First, friendship and comradeship are shown to be separate and distinct forms of interaction.
In this way, all relevant indicators can be assessed in one measurement model and, since causality has been stipulated, the effect of hegemonic masculinity upon both friendship and comradeship can be simultaneously analyzed.
In this model the latent variables Hegemonic Complicity, Friendship, Comradeship, and Life Regrets are shown as indicated by latent dimensions in some cases or known to be measured using indicators from the survey.
Life Regrets has been added to determine whether the practice of friendship or comradeship will generate a retrospective satisfaction with interpersonal relationships.
Again Hegemonic Complicity is a negative and robust predictor of Friendship and a positive predictor of Comradeship.
Nonetheless, increasing age continued to negatively affect the practice of Comradeship.
Others (see Strikweda & May, 1992) have conceptualized friendship and comradeship as separate and distinct.
In this case, comradeship is the form of interaction that is commensurate with hegemonic complicity, and middlers do gender through the practice of comradeship.
Perhaps following Levinson and other developmental analyses, middlers have a greater tendency to do gender as comradeship in their youth than in their older years.
As validated and constructed, hegemonic complicity will predict friendship as it decreases and comradeship as it increases either within a specific situation, as a habitual pattern, or over the life course.
By approaching these middlers and their interactional dynamics from within a gender relations perspective, I have argued that friendship and comradeship are separate and distinct forms of interaction that men engage in subject to their degree of hegemonic complicity.