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.

Dave’s Story: College Men’s Identity Exploration through Participation in Qualitative Research

Several years ago I was involved in my dissertation research project.  My qualitative study explored the perceptions a group of first-year male students had about interacting with faculty outside of class.  Talk about exploding one’s research scope; not only were my participants first-year men, but they were also White, and first in their family to potentially graduate from college.  So, I had a veritable smorgasbord of identities to deal with as I set up the study.  

Each participant sat for three individual interviews, each of which lasted between 45 minutes and 2 hours. One of my participants – let’s call him Dave – was one of my favorites (I wasn’t supposed to have those but it happened).  He was funny, open-minded, smart, expressive, vulnerable, confident, and inquisitive.  His story was one of hardship and success, misunderstandings and friendship, and family love and strife.  “Breaking Away” emerged as the central theme from Dave’s three interviews.  He was from a small town and he perceived its people to be racist, homophobic, and intolerant of most non-Christian religions.  All he wanted growing up was go to college away from home, beat the odds most believed he couldn’t, and be successful in college and in life.  He visited the campus by himself over the summer, registered for classes, and when it came time to move into his residence hall, he did so by himself as well.  I was entirely enthralled by his story.  Months later I could still hear his voice and see his smile as I combed through the transcripts working on a publication.

Long story short, I completed the interviews, finished the dissertation, and ended up moving to another state with my family.  I friended some of my research participants on Facebook later that year, Dave among them.  I suppose we stayed in loose contact over the years.  He graduated and moved far away from his home state.  Every once in a while I “liked” one of his posts or he one of mine, but no substantive messages were ever exchanged.  That changed a little over a year ago when Dave Facebooked me indicating how much he had been thinking about the interviews (more than half a decade ago after they took place), how he wondered what he had said then, and how he wished he would have known then what he knew now.  I was elated about him reaching out and inquired more about his motivation to contact me.  He shared more of how much the interviews meant to him, and how I was the first person with whom he wanted to share more of his identity at the time because I was open to listening, because I wasn’t judging him, and because I wouldn’t share anything with anyone.  He trusted me as a researcher - and perfect stranger really - with some of his secrets. This exchange of messages was eye-opening to me and reaffirmed what we as educators hope for whenever we connect with a student: that we can make a difference, perhaps not noticed in the moment, but over time.  

Since reconnecting, I have interviewed Dave twice on the phone and am interviewing him once more in person in a few weeks when I am in his city.  The focus of the manuscript I will write for publication will rest on self-authorship and identity development of college men through participating in qualitative research.  

I have also since talked with others who conducted similar research with college men.  One good colleague mentioned that during a follow-up study with participants two summers ago, most of the men said the original interviews were among the most powerful experiences they had during their undergraduate careers.  One of the most powerful?!  It is telling that research participation can mean so much to students, specifically to college men.  College men are often at odds with the way they perceive to be socialized by families, schools, and society and how they may conceive of themselves.  The resulting conflict can lead to a host of concerns, chief among them the fear to show emotion or vulnerability.  Yet, the need to explore and reflect on these feelings exists and remains in men.  

Dave’s story, and those of so many other college men who participate in a variety of interpersonal, communicative, or expressive activities paint an image of positive identity development through prolonged individual or small group conversation and engagement.  Not all college educators are trained counselors or may have time to engage in qualitative research with young men.  But the rapport qualitative researchers build with participants is near synonymous with the rapport student affairs professionals or faculty must create to reach, guide, counsel, advise, teach, and mentor students.  Finding ways to engage men in deep conversation or reflection is necessary in coursework, during educational programs, during conduct or advising sessions, on alternative spring break trips or study abroad sojourns, during service learning experiences, or simply in everyday face-to-face conversation.  Research has suggested for years that critical conversation and reflection in one-on-one or small group settings may do wonders for men’s positive identity development.  Over time this kind of engagement may lead college men away from attitudes and behaviors associated with performing masculinity and becoming more self-actualized and authentic individuals.  Finally, men who have been encouraged to engage in this personal exploration and reflection may more easily commit to acting in solidarity with marginalized students on campus and members of society.  So, whether you conduct a research study with college men or sit across from them during a regular one-on-one meeting, don’t underestimate the potential influence a conversation will have on them.

