Developing a Positive Masculinity Approach to Fraternity and Other College Men

Developing a Positive Masculinity Approach to Fraternity and Other College Men

On March 3 of this year, I posted a response to Caitlin Flanagan’s “The Dark Power of Fraternities” to the ACPA Men & Masculinities blog. The post briefly addresses a common occurrence when discussing fraternity life in the American higher education system. Media and commentators frequently highlight troubling statistics and pervasive attitudes that exist within Greek Life; a means to devalue the positive and developmental qualities we claim are espoused by fraternities. This often loud and critical perspective on Greek life creates a need for self-preservation. In the Winter 2014 issue of Perspectives, a publication of the Association of Fraternity/Sorority Advisors, Editor Heather Kirk writes:

When the media picks up an incident that seams sensational or shocking, we swing into reaction mode. ‘How could this happen,’ we ask. ‘What were they thinking?’ ‘Not again.’ Just as often, we say ‘But this is a small population; most of the students do the right thing.’ Or, ‘But fraternities also provide leadership and growth experiences.’ And of course, ‘The media is just trying to sell copies” (pp. 3). 

Kirk adequately describes the current state of affairs within conversations regarding the future of fraternity life in higher education. While we listen to external critics with little knowledge of fraternal structure and transformative experience call for an end to American Greek Life, we develop a “protect our house” defensive mentality that does not serve a productive purpose. In my previous post to the ACPA blog, I state:

Let’s stop debating the pros and cons of fraternity life. We cannot sit down with the statistics of philanthropy dollars raised and the number of sexual violence reports and decide on which overshadows the other. Placing a quantifiable value on each positive and negative action to prove our stance is not only impossible, but [also] harmful to the overall discussion.

While I continue to believe that we spend too much time defending the future of fraternity life, I am inclined to clarify my perspective. The often-hostile back-and-forth that exists between various campus and community partners adds little to the conversation. The time has come to adopt a new perspective on our college men. We must recognize that there are men inside (and out of) fraternities who are exhibiting dangerous behavior and attitudes. While not disguising this fact, it is important to affirm that most men are not responsible for such actions, and many college men add positive value and advance the mission of higher education.

In “Affirming the Strengths in Men: A Positive Masculinity Approach to Assisting Male Clients,” Matt Englar-Carlson and Mark S. Kiselica (2013) note that existing research on masculinity is problem-focused, emphasizing the “deficits of and the difficulties created by men” (pp. 399). When discussing the culture of fraternity men in “Beyond Bad Behaving Brothers,” Harper and Harris (2014) perfectly highlight this deficit-based approach to masculinity, summarizing the popular perspective on college men as follows:

They are drunken, promiscuous, academically disengaged lovers of pornography, sports, and video games who rape women, physically assault each other, vandalize buildings on campus, and dangerously risk their lives pledging sexist, radically exclusive, homophobic fraternities (pp. 703).

When addressing men and masculinities, research and scholars often develop a foundation within the deficit model described by these previous authors. During the 2011-2012 academic year, I was a senior Sociology & Gender Studies major at Washington & Jefferson College. Through the senior capstone experience, I was able to foster a basic understanding of and interest in the area of men and masculinities. While fortunate enough to present my findings, titled Eliminating the Gender Gap: Research into Past and Present Achievement Levels Between Students of Washington and Jefferson College, at the 2012 North Central Student Sociology Conference, the entire focus operated on a deficit model. The paper cited decreasing percentages of males in higher education as well as persistence to graduation, lower participation in campus activities and leadership positions, and extrinsic factors as the motivating force to higher education. While the idea of assigning negative characteristics to masculine identity provides a foundation to the study of college men, we must remember that there are those achieving healthy masculinities and engaging campus opportunities (Harper & Harris, 2014, pp. 704).  

Englar-Carlson and Kiselica (2013) assert that our fixation on viewing men as defective has been culturally fostered through historical notions of success and expectations of gender performance. We assigned positive traits to women, inhibiting the productive conversations we have with our male college students. Through socialization, men are bombarded with biases that reinforce a preconceived lack of healthy and adaptive behavior (pp. 401). In essence, we continue to allow the extreme incidents of a few men to blind us from the empowering and productive experiences of others.

How can we foster the healthy masculinities that exist and promotes cultural competency? Englar Carlson and Kiselica (2013) cite a shift in dialogue to allow all men to understand the standards of which they can achieve. Examples of this shift may include the “protector” role. A historical deconstruction of this image reflects power, dominance over women, and physical strength; however, reframing this to illustrate new understandings of traditional masculinity can mean loyalty, responsibility, and courage (pp. 401-402). Using positive psychology, college men counter stigmatizing language with specifics of where and how healthy masculinity has been enacted. When we change discourse from “bad-dogging,” as Jason Laker would describe it, to conversations on what positive masculinity looks like in a community context, men are not felt to be inherently flawed by birth.

It is important to develop an understanding of a positive masculinity approach to college men before applying this theory to segments of the campus population; however, the same concept noted here can be implemented when fostering development in our fraternal organizations. Just as men are not biologically damaged, fraternities are not organizationally harmful. It is the culture of masculinity that has infiltrated these societies and been allowed to persist over time that must be changed. The foundation of fraternities is to bring together men to share in a common bond while advancing unique values. In theory, fraternities provide a prime space to initiate and test the positive masculinity approach. Refocusing the conversation to how our fraternity men have upheld these immutable principles provide a context to the expectations we require while reinforcing praise when healthy masculinities are achieved.

