Capitalist messiahs fighting small-mindedness: hegemonic startup masculinity in a semi-peripheral context Open Access

Research has established that the dominant discourse on entrepreneurship, perpetuated by both academic research (Ahl, 2002) and media representations (Hamilton, 2013), is highly masculine, thus excluding women. Furthermore, studies on masculinity in entrepreneurship draw attention to hierarchies between different kinds of entrepreneurial masculinities constructed by race, sexual orientation and class. They point out that specifically white, heterosexual, middle-upper class masculinity is deemed normative (Giazitzoglu and Down, 2017; Ogbor, 2000; Rumens and Ozturk, 2019). However, as these studies examine Western contexts, geographical inequalities remain largely unaddressed in this regard. Research on entrepreneurial masculinities in semi-peripheral or peripheral countries, which are less economically developed, is scarce.

The current paper aims to contribute to filling this research gap by focusing on the startup context of Hungary, a semi-peripheral Central Eastern European country where the development of neoliberal capitalism and the institutions supporting the startup ecosystem started with a considerable delay compared to Western countries. Drawing on critical discourse analysis of 143 online and print media articles, the paper aims to explore how hegemonic startup masculinity, as a cultural ideal, is discursively constructed in this specific context, how femininities and other types of masculinities are excluded or subordinated by this construction, and what role semi-peripheral locationality might play in the process. By focusing on the startup masculinities in the context of Hungary, the paper adds to the understanding of masculinity in entrepreneurship literature and contributes to the decolonisation of masculinity studies (Connell, 2016) as well.

According to Connell’s hegemonic masculinity theory, masculinity is not a unitary and homogeneous concept but plural and changeable. Masculinities are historically variable, and even at a given time, there can be multiple masculinities in society, which are not equal alternatives but are arranged in a specific relation to each other (and to femininities). At the top of the hierarchy is “hegemonic masculinity” (Connell, 1987, 2000), the normative, culturally dominant, most widely accepted and socially preferred form of masculinity, “the most honoured way of being a man” (Connell and Messerschmidt, 2005, p. 832). It is always constructed in relation to other subordinated or marginalised masculinities and in relation to femininities and women. Furthermore, it serves to legitimise the patriarchal gender order (Connell, 1987, 2000; Connell and Messerschmidt, 2005).

Hegemonic masculinity is not a fixed character type. Its precise content is dependent upon the social and historical context in which it operates. However, power, authority and dominance over femininities and other types of masculinities are always central to the concept (Kimmel, 2018). In the United States, hegemonic masculinity can be described as a “rich, good-looking, popular, athletic, white, heterosexual man” (Cooper, 2000, p. 381), but this may vary across time and space. For instance, in high schools and universities, sexual experience and the demonstration of heterosexuality may be the most important ways to move up in the hierarchy of masculinity (Flood, 2008; Hamilton and Armstrong, 2009; Pascoe, 2012). In the bodybuilding subculture and in gymnasium scenes, the physical size of the body, muscles and the ability to lift heavy weights are key elements of hegemonic masculinity (Klein, 1993). A study of masculinity in construction sites found that the demonstration of physical toughness and prowess, even at the risk of one’s own safety, as well as participation in collective masculine practices, such as staring at, objectifying (sometimes harassing) women and drinking alcohol after work in bars, are all building blocks of hegemonic masculinity (Iacuone, 2005).

Studies have repeatedly shown that entrepreneurship and the business world are not gender-neutral, but rather fundamentally masculine spaces (Ahl, 2006; Bruni et al., 2004; Hamilton, 2013; Hechavarria and Ingram, 2016; Smith, 2010), where financial success and the possession of power based on large financial resources determine hegemony (Giazitzoglu and Down, 2017).

The media discourse on entrepreneurship is similarly gendered and highly masculine (Hamilton, 2013; Ljunggren and Alsos, 2007). A study of metaphors in entrepreneurial media discourse in several Anglo-Saxon countries and India found that military and sports metaphors associated with competitiveness and fighting were the most prevalent (de Koning and Dodd, 2004). According to studies examining newspapers in Northern European countries (Jernberg et al., 2020; Ljunggren and Alsos, 2007), the hallmarks of hegemonic entrepreneurial masculinity are a competitive and driven personality, ambitious goals, distinctive risk-taking behaviour, passion for growth, and, most importantly, success linked to financial measures. The hegemonic male entrepreneur is described as a hero who can work tirelessly, thanks to his never-ending amount of energy and self-confidence. Besides work, he still has room for hobbies and high-status leisure activities. He also has a supportive, but basically invisible family in the background, showing that successful entrepreneurship goes hand in hand with a successful private life.

