A View of the News

Jim Mahalik, PhD

Getting to know the people involved in Division 51 has been a great opportunity to see how a group of people with many different interests can find a home in an organization that critically examines issues related to masculinity. A very partial list of the many interests represented in the division include addressing men’s health, boys and adolescent males, violence, homophobia, and the role of fathers to name a few.

It encourages me that people in the division have such interests and expertise because after watching last Sunday’s local news, I more firmly believed that this division has much to say and could do much to address many issues in the United States. Specifically, after watching the local news it was clear to me how the constraining effects of masculine socialization are ingrained and unchallenged in society.

For example, the tragic death of Dale Earnhardt in the last lap of the Daytona 500 led the coverage. “The Intimidator” as he was nicknamed among his fans and competitors had a very tough persona on the racetrack but was apparently quite a devoted father, supportive friend, and genuinely warm hearted person. However, Mr. Earnhardt chose not to wear the HANS device (head and neck support) when he raced even though it was available to him and is a required restraint in several other racing circuits. Medical examiners concluded that this device would have saved his life. Thus, his risk-taking within a risk-taking sport further contributed to the disparity between men and women’s average lifespan.

The second story that Sunday was about two boys from Vermont accused of murdering two professors at Dartmouth College. As the anchor introduced the story, she used the phrase “yet another tragedy where boys commit senseless violence.” What was most troubling to me about the report, though, was the way in which the anchors and other reporters seemed to have become accustomed to this story line. It seems that since we have been bombarded with so many stories of boys and disgruntled employees—almost always men—committing murder that we are increasingly numb to these events. My concern is that we are implicitly accepting the inevitability of male violence and not questioning or challenging those forces that shape it.

In the interest of space and the reader’s time, I will skip over the story about Eminem and the most recent reports of the former President’s abuse of power and marital infidelity. Instead, I want to discuss a local story that is likely to be a national one soon. Namely, the current governor of Massachusetts is being named to be ambassador to Canada and our Lieutenant Governor, Jane Swift, will become acting Governor.

As Ms. Swift happens to be pregnant with twins, the “news” story, and the media questions during the “person on the street” interviews on television and in the papers, focuses exclusively on “how is she going to be able to handle new babies and the job as Governor?” Let me be clear that I believe it is going to be a very difficult time for the acting Governor as a parent of small children in the demanding role of being Governor. Having said that, however, I firmly believe that if the acting Governor was a man and was going to be a new father to twins, there would be no story. Secondly, what is alarming to me is the fact that no media person or “person on the street” has mentioned her husband as possibly being involved in the raising of the children—let alone being the primary caretaker. It is as if he has been relegated to the status of some inert presence in his home that will passively respond to his wife’s raising of the children while she governs the Commonwealth. Thus, both the fact that this would not be a news story if the acting Governor were a man, and how every party discussing the story assumes that the father will not be involved, points clearly to the unspoken understanding that fathers are peripheral in the raising of their children.

After turning off the television, I decided that what was especially scary to me was how these assumptions about masculinity in these news stories stay unchallenged and the negative effects of masculinity that contribute to these stories get accepted as inevitable. We need to bring these issues to consciousness with our communities, organizations, classrooms, clients, and colleagues and challenge those forces that shorten men’s lives, let “boys be boys,” speak hate against homosexuals, and put men on the sidelines in the lives of their children. Talk to a friend of yours who shares your values about these issues and ask him or her to join us in this work. There is plenty to do and this is a great group of people to join with in the work.

---

Division 51 Candidates

Candidates for President

Corey J. Habben • President

There are roughly 150,000 members of APA, and there is not one individual whose life is not affected by the psychology of men. This is one of the many reasons why I believe the Society for the Psychological Study of Men and Masculinity is so special . . . and so very important.

In 1995, Ron Levant’s words “Masculinity is at a turning point” grabbed me and energized me to such an extent that I felt I had to get involved with this new APA division called “SPSMM” as a young student. As you will note when you read my requisite qualifications below, I have since called SPSMM my home. I have gotten to know the individuals who have contributed in different ways to our understanding of the psychology of men and I have watched SPSMM evolve over the years. And yet, I still cannot help but be very excited by this simple truth: SPSMM is also at a turning point.

There are new generations of professionals, individuals, students who have yet to be grabbed and energized by the very thing that has grabbed us. There are so many new frontiers of research, practice, and understanding that have yet to be embarked upon. There are whole new audiences, whose lives are touched by the psychology of men, we have yet to reach.

In the early years of SPSMM, the biggest question was “Can we create this APA division and make it work?” With that question successfully answered, it is now time to focus on expanding— expanding our knowledge, expanding our audience, expanding the way we touch the lives of men and women everywhere. It is time for SPSMM to take the psychology of men to “the next level.” If you share my vision, I will energetically serve as a catalyst as president of SPSMM.

I have served as your Chair of your Membership Committee for the last two years. Prior to that, I served as Student Coordinator for three years. In 1997, I was honored to be one of the first recipients of the SPSMM “Student of the Year” award. My most recent collaboration is a book chapter on rural men (in press) co-authored with Ron Levant. I have also been quite active with APA, serving on APAGS for four years as chair of two different committees and as a member of several APA task forces as a representative of new psychologists and students (most recently, the APA Commission on Training and Education Leading to Licensure). Through those experiences with APA boards and committees, I learned that you only need a voice and a good message to be heard and facilitate change for the better. SPSMM has the good message, and I will gladly be the voice.

There are nearly 300 million people in the United States and billions more throughout the world . . . and yet we are all touched, directly and indirectly, positively and negatively, by the psychology of men. SPSMM is at a turning point, a point at which we can better understand the psychology of men, share this understanding with a larger audience, and include more individuals to join us in the process. I would be honored to be a part of taking SPSMM to the next level as president.

Roderick D. Hetzel • President

I was recently asked to run for President-Elect of SPSMM and it is with a combination of excitement and humility that I accept this nomination. Within our relatively brief history, we have created a professional “home” that has allowed us to pursue our scholarly interests within a supportive and encouraging environment. I feel truly fortunate to count the members of this division as my colleagues and friends. In this respect, I am excited by the challenges that lie ahead, yet humbled when I think of the footsteps in which I would follow. There are three primary areas that I believe will need our continued attention: scholarship, organizational development, and social advocacy.

First, we need to continue to support and produce high quality scholarship in the area of men and masculinity. We have only just begun to explore the complex theoretical, empirical, and clinical issues associated with men and masculinity. It is important that we continue to promote healthy conceptions of masculinity and foster the health and well-being of men. To further develop our understanding of men and masculinity, we need to continue to produce scholarship that is based on sound theory, conducted with methodological rigor, and driven by clinical and practical considerations. I believe it is particularly important to begin to develop empirically supported treatments for men in various clinical settings. As President-Elect I will help to develop division-wide research teams and think tanks, consisting of practitioners and academics, that encourage scholarly thinking in the psychology of men. I will also work to encourage the mentorship of young professionals in scholarly endeavors.

