exam on philosophy

User Generated

nyqnjfnev

Humanities

Description

i have exam on philosophy 220 the exam will 10Q in 30 minutes . the deadline for it is after 2 and half hours . there will be files that i upload the exam will be form the files so you have to read them well then let me know so i can strart the exam and taking pics for u

Unformatted Attachment Preview

Constructing Gender: An Exploration of Afro-American Men's Conceptualization of Manhood Author(s): Andrea G. Hunter and James Earl Davis Source: Gender and Society, Vol. 6, No. 3, This Issue Is Devoted to: Race, Class, and Gender (Sep., 1992), pp. 464-479 Published by: Sage Publications, Inc. Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/189997 Accessed: 23-02-2018 14:22 UTC REFERENCES Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article: http://www.jstor.org/stable/189997?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org. Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://about.jstor.org/terms Sage Publications, Inc. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Gender and Society This content downloaded from 158.103.2.1 on Fri, 23 Feb 2018 14:22:53 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms CONSTRUCTING GENDER: An Exploration of Afro-Ameri Men 's Conceptualization of Manh ANDREA G. HUNTER University of Pittsburgh JAMES EARL DAVIS University of Delaware This article explores the meanings of manhood as articulated by Afro-American men (N = Conceptualization and Q-sort methods are used to examine (1) men's construction of manho and (2) men 's ratings of the importance of selected attributes to being a man. Manhood emer as a multidimensional construct with four major domains (self-determinism and accountabili family, pride, and spirituality and humanism) and 15 distinct clusters of ideas. The cluster attributes rated as most important to being a man paralleled the conceptualization of manho derived from the open-ended interviews for both professional and nonprofessional men. Me ratings of attributes in the areas of ownership, manliness, spiritual and religious, and pow varied by occupational status. To be Black and male in American society places one at risk for a varie of economic and social ills. Afro-American men are twice as likely to b unemployed as white men, with unemployment rates highest in major urb areas and among youth (U.S. Department of Labor 1991; Wilson 1987). In school achievement and academic skills, Afro-American males are at risk f lags in performance; as a result they suffer the highest rates of school dropo and failure (Garibaldi 1988). The absence in mainstream employment secto and educational institutions is paralleled by the disproportionate incarcer tion of Afro-American males, who make up 42 percent of the prison popu AUTHORS' NOTE: We would like to thank the men who shared their lives with us. REPRINT REQUESTS: Andrea G. Hunter, Department of Psychology, Langley Hall, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15260. GENDER & SOCIETY, Vol. 6 No. 3, September 1992 464-479 ? 1992 Sociologists for Women in Society 464 This content downloaded from 158.103.2.1 on Fri, 23 Feb 2018 14:22:53 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms Hunter, Davis / CONSTRUCTING GENDER 465 tion and 47 percent of those on death row. In addition, the average life expectancy of Afro-American males, who face a lifetime homicide risk of 1 in 21, has declined during the last three decades (Bureau of Justice Statistics 1985, 1988). These patterns of violence, crime, and school failure have been viewed as a function of racism, unemployment, and poverty as well as a product of cul- tural adaptation to these systemic pressures, which tend to promote definitions of masculinity and manhood that are maladaptive (Franklin 1984; Hare and Hare 1985; Liebow 1967; Madhubuti 1990; Oliver 1984,1989a; Wilson 1987). However, even in the context of oppression, Afro-American men have been instrumental in the continuation of their communities and families, suggesting that there is a cultural tradition within which Black men have forged a meaningful and viable identity for themselves (Bowman 1989; Cazenave 1979, 1985; Gwaltney 1980; Gutman 1976; Hunter 1988; Shaw 1974). This paradox of crisis and survival is at the core of the Afro-American experience. In this article we explore the definitions and meanings of manhood that grow out of it. Afro-American men move between majority and minority cultures and must negotiate the racism and discrimination that accompany castelike minority status. Franklin (1986, 1987) suggests that Black masculinity and male role identity must be viewed in these varying social and cultural contexts. Specifically, Afro-American men are expected to conform to dom- inant gender role expectations (e.g., successful, competitive, and aggressive) as well as to meet culturally specific requirements of the Afro-American community that may often conflict (e.g., cooperation, promotion of group, and survival of group). Further, he suggests a Black men's group also exists that embodies expectations (e.g., sexism, irresponsibility, and violence) that are antithetical to adequate male role performance as defined by both the Afro-American community and mainstream American society. Franklin's thesis is suggestive of the potential complexities in the conceptions of manhood among Afro-American men as they negotiate these vaned contexts. Currently, replacing the traditional focus on a generic male sex role, variations in the meanings of manhood are at the