Female entrepreneurs and non-hegemonic (subordinated) male entrepreneurs, on the other hand, are discursively attached to their families in a much more direct way: the representation of female entrepreneurs is usually linked to domestic concerns. They are portrayed as having a caring attitude, prioritising work–life balance and lifestyle goals. Subordinated male entrepreneurs were also presented as passionate about their families (besides work) and had a much lower ambition to grow their business (Jernberg et al., 2020; Ljunggren and Alsos, 2007).

The findings regarding the gendered nature of media discourse on entrepreneurship, as well as the feminised discourse surrounding female entrepreneurs, such as their typical portrayal as motivated by lifestyle and other softer goals, and being constructed as secondary entrepreneurs, have been corroborated by other studies across Europe (Eikhof et al., 2013; Rugina and Ahl, 2023; Virágh and Szepesi, 2022). Although entrepreneurship is often depicted as an open and meritocratic space, masculine discourse leads to normative results in exclusions. Those who do not conform to this discourse are cast as the “other”, requiring specific interventions for “fixing” assumed deficits (Ahl and Marlow, 2012). This is frequently discussed in the context of female entrepreneurs, who, according to the narrative, are expected to exert more effort and undergo education to acquire prototypical entrepreneurial skills and attitudes, such as being proactive, competitive, risk-taking and confident, in order to overcome their feminised entrepreneurial shortcomings (Marlow, 2020).

The term “startup” is typically applied to young and innovative companies aiming for rapid growth. Fast expansion is enabled by a scalable – usually technology-based – product easily applicable to new contexts. Startups are embedded in the new knowledge economy born in Silicon Valley, a “male-dominated, turbo-capitalism environment” often referred to as the “Valley of the Boys” (Cooper, 2000, p. 379) or “Brotopia” – a boy’s club behind a veil of utopistic ideals (Chang, 2019). Thus, like entrepreneurship in general, the startup subculture is considered to be an inherently masculine socio-economic space (Duong and Brännback, 2023; Kanze et al., 2018; Koskinen, 2021; Marlow and McAdam, 2015).

Cooper (2000) studied knowledge workers (startup founders and employees) in the technology sector of Silicon Valley and found an emerging new masculinity rooted in the so-called nerd masculinity. The nerd or geek masculinity, originally a marginalised type, has been heavily repositioned as the knowledge economy has blossomed (Bell, 2013). It became glorified in the high-tech world and the Silicon Valley, the success story of which is also often described as “the revenge of the nerds” (Cooper, 2000, p. 381). This demonstrates how (hegemonic) masculinity can vary across time and social contexts: a configuration marginalised and ridiculed in one context can be honoured in another (Giazitzoglu, 2024).

According to Cooper (2000), this new masculinity – the “go-to guy” – is just as competitive as its hegemonic counterparts. However, instead of emphasising physical strength, sports skills or sexual conquest, competition here is based on technical and coding skills, creativity, innovation and the ability to work more hours than others. There is a clear deviation from traditional types of masculinities. First, the new type of masculinity rebels against traditional corporate masculinities (Giazitzoglu and Muzio, 2021) by favouring flat organisational hierarchies, less rigid workplace cultures, flexible working hours and a casual dress code. Second, unlike traditional masculinities but similar to entrepreneurial masculinities in general, the importance of physical strength and muscles is replaced by mental and emotional strength, as well as high intellect. Hegemonic masculinity is constructed by demonstrating a full commitment to the job, completing the mission against all odds and dedicating oneself to a masculine work ethic. Cooper (2000) argues that the expectation to be absorbed in the task and work 10+ hours a day excludes women and caregiving responsibilities, whether by effect or design.

Research on the startup culture has been conducted in Central Eastern European (CEE) post-socialist countries as well (Koskinen, 2021; Tobiasiewicz, 2021; Virágh et al., 2024). According to these studies, startup founders are expected to have global ambitions, international orientation and a growth-seeking mindset, and they are always eager to take risks. Teamwork and cooperation are glorified, experimentation is appreciated, and failures are not only not stigmatised but embraced and reframed as part of the startup founder’s journey and self-development. The focus on community impact and the heroic endeavour of creating a better world are also key elements of startup culture, not only in Silicon Valley but also in CEE contexts.

Only one of these studies analysed startup culture from the perspective of masculinities, stating that the notions of fighting, winning, risk-taking and expanding relate it to hegemonic masculinity, while several practices in the discourse – such as cooperation and the acceptance of making mistakes – could be associated with other gender constructs (Tobiasiewicz, 2021). However, even this study failed to explore the ways hegemonic masculinity constructed in the startup discourse subordinates “others” and the relevance of semi-peripheral locationality in the process, which is the aim of the present paper.

