Mentoring College Men to Close the Gender Gap: An Interdepartmental Approach for A Small Regional Campus

There is no hiding the fact that college men can be considered a minority. This is not in regard to minorities in the sense of ethnicity, religion, physical disability, sexual preference, or gender identity. Male students, male faculty, male staff, and male administrators are, in terms of higher education, in a woman’s world. 

I work at a unique institution of higher education, WKU-Glasgow.  WKU-Glasgow is a regional campus of Western Kentucky University located in the small town of Glasgow, Kentucky.  Anyone familiar with regional campuses can identify with some of the unique characteristics and parameters of such an institution.  Specifically discussing WKU-Glasgow, the student population is by far the most interesting characteristic.  The total student population of WKU-Glasgow is 2,532.  There are 1,740 female students and 792 male students enrolled at the WKU-Glasgow campus.

This gender difference in enrollment at WKU-Glasgow is nothing new or revolutionary in higher education. According to the United States Census Bureau in 2012, there were 10,032,000 females and 7,456,000 males enrolled in higher education.  While the difference is not vast, I cannot help but wonder why there is such a difference.

However, enrollment discrepancy is not the only issue facing male students in higher education. Males face an array of academic issues within higher education which include overall academic success, academic engagement, completion of degree, higher risk of academic probation, and higher risk of being dismissed from an institution for academic reasons (Kahn, Brett, & Holmes, 2011).   I advise two different student organizations at WKU-Glasgow.  Between the two organizations, there are a total of 11 students.  Not surprisingly, there are eight female students and three males.  Also to no surprise, two of the three male students are currently facing problems academically.  Unfortunately, these are common themes within higher education. 

In comparison to men, women are more likely to experience academic success in higher education. Surprisingly, this is includes most women despite racial, ethnic, or socioeconomic group (Ewert, 2012). This makes me wonder about the importance of masculinity as it relates to male students’ academic success and males’ ability to exist and function in a female-dominated environment.

Clearly, there is a link between masculinity and academic success.  For example, it can be assumed that many males in higher education adhere to hegemonic masculinity, which is “a form of masculinity where dominance is maintained and reinforced through a variety of avenues (e.g. rejecting femininity) (Kahn, Brett, & Holmes, 2011).

Such behavior or ideology as hegemonic masculinity presents a serious dilemma academically. “Reading, writing, analysis, oral discussion and debate, all behaviors that    have engaged humans for thousands of years in cultures all over the world, when constructed as ‘feminine’ run counter to dominant masculinity, which by definition rejects women and femininity” (Kahn, Brett, & Homes, 2011).  The aforementioned behaviors are crucial to academic success. In addition, women typically spend more time outside of the classroom studying, completing coursework, and engaging in academic discussions (Kahn, Brett, & Holmes, 2011).  This alone, unfortunately, has the potential to promote femininity in academics for males.

So, as student affairs professionals and administrators within higher education, how do we encourage males to increase academic success?  What must happen in order to bring the gender gap in higher education closer to equilibrium? These are loaded questions that not one individual or one program will answer since the concept of masculinity takes on a variety of forms through individual perspective.  Regardless, professionals within higher education must be cognizant that men are struggling academically, and more efforts could potentially reverse the less-than-impressive numbers regarding men in higher education.

Fortunately, universities and colleges across the nation have begun combating this dilemma.  St. Norbert’s College maintains a program called “Men’s Initiative.” This initiative is designed to “[provide] resources and educational programming around topics like: dominant ideas about masculinity in the media, healthy relationships and lifestyles, and difficult dialogues about topics like sexual assault” (“Men’s Initiative, n.d.).  Similarly, at the University of Arizona, the Women’s Resource Center opened “The Men’s Project.” which, like “Men’s Initiative,” covers important and relevant issues regarding masculinities and college men. Such initiatives exist within colleges and universities across the nation. 

In light of the programming, awareness, and other efforts to close the gender gap and bring college men out of the mentality that academic success is feminine, college men are still lacking academically; this is evident in Dr. Claudia Buchmann’s The Rise of Women: The Growing Gap in Education and What It Means for American Schools.  