Jörg Vianden is Assistant Professor of Student Affairs Administration at the University of Wisconsin-La Crosse.  His scholarship focuses mainly on college men and masculinities.  Please consider following him on twitter at @jvianden.

Reflecting on Our Past, Visioning Our Future: Celebrating 30 Years of Men & Masculinities Work in ACPA

Daniel Tillapaugh, Ph.D. @dtillapaugh

University of Maine

Chair, Standing Committee on Men & Masculinities

            In 2004, Harry Cannon, one of the founders of the then-Standing Committee for Men, wrote a lovely retrospective article of the SCM’s first 20 years.  The article – a brilliant history lesson on the founding of the SCM within ACPA’s organizational structure and other key aspects of the tensions between the feminist men’s movement with those within the men’s rights movement – provides a helpful reminder about the power of place.  Cannon (2004) writes:

The Standing Committee for Men has been ‘built into’ the institution that is ACPA.  The
            committee members not only find strength in each other, but have – over two decades –
            continued to make a difference in the lives of men on their home campuses. (p. 2)

A decade later, these sentiments still ring true.

              Over the past ten years, five chairs have led this organization and its work along with many dedicated and engaged directorate and leadership team members.  Matt Helm (2004-2006), Mike Strong (2006-2008), Paul Brown (2008-2010), Z Nicolazzo (2010-2012), and myself (2012-2016) have had the privilege of serving as chair of this organization, and even in a decade, the organization has continued to evolve.  The founders of the SCM were clearly supporting a pro-feminist perspective (Cannon, 2004), and that continues today.  Several years ago, the SCM’s leadership team reaffirmed the organization’s vision statement “to be a preeminent clearinghouse of information, knowledge, and professional development on issues related to men’s identity and development for all student affairs educators” (SCMM, n.d.).  We continue to aspire to this vision, and we are working proactively to reach this every day.

These past ten years have brought along new mile markers in our work to attain our vision statement.  In 2007, the inaugural Conference on College Men (CCM) was launched in collaboration with NASPA; the CCM has continued to be a biannual event with work already beginning for the next CCM in 2015.  In 2010, we saw the establishment of our Scholar-in-Residence program, which has provided opportunities for the dissemination of research and scholarship on college men and masculinities work by emerging scholars.  Throughout that time, we have been honored to have Chase Catalano (2010-2011), Dr. Brian D. Reed (2011-2013), and Dr. Brian McGowan (2013-2014) serve in this role, each with their research that provides an intersectional perspective of gender and other social identities.  Over the past few years, we have maintained a wonderful partnership with our colleagues in the NASPA Men and Masculinities Knowledge Community through three joint publications.  In 2012, we saw our name change officially from the Standing Committee for Men to the Standing Committee on Men and Masculinities with wide support of our members and the ACPA Governing Board, and the publication of an excellent publication on men and masculinities issues from a group of graduate students and new professionals.  2013 brought about increased opportunities for leadership involvement within the SCMM through Coordinator positions, one year appointed leadership roles.  Additionally, we launched our SCMM blog, which has continued to serve a vital role in the dissemination of knowledge for our members.  Personally, I was proud as both Chair and my role as a professor in the Higher Education program at the University of Maine to have the graduate students enrolled in my College Men & Masculinities course this Fall publish thoughtful and insightful blog posts here on the SCMM blog. 