Second, on an organizational level, we need to continue to expand our presence within the APA as well as other professional settings related to men and masculinity. As President-Elect I will continue to help SPSMM develop and sustain ties with those who share similar missions. One way to do this is through the appointment of liaisons to other APA divisions and professional organizations and through affiliation and collaboration on shared issues. While reaching out beyond our membership, we also need to remain responsive to and supportive of the needs of our own growing membership. Continued diversity (including diversity in gender, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, sexual orientation, disability/ability status, and religious/spiritual orientation) among our membership should also be given the highest priority. We are a voice of inclusion and acceptance in a broader society that is often polarizing and contentious. As President-Elect I will actively encourage the theme of unity through diversity.

Third, we need to increase our visibility in the public arena as social advocates for men and masculinity. Our society is confronted by such problems as domestic violence, sexual assault, parenting problems, and substance abuse, to name but a few. These are all examples of areas in which SPSMM members could contribute their knowledge and expertise. The public is increasingly looking for support and guidance in dealing with these difficult social issues. A number of our members have already been outspoken advocates for men and SPSMM needs to continue to develop effective strategies for communicating information to the broader society. As President-Elect I will encourage public information campaigns as a first-step in reducing misinformation and educating the public.

My background? Presently I am on the faculty at Rochester Institute of Technology. The majority of my clinical and research work has focused on issues related to men’s health, particularly men struggling with chronic medical conditions. Within SPSMM, I serve as the Chair of the Research Funding Task Force, Co-Chair of the Men and Health Task Force, and as liaison to Divisions 22 (Rehabilitation Psychology) and 38 (Health Psychology). Further, I am a previous recipient of the Division 51 Student of the Year Award. Outside SPSMM, I have been involved with the Men’s Health Network and Men’s Healthline. I have enjoyed the organizational and administrative aspects of my work as much as I enjoy my clinical and research endeavors.

In summary, I find the study of men and masculinity to be deeply rewarding on both a professional and personal level and am very honored to be nominated for President-Elect of SPSMM. If I am elected, I commit myself to do my very best to serve you and SPSMM. I believe that as a division we have many exciting challenges and opportunities ahead of us. Let us continue together in this process!

Candidates for Treasurer

Michele Harway • Treasurer

On a professional level, I often work with families affected by domestic violence and many of my publications have addressed how men’s violence towards women affects all family members. Learning to empathize with perpetrators of domestic violence is a necessary step for effective treatment and I am thankful to those whose understanding of the issue have informed my work.

Regarding the office for which I have been nominated, I tell you up front that I have no formal experience as treasurer. However, I am the keeper of the family budget and family bill payer; I regularly underspend my budget at work; and last year as Division 43 president, I spent only 1/3 of my allocated budget. I cannot promise you that I can single-handedly turn around Division 51’s tight financial situation, but I sure am willing to try. And I know that no matter what the outcome of the election or of the budget, I am one of Division 51’s fervent supporters!

Fred Rabinowitz • Treasurer

I am honored to be nominated for the position of Treasurer for the Society for the Psychological Study of Men and Masculinity. I have enjoyed the camaraderie and support in this division on a personal and professional level and feel it is important to give back and serve. SPSMM has been fortunate to have James Campbell in this position for several years. His dedication to the division, competency in accounting, and his commitment to fairness have kept the financial end of SPSMM functioning responsibly.

If elected, I will continue the legacy of responsible fiscal management for our division. I look forward to working with the SPSMM leadership and membership to ensure that policies involving the financial cornerstones of Division 51 are cared for in a fair, equitable, and accountable manner. As someone who takes responsibility seriously, I promise to approach problems with openness, flexibility, and concerted effort. I feel prepared for the role of Treasurer having had previous experience as a budget manager in my professional positions as Department Chair of the Psychology Department of the University of Redlands, Director of the Study Abroad Program in Salzburg, Austria, and Director of the Community Mental Health Center in Redlands. I also served as the Chair of the Standing Committee for Men in the American College Personnel Association in the early 1990s, a position that also involved fiduciary management.

In terms of my academic and clinical background in the field, I received my doctorate in Counseling Psychology from the University of Missouri—Columbia in 1984. I am currently a Full Professor of Psychology at the University of Redlands in California. I have also maintained a private practice specializing in men’s issues that has included “innovative” approaches to individual and group psychotherapy.

Over the years, I have presented at APA and other conferences symposia and papers on the topic of men’s issues. These have included men and depression, men and psychotherapy, and innovative approaches to working with men. I have also written and co-written articles and book chapters in these primary areas. Sam Cochran and I have co-written three books: Man Alive: A Primer of Men’s Issues in 1994 published by Brooks/Cole, Men and Depression: Clinical and Empirical Perspectives in 2000 published by Academic Press, and Deepening Psychotherapy With Men to be published in 2001 by the American Psychological Association.

I have been actively involved in SPSMM since it became a division and have served as Membership Chair, Co-Chair of the Task Force on Men and Depression, Convention program reviewer, Editorial Board member for The Psychology of Men and Masculinity, and contributor to the SPSMM Bulletin. I will also be the next Division 51 Program Chair for the APA Convention in Chicago. I appreciate your support for my candidacy as Treasurer and feel honored to be able to serve in this position if elected.

 

Member-at-large Candidates: Slate 2

Kurt A. DeBord • Member-at-large: Slate 2

It is nice to be able to say that I have been with Division 51 for a few years. Saying that before this point would have been premature, since the division is still so new. However, even in the short time that we have existed as a division of APA, we have broken new ground (e.g., publishing Psychology of Men and Masculinity) and established new traditions (e.g., our cookbook was recently featured in the APA Monitor). I would like to extend one of those traditions by again accepting nomination for a position on the executive board as a member-at-large.

Briefly, I have been professionally active as an assistant and associate professor of psychology at Lincoln University in Jefferson City, Missouri for the past six years. Professionally, teaching is nearest to my heart, but my research also stimulates and satisfies my curiosities. I recently co-edited the APA published Handbook of Counseling and Psychotherapy With Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Clients with my colleagues Ruperto Perez and Kathleen Bieschke. I am an active member of Division 44 and have been active with Division 51 by serving on the editorial board of Psychology of Men and Masculinity, presenting my research with the division at APA, serving as a discussant, coordinating a special focus section on AIDS for the newsletter, and serving briefly as a member-at-large. These experiences have not only proven to be challenging, but rewarding as well. Generally, contributing to Division 51 is a service that seems easy to provide. If elected to serve as a member-at-large, I will gladly accept the challenge to live up to the responsibilities inherent in the position.