Hungary, like other post-socialist CEE countries, is considered to be in a semi-peripheral position in the global hierarchy of the world economy. The term “semi-periphery” emerges from world system theory (Wallerstein, 1979), referring to regions or countries positioned between the core and the periphery. This concept is closely linked to the process of “transition”: the transformation of post-socialist countries into neoliberal market economies by adopting the Western model (Blagojevic, 2013), constructing “capitalism by design” (Stark, 1992, p. 17) or “capitalism from above”. In contrast to the “capitalism from below” model, where capitalism develops gradually and organically, in this case, change occurred rapidly and was predominantly “manufactured” by foreign experts (King and Szelényi, 2005, p. 211).

In the 1990s, following the regime change in Hungary, the prevailing narrative focused on catching up with Western countries and reintegrating into Europe, which portrayed Western nations as superior. In addition to its economic dimension, this narrative also had a cultural and moral aspect (Böröcz, 2006). This meant that CEE countries were expected not only to adopt neoliberal economic policies but also to embrace neoliberal ideology and Western liberal democratic values (Grzebalska and Pető, 2018). This can be linked to the concept of the “East-West slope” (Melegh, 2006) that is deeply embedded in the discourses on Hungarian history. It encompasses the cultural hegemony of Western countries alongside their economic advantage, presenting these two aspects as interconnected: Western countries are deemed the most developed due to their cultural superiority, while the relative poverty of Eastern countries is seen as a consequence of their perceived inferior intrinsic qualities, which are therefore deemed to be overcome (Böröcz, 2006; Gagyi, 2016). The hegemony of the convergence discourse was only challenged during the economic crisis in 2008; however, it continues to persist in the Hungarian media (Kováts, 2020).

The discourse around entrepreneurship could not escape the above pattern either. As a result of the opaque and suspicious transactions of privatisation, the massive practice of tax evasion, growing social inequalities and the non-organic development of the new neoliberal capitalist economic system overall, the social image of the entrepreneur in Hungary was far from the masculine ideal of the Western entrepreneur in the 1990 and 2000s (Szerb and Kocsis-Kisantal, 2008). However, recent research suggests that there has been an improvement in this image (Virágh and Szepesi, 2022), perhaps not independently from the emergence of startup culture in Hungary, representing a new type of entrepreneurialism.

To investigate the construction of hegemonic startup masculinity through discourse, the method of critical discourse analysis (CDA) has been applied (Fairclough et al., 2011; Wodak, 1997) to a sample of 143 startup-related articles selected from printed and online media.

Forbes magazine has been selected as a source due to its status as the most prestigious and influential business magazine in the country, with a particular focus on startups. Forbes serves as the exclusive media partner of the Hungarian Startup Report (Startup Hungary, 2022, 2023) and has been compiling the list of “the hottest Hungarian startups” every two years since 2019, based on assessments from the editorial board and external experts. According to a recent study, Forbes occupies a unique position in the Hungarian media landscape and serves as a primary reference point for startup founders as well (Virágh and Tímár, 2024).

Forbes exists in both printed and online forms in Hungary. Although there are overlaps, the published contents are not identical; hence, both were considered as data sources in the research to enhance the richness of the data. In the case of forbes.hu, the search by tag method was applied to compile the online sample, with a search period from January 1, 2021, to December 31, 2023, i.e. three years. Firstly, articles with the tag #hottest startup (#legforróbb startup) were selected. Secondly, the tags #success (#siker), #success story (#sikersztori) and #successful person (#sikeres ember) were added to the sample. However, articles that were not relevant from the startup perspective were dismissed. As success has been found to be a key part of constructing hegemonic entrepreneurial masculinity (Giazitzoglu and Down, 2017), it can be assumed that these articles are fertile sites to study discursive constructions of hegemonic masculinities in the startup context.

The above search method was not available for printed Forbes magazines. In this case, all issues of the same three-year period (36 issues in total) were examined. Articles where startups were the main topic were selected, including interviews with startup founders or other prominent figures (such as business angels and investors) in the startup ecosystem, lists and brief descriptions of successful startups (including the “hottest startups” lists in 2021 and 2023), and summary articles about the Hungarian startup scene and its development. Both Forbes magazine and forbes.hu promoted articles from the other medium. In cases of duplication, only the longer, full version of the article was considered to be part of the sample. The final sample consisted of 104 online and 39 printed articles.

According to the CDA approach, discourse is seen as a social act, described as “a form of social interaction” (Van Dijk, 2011, p. 3). CDA holds that discourse and social conditions are mutually constitutive: on one hand, discourse reflects the reality of the social context, but on the other hand, it also has the capacity to shape it (Fairclough et al., 2011; Wodak, 1997). Identities, including gendered identities, constitute one domain where the reality-shaping role of discourse is prominent (De Fina, 2011; Fairclough et al., 2011).

