In recent interviews with public radio, Professor of Sociology Emily Kane talks about her new book, The Gender Trap: Parents and the Pitfalls of Raising Boys and Girls, and why customs like pink for girls and blue for boys are not necessarily benign choices.

Asked about the impact of gender-specific toys, colors and activities, Kane tells the North Texas Public Media program Think聽that these choices “are not just about whether we train boys and girls to be different. It’s about whether we might be reproducing structures that systematically disadvantage girls and women.”

What鈥檚 more, Kane says, while we often believe that all gender differences in children are natural, many are actually the result of specific parental and societal choices and reinforcement.

In her interview with Southern California Public Radio’s , she says that by choosing gender-specific opportunities and surroundings for our children, “we’re constructing these categories of boys and girls and kind of convincing ourselves that it’s inevitable.”

But it鈥檚 not inevitable, she says.

Referring to the fact that many of the parents she interviewed in the study wanted to offer their children a wider range of possibilities but feared social judgments, Kane notes, “One of my hopes with this book is that…we may realize there are more of us who want to see some kind of relaxing of those constraints than we might otherwise realize, so in that sense it wouldn’t be so hard to swim upstream.”

That might mean choosing neutral colors and toys that “would be interesting to any small human being.”

The myth is that nearly two-thirds of 乐播传媒 alums marry fellow alums. The truth is different 鈥� but no less intriguing

By Maura McGee 鈥�10

Did you know that 60 percent of 乐播传媒 alums marry fellow alums? It鈥檚 common knowledge, circulated among 乐播传媒ies and passed on from generation to generation.

On campus, 鈥�60 percent鈥� launches some of the first conversations among incoming students. It鈥檚 an icebreaker for first-year women crowded on a bunk in Smith. Or, during a pre-orientation AESOP trip, the upperclass trip leader shares the fact with her new charges.

Later on, the statistic might be used to tease a friend after his or her embarrassing encounter, romantic or otherwise, with another 乐播传媒ie: 鈥淗ey, it鈥檚 60 percent 鈥� it could happen!鈥� Or, much later, the stat might come up in an awkward conversation, like when someone asks the senior couple who鈥檚 been dating since freshman year if they鈥檙e going to become 鈥渟tatistics.鈥�

And the statistic is perpetuated via many pathways. Besides word of mouth, it鈥檚 published in at least one college guide. And the stat has history: A 1978 grad claimed to have heard then-President Thomas Hedley Reynolds announce at Convocation, 鈥淟ook to your left, look to your right. Sixty percent of you will marry other 乐播传媒 grads.鈥�

Sixty percent grabs our attention, plays to our emotions, and tests our imaginations. But can it really be true? Will over half of us really marry one another?

Well, no.

The accurate figure is approximately 12.5 percent. Of the 23,356 living alums in the 乐播传媒 database, 2,914 have a spouse or partner who is also a 乐播传媒 alum. (If you include alums whose 乐播传媒 spouse or partner is deceased, the number creeps up a few points.)

Finding this real answer, and exploring the connection between myth and reality, was part of my final project in the seminar 鈥淢arriage in America,鈥� taught by Professor of Women and Gender Studies Rebecca Herzig. Besides finding the real 乐播传媒 marriage statistic, I interviewed various 乐播传媒 people, including President Elaine Tuttle Hansen, and presented my findings in a

When they heard the real marriage percentage, 乐播传媒ies expressed genuine shock. One not-yet-hitched senior female, figuring the pool of spouses was only the

size of 乐播传媒, responded in relief. 鈥淭hank God, I still have time! I won鈥檛 die alone with my cat!鈥�

Others went to great lengths trying to convince me that I was wrong. They insisted they heard the figure recited during an official campus tour, while others named a long list of married 乐播传媒 couples. One girl even tried to drag me to her dorm to show me the statistic printed in a college guidebook.

In fact, I found that colleges of our ilk also tend to have a mythical marriage statistic. At Colby, the myth is 50 percent and the reality 11 percent, while at Carleton it鈥檚 60 and 15 percent, respectively. At Middlebury, the numbers are 60 and 13 percent.

I was also interested in unraveling the meaning attached to both the 13 percent and 60 percent.

The politics of marriage has influenced the very well-being of the College.