Douglas C. Haldeman • Member-at-large: Slate 2

These are exciting times in Division 51. There is openness to new ideas, and a spirit of inclusivity, that has made the Division a place where a wealth of diverse ideas can be discussed. Increasingly, it is a place where all are welcome—especially those of us who do not identify as heterosexual. For the past year, it has been my privilege to be part of this Division’s Board. At every step of the way, I have found the Division leadership to be completely receptive to ideas that will bring issues faced by gay/bisexual men into the Division’s agenda, and that gay and bisexual men are warmly welcomed as members of the Division 51 family. Much work remains to be done, however, and I would ask the Division for another term on the Board to complete the projects I have started relative to the active inclusion of gay/bisexual men into the life of the Division.

This year at Convention, Division 51 will have its first co-sponsored program with Division 44 (Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual Issues) on Homophobia and Heterophobia, under the leadership of myself and Dr. Gary Brooks. The program will examine the harmful effects of both homophobia and heterophobia on heterosexual and gay/bisexual men, and marks the beginning of an important dialogue toward mutual understanding. It is a first step in the process, however, and needs to be followed with more programming and newsletter articles. I ask your support to continue these projects.

My background in gay/bisexual issues includes a long history of advocacy, scholarship, and clinical practice. I am the author of a wide range of articles and chapters on the treatment of gay/lesbian/bisexual psychotherapy clients, ranging from the development of gender identity to the harmful effects of sexual orientation conversion therapy. I am co-author of APA’s recently adopted Guidelines for Psychotherapy With Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual Clients and serve on the Task Force charged with their implementation. It has been my honor to lecture internationally on the psychological science relative to sexual orientation, including the ethical and practical implications of therapies intended to change (homosexual) orientation.

I have held a variety of positions in APA governance, including serving as Chair of the Committee on Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual Concerns, leading Division 44 as President, and serving on BAPPI’s Task Force on Appropriate Therapeutic Responses to Sexual Orientation, an APA policy which I co-authored. At present, in addition to my service on the Division 51 Board, I serve on the Ethics Committee and represent Division 44 on APA Council. It would be my great pleasure and honor to continue serving on Division 51’s Board, and I ask you for your support.

Member-at-large Candidates: Slate 3

Jay Wade • Member-at-large: Slate 3

I am honored to be nominated for the Member-At-Large position for Division 51. I became involved with SPSMM in 1992 when I returned to graduate school to pursue a doctorate in counseling psychology at the University of Maryland. I received my PhD in 1996, and have since been an assistant professor in the doctoral program in clinical psychology at Fordham University.

Initially, I became involved with SPSMM because of my desire to associate with colleagues whose professional interests, in line with mine own, concerned the psychology of men. After having worked as a mental health practitioner for 13 years, I returned to graduate school to work on developing a model of counseling for men. I began with research on institutional racism and the mental health system, counseling African American male substance abusers, the father-son relationship in African American males, and gender role conflict in middle-class African American men. My current research concerns the validation of a theory I developed on male identity, male reference group identity dependence theory, and the instrument I developed based on the theory, the Reference Group Identity Dependence Scale. I am most interested in examining how the male identity statuses I proposed relate to men’s social attitudes: masculinity ideology, discriminatory attitudes, race and gender equity, sexual harassment proclivities, and issues of diversity.

My continued interest and involvement with SPSMM primarily can be attributed to the members with whom I have come into contact. I have always felt welcomed, included, and encouraged to participate in the Division’s activities. Additionally, I fully support and respect the mission of Division 51 and am motivated towards working with the Division to reach its goals and objectives. As with my academic and scholarly activities, Division 51 provides another means by which I can contribute to the development of race and gender equity in society and more healthy positive masculinities in men. If elected as a Member-At-Large on the Division 51 board, I would work wholeheartedly towards furthering the Division’s visibility and implementing the Division’s goals and objectives.

Marty Wong • Member-at-large: Slate 3

It has been gratifying to me to be able to take part in the creation of, and the sustaining of, something of value: Division 51, The SPSMM. In its short history it has been helpful in defining how we feel, what we wish to work for, and in actually organizing efforts in those directions. It is my ideal to help SPSMM to continue to be a valued authority and force in promoting gender equity and also in promoting the more positive raising of our sons. I hope that in some small way, being a representative on the board of SPSSM can help further that aim. More specifically, I hope to continue my work toward these goals as well as to continue to work as Fellows Chair and in recognizing our members through the awards committee.

Council Representative Candidates

Glenn E. Good • Council Representative

In the past decade, SPSMM has evolved from a mere idea into the 51^st APA Division. SPSMM is now an organization actively promoting advances in both scientific and applied psychology associated with men and masculinity. As we look ahead, there are many human needs and professional issues that require our attention. Indeed, we have just begun to scratch the surface of important scientific and applied issues associated with men and masculinity.

Some of the issues that stand out for me include further delineating and promoting healthy conceptions of masculinity and developing effective interventions for high frequency men/masculinity-related concerns (e.g., promoting emotional competence, men’s health). The public is also eager for guidance on important societal issues such as the development of healthy boys, relations between the sexes, perpetration of violence, and encouraging parental involvement.

While I am highly optimistic about SPSMM’s future, important organizational issues remain to address. We have launched our outstanding Psychology of Men and Masculinity journal, yet we still need to increase our membership, improve our space at the APA convention, maintain the SPSMM Bulletin, and offer improved services to members. We also need to try and do all these things in the most cost-effective way possible (lowest possible dues for members).

For the past two years, SPSMM has enjoyed direct representation on the APA Council of Representative. This has resulted in SPSMM having greater visibility and influence on APA endeavors. It has been my privilege and honor to serve SPSMM as our Council Representative.

During my time on APA Council, I accomplished many things. For example, I ensured that the psychology of boys and men was incorporated into the model High School Psychology curriculum. I helped ensure that the psychology of boys and men will be included in the upcoming recommendations for publishers of introductory psychology texts. I also consulted with APA President Norine Johnson regarding planning for an exciting, inclusive opening celebration planned for the upcoming APA convention in San Francisco.

