Does
Race Matter: Perceptions of Masculinity among Black Males at a Predominantly
White Institution
Brian
L. McGowan
Indiana
State University
Brian L. McGowan, Ph.D. is an
Assistant Professor of Student Affairs and Higher Education in the Department
of Educational Leadership at Indiana State University. He recently completed his doctoral degree in
Higher Education and Student Affairs at Indiana University. Dr. McGowan can be reached by email at brian.mcgowan@indstate.edu.
Abstract
The
purpose of this qualitative study was to explore how race influenced perceptions
of masculinity among a sample of Black males at a predominantly White
institution (PWI). Based on in-depth semi-structured interviews conducted with
17 Black undergraduate males attending a PWI in the Midwest, findings suggest that
participants had varying views on the influence of race on perceptions of
masculinity. Participants’ perceptions
of masculinity also influenced how they negotiated the college campus. When asked if
there was a difference between what it means to be a man versus being a Black man,
nine participants indicated race as salient in their perceptions of
masculinity. Based on the
findings, recommendations for researchers and higher education practitioners looking
to support the identity development of Black males on their respective campuses
are offered and recommendations for future research is provided.
Does
Race Matter: Perceptions of Masculinity among African American Males at a
Predominantly White Institution
College
enrollment rates are becoming more diverse with increases in students of color pursuing
higher education (Carter, Locks, Winkle-Wagner, 2013). Despite these increases,
Black male representation in higher education is disproportionately low
(Harper, 2012). Specifically, in 2002, Black
males encompass 4.3% of all students enrolled in college, the same percentage
as in 1976 (Harper, 2006). An
overwhelming majority of these Black males students attended Historically Black
Colleges and Universities (HBCUs), less selective regional state institutions,
or community colleges (Harper & Griffin, 2011). In addition to stagnant enrollment rates,
Black male college student completion rates are low compared to other
racial/ethnic groups in the United States.
Specifically, across four cohorts of undergraduate students in college,
the six-year graduation rate for Black male students attending public
institutions was 33.3% compared to 48.1% for students overall (Harper, 2012). These problematic trends have heightened the
need to understand the experiences of Black male college students that includes
their conceptualizations of masculinity.
Recent
empirical studies focusing on Black college men have explored issues of gender
and masculinities in higher education (Dancy, 2012; Harper, 2004; Harris,
Palmer, & Struve, 2011; Martin & Harris, 2006). These studies are critically important in
addressing gendered achievement and outcomes that permeate many higher
education institutions (Harris, Palmer, & Struve, 2011). Harris (1995)
stated that Black men face pressures to adhere to Eurocentric and Afrocentric
standards of manhood. Bonner (2011)
posits:
The
African American male serves as the understudy in the performance of
masculinity. The White male serves as
the lead character, and the script is structured around his actions and
proclivities. This essentialist,
hegemonic, heterosexist, White model serves as the benchmark from which all
notions of masculinity are based. For
the African American male who falls outside of this rigid template, he faces
potential ostracism, isolation, and invisibility (p. 147)
Pressures to conform to
Eurocentric standards of masculinity can result in misinterpretations of
traditional gender expectations of Black men.
Thus, exploring how Black men perceive masculinity yielded insights into
how they make meaning of their race and how these meanings evolved during their
time in college.
Black men
enter college campuses having been socialized to adhere to traditional
expectations of masculinity that is learned and reinforced in multiple social institutions
(Dancy, 2012; Harris & Harper, 2008). These socially constructed expectations
influence the manner in which Black men conceptualize and express their
masculinities during college (Harris, Palmer, & Struve, 2011). Despite the various ways Black males are
socialized, scholars tend to treat them as a monolithic group (Harper &
Nichols, 2008). As a result, scholars
advocate for studies that explore within-group differences in the expression of
masculinities among Black college men (Dancy, 2012; Harris, Palmer, &
Struve, 2011). The purpose of this study
was to explore how race influenced perceptions of masculinity among 17 Black
undergraduate men attending a PWI. Prior
to discussing this study’s findings, a review of the literature, theoretical
framework, and methodology will be discussed.