center of discussions of masculinity (Brod 1987; Pleck 1981, Stearns 1979). This emergent perspective emphasizes "masculinities" and the multidimensionality of gender identity. In contrast, the adequacy of Afro-American males' performance as men, where the male role is implicitly defined as a universal concept, has domi- nated research on Afro-American men and masculinity (Franklin 1984; Frazier 1939; Hare 1971; Liebow 1967; Moynihan 1965; Pettigrew 1964; This content downloaded from 158.103.2.1 on Fri, 23 Feb 2018 14:22:53 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms 466 GENDER & SOCIETY / September 1992 Pleck 1981; Staples 1982). An archetype of Black manhood, as either deficient or distorted under the weight of racism and economic marginality, has emerged from this framework, obscuring the diversity among Afro- American men (Bowman 1989; Cazenave 1984; Pleck 1981; Staples 1971). Moreover, the construction of Black men and manhood, often mired in political symbolism, becomes either a justification for what is denied Afro- American people or a symbol of what is owed (Hoch 1979; Segal 1990; Turner 1977; Wilkinson and Taylor 1977). THE SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION OF BLACK MANHOOD The social construction of Black manhood in mainstream American culture is rooted in the Idea of "Blacks as beast" (Gossett 1965; Gould 1981, Hoch 1979; Montague 1964; Turner 1977). This early imagery provided a rationalization for the enslavement of African peoples who, as chattel, needed the control and the paternal protection of whites. Central to this imagery is the emphasis on the physical attributes of the Black male, the limited capacity of mind, and the absence of soul that made one human. As the institution of slavery became a fundamental economic and cultural component of American society, the "Sambo" persona emerged, defining the Black male as eternal boy and servant (Elkins 1959; Turner 1977). The Sambo persona, via the imagery of the emasculated Black male, followed Afro-Amencan men into freedom and the migration north (Elkins 1959; Frazier 1939). However, at the same time they were defined as physically aggressive and sexually uncontrolled (Hoch 1979; Segal 1990). During the early twentieth century, massive Black migration to northern cities placed the "Negro problem" on the national agenda. Frazier's (1939) seminal work, The Negro Family in the United States, suggests that the history of slavery, oppression, and disenfranchisement had bor a cultural pathos in which the patriarchal family system had been replaced by the "matnchate." Frazier suggests this pattern may not have been maladaptive in rural areas, but in the context of urban living the structure and organization of many poor Afro-American families led to juvenile delinquency, illegitimacy, increasing numbers of female-headed households, and a litany of other social ills. Frazler's (1939) thesis, in conjunction with the male sex role identity paradigm, provided the conceptual basis for several decades of research defining Afro-American men as psychologically and Interpersonally impotent (Kardiner and Oversey 1951, Moynihan 1965; Pettigrew 1964; Pleck This content downloaded from 158.103.2.1 on Fri, 23 Feb 2018 14:22:53 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms Hunter, Davis / CONSTRUCTING GENDER 467 1981). Specifically, the presumed absence of Afro-American men at the he of their families and too-powerful Black women precluded appropri gender socialization and, ultimately, adult male role performance (Bowma 1989; Pleck 1981; Staples 1971). Following the publication of Moynihan's (1965) report, a perspecti emphasizing economic and political oppression as an impediment to male role performance appeared (Hare 1971; Liebow 1967; Staples 1971). Adopt ing this viewpoint, dissenters from the Black male emasculation thesis arg that Afro-American men could adequately perform the male role but wer denied manhood by racist institutions and economic depnvation. Althou this literature emphasized Afro-American men's struggle for manhood in t context, it offered alternative explanations for men's failures, particular among low-income males. Because early revisionist perspectives on Black masculinity and male role performance were typically steeped in the heg mony of masculinity, they failed to elaborate variations in male role perfo mance among Afro-American men and the varied meanings of manhood a their potential divergence from the traditional white masculinity model. During the civil rights era, the Black power movement offered a radica ized image of Black manhood. Black manhood as the embodiment of "Bl rage" was an alternative to the emasculated Black male, particularly in inn cities. Grier and Cobb's (1968) Black Rage was a major articulation of thi perspective, found also in the works of Afro-American men writers of t period (Baldwin 1961, Brown 1965). The collective frustration and anger over the denial of manhood, Identity, and peoplehood that led to urban ri was seen as a powerful expression of manhood and as a vehicle for socia protests (Grier and Cobbs 1968; Segal 1990; Turner 1977). In contrast, th imagery of contemporary urban Black manhood emphasizes hypermasculi ity (i.e., hyperaggressiveness, hypersexuality, excessive emphasis on appea ance of wealth, and the absence of personal accountability) as a form of ghetto-specific manhood born out of the pathology or despair of the "Bla underclass" (Anderson 1990; Franklin 1984; Glasgow 1980; Oliver 19 1989a, 1989b). The