My professional qualifications? I received my PhD from the Ohio State University. I am currently an Associate Professor and the Director of Training for the APA-accredited Counseling Psychology program at the University of Missouri—Columbia. I also maintain a private practice. I am a Fellow of SPSMM and Counseling Psychology, I served as SPSMM President, am the recipient of the SPSMM Researcher of the Year Award, and have been involved with men’s issues since 1972. I have held men/masculinity-associated leadership positions in APA Divisions 17 and 51, ACPA, and NOMAS. I have authored more than 50 articles, chapters, and books, and have made more than 100 presentations at national and international conferences. If reelected, I commit to do the very best I can to serve you and SPSMM.

While I would be honored to serve SPSMM again via reelection to this position, I would also like to recommend that you give serious consideration to Dr. Neil Massoth. In addition to being a very fine person, Neil is an energetic and very enthusiastic advocate for men’s issues. Neil is also a master at negotiating APA politics and would get a great deal accomplished.

Neil A. Massoth • Council Representative

I served on the Council of Representatives for two terms (six years) representing New Jersey. I enjoyed Council work and would like to serve on Council again representing Division 51. Council is complex. It takes one three-year term to fully understand the perplexities of Council, and a second term to make a full contribution. Glenn Good is doing a wonderful job representing our Division on Council; he deserves a second term. I am running simply to let you know that I am interested in serving Division 51 as Council representative AFTER Glenn’s SECOND term. Glenn deserves your support; he deserves a second term. Please vote for me three years from now (assuming that I will be nominated), but join me now as I VOTE FOR GLENN GOOD FOR COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVE.

Division 51 Candidates

President

Corey J. Habben

Roderick D. Hetzel

Treasurer

Michele Harway

Fred Rabinowitz

Member-at-large: Slate 2

Kurt A. DeBord

Douglas C. Haldeman

Member-at-large: Slate 3

Jay Wade

Marty Wong

Council Representative

Glenn E. Good

Neil A. Massoth

---

Working to Create a Violence-Free Future for Children

Julia Silva and Jacquelyn Gentry

Using information from decades of research on child development, aggression, violence, and prevention, the American Psychological Association (APA) and the National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) have launched the ACT—Adults and Children Together—Against Violence project. This exciting new initiative addresses violence prevention in the critical years of early childhood, ages 0 to 8, by focusing on the adults who are most influential in the children’s lives—parents, teachers, and other caregivers.

“Kids learn more from what they see people doing than from what people say,” says Jacquelyn Gentry, PhD, director of Public Interest Initiatives at APA. “Violence is primarily a learned behavior, often learned early in life, and children who learn constructive ways to resolve conflicts are learning violence prevention.”

Few violence prevention programs focus on early childhood, a critical period when children learn basic skills for getting along with others. But ACT Against Violence is designed to fill this gap by translating research findings on early child development, aggression and violence, and evidence-based interventions into an early violence prevention initiative focusing on the adults. ACT emphasizes that the adults who spend the most time with young children—parents, teachers, caregivers—are the ones who establish the children’s learning environment and consequently can help them to develop positive ways to resolve conflicts and deal with anger and frustration.

ACT Against Violence brings together two organizations with longstanding interest in violence prevention and children’s well-being. The APA, with nearly 160,000 members, has synthesized behavioral and social science research on many aspects of aggression and violence, and its members have been on the forefront of research on violence for nearly a half century. Through its policies and programs, the NAEYC promotes peaceful environments for early learning experiences, and its membership of 105,000 early childhood educators work with hundreds of thousands of young children, mothers, dads, and other family members every day.

ACT Against Violence is a two-pronged initiative—it highlights early violence prevention by combining a national multimedia public service advertising campaign with community training programs.

National Media Campaign

Sponsored by the Advertising Council, Inc., the APA/NAEYC public service advertising campaign is designed to raise awareness about the important role of the adults in protecting children from involvement in violence. Ads have been developed by Flashpoint, a New York City advertising agency that has donated its creative services to design campaign materials and public service announcements (PSAs) for TV and radio. The television and radio advertisements will be distributed through the Advertising Council to TV networks and 50 major U.S. media markets around the first of March.

The ACT Against Violence media campaign includes a toll-free telephone number—1-877-ACT-WISE—that viewers and listeners can call to request a brochure on violence prevention in early childhood. The Web site http://actagainstviolence.org will offer further information about the campaign, child development, and violence prevention for parents and teachers of young children.

Campaign kits including fact sheets, brochures, press releases, and draft of a contact letter to local station public service directors are being prepared for distribution through the state psychological associations.

Community Training Program

The goal of the ACT Against Violence Community Training Program is to make early violence prevention a central part of a community’s efforts to prevent violence. Designed as a three-day train-the-trainers workshop for groups of 30-40 professionals, the ACT training program is for individuals who work with families and/or young children. The workshop program provides instruction on how to work with diverse groups of adults, how to disseminate child development information, how to select intervention programs, and how to design an action plan. It also offers model workshops and educational materials to be shared with others addressing core violence prevention skills—problem solving, anger management, discipline, and media literacy. Participants in the ACT Against Violence trainings are expected to use what they learn in the workshop to enhance programming in their organizations and communities.

To develop ACT training in a specific community, a Local Coordinator, typically in an organization that can provide an administrative base for the project, directs the program and maintains liaison with national staff at the APA and NAEYC. Experienced trainers in the community are recruited as instructors and trained by APA/NAEYC to conduct the workshops.

With a grant from the Packard Foundation, the APA and NAEYC developed the community-training program with assistance from experts in child development and violence prevention. In the summer of 2000, it was pilot tested in Washington, DC; the first workshop was conducted in partnership with the Monterey Peninsula College in Monterey, California last fall for 31 participants representing three counties in that area. An evaluative study assessed the short-term effect of the workshop and continues to monitor its impact in the community.

Currently, APA and NAEYC are working with Child & Family Resources, a community-based organization led by an APA member in Randolph, New Jersey, to implement the ACT training program in Morris County, NJ. This program is being funded by the AT&T Foundation. A program in Kansas City, to be supported by the Kaufmann Foundation, also is under development through Homefront, a community-based organization.

Looking Into the Future

APA and NAEYC encourage their members to participate in the ACT Against Violence project by promoting the media campaign and educational materials in their communities and by participating in local ACT training programs.

ACT Against Violence has received financial support from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, Kellogg Foundation, Los Angeles County Psychological Foundation, Foundation for Child Development, CDC Foundation, Metropolitan Life Foundation, American Psychological Foundation, American Psychological Association, and Beth and Russell Siegelman. Additionally, the project is a partner SafeUSA, a CDC-sponsored initiative promoting injury and violence prevention.

Making a difference in such a complex problem as violence prevention requires a sustained effort, and the APA and NAEYC continue to pursue support for expansion and refinement of this combination of a nationwide mass media campaign and local training efforts.