Literature Review
Several sociocultural
influences shape how Black men construct their masculinity. “Boys learn to be a man from an early age in
playgrounds, schoolrooms, religious institutions, and homes, and are taught by
peers, media, parents, teachers, coaches – just about everywhere and from
everyone” (Kimmel & Davis, 2011, p. 7). The behavioral experiences of young Black boys
are critical when understanding the development of masculine identity (Dancy,
2012). The importance of understanding
how Black undergraduate college men conceptualize masculinity is reinforced in
two broad areas of the literature: (a) influences that shape Black masculine
identity, and (b) literature examining masculinities among Black men in
college.
Influences
Shaping Black Masculine Identity
Parental and familial influences, male peer groups and
schooling, and participation and excellence in sports shape masculine identity
prior to entering the college campus (Harper, 2004; Kimmel & Messner,
2007). At birth, Black boys are socialized according to their gender in ways
that differ from their White counterparts (Wallace, 2007). Wallace noted that
studies examining the gender socialization of Black children and stated:
Black
children are taught that womanhood is something that one must grow into while
manhood is something that is both natural and automatic…Black boys are regarded
as adult men from young ages and therefore are expected not to participate in
behaviors associated with girls or childhood (p. 15).
Schools
also serve as sites for socialization and the development of Black masculine
identity (Davis, 2003; Ferguson, 2000). Davis (2003) suggested that Black boys
tend to underachieve academically as a result of their perception of schooling
being incongruent with masculinity. Ferguson (2000) discussed how Black boys
interpret masculinity by exploring the experiences of 20 fifth and sixth grade Black
boys at an urban school over a three and a half year period. She explored the ways that racial inequities
influenced the school environment and found that the school environment
marginalized Black boys in a “covert and informal manner” (Ferguson, 2000, p.
19). Ferguson also stated “race continues to be a ready-made filter for
interpreting events, informing social interactions, and grounding identities,
and identification in school” (Ferguson, 2000, p. 17).
Participating
in sports influences the development of masculine identity in school settings
and is salient in boys gaining peer acceptance (Harper, 2004; Kimmel, 2008). Sporting
activities provide boys opportunities to become socialized with hegemonic
masculine attitudes (Martin & Harris, 2006). As a result, many boys rely on
sports as a way to demonstrate and perform their masculinity. Kimmel (2008) noted
that participation in sports validates manhood and cements the bonds among men.
Sports not only cement bonds among men but it marginalizes other men in the
process. hooks (2004) described the prevalence of sports in Black culture by
linking excellence to respect by stating:
This
need to prove their value through performance is one of the reasons so many
Black boys look to sports as a site of redemption and affirmation. Given the
history of Black male success in the arena of sports, an arena deemed “manly”
by patriarchal standards, Black boys learn early on in their lives that by
excelling in sports they can gain both visibility and a measure of respect (p.
89)
Kunjufu (1988) noted that some
Black boys must decide between being accepted by their peers or achieving
academic success resulting in them identifying as athletes instead of academic
leaders.
Conceptualization
of Masculinity among Black College Men
Recently, studies have explored
masculinities and gender performance among Black college men. Harper’s (2004)
study of 32 high-achieving Black college men discovered that participants
expressed their masculinity via their academic achievement, leadership, and
efforts to advance their respective communities. This study was significant
since it challenges prior research on Black men and academic excellence. Similarly, Martin and Harris’s (2006) study of
27 Black male student athletes found that participants conceptualized their
masculinity in ways that included being accountable and pursuing academic
excellence. These findings suggest that high-achieving Black male student
athletes conceptualize their gender identities in a productive manner that
differs from other male college student athletes. The 22 Black men in Harris,
Palmer, and Struve’s (2011) study conceptualized masculinity in traditional
ways that include being tough, a provider, unemotional, and responsible.
