financial Power
Men artists’ attribution of power over time
n = per decade total number of songs by men artists with powerful men or women.
Women artists’ attribution of power over time
n = per decade total number of songs by women artists with powerful men or women.
One way that men express celebrity power is by arguing how well-known the named person is. In “Flow Joe” (Fat Joe 1993), for example, the artist states, “Everybody knows Fat Joe’s in town.” He goes on to say, “My name rings bells, within the vicinity.” Detailing the reach that men celebrities have in society is a common way of portraying influence over others. In addition, some singers state how men’s celebrity status makes them representative of other men. For instance, in “Still D.R.E.,” (Dr. Dre feat. Snoop Dogg 1999) asserts, “I’m representing for them gangstas all across the world,” portraying himself as someone who encapsulates the experience of an entire group of people.
Many of the songs that emphasize celebrity power also discuss financial power. Showing off one’s riches is a common method that celebrities use to demonstrate their control over others in song lyrics. Of the 17 songs that express financial power, 15 of them are also tied to celebrity power. None of the songs in our analysis contain women with financial power, thus men always have greater financial power than women. Additionally, men’s financial power steadily increases from decade to decade, except for a lack of financial power in the 1970s. However, financial power is never a common source of power for men. The peak of financial power occurred in the 2000s, but even in this time period, fewer than half of powerful men were described as having financial power. Financial power in song lyrics is much more significant in its tie to celebrity power.
Men artists portray financial power by stating how money and expensive objects (in addition to their celebrity status) can give men influence over women. In “Bill Gates,” Lil Wayne exclaims, “Bitch, I get big bucks, pockets on Bruce Bruce” (2010). In “Bow Wow (That’s My Name),” Lil’ Bow Wow brags of having “hundred-thousand-dollar chains” (2000). In both of these examples, artists describe financial assets as something that bolsters celebrity status, gives superiority over others, or is a powerful means for attracting women.
Power in the Form of Skills
Men artists consistently describe themselves and other men as deriving power from their skills, abilities, and talents, whereas they rarely describe women in this way. In fact, there are only two songs in the entire dataset in which women are described as being powerful for their skills. In contrast, men having power related to skills and abilities ranges from a low of 7.7 percent in the 2010s to a high of 47.1 percent in the 2000s.
Songs describing men celebrities talk about the skills, abilities, and talents that made them famous. For example, Eminem says he is among the best rappers, boasting “whether you like to admit it, I just shit it, better than ninety percent of you rappers out can” (2000). Mike Tyson and Muhammed Ali are described as skillful boxers (Jazzy Jeff and The Fresh 1989; Johnny Wakelin & The Kinshasa Band 1975). In his ode to Barry Manilow, Ray Stevens (1979) describes Manilow’s singing talent to be so powerful that his “songs can really comfort the unlucky,” including the singer, who is “miserable” because of his myriad problems.
Unlike men, who are described as powerful for a range of abilities, only two songs feature women as powerful because of their skills and talents. “Mame” by Louis Armstrong (1966) describes a woman who can “coax the blues right out of the horn,” “charm the husk right off of the corn,” and make men “feel like a king.” In “The Adventures of Rain Dance Maggie,” Maggie’s talent is primarily sexual, a woman who “make[s] it rain” and takes charge in sexual situations (Red Hot Chili Peppers 2011).
Interpersonal Power
Distinct from hegemonic power, which artists typically tied to the public sphere, interpersonal power was described as control or influence over others that manifested in the everyday, private interactions between individuals. Such power demonstrates a variety of scenarios in which artists bolster men’s dominance over others, especially women.
Physical Power
In every decade, men are ascribed a greater amount of physical power than women. Overall, men’s physical power remains relatively steady over time, from approximately 18 percent to 44 percent. Women’s physical power, on the other hand, is more sporadic. Nonetheless, women never exceed men in their level of physical power. The peak of men’s physical power is 44.4 percent compared to women’s 16.7 percent.
