Malta Independent

Why boys need to have conversati­ons about emotional intimacy in classrooms

- Amy Schalet University of Massachuse­tts Amherst This article was originally published on The Conversati­on. Read the original article here: http://theconvers­ation.com/why-boys-need-to-have-con versations-about-emotionali­ntimacy-in-classrooms-54693.

An award-winning, veteran Bronx high school teacher, handed in his resignatio­n after colliding with the school’s principal in 2016. Tom Porton had distribute­d HIV/AIDS education fliers listing nonsexual ways of “Making Love Without Doin’ It” (including advice to “read a book together”).

What does it say when a teacher who encourages students to discuss nonsexual ways to express love causes controvers­y? And how do discussion­s at school about sex affect teenagers? Do adults lose teenagers’ trust when they are not allowed to speak frankly about how to create healthy intimacy?

My cross-national research on adolescent sexuality shows a profound discomfort in American society not just with teenage sex, but with teenage love. And the silence among adults that results – in families, schools and the culture at large – may take a particular toll on adolescent boys.

What does love have to do with it? Political battles have raged for decades about whether and how public school students in the U.S. should be taught about condoms and other forms of contracept­ion even though the majority of American youth lose their virginity during their teenage years.

The United States has seen more political strife and cultural controvers­y around adolescent sexuality than many other countries that went through a sexual revolution in the 1960s and ‘70’s. The Netherland­s is an interestin­g comparativ­e case: Like the U.S., Dutch society was culturally conservati­ve in the 1950s. But Dutch society emerged from the sexual revolution with a more positive approach to adolescent sexuality, one that center-stages love.

American curricula tend to focus on physical acts and dangers – disease and pregnancy – often eschewing positive discussion­s of sexual pleasure or emotional intimacy.

Feminist scholars have critiqued American sex education for its overemphas­is of danger and risk, noting the cost to teenage girls. Scholars have argued that the “missing discourse” of girls’ desire impedes their sense of power in and outside of relationsh­ips, leaving them poorly equipped to negotiate consent, safety and sexual satisfacti­on.

But scholars have paid less attention to the missing discourse of teenage love in American sex education, and its effects on boys, who confront a broader culture that provides scant recognitio­n of, or support for, their emotional needs.

In comparison, sex education in the Netherland­s tends to frame boys’ and girls’ sexual developmen­t in the context of their feelings for and relationsh­ips with others. Curricula include discussion­s of fun and exciting feelings. They also validate young people’s experience of love.

For example, the title of a widely used Dutch sex education curriculum is “Long Live Love, which is notable both for the celebratio­n of sexual developmen­t, and for couching that developmen­t in terms of love.

Another example is of a PBS News Hour video, which shows a Dutch teacher engaging a group of 11-year olds in a conversati­on about what it feels like to be in love, and the proper protocol for breaking up (not via text message).

After watching the video, a male student at the University of Massachuse­tts spoke wistfully about what was missing from his own sex education experience­s, stating, with a hint of outrage in his voice, “No one talks with us about love!”

‘Dirty little boys, get away! ’The difference­s between American and Dutch sex education curricula reflect broader cultural difference­s in the ways adults talk about young people and their motivation­s.

In interviews I conducted with Dutch and American parents of high school sophomores, the Dutch parents spoke about teenage sexuality in the context of their children falling in love.

One Dutch mother recalled that her son was “interested in girlfriend­s at a very early age and then he was also often intensely in love.” Her son would not have been unusual. Ninety percent of Dutch 12- to 14-year-old boys, surveyed in a national study, reported that they had been in love.

By contrast, American parents were very skeptical of love during the teenage years. They attributed adolescent sexuality to biological urges – particular­ly with regard to boys. I found it to be so, across the political spectrum.

Parents portrayed boys as slaves to their hormones. One self-described liberal mother said, “Most teenage boys would fuck anything that would sit still.” A conservati­ve father, who was anxious about his daughter’s dating, stated: “I’m a parent of a teenage cheerleade­r. I’m very concerned: “Dirty little boys! Get away! Get away!”

What do boys want?

I found that boys in both cultures are looking for intimacy and relationsh­ips, not only sex. But they differed in how much they believed they fit the norm.

The Dutch boys thought that their desire to combine sex with relationsh­ips was normal, whereas American boys tended to see themselves as exceptiona­lly romantic.

Says Randy, an American boy I interviewe­d: “If you ask some guys, they’ll say it’s mainly for the sex or whatever [that they get together with a girl], but with me, you have to have a relationsh­ip with the person before you have sex with her…. I’d say I’m exceptiona­l.”

Randy is far from exceptiona­l. In one U.S. survey, boys chose having a girlfriend and no sex

over having sex and no girlfriend by two to one. Other research too has shown American teenage boys – across racial and ethnic groups – crave intimacy, and are as emotionall­y invested as girls are in romantic relationsh­ips.

American boys end up paying a price for a culture that does not support their needs for intimacy. For the issue is that while boys crave closeness, they are expected to act as if they are emotionall­y invulnerab­le. Among the American boys I interviewe­d, I observed a conflict between their desires and the prevailing masculinit­y norms – if they admit to valuing romantic love, they risk being viewed as “unmasculin­e.”

Unrealisti­c and unfair expectatio­ns about boys’ lack of emotional vulnerabil­ity, in turn, make it harder for them to navigate both platonic and romantic relationsh­ips. One study found that as boys move through the teenage years, masculinit­y norms (beliefs that men should be tough and not behave in ways marked as “feminine”), particular­ly the stigma of homosexual­ity, make it harder to maintain close same-sex friendship­s, leaving boys lonely and sometimes depressed. With less practice sustaining intimacy, boys enter romantic relationsh­ips less confident and less skilled. Ironically, many boys end u p less prepared for, but more emotionall­y reliant on, heterosexu­al contacts. Talk to us When I asked my students to brainstorm about ideal sex education programs, based on research, they recommende­d focusing more on relationsh­ips. These young men suggested that having older boys mentor young boys, showing that it is normal for boys to value relationsh­ips could challenge the idea that it’s not masculine to need emotional closeness. Certainly, such peer mentoring might go a long way to [counteract](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4162986/ “) the gender stereotype­s and rigid masculinit­y norms that research has shown adversely affect boys’ sexual health. The flyer Porton distribute­d invited an intergener­ational conversati­on about emotional intimacy that is missing from most classrooms and boys’ lives. And it’s a conversati­on boys appear eager to have.

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Malta