expressed rage of the urban Black male, which was onc viewed as a political vehicle and a form of self-expression, is now seen a aimless, dangerous, and self-destructive (Franklin 1987; Kunjufu 198 Oliver 1989a, 1989b). Growing concern over the survival of Afro-American males has led t new images that refer to the "institutional decimation of Black males" "Black males as endangered species" (Gibbs, 1988; Hare and Hare 198 Kunjufu 1982; Stewart and Scott 1978). The harsh realities of the Black m expenence are seen as consequences of an attack on Afro-Amencan commu This content downloaded from 158.103.2.1 on Fri, 23 Feb 2018 14:22:53 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms 468 GENDER & SOCIETY / September 1992 nities. In this context Black males are both victims and participants in their own destruction. Broader sociological and economic forces are viewed as undermining both the development and the appropriate expression of manhood among Afro-American men, particularly among the inner-city poor. In contrast to earlier versions of the perspective of manhood denied, these writers offer an alternative Afrocentrlc model of manhood (Akbar 1991, Kunjufu 1984; Oliver 1989a). However, an image of manhood as either unfulfilled or gone awry continues to dominate. PARAMETERS OF BLACK MALE GENDER IDENTITY Research examining social roles indicates that Afro-American dorse the importance of economic provider roles and family resp and involvement (Bowman 1985; Cazenave 1979, 1984; Coles 1977 and Midlarsky 1985). Cazenave's (1979) study of working-class m that men endorsed roles in this order of importance-provider, father, and worker. His later study indicated middle-class men are m to rank husband most highly and infrequently see provider as t role, suggesting that the precariousness of men's economic pos affect the primacy of the provider role in their thinklng about identity (Cazenave 1984). Using an expanded list of attributes, C (1984) examined white-collar men's view of traits essential for man." At least two-thirds of the sample endorsed traits of compe aggressiveness, and importance of success at work. In addition, tr to sense of self (i.e., self-confidence, standing up for beliefs), fa expressive relationship to others (i.e., warmth, gentleness, and be love) were rated as important as well. Studies of gender conceptions at varying points in the life spa that Afro-American males are less gender stereotyped in their c about masculinity and femininity than their white male counterpar and Porter 1988; Bardwell, Cochran, and Walker 1986; Smith and 1985). However, images of masculinity that parallel mainstream concepts are evident. Franklin (1985), in a participant-observatio a Black urban barbershop, found that the discourse emphasized " athletic prowess, decisiveness, aggressiveness, violence and pow As outlined earlier, several writers share the view that an ove on masculinity leads to a maladaptive model of manliness that is to the cultural imperatives and survival of the Afro-American c This content downloaded from 158.103.2.1 on Fri, 23 Feb 2018 14:22:53 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms Hunter, Davis/ CONSTRUCTING GENDER 469 (Glasgow 1980; Madhubuti 1990; Oliver 1984, 1989a, 1989b). Examples of the behavioral manifestations of these images are reflected in the "tough guy" and the "player of women" personas that Oliver (1984, 1989a) argues emerged as acceptable alternatives to traditional definitions of manhood, particularly among low-income Afro-Americans. The research on gender identity indicates Afro-Amencan men endorse traditional aspects of the male gender role and attributes that are not stereotypically masculine. In addition, occupational status and economic deprivation may shape prevailing views of masculinity and manhood. However, the complexities of Black manhood are not well articulated. METHODS Conceptualization and Q-sort methods are used to examine men's construction of manhood and (2) their ratings of the Imp selected attributes to being a man. Thirty-two Afro-American Central New York were interviewed. These men were recruited wi of local contacts at churches, community centers, schools, barbe other businesses. Participation was voluntary, with no incentives The respondents were selected through convenience sampling; h efforts were made to include a diverse group in terms of age and oc status. Data were collected in face-to-face private interviews in en that were familiar to the men (e.g., work site, home, and commun Two investigators, a male and a female, jointly interviewed app one-third of the sample. The remainder of the interviews were divi between the two interviewers. Conceptualization Methodology In the first step, men were asked to brainstorm responses to the following open-ended question: "What do you think it means to be a man?" The interviews, ranging from 30 minutes to 1 V2 hours, were tape-recorded. Over 250 ideas were generated, 108 unique ideas remained after repetitive ones were discarded. Next, an independent group of Black men provided information about the conceptual relationship between the generated ideas. Each person twice sorted ideas (N = 108) into conceptually similar categories. For each sort a 108 x 108 binary symmetrc matrix was constructed (Rosenberg and Kim 1975). This similarity matrix was analyzed, using multidimensional scaling This content downloaded from 158.103.2.1 on Fri, 23 Feb 2018 14:22:53 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms 470 GENDER & SOCIETY / September 1992 and