Women’s physical power is typically described as retaliation for experiencing a bad relationship. In these songs, enduring cheating and abuse pushes women to use physical power to exact revenge or take control of their situation. For example, in “Frankie and Johnny,” the singer narrates, “I was her man, she caught me doing her wrong… For in her sweet loving hand / She was totin’ a 44 gun” (Elvis Presley 1961). It is assumed that Frankie shoots her former lover for cheating on her, one example of women’s physical power.
Men, on the other hand, are attributed a wider assortment of physical power. Unlike women’s violence, men’s violence does not occur in response to a bad relationship. Instead, men are described as displaying violence or threats of violence as a means of intimidation or to reinforce a claim of superior status. Many of the songs using this intimidation tactic threaten men’s physical strength. In “Mr. Carter,” Lil Wayne (feat. Jay-Z, 2008) raps, “And you can try me, fucker, but when I squeeze, it hurt,” an example of harming others that was common in many rap songs. Other genres also described men as physically powerful. In “Bad Bad Billy,” Snuff (1983) sings, “No match or rumble, he’s gonna get in trouble/Nobody’s gonna stop him, just try.” Both of these songs either allude to or explicitly state how men use physical strength to hurt others. These descriptions operate to intimidate others, convey superiority, and defend one’s celebrity status.
In other genres, the context for motivating physical violence is more varied. In “Jeremy,” Pearl Jam describes a mentally disturbed adolescent who “gnashed his teeth and bit the recess lady’s breast” (1995). “Black Superman” describes the physical power of a world famous boxer, Muhammad Ali: “He knows how to talk and he knows how to fight / And all the contenders were beat out of sight” (Johnny Wakelin & The Kinshasa Band 1975). These songs show how winning a physical fight makes one a powerful intimidator. Other songs detailing physical strength are vaguer, such as “drinkin’ beer, kickin’ ass, and takin’ down names” (Don Henley 1982).
Some physical power even goes beyond descriptions of physical strength, describing the use of weapons as a way of maintaining superiority. In “Wesley’s Theory” featuring George Clinton and Thundercat, Kendrick Lamar (2015) raps, “When I get signed, homie, I’ma buy a strap/Straight from the CIA, set it on my lap / Take a few M-16s to the hood / Pass ‘em all out on the block, what’s good?” In this song, the singer’s distribution of weapons within his community makes him a powerful figure. Other rap songs similarly describe the use of weapons as a mechanism for instilling fear and obtaining power.
In extreme cases, men’s power is portrayed through acts of killing. Here, a threat of death can be seen as the ultimate intimidation tactic. In “Forgot About Dre,” the singer states, “One day I was walking by with a Walkman on/When I caught a guy, gave me an awkward eye (What you looking at?)/I strangled him up in the parking lot” (Dr. Dre feat. Eminem 2000). In “President Carter,” the singer says, “The body count is the physical proof/And they thought drugs were killing the youth” (Lil Wayne 2011). Both of these singers describe killing as a means for displaying power. When thinking about their conjunction to other categories, these men are rich, famous, and dangerous.
Relationship Power
In every decade of our analysis, except the 2000s, men are most likely to describe women as possessing relationship power. In fact, other than the 1970s and 1990s, when a quarter or less of powerful men exhibited relationship power, men are rarely described as wielding this form of power. Women, on the other hand, differ each decade in their level of relationship power, from a low of 16.7 percent in the 2000s to a high of 81 percent in the 1970s. There is no clear pattern in women’s relationship power over time.
The men who sing about women’s relationship power frequently reference women’s control over their emotions. Oftentimes, singers describe the sadness they would feel if their current lover broke up with them or the woman they desire refused to be with them. In “Laudy Miss Claudy,” the singer states “I’m in misery” in response to his lover not giving him the attention he thinks he deserves (The Buckinghams 1967). In “Ginnie Bell,” Paul Dino (1961) describes the emotional distress he would endure without the girl of his desires: “If you lose this girl/You’re gonna lose your head.” Finally, Incubus details the immense depression the artist feels without Anna-Molly by his side: “A cloud hangs over and mutes my happiness/A thousand ships couldn’t sail me back from distress” (2006).