This year brings a great deal of celebrating our past, present, and future.  We hope that you’ll continue to check out this space over the coming months to read the terrific insights of scholars and practitioners as well as some recognition of our 30 years of history.  Our social and awards ceremony at ACPA on Monday, March 31 from 6 – 7 p.m. in the Indianapolis Marriott Downtown – Boston will serve as a formal time to have our members come together and honor this momentous occasion.  However, our celebrations will happen outside of convention as well.  We have plans for a new webinar series that will be free to our members which will be launched this Spring, and we have established a partnership with ACPA’s quarterly online publication, Developments, which will publish a series of articles relating to issues of intersectionality and college men and masculinities.  We look forward to all of these opportunities to connect with you around these important issues within our community.

What comes next?  We have so much potential for our collective work in this next decade ahead.  The Standing Committee on Men and Masculinities is lucky to have a membership that is passionate about the work that we do and who supports our collective work.  Whether it’s connecting with us via Facebook or Twitter, in open meetings at convention, or other avenues, we welcome your involvement, input, and insights.  As we look forward to our 40^th anniversary in 2024, I hope that our collective work continues to be informed by excellent research and scholarship, outstanding practices that aim to help support our college men, and partnerships that can move our field forward.  Thank you for your engagement, involvement, and support.  I look forward to connecting with many of you who will be in attendance at Indy ’14. 

References

Cannon, H. (2004).  Back when…  Men on campus: Standing Committee on Men Newsletter. 
            Washington, D.C.: ACPA.

Standing Committee on Men & Masculinities (n.d.).  Vision Statement.  Retrieved from
            http://www.myacpa.org/scmm

30 People in 30 Years Part 1

In his blog post this week, Daniel Tillapaugh, Ph.D. (@dtillapaugh) wrote about the great progress that the Standing Committee on Men & Masculinities has made over the past decade. We, the Standing Committee want to take this opportunity to recognize 30 individuals who have been nominated by their peers and colleagues for making a significant impact on our experience, organization, and the student affairs community. Below are a compilation of comments made out these great advocates and educators.

#1) Jason Laker - Jason has been recognized as being a champion of the SCM & SCMM for many years.  He has served as the chair of the group in the early 2000s, and he has continued to advocate, partner, and advise the leadership team in that time.  His work and scholarship on men and masculinities in addition to gender development issues have been extremely important for our field.  His mentorship and and continued participation as a presenter for sponsored programs and advocacy at executive levels for having keynote speakers on the larger ACPA agenda has continued to advance the work of SCMM.  The SCMM would not be what it is today without the hard work and dedication of Dr. Jason Laker.

#2) Chase James Catalano - Chase was the inaugural Scholar in Residence for the SCMM a number of years ago.  In assuming this role, Chase expanded the Standing Committee's conversations about gender beyond the body.  By that I mean that Chase was able to talk about masculinity about not being something attached to one's body, but as a discourse that shaped the lives and experiences of individuals who identified as men regardless of their bodies. Chase is deeply committed to advancing social justice around issues of gender and has been a leader in our field, as well as the scholar in residence for SCMM, promoting transgender understanding.  Chase's scholarship also is critical to pushing back the boundaries of knowledge regarding gender performance on campus.

#3) Rachel Wagner - Rachel has been central to the SCMM's understanding of the various forms of masculinities and has been a key ally in the efforts to help student affairs professionals understand how to effectively engage and promote the learning of male identified students.

#4) Paul Brown - Paul is a former chair of the Standing Committee on Men and Masculinites.  While chair, Paul put in a significant amount of time working with others involved with the committee on restructuring the SCMM. Paul not only has been a tremendous advocate for understanding the issues around male identified students on college campuses, he has fostered collaborative and deeper relationships among SCMM and other ACPA committees, commissions, and The Executive Committee.  Additionally, Paul is the genius behind our yearly tradition of developing SCMM pins. Since his time as chair, Paul has been a strong supporter and advocate for the work of SCMM.

#5)  David Braverman - David was performing research regarding men's development long before it became understood, accepted, or popular.  He has been one of the leaders in our field, helping to pave the way for others to have an easier time working to focus attention on men and masculinities.