One message is within these very pages. Although official 乐播传媒 alumni records reflect partnerships as well as marriages, 乐播传媒 Magazine鈥檚 Vital Statistics section employs the heading 鈥淢arriages.鈥� Why not 鈥淢arriages and Commitments,鈥� to give same-sex couples an equal opportunity to publicly announce lifetime partnerships? The magazine鈥檚 wedding photo section, however, does include non-marriage celebrations.

The politics of marriage has influenced the very well-being of the College. Anecdotally, I found that people who are highly involved in 乐播传媒 affairs are often married to other 乐播传媒ies. And when a 乐播传媒 alum marries a non-乐播传媒 alum, a curious historical phenomenon has often come into play: The husband鈥檚 college tends to get a greater share of the couple鈥檚 philanthropy. (This can also be true at other colleges elsewhere.)

So, how did we get to 60 percent?

The people I spoke with alluded to the mesmerizing quality of 60 percent, how it foreshadows our transformation from single undergraduates sitting in Commons to adults married to someone who once possibly grazed next to us at the salad bar. (And lest you think that students don鈥檛 ponder marriage: Think again. A classmate who鈥檚 a sociology major found that marriage is quite on the minds of 乐播传媒 students.)

Perhaps 60 percent represents residual social pressure to find a mate. For women of another era, one goal of college was to find a husband, and 60 percent could reflect lingering social demand.

Or, rather than some heteronormative notion of marriage, where men and women express traditional gender roles, maybe 60 percent embodies something else altogether: the lifetime bond shared by all 乐播传媒ies.

In this sense, the statistic conveys the notion, or at least the hope, that most of us will remain connected in some capacity, with marriage merely being the traditional way for us to conceptualize a lifelong, committed relationship. Belief in the statistic speaks not to reason but to emotion; not to marriage but to friendship; and not to individuals but to community.

鈥淭he myth of very high numbers of 乐播传媒 people marrying each other is simply another translation of what 乐播传媒 people do do,鈥� offered longtime administrator Bill Hiss 鈥�66, 鈥渁nd that鈥檚 make very good friendships and keep those friendships for a lifetime.鈥�

From the moment the statistic spurs freshman-year intrigue, the 60 percent myth forges and then perpetuates alumni identity. It provides comfort and a sense of belonging, alluding to a lifelong bond. We hold the myth like a protective 乐播传媒 shield, Chrissie Grover 鈥�10 says. 鈥淭here鈥檚 something special we gained at 乐播传媒 that unites us.鈥�

Maura McGee 鈥�10 graduated in May with a double major in politics and French. A recipient of a Fulbright Fellowship, McGee鈥檚 immediate plans are to teach English in France.

If you鈥檝e been paying attention to education news, you know that boys are falling behind academically. You鈥檝e heard they are lagging in reading and writing, graduating from high school at lower rates than girls, and filling fewer seats in college classrooms.

No doubt you鈥檝e also heard theories about the causes of this phenomenon, from the rise of feminism to the departure of fathers from the home. You鈥檝e also heard ideas about how to reverse it, from same-sex classes to more male teachers.

What you probably haven鈥檛 heard is what boys think about it. Until now.More than 540 Maine boys and young men shared their views on schooling in a yearlong research project whose preliminary findings, released at a statewide education conference at 乐播传媒 last October, are attracting queries from teachers across North America.

The study confirms what researchers suspected 鈥� boys鈥� underachievement parallels a sense of disenfranchisement in their schools 鈥� and it offers some surprises. Defying stereotype, for example, boys do care what teachers think of them. When boys have good relationships with their teachers, it has much to do with their love of a class.

“Our boys are saying they want people to connect with them,” says Professor of Psychology Georgia Nigro, 乐播传媒鈥� representative to the Maine Boys Network, the consortium of policy analysts, educators, and youth-service professionals that sponsored the study. “They love it if someone 鈥� it doesn鈥檛 have to be a male teacher 鈥� knows and shares their interests.”

The project is significant not only for adding a vital piece to the national discussion, but also for its ambitious reach: Hundreds of boys offered opinions about the teaching techniques that engage them 鈥� or lose them. Nigro, with Maren Vouga 鈥�09 of Louisville, Ky., and Erin Bonney 鈥�09 of Sudbury, Mass., conducted a daunting analysis of the discussions, identifying common themes as well as classroom strategies that some Maine teachers are already putting to use.

“That鈥檚 where Georgia took the lead,” says Mark Tappan, a Colby College professor of education who performed the data analysis with Nigro and Stephan Derochers, assistant professor of psychology at the University of Maine鈥揊armington. “She developed a way to critically examine
the interviews. We were so lucky to have her expertise.”