Awards of the Society for the Psychological Study of Men and Masculinity

Potential Award Categories and Corresponding Award Criteria

Practitioner of the Year

Purpose of the Award: The Practitioner of the Year Award is intended to honor a psychologist who has provided outstanding clinical service to boys, adolescent males, or men.

Criteria:

1. The nominee must be a member of the SPSMM.

2. The nominee must be a psychologist who spends at least 51% of his or her time in providing clinical services to boys, adolescent males, or men.

3. The clinical activities of the nominee must clearly foster the positive psychological adjustment of boys, adolescent males, or men.

Distinguished Professional Service Award

Purpose of the Award: The Distinguished Professional Service Award is intended to honor outstanding service at the local, state, or national level that reflects a significant contribution to the SPSMM or promotes positive policy changes that enhance the well-being of boys, adolescent males, or men.

Criteria:

1. Nominees may include those whose long-term service contributions have significantly and positively impacted the SPSMM (e.g., a SPSMM member who has fulfilled numerous service positions for Division 51) or public policy as it relates to the well-being of boys, adolescent males, or men (e.g., any individual who has devoted significant time and energy to changing public policy in order to enhance the development of males).

2. The nominee does not have to be a member of SPSMM (e.g., he or she could be a government official who has drafted or sponsored legislation to support the adjustment of males.)

Researcher of the Year

Purpose: The Researcher of the Year Award is intended to honor outstanding published research concerning males and masculinity.

Criteria:

1. The nominee must be a member of SPSMM.

2. The work for which the member is being nominated must be clearly related to the psychological study and understanding of boys, adolescent males, men, or masculinity.

3. The work for which the member is being nominated can include empirical research, qualitative research, scholarly reviews of the literature, or theoretical models and approaches to treatment.

4. Nominees can be nominated for a single work published after January 1 or the year prior to the award presentation or for thematic scholarship consisting of several works published over the course of many years.

Student of the Year

Purpose: The Student of the Year Award is intended to honor an undergraduate or graduate student who has demonstrated outstanding academic performance, counseling practice, or research pertaining to boys, adolescent males, men, or masculinity.

Criteria:

1. The nominee should be a student member of the SPSMM.

2. The nomination should be accompanied by two letters of recommendation from two professors within the nominee’s academic department.

3. The nominee should maintain at least a 3.0 GPA and be involved in counseling practice or research pertaining to boys, adolescent males, men or masculinity.

Potential Nomination Process:

1. Call for nominations, the purpose and criteria of awards, and the nomination process will be placed annually in the spring edition of the SPSMM newsletter.

2. Any person who is an SPSMM member may make a nomination.

3. No current member of the Division 51 Awards Committee may make a nomination or write letters to support a nominee.

4. No current member of the Division 51 Awards Committee may be nominated for an award.

5. All completed nomination materials must be submitted in one, complete packet by the nominator to the Awards Committee Chair. The nomination packet should include four copies each of the following:

a. A completed nomination form.

b. A nomination letter (no longer than two pages) from the nominator that speaks directly to the nominee’s qualifications for the award.

c. Two letters of support from individuals other than the nominator.  (For the Student of the Year Award, these letters should be written by two professors from the student’s academic department.)

d. The nominee’s vitae.

e. A phone number where the nominator can be reached.

f. Researcher of the Year Award nominations should include copies of the nominee’s publications for which the member is being honored.

6. All nomination packets must by received by May 15 of each year and should be sent to the Division 51 Awards Committee Chair.

Please send nomination materials by May 25 to Larry Beer, EdD, Director, Child and Family Psychological Services, P.C., 5380 Holiday Terrace, Kalamazoo, MI 49009.

---

New Joint Task Force to Help Students

A new joint task force has been created by Presidents Janice Yoder (Division 35, Society for the Psychology of Women) and David Johnson (Division 2, Society for the Teaching of Psychology). The Task Force on Enhancing the College Experience: Helping Students Thrive will assemble a variety of resources, designed to be used by those who teach Introductory Psychology.

Teaching faculty and university support staff have frequently observed that students arrive at college and find that they must make choices they never faced during high school. At many colleges, the orientation for first-year students consists of little more than a guided tour and a brief overview of college policies.

The goal of the task force is to gather information that Introductory Psychology professors can use as relevant supplements to their courses. At present, the task force is focusing on social issues faced by students, rather than academic/cognitive problems. The topics currently include the following: (1) alcohol use and binge-drinking, (2) drug and tobacco use, (3) eating disorders, (4) sexual behavior and sexual orientation, (5) depression and suicide, (6) social pressure and social support, (7) interpersonal violence and aggression, and (8) exercise and other health-related behavior. Other topics may be added at a later time.

The task force will examine relevant material and submit it to Division 2’s Office of Teaching Resources in Psychology (OTRP), a service that develops and distributes teaching and advising material. The material will include discussions of key topics, reviews of the literature, case studies, critical-thinking exercises, demonstrations, reviews of videos and other media resources, and questionnaires.

If you have information or resources related to the key topics, please send them to one of the following task force members: Dr. Barbara Sommer, Teaching Resources Center, University of California, One Shields Avenue, Davis, CA 95616-8717, basommer@ucdavis.edu; Dr. Margaret Matlin, Department of Psychology, SUNY Geneseo, Geneseo, NY 14454, matlin@geneseo.edu; or Dr. Regan Gurung, Department of Psychology, University of Wisconsin, Green Bay, 2420 Nicolet Drive, Green Bay, WI 54311-7001, gurungr@uwgb.edu

---

BOOK REVIEW

A Review of Edward J. Tejirian’s Male to Male: Sexual Feelings Across the Boundaries of Identity

Review by Dr. James Harrison

This is an interesting book, if hard to categorize or describe. Tejirian is a clinical psychologist with 25 years of experience as a therapist and college teacher of basic and applied psychology. His research is not clearly distinguished from his psychotherapeutic work. It is phenomenological, N = 1 exploration of individual experiences not only of patients and students but also several volunteers whose sexual lives he explores with the depth of long term analytic therapy. This reader soon was convinced that his respondents were fortunate to have the ear of an interested and caring, broadly educated and open-minded person.

Tejirian does not offer a hypothesis but grounds himself in a social constructionist perspective not only describing ways individual persons are shaped by their culture but also emphasizing ways in which they are in a confrontational relationship with their culture. He touches on same-sex attractions between women, particularly as he describes the attitudes of his college students. His emphasis, however, is on relationships between men.

In short vignettes he describes a full array of possible attitudes men have toward same sex intimacy. These range from anxiety about and denial of any emotional or affectional relationship toward another man to the struggles of men with explicit sexual attraction toward and activity with another man in the context of a culture which assumes that homosexuality is deviant if not pathological.