Clearly, within higher education, there are male staff, faculty, and administrators who have encountered the same obstacles that face college men today but have overcome those obstacles.  This realization has increased my appreciation of mentoring programs.  One of the biggest hindrances for males is the mentality that communicating feelings or admitting to struggling will somehow discredit our masculinity. As I have experienced with male students that I advise, many male students will not seek academic help or admit that they are struggling academically.

Of course, there are a variety of mentoring programs that exist within institutions of higher education across the nation. However, mentoring programs that focus specifically on the academic performance of college men seem to be scarce to non-existent. In addition, there do not seem to be any such programs that incorporate an interdepartmental approach in which professional men from academic affairs and student affairs partner to mentor college men. Currently, such a program does not exist at WKU-Glasgow or university-wide at Western Kentucky University. This is a program that I have been thinking about establishing at WKU-Glasgow given the low enrollment of male students, low retention of male students, low academic performance of male students, and low involvement of male students.

Ultimately, I want to contribute to the closing of the gender gap that exists in higher education, especially the gap that exists in academic performance.  For me, an interdepartmental mentoring program would be the ideal method because it creates relationships and accountability as well as a place for college men to break the boundaries that hegemonic masculinity creates.  As Kyle Carpenter’s post “It Takes a Village to Develop Men” (which I encourage everyone to read) suggests, it takes a university or college to close the gender gap at each individual institution.

To conclude, I would like to leave you with several questions to consider in regard to an academic mentor programming for college men:

• Recruiting college men to participate in this program will be a challenge in and of it self. What methods could be used to attract college men to such a mentoring program? Specifically, what methods would help recruit college men who are enrolled in a small regional campus or community college to participate in such a mentoring program?
• It would be my hope that this mentoring program would be interdepartmental.  However, time is valuable for higher education professionals. How could higher education professionals be encouraged to participate in this program (i.e., unite this mentoring program to a student worker position within each department)?
• What would accountability look like for this sort of program? Should there be some sort of formal procedure or policy?
• Should there be any additional parameters set for such a program to limit or control membership/involvement?

Connect With Me:

John Roberts is the publisher of this post.  You can connect with John on Twitter @JohnRoberts348 or via e-mail at john.roberts@wku.edu.  John works at Western Kentucky University Glasglow as the Coordinator of Communications for Student Recruitment.  John also serves as the Co-Coordinator of Social Media for the ACPA SCMM

Resources:

Ewert, S. 2012. Fewer diplomas for men: The influence of college experiences on the gender gap in college graduation. The Journal of Higher Education, 83(6), 824-846.

Kahn, J. S., Brett, L. B., & Holmes, J. R. (2011). Concerns with men’s academic motivation in higher education: An exploratory investigation of the role of masculinity. The Journal of Men’s Studies, 19(1), 65-82.

Men’s intiative. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.snc.edu/mensintative

The Melting Pot of Masculinity

What does it mean to be a man? This is a constant question, not just for college men still forming who they are at their core, but also for researchers, parents, and college administrators. Is there one answer, one definition of masculinity, or is a person’s gender identity and expression one that is fluid, defined by that person, a post-modern “what you believe is right” answer? It would appear that the latter is becoming the more accepted answer on campus, but what consequences does this have for men on campus and in life? And, if the former is accepted, what culture provides the model for masculinity, in a society made up of many cultures?

Let us begin by unpacking the idea that there is one cultural definition of masculinity. This is to say that each group of people, each tribe if you will, has set up an expectation of masculinity and male behavior and traits; this will differ from tribe to tribe. While primitive cultures are highly gender-segregated in rights, roles, and privileges, studies of them have shown that they have some success in initiating boys into masculinity and teaching them the cultural expectations of men.

David Gilmore paints scenes of this initiation in his book “Manhood in the Making”, offering descriptions of rites of initiation that include boys being taken from their mothers, taught the expectations of men in the society, and being returned triumphantly to their tribe once their initiation is complete. After this initiation, these men are now held to the standard of masculinity of the tribe. Of course there is often gender discrepancy and inequality in these tribes, but it appears that men and women generally respect and care for each other, with less of the abuses and struggles that one might expect.