Lastly, the 24 Black men in Dancy’s (2012) study constructed manhood based on
self-expectations (statements of self-determinism and answerability),
relationships and responsibilities to family (statements positioning Black men
as patriarchs, sons, and brothers), and worldviews and life philosophies
(statements on beliefs about others). Despite these
important contributions, higher education scholars continue to advocate
for more gender-sensitive inquiries exploring Black male college students
(Dancy, 2012; Davis, 1999; Harper, 2004; Harris, Palmer, & Struve, 2011;
Martin & Harris, 2006).
The
purpose of this qualitative study was to examine perceptions of masculinity among
a sample of Black males at a PWI. The following questions guided this inquiry:
(a) What definitions of masculinity do Black men ascribe to their
masculinities, (b) how does race influence these definitions of masculinity,
and (c) how do these definitions of masculinity evolve during the college
experience?
Theoretical Framework
The
conceptual framework employed in this study combines the social construction of
masculinities perspective (Kimmel & Messner, 2007) and racial identity
development (Cross & Vandiver, 2001). The social construction of
masculinities perspective treats gender as a performed socially constructed
identity that encompasses meanings that are culturally defined as masculine and
retreats from research that suggests biological differences as explanation for
men’s behaviors (Harris & Struve, 2009). Embedded in this perspective is that certain masculinities
are hegemonic and prioritized over others.
Davis (1999) argued that Black men face hegemonic masculinity in college
on a daily basis in complex ways.
Cross and Vandiver’s (2001) expanded nigrescence model
also provided context to this study. This model consists of three thematic
categories: pre-encounter, immersion-emersion, and internalization. The
pre-encounter theme describes individuals with attitudes or low racial identity
salience attributed to being Black. The immersion-emersion theme describes
individuals with an identity in a state of transition and internalization occurs
when an individual is comfortable being Black and views race as being positive.
Cross and Vandiver’s (2001) thematic categories illustrate the racial attitudes
some Black men bring to the college which influences how they negotiate the
campus. Together, these theories allow
for the exploration of how race influences perceptions of masculinity among Black
undergraduate college men at a PWI.
Methodology
This
article is based on findings from a larger qualitative study exploring how Black
men developed interpersonal relationships with other men on a college campus. Specifically, the larger exploratory
qualitative study sought to understand how Black men developed interpersonal
relationships with other men, how identity influences these relationships, and
the sociocultural influences on these relationships. For this study, data were extracted from the
larger data set and analyzed based on the abovementioned research questions and
theoretical framework.
Site
and Participants
The
context for this sample is a large, public, flagship research institution in
the Midwestern region of the United States. Men comprised 50.1% of the undergraduate
student body and African Americans accounted for 4.2% of the overall
population. Participants for this study
were obtained through a purposive snowball sampling procedure (Patton,
2002). Four gatekeepers who had extensive
contact with Black men were sought to identify participants. The criteria for participation in this study
are Black male undergraduate students across different class years of at least
sophomore status. First-year students were not considered as a result of their
lack of exposure to the institution.
The
sample consisted of 7 seniors, 5 juniors, and 5 sophomores. The majority of these men were involved in
co-curricular activities on campus. Ten participants
came from two parent homes and the remaining seven were raised in a single
mother household. Seven participants in the study identified their
socioeconomic status as working class, seven from middle class, and three from a
poor/low-income environment. Eleven participants were first-generation and six
participants identified as gay or bisexual.
Data
Collection and Analysis
The
larger study used two data sources: semi-structured interview (Patton, 2002)
and photo-elicitation interview (Harper, 2002).
All 17 men participated in both interviews and discussed their
relationships and interactions with other men on the campus. Each interview was audiotaped, transcribed,
and analyzed. Using the interview
transcripts, the data was analyzed using three levels of coding: open, axial,
and selective coding (Strauss & Corbin, 1998). After each interview, open codes were
considered and then determined if the codes applied across class levels in the
sample which allowed for a narrowing of codes. The purposes of axial coding are
to sort, synthesize, and organize large amounts of data and resemble them in
new ways after open coding (Creswell, 2009).