The major portions of the book are in-depth studies of the evolving experience of two persons. The first describes a 32-year-old divorced high school graduate who had been incarcerated for aggravated rape six years at the time he initially met Dr. Tejirian, who was his therapist at the prison. After being confined for nearly a year he began to consider the possibility of seeking sexual gratification with other prisoners. In this facility, consensual homosexuality was considered unproblematic. Tejirian describes the gradual evolution of this man’s self understanding and attitude toward his partners from using and dominating them to mutual respect and affection, as well as from an attitude of being serviced to being concerned about his partner’s pleasure and well-being, resulting in increasing flexibility about mode of sexual involvement.

The second in-depth study describes the personal development of a gay police officer in a small police force in a suburban town close to New York. This young man in his 20s did not have the option of remaining closeted in a community of this size because the patterns of his personal life were too visible to fellow officers. He laments, People make me gay. Otherwise I would think I was normal, just liking men . . . society has made me gay. . . . If way back someone had said it’s no problem with men liking men, I’d just exist as I am. History has made it a problem. And indeed it was a problem for him, including severe depression, until he found the inner strength to relate to his peers in a way that elicited their respect. Surely Tejirian deserves much credit for this man’s growing self awareness and self confidence.

The book could have been strengthened if Tejirian had been less oblique about his own views. It would appear that he would share mine that our culture’s expressed ideal of limiting sexuality between married heterosexual partners is so grossly unrealistic that we fail to prepare young people to find consensual intimacy. In doing so, we raise both boys and girls, men and women who blunder along with immense self doubt, insensitivity, shame, and guilt at best; and at worst sexual expression that violates the integrity of the other person. He does effectively illustrate that sexual orientations can have flexible boundaries when cultural prohibitions are lifted, and implicitly that healthier sexuality of mutuality also emerges.

This book can be useful for the clinician who has little knowledge of experience of same-sex relationships. It also would be particularly helpful for clients who struggle with internalized homophobia.

---

Update on Task Force on Men and Depression

Sam V. Cochran

The SPSMM task force on men and depression promotes understanding of depression in men. We do this by supporting SPSMM members in any work they might be doing related to theory, research, and practice related to depression in men. Our primary vehicle for accomplishing this is a men and depression e-mail list serve that is open to any SPSMM member. In addition, task force members have been instrumental in presenting symposia at the annual APA convention and the task force has assembled a bibliography of articles, books, and other references related to men and depression. For more information or to become a member of the task force, contact Sam V. Cochran, PhD, at the University of Iowa (sam-cochran@uiowa.edu).

Update on Cookbook Committee

Larry Beer

The SPSMM cookbook that is the result of contributions by SPSMM members and recently portrayed in the APA Monitor has now been available for purchase for a year and a half. As most of you know, $15 from every book sold goes to the treasury of Division 51 and over $600 has been raised to date. My long-term vision for the longstanding project is to expand the book and contract with a national publisher so that the book can bring more attention to the merits of our division and bring more funds into our treasury.

---

SPECIAL FOCUS SECTION

New Directions for the Study of Men’s Ways of Relating

Vicki Putz, PsyD
Special Focus Section Editor

In This Special Focus Section:

Same-Sex Feeling, Masculinity, and Pseudo-Masculinity - Edward J. Tejirian, PhD

Fraternity Men and Same Gender Intimacy - Gregory J. Van Hyfte, BA and Fredric E. Rabinowitz, PhD

Across the Bench: What We Can Learn From Men’s Relationships With Each Other at Work - Vicki Putz, PsyD

Stranger in a Strange Land: A Male Among Feminists - Rory Remer, PhD

To Know and Be Known: Honoring and Valuing the Men in Our Midst - Bret G. Burkholder, MA

Perhaps the most useful purpose of any dialogue is to compel further exploration by pointing out more questions than answers. The essays in this section suggest that we have yet to ask the right questions about men’s ways of relating. Edward Tejirian’s essay beautifully demonstrates the existence of sexual feelings between men in friendship relationships that have been silenced by the search for categorical knowledge about sexuality. Gregory Van Hyfte and Fredric Rabinowitz further explore the degree to which conflicts about physical feelings affect whether men feel free to express feelings of closeness, and argue the need to help men find their own language for communicating closeness. In my essay, Across the Bench, I discuss the importance of expanding definitions of connection to accommodate nonverbal interactions, as well as the complex rhythms of relating within groups of individuals over time. Writing about his personal experience, Rory Remer exquisitely draws our attention to the importance of our own self-reflection as we attempt to navigate this terrain. Finally, Bret Burkholder discusses how one institution came to better recognize the experience of the men they served, and to utilize this understanding to move closer to these men, rather than demand transformative change before offering acceptance. Other important themes emerge as well, particularly differences arising out of diverse experiences, such as sexual orientation and class, the role of language in relationships and their study, and the complexity of our strivings to be open to different ways of relating.

It was a privilege to work with the contributors to this section; each gave generously of their time, expertise, and forethought. The section was fueled by the support and enthusiasm of Jim Mahalik, who suggested there might be something to learn.

---

Same-Sex Feeling, Masculinity, and Pseudo-Masculinity

Edward J. Tejirian, PhD

Private Practice, New York City

This contribution aims to expand the dialogue about men and their relationships by focusing on a widespread but rarely discussed aspect of male sexuality—the prevalence of male-to-male sexual feeling among men who do not identify themselves as gay, and whose primary erotic relationships are with women. Fifty years ago, Alfred Kinsey and his associates shocked America by revealing that 50% of the men in their national sample acknowledged some degree of attraction to their own sex, while something over a third had actual sexual experience with another male from adolescence onward. The initial response to Kinsey’s results was to deny that they could represent the truth of male sexuality. Subsequently, psychological research studies continued to classify men into separate categories of homosexual or heterosexual, while searching for statistically significant differences to justify the categories. In contrast, the data showing extensive overlapping between the individuals in both groups was left unanalyzed. This gap in the analysis amounted to another kind of denial—silence.  

However, when men’s voices are allowed to fill that silence they provide further confirmation—50 years later and in an entirely different context from the Kinsey study—that male same-sex feelings bridge the categories of sexual identity constructed by this culture. In the research (Tejirian, 2000)  whose results I will touch on here, I was able to listen to those voices. The circumstances that provided that opportunity are important to discuss.  

In the mid-1990s, I was teaching the graduate course in adolescent psychology at Queens College. By then the gay movement was well established and, in defiance of the political and religious right, demanded recognition and equal rights. However, the boundary between the two categories—recast now as an affirmative gay versus heterosexuality identity—remained at least as firm as before. My students ranged in age from their early 20s up to their 50s, with the average being late 20-something. Most were already actually teaching, the rest planning to, at the secondary level in a variety of areas. Although obviously college educated, many came from blue-collar backgrounds.  

