On the Nature of the Male Role and Behavior

[Fire Fly]

I had to recently do an anthropological fieldwork regarding any topic related with education and I decided to do some observations on male students within a high school choir and thought that I would share some of my observations and insights to what I saw. My paper is a truncated version of what I would've prefered to write but I was limited to five pages of writing, double spaced. Some of it is obvious, but its interesting to see it yourself from a third person point of view, that is, as an outsider.

Politicking and Power

On the Nature of the Male Role and Influence Vying
Within A High School Choir

There are few issues which generate as much interest and debate as differences in men and women. If one ever wanted to know how the male and female mind differed, one need not look beyond the simple American high school, where all cultural manifestations of identity and politics collide. In years past, the high school institution has rapidly evolved, reflecting the cosmopolitan nature that society has become. Empirical observation of student behavior can yield insights into how we, as a society, often function. Simplification of complex issues, such as society, can yield startling differences that exists and the causes of these differences in men and women. By applying dehomogenization, one can extract the desired answers to better highlight a rather murky issue.

In this paper, I will attempt to address a basic issue that has been in contest between biological and cultural points of views, that is, why do men behave the way they do? The atypical characterizations of men are aggressive, dominant, apathetic, and immature. During my field work, I often did observe these behaviors, but not from all of the males. Often, these behaviors were exhibited within a small group of male students who easily agitated others to conform to their own behavior and often, this small group of student was usually the most influential. They created their own social group and maneuvered themselves to attain the most influence, often hegemonizing over less influential students. Their behavior created a cultural blueprint for others to follow in. This issue is much akin to gender role and therefore, the questions that arise are: are male actions and behaviors culturally inherited and expected of? Are male student behaviors pre-selected before they even decide? Empirical observation has suggested that the most influential students dramatically alter the dynamic nature of other male students to conformity; those who did not were often ostracized and excluded from the activities of the dominant group. The male high school nature is a role that is actively selected for.

I have spent several hours observing, analyzing, and interviewing high school students within a choir setting to better gain insight into larger issues. A choir setting offered three factors that helped to maximize comprehension. The first, a choir could be divided into various voice parts; this allowed for controlled variables for comparison and contrasting. The second, the choir setting offered a large enough student population for observable patterns without the sample becoming too large. Thirdly, it had students from various facets of cliques, offering a somewhat heterogeneous population. During observation, I attempted to minimize my presence by sitting in the back corner, least should my presence regulate student behavior of decorum and hinder more open expressions. When certain conflicts arose, I attempted to ask the involved students, teachers, and observing students after class as to why the course of action was taken, to see the issue from different angles. Observations were approximately fifty minutes long, twice a week for three weeks.

Firstly, one must realize that student influence is proportional to status. In a high school, students are automatically divided into freshmen, sophomore, junior, or senior, depending on when they began their high school career. As one moves up, one is allocated greater freedoms, more options, more privileges and seniority. In the choir, male students were divided into bass, baritone, second tenor, or first tenor, depending on how high they could sing and the ease with which they could sing at that level. A student who could sing second tenor may have trouble reaching the higher pitches (though certainly possible with practice) could be “demoted” to a baritone position. Firstly, the grade distinction is inherent; it cannot be altered. It is an administrative status that one has no control over. Secondly, the voice positions are dependent upon the singer’s ability; while limited by physical constraints, the singer is still capable of determining their position. The nature of stratification, of course, leads to one position becoming higher than the other, even though all positions are supposed to be equal. When these positions are mixed together in a choir setting, the senior tenors often held the most influence and on downward.

While the two polar opposites of the voice positions realized that a music piece necessitated the other, there existed tension between the upper and lower voices. The tenors were often allocated the position of singing the melody, which dominated a song and was often the easiest part while the others were allocated the supporting roles. Here, it can be seen that there existed a certain uneven distribution of labor. The tenors were often given the primary role, which was the easiest, while the function of the others was a supporting role, the bulk of the labor. In addition, the melody carried prestige. A melody is inherently the most audible and intelligible part; this is what an audience typically hears and it is the tenors which are often the ones heard. This created a certain amount of unspoken envy.