Their findings appear in the October 2008 report “The Gender Divide in Academic Engagement: Perspectives from Maine Boys and Young Men.”

To read the report go to http://www.boystomen.info/ and scroll down to the report.

Children have been at the center of Nigro鈥檚 research at 乐播传媒. She has studied children鈥檚 memory to develop interview methods that improve preschoolers鈥� recall and resistance to misinformation. She
also developed a project to raise middle-school girls鈥� awareness of careers in math and science.

Her concerns about boys date to 1997, when she helped to interpret a survey of Lewiston sixth-graders鈥� attitudes toward school and their future. (The survey had been designed and implemented by 乐播传媒 students under the direction of Professor of Political Science Douglas Hodgkin, now retired.)

“I was struck by the gender difference,” Nigro recalls. “Twenty-five percent of male students felt excluded in the classroom, that their opinions weren鈥檛 valued.”

When the survey was presented publicly to Lewiston residents, however, their attention went to other findings 鈥� understandably, since the national focus at that time was on improving girls鈥� education and career opportunities. “People thought paying attention to boys would take away from the attention that was being paid, and still needed to be paid, to girls,” Nigro says.

The Maine Boys Network study was her long-awaited opportunity. She and students from her “Action Research” psychology course were among numerous facilitators convening focus groups in elementary schools, middle schools, high schools, and colleges during 2007鈥�08. “The boys were thoroughly engaged,” she reports. “They took it seriously, but they also had fun. They appreciated that someone was asking the questions we were asking.”

Students shared, among other things, their yearnings for a kinesthetic but challenging curriculum; variety and freedom in their assignments; caring, fair teachers; and the same respectful treatment that they thought girls received.

“Sometimes I wanted to go off-script and intervene,” Nigro confesses. “One middle-school boy asked, 鈥榃hy do I have to study science? I want to be a lobsterman.鈥� I asked him, 鈥楧on鈥檛 you think a lobsterman needs to know what鈥檚 happening in the oceans, what鈥檚 happening to the fish? That鈥檚 science.鈥� I could have gone on with an entire science lesson, but I stopped myself.”

That exchange was among many poignant moments from gatherings that often stretched to two hours 鈥� with students begging for more time. “That boy was getting the message that you鈥檙e a nobody if you don鈥檛 go on with education,” Nigro reflects. “Yet the somebodies in his life 鈥� his father, his uncles, his grandfather 鈥� hadn鈥檛 gone on in education. It made me see that we have to listen to them and think about how we convey the message that higher education is important.”

“There鈥檚 not going to be a single quick fix,” Nigro believes. “It鈥檚 not going to be single-sex schools or classrooms. That may work for some boys, but it鈥檚 not one size fits all. The teaching the boys want is simply good teaching. It doesn鈥檛 have to be tailored to boys. Good teaching embraces a variety of approaches to reach different kids, whatever their needs are. Everyone, boys and girls, benefit.”

When you鈥檙e a women and gender studies major you discuss oppression ALL THE TIME. And we鈥檙e not just talking about the big time oppression of sexism in the American workplace, we鈥檙e talking about theories down to how high heels were designed to cripple women and keep them in their place. (You can decide what you think of that, I must say I agree but I鈥檓 unsure whether I can ascribe it to the Patriarchy or to the fact that for about 2 years now my feet cramp constantly. Perhaps they鈥檙e one and the same. Too bad more potassium isn鈥檛 the solution to both.)

But anway, you learn all these little things that you鈥檝e always witnessed but never really looked upon as anything much, like how I tend to always sit cross legged. Well, this can be related to the idea which posits that in society, women are expected to take up as little room as possible. Hence why we sit cross legged, it鈥檚 a gendered behavior. You don鈥檛 see many men sitting cross legged and the ones that do are often viewed as less masculine. It is deemed more masculine to take up space. And whose space do they take? Mine, on an airplane flight from Chicago.

I have never experienced an encroachment of space like this one before. Actually, that鈥檚 a lie. I鈥檝e never before experienced such an encroachment of space where the person wasn鈥檛 hitting on me. This man must have been the manliest man alive. He was all sorts of splayed, listening to his ipod. His suitcase was not under the seat in front if him but on the floor between his seat and the seat in front of him and his legs were stretched on either side of his suitcase. Not only was his right leg poking into my space but he wasn鈥檛 following the safety rules. But that wasn鈥檛 the worst of it, the worst of it was the arm rest. He had taken all of it and not just taken it but his elbow was poking into my space, poking me as I bitterly sat scrunched trying to avoid the point of his elbow. Two limbs out of four encroaching. That鈥檚 half. That鈥檚 a lot.

