 | The Cavalier daily. Monday, December 9, 1968 |  |
Co-education: Help In Search For Male Self-Concepts
By Earl Glosser
The following article was written by Earl A.
Glosser, Director of Student Counseling Center,
at the request of the Co-education Committee
of the Virginia Human Relations Council. Mr.
Glosser received his Ph.D. at Indiana University
where he worked with the counseling program
for nine years. He came to the University two
years ago after leaving his counseling post at
Southern Illinois University. — ed.
The question of admitting women students
to the undergraduate college has received considerable
attention in recent issues of The
Cavalier Daily. At the risk of beating the
proverbial dead horse, I would like to share
some of my observations with Cavalier Daily
readers.
In 1967, while still a "prospective faculty
member" from the Middle West, my first
reaction upon discovering the relative celibate
status of the University was the usual "You're
kidding! U.Va. is a men's school?" In the
provinces of Illinois, and Indiana, one can find
a number of first rate institutions that are,
indeed, single sex (male) in nature: Wabash,
Notre Dame, and Joliet State prison to name a
few. However, with the exception of the last
named seat of learning, none of the state
institutions exclude women from the basic core
of undergraduate studies. As a matter of fact, I
cannot think of another single state that currently
enjoys the "separate but equal" arrangement
we have here at U.Va.
Frankly, I do not believe the Board of
Visitors will decide the issue by choosing
between jumping on the 49 state bandwagon or
simply standing pat because it retains a kind of
unique statistical distinction for U.Va. There
are many obvious practical problems of a legal,
economic, psychological and ethical nature that
must be weighed before the controversy can be
reasonably settled.
My principal goal at this time is to examine
some of the psychological implications that
co-education or, the lack-of it, brings (or may
bring) to the grounds. In particular, I want to
draw upon my experience with University
students who have come to the Counseling
Center and expressed normal concern about
their relationships with the opposite sex. I use
"normal concern" here because the problems
predominantly presented are not sick or neurotic
so much as they are cases of misunderstanding
based upon lack of simple information. In
short, a great many bright young men are
woefully ignorant about themselves and about
intelligent young women . . . and, vice versa!
This alleged ignorance appears to be the
product of multiple inter-related conditions
currently evident in middle class American life:
(1) an extended period of dependent, adolescent
development carefully fostered by family,
school, government, business and industry, and
church; (2) a lack of opportunity to freely
explore healthy heterosexual relationships in a
wide variety of settings; (3) a gradual erasing of
the traditional differences in sex roles commonly
played in the family and larger economic
society; (4) the increasing awareness of mass
society and its incumbent pressures; (5) the
relative case with which affluence can be
obtained (and thus the loss of personal meaning
for the acquisition of things); and (6) the
changing role of formal religion from the giver
of absolutes to the creative search for God in
daily living.
Certainly the net effect of this interweave of
influences must be confusion concerning the
vital question of "who am I?" Further, it must
and does not leave college age men and women
with numerous misconceptions and irrational
ideas concerning their masculinity, femininity,
competence, lovableness, worthwhileness and
ability to belong to any "community." I regard
the search for relatively successful individual
solutions to these "identity crises" ad a prerequisite
for developing human beings capable of
meeting the myriad problems of mankind.
Could anything be more central to the goals of
liberal education?
Perhaps the area least open to a search for
truth in American academic teaching
departments is that of sexual identity and the
peculiar condition called "love" that sometimes
accompanies sexual relationships. To be sure,
many departments of English, Anthropology,
Sociology, Psychology, etc., have helped students
but the intimate centricity of love, sexual
identification, and sexual relationships has
worked against open discussion (and laboratory
exploration!). The conspiracy of silence has
been a destructive element in American sex/
love life for many generations.
In my own experience (academic, that is) I
vividly recall an undergraduate psychology
course entitled "Marriage and the Family."
Only two days out of the entire semester's
work were devoted to the sex and love aspects
of marriage! In addition, on those two days the
men in the class met at one hour and the
women met at another! No discussion between
the sexes was allowed. Little wonder that forces
outside the classroom (a grudging nod to Hugh
Heffner) could best start a reconsideration of
such a controversial, but vital, life issue. Historically,
of course, the Kinsey research group grew
as a separate entity at Indiana University and its
birth required great moral courage on the part
of the President & Board of Trustees in the face
of public criticism. Masters & Johnson's work
at Washington University enjoyed similar administrative
support. However, more typical of
action taken when the "teaching" of undergrads
was involved, was the firing of Professor
Kock from the University of Illinois for airing
his views on sex in the Daily Illini.
Psychological Nonsense
The state of separation between the sexes
which now exists at U.Va. for undergraduates
undoubtedly once made psychological sense. I
am inclined to think that it essentially makes
psychological nonsense today. In so stating my
position I wish to indicate that I am fully aware
of the likely costs, confusion and pain that
accrue to any change of this magnitude. However,
I deem the long run values to be worth it.
The most meaningful changes that intelligent
coeducation can bring to U.Va. are the
reduction of mythical concepts surrounding
masculinity and the increased opportunity for
young men (and women) to develop secure,
accurate images of themselves (relatively devoid
of self-deception) as they explore relationships
over extended periods of time. It is a marvelous
stroke of luck that the College is also currently
examining its goals and curriculum, for the
success of coeducation is closely tied to the
processes and content of academic offerings.