Is this possible in a melting pot society like America? Given that such a society is one nation, it would seem that providing a similar tribal initiation and male definition would be easy. However, encompassed in that one nation are many different tribes, coordinated and defined by nationality, religion, and other factors. Each of these tribes will have their own definition of masculinity, some close in similarity to others but many quite distinct. With many definitions of masculinity come many ways to teach and initiate young males into manhood, thus making it hard to provide a meaningful initiation. What happens if another culture does not recognize your masculinity, your initiation? Are you less a man?

Obviously there is some difficulty in allowing for culture to define masculinity. Even though it may work in primitive cultures, the divergent beliefs and representations about masculinity in a melting pot society may cause men to always have their manhood in question unless they always remain in their own “cultural bubble”.

One solution to the difficulty of culturally defined masculinity is individually-defined masculinity, the post-modern approach. This allows males to say “This is what I believe being a man is, this is how I will behave, and I am secure in this belief.” No one is forced into a box with this, at least not openly. One could argue, however, that if a person believes a man is X, then they will judge people who do not conform and try to put them into “their box”.

The problem with this approach is that we must consider what the purpose of defining masculinity is. Is the purpose individual or societal? An argument can be made that it is both. Individual definitions, then, may not meet the societal purpose. Additionally, Michael Kimmel in “Guyland” speaks to the innate need of males to be initiated, to have their masculinity affirmed and confirmed. If they do not receive it from elders, they seek it out from their peers. Thus, their definition of masculinity may never be solely theirs but rather is sculpted and verified by those around them. Finally, this need for initiation and affirmation of masculinity, if not met, may have harmful consequences down the road, as middle-aged men begin to have a crisis of gender and confidence.

An option that is less talked about in answering this question of what makes a man is a combination of these two. Michael Kimmel, in “The Gendered Society”, argues that the differences between men and women are small, but the differences between men and other men can be quite large. It is not about differentiating men from women, then, but men from boys, the mature from the immature.

Imagine a definition of masculinity that did not include what a man does, but rather focuses on how he does something. In this definition, masculinity and the quest for manhood becomes about character and maturity. The opposite of manhood stops being womanhood and starts being boyhood. It requires effort and maturity to be a man, not fitting a certain role. In our melting pot, this seems to makes sense. Granted we are trading defining one attribute (masculinity) for another (maturity), but it seems that maturity and the characteristics that come along with it are much less disputed and more applicable to a wide range of gender behaviors. In this approach, we allow for expressions of masculinity to be defined by an individual, but also allow society to express expectations of maturity (which exist for all genders).

There are pros and cons to every approach to a definition of masculinity. I think Norman Mailer said it best: "Masculinity is not something given to you, something you're born with, but something you gain. ... And you gain it by winning small battles with honor." Perhaps allowing masculinity to be won with honor, with character, will make it a more developmental and meaningful process. And perhaps this will decrease the questioning and challenging around manhood, allowing our men to embrace masculinity as they want, but as mature males.

Matthew Deeg works as Assistant Director of Fraternity/Sorority and Residence Life at Hanover College. In his daily work, he advises fraternity men to reach their potential as leaders and as men. You can reach him via email at deeg (at) hanover.edu, on Twitter @mattdeeg, and find his blog at navigatingthewild.org.

Resources:

Gilmore, D. (1990). Manhood in the making: Cultural concepts of masculinity. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Kimmel, M. (2008). The gendered society (3rd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.

Kimmel, M. (2009). Guyland: The perilous world where boys become men. New York: Harper Perennial.

The Fabric of Masculinity: Professionalism, Fraternity Letters, and Family Roles

                     I thoroughly enjoy competition, watching others compete in particular. Project Runway, a reality-television competition to find the next top American fashion designer, has taken up the free time I have between visiting my family in Texas and traveling the U.S. I was excited to see the creativity that all the contestants brought to the show, more for the designers that played with gender roles and designed clothing with androgyny in mind. Somewhere within the last couple of seasons, I began exploring how clothing has been used to shape masculinity and the identity of ‘man’ at work, in college, and in family roles.

