In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Reviewed by:
  • Men and Masculinities: Theoretical Foundations and Promising Practices for Supporting College Men's Development ed. by Daniel Tillapaugh and Brian L. McGowan
  • Robert T. Palmer, Chaz T. Gipson, and Cecil A. Duffie
Men and Masculinities: Theoretical Foundations and Promising Practices for Supporting College Men's Development Daniel Tillapaugh and Brian L. McGowan (Editors) Sterling, VA: Stylus, 2019, 235 pages, ( $35.00 soft cover)

Daniel Tillapaugh and Brian L. McGowan's edited volume, Men and Masculinities: Theoretical Foundations and Promising Practices for Supporting College Men's Development, is timely. Often on Facebook and other forms of social media, there are conversations and postings about toxic masculinity and hypermasculinity and how these serve as the impetus for men to act stoic and prideful. Recently, toxic masculinity has been attributed to men self-harming themselves, and in some cases, harming society at large. Tillapaugh and McGowan's book is comprised of 11 chapters and is divided into 3 sections. Early into the reading of this book, one aspect we greatly appreciated was the acknowledgment of other scholars whose work had contributed to the ongoing discussion of men and masculinities.

Still, the editors clearly articulated how this volume would be different from other books on college men and masculinities. Specifically, Tillapaugh and McGowan delineated in the Introduction (p.13) that their intent with this book was to help student affairs practitioners design programs, services, and initiatives to best support college men and their development. Aside from this, we also appreciated the editors' discussion around terminology in which they pointed out that terms such as male and males are identifiers of sex whereas masculine and feminine are inextricably linked to gender role socialization. The inclusion of this discussion is timely and highlights the inclusive intent of this book, which is a theme that resonates throughout this work.

Chapter 1 is aligned with the editors' intent. Specifically, Tillapaugh, Catalano, and Davis argued that in order to best support college men, higher education administrators must be keenly aware of their epistemology, because it is related to their professional praxis. Using the description of an exercise called "the Gender Box Activity," they discussed three specific epistemological waves and contextualized how the exercise is shaped and guided by each particular epistemological stance. They concluded their chapter by encouraging higher education administrators to reflect on their epistemological perspectives and to broaden their cultural assumptions about communities included in the discourse on college men and masculinities. In chapter 2, McGowan, Tillapaugh, and Harris discussed the history and development of student development theory with an intentional focus on college men and masculinities. Their discussion was clustered within the three epistemological waves that were addressed in chapter 1. As the chapter progressed, the authors encouraged readers to realize that college men are not monolithic and that it is critical to recognize the intersectional identities of college men, particularly those who are understudied, such as Men of Color, trans* men, sexual minority men, and college men with disabilities.

In chapter 3, Edwards, Foste, and Taylor discussed ways to build campus coalitions for college men. In discussing this topic, the [End Page 402] authors drew from their own experiences as well as research. They underscored that their personal identities gave perspective to their own experiences and shaped their work with college men. The authors provided seven considerations to help colleges and universities foster campus coalitions to engage college men in the role of gender and masculinity. They emphasized that a model of one-size-fits-all does not fit all. Some of their propositions were detailed with subcategories and the chapter ended with a conclusion for practitioners to remain open and vulnerable.

In chapter 4, Ashlee and Wagner provided practitioners programming, theoretical, and practical suggestions for college men as related to masculinity and men's identity development. Specifically, they discussed various types of programs for college men on campuses and presented an intersectional model for college men and masculinities and masculinity programming. The authors concluded their chapter by encouraging practitioners to collaborate on programming related to college men and masculinity.

In chapter 5, Schalewski, Lackman, and Utt proposed assessment and evaluation tools to assess and to support the need for programming and services...


Additional Information

Print ISSN
pp. 402-404
Launched on MUSE
Open Access
Back To Top

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Without cookies your experience may not be seamless.