Bucholtz and Hall (2005) outlined five principles concerning the process of identity construction in discourse. According to the emergence principle, identity is the product of discursive practices and is therefore fundamentally social and cultural. The positionality principle states that, besides macro-level demographic categories such as gender and age, identities can be cultural and situational. The principle of indexicality refers to the fact that identity is discursively produced in direct as well as indirect ways, such as by using implicit presuppositions. The relationality principle means that identities are not independent but are always constructed intersubjectively, in relation to other possible identities. Finally, the partiality principle states that identities are partial and dependent upon the context and exact situation.

The data analysis focused on the construction of entrepreneurial (startup) masculine identities, with an emphasis on hegemonic masculinity and the potential exclusions and subordinate concepts it implies. Based on De Fina (2011) and Bucholtz and Hall (2005), startup masculinities are considered as discursively constructed entrepreneurial (Giazitzoglu and Down, 2017) and gendered identities, heavily embedded both in startup culture as a global phenomenon (Koskinen, 2023) and in the semi-peripheral locationality of Hungary. Furthermore, the paper acknowledges that masculinities can be applicable to both male and female genders (Byrne et al., 2021) and are the results of mutual constructions of media workers (journalists and editors) and the interviewees themselves.

Based on the indexicality and partiality principles specified above, partial elements of masculinity constructions as well as indirect, implicit appearances were coded in addition direct labelling. Inductive coding was applied, meaning codes were not pre-defined, but emerged from the data. However, I was attentive to the possible presence of elements of entrepreneurial and startup masculinity identified in previous studies. Articles that did not feature a single startup or startup founder but provided a broader picture of the local and regional startup ecosystems were also included in the analysis to follow CDA’s historical approach and emphasis on socio-cultural embeddedness (Fairclough et al., 2011). Besides that, the nationality and gender of the startup founders appearing in the articles, as well as the gender of the startup founder(s) at the centre of the articles, were coded as well. Findings are presented in the following section, illustrated by quotes from the articles.

In 80.6% of the cases presented in the articles, the startup founders are Hungarian. In a further 6.9% of the cases, they are from another CEE country, such as Romania, Slovakia, Poland or Estonia. In the remaining 12.5% of the cases, they are from another (mostly Western) country. The overwhelming majority (89,6%) of startup founders mentioned in the articles are men, and the picture is not much different when considering the main characters in the articles or the founders interviewed or presented (see Table 1). A 2019 study examining the demographics of Hungarian founders concluded that founding a startup is overwhelmingly a male initiative in Hungary: 86% of the founders are male, while only 14% are female (Jáki et al., 2019). Thus, Forbes roughly reflects the reality of the Hungarian startup scene, while at the same time reinforcing this gendered pattern.

The discursive context of startups can be described by a sense of fierce competition. Startups operate in a highly volatile environment, at risk of an outstanding failure rate.

In these circumstances, avoiding failure could already be interpreted as success; however, in discourse, it is far from enough. Instead, “the question is how to be good enough to join the top 0.1%” (Gólya, 2021b), or in other words, how to become a unicorn, that is, a company of $1bn value. The pattern of competing startups is repeated at another level, where startup ecosystems compete with each other. The situation of the Hungarian startup ecosystem in relation to other countries, and most importantly, countries in the CEE region, is constantly assessed in various articles and interviews. The main basis for comparison is the number of unicorns produced by the economies, an aspect where Hungary is clearly lagging behind, with Logmein being the only Hungarian startup reaching unicorn status so far. Thus, the stakes for the most promising startups are twofold: to become a unicorn for their own benefit, but also to strengthen the country’s position in the startup ecosystem race.

Top startups are constantly compared to each other, that is most clearly reflected in the biannual list of the “hottest startups”, published and promoted both in Forbes magazine and on forbes.hu. This list is designed to showcase the elite club of the most promising startups in the country at the given moment. Getting on the list is a very prestigious but also precarious position that startup founders are pressured in various ways to maintain or possibly improve for the next round. For instance, an arrow next to the ranking indicates whether the startup’s position has improved or deteriorated since the last list. For startups that fall out, a separate text box explains the reason for the elimination, which can be a successful exit or a failure (Gólya and Knittel, 2023).

This establishes a definite and robust hierarchy among startups and startup founders as represented in Forbes. First, there are the startup founders “beyond the list”. These are individuals who are not included in the list because they have already proven themselves. They may be foreign role models or Hungarian (former) startup founders whose companies have achieved highly successful exits or have outgrown the startup phase, perhaps attaining unicorn status. Secondly, the latest list includes startup founders with a definite number indicating their current place in the hierarchy. Finally, the remaining startup founders are positioned “below the list”, at the bottom of the hierarchy of publicly visible startup founders. Hegemonic startup masculinity is predominantly embodied by founders who are either “beyond the list” or at the very beginning of the “hottest startups” list.