During one of my observations, I slowly realized that there existed a certain group of senior tenors who held considerable influence among the other students and even with the teacher. They demonstrated their influence often by exerting direct control on the actions of more junior students. In one episode, a senior tenor by the name of Joe (who was also an athlete, yielding even more influence), in the absence of the teacher, was able to manipulate one freshmen student into punching another. This often occurred among other students by the same perpetrators. Although the punches were never too violent and were mildly light hearted, I never saw these actions repeated among the basses and baritones. While senior basses and baritones were regarded as the section leaders, they never were able to project and exert authority as the select senior tenors were able to do. Were these senior basses and baritones merely more mature or is it that they really do lack the influence to project authority? There was a senior bass who was also an athlete, yet he never ventured to exert his influence nor did he want to. Moreover, this bass was also the only senior bass; perhaps, being away from the influence from other senior peers isolated him from the group mentality that often was pervasive among the tenor ranks. I would surmise that with the tenors, due to the focal role that they played, they were more willing to step beyond their roles as section leaders and used their positions for other purposes. Perhaps the amount of attention adorned to the tenors inflated their egos and they slowly became more willing to abuse their roles for their own ends. It is also likely equal that because the tenor ranks had more seniors, they were more willing to reinforce each other’s actions, resulting in a group mentality, which was clearly lacking in the other sections.

Another issue that seemed to arise was that those who followed the senior tenor’s orders were given considerable attention and praise, often earning them more influence among the more peer and junior singers. Not everyone always followed, of course, but the trend slowly suggested that these students were the “uncool” students. Typically, this group was silent, mild-mannered, and more introverted. In an interview with one of these students, he indicated that he typically did not go to parties, preferred the company of close friends, and enjoyed quieter settings. In contrast, one of the students who did follow the instructions of the senior tenor Joe enjoyed going out often and was on the soccer team. A simple analysis suggests, then, that students who wished to maintain their influence and popularity had to associate themselves with the most dominant and influential students, or the senior tenors. We can see here that conformity to the most influential group equated to more prestige and influence among both the upper and lower student ranks, or at least within a certain circle of students.

For some reason, which I still have trouble understanding, there has always been the issue that rebelliousness equated to greater popularity. Perhaps, those who are seen actively challenging the authority of the teacher are seen as brave, masculine, or, as it is said, have great testicular fortitude. Often, I observed that the ones who often challenged the teacher were the tenors, both first and second. Rarely did I see the basses and baritones behave in active rebelliousness. While such infractions typically were not great, it was often enough to change the productivity long enough that sometimes, not enough singing occurred and it would drive the class on a tangent. I asked the choir conductor if such activities often happened and she responded that generally, it was always the senior tenors who caused the most trouble. In one such instance several years back, she recalled that there was a first tenor whose actions necessitated expulsion from the class because the disruptions were so aggravating to the conductor; there was outright defiance and arguing which occurred in the presence of the entire class. The student’s expulsion immediately reduced the amount of friction which the expelled student agitated into the other students and productivity increased.

With the students that I observed, there was usually one minor disruption each time I attended, which was agitated by the one particular group of senior tenors. Typically, one of the senior tenors would protest a certain song selection and the other senior tenors, first and second, would follow suit. In one such instance several years back, the conductor tried to reassert her authority and, as with one of the basic principles of the universe, her action was met with an equal and opposite reaction. The agitator, the expelled student mentioned earlier, incited several of his peer tenors to criticize the conduct of the conductor, which necessitated administrative intervention. In the minor protestations that I observed, there seemed to be a group mentality; when one would protest, two or three others would join in. Is it that all of those other students feel the same way as that one particular student or is it that they are merely standing in solidarity? Perhaps, because these students are of the same class ranks, they are expected to stand together, as in an alliance, or less should they lose their influence among their peers. I do not know which is the correct answer, as when agitated, one may behave irrationally or behave in a manner which is not of themselves. Social pressures to conform can often be powerful enough to compel a student to do something which he would normally not do.

Inclusiveness and exclusiveness are typically present in all stratified groups and it was no exception in the male choir that I observed. The senior tenors often portrayed themselves as a very cohesive, exclusive social group that was highly extroverted and socially well connected. They typically conversed only with other senior tenors or baritones; the basses tended to be either not interested or were not included. Conversations usually varied from daily activities, sports events, discussions regarding females, or miscellaneous activities. The more junior singers who did converse with these seniors were students who seemed to be also highly extroverted; the loose manner and colloquialism in which they conversed with the senior tenors suggested a strong rapport. When one of the quieter students tried to make conversation, the conversation was often much more formal and brief. This suggested that to cross this invisible boundary of association, one had to be similar to those who were already in this social group. Again, conformity, or at least similar characteristics, was a prerequisite to participate in such activities. In one instance, I observed that one of the quieter, more junior student utilized language which he normally did not use; this student was more colloquial, more vulgar, and utilized hyperbole in his conversation. He suddenly found himself at the center of attention of the senior tenors for the time being; he was, as it is said, in.

There is a very strong internal desire to feel belonged, in most people. Perhaps it is a leftover of humanity’s earlier days, when belonging to a group meant survival. Or is it, rather, that we have a great desire to belong so that we have an identity of our own? I believe that in a post-modern society, we desire to belong to a group because it gives our lives a deeper meaning. As a group, we interact together and we do activities together, strengthening our bonds of friendship. It is the desire for these relationships, I believe, which are one of the driving forces behind social conformity.