Selective coding involves developing a core category, the central
phenomenon where the categories are integrated in grounded theory research.
Trustworthiness
Lincoln
and Guba’s (1985) trustworthiness techniques were employed in this study. First,
a peer debriefer was selected to offer perspectives on the data analysis.
Second, member checking was conducted. Summaries were written of the interviews
in the form of a participant profile and were shared with the participants to
verify that my interpretation matched their viewpoint. Third, a journal was
established, as part of the data collection process and as a running
self-commentary during data analysis (Torres, 2003). Lastly, a researcher positionality reflection
was created to articulate how the researcher’s biases and perspectives
influenced the research process (Jones, Torres, Arminio, 2006).
Findings
Participants’ conceptualizations of masculinity served as
the focus of this article. Using the
abovementioned analytic approach, three themes emerged: (a) all participants
embraced traditional definitions of masculinity, and (b) race only had a
profound influence on some of the participant’s conceptualizations of
masculinity, and (c) definitions of masculinity evolved given their prolonged
exposure to the campus environment. Responses to these themes are explored with
illustrative quotes from participants.
Traditional
Definitions of Masculinity
All of
the participants entered college adhering to stereotypical definitions of
masculinity that were engrained in them at an early age. Most participants
cited accepting responsibility as an essential part of being a man and discussed
the importance of “being a provider, “accepting faults,” “keeping your word,” “being
on your grind” or described tasks such as paying bills or taking care of family.
For example, one participant shared, “A man is someone who takes
responsibilities for their actions, no matter whether they’re good or bad.” Some participants mentioned respectfulness as
an expression of masculinity. One participant
illustrated this by stating, “Being a man is someone that is respected and
respects people as well.” Another definition most participants subscribed to masculinity
was toughness. One participant stated,
“A man has to be strong, aggressive, assertive, you have to be a leader, be at
the forefront.”
Some of
the participants also provided examples of how advancing the Black community shaped
their definitions of masculinity. One participant shared, “I would say manhood,
perseverance, scholarship, and uplift, and by uplift, I mean helping out your
community and always being there for other people.” Some participants also mentioned
not displaying vulnerable emotion as a component of masculinity. For example, one participant shared, “You’re
taught to be strong and you’re taught to be in control of your emotions, to not
cry.” These concepts consistently emerged as definitions of masculinity that influenced
how participants negotiated the campus.
Influence
of Race on Conceptualizations of Masculinity
When asked if there was a difference between what it means to
be a man versus being a Black man, eight participants mentioned that race did
not influence their definitions of masculinity.
These participants made statements such as “all men are the same,” “race
doesn’t define who I am or change my definition,” and “race has nothing to do
with it.” Conversely, nine participants
indicated race as salient in their definitions of masculinity. Some participants
emphasized how negative stereotypes commonly associated with Black men
influenced their definitions. For
example, one senior participant linked his definitions of Black masculinity to
the academic classroom.
Being a
Black man in America definitely adds stereotypes and at times negative
connotations to who you are as a person especially being a Black student in the
science field. It's definitely a struggle in itself because it's very rare you
find professors who look like you, AIs [Teaching assistants] who look like you.
It’s even harder sometimes to find students who looks like you and so to build
that community, it's not always comfortable to go outside of your comfort zone
and ask people who you don't know for help.
As evidenced
in this quote, he described the difficulties associated with being a Black man
and the lack of same race peers at the PWI. Another senior participant offered
a similar experience.