Financial success. The position in the hierarchy, and thus the most important signifier of hegemonic masculinity is financial success, measured by company value, the size of an accomplished exit or investment round, or even the startup founder’s estimated personal wealth. The article about Tomas Cupr, a Czech startup founder “beyond the list”, lists his financial achievements:

Similarly, Tamás Kádár, the young Hungarian founder of SEON, the #1 hottest startup in 2023, is not only praised for “having closed a $94m Series B investment round of historical significance” (Gólya and Knittel, 2023, p. 66) and being on the right track to become a unicorn but also for making it onto the Forbes list of the “richest Hungarians” as the 33rd wealthiest person in the country. Thus, power based on large financial resources seems to determine hegemony in the Hungarian startup context as well, similar to other entrepreneurial contexts (Giazitzoglu and Down, 2017; Ljunggren and Alsos, 2007).

A young, highly educated, well-travelled male. As mentioned above, the startup founders featured in Forbes are overwhelmingly male, especially “beyond the list” and “on the list”. In the lead text of the “Hottest Startups List 2023”, Forbes itself calls readers’ attention to the fact that “this is the first year that no startup in the top fifteen has a woman among its founders” (Gólya and Knittel, 2023, p. 66). Besides being young (middle-aged at most) and highly educated, this individual tends to be cosmopolitan as well. They have lived abroad and can move easily, without emotional attachment to any specific location on the planet. They do not hesitate to go wherever opportunities arise to make the best use of their talents, fulfil their ambitions or accumulate experiences that fit their future plans. Due to their international background, they speak fluent English, are embedded in international networks and possess a global mindset overall.

Global ambition. Constructing hegemonic startup masculinity involves a global ambition as a key aspect. Top Hungarian startup founders must demonstrate in their self-representations that their ambition is nothing short of aggressively growing their business to achieve global success and unicorn status: “our goal is pretty clear, we want to raise capital at a valuation of $1bn in the next round. The question we’re looking at now is how do we get to unicorn level from here.” (Zsiborás, 2022b). While aiming for aggressive growth and building a powerful business is an expected ambition, and while personal wealth accumulation is both a necessary consequence of it as well as a hallmark of hegemonic startup masculinity, as discussed above, becoming wealthy seems to be completely illegitimate as a motivation for founding and running a startup.

Instead, the most successful startup founders are portrayed to be fundamentally “driven by big things and great transformations” (Vaszkó, 2023). They claim to be motivated by the fact that they “can build something” (Zsiborás, 2022a) and “create something lasting” (Vaszkó, 2022, p. 13) instead of merely accumulating endless wealth. Even if they have accomplished a successful exit already, they do not lay back, but want “to build an even bigger story than they have already achieved” (Gólya, 2023). The origin story of the hegemonic masculine startup founder often revolves around either a university student or an already successful man. In many cases, the latter individual was dissatisfied with his senior management position, high salary, company car and convenient lifestyle because he felt that he “did not move humanity forward” (Zsiborás, 2023b, p. 102).

The ambition to have an impact on the world is an outstanding element of hegemonic masculinity construction in the startup context, especially when it goes hand in hand with profit generation. For instance, the aforementioned startup SEON, operating in the online fraud prevention market, is described as:

Startup founders are portrayed as being on a serious mission to make the world a better place, whether they intend to democratise the fraud prevention market, pioneer 3D printing, or ensure that “future generations have access to nutritious, fresh, chemical-free and safe food” (Váradi, 2021). Their discursive identity constructions resemble that of a world saviour, akin to a capitalist Messiah. Masculine military expressions such as conquest and world domination are blended with utopian morality about changing the world for the better. The figure of the conqueror and the figure of the saviour are both masculine archetypes (Sjö, 2009), mutually constructing a hegemonic form of masculine identity in the startup context. The notion that “saving the world” can and should be achieved via “conquering the world” makes the two terms almost interchangeable in the discourse.

Global ambition is a key differentiator between hegemonic startup masculinity and traditional entrepreneurial masculinity: “an SME founder is content with a small market, while a start-up founder dreams of conquering the world” (Zsiborás, 2023a). In this comparison, the masculinity of the SME (small and medium enterprise) founder is constructed as subordinate to the hegemonic masculinity of the world-conquering startup founder. Moreover, global ambition constitutes an aspect of hegemonic startup masculinity that sets it apart from the masculinity exhibited by the typical Hungarian startup founder, a discursive identity primarily constructed in articles analysing the unsatisfactory state of the Hungarian startup ecosystem.

The fact that Hungary is a relatively small economy in a semi-peripheral region with a unique language, a population of less than 10 million and a history of communist dictatorship and state socialism is no excuse, as Estonia, a country with a similar historical background and location and an even smaller population of three million people, has produced nine unicorns and made hundreds of people billionaires (Zsiborás, 2022c). The primary diagnosis is that the ultimate reason for the gap between the levels of development of the Hungarian startup ecosystem and other startup ecosystems in the region is the lack of “uninhibitedly ambitious” startup founders and the “dare to dream little attitude” (Knittel, 2022, p. 73).