#6) Brian Reed - Brian, during his time as the Chair of the NASPA MMKC initiated the creation of the first Joint Publication between the NASPA MMKC & the SCMM.  Brian's work with the SCMM continued when he served as the second Scholar in Residence.  He continues to provide important support to the SCMM as well as forward scholarship that focuses on the convergences of class and masculinities, which is often overlooked throughout the literature.  He has been an instrumental figure in forwarding scholarship throughout the SCMM, even when he was not a member of the group (i.e., when he was the Chair of the NASPA MMKC).

We will have more posts coming to recognize more great scholars and professionals over the coming weeks as we usher in our 30th year!

Skin Deep: On Being a Tattooed Man in Higher Education

Just a quick interaction…

I was in the middle of my 18th sit—wait, 19th? 20th? No, 18th. 18th sit! I was in the middle of my 18th sit when a conversation that changed my perception of tattoos occurred.

I was chatting with my artist, (who will remain nameless for the sake of privacy and will be referred to by pronouns 'they/their' or simply, 'artist'), when they asked, "What do the people you work with think of tattoos?"

"Oh, it isn't ever really an issue," I said, shrugging nonchalantly.

"I figured that not many people in student affairs would have tattoos."

"Tattoos are becoming more common these days," I said, thinking of many of my colleagues with visible pieces.

"Interesting," they said, eyes widening to focus on a tricky line of my tattoo.

"And the only reason I get away with tattoos is because I'm white dude."

"Yeah—" the artist said, laughingly, then they stopped tattooing when they saw I was serious. "What do you mean?" the artist said as they raised their head to look at me for clarification.

"I'm white. Tattoos are more accepted because I'm already in a position of power, so it's generally less frowned upon to have tattoos."

The artist explained how they hadn't really ever attached race to tattoos in the past.

"Think of when you randomly see a black man, or a Hispanic dude, on the streets with multiple visible tattoos—what's the first thing that comes to mind?"

"Trouble."

I was surprised by their word choice because it was almost instantaneous. And this was from someone who tattoos people of color all the time. So I asked the same question but about women.

"Trouble."

"Okay, what about a white man?"

"He can afford tattoos."

We launched into a conversation on how white men simply possess the power to have multiple visible tattoos without anyone batting an eye. It was incredible to have such an empowering conversation with someone who is surrounded with this culture on a daily basis. I could tell things were clicking with my artist because it seemed like this was the first time they'd really had a conversation like this during a tattoo session.

*          *          *

A recent study (Diaz, 2011) suggests America has shifted toward an acceptance of tattoo culture, as four-in-ten adults have at least one tattoo; yet, I feel there is still a blatant stigma associated with tattoo culture—explicitly in higher education.

In a field that sings the praises of motivating students to be authentic by constantly saying, "just be yourself!" how often do we stand by this notion in our own personal expression as administrators (and budding administrators—like myself)?

Further, living in a society that already suppresses male emotions, tattoos can be an essential form of personal authenticity and expression. However, the long discourse has been that, in order to move up in the world, men must cover themselves in business attire to be taken seriously among other administrative men. This is unacceptable because forcing men—across race, class, and sexual orientation; including women—to dress a certain way to be accepted perpetuates systematic oppression of authenticity.

How am I to be truly successful as a man if I am not allowed to be comfortable in my skin and express myself authentically as a creative person?

Insert: Tattoos.

Tattoos are therapy—representative of our past, our present, and future—and allow men to create tributes to our mothers, fathers, wives, children, struggles and/or successes in life, appreciation of music, art, and literature. If society and/or academia suppress men from expressing their emotions by literally wearing their heart on their sleeve, then where can men express ourselves fully authentically?

Tattoos are an important aspect of society because they carry a shared belief in transformation. Anyone can get tattooed for any reason and use the experience to process through that landmark in their life. Tattoos instantly transform skin into a story. Tattoos create conversation starters that intersect gender, racial, and class lines—these connections are important. I am willing to engage anyone in a conversation about their tattoos simply because I am curious to how their skin tells their story.