cluster analysis (Trochim and Linton 1986). First, the multidimensional scaling technique provides information about the conceptual similarity of the ideas generated (Davison 1983). Second, a hierarchical cluster analysis was performed that begins by assuming that all ideas are in a single cluster and then successively partitions them into smaller clusters (Everitt 1980). Q-Sort Methodology Participants completed an unstructured Q-sort technique, a variation of the traditional Q-sort method used extensively in social and psychological research (Block 1961). The unstructured Q-sort technique differs from conventional Q-sort methods because items are not forced into a symmetrical normal distribution. Men were asked to rate 96 attributes according to their importance to manhood. The items were derived from research literature on manhood and masculinity and results of informal focus groups with AfroAmerican men. The items were presented in a random order that each respondent sorted into 5 categories, ranging from 1 (least important to manhood) to 5 (most important to manhood). Sociodemographic Characteristics of the Sample Thirteen percent of the men were younger than 25 years old, 32 percent were 25 to 34, 42 percent were 35 to 54, and the remainder (13 percent) were 55 and over. A little over one-half of the sample were currently married or had been married (42 percent and 13 percent, respectively), while 45 percent of these men had never been married. In educational attainment, there was a slight skew toward the upper end of the range. Less than 10 percent of the sample had fewer than 12 years of education. Thirteen percent had a high school diploma or a general equivalency diploma. Approximately 22 percent received some college or vocational training and a little over one-half possessed college or graduate degrees. The sample was almost equally divided between professional and nonprofessional men. About 13 percent were unskilled workers, and 29 percent, skilled workers or clerks. Almost one-half (48 percent) were employed in professional positions, and 6 percent were college students. The level of earnings was vared, 16 percent had an income of less than $10,000; about one-quarter earned between $10,000 and $20,000. The remaining respondents reported an income between $20,000 and $29,000 (32 percent) or $30,000 or more (22 percent). This content downloaded from 158.103.2.1 on Fri, 23 Feb 2018 14:22:53 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms Hunter, Davis / CONSTRUCTING GENDER 471 RESULTS The Conceptualization of Manhood Men's discussions of manhood were often interwoven with stones own lives and, also important, the movement toward self-definition they learned of manhood as they aged and matured. Men also spok pain In their lives and the struggles of manhood. For men who ha unemployed intermittently, reviewing the emotional toll of econom ship and its impact on their sense of dignity left some poignantly r of the meaning of manhood in their lives. Although it was often re that there were unique challenges to being a Black man, the central of manhood was defined in terms of what they expected of themsel Manhood emerged as a multidimensional construct that defines man In terms of the self, a man's relationship and responsibility to and a worldview or existential philosophy. Four major domains wer fied: (1) self-determinism and accountability, (2) family, (3) pride spirituality and humanism. These domains included 15 distinct clu ideas. Self-determinism and accountability. All respondents generated comments related to self-determinism and accountability. It is our view that the ideas contained In this domain are at the core of the self and manhood. The cluster of ideas includes (1) directedness ("a man is clear," "a man thinks about what he wants to do"); (2) maturity ("responsible for damages created," "ability to rectify bad situations"); (3) economic viability ("having a job," "having salable skills"); (4) perseverance ("having to go when it's raining," "a man rolls with the punches"); and (5) free will ("control over one's life," "having the freedom to make decisions"). It is the coherency and viability of the self on which one's performance or fulfillment of role expec- tation rests. At the center is responsibility and economic viability, which are core components of the traditional male role and adulthood. A returning 40-year-old student stated: "[The] most critical issue is the ability to take care of one's self-surviving on your own." An unmarried professional man in his 30s stated: "[A man is] totally accountable for his actions and how this affects others, he must face the consequences . the buck stops here!" And it is in this domain that poverty and unemployment have the most direct impact, because they undermine a man's ability to provide adequately for himself and to have a sense of independence and control over life cir- This content downloaded from 158.103.2.1 on Fri, 23 Feb 2018 14:22:53 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms 472 GENDER & SOCIETY / September 1992 cumstances. A respondent in his mid-20s who had been unemployed the previous three years talked about the tenuousness of not having the means to create an independent environment. He stated: "I want to have something of my own. I live with a friend in his nice house. I don't have anything of my own. I want to have my own house and land, so people can't say get out." At issue here is the desire for self-determination and free will that is most precarious when one is