I have always assumed that masculinity
could best be understood, appreciated, and
affirmed when healthy examples of femininity
were available for comparison. In such a setting
the unique and the complementary aspects of
each identification could be worked out
through normal explorations which would
move at mutually agreeable pace. Frantic weekend
body grabbing in an alcoholic haze would
not cease, but its shallowness would become
strikingly evident when more satisfying alternatives
are available.
Superiority Myths
As it stands now, many U.Va. undergraduates
are free to develop or retain unchallenged
myths of male superiority. This pleasant
but false security blanket is sometimes woven
to hide from unconscious fears that women
may really be stronger (equally mythical) but it
is usually constructed to bolster the normal
male doubts about his competence before he
tests himself in the world of work. Success as
an adult male is tied closely to job success and
college is "make believe" preparation.
The fear of a woman's power of acceptance
or rejection is not without foundation during
this phase of male development. Many U.Va.
men were largely raised by women and largely
taught by women. As children they heard the
message that this is a man's world, but women
seemed to be in charge of everything in their
world (including sex).
Money Pump
This overexposure to feminine influence
and power is frequently made possible by the
psychological abdication of the Father from his
male role. Dad spends much of his time at the
office, in front of the TV, or pursuing hobbies
that take him away from his wife and family
because they offer greater self-esteem than the
uncertainties of intimate familial roles. Good
old Dad becomes identified with a money
pump because this is only function his son has
observed.
Another equally disastrous situation is encountered
when Father, invoking his myths of
male superiority, tries to over direct his son's
life. Usually the wife/mother "rescues" the boy
with misguided, overprotective, dependency
producing, love and attention. Little wonder
that numbers of young men want to attend an
all male school and literally get away from the
de-masculinizing influences they have known!
However, it is a short lived escape and the real
world demands more effective adjustments.
Unlearn Nonsense
Modern marriages require educated partners
and open, non-defensive, communication to
survive and grow in depth of meaning. Modern
families need intelligent, sensitive husband/fathers
who are secure in their sense of masculinity
(not threatened by women or intimacy) and
who can act as authentic models for their
children. Yes, a U.Va. man can adequately learn
to accept and accurately assess himself after his
college days: it just means he often has to
unlearn gobs of nonsense he acquired while
living in a heterosexual vacuum.
This vacuum also produces immediate problems
as well as those of the future. Some recent
discussions with fraternity men and residence
hall counselors lead me to think that much
frustration expressed directly via physical damage
indirectly via drinking and depressed withdrawal
is related to the feeling that a girl isn't
available to date and talk to during the week.
These men have asked me point blank,
"Don't you think a man can more successfully
respond to his academic work when his love/sex
life has adequate expression?" As a matter of
fact, a young man can tolerate dull courses,
uninspired teaching, and lousy counseling if he
feels secure in his relationship with a girl
although I'm not sure we would want to
encourage such indifference!
In general, I think our students are saying,
"We're busy but we get bored with ourselves.
That's why we blast on weekends and join Eli
Banana. More coeds on the grounds will liven
things considerably on a day to day basis."
Despite the fact that over 1200 women are now
enrolled, the mass of male students are still
looking "off grounds." I have a hunch that
U.Va. coeds will remain "invisible" until the
first year class in integrated sexually.
Walking Phonies
Perhaps one of the greatest practical psychological
aids that women can provide for men is
the sympathetic listening ear of the trusted girl
friend. Whereas many a U.Va. gentleman will
encumber himself with the attitude that he dare
not admit weakness in front of other male
friends, he can ofter overcome this more easily
with his girl. This helps relieve his anxiety and
he frequently learns that having weaknesses is
human and nothing to get all hung up about.
He also learns that she needs him and this
realistically supports his own sense of male
competence. I definitely regard this pseudomasculine
image (super-cavalier?) of apparent
external infallibility as one of the major
psychological deterrents to self understanding
on the grounds today. Many of our students are
walking around feeling like phonies because
they are "acting" a role they sense is not
authentic.
Partnership of Equals
It should be evident by now that my theme
is "Let's realistically evaluate the partnership
possibilities with women. Let us understand the
healthy and progressive sense of well being
which comes from complementary relationships
worked out in real life experiences. Let us
understand the retarding and self-destructive
aspects of unchallenged fantasies built upon
unconscious threat and fear." I definitely believe
that men can lead productive lives without
women - and vice versa: what we are arguing
for is an environment considered most preferable
- not perfect! Bringing undergraduate
women to U.Va. must not be likened to asking
the girls to join us in the men's locker room!
We can appreciate the best aspects of femininity
when women are not available 100% of the
time and the right to solitude is respected.
As I consider the future of relations between
the sexes in this country, I can only
conclude that we had best face up and fully
acknowledge the situation as a partnership of
different, but complementary, equals. The concept
of a relationship built upon the archaic
attitude that one member is inherently superior
and the other inherently inferior should pass
into an appropriate limbo. U.Va. can help the
majority of its male undergraduates search
more effectively for realistic and acceptable
masculine self concepts by providing for the
admission of women students to the College of
Arts and Sciences. The students will take it
from there.
| The Cavalier daily. Monday, December 9, 1968 | |