Self-confidence. The lack of ambition and the “dare to dream little” attitude is constructed to be both the cause and the consequence of the lack of Hungarian unicorns, but the underlying reason is a cultural one: “the basically self-doubting Hungarian environment” (Zsiborás, 2023b, p. 100). After meeting with two Hungarian founders, Dávid Lakatos, minority owner and CTO of the Boston-based unicorn Formlabs, told Forbes, “I know that in the US they would already be bombarded by offers, and it was interesting to see that they were doubting whether they have come up with anything good” (Gólya, 2021c). Thus, the majority of Hungarian startup founders need “fixing” to help them overcome their small-mindedness. The “Hunicorn” programme serves precisely this purpose.

Idealised startup founders often begin with the same state of mind, but manage to overcome this potentially blocking mentality. The story of László Kishonti, the founder of AIMotive, who accomplished the largest Hungarian startup exit so far, is a telling example:

The belief that global success is achievable from the Hungarian capital, Budapest, is framed as the key success factor here, the main ingredient of the future success of Kishonti and his company. Similarly, the biggest achievement of the Czech startup star Cupr, and the secret behind his impressive success story, is that “he managed to overcome the notorious Eastern European small-mindedness he suffered from throughout his youth” (Gólya, 2022b, p. 25).

Risk taking. Extreme risk-taking is constructed as an essential element of extreme growth. Successful founders such as Cupr are praised for “learning to jump with their eyes closed” (Gólya, 2022b, p. 25). There are numerous stories in interviews about quitting jobs, putting mortgages on family homes, or risking more money in a hackathon than the founders actually had in their bank accounts. Similar to physical workers who display their masculinity by risking their physical safety on construction sites (Iacuone, 2005), startup founders attempt to create a masculine identity by narrating stories about risking their financial safety in volatile market conditions.

As global ambition and self-confidence play crucial roles, risk-taking becomes a determinant factor in achieving hegemony within the startup context, distinguishing between knowledge workers who remain employees and from knowledge workers who venture into building their own startups. “Although Hungary has the brains, international research shows that risk appetite is very low. Good developers tend to be employees rather than founders” (Zsiborás, 2023a). Once again, the low level of risk appetite is discursively constructed to be a culturally and historically ingrained attitude associated with a subordinate form of masculinity. This attitude may only dissipate over time, as “security optimization is generationally in us” (Zsiborás, 2023a). The youth of hegemonic masculine startup founders thus represents the promise of a new generation of Hungarian entrepreneurs, already liberated from the old, harmful constraints that have shackled the spirit of previous generations.

Mental strength and hard work. Taking risks involves the possibility of failure, which is discursively constructed to be a natural part of the startup founder’s journey. However, we only learn about failures that have been followed by an outstanding success story, which raises the question of whether failures are truly embraced and incorporated into hegemonic startup masculinity. It rather seems to have more to do with the mental strength required for recovering from failure. Another aspect of mental strength is the opportunity-focused, driven mindset that the idealised startup founder seems to possess. During the examined time period, this mindset was most prevalent in the discourse surrounding the COVID-19 and economic crises. Being pessimistic and anxious was not considered a legitimate attitude. Instead, startup founders were expected to demonstrate resilience and pragmatic optimism in their discourse, demonstrating the ability to see opportunity even in the deepest crisis. All of these elements construct the masculine identity of the “fighter” who faces various obstacles thrown in his way, but ultimately triumphs against all odds.

Besides personal failures, unfavourable market conditions and crises, structural disadvantages such as geopolitical and gender inequalities also count as obstacles that founders have to combat alone or with their core team. The discourse in Forbes sometimes reflects on the fact that a startup founder faces a much more difficult challenge in reaching the global bar if they are a Hungarian citizen or a woman. The articulation of these disadvantages is only legitimate as long as it is brief – to avoid being accused of complaining – and immediately followed by the discursive demonstration of a strong intention to fight these circumstances in an individual way – typically through even harder work. The interviews with Kinga Jentetics, one of the few successful Hungarian female startup founders, whose company Publishdrive was #11 on the “hottest startups” list in 2021, are good examples of both. Global ambition is the way out of the disadvantageous semi-peripheral position: “the goal was always to make this a global story, we were aiming for the international market right from the beginning” (Bánlaki, 2021, p. 101). In another interview, she also reflects on her position as a female startup founder:

Here, she transforms the fight against structural inequalities into an individual battle, simultaneously showcasing masculine qualities as a woman. Her identity construction resembles that of a “fierce warrior” and a “go-to guy” (Cooper, 2000). “There are problems, but for her the question is how to solve them. She never loses sight of this and takes the actions through everything” (Bánlaki, 2021, p. 102).