As I eluded to in my intro, much of this conversation on tattoos sadly looks different for me—given the privilege and power I inherit from being a white male—and isn’t completely accepted for everyone yet. And for that, I hope this article can create a new conversation on tattoos in higher education.

I do not appreciate the reality of tattoo stigma that exists across racial lines because no man (or woman) should have to hide any aspect of themselves in order to be accepted in society. I should not be able to “get away” with having tattoos (or anything, for that matter) because I am a white man. I can’t say I completely “get away” with having my tattoos because I still catch judging eyes from elder administrators and from faculty, but I refuse to hide who I am.

And yes, I get that tattoos are an active choice made by the person who accumulates them and that skin color does not operate that way—but I also recognize that, because of the stigma surrounding tattoos, many men of color might hesitate to go under the needle in fear of further stigma—that is what pains me.

Every man should be comfortable wearing some ink on his skin if he chooses to express himself in that manner.

As Leonard (2012) writes, men should feel free to express ourselves with tattoos as members of academia because tattoos can make us more human in the eyes of our students—challenging the myth of the professor as an untarnished vehicle of knowledge. Not only are we as learned men able to express our knowledge and our competencies, but we can display our personality and authentic pedagogy by distinctly displaying our art for the world to see.

Tattoos are a vehicle of learning because I firmly believe that my tattoos exist in order to aid in how I tell my story of emerging into adulthood as a professional in higher education. Working with students and aiding in their development is equally dependent on how we have explored our own development (Leonard, 2012)—our physical bodies play a significant role in this relationship.

When I roll up my sleeves, I almost have one entire full sleeve and a visible piece on my other forearm. I made the conscious decision to go below my elbows on both are because I have a story I want to share on my body. I am comfortable defending the tattoos I possess and genuinely love telling the stories behind my ink. There is always a story.

Students engage in this story. Students are curious to learn the significance of each of my pieces. Students often ask how many tattoos I have—I truly have no idea anymore—so I respond with my hour/sit ratio. (Note: I’ve sat 20 times for 55 hours.) With these tattoos, I make connections with students. I am human to them. I am authentic to them because I am not hiding.

I had a conversation with a heavily tattooed male administrator at the University of Kansas when I was interviewing there for graduate school. He told me something that stuck with me, “in higher education, no one cares what you look like so long as you do a good job and inspire students.” It was a simple comment that resonated with me because I was able to acknowledge the fact that higher education truly does operate that way. We have an incredibly welcoming field that caters to people from all walks of life. So why can’t we bring about a destigmatization of tattoo culture?

This interaction at Kansas stuck with me because, as we shared our tattoo stories, we came back to many frustrations over how tattoo culture is stigmatized instead of appreciated for artistic expression. Because what this all comes down to is my fundamental belief that tattoos are art. Art is brilliant. Men who desire expressing themselves with this form of art should not feel as though we should have to hide our personal authenticity.

Men already feel like we have to suppress enough of our authentic emotions and modes of expression—so why, too, tattoos?

People who do not understand, or actively refute, a specific culture are the first to make outlandish judgments of that culture. And it is a shame this topic has not been covered much in the realm of higher education because, like racial stereotypes, the stigma around tattoos is purely skin deep.

Dennis Ahlburg (2012), who is president of Trinity University (a small private liberal arts college in San Antonio, TX) presents a mockery of how tattoo shops and tattoo culture actually function. Ahlburg makes many outlandish claims to insinuate that tattoo artists are unintelligent and that those who are tattooed are predisposed to fail in the job search the moment the ink touches skin. Ahlburg claims to know “the facts” about tattooing and yet, claims to own no ink of his own. I am simply shocked and outraged that he would attempt to assert any form of judgment over anyone for their choice in permanent artwork seeing as he obviously has no knowledge of the culture itself.

Tattoo stigma like this operates as oppression of individualistic authenticity in men.

