When Boys Become Boys: Development, Relationships, and Masculinity by Judy Y. Chen is based on a two-year study in which Chen not only observed, but also interviewed a group of boys from pre-kindergarten through first grade about what it means for them to be a boy. In doing so, Chen focused on relational theory to examine the importance of relationships, the development throughout these years, as well as the resistance to or acceptance of certain masculine norms. In When Boys Become Boys, Chen also uses case studies to further examine and discuss why some boys seem more “successful” in adopting to or rejecting norms and how they engage each other as well as girls on a daily basis.

As Chen got to know the boys more and as they started to trust and open up to her during her visits, she noticed that certain masculine norms played a significant part in their interactions. For example, weapons (of various sorts, but most significantly guns) signified masculinity, and set the boys apart from the girls, since the girls rarely engaged in gunplay. At the same time, many of the boys were adamant about the fact that dolls were only for girls, and even though some of the boys played with dolls at home, or occasionally at school, their choices of toys became rather segregated and doll play was rarely accepted among the group of boys Chen studied. For the boys, distancing themselves from the girls became a significant indicator of boyhood. As gunplay, gendered play and also gendered segregation took place, Chen also noticed that many of the boys felt the need to distance themselves from their mothers, and those who did this in a successful manner (especially when their mothers dropped them off) were more likely to enjoy a higher status in the group. It became obvious to Chen that displaying gender-appropriate behaviors even in early childhood is a significant part of boyhood and masculinity for these boys. Another significant find in her study was the fact that one of the high status boys in the class came up with an all boy group named “The Mean Team”. The Mean Team targeted girls in the sense that they teased them or were mean to them. Being a successful Mean Team participant ensured a higher status and participation in a group and became another way for the boys to establish hierarchy and segregate themselves based on gender.

Chen also noticed that in contrary to many beliefs or thoughts about boys’ relational capabilities as less developed than girls, Chen noticed that the boys in her study expressed honest emotions and had the ability to openly discuss and express their emotions to each other. However, Chen also noticed a shift in such expressions halfway through her study. Instead, many of the boys became less attuned to their own feelings as well as the feelings of others. They used posturing (in which they took on roles) to display a more “appropriate” form of masculinity, thus loosing some of their relational capabilities and closeness to each other. As Chen also met with parents and discussed what they enjoyed about their boys and what they worried about for the future, it became obvious that most parents took pride in their children’s ability to be spunky, spontaneous and free. At the same time, they also worried about certain pressures of masculinity, conforming to norms about how to behave and what to say, and they did not want their children to feel restricted in their feelings and behaviors. Some parents indicated that they had already noticed a shift in behavior and they worried how their boys would deal with the pressures of adapting to masculine norms.

As Chen notes, her study counter many stereotypes describing boys as emotionally stoic and underdeveloped. Instead, Chen found that these boys were able to express their emotions and opinions, but that a shift and modification of their behaviors started taking place. Chen believes that “…boys’ socialization towards cultural constructions of masculinity that are defined in opposition to femininity seems mainly to force a split between what boys know (e.g., about themselves, their relationships, and their world) and what boys show. In the process of becoming “boys,” these boys essentially were learning to disassociate their outward behavior from their innermost thoughts, feelings, and desires” (p.209). At the same time, it might be fair to state that this split between what boys know and what they show do have implications for girls as well since The Mean Team’s mission was to target and tease the girls in the class. Even so, Chen aptly describes the tension between what boys know and what they show, even as these boys are very young and are merely starting to adopt masculine norms.

Chen writes in a manner that is easy to understand and as she bases her research on relational theory, she often comes back to and describe the ways in which relationships become the basis for the boys in her study. The book would be an important addition to most college classrooms, and When Boys Become Boys is not only suitable for Early Child Development, but works equally well in studies of Sociology, Psychology and Gender Studies. Parents will also find this book valuable as they navigate early childhood with their child or children.

© 2014 Hennie Weiss

Hennie Weiss has a Master’s degree in Sociology from California State University, Sacramento. Her academic interests include women’s studies, gender, sexuality and feminism.