Foundations of American Education

Essay instructions

Some theorists state that males display an evolutionary tendency to violence,

which often leads to catastrophic events. If theorists are correct, why and how
do schools endorse such a tendency as a social virtue?

Male Tendency to Violence:

What Schools do to Endorse and
Question this Issue

LEROYS VALDÉS
European University of the Atlantic

The Humankind, whether in nations, peoples, or individuals, have been heavily

involved in a multitude of violent events throughout history and up through the
present day. Many theorists blame this events on men’s tendency to violence,
which is usually attributed to either religious or patriarchal values. Violence as a
characteristic feature of mankind are sometimes difficult to dispel in education
for peace curriculum, which is focused on teaching students to create a “better
world” in the 1st century. Given the large presence of male violence throughout
history, this essay address the questions of why and how schools endorse this
male tendency to violence as a social virtue, and what methods educators might
use to question this tendency. To do so, some of the theoretical foundations
presented by Nel Noddings in her chapter on Masculinity and the Warrior (37-50)
will be taken into consideration.

I would like to start by saying that the biological differences between

males and females has been scientifically demonstrated and are often

1
 Foundations of American Education

unquestionable. However, nowadays, some features are not entirely attributed

to biology since external aspects play a important role in the formation of
behavioural characteristics in both men and women. One of this aspects has
undoubtedly been religion. For centuries, religious worship has forged essential
foundations in human societies that have contributed to the concept of
masculinity, which is closely linked to the male ‘biological’ inclination toward
violence. In her book, Noddings (2012, p. 42) makes a brief reference to this to
“underscore the role that religion has played in supporting and elaborating upon
the concept of masculinity”. In other words, this binary categorization is no more
than a sex hierarchy on which humankind has been based for centuries. Through
some kind of spiritual agreement, the woman belongs to the man, and the man
protects his woman. The man then becomes a symbol of strength, vigor, and
virility. As an example, there is a clear distinction between the role of men and
women in church, with men holding the power.

One other aspect influencing male’s inclination towards violence is

patriarchal attitudes and behaviours. As we moved throughout history, all
peoples have had one or several leaders in power. Most of them, has been male
—we still see this today. Power often ignites an obsession for more power,
usually through acquiring more territories or resources. In order to do this, the
men in power had to resort to violence. Violence was also useful to protect
existing territories and resources. For instance, today, some war theorists say
that russian military intervention in ukraine can be described as a strategy to
gain petroleum resources.

Given this background, how do we educate to dispel this now instilled

male capacity to resort to violence? What do schools do to endorse or question
this issue? It is difficult to deny how obvious male violence has been over time.
Therefore, banishing or questioning this tendency are a challenging task within
societies that still advertise gender-specific toys, that use men as a symbol of
strength and power, and where women have to behave in a manly way to
assume power. Then, this also sounds like violence is a man’s job too.

In the educational context, many of us studied the human behaviour

through Psychology or Philosophy courses. I remember how tense our high

2
 Foundations of American Education

school’s Psychology classes used to be when this topic come up: “Men are more
aggressive than women”. By then, there was a high school female-only
organization that highly promoted gender equality, and these sorts of
statements would drive them really mad. Teachers would bring to the table
some arguments such as testosterone and its relation to aggressive behaviour in
men. In fact, some years ago an article published by the international journal of
endocrinology and metabolism concluded that “there is evidence that
testosterone levels are higher in individuals with aggressive behavior, such as
prisoners who have committed violent crimes” (Batrinos, 2012). So, science can
help to explain male’s tendency towards violence. In contrast, some Philosophy
teachers would be a little bit more skeptical about this and argue that society is
what corrupts the individual. Such an idea has been present for centuries thanks
to Jean. J. Rousseau (1712-1778). Rousseau, in fact, stated “that humankind is
good by nature but is corrupted by society” (Bertram, 2017). It is clear that
society is divided on how to explain this tendency towards violence.

Therefore, in the best case scenario, society will change through

education. The role of educators in elementary school, e.g., is to work to break
down gender stereotypes. One way to to this is to teach stories of women in
power. Educators should also teach children that violence is not the way to
resolve conflicts. This is the ideal, but as we know, educators cannot control
what children’s experiences are going to be outside the classroom.

References

Batrinos, M. L. (2012). Testosterone and Aggressive Behavior in Man.

International Journal of Endocrinology and Metabolism,​ 10(3), 563–568.

Bertram, C. (2017). Jean Jacques Rousseau. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), ​The

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy​ (Summer 2017). Metaphysics

Research Lab, Stanford University. Retrieved from

https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2017/entries/rousseau/

Noddings, N. (2011). ​Peace Education: How We Come to Love and Hate War​.

Cambridge University Press.