Servant leadership reframed masculine authority to fit a post-industrial service economy

Evidence

Less abrasive than “male headship,” servant leadership framed male authority as obligation, sacrifice, and service. Men were urged to accept their responsibilities, to work hard, to serve their wives and families, to eschew alcohol, gambling, and pornography, to step up around the home, and to be present in their children’s lives. The notion of “servant leadership” had originated in the business world. With the decline of production in the 1970s and 1980s, service work took over a larger share of the labor market, and servant leadership helped redefine masculine authority in a way that didn’t conflict with men’s role in a service economy. No longer producers in a traditional sense, men could still be leaders. Within Christian circles, the concept of servant leadership similarly enabled men to maintain their authority in the home even as they no longer maintained breadwinner status. — Kristin Kobes Du Mez, Jesus and John Wayne, 352

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to the reader’s broader interest in how ideology adapts to economic structure — echoes Milgrom-style institutional adaptation and the theme of ideology tracking material conditions. — connects to: Leadership is rooted in service, generosity, and being first to give — Robin Wall Kimmerer, Braiding Sweetgrass: Indigenous Wisdom,…, 394
• SEED: Essay angle: ‘servant leadership’ as a case study in how religious masculinity absorbed economic displacement — how theology catches up to labor markets.