The fight demands complete dedication to the job. Startup founders are depicted as willing to go to extreme lengths to get the job done, often working 10–12 or even 16 h a day (Gólya, 2022b), “getting almost no sleep” (Gólya, 2021a). This is only possible because they are “driven by passion” (Gólya, 2021a) and exhibit almost superhuman mental strength, which manifests in outstanding stress tolerance (Zsiborás, 2023b). Needless to say, maintaining this level of dedication is hardly possible alongside caring responsibilities. In typical interviews, the topic of family is rarely broached. However, in a few cases, it almost accidently comes to light that the startup founder does indeed have a family and children. This revelation usually occurs in interviews with middle-aged male founders, typically those “beyond the list”, for whom families remain in the background, posing no obstacle to their heroic endeavour of building a startup.

Semiotic and aesthetic aspects. The hegemonic masculinity of the idealised startup founders is also confirmed by the semiotic and aesthetic aspects of the photographs in the articles. The shift away from traditional entrepreneurial masculinity is also reflected in the aesthetic: the most formal attire in the photos is a suit without a tie, but overall smart casual and casual seem to be the dominant dressing style. The typical startup founder is seen in jeans and a shirt but t-shirts and hoodies are not uncommon either, conveying the youth and self-confidence of the founders, as well as their distance from traditional entrepreneurial masculinity. The self-confidence and power of the hegemonic startup masculinity is also emphasised semiotically. The founders are either casually leaning against a wall or standing with their feet wide apart, hands in pockets or arms crossed. The typical background is a minimalist, modern office, which reflects professionalism. However, if the profile of the startup is in any way related to vehicles, the founders often pose in photos next to cars, motorbikes or aeroplanes, thus reinforcing their hegemonic masculine identity.

As mentioned above, the representation of female startup founders is relatively low: only 8.7% of the main characters in the articles are exclusively female, and another 3.9% share the spotlight with men (see Table 1). Overall, as there are hardly any women among the founders of the “hottest startups” and none “beyond the list”, the image of female founders seems to be determined by their lower position in the startup hierarchy on average. The most successful ones, such as the aforementioned Kinga Jentetics, display hegemonic masculine behavioural traits (global ambition, self-confidence, a driven personality) and their femininity is limited to aesthetics, such as wearing bright colours, skirts or long hair. Regarding financial success and ambition, the entrepreneurial identity of female startup founders lower down the hierarchy differs from hegemonic masculinity. Although the mission to create something beneficial is central to how they are portrayed, they typically do not have global aspirations and are content with the local impact they have already achieved. “If I get hit by a tram, or something happens to me, I’ve made it in this life” (Tóth, 2021, p. 41). Furthermore, when they run a femtech startup, they are solving a problem that is “only” specific to women, and therefore inherently limited in its potential, unlike male founders who address seemingly more universal societal problems. Several female founders voice their concerns about endless working hours and try to maintain a work–life balance. However, family and caring responsibilities are not discussed in the interviews with female founders either, probably due to their young age and pre-family life stage. In fact, even the oldest female startup founders featured in Forbes are in their early 30s at most.

The majority of the founders represented in Forbes are men, particularly at the top of the pyramid. Besides quantitative representation, the values and traits of the idealised startup founder could also be described as fundamentally masculine. Firstly, hegemonic startup masculinity shares kinship with the traditional entrepreneurial or business masculinity described in Western European contexts (Giazitzoglu and Down, 2017; Hamilton, 2013; Ljunggren and Alsos, 2007). Hegemonic startup masculinity, such as hegemonic entrepreneurial masculinity in general, includes a competitive personality, ambitious goals, a passion for growth and high levels of risk tolerance and risk-taking. Hegemony is ultimately based on financial success and the possession of large financial resources, both in the form of capital attracted by the startup and in the form of personal wealth. Secondly, hegemonic startup masculinity shares common features with the “technological” masculinity of Silicon Valley. Similar to the “go-to guy” (Cooper, 2000), the hegemonic masculine startup founder identity is constructed by demonstrating a departure from traditional entrepreneurial masculinities through a casual style of dressing, full commitment to the job and an intention to complete the mission against all odds. This portrayal showcases a masculine work ethic characterised by endless working hours, extreme levels of mental and emotional strength, high intellect and a competitive mindset. As Cooper argued, such a level of dedication is inherently exclusionary to women and their care responsibilities, whether by effect or design.

