ABSTRACT
Theories abound regarding the gendered experience of men (see Smiler, 2004, for a recent review). Many have speculated, for example, that men are the way they are because of genetics or evolution (see Buss, 1995). However, most researchers agree that masculinity is a social construction (see O’Neil, Good, & Holmes, 1995, for review) related to, but distinct from, biological sex (i.e., Lips, 2007). Specifically, society teaches boys to adopt a set of culturally embedded standards of appropriate masculine behavior (Levant, 1995, 2001). Consider Mr. Acrann in the case example; he “knew how things were supposed to be” because men in his life, his father and brother, had impressed on him the value of working hard, not complaining, and serving others as a way of honoring himself. However, the extreme end of such teaching causes boys to “suffer under a code of masculinity that requires them to be: aggressive, dominant, achievement-oriented competitive, [and] rigidly self-sufficient” (Pollack & Levant, 1998, p. 1). Indeed, characteristics such as “problem-solving, risk-taking, staying calm in the face of danger, assertion, and aggression” (Levant, 1995, p. 229) are expected of boys if they are to be perceived as manly. “Big boys don’t cry” (Good & Sherrod, 2001, p. 24) becomes the standard, and boys are subsequently punished for expressing “weakness and vulnerability” (Good & Sherrod, 2001, p. 24). For example, how would Mr. Acrann’s father and brother have reacted if as a teenager Mr. Acrann had cried about or protested the standards he was living under? Could that predicted response be part of the explanation for why Mr. Acrann is now disgusted with the “kids” of today?