Black and poor. Family. Family emerged as a central context for the men interviewed, both married and unmarried (never marned, separated, or divorced). As a married man and father of two children suggested, "Family is an extension of the male ego." This domain included the following clusters of ideas: (1) family responsibilities and connectedness ("concerned with family," "a man is responsible for the family," "a sense of those around him"); (2) equity in male and female relationships ("side-by-side with a woman," "contributes to household"); and (3) fulfillment of family role expectations ("moral example for family," "meets expectations of being husband and father"). Central in men's conceptions of their role in the context of family are themes of man as patriarch ("provides leadership," "makes decisions for family," "headship of family") and as partner ("instills equality in family," "not dominated by a woman"). The apparent contradiction in these philosophies is suggestive of the potential negotiations and tensions that men may face when attempting to balance family role expectations grounded in patriarchy and the comparatively egalitarian work and family roles in AfroAmerican families. Two respondents reflect these potential tensions. A professional in his mid-30s stated: "If I earn 30K and she earns 40K, who is the real provider, she is. It doesn't mean she leads, no problems with me if she makes more." A married man in his late 20s with children asserted: "Some think this is sexist but he [the man] must be head of the house. That's the way I have been raised, I have to be who I am." Beyond the issues of roles and responsibilities, family was of intrinsic value to men as well ("concerned with family," "raise a family," "insures family lineage"). Thus, for the men interviewed, manhood was defined In terms of the collective family unit and their role within it. Pride. Being a man included pride in one's manhood and sense of self. There were two clusters of ideas: (1) pride ("a man has prde," "aware of capacity") and (2) self-betterment ("going beyond mere survival," "competes with self'). Thus a man's pride is linked to his desire and capacity to better himself and his life. This content downloaded from 158.103.2.1 on Fri, 23 Feb 2018 14:22:53 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms Hunter, Davis/ CONSTRUCTING GENDER 473 Spirituality and humanism. Spirituality and humanism includes men's views of their relationship to other human beings, the human community, and the importance of spiritual groundedness. The clusters of ideas include (1) spiritual and moral pnnciples ("man is spiritual centered," "faith in life," "a man should try to be good"); (2) connectedness to human community ("caring about fellow humans," "being helpful," "not detached from soci- ety"); and (3) respect for womanhood ("not superior to women," "being faithful"); (4) sensitivity ("a man is understanding," "a man is loving," "a man is trusted"); and (5) belief in human equity ("not superor to other men," "not elevated," "dealing with people"). This configuration of concepts is congruent with Afrocentrlc philosophies (Asante 1987) and the traditional importance of religion in the Afro-American experience. This domain embodies a worldview that links manhood to the collective "we" and spirituality. The presence of these ideas in response to questions about the meaning of manhood perhaps speaks to how Black manhood, born out of a history of oppression, can embody ideals and principles that diverge from dominant gender role expectations. Being a Man: Ratings of Attributes The respondents rated the following clusters of attributes as most important to being a man (mean ratings of 4 and above; see Table 1). They include sense of self (4.57; e.g., independent, self-esteem, stand up for beliefs); resourceful/responsibility (4.43; e.g., sense of responsibility, handles crises and stress, makes best of situation); parenting and family (4.33; e.g., strong sense of family, child-oriented, protecting family, good parent); goaloriented (4.26; e.g., goals and direction, ambition); provider (4.03; e.g., provide income for family, good job, financially secure); and humanism (4.02; e.g., kind and canng, placing needs of others before own, forgive others). These clusters of attributes parallel the major domains generated from the open-ended interviews. There were no significant differences in the mean cluster ratings of professional and nonprofessional men. Clusters that emerged as somewhat Important (mean ratings between 3 and 4) to being a man include education/intellectual skills (3.71, e.g., having an education, common sense, well-read, street-wise); spiritual and religious (3.58; e.g., church-going, sense of morality, faith in God); risk taking (3.53; e.g., courageous or brave, taking chances); respect (3.53; e.g., respected, well-known, looked up to); and authority (3.39; e.g., authority, leader, head of family). Professional and nonprofessional men varied in their ratings of This content downloaded from 158.103.2.1 on Fri, 23 Feb 2018 14:22:53 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms 474 GENDER & SOCIETY / September 1992 TABLE 1: Rank Order of Mean Q-Sort Cluster Ratings (Total Sample) Mean SD Sense of self 4.57 0.45 Resourcefulness/responsibility 4.43 0.58 Parenting and family 4.33 0.63 Goal-oriented Provider 4.26 4.03 Humanism 4.02 0.78 0.92 0.51 Education/intellectual skills 3.71 0.78 Spiritual and religious 3.58* 1.10 Risk taking 3.53 0.96 Respect 3.53 0.91 Authority 3.39 0.98 