Search results

This paper explores masculinity ideologies which influence family perspectives, and therefore, instigate mental distress among Black and White men between the ages of 18–30.

Using a grounded theory approach, 30 in-depth interviews were conducted to explore the social construction of masculinity and investigate the ways in which gender ideologies influence family gender roles.

Black men’s gender ideology was influenced by racial identity and stressed a communal and collaborative identity which can be seen by the reliance on religion and maintaining family financial stability. White employed a pragmatic, individual perspective that emphasized individual behavior in a changing society. They embraced evolving discourses necessary to cope with changing family structure and refocused attention from family of origin conflict.

Though this is a qualitative study, it does provide a starting point for further research on how the family roles of Black and White men affect their mental health.

Few studies have employed a racial comparison research design to investigate mental distress associated with gender ideologies. The paper suggests that moving forward will require, as Black men suggested, adopting a critical racial sociology of gender that emphasizes processes and social structure. Analyzing manhood acts through the lens of social marginality, identity work to claim membership in the male group, and the identification of characteristics to maintain male privileges vis-à-vis women may prove to be useful. Focusing on process allows an exploration of social forces that influence masculinity, gendered household ideologies, and mental health.

This chapter details how local racial contexts and educators’ readings of those contexts shape actions they took in sponsoring Black students. Sponsorship was understood as the process in which agents provide, stymie, and/or enhance access to valued resources. The author utilized data collected during a yearlong ethnography of two high schools – one urban and the other suburban – both within a metropolitan Midwestern city. Findings from the study highlighted that teachers’ involvement in sponsorship was shaped by how they understood local racial disparities and contrasting views of equality. First, teachers noted residential segregation patterns as evidence of past and present manifestations of systemic racism that disadvantaged Black students. Second, they relied on their knowledge of racialized educational disparities to shape equitable actions. Third, teachers employed a restrictive equality approach to argue that access to high-performing schools was enough for some Black students in order to neglect modifying assignments. The need exists for researchers to examine complexities of sponsorship and how racism (re)shapes actions sponsors take toward fostering Black student academic success. Additionally, it is important for teachers to deepen their understanding of systemic racism and its manifestations within particular localities.