Abstract
This paper aims to fill an important gap in the literature on BGLOs—how black fraternity men treat women. Analyzing interview and observation data from a 9-month study including 28 black fraternity men, I find that the level of accountability, visibility, and personalization elicited by the small black community at PWIs leads to black fraternity men acting as “sophisticated practitioners” to strategize about the best ways to romantically and sexually engage women. Three factors—perception of the type of woman being engaged, desired relationship status, and structural conditions—facilitate the strategies (i.e., language usage and “reverse psychology”) they employ. Still, black fraternity men treat women more respectfully than white fraternity men and other black men due to the socialization process that black fraternity men normally undergo to be members of their organization.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Sociologists frequently use status as a proxy for social class. Social class normally encompasses education, occupational prestige, income, and self-employment (Davis and Robinson 1988). However, not all forms of status are economic. Status also taps power differentials between groups. This paper takes this perspective. Here, status is used to highlight the differences between black fraternity men, collegiate black men who are not in fraternities, black men who are not in college, and white fraternity men regarding how these various roles influence the treatment of women.
Although some may find the term “reverse psychology” to be uncommon, this is a term used by several study participants. While some may also contend that as researchers we should critique terms such as these, privileging participants’ voices can be extremely advantageous. I believe it is fitting in this context.
Although there are some black Greek chapters across the US that have on-campus houses, they are few in number. They also do not benefit from the privilege of unaccountability and invisibility like white fraternity men. At Cornell University, Alpha Phi Alpha Fraternity has a house that is centrally located on campus property. Speaking to men at the Alpha Chapter reveals that black fraternity men at Cornell potentially perceive more scrutiny from university police and administrators than the black men discussed in Ray and Rosow (2010).
Though being hurt emotionally by a man may be better than being sexually assaulted and/or raped, these unfulfilling interactions can have consequences for the mental health of women. Future research is needed to examine the mental and emotional aftermath of hook-ups and how these outcomes vary by race.
References
Anderson, E. [1978] (2003). A place on the corner. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Anderson, E. (1999). Code of the street: Decency, violence, and the moral life of the inner city. New York: Norton.
Armstrong, E. L., & Sweeney, H. B. (2006). Sexual assault on campus: A multilevel explanation of party rape. Social Problems, 53, 483–499.
Black, T., Belknap, J., & Gingsberg, J. (2005). Racism, sexism, and aggression: A study of black and white fraternities. In T. L. Brown, G. L. Parks, & C. M. Phillips (Eds.), African American fraternities and sororities: The history and the vision. Kentucky: University Press of Kentucky.
Blee, K., & Tickamyer, A. (1995). Racial differences in men’s attitudes about gender roles. Journal of Marriage and Family, 57, 21–30.
Boswell, A. A., & Spade, J. Z. (1996). Fraternities and collegiate rape culture: why are some fraternities more dangerous places for women? Gender and Society, 10, 133–147.
Brown, T. L., Parks, G. L., Phillips, C. M. (Eds.). (2005). African American fraternities and sororities: The history and the vision. Kentucky: University Press of Kentucky.
Chen, A. S. (1999). Lives at the center of the periphery, lives at the periphery of the center: Chinese American masculinities and bargaining with hegemony. Gender and Society, 13, 584–607.
Collins, P. H. (2004). Black sexual politics: African Americans, gender, and the new racism. New York: Routledge.
Connell, R. W. (1995). Masculinities (2nd ed.). Berkeley: University of California Press.
Corsaro, W. (1985). Friendship and peer culture in the early years: Language and learning for human service professions. Ablex Publishing.
Davis, N. J., & Robinson, R. V. (1988). Class identification of men and women in the 1970s and 1980s. American Sociological Review, 53, 103–112.
Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S., Eds. (1994). Handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Du Bois, W. E. B. (1903). Talented tenth. The Negro problem: A series of articles by representative Negroes of to-day. New York: James Pott and Company.
Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. New York: Anchor Books.
Grazian, D. (2007). The girl hunt: urban nightlife and the performance of masculinity as collective activity. Symbolic Interactionism, 30, 221–243.
Hoberman, J. (1997). Darwin’s athletes. New York: Houghton.
Hollander, J. A. (2004). The social contexts of focus groups. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 33, 605–637.
Hughey, M. W. (2007). Crossing the sands, crossing the color-line: Non-Black members of historically Black Greek organizations. Journal of African American Studies, 11, 55–75.