                   The design and style of our clothes indicates much more at first meeting than we are willing to admit. Much like in “The Devil Wears Prada” movie when Miranda (played by Meryl Streep) talks about how fashion choices from ‘the top’ trickle down to the everyday consumer, so too do the designs of Giorgio Armani, Donatella Versace, and Kenneth Cole (among others) shape the way men should look for their status. The sociologist in me could spend years observing cities like New York and Los Angeles to formulate how men display themselves and what their choices in clothing indicate to others around them. What does the whimsical tone of a print do for pants that it does not for a shirt? Would a man be followed at a department store for wearing baggy clothes regardless of styling? What outfits are appropriate for all men, and what outfits are designed for certain occasions and people? Professional dress (for the most part) seems to have the clearest expectation of men.

                  Forensic competitions (literary interpretation, extemporaneous speaking, moot court, and the like) shaped much of what my idea of professional dress is supposed to be. Simple formula for the guys: wear a suit, complementary shirt and tie, dress shoes, and a watch if jewelry was necessary. My time at the University of the Pacific has shaped the image of a student affairs professional to be different than the consulting I received and conducted in competition. When I interviewed for the position as a residence director, I wore my suit and three shirt and tie combos each day I was on campus. I wanted the competitive edge, to which I met full force against the other male candidates invited to campus. I laugh at the realization that I wore my suit less than five times this past year. I spent a great deal of time experimenting with professional standards and gender lines that were much more flattering and comfortable than stiff dress shirts and boxy blazers. I think it’s commendable that the men in leadership roles at Pacific each have their own distinct images that reflect their personalities, ranging from bowties to polo shirts. The ‘minimal requirement’ approach to workplace dress is likely not a standard at every institution, and it would be nice to see professionalism as a whole loosen its belt and unbutton the collar every now and then.

                  A particular image of masculinity in college I have noticed over others is that of a fraternity man. Pacific’s social fraternities each have their own image on campus, and within them an expectation for how their members live up to that image. Living in a fraternity house as a residence director has its clear moments where masculinity and manhood are shaped and challenged. The brothers will size each other up for competitions and recruitment, and have discourse on how their image among the other fraternities is more or less masculine based on the ‘expectations’ of men’s fraternities. Partying, academics, and relationships with sororities were the three major indicators of a fraternity’s success at the beginning of the year for some of the men. It’s a formula that I imagine is negotiated nationwide across fraternities. A conversation sustained throughout the year involved how to accept the gay, bisexual, and transgender community into fraternities on campus without losing masculinity and brotherhood. (Suggestions that arise are definitely welcomed, as I am still formulating with campus partners and national groups if this is a possible reality.) Aside from the letters themselves, the style and color of fraternities’ paraphernalia has become a sign of masculinity through the upholding (or lack of) traditional expression. Some fraternities argue within their own membership the allowance of clothing with letters on it to be in any other colors besides that of the organization. Certain clothing styling has also turned the image of a fraternity man into a ‘frat star’, bringing both anger and excitement for almost all organizations. I see students come to college and change their wardrobe based on the types of clothes that their preferred organization wears. A power of clothing that I presume someone has research on, though I have so far been unable to discover.

                  If I asked you to dress the typical father figure in America, what would he be wearing? What about his son? Does a brother have different style of dress from his dad if he has only sisters? What if there is no father? How does the son’s image change then? The media paints quite the picture for all family roles involving men. In many ways, the college environment has a hand in shaping what these can and will be for their male population. After this past week, I am excited to see society and colleges explore and further the role of husband in the family. After the monumental wins for marriage equality at the Supreme Court with Hollingsworth v. Perry and United States v. Windsor, same sex marriage will be supported federally in several states and the District of Columbia and be restored in the state of California. Will this produce catalogs for weddings that have male couples on the cover? (I sure hope so.) Families built and born into will hopefully be engaging in dialogues on how marriage equality has and will shape the fabric of society.

                  I challenge all who read this to ask themselves the following question: if I could pick a fabric that embodied masculinity, what would it be? What qualities would it have? Is it the star of the outfit, or does it have a supporting role? While I am still picking up the trade of clothes making and design, I have come to realize that fashion is a tool of expression that has been called a tool of oppression. Dividing clothes under two categories might be a way to flatter different sexes and genders, though having buttons to a shirt on the right can make all the difference to someone raised to wear them on the left.