References:

Englar-Carlson, M. & Kiselica, M. S. (2013, October). Affirming the strengths in men: A

positive Masculinity approach to assisting male clients. Journal of Counseling & Development. Vol. 91, 399-409

Harris III, F. & Harper, S. R. (2014). Beyond bad behaving brothers: Productive

performances of masculinities among college fraternity men. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education. Vol. 27, No. 6., pp. 703-723.

Kirk, H. M. (2014). Editor’s Note. Perspectives. Association of Fraternity/

Sorority Advisors. Winter. pp 3.

About the Author

Mike Prinkey serves as the Area Coordinator for Student Conduct under Residential Life & Student Activities at Champlain College. While studying Higher Education Administration at Northeastern University, Mike was the Program Assistant for the Office of Fraternities, Sororities & Independent Living Groups at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, as well as the Graduate Assistant to the Office of Multicultural Student Affairs & GLBTQ Resources at Emerson College. Mike is a proud alum of the Alpha Tau Omega Fraternity from Washington & Jefferson College.

You can contact Mike through:

Email: michaelcprinkey@gmail.com

Twitter: @McPrinkey

Set Perfectionism Aside

Set Perfectionism Aside

I spent the greater part of the week torn over what I should write about for the Men & Masculinities blog. I had these grandiose ideas of writing something that would change the landscape and contain some groundbreaking original thought. Something that would move readers. I was so caught up in this idea of writing something profound or perfect that it actually kept me from writing. Where else does this happen in our lives?

I see this every day in my own life. We are so obsessed with making sure everything we do is perfect. The never ending quest for perfection is absolutely debilitating. It doesn’t breed productivity, but rather keeps us from engaging and moving forward. But before I making sweeping statements and claim that we all are always striving for perfection, I will say it’s cultural. For me, it’s a privilege I have to strive towards perfection. I am a white, heterosexual, temporarily able-bodied, male on a predominantly white campus. I have been told all my life that I should be creating and disrupting.

I am so afraid that this mission for perfection prevents us from action. And then I realize through my own identities that I also have the privilege to not so anything. I can perpetuate norms day in and day out and nearly never be questioned. I have the undeserved privilege to not even have to say a word. This ranges from the countless micro aggressions I see in person or the conversations I share with students about hetero and sexist norms. I don’t have to say anything.

These perfectionist tendencies leave us always straining our brains or sifting through the research to figure out how to have these conversations. We are left with thoughts of, “what if I say the wrong thing,” “what if this person then doesn’t like me,” “what if I don’t think I am the expert?” It’s absolutely paralyzing. So we are able to slowly back away and not say a thing. We have unreal expectations that there is only one way to make change. We have unreal expectations that there is only one way to have a conversation. It’s time to move the discourse from perfection to good enough. What if any conversation was good enough?

Dr. Stephen Quaye spoke at ACPA 2014 and left a sentiment that brings to light so much of our fear. Dr. Quaye suggests that we should move from being “Perfect to Good Enough.” He went on to say that the culture of perfectionism has become a defense mechanism for the fear of failure. And isn’t it just that? We are so afraid that the conversations we have with our students just might not work. But for a moment, think about one conversation that changed your life or your perspective.

Have the conversation even if you don’t think it’s perfect. Say what needs to be said even if it’s not perfect. Because without even starting that conversation, we perpetuate the cycle. Maybe that one conversation you have will be enough.

How does this relate to men and masculinity? As a white male, this is one of the biggest problems. We need to have conversations with the students we interact with and begin to help them to identify themselves within identities. Be a support for to our students as they begun to understand their identities and privileges that they hold. Empathize. But number one be willing to share the conversation. Because my silence perpetuates white supremacy and patriarchy. We need to guide our students through these conversations rather than hope someone else will bring it up.

1.       Have the conversation

If you can’t complete this, please go back to the beginning and read again.

2.       Seek their Story

There is so much humanity and so much community when you allow a space for someone to share their story. You both have now spent time and energy sharing and making meaning of what their young person’s life is like. You can begin to seek to understand why they say what they say or what they think. We can begin to then understand what questions to ask them in order to help them. We can ask them how they feel about their origins or how they fit into the world of binaries we have created. In particular with masculinity, sexism and our patriarchal society.

3.       Your story is your own

Do not expect your students to be where you are or to understand you immediately. Our nation is suffering from a lack of ability to take another’s perspective. We are surrounded by individuals that have rarely imagined life beyond their very own story. When you are sharing a conversation it is important to remember that you are where you are because you have spent your whole life as you.

But even more, my understanding of masculinity is not the same as one of my best friend’s understanding of masculinity. We must be aware of our identities and how culturally it impacts us all differently.

I know I haven’t said anything profound but I hope we can begin to shift our thinking from perfect to good enough. Any conversation is better than no conversation. Say something when you hear something. Because after all my silence perpetuates white supremacy and patriarchy so you can at least count on me.

About the Author:

Evan Knoespel is currently a Hall Director at Iowa State University. He earned his graduate degree in Higher Education and Student Affairs from the University of Iowa where he served as an Assistant Hall Coordinator. He earned his undergraduate degree in Sociology from the University of Wisconsin-La Crosse. Evan also previously served as an Intern at the Savannah College of Art and Design.