Much of Ahlburg’s (2012) conversation on tattoos centers on this misguided belief that all tattoos involve problematic content or that everyone who has tattoos should be viewed in some negative light—when, in reality, these misconceptions are inherently themselves problematic. I have a beautiful children's literature half sleeve with Max from Where the Wild Things Are, Milo from Phantom Toll booth and the boy from The Giving Tree. However, from afar, it might look as though I just have a black and grey half sleeve covered in skulls and messages of hate—but that's not the case at all. Children have literally jumped for joy when they saw my Max tattoo. My tattoos are strategically chosen to create an image I am proud to wear.

If an employer or an institution wants to hire me for my skills and yet refuses to hire me because I choose to present myself as an art-filled canvas of self-expression—or requires me to hide my work in order to do my job, then I do not want to work for that institution or employer. Forcing someone to hide who they authentically are is a form of oppression—this includes race, gender, gender expression, class, sexual orientation, and even tattoos.

I unapologetically identify with tattoo culture and I am proud to be a future student affairs professional. My only hope is that this will begin the conversation for institutions and supervisors to rethink how we think and view men with tattoos in higher education. There is already a great deal of change taking place in higher education and I see more acceptance of tattoos—which is great—but I will not feel tattoos are truly accepted until the day I no longer have to hear someone explain that they must strategically place a tattoo so it doesn't show at their work.

Get tattooed. Share your story.

About the Author:

Craig Bidiman is a first-year Higher Education MEd graduate student at UMass Amherst. He earned his undergraduate degrees in English and Secondary Education at Oregon State University, where he served as Memorial Union President for a year and was forever transformed to enter the realm of student affairs.

Craig currently holds assistantships in the Center for Health Promotion at UMass Amherst, where he serves as a Masculinity Educator and advises the sex positive comedy troupe, Not Ready for Bedtime Players. Craig also holds an assistantship with the UMass Graduate Student Senate, where he manages advertising and social media marketing.

Craig is also an avid music reviewer, tattoo and vinyl collector, and professional wrestling nerd.

Join the dialogue on Twitter at @CrigBididman

...or on Facebook at Facebook.com/bidimanc.

 References

Ahlburg, D. (2012, October 05). President Ahlburg on tattoos: What they won’t tell you at the tattoo

parlor. The Trinitonian. Retrieved from http://www.trinitonian.com/2012/10/05/president-ahlburg-on-tattoos-what-they-wont-tell-you-at-the-parlor/

Diaz, S. (2011, August 21). Think before you ink: Could that tattoo cost you a job one day? USA

Today College. Retrieved from http://www.usatodayeducate.com/staging/index.php/

career/think-before-you-ink-could-that-tattoo-cost-you-a-job-one-day

Leonard, D. (2012, October 25). The Inked Academic Body. The Chronicle of Higher Education.

Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/blogs/conversation/2012/10/25/the-inked-academic-body/

“The Bright Power of Fraternity Men: Redefining Masculinity”

There has been quite a wealth of articles and conversation coming out around the concerns of the American Fraternity system. Most notably, The Atlantic recently published Caitlin Flanagan’s piece “The Dark Power of Fraternities” in which she presents a year’s investigation of social and cultural trends within Greek houses and the liability that lurks behind the walls. Within a brief period, Flanagan captured the attention of individuals and organizations both inside and out of the Greek community. If you have not done so already, I highly encourage you all to read Flanagan’s article as she outlines very real concerns for our Fraternal men and undergraduates at-large.

In developing my thoughts and reactions to what immediately seems an attack on the Greek system, it is crucial for me to understand my background and how this affects my perspective. As an undergraduate student, I spent three academic years as a brother to the Washington & Jefferson College chapter of the Alpha Tau Omega National Fraternity. For those of you who have already observed the aforementioned article, you will recognize that this is the same National organization that Flanagan referenced within the first sentence. The poor publicity for Alpha Tau Omega continues with Flanagan later noting a fall from the University of Idaho house during the 2012-2013 academic year. My connection to the anecdotes do not stop there as she briefly makes note of a fall at a September 2013 fraternity party at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, where I have served as Graduate Assistant since August 2013.