All of my observations have suggested that male behavior is actively selected for by the desire to be included, by peer pressure, and group mentality. Observations suggested there was a correlation between status and influence and between selective pressures and behavior. The more status one has, the more influence they could wield; the more the student wanted to be included, the more he had to conform. The most influential students were able to define what was culturally acceptable and in order to be a part of that social group, other students had to be willing to accept those standards. By this definition then, the male role would seem to be the result of pre-defined acceptable standards from a small group that was passed on downward, inherited by the next group.

In society, even, this can be seen applied. There is a small group who can actively control the behavior of the many. Media outlets, fashion consortiums, and marketing corporations actively try to steer the standard in a particular path utilizing agents who have considerable influence over those many. Fashion models, celebrities, singers and other influential figures have been able to define what is culturally acceptable and what is to be the norm, the “in” thing.

In my own experience, I have witnessed such behavior myself, with this fieldwork only to reinforce what I believed before. Throughout my own high school career, I was witness to people whom I had known for long periods of time slowly change to conform to the most influential group, for better or worse; it was not necessarily the dominant group, but its members often were the most visible, being athletes, being wealthy, being very academically active. A significant portion of the male students whom I witnessed seemed willing to conform, if not only to belong. I was always under the impression that a good portion of them actively falsified their own behavior to meet the standard; whether this is true or not, I can only speculate. There is such a strong desire within all of us to have a cultural identity that sometimes, I believe, we are willing to sacrifice a part of our self.

[Darth Wong]

I think you need to differentiate between men and boys here; the behaviour of adult men is far less oriented toward peer pressure and social cliques than the behaviour of teenaged males. While there are pressures to conform in any society, they are vastly reduced on the individual level in adulthood when compared to high school.

If you need proof, just look at the demographics of suicide. Teenagers commit suicide at a much greater rate than any other age group because they are so massively affected by social neuroses: much more so than older, more mature people.

[Fire Fly]

I think you need to differentiate between men and boys here; the behaviour of adult men is far less oriented toward peer pressure and social cliques than the behaviour of teenaged males. While there are pressures to conform in any society, they are vastly reduced on the individual level in adulthood when compared to high school.

If you need proof, just look at the demographics of suicide. Teenagers commit suicide at a much greater rate than any other age group because they are so massively affected by social neuroses: much more so than older, more mature people.

There was something that kept toggling me as I finished the paper and I wasn't sure what it was but I think what you just said perfectly addressed what I was unsure of. I can't believe I overlooked this simple issue, it seems like a rather large blind spot.

[wolveraptor]

Maybe this essay could still apply to adults, except that it would exclude individuals with specific job types or settings that don't require strong rapport with coworkers or convokations in general. For example, firemen may, in a moblike manner, cooperate to subtly harass and estrange female coworkers, as has often occurred. These actions may not have taken place had 1, who we might call the pack leader, not invoked the feelings of emasculation in those who worked side-by-side with a female in a "man's job". The same sort of principle could be applied to persecution of gays and lesbians within a community, or ethnic minorities.

[kc8tbe]

Darth Wong's observation notwithstanding, a nice paper.

I would like to offer supplemental explanations for two of the behaviors you observed based on my own, anecdotal observations.

First, the tendency of the senior male tenors' behavior to be rebellious in nature. I have held several influential positions in male youth groups. My leadership style was relaxed; I rarely acted out against the adult supervisors, never hazed, and I usually tried to optimize productivity. In two of three of these groups, my subordinates acted out in much the manner you described. In some cases, their actions were directed against me. In one such group, I was later joined by a co-leader who himself acted out against the adults and to the end of intimidating our subordinates. The subordinates' misbehavior stopped immediately, and they treated both myself and my co-leader with respect.

So consider, hypothetically, what would occur if the senior male tenors did not act rebelliously or assert their influence over their underlings. I submit that the next most influential group (perhaps senior baritones) would, seeing an opening, attempt to assert its own influence and become the most influential group. Then the behavior you observed was not just a privilege of being the most influential group, but also necessary in order to maintain that privileged status.

Second:

There was a senior bass who was also an athlete, yet he never ventured to exert his influence nor did he want to. Moreover, this bass was also the only senior bass; perhaps, being away from the influence from other senior peers isolated him from the group mentality that often was pervasive among the tenor ranks.

In my high school, I observed a typical freshman who was a skilled tuba player (not at all a glorious instrument). Furthermore, he was the only tuba player in the whole band. I observed the same scenario as you: this freshman tuba player neither harassed nor was harassed by any other band members, but other freshman were harassed by upperclass band members.

Perhaps being the only tuba player in the band gave this individual "immunity" from harassment. While he lacked the status to exert his influence on others, others knew that the band could not afford to exert its influence on him.