Women are also described as influencing men’s happiness. These songs typically describe men as chronically sad until a woman enters their lives. Whether they are in an actual relationship or a desired one, men often sing about women’s joyful influence. In “Sunny,” Bobby Hebb sings “Sunny, yesterday my life was filled with rain/Sunny, you smiled at me and really eased the pain” (1966) (Similarly, Neil Sedaka sings “I never wore a smile/Till the day I found you” (1964)). Both of these songs detail a dramatic shift in the singer’s life due to a relationship with a woman. Nonetheless, neither of these songs have many details on how the woman has improved their lives beyond their mere presence and beauty. Likewise, in “Bernadette” by The Four Tops (1967), the singer describes how being in a relationship has brought him immense happiness, but the reasons why remain a mystery: “But you, you give me the joy, this heart of mine/Has always been longing for.”
Some men describe women’s power over their very willingness to live. In some situations, singers describe wanting to die after hurting the women they were with by cheating on them. In “C’mon Marianne,” the singer states “So I hang my head, wish that I was dead,” (The 4 Seasons, 1967). Similarly, The Hollies sing, “I can’t make it if you leave me” (1969). In another example, a man describes wanting to die after his lover chooses to be with another man: “And if there’s time/Before I pull this trigger/Then tell me what he’s got/That I ain’t got” (Brook Benton, 1967). Overall, these songs showcase some men’s inability to conceptualize a life worth living if they are left or refused a relationship, even when they were the one who put their union in jeopardy.
Sometimes, artists portray women as having power over men’s behavior. In these songs, men describe feeling constrained in their ability to do as they please. In “Ruby,” Adam Wade (1960) describes a woman with an enchanting power he cannot ignore, singing, “I hear your voice and I must come to you / I have no choice what else can I do?” In “Maggie May” by Rod Stewart (1971), Maggie has consumed every aspect of the singer’s life, drawing him away from home and making him unable to consider the possibility of leaving her: “You stole my heart, I couldn’t leave you if I tried.”
Only one song describes a man with relationship power. In “Standing in for Jody,” the singer describes a man who has control over the woman he wants to be with. In this case, the woman finds Jody irresistible and keeps going back to him, to the singer’s dismay. Overall, this is similar to how women have control over men’s behavior in the context of a relationship (The Soul Philosopher 1972).
Sexual Power
Twice as many songs refer to women’s sexual power (n = 28) than men’s sexual power (n = 13). In all but three of the songs about men, it is men making claims about their own or another celebrity’s sexual power. Moreover, in all but two songs the scope of men’s sexual power is over multiple women. The songs about women are generally about current or former lovers, or romantic crushes, and their power is more likely to be just over one person, usually the singer (19 of 28 songs are about individual power). Women in every decade except the 2000s are attributed more sexual power than men.
Women’s sexual power is the second-most common type of power that men sing about. Women’s sexual power is so great that, even when men are in bad relationships, they feel powerless to leave them. For example, in the 1972 hit “Mean Little Woman, Rosalie” by Tommy Roe, the singer complains, “I can’t believe the way you treat me/I never get a smile from you/I’m like a puppet on a string baby/I have to do just what you tell me to.” He then goes on to imply, however, that the sex is so good that it makes everything else worthwhile: “But when you love me nothing matters/I couldn’t get enough of you/All that I need you finally give me/And that makes all the pain worth going through.” Likewise, Rod Stewart complained about “Maggie May” in the 1971 breakup song that “I feel I’m being used,” and that she “made a first-class fool out of me,” but stayed in the relationship for as long as he did in part because “what a lover, [she] wore me out.”