Manliness Ownership Sexuality Power 2.92* 0.98 2.75* 1.03 2.58 1.03 1.77* 1.66 NOTE: N = 32. *p < .05 (nonprofessional vs. professional respondents). the importance of spirituality and religlosity, with nonprofessional men rat this area higher (p s .05). The cluster of attributes related to manliness (2.92; e.g., good at sport physically strong, masculine, aggressive, competitive) most closely par leled traditional notions of masculinity. In terms of men's ratings, this clus bordered ratings of being somewhat important to least important to bein man. Professional and nonprofessional men differed in this assessment. N professionals ranked "manliness" attributes more highly than did their p fessional counterparts (p s .05). The cluster of attributes related to ownersh (2.75; e.g., nice house or apartment, owning a nice car, well-dressed, own property) also bordered the somewhat important and least important rati The ratings of the ownership cluster also varied by occupational status Again, nonprofessional men rated this cluster of attributes more highly th professional men did (p a .05). The cluster of attributes related to sexual (2.58; e.g., good lover, satisfy a woman, lots of women, attractive) similarly rated; however, there were no significant differences in men ratings of this cluster by occupational status. The cluster of attributes rated as least important (mean ratings of 1 to to being a man was power (1.77; e.g., "having power and control over othe "slick," "getting over"). Nonprofessional men rated this cluster of attribu significantly higher than professional men did (p s .05). This content downloaded from 158.103.2.1 on Fri, 23 Feb 2018 14:22:53 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms Hunter, Davis / CONSTRUCTING GENDER 475 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS Historically, the images of Black manhood have been unidimen research has tended to focus on the inadequacies of Afro-Amer role performance. In this preliminary analysis, we explored th constructions of manhood as defined by Afro-American men at v locations (age, occupation, income, and marital and family status was defined in terms of the self (self-determinism and accountab family (family), the human community, and existential ideology and humanism). It is our view that issues of self-determinism an ability (i.e., directedness, maturity, economic viability, free will, verance) are at the core of the self and of manhood and form the on which family role enactment, pride, and living through one's philosophy (e.g., spiritual, Afrocentrc, and humanistic) are based ingly, discussions of masculinity were absent from men's defin manhood. Perhaps this reflects an awareness of the differences physical sexual man and the social man that Hare and Hare (198 is critical in Black boys' transition into manhood. When respon asked to rate attributes related to masculinity (e.g., physically s petitive, masculine, and aggressive), they saw it as somewhat im short, although masculinity may be a part of being a man, it is not dation on which manhood rests. Among Afro-Amercan scholars and activists, the endorsement of unidimensional conceptions of manhood (e.g., tough guy, player of women) is seen as a dysfunctional cultural adaptation to racism and economic oppres- sion (Franklin 1986; Hare and Hare 1985; Oliver 1984; Madhubuti 1990). For the men interviewed, manhood is defined in multiple arenas and contexts, both within and beyond traditional notions of masculinity and male role. It is a conceptualization of manhood that flows back and forth from margin to center, providing men with varied tools and avenues to define themselves and to negotiate manhood. This multidimensional construction of manhood may serve as a cultural mechanism for adaptation and survival. Few men explicitly talked about issues of race and culture. Because the respondents and interviewers were the same race, this shared group affiliation may have resulted in fewer direct references to race; however, there appeared to be infusions of issues related to racial stratification. For example, the absence of references to a man's professional success, wealth, ambition, or power as a part of expressed definitions of manhood suggests a tacit awareness of the barriers to these measures of success for Afro-American men and the need for more substantive measures of a man's worth. Further, the This content downloaded from 158.103.2.1 on Fri, 23 Feb 2018 14:22:53 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms 476 GENDER & SOCIETY / September 1992 emergence of free will as a important component of manhood suggests that it is something Afro-American men do not take for granted. Only a small portion of the sample came of age dunng the post-civil rights era, perhaps the precanousness of Afro-Americans' right to freedom was not far from the hearts and minds of the men interviewed. Although, the respondents differed on a number of soclodemographic characteristics, they tended to converge around broad parameters of manhood. The areas in which variations existed give some insight into the ways socioeconomic status may influence the primacy of certain aspects of masculinity or the male role. For example, during the interview, men who experienced intermittent unemployment were more likely to stress the importance of having a job than were men in professional occupations or those who were more securely employed. Although material indicators of economic success were rated as somewhat important by respondents, nonprofessional men rated