One stitch makes all the difference.

Juan Martinez is a second year residence director for Greek Life at the University of the Pacific. They are also a second-year higher education graduate student. Follow them on Twitter (@pacificjmar) and Blogger (jmarsagrad.blogspot.com).

Confronting Rape Culture

In reflecting back before I wrote this post, I remember hearing fewer people in my life make "jokes" about rape or make comments supporting rape culture in the last few years. I believe this is due to most of my friends or acquaintances are involved in higer education in some way and have been confronted about how inappropriate comments that support rape culture truly are for the work they are doing (I also avoid the cesspool of comments on YouTube and I turn off the volume of other players when I play video games online). However there have been signs that this trend is not a reflection of the society around me. There have been several incidents over the course of the last few years in which comedians or politicians make jokes that belittle the impact that rape has on survivors or make comments that promote rape culture. One incident that sticks out in my mind, and is most directly relevant, is from Daniel Tosh. The incident involved Tosh telling an audience member that it'd be funny if she was raped. This was written about and put on tumblr and had many responses from social commentators from around the web including one from the Daily Beast.

Fast forward to last week, W Kamau Bell had a segment on his show titled Comic vs. Feminist where Lindy West, a blogger for Jezebel.com, debated with Jim Norton, a comic who is known for his shock value, about whether comedians' can make jokes about rape. 

From my perspective, the basic premise of Jim Norton's argument was that comics have free speech and they need to be able to make jokes about any topic they choose in order to do fill their role. Norton added that comics shouldn't "get in trouble" when they're trying to be funny. Norton then defined trouble as when people get together and encourage advertisers to drop their funding. He claimed that the market should dictate what is on TV and whether advertisers fund certain shows (in my 

Lindy West's point was that we all have the right to call out people when they're contributing to a culture that promotes violence and, more specifically, rape. And calling those people out can and should include some kind of protest that involves holding them accountable to their words by making their sponsors aware of what messages they are sponsoring. 

I was, and still am, fully on the side of Lindy West during the segment and after watching the extended version of the discussion, I thought about how men have these conversations with each other. On one hand I did not think that belittling sexual assault and rape was as present in the world as it was a few years ago. But then I thought back to the work that I do with college men and I was reminded that all students have internalized that, to some extent, men are supposed to be sexually aggressive in order to demonstrate their masculinity. So clearly having dialogues like these are going to continue to be an important piece of confronting masculinity.

Thinking back to the video, Norton's argument mainly came from a place based in free speech and how important free speech is for comics to be able to express themselves fully and not feel stifled. In my opinion, Norton was holding speech as being extremely important but was ignoring the impact that speech has. As I mentioned earlier, West brought up the climate of comedy clubs and how they are perceived as not very inviting and a huge part of that is the power dynamic involved both between genders and between the audience and the comic on stage. Norton was not acknowledging that dynamic or the privilege he carries being a male in society. Men have the ability to shrug off a suggestion or "joke" someone makes about sexual assault or rape because men know that it's very unlikely to happen to them. Sexual assault is, after all, a men's issue. 

So what does this mean for our work with students in addressing their patriarchal masculinity and privileges they are given through that systemic culture? I think it means we need to be able to hold free speech and accountability in both hands in our work with men. We need to be able to help men understand the power that they hold within their free speech and what they can do to hold each other accountable to making our world a more welcoming and including place. I know it's work that most of us are already doing, but in looking at some of the responses Lindy West has gotten on twitter, we clearly need to continue this work. 

I would like to open this up to a discussion because, in my opinion, men are the primary promoters of rape culture and we need it be active in stopping it. What are you doing to help change rape culture in your role? How are you empowering the men around you to confront comments that support rape culture? What can we do to help our students protest people who support this culture? (For instance, someone posted a petition on change.org to remove Daniel Tosh's show, Tosh.0, from Comedy Central's lineup). What programs are your sponsoring or leading that is helping address these constant concerns? How can we incorporate confronting patriarchal masculinity into the increasingly popular Movember? How do we continue to challenge patriarchy despite the contrary influence of organizations like A Voice For Men? How do we discuss the action that Men’s Rights Advocates are taking while ensuring that our work is foundationally different?