Artists also describe instances where women’s sexual power makes men lose their minds. For example, in 1986, in one of the few songs where women had sexual power over multiple people, Jermaine Stevens sang about “Jody,” a woman who “everyone wants a piece of.” Her sexual skills, “the way she moves her hips,” were so high that “Your world is spinnin’ ‘round when you close your eyes/You’ll think you must be learning how to fly.” He warns, “When she gets to you/You could lose your mind, ‘cause she’s so damn fine!” Other examples include the song “Tracy” (1969), where The Cufflinks say that “Something you do/Bounces me off the ceiling,” and the 1979 hit “Plain Jane” by Sammy Hagar , who says she “kisses with her lips so tight/Oh, it hits me just like dynamite,” that “Plain Jane - Oh yeah, you’re drivin’ me insane.”
In contrast, artists are much more likely to describe men’s sexual power as extending over multiple people. For example, in “Jesse Brady” by the The McCoys (1968), the titular character is “known all over the world” because he “takes care of all of the girls.” He says, “I know what makes women happy/They’d like me to come inside/I don’t stay with one girl too long/I can’t stop ‘til every girl is satisfied.” Similarly, Jim Stafford sang about a man named “Jasper” (1976), describing him as “A ladies’ man, sweet as candy/Fish ‘em in on a sugar-coated line/Left a trail of helpless husbands/Lonely ladies by the dozens… Jasper wrapped his spell around ‘em/Like a clinging vine.” In 1998, Pressha sang about a man literally named “Splackavellie,” a term for a man who is very good in bed. He says, “Every woman needs her own Splackavellie/A brotha she can call when her man ain’t doin her right/He can work it all night until the morning light/Make her feel right right right.” Thus, when men do possess sexual power, it is much different in scope and effect than women’s sexual power.
Portrayals of Gender and Power in Songs by Women Artists
While the number of songs by women that include a named person in the title is small, there are some important takeaways that motivate further research on this topic (see Table 4). First, women sing about men’s relationship and sexual power most frequently, but there is not an identifiable pattern over time. However, in the 2010s, women artists describe many kinds of power that women possess. Still, these findings stem from only 7 songs in the 2010s about powerful women, making it difficult to meaningfully compare how men and women sing about powerful, named individuals. Future studies could include songs without a named person in the title to further investigate how women artists describe powerful women and if powerful women are more common in later decades.
Discussion and Conclusions
Our analyses illustrate how hegemonic masculinity is symbolically constructed and reproduced in mainstream song lyrics. We show that when men artists name individuals in their song titles, an act that linguistically signals significance and narrative centrality, they overwhelmingly endow named men with multiple forms of hegemonic power that are expansive, public-facing, and culturally celebrated. Named women, in contrast, are typically granted power only within the interpersonal realm, confined to the domain of romantic or sexual influence, and frequently depicted in ways that reinforce, rather than challenge, patriarchal hierarchies. In other words, we find that men’s importance is linked to their ability to shape the world; women’s, to their ability to shape a man.
Our use of Collins’ (2000) framework of the four domains of power (structural, disciplinary, hegemonic, and interpersonal) allows us to theorize how forms of masculinity are embedded across multiple layers of cultural meaning. While structural and disciplinary power were less visible in lyrical form, hegemonic and interpersonal power saturated the dataset. The hegemonic domain, characterized by the shaping of ideology, culture, and norms, was especially dominant. This was most evident in representations of named men as celebrities or cultural icons who not only command social recognition but also possess dominant attributes of manhood such as financial prowess. These portrayals legitimize men’s power not through direct control, but through symbolic capital, or the ability to define what counts as desirable, impressive, or normal.