items in the ownership cluster (e.g., nice house or apartment, owning a nice car, owning property, well-dressed) more highly than professional men did. In general, these patterns suggest men who are less economically secure do not take for granted the ability to attain a desired standard of living or financial security, and as a result, it becomes a more salient challenge. Attributes related to power (e.g., power and control over others, "being slick", "getting over") were rated as least important; however, nonprofessional men tended to give these items a higher rating. Although in general these manifestations of "power" were not highly rated, the variations by occupational status suggest that professional men's sense of empowerment, even in the context of American racism, may not be as circumscribed as it is for their nonprofessional brothers. As has been suggested elsewhere, men who are farthest outside the economic mainstream may experience feelings of lack of empowerment and alienation that can bring issues of power and nonmainstream means of power attainment to the forefront (Franklin 1987; Oliver 1989b; Staples 1982; Stewart and Scott 1978). Our findings illustrate conceptual linkages between behavioral proscriptions and ideology representing a collective articulation of manhood both as social role and personal identity. To the extent that conceptualization of manhood appears idealized, it is indicative of the perceived demands of manhood and adulthood. It is our view that the conceptualization found here is representative of core conceptions of manhood endorsed in Afro-American communities. The domains of manhood generated from the interviews parallel the content of manhood training programs for Black youth developed in Afro-American communities as a strategy to counter structural and cultural This content downloaded from 158.103.2.1 on Fri, 23 Feb 2018 14:22:53 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms Hunter, Davis / CONSTRUCTING GENDER 477 forces that undermine the development of Afro-American males. It is an intervention strategy that views gender identity (i.e., manhood, if appropri- ately developed) as a mediator of the effects of racism and economic oppression (Hare and Hare 1985; Kunjufu 1982). Afro-American men moving between majority and minority cultures must survive in a context of economic and racial oppression; what emerges is a diversity of experience and views. Our preliminary analyses suggest that prevailing constructions of Black manhood have ignored the complexities of manhood as a cultural construct and social role for Afro-American men. There was both diversity in the meanings of manhood and commonalities among the men interviewed, who with varying degrees of resources and opportunities negotiate the currents of manhood and adulthood. It is important to note that these findings suggest that the dynamics of race, culture, and class have forged varied constructions of manhood whose contours and shades are not limited to the hegemony of masculinity or the politicized images of Afro-American men. REFERENCES Akbar, Naim. 1991. New visions of men. Nashville, TN: Winston-Derek. Albert, Alexa A., and Judith R. Porter. 1988. Children's gender-role stereotypes: investigation of psychological models. Sociological Forum 3:184-210. Anderson, Elijah. 1990. Streetwise: Race, class, and change in an urban commu University of Chicago Press. Asante, Molefi. 1987. The Afrocentric idea. Philadelphia: Temple University Press Baldwin, James. 1961. Nobody knows my name. New York: Dial. Bardwell, Jill, Samuel Cochran, and Sharon Walker. 1986. Relationship of parent race, and gender to sex role stereotyping in five-year-old kindergartners. 275-81. Block, John. 1961. The Q-sort method in personality assessment and psychiatric research. Springfield, IL. Charles C. Thomas. Bowman, P. J. 1985. Black fathers and the provider role: Role strain, informal coping resources and life happiness. In Empirical research n Black psychology, edited by Wade Boykn. Washington, DC: National Institute for Mental Health. 1989. Research perspectives on Black men: Role strain and adaptation across the Black adult male life cycle. In Black adult development and aging, edited by Reginald Jones. Berkeley, CA: Cobb & Henry. Brod, Harry, ed. 1987. The making of masculinities: The new men's studies. Boston: Allen & Unwin. Brown, Claude. 1965. Manchild in the promised land. New York: Macmillan. Bureau of Justice Statistics. 1985. The prevalence of unprisonment. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice. 1988. Profile of prson inmates, 1988. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice. This content downloaded from 158.103.2.1 on Fri, 23 Feb 2018 14:22:53 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms 478 GENDER & SOCIETY / September 1992 Cazenave, Noel A. 1979. Middle-income Black fathers: An analysis of the provider role. Family Coordinator 28:583-93. 1984. Race, socioeconomic status, and age: The social context of American masculinity. Sex Roles 11:639-56. Coles, Robert. 1977. Black fathers. In The Black male in America, edited by Dons Wilkinson and Ronald Taylor. Chicago: Nelson-Hall. Davison, Mark L. 1983. Multidimensional scaling. New York: Wiley. Elkins, Stanley M. 1959. Slavery. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Everitt, Brian. 1980. Cluster analysis. 2d ed. New York: Halsted. Franklin, Clyde W. 1984. The changing definition of masculinity. New York: Plenum. 1985. The Black male urban barbershop as a sex-role socialization setting. Sex Roles 12:965-79. 