There’s
a lot of adversity being a Black man. When you are walking and leaving the
library late at night, automatically you are criminal number one. You cannot deviate
from that. In criminal justice classes, we always talk about crime. On the first
day of class the professor states that the jails are overpopulated with Black
males and if you are a Black male, there is a high chance that you will be
incarcerated. I’m tired of hearing that. It seems like everywhere I go; I am
the elephant in the room. I can’t escape it. You
are like a representative for the whole race in class because you are the only
person there.
This
quote illustrates the discrimination he had experienced in the classroom, which
is further complicated by feeling like he had to represent the entire Black
population. Another participant mentioned that stereotypical definitions of
masculinity are even more intense for Black men.
Some of
the same things that I've said as far as being assertive, aggressive and all
that stuff goes, but in a Black community it's even more. You have to be even
more powerful. These are really the only
options. You have to be powerful and by doing that you have to either be a
basketball player, or a football, or some type of athlete, or some type of a
singer, or an artist, or musician, something like that, or just an all-around
attractive guy.
His quote
suggests that certain Black men are privileged more than others on the
campus. One of the other participants in
the sample offered his perspective on being a Black man by stating:
I feel
like when you say a Black man, I feel like there’s so many different things
that can be brought up in that identity just because there’s so much stigma in
our country around Black men and what that means. So, I think that to be a Black
man and somebody that is not necessarily, not at all times, or in a general
sense, not looked upon as you know the pillar of success, the pillar of
achievement. So, I feel like being a Black man is something that kind of
disenfranchises you, something that makes you have to prove yourself more.
Evolving Definitions of Masculinity
Differences emerged between class
groups when asked about definitions of masculinity changing over time. One notable finding is that sophomore
participants’ definitions of masculinity did not change which could be attributed
to their limited exposure to the campus setting. Conversely, junior and seniors discussed the
evolution of these definitions based upon experiences on campus, interactions
with others, and the awareness of multiple masculinities. For example, when asked if definitions of
masculinity changed over time, one junior participant stated, “I feel like I’m
starting to learn more about different viewpoints of what masculinity is versus
this generalized sense of it.” Similarly,
one of the senior participants described transcending traditional definitions
of masculinity by sharing:
As I
progress, I think that my understanding of a man is someone that’s secure
within themselves, someone that takes responsibility and I’d kind of use that
more as analogy or a comparison between like a child and an adult or like a boy
and a man.
Another senior participant
stated that his meanings of masculinity “evolve with every stage that you think
about in life” while another senior participant mentioned that his
conceptualizations of masculinity have “more depth” based upon his experiences
on campus. These definitions of masculinity provide insight into the behaviors
men bring to the college and how they evolve.
Discussion and Implications
Participants’
definitions of masculinity derived from multiple influences including parents,
hometown environments, schools, sports, media, and religious institutions. Definitions
that consistently emerged were accepting responsibility, displaying toughness,
showing respect, uplifting the Black community, and not displaying vulnerable
emotion. These definitions mirror how Black men described these
conceptualizations in prior studies. Junior
and seniors were able to redefine what it meant to be a man based on prolonged
exposure to the PWI. This finding is
consistent with the men in Harris, Palmer, and Struve’s (2011) study emphasizing
how conceptualizations and expressions of masculinities evolve during the
college years as men grow and mature. Similar
to the men in Dancy’s (2012) study, participants’ definitions were constrained
by themselves, African American peers, and pressures to adhere to majority
culture. These external pressures
influenced how these men negotiated the PWI.
Interestingly,
one significant finding is that almost half of the participants did not view
race as influencing their conceptualizations of masculinity. Given the issues and challenges Black men
negotiate on a daily basis, this finding is somewhat surprising. This finding could be attributed to these men growing
up in a predominantly White hometown environment where participants had limited
interactions with their same race peers.