On the other hand, within the interpersonal domain, named men were often characterized as violent, contributing to a construction of hegemonic masculinity that values physical strength and aggression. This aligns with past work revealing ties between masculinity and violence against women in popular music (Couto et al., 2022; Kubrin 2005; Weitzer and Kubrin 2009). However, in our sample, an increase over time in songs about sex (Dukes et al., 2003; Madanikia and Bartholomew 2014; Smiler et al., 2017) coincided with a decrease in men artists characterizing named men as sexually powerful. Instead, men artists portrayed named women as more sexually powerful than named men in every decade except the 2000s. This suggests that named women in song lyrics may be described as victims of men’s sexual violence less frequently than women who remain nameless. In contrast, when considering women’s empowerment in song lyrics (Emerson 2002; Hunter and Cuenca 2017), our findings detail many examples of named women’s sexual power influencing men’s emotions and behaviors, which could be interpreted as named women having strength and agency. The singers in our sample certainly portrayed named women as having noteworthy sexual attributes that gave them an immense level of power. However, determining whether these examples are empowering or objectifying women requires an additional analysis looking at objectification and victimization in song lyrics, which was not the focus of this article.
In addition to these themes, named men in songs typically enacted their power over multiple people, whereas women’s power was usually bound to the context of a heterosexual relationship and only manifested in control over a single person’s emotions and behaviors. The implications are significant: men are imagined as public actors, women as private muses. This conceptualization of women’s power reifies a long history of U.S. culture relegating women to the private realm rather than recognizing how public and private spheres are mutually reinforcing. In contrast, men artists assigned named men an ever-increasing scope of power over time. Overall, our findings reveal key patterns in how men artists portray the relationship between gender and power over time. We contribute to previous work on this topic by highlighting how portrayals of hegemonic masculinity have increasingly become linked to mechanisms of hegemonic power such as celebrity status and cultural influence, which are notably unattainable ideals for most men.
Our analysis had several limitations. First, we focused only on named individuals, which overlooks how gender and power are portrayed in songs without a person’s name in the title. Second, due to a small sample size, we were unable to meaningfully analyze songs by women. Future studies could examine songs without a named person in the title to address these two concerns. Third, our analysis was limited thematically. Even though power is important, other attributes of named people in songs, such as vulnerability, objectification, personality characteristics, or appearance, could reveal more gender differences in the characterizations of named people in song lyrics, and would be important directions for further research. Fourth, we did not measure differences by genre. Still, our data indicate that R&B/Hip-Hop songs most frequently portray men as powerful for their celebrity status, skills, and physical prowess, but we did not formally test this assumption. Future research should expand on previous work analyzing genre (Flynn et al., 2016) and include power more centrally. Other suggestions for future research include analyzing differences in men and women’s power by the race of the artist, examining how non-binary artists portray gender and power, or looking at the manifestation of power in other forms of popular media.
In the end, our findings point to distinct ways that men artists conceptualize men and women’s power in song lyrics. By integrating intersectional theory with cultural analysis, this study offers a framework for understanding how gendered power is portrayed not only through who is represented, but through the types of power they are allowed to possess. As Collins (2000) reminds us, domination is multidimensional; power operates through symbols, interactions, ideologies, and institutions. Mainstream music, as a cultural artifact with massive reach, is a key site where these domains converge. Songs do not only reflect power, they narrate, mediate, and legitimize it. Our analysis reveals that hegemonic masculinity in popular music is not a flat or static ideal. It is dynamic, expanding, and reasserting itself in different guises, from brute strength to branded celebrity. But it remains hegemonic because it excludes, marginalizes, and delimits other forms of power. Women may be powerful in love, but they are rarely powerful in the world. And when they are, that power is underrepresented, under-named, or tied to sexuality rather than skill, status, or institutional control. Where are the songs that celebrate powerful mothers, bosses, political leaders, and/or everyday heroes? Women have a wide range of skills and talents that should be reflected in the music we listen to. We encourage artists and listeners to flip the channel to one that challenges outdated stereotypes and celebrates powerful women and men in all their complexities.
Footnotes
Acknowledgments
The authors wish to thank Dan Whalen and Sarah Smith for their research assistance on this project.
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.