Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
academic attention. These events show a complete disregard for human life and are shocking to
the public. School shootings at Columbine and Virginia Tech still raise emotions in people who
had no direct connection to the tragedies. While shootings are attractive problems to tackle
because they’re instant, easy to see the results, and have vast political support, they are rare in
occurrence and are a result of a larger societal problem. Young boys and men are (by and large)
the main perpetrators of school violence and delinquent activity. These activities, particularly
those that appear small and normal, can be extremely detrimental to the development of a child
and a school’s environment. Social standards and stereotypes have allowed these type of
activities to continue until it is too late. A change in the societal norms of masculinity would aid
“Masculinity” is a socially constructed concept that defines (although it doesn’t have to)
what being a man is, just as femininity defines a woman. While it is easy to say that one hasn’t
inseparable part of how men view themselves and the world around them. Society and its
educational institutions re-enforce this ambiguous thing called “masculinity” that focuses around
violence and power. These standards “diminish [boys’] genuine emotional voices . . . too many
boys self-critically judge themselves (and are judged) as immature, undeveloped, or deficient in
intellectual-emotional skills and as failing the impossible test of masculinity” (Pollack “Male”
190). Given the emphasis placed on masculinity, to have one’s manhood be questioned or
scrutinized can be devastating, if not dehumanizing. This leaves boys who don’t fall into
traditional stereotypes searching for recognition in a world where masculine reactions are the
rampant bullying and high levels of violence. School boys don’t define masculinity for
themselves, but learn from what they observe. The current cultural norms of “what is”
the weak. The feminine, with its implications of vulnerability; humility; and
This dichotomy of what is feminine and what is masculine puts unreasonable pressures on
but the social hierarchies in schools act to re-enforce it. Jessie Klein, in her article “Cultural
Capital and High School Bullies” says, “[t]raditional value structures reward boys for being
strong, defiant, aggressive, dominant, and violent” (53). These reward structures create and
maintain what Klein calls “social hierarchies” from a very early age. Cultural capital is required
to reach higher levels in the social hierarchy. According to Klein, such cultural capital is
This type of social ranking inherently places some boys at the top for meeting the “masculine
image” and others at the bottom of the social ranks, due to failures in meeting the male standards
dictated for them. Those at the bottom of the ranks have an unfortunate role; they act as ego
boosts to those at the top. Those at the top, in an order to affirm their masculinity and gain
cultural capital, act to further de-maculate those at the bottom through repeated psychological or
physical bullying (Klein 61). The school allows such a system to exist because it appears
innocent and even normal: society still has the “boys will be boys” mentality (Pollack “War”
142). The school environment allows divisions to be easily created and a social hierarchy that
embraces the masculine ideal. “These hierarchies . . . represent the ranking of individuals on a
scale of human worth and value. Indeed, from kindergarten on, educational institutions claim to
assess and award the deepest of human attributes--our dignity and inherent worth” (Shapiro 4).
norms of masculinity is through school textbooks. Sexism is demonstrated through the school
literature children read. In “No Sissy Boys Here”, Kimberly Davies and Lorraine Evans study
how masculinity is represented in elementary school reading texts. The analysis looked at several
different studies in the 1990’s targeting sexism in schoolbook publishers’ texts. The results of the
analysis found that “[m]ales are overwhelmingly more often portrayed as aggressive,
affectionate, emotionally expressive, and passive” (Evans and Davies 268). This helps to
understand why such a definition of masculinity is so widely accepted within our culture. These
ideas of what being a “man” is have been ingrained in children every day through the educational
institutions. This is a dangerous and deep-rooted stereotype that is accepted as the norm.
In the status quo there are strict guidelines for what is accepted as masculine.
These guidelines force some boys to the bottom of the social hierarchy, and others to the top. If
the theory of cultural capital is endorsed, boys are constantly struggling to gain more capital than
their male peers. This struggle can escalate as boys compete to gain cultural capital. By
ostracizing and demeaning that which is feminine, boys feel accepted by society, because they
are embracing the masculine ideal they have been taught. In Glen Ridge, New Jersey such
violence escalated to the gang rape of a mentally handicapped girl. “If I think back about that
period. I can see the group getting stronger, closer, everytime they got together and humiliated a
girl . . . For them this was what being a man among men was” (qtd. in Klien 58). While societal
norms do not directly cause this type of violence, they create an environment that fosters it. Not
only the boys who embrace this stereotype are dangerous, but those who are victims of
dehumanizes them. This system doesn’t just exist within their school, but one that is re-enforced
by their educational institutions, and accepted by society at large. When these children even
attempt to reach out or express themselves (whether it is to parents, teachers, or peers), they face
scrutiny and humiliation. This pain is felt most by those at the bottom of the social hierarchy.
This pain (without an appropriate outlet) could lead to fists or bullets if action isn't taken to
vulnerability, and thereby disconnected from healthy relations with each other,
with potentially supportive adults, and from a full range of emotions within our
own selves. And attempts to resist are met with cruel and endless additional
shaming, a later predictor for violent behavior in adolescence. (Pollack “War”
144)
Many of the boys who are de-masculated and dehumanized seek a way to find worth in the world
we live in: some choose the ultimate masculine act of violence, murder. These boys are stuck in a
system that doesn’t value them as human beings; ergo they turn to different ideologies that make
them feel accepted (Klein 64). Victims of this bullying and peer victimization may develop a
The male stereotype is often overlooked, and its impacts on psychological and social
dominance may lead some children to bully their peers in order to reach their goals” (Gini and
Pozzoli 586). This system of cultural capital causes cyclical violence and long-term harm as
victims of the system are forced into adopting violent ideologies of masculinity to seek
acceptance. The perpetrators and the victims suffer: both bullies and victims report higher levels
of depression and correlate with “being aggressive and holding attitudes that promote violence as
the primary method of conflict resolution” (Seals and Young 744). Society needs to redefine
masculinity or, more appropriately (however, utopian) eliminate gender constructs and identity
completely. But that’s another argument. In the short term, schools need to make an effort to
create peer-to-peer, as well as child-adult bonds. Boys need to feel cared for, and only then will
they be more open to communication. We can’t allow rewards to be built around masculine
constructs. “Although we cannot eliminate the pain from boyhood or from adolescence, we can
lessen it and make it more tolerable by giving boys in consulting rooms, school clinics, and so
forth the chance to voice it without being shamed” (Pollack “War” ). The current constructs
allow violence as a solution to pain or difficult situations. Administrators can't ignore simple
bullying or psychological abuse; this simply fuels the social hierarchy. There needs to be an
overall change or shift in the mindset of society. Whether it starts with gender equality in
textbooks, or simple parenting, there is a problem. A change in the societal norms of masculinity
Davies, Kimberly and Evans, Lorraine. “No Sissy Boys Here: A Content Analysis of the
jkg Representation of Masculinity in Elementary School Reading Textbooks.” Sex Roles 42.¾
Gini, Gianluca and Pozzoli, Tiziana. “The Role of Masculinity in Children’s Bullying.” Sex
Klein, Jessie. “Cultural Capital and High School Bullies: How Social Inequality Impacts School
ui Development Pathways.” Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1036 (2004):
jhy 141-150.
---. “The ‘War’ For Boys: Hearing ‘Real Boys’ Voices, Healing Their Pain.” Professional hjkgh
Seals, Dorothy and Young, Jerry. “Bullying and Victimization: Prevalence and Relationship to
ety Gender, Grade Level, Ethnicity, Self-esteem, and Depression”. Adolescence 38.152
Shapiro, Svi. “Virginia Tech Education and a Culture of Death.” Tikkun 22.4 (2007): 56-59.