In contrasts, most participants from urban areas discussed race as
salient in their conceptualizations of masculinity. These participants offered
examples based on culture shock experienced at the PWI. The culture shock
expressed by these participants is consistent with literature suggesting that
Black men at PWIs experience challenges adjusting and persisting (Cuyjet,
2006). As a result of this culture shock, many of these men consciously
combatted negative stereotypes held by faculty and peers. Specifically, as a way to cope with the culture
shock, participants exemplified what Cross and Vandiver referred to as intense
Black involvement in the immersion-emersion theme where they were deeply
immersed in all things that are affiliated with Black culture. Despite the racial discrimination Black men
face in society at large, participants made meaning of race in varying ways.
This finding further illustrates how Black men are not a monolithic group.
As a
result of this study’s findings, some implications can be offered. Higher education professionals at PWIs should
create a climate and culture that considers the experiences of Black men. Participant meanings around being a Black man
revealed a plethora of issues they constantly negotiate at the PWI which
includes: racial discrimination, alienation, isolation, image concerns, lower
academic expectations from faculty, and struggles to transcend traditional
expectations of masculinity. Institutions should be cognizant of these
findings as they develop initiatives to improve the experiences of Black men on
their campus. Given the importance of peer influence among Black men (Bonner
& Bailey, 2006), higher education professionals should create peer-mentoring
programs where Black males can learn more authentic definitions of masculinity.
These initiatives are especially important for underclassmen trying to make
meaning of multiple definitions of masculinity and the predominantly White
campus environment. Depending on
institutional resources, mentors can expand beyond upperclassmen male peers to
include graduate and professional students, or faculty and staff. Participants serving as mentors should be
knowledgeable of issues and challenges facing Black college men and identity
development.
Though this article emphasized the influence of race on
definitions of masculinity, future research should investigate the role
multiple social identities play in conceptualization of masculinity. Exploring issues of race, class, spirituality,
and sexuality could provide insight into the complex challenges Black men face
negotiating these intersecting identities.
Future studies should also consider how these definitions of masculinity
influence their interpersonal relationships. Doing so could provide important insights
into their sense of belonging and retention (Strayhorn, 2008). Lastly, different
institutional contexts should be considered.
Conducting this study at another institution type such as an HBCU could
provide insights into how the environment influences participants’ definitions
of masculinity.
Limitations
Some
limitations are worth noting in this study.
First, based on the qualitative design, these findings may not be
generalizable to all African American men at PWIs. Second, though the gatekeepers had access to
a large percentage of African American men on the campus, some students may
have been overlooked. Despite the
diversity present in the sample, these 17 participants may not represent the
experiences of all African American men. Furthermore, though the article focused on how
race influenced definitions of masculinity, additional insights into the
experiences of those who did not view race as being integral in their
conceptualization of masculinity could have been informative. Despite these limitations, this study offered
important insights into the gendered experiences of Black male college
students.
References
Bonner, F.A. II. (2011). Negotiating the ‘in-between:’ Liminality
and the construction of racial
identity among African American male collegians.
Journal of African American Males in Education, 2(2).146-149.
Bonner, F. A., &
Bailey, K. W. (2006). Enhancing the academic climate for African- American
college men. In M. J. Cuyjet and Associates
(Eds.), African American men in college
(pp. 24-46). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Carter, D. F., Locks,
A. M., Winkle-Wagner, R. (2013). From when and where I enter:
Theoretical and empirical considerations of
minority students’ transition to college. In M. Paulsen (Ed.), Higher Education: A Handbook of Theory and
Research, 28 (pp. 93-149). London: Springer.
Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing
grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative
analysis.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Creswell, J. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative,
and mixed methods approaches
(3rd ed.). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Cross, W. E., Jr., &
Vandiver, B. J. (2001). Nigrescence theory and measurement: Introducing
the
Cross Racial Identity Scale (CRIS). In J. G. Ponterotto, J. M. Casas, L. A.
Suzuki, & C. M. Alexander (Eds.), Handbook of multicultural counseling (2nd
ed., pp. 371-393). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Cuyjet, M. (2006). African
American men in college. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Dancy, T. E. (2012). The brother code: Manhood and masculinity
among African American men
in college.
Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing
Davis, J. E. (1999).
