(Re)Imagining Black Boyhood: Toward a Critical Framework for Educational Research

Abstract

Drawing on critical childhood studies, Michael J. Dumas and Joseph Derrick Nelson argue that Black boyhood is socially unimagined and unimaginable, largely due to the devalued position and limited consideration of Black girls and boys within the broader social conception of childhood. In addition, the "crisis" focus of the public discourse on Black males-focused as it is on adult Black men-makes it difficult to authentically see young Black boys as human beings in and of themselves. A critical reimagining of Black boyhood, the authors contend, demands that educators, policy makers, and community advocates pursue pedagogical and policy interventions that create spaces for Black boys to construct and experience robust childhoods. Further, a (re)commitment to critical research on Black boyhood should inspire inquiry that asks young Black boys who they are, what they think, and what they desire in their lives now.

Reimagining Social and Emotional Development: Accommodation and Resistance to Dominant Ideologies in the Identities and Friendships of Boys of Color

“…Our data also reveal the intersectional nature of dominant ideologies and boys' resistance and accommodation to them. The "boy code" and the "cool pose," for example, are gendered, raced, sexualized (i.e., heterosexual), and classed [Cunningham et al, 2013;Dumas & Nelson, 2016;Way & Rogers, 2014]. The "Black box" that Marcus describes in his identity narrative is explicitly racialized but also implicitly classed, gendered, and sexualized.…”

“…In other words, they have been neglected in the developmental research due to a dominant ideology that only sees their experiences as relevant to discussions of risk and protection rath- Rogers/Way DOI: 10.1159/000493378 er than to explorations of human development [Dumas & Nelson, 2016;Way, 1998Way, , 2011. Such boys also clearly reveal the human potential to resist as they are subjected to some of the most dehumanizing stereotypes and thus the internal pressure or motivation to resist is likely more intense than for those for whom the stereotypes are less dehumanizing.…”

“…We focus, in particular, on how boys of color accommodate to and resist gender-sexuality-and race-based stereotypes, as these are the mechanisms through which dominant cultural ideologies are communicated and justified Way et al, 2018]. As Dumas and Nelson [2016] urged us to reimagine Black boys as human beings rather than stereotypes, our data allow us to not only reimagine boys of color but also social and emotional development more broadly. Rogers/Way DOI: 10.1159/000493378 The intersection of these ideologies, in addition, means that women will be stereotyped -to varying degrees depending on race, social class, sexuality, and religion -as not being "thinkers" and not in need of an autonomous self and, thus, not deserving of a voice in the conversation.…”

This is a black-white conversation : navigating race, class, and gender at an urban school.

“…This approach can be understood within a neoliberal policy regime which emphasizes the Black male crisis narrative and private policy solutions. When the problem is situated within the Black male body (as argued by Dumas and Nelson 2016), the Black body becomes something that students should strive to overcome. Fordham and Ogbu (1986) famously argued that a major reason Blacks have relatively low academic achievement because their culture is antithetical to mainstream US society and they are concerned about the accusation of acting White.…”

“…According to Dumas and Nelson (2016), Black boyhood is socially unimagined and unimaginable beyond a crisis narrative; we are unable to see Black boys outside of fears and anxieties about their future lives. The message that Black males are in crisis is definitive.…”