A few years after the publication of my first book (Tejirian, 1990), I decided to have my students read it for this course. It told the story of the analysis of a young man who came to me for help with a frightening symptom—the obsessive thought that he might become possessed by the Devil. My patient, Frank, was married and had always been sexually drawn to women, but the Devil symbolized the man that, unconsciously, he both desired and feared. Here then, in a single individual, were brought together the two strands in human feeling—for men and for women—that our culture’s institutions, as well as psychological research, had put asunder. Although his sexual feelings for men finally emerged into Frank’s consciousness, he had no need to relinquish his feelings for women. He married for a second time and became a successful professional and the father of two sons.  

When I asked students to write reaction papers—not to be graded—on the chapters that I assigned in this book, a number of them—both women and men—surprised me by either hinting at or telling of some degree of same-sex feeling themselves. As a result, in subsequent classes I began to inquire to what extent people were aware of such feelings, assuring them that they were free to say as much or as little as they wished to on the subject. A systematic survey of responses from four separate classes over four consecutive semesters yielded the following results.  

Across four different groups from 1995 to 1997, 24 of 73 women (33%) acknowledged some degree of same-sex feeling. Apart from one lesbian woman, two had some post-adolescent sexual experience with another woman. Twenty-four of 53 men (45%) acknowledged some degree of same-sex feeling as well, with four having some post-adolescent sexual experience with another male. None of these identified themselves as gay, either in their reaction papers or in the follow-up dialogues that we had together.  

But beyond percentages, it seemed important to know what these feelings meant to the people who revealed them. Their same-sex feelings emerged from a deeply emotional part of the self that they knew to be at odds with their culture. However, these emotions were not about being different from others of their own sex. On the contrary, women felt a closeness to each other as women. And men’s sexual feelings toward each other could best be understood as an expression of male bonding—the deep sense of closeness and identification that men—as men—feel toward each other. The words they used to describe the emotions embedded in their sexual thoughts about each other included friendship, brotherhood, intimacy, love, and a sense of the sacred. And significantly, when a particular person was the object of these emotions, he was virtually always a good or best friend.  

The fact that Frank’s same-sex feelings were initially cordoned off from his consciousness—the “I” part of himself that lived in culture and had a heterosexual identity—indicated that he had internalized in his mind a replica of the external, culturally drawn boundary segregating gay from heterosexual men. This boundary was present in the minds of the men in my classes as well, but permeable enough so that their feelings could enter awareness, with varying degrees of intensity—and anxiety. One could see signs of a dynamic approach-avoidance conflict around this boundary as the emotional part of the self—the “emotional I”—moved to close the gap between a man’s own body and that of another while the “cultural I” resisted this movement, even in imagination. As one man put it, “You’re afraid to let your mind explore further.” At the same time, it was possible to see movement in both men and women, even in the course of a 14-week semester, toward an integration of their same-sex feelings as a worthwhile part of the self. Thus, as the semester neared its end, one young man announced with an air of discovery, “I consider myself to be bisexual because I love both males and females, and if I ever feel like being physically close to a male and he’s open to it, I will do it.” Although he framed it in terms of one of this culture’s categories of sexual identity, he was asserting a newly found inner freedom to move across category boundaries—a movement whose possibility the assumptions underlying those categories would deny, and their boundaries prevent.  

I think this kind of movement was possible because the attitudes I conveyed, the book they read, and the historical and cross-cultural material introduced in the course added up to a definition of masculinity not requiring one half the human race be ruled out for the fulfillment of emotional and physical closeness. The social cost of that requirement is high. Setting up an ideal of masculinity that denies that men can and do relate sexually to men, as well as to women, substitutes a truncated pseudo-masculine ideal for the real thing. The fact that I was virtually the only person to whom the men revealed these feelings makes it clear that widespread concealment is required to sustain this pseudo-masculine ideal. “Don’t ask, don’t tell”—while our military leadership sacrifices capable soldiers and talented officers to maintain the pseudo-masculine ideal and the myth of heterosexual purity that is its corollary.  

At the level of the individual, there is a price to be paid as well. A self that is organized around a pseudo-masculine ideal denying any possibility of same-sex feeling in the masculine self is vulnerable at best and false at worst. Sex, as performance aimed at shoring up the fragile pseudo-masculine self, can undermine both erotic pleasure and tenderness in relationships with women. For those men who have some awareness of their same-sex feelings—and there appear to be significant numbers who do (see also Sell et al., 1995; Weinberg et al., 1994)—portions of the emotional self can be experienced as alien. Where the “cultural I” stops the emotional movement toward another male before it reaches the threshold of awareness, the suppressed emotions can be projected—not usually on the Devil—but on men who are demonized because they acknowledge such feelings. But these emotions are part of what it means to be a man. For a man to fear or hate them is to fear or hate something—potential or actual—in himself as well as in the selves of other men.  

SPSMM has criticized traditional ideals of masculinity as constricting and damaging. But I think this is only part of what needs to be done. The other part is to work—together as men and in partnership with women—toward constructing a picture of masculinity that corresponds—not to the ideals of any group or culture—but to what men are really like, in all their emotional and sexual complexity. A step in that direction is recognizing that the movement toward emotional and physical bonding with another man, whether it represents the primary direction of a man’s erotic life or not, is as much a part of male psychology—of masculinity—as is that toward women.

References

Sell, R. L, Wells, J. A., & Wypij, D. (1995). The prevalence of homosexual behavior and attraction in the United States, the United Kingdom, and France: Results of national population-based samples. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 24(3), 235-248.

Tejirian, E. J. (1990). Sexuality and the devil: Symbols of love, power, and fear in male psychology. New York: Routledge.

Tejirian, E. J. (2000). Male to male: Sexual feeling across the boundaries of identity. Binghamton, NY: Harrington Park Press.

Weinberg, M. S., Williams, C. J, & Pryor, D. W. (1994). Understanding bisexuality. New York: Oxford University Press.

---

Fraternity Men and Same Gender Intimacy

Gregory J. Van Hyfte, BA

University of Chicago

Fredric E. Rabinowitz, PhD

University of Redlands

Across the life span many men participate in all male groups. During young adulthood in the college environment, some men seek the companionship of other men to share common interests, to meet needs for security and belonging, and to help them define and reinforce their cultural masculinity. An important part of a man’s development seems to involve searching for friendships of the same gender that allow for a special “masculine” connection, that is qualitatively different than a female relationship. While a man may crave a close male friendship, he may also fear this type of closeness because it threatens his internalized definition of manhood. He might believe that he will be perceived as feminine or gay and therefore unmanly in the eyes of his peers and society. This conflict creates ambivalence about male friendship and how close it should be.