1986. Conceptual and logical issues in theory and research related to Black masculinity. Western Journal of Black Studies 4:161-66. 1987. Surviving the institutional decimation of Black males: Causes, consequences, and intervention. In The making of masculinities: The new men's studies, edited by Harry Brod. Boston: Allen & Unwin. Frazier, E. Franklin. 1939. TheNegro family in the UnitedStates. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Garibaldi, Antoine M. 1988. Educating Black male youth: A moral and civil imperative. New Orleans, LA: Committee to Study the Status of the Black Male in the New Orleans Public Schools. Gibbs, Jewell T. 1988. Young, Black, and male in America: An endangered species. New York: Auburn House. Glasgow, Douglas G. 1980. The Black underclass. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Gossett T. 1965. Race: The history of an tdea. 2d ed. New York: Schesdam. Gould, Stephen J. 1981. The mtsmeasure of man. New York: Norton. Grer, William H., and Price M. Cobbs. 1968. Black rage. New York: Basic Books. Gutman, Herbert. 1976. The Black family m slavery and freedom, 1750-1925. New York: Pantheon. Gwaltney, John L., ed. 1980. Drylongso: A self-portrait of BlackAmerica. New York: Random House. Hare, Nathan. 1971. The frustrated masculinity of the Negro male. In The Black family, edited by Robert Staples. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Hare, Nathan, and Julia Hare. 1985. Bring the Black boy to manhood: The passage. San Francisco: Black Think Tank. Hoch, Peter. 1979. White hero, Black beast: Racism, sexism, and the mask of masculinity. London: Pluto. Hunter, Andrea G. 1988. Making a way: Economic strategies of southern urban Afro-American families, 1900-1936. Ph.D. diss., Cornell University, Ithaca, NY. Kardiner, Abram, and Lionel Oversey. 1951. The mark of oppression. New York: Norton. Kunjufu, Jawanza. 1982. Counterng the conspiracy to destroy Black boys. Chicago: AfroAmerican Publishing. 1984. Developing positive self-images and disctpline in Black children. Chicago: African-Amencan Images. Liebow, Elliot. 1967. Tally's corner. Boston: Little, Brown. Madhubuti, Hakhi. 1990. Black men: Obsolete, single, dangerous? Chicago: Third World Press. Montague, Ashley. 1964. Man's most dangerous myth: The fallacy of race. 4th ed. Cleveland: World. This content downloaded from 158.103.2.1 on Fri, 23 Feb 2018 14:22:53 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms Hunter, Davis / CONSTRUCTING GENDER 479 Moynihan, Daniel. 1965. TheNegrofamily: The casefor nationalaction. Washington, DC: GPO. Oliver, William. 1984. Black males and the tough guy image: A dysfunctional compensatory adaptation. Western Journal of Black Studies 8:199-203. -1989a. Black males and social problems: Prevention through Afrocentnc socialization. Journal of Black Studies 20:15-39. 1989b. Sexual conquest and patterns of Black-on-Black violence: A structural-cultural perspective. Violence and Victims 4:257-73. Pettigrew, Thomas F. 1964. A profile of the Negro Amencan. Pnnceton, NJ: Van Nostrand. Pleck, Joseph. 1981. The myth of masculinity. Cambrdge: MIT Press. Rosenberg, Seymour, and Moonja P. Kim. 1975. The method of sorting as a data-gathenng procedure in multivanate research. Multivartate Behaviorial Research 10:489-502. Segal, Lynn. 1990. Slow motion: Changing masculinities, changmg men. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press. Shaw, Nate. 1974. The life ofNate Shaw, compiled by Theodore Rosengarten. New York: Knopf. Smith, Patricia A., and Elizabeth Midlarsky. 1985. Empmcally derved conceptions of femaleness and maleness: A current view. Sex Roles 12:313-28. Staples, Robert. 1971. The myth of the impotent Black male. Black Scholar 2:2-9. 1982. Black masculinity: The Black males' role in American society. San Francisco: Black Scholar Press. Steams, Peter N. 1979. Be a man: Males in modern society. New York: Holmes & Meier. Stewart, James B., and Joseph Scott. 1978. The institutional decimation of Black Amercan males. Western Journal of Black Studies 2:82-92. Trochim, William, and Rhoda Linton. 1986. Conceptualization for evaluation and planning. Evaluation and Planning 9:289-308. Turner, William H. 1977. Myths and stereotypes: The Afrcan man m Amerca. In The Black male n America, edited by Dons Willunson and Ronald Taylor. Chicago: Nelson-Hall. U.S. Department of Labor. 1991. Employment and earnings. Washington, DC: GPO. Willunson, Dons, and Ronald Taylor, eds. 1977. The Black male in America. Clhcago: NelsonHall. Wilson, William J. 1987. The truly disadvantaged. Clhcago: Umversity of Chicago Press. Andrea G. Hunter, PhD., is a Research Assistant Professor m the Department of Psychology and a member of the Institute for the Black Family at the University of Pitts- burgh. Her research centers on Afro-American families and explores linkages between families, social structure, and culture. James Earl Davis, PhD., is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Educational Studies in the College of Education at the University ofDelaware. His research interests include the educational experiences ofAfro-American males, particularly the relationship between gender role identity and academic achievement. This content downloaded from 158.103.2.1 on Fri, 23 Feb 2018 14:22:53 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool's honor code & terms of service.

This question has not been answered.

Create a free account to get help with this and any other question!

Similar Content

Related Tags