So I got angry. And then I got angry that I was angry and not doing anything about it. What could I do? I crossed my legs and shrunk towards the aisle because I didn鈥檛 want to touch him as I mulled over my options. I ended up using a three-fold approach. I would every once and a while jab his elbow with mine, sending a 鈥淚 know what you鈥檙e doing and I鈥檓 aware that this is my space too even though I鈥檓 a frail looking tired woman, and ill even let you have the armrest how generous of me just move your elbow.鈥� I also would look scathingly down at the armrest every time his elbow poked me, willing his arm, not to burst into flame because we were on a plane, but to perhaps disintegrate into dust like the humans in Body Snatchers when they would get killed and replaced by alien clones in their sleep. My third approach (this one was my favorite) was to pretend I was asleep the whole way so he would have to 鈥渨ake me up鈥� to go to the bathroom because I had the aisle seat and it鈥檚 SO awkward to attempt to wake up a stranger so you can urinate. I thought that would get him.

Anyway, so that was my experience and it left me wondering if he saw me and thought that he could be disrespectful in that way or if he just had no clue what he was doing. I鈥檓 not sure which one is worse. I also thought back to my other plane experiences and I realized that I鈥檝e always worked out an armrest compromise when I am seated next to another woman. Either she takes the front and I the back or vice versa. Her elbow doesn鈥檛 sneak over, her legs aren鈥檛 splayed, there鈥檚 almost an unspoken understanding. Perhaps it results from her on her last flight having to pretend she was asleep so the man next to her would have to hold his pee for 2 and 1/2 hours just to teach him a lesson he probably didn鈥檛 get.

So, moral of the story: Men, close your legs and keep your elbows in check. Women, don鈥檛 feel afraid to take what鈥檚 yours and when all else fails and your in the aisle seat, feign sleep. I know the arm rest isnt big but in the interest of gender equality, let鈥檚 compromise.

Shhhh,

Steph

In this photograph by Randy Goodman, William Worthy (center) sets up a question-answer session at a Tehran hotel with Hossein Sheikholislam (left) and Massoumeh Ebtekar (right), spokespeople for the students who held 52 U.S. diplomats hostage for 444 days.

Ebtekar, often interviewed by U.S. journalists during the crisis, was dubbed 鈥淪creaming Mary鈥� by the media. Now a professor of immunology in Tehran, she talked to Matt Lauer of the Today Show last September about the status of women in her country. Sheikholislam, meanwhile, became Iran鈥檚 deputy foreign minister and ambassador to Syria.

As a journalist, Worthy was drawn to societies that had revolted against oppressive, U.S.-backed regimes. At the same time, he believed the U.S. media鈥檚 foreign coverage favored American interests. 鈥淵ou have to talk about the imperialist press when you talk about the mass media,鈥� he told an MIT audience in 1973.

Perhaps because of this, Worthy had the U.S. government frequently nipping at his heels. In a well-publicized incident in the 1950s, he couldn鈥檛 get his passport renewed after traveling to off-limits China. To a Senate subcommittee investigating the affair in 1957, Worthy said, 鈥淚 want my passport. And I want it now.鈥�

Worthy, self-described as a pacifist and civil libertarian with a 鈥渞ebel temperament,鈥� never tired of the hassle nor wavered from a belief in the value of his work in a democratic society. For that, he recently received the Louis M. Lyons Award for Conscience and Integrity in Journalism from Harvard鈥檚 Nieman Foundation for Journalism.

Photographer Randy Goodman traveled with Worthy and recalls that 鈥渉e just never rested. Sometimes I鈥檇 just want to get something to eat,鈥� she laughs.

Worthy did eat 鈥� often while working. One night in Iran, he interviewed Hossein Sheikholislam over dinner, seeking insights into both the crisis and Iran鈥檚 Islamic Revolution. As Worthy later reported in The Boston Phoenix: 鈥淢artyrdom is a concept very dear…. If one is killed in the struggle, one鈥檚 ideas live on, and one鈥檚 work is picked up and carried to fruition by others.鈥