What does gender have to do with the experiences of African American
college men? In V. Polite & J. E. Davis
(Eds.), African American males in school and society: Practices and
policies for effective education. New York: Teachers College Press.
Davis, J. E. (2003).
Early schooling and academic achievement of African American males.
Urban Education, 38, 515-537.
Ferguson, A. A. (2000). Bad
boys: Public schools in the making of black male masculinity. Ann
Arbor:
The University of Michigan Press.
Harper, D. (2002). Talking
about pictures: A case for photo elicitation. Visual Studies, 17(1), 13-
26.
Harper, S. R. (2004).
The measure of a man: Conceptualizations of masculinity among high-
achieving African American male college
students. Berkeley Journal of Sociology, 48(1), 89-107.
Harper, S. R. (2012). Black
male student success in higher education: A report from the national
Black
male college achievement study. Philadelphia: University of
Pennsylvania, Center for the Study of Race and Equity in Education.
Harper, S. R.,
& Griffin, K. A. (2011). Opportunity beyond affirmative action: How
low-income
and working-class Black male achievers access
highly selective, high-cost colleges and universities. Harvard Journal of
African American Public Policy, 17(1), 43-60.
Harper, S. R., &
Nichols, A. H. (2008) Are they not all the same? Racial heterogeneity among
Black
male undergraduates. Journal of College Student Development, 49,
199-214.
Harris, F. (1995).
Psychosocial development and Black male masculinity: Implications for
counseling economically disadvantaged African
American male adolescents. Journal of Counseling Development, 73,
279-287.
Harris III, F.,
& Harper, S. R. (2008). Masculinities go to community college:
Understanding
male identity socialization and gender role conflict. In J. Lester
(Ed.). Gendered Perspectives on Community Colleges: New Directions for
Community Colleges, 142 (pp.25-35). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Harris
III, F.,
Palmer, R. T., & Struve, L. E. (2011). Cool posing on campus: A qualitative
study
of
masculinities and gender expression among Black men at private research institution.
Journal of Negro Education 80(1), 47-62.
Harris III, F., & Struve, L.E.
(2009). Gents, jerks, and jocks: What men learn about masculinity
in
college? About Campus, 14(3), 2-9.
hooks, b. (2004). We
real cool: Black men and masculinity. New York: Routledge.
Jones,
S. R., Torres, V., & Arminio, J. L. (2006). Negotiating the complexities
of qualitative
research in higher education: Fundamental elements and
issues. New York, NY:
Brunner-Routledge.
Kimmel, M. S. (2008). Guyland,
New York: Harper Collins.
Kimmel, M. S., &
Messner, M. A. (Eds.). (2007). Men’s lives (7th ed.). Boston: Allyn
& Bacon.
Kimmel, M. S. &
Davis, T. (2011). Mapping guyland in college. In J. A. Laker & T.
Davis
(Eds.),
Masculinities in Higher Education (pp.
3-15). New York, NY: Routledge.
Kunjufu, J. (1988). To be popular or smart: The Black peer
group. Chicago : African American
Images.
Lincoln, Y., & Guba,
E. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Martin, B. E., &
Harris, F. (2006). Examining productive conceptions of masculinities: Lessons
learned from academically driven African
American male student–athletes. Journal of Men’s Studies, 14(3),
359‐378.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative
research & evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J.
(1998). Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and procedures for
developing
grounded theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Strayhorn, T. L. (2008).
Fittin’ in: Do diverse interactions with peers affect sense of belonging
for
Black men at predominantly White institutions. NASPA Journal, 45(4) 501-527.
Torres, V. (2003).
Influences on ethnic identity development of Latino college students in the
first
two years of college. Journal of College Student Development, 44(4),
532-547.
Wallace, D. (2007). It’s
a M-A-N thang: Black male gender role socialization and the
performance of masculinity in love
relationships. The Journal of Pan African
Studies, 1(7), 11-22