Our research of college fraternity men at a liberal arts university campus in Southern California seemed to highlight this emotional ambivalence about same gender intimacy. Questionnaire data showed that men who participated in all-male fraternity groups reported more intimate same-sex friendships than a control group of men not affiliated with fraternities. In our focus group discussions with the fraternity men we were particularly interested in how they defined intimacy, what meanings they ascribed to their friendships, and what influences affected the presentation of these friendships outside of the group’s close-knit circle.

While many of the men in the fraternity groups defined intimacy in self-disclosure terms, as much of the friendship literature defines it, they rated emotional closeness as a more salient feature of their same-sex best friendship. They spoke of this closeness in detail and also demonstrated subsequent intimate behaviors. For example, men in the fraternities referred to intimacy within the group as “a close emotional friendship,” “closeness,” and “sharing of emotion or affection.” Regardless of how these men defined “intimacy,” the above mentioned feelings describe sincerely close friendships with each other.

Forcing the label “intimate” on the fraternity men’s experience of same-gender friendship revealed certain negative connotations of this label, as the following dialogue from a focus group suggests. (Names have been changed to protect confidentiality.)

Researcher: According to how you just described it, would you say your friendships are intimate with any of the guys in here?

Frank: Yeah . . . but maybe not. I don’t know. When you say “intimate,” I think of sex. I’d use “close” instead.

Men in another fraternity seemed to share a similar association between “intimacy” and sex:

Eduardo: I’m not intimate in the way of touching.

Victor: [Angered] No! He’s intimate but he doesn’t like to admit it because of this machista thing [others “yeah” in agreement]. [To Eduardo] How do you define intimacy?

Eduardo: Sharing of emotion, affection, I see it as a physical thing.

Overall, these men did not deny that their friendships were close; they did, however have a more difficult time saying that they were “intimate,” because of suggestive physical and/or sexual connotations.

Some men actually recognized the frequency of physical interaction with the other men, and even saw this as integral to their friendship, while others were still uncomfortable. Citing behaviors such as “hugging,” “putting our arms around each other,” “lying on the couch together to watch the game,” “getting together to wrestle like kids,” and “playing sports,” some fraternity men talked about how these behaviors are expressions of closeness. But others spoke of the connotations that physical affection between men might imply:

Gary: Most of you guys know my bro and I are pretty close, if you see us huggin’ in public and stuff. Some of you guys are uncomfortable with it, so I don’t hug you.

Victor: [Jokingly] C’mon, there’s some buttsmackin’ going on there [laughter].

Eduardo: I want it, you know it.

For men like these, who experience close, intense friendships, the laughter and joking that ensued seemed to serve as a buffer against their own insecurities and fears of such closeness, especially on a physical level. Though volatile and difficult to explain, the physical affection between these men seemed important and valuable to their friendships, but it had its limits.

Some men were comfortable hugging inside and outside the group, while others refrained from hugging in public. One fraternity member even said that their public hugs were more “masculine,” and that “because we hug in public . . . everybody says we’re the gay fraternity.” In a sense to protect their “masculine” image and conform to society’s gender role norms, the fraternity men cautiously expressed affection with each other in public. However, in the safety of the group context they became more immune to the society’s restrictive norms and felt more free to express more affectionate behavior. Thus, participation in these all-male groups allowed the men to have more intimate and satisfying same-gender friendships, largely due to the group’s private revamping of society’s homophobia taboos.

The influence of homophobia also arose when each of the fraternities discussed the presence of an openly gay member. In one fraternity, when asked about a hypothetical situation in which one of their members disclosed that he was gay, one man replied, “Well, actually that recently happened with us” and said no more. In the other fraternity, the men began talking openly about the experience of having a gay member, even before we asked them:

Tyler: You know, it seems like in the group, most of the guys in here will be more willing to hug Jorge than to hug another guy who’s not [known to be] gay. That’s very interesting because we all become very touchy, but when it comes to being intimate with guys who are heterosexual, then it doesn’t happen.

Researcher: Why do you think that is?

Bill: I think it’s the fact that maybe subconsciously you might think, “Well, Jorge might not mind it so much, because maybe he likes guys, or he might like me anyway [laughter].”

The openness expressed about the experience of having a gay “brother” pointed out certain barriers men encounter when fostering close friendship. Bill’s assumption that Jorge might not mind receiving a hug from another man just because he’s gay seems to imply that it would be wrong for a heterosexual man to enjoy hugging another heterosexual man. Jorge evidenced this barrier, experiencing men blurring the line between sexual and non-sexual affection:

Jorge: It happens every time I introduce myself, and then they find out I’m gay, and then they start backing up—like they think, “He’s trying to come on to me.” It’s something that I deal with every day of my life.

The uncertainty of one’s sexual orientation seemed to be a prevalent barrier which impeded close friendship in this group at first, but allowed the heterosexual men to be more physically affectionate with another man, even if they weren’t as comfortable hugging other (known) heterosexual men. In this instance, Tyler and Jorge have experienced what more men will encounter—especially in close groups in which intense personal connections are inevitable to form.

Jorge’s openness in this fraternity offered these men an opportunity to know on an intimate level a friendship across the lines of sexual orientation. With society’s increasing attention to issues of sexual identity and with gay and bisexual people coming out more freely than in past decades, it is important to educate men about each other’s experiences of these friendships. Merely one positive connection between two men of different sexual orientations can help several men in such a small group become closer. Breaking the silence of Jorge’s sexuality helped the other men understand and accept his being gay, alleviating the barrier of homophobia:

Tyler: I would not—and I don’t have nothin’ against gay people—but I would not go out and hug another gay guy like I do this guy right here [referring to Jorge]. . . . You have to make this connection with this person in order to become really close to him. It took me years and years to touch someone who wasn’t heterosexual.

For these types of interpersonal connections and intimacy to build and grow, it ultimately depends on calming men’s fears that their own neediness to connect with each other is somehow wrong.

While we did find that progress was being made in fraternity groups in deepening and expanding their male friendships, it seemed that these men still have more work to do to attain a homophobic-free and diversity-accepting friendship environment. We would urge all men, regardless of sexual identity or age, to use the comfort and security established male groups offer (e.g., work groups, clubs, ethnic/racial groups, informal groups, religious groups, family gatherings, men’s therapy groups) to face their fears of intimacy and enjoy the full benefits of open male friendships. We would also recommend that further exploration of these issues take into consideration men’s own definitions and understanding of these complex experiences to achieve a more accurate account of men’s close