Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Academic Blogs -> Feminist Law Professors
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Academic
: Feminist Law ProfessorsSome Blatant Self Promotion: Single Sex Education and Masculinity
By David S. Cohen
Please forgive me if this self-promotion is beyond the standards of decency. But, if anyone is interested, I’ve posted the most recent draft of an article I’m working on and would love any feedback people might have if they are inclined to look at it. The abstract is below, and the link to the page where it can be downloaded is here. Thanks!
In late 2006, the Department of Education changed the Title IX regulations to broaden the permissibility of single-sex education in primary and secondary schools. The changes took place in the context of a growing concern over the performance and well-being of boys in American schools. This article describes, dissects, and critically analyzes the narrative about boys, masculinity, and single-sex education that surrounded these changes.
The public narrative about the need for single-sex education focused, in substantial part, on what I call the essentialist myth of masculinity. This article catalogs the important components of this myth: heteronormativity, aggression, activity, sports-obsession, competitiveness, stoicism, and not being girls. The article then shows, using education and gender theory, that this conception of masculinity is harmful to both girls and boys. Instead of pushing this form of masculinity, the law and schools should make room for multiple and varied masculinities for boys (and girls).
The article argues that the Title IX regulatory change that allows for the expansion of single-sex schooling can actually work to further empower and entrench the essentialist myth of masculinity, thus violating its own prohibition on sex stereotyping. By adopting strong interpretations of already-existing jurisprudence about gender stereotyping from both constitutional law and Title IX, the article shows how de-essentializing masculinity is possible and preferable in the law. The article concludes that schools that implement single-sex education must do so for reasons other than promoting an essentialized notion of masculinity and that the law must be vigilant in ensuring that schools? implementation not further reify dominant conceptions of what it means to be a boy.
- David S. Cohen
Full post as published by Feminist Law Professors on February 15, 2008 (boomark / email).
Bunn-O-Matic
Recalls Single Cup Tea/Coffeemakers
Department of Education Fraud
$4.25 million settlement to be paid in whistleblower lawsuit.
Racist Voicemail
Stamford Board of Education pays student $37,500 settlement after failing to protect her from racial discrimination.
Wrong Bus
Greenbrier County Board of Education agrees to $15,000 negligence settlement after dropping a 5-year-old off at the wrong spot.

Essentialist Masculinity And Single Sex Education
Single-Sex Education Stereotypes Boys
No Boy Left Behind Single-Sex Education and the Essentialist Myth of Masculinity
Twitter Updates for 2008-05-17
International OER Community Update
ACLU Wants Greene County Segregation Plan