The motivational patterns, on the other hand, seem to be unique to the hegemonic startup masculinity. Personal financial gains are not legitimate driving forces. Instead, grandiose and utopian ideals such as creating something meaningful, building something significant, and, most importantly, doing all this on a global scale are the motivations that construct the hegemonic masculine identity in the startup context in Hungary, as well as in other countries (Tobiasiewicz, 2021). Global ambitions can take the form of the world saviour as well as the world conqueror, but both of these are fundamentally masculine identities. Another specific feature of hegemonic startup masculinity, as pointed out by Tobiasiewicz (2021) and confirmed in this study, is the repositioning of failures, which are embraced and reframed as part of the startup founder’s journey and self-development. This constitutes, according to Tobiasiewicz, a non-masculine element of the startup identity. However, as the current results show, the glorification of failure – at least in the Hungarian context – has more to do with the masculine strength required to stand up from the ground and get back into the ring. In the examined articles, failure was never the end of the story but rather a bump on the road that the idealised startup founder had already managed to overcome by the time of the interview. Thus, the incorporation of failure cannot be considered a feminine quality either. Instead, it is another masculine element strengthening the discursive identity construct of hegemonic startup masculinity even further.

In summary, the discourse surrounding successful startup founders is highly masculine. Families are almost entirely invisible, and even when they are mentioned, they are marginalised and deemed insignificant within the discourse. Furthermore, female startup founders are scarcely represented among the top ranks, and when they do appear, they construct their own discursive identities according to the same hegemonic masculine norms as their male counterparts, thus affirming the findings of previous studies (Duong and Brännback, 2023).

Feminist research on entrepreneurship has revealed that male entrepreneurs enjoy “a sense of normalness in their entrepreneurial identities” (Giazitzoglu and Down, 2017, p. 40) that female entrepreneurs do not experience (Ogbor, 2000). Considering the overwhelmingly masculine discourse around startups in Hungary, it seems unambiguous that male startup founders must be more comfortable in their entrepreneurial identities (Down and Giazitzoglu, 2014) than female startup founders. However, the “sense of normalness” does not appear to apply to Hungarian male startup founders either. Hegemonic startup masculinity is constructed through characteristics and behavioural patterns that distinguish and distance it from traits assumed to be distinctly Hungarian and rooted in Hungarian culture, such as small-mindedness, lack of ambition and low risk-taking. From this perspective, the fear of failure can also be seen as part of the self-doubting Hungarian mentality that startup founders have to overcome.

In the sample, we can observe two typical patterns. In the case of middle-aged idealised startup founders, the “notorious Eastern European small-mindedness” (Gólya, 2022b, p. 25) was part of their mentality in their youth, which they managed to overcome. Younger startup founders, on the other hand, have a higher chance of starting with a clean slate, free from the burdensome “national heritage”, especially if they have lived abroad for several years and socialised (at least partially) in a Western context. This kind of cosmopolitanism is another feature of hegemonic masculinity that distances it from semi-peripheral locationality, offering a potential individual escape, but also reinforcing the subordinate discursive position of “Hungarian mentality” and the self-colonising narrative of the East-West slope (Gagyi, 2016; Melegh, 2006).

Based on the results, the successful startup founder seems to embody a masculine ideal. The hegemonic masculine identity in the Hungarian startup context is constructed as a young, cosmopolitan, highly educated, financially successful man who is not driven by monetary gains, despite his significant financial achievements. He possesses a truly global mindset and harbours grandiose ambitions of conquering and saving the world. Thus, even if he is Hungarian, and lives in Hungary, he is constructed to be spiritually free from the semi-peripheral locationality in which he is physically embedded. He faces various obstacles along the way, but his driven personality and self-confidence enable him to take even serious risks and overcome all barriers, including structural inequalities. In addition to his passion and pragmatic optimism, he demonstrates outstanding mental strength, stress tolerance and full dedication to the job by working extremely long hours to make his ambition a reality.

As a hegemonic form, this kind of masculinity is also discursively constructed in relation to femininities and other subordinated masculine identities. Those who cannot fit into the normative discourse are constructed as the “other”. The paper has shown that besides feminine identities, which get automatically excluded from the masculine discourse on entrepreneurship as pointed out by many studies before (Ahl and Marlow, 2012; Giazitzoglu and Down, 2017; Marlow, 2020), masculinities rooted in the semi-peripheral, specifically Hungarian locationality are subordinated and “othered” as well. Examples include the masculinity of the developer who chooses to be an employee, the SME entrepreneur, who is content with the local market, and even the average Hungarian startup founder who does not possess the necessary level of ambition. According to the narrative, they all require “fixing” to overcome their small-minded, risk-avoiding mindset and “dare to dream little” attitude. Thus, the construction of hegemonic startup masculinity in Hungarian Forbes reflects and discursively reproduces not only the hierarchical gendered relations in society and the subordinated position of femininities and women but also the culturally inferior position of the semi-periphery, reinforcing the self-colonising narrative of the “East-West slope”.

Funding: The publication is connected to the research of the Budapest LAB – Office for Entrepreneurship Development of Budapest Business School. Project no. TKP2021-NKTA-44 has been implemented with the support provided by the Ministry of Innovation and Technology of Hungary from the National Research, Development and Innovation Fund, financed under the Tématerületi Kiválósági Program 2021 (TKP2021-NKTA) funding scheme.