With my connection to at least two of the entities noted, as well as the love and respect I have for my own fraternity experience, one would expect me to quickly take the role of defender to the Fraternity system. That’s not the case. Caitlin Flanagan is correct in every word. There is a culture of liability engrained within the walls of many fraternities across the country. Sexual and physical assault remains evident, hazing continues to be a concern for every administrator and potential new members, and unintended slips and falls will never completely be eliminated no matter the preventative measures by institutions, students, or national organizations. Lets stop debating the pros and cons of fraternity life. We cannot sit down with the statistics of philanthropic dollars raised and 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 harmful to the overall discussion.

My concern with this article, and frankly many stories in the media reporting on reckless and harmful behavior within fraternities, is not the negative attention. My concern is that we are not focusing on the appropriate issues. Fraternity houses and organizations are not the cause of sexism/sexual misconduct, racial discrimination, physical violence, homophobia, etc. as they have no fundamental values rooted in such harmful practices. The concern comes from the men who are entrusted to represent those organizations. We need to be asking ourselves why our undergraduate men are behaving in a manner that directly opposes the values they agreed to uphold when initiated into their organization.

From birth we are telling our boys that the essence of masculinity is to be strong and aggressive, athletic and cunning, composed with our emotions, and physically appealing. To be a man, we are to be a god on earth, the Adonis we see immortalized in unhealthy pursuits of masculinity. Boys grow to learn that men cease to have dreams. Financial stability and securing the future of our families—or destroying our bodies and minds in the process—defines our legacy. Furthermore, we are to protect this manhood from anything—and anyone—at all cost. We are providing our boys and young men limiting narratives that equate social capital and power with domination over others. I firmly believe that as we see the media continue to highlight the negative stereotypes and tragedies associated with our fraternities, we are witnessing first-hand accounts of the harmful realities that arise from our traditional thoughts on masculinity, brotherhood, and youth.

When we are developing a dominant culture of masculinity and an educational system that seem to directly oppose one another, we begin to understand behavior. The reality is that many men are not personally invested in the values of higher education (or any level of academia for that matter). College campuses, and fraternity houses most notably, then become a breeding ground for men to enact the culture we have long since prescribed on our young boys. This collegiate space can be a potentially hostile environment for our male students who are told they as individuals (not boy culture at-large) are a root cause for destruction of self and others. This dis-empowerment of our men only perpetuates the negative behavior we read about in pieces like Caitlin Flanagan’s “The Dark Power of Fraternities.”

There is a silver lining to all of this, however. Not only at Emerson College and MIT where I am employed, but across the nation, fraternity men are actively engaging their brothers and their peers outside the Greek community to redefine what it means to be a man. The majority of our young men―as the majority of all men are not perpetrators of these behaviors―are growing tired of themselves and their male peers being understood as "the enemy of the state." Their hopes are to raise awareness around issues of sexual assault, binge drinking, and lack of development and academic motivation. Not because they are atoning for the sins of the past, but but because they are invested in this redefinition and the future. With each new recruitment period, we move closer to a culture that embraces multiple forms of masculinity and espouses the love and respect that is central to the values of fraternity life. As internet blogs and comments are calling for an end to Greek life, it is now more important than ever to recognize the appropriate place these organizations have in dismantling our notions of masculinity. We must empower our undergraduates and allow them to be more than the “frat bros;” instead, rise to the worth of fraternity men.

Mike Prinkey is a Graduate Assistant (GA) to the Office of Fraternities, Sororities, & Independent Living Groups at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, as well as GA to the Office of Multicultural Student Affairs & GLBTQ Resources at Emerson College. He is in the last semester for a Masters of Higher Education Administration from Northeastern University. You can contact Mike through:

email: michaelcprinkey@gmail.com

Facebook: facebook.com/mike.prinkey

Twitter: @McPrinkey