Hughey, M. W. (2008a). Brotherhood or brothers in the hood? Debunking the educated gang’ thesis as black fraternity and sorority slander. Race, Ethnicity, and Education, 11, 443–463.
Hughey, M. W. (2008b). Virtual (Br)others and (Re)sisters: Authentic black fraternity and sorority identity on the internet. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 37, 528–560.
Jackman, M. R., & Muha, M. J. (1984). Education and intergroup attitudes: Moral enlightenment, superficial democratic commitment, or ideological refinement? American Sociological Review, 49, 751–769.
Jeffers, G., Ray, R., & Hallett, T. (2010). The vitality of race and ethnography: Realizing the promise of dialogue between method and theory. In S. Hillyard (Ed.), What’s (Still) wrong with ethnography (pp. 19–46). UK: Emerald Publishing.
Kimbrough, W. M. (2003). Black Greek 101: The culture, customs, and challenges of black fraternities and sororities. Cranbury, NJ: Associated University Presses.
Kimbrough, W. M., & Hutcheson, P. A. (1998). The impact of membership in black Greek-letter organizations on black students’ involvement in collegiate activities and their development of leadership skills. The Journal of Negro Education, 67, 96–105.
Kimmel, M. (2008). Guyland: The perilous world where boys become men. HarperCollins.
Konrad, A. M., & Harris, C. (2002). Desirability of the Bem Sex-Role Inventory items for women and men: A comparison between African-Americans and European Americans. Sex Roles, 47, 259–272.
Majors, R. G., & Billson, J. (1992). Cool pose. New York: Lexington Books.
Martin, P. Y., & Hummer, R. A. (1989). Fraternities and rape on campus. Gender and Society, 3, 457–473.
McAdoo, H. P. (1988). Black families. Newbury Park: Sage.
Morgan, D. L. (1997). Focus groups and qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Parks, G. S. (Ed.). (2008). Black Greek letter organizations in the 21st century: Our fight has just begun. University Press of Kentucky.
Pleck, J. H. (1985). Working wives, working husbands. Beverly Hills: Sage.
Ragin, C. C. (1994). Constructing social research: The unity and diversity of method. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Ray, R. (2008). The professional allowance: How socioeconomic characteristics allow some men to fulfill family role expectations better than other men. The International Journal of Sociology of the Family: Special Issue on Intersectionality., 34(2), 327–351.
Ray, R., & Rosow, J. (2010). Getting off and getting intimate: How normative institutional arrangements structure black and white fraternity men’s approaches towards women. Men and Masculinities., 12, 523–546.
Rizzo, T. A., Corsaro, W. A., & Bates, J. E. (1992). Ethnographic methods and interpretive analysis: Expanding the methodological options of psychologists. Developmental Review, 12, 101–123.
Sanday, P. R. [1990] (2007). Fraternity gang rape: Sex, brotherhood, and privilege of campus. New York: New York University Press.
Skocpol, T., Liazos, A., & Ganz, M. (2006). What a mighty power we can be: African American fraternal groups and the struggle for racial inequality. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Staples, R. (1982). Black masculinity: The black males’ role in American society. San Francisco: Black Scholar.
Stombler, M., & Padavic, I. (1997). Sister acts: resisting men’s domination in black and white fraternity little sister programs. Social Problems, 44, 257–275.
Torbenson, C. L., & Parks, G. S. (Eds). (2009). Brothers and sisters: Diversity within American college fraternities and sororities. Fairleigh Dickinson University Press.
Acknowledgements
The author thanks The Kinsey Institute, the Center for the Study of the College Fraternity, the Graduate and Professional Student Organization (GPSO), Student Affairs, and the Vice President’s Office of Institutional Development and Student Affairs at Indiana University for financial support for this study. The author also thanks Jason Rosow, Elizabeth Armstrong, Brian Powell, Jane McLeod, Abigail A. Sewell, Evelyn Perry, Paula England, Michael Kimmel, and Juanita Diaz-Cotto for constructive comments. Address all correspondence to: Rashawn Ray, RWJF Scholars in Health Policy Research Program, UC Berkeley, School of Public Health, 50 University Hall, MC 7360, Berkeley, CA 94720-7360 or via email at http://www.rashawn.ray@berkeley.edu.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ray, R. Sophisticated Practitioners: Black Fraternity Men’s Treatment of Women. J Afr Am St 16, 638–657 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12111-010-9156-8
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12111-010-9156-8