Research connects gender and protective processes (alternative program) and the role that gender construction plays in successful educational outcomes. This study presents a synthesis of research and considers the lack of research on gender influences/differences. For at-risk adolescent males to be successfully reintegrated into an educational setting the environment must provide the opportunity to challenge the legitimacy of traditional masculine performances. The aim of probing the resilience literature is to develop a framework for understanding how it informs us that dominant acting out masculine behaviours has a major impact on the effectiveness of an alternative program.

Resilience is defined as the capacities to rebound and adapt successfully in the face of adversity. Capacities for resilience help children develop social competence, problem-solving skills, a critical consciousness, autonomy, and a sense of purpose. The concept of resilience grew out of recognition by clinical psychologists, psychiatrists, and others interested in child development that the term "at-risk youth" was based on a negative perspective of young people and failed to recognise and appreciate their strengths, individuality, and uniqueness. Risk factors are defined as variables that increase the probability of bad outcomes. However, a merely statistical concept of risk, provides no information about the underlying processes (Cicchetti, 1993).

Resilience focuses on children at-risk of adverse developmental outcomes and on specific factors such as children's competence as a strength. Researchers have found that many young people who lived in high-risk situations overcame risks. Studies of children at-risk led quickly to the recognition that certain children did not succumb in the same way as others to maladaptive behaviour. Such children seemed to be in some way protected against the negative effects of parental, social, or environmental factors so that their development could proceed apparently unimpaired by difficulty.

Therefore, resilience is concerned with individual variations in response to risk; some people succumb to stress and adversity whereas others overcome life hazards. However, resilience cannot be seen as a fixed attribute of the individual. Some people successfully deal with difficulties at one point in their life and may react adversely to other stressors when their situation is different. If circumstances change, resilience alters (Benard, 1997; Roosa, 2000).

Research reaffirms the perspective of resilience for children around differentiation and hierarchic integration within adolescent development. The unexpected occurrence of depression or the sudden emergence of eating problems in an individual who has always appeared well adjusted may well be rooted in this type of phenomenon. Similarly, such processes may account for situations where people react in an unexpectedly competent way to particularly adverse types of experience. Therefore, such ideas have helped to move the focus of much developmental research towards issues such as the relationships between continuity and change in development, or the significance of the different types of transitions which development bring (Collins, 1990).

Despite this evidence of the positive effects of identification with peers, it is important to bear in mind that in certain group contexts identification may have negative effects. Identification with delinquent groups is one example of this (Emler, 1987) findings on the effects of early maturation on girls' subsequent development provides another more specific example. In addition, there is evidence that children who are rejected by their peers (i.e., have problems in establishing and maintaining friendships and close relationships with peers) are more likely to experience one or more of a variety of disorders at some subsequent stage in their development (Kupersmidt, 1990). These studies do not contradict the general message that positive peer relationships are a significant factor in healthy development in adolescence, but they do emphasize the need to examine more closely the nature of the relationships formed, with whom they occur, how they relate to previous developmental history, and their implications for future development.

We need to recognise not only the role of positive peer relationships but also the impact of gender effects and masculinities on these at-risk adolescent males. Some studies have found that being a female was a resource or a protective factor (Cicchetti, 1990; Rutter, 1996) Other researchers have found that being a girl was a resource factor from birth to 10 years, but that the trend reversed during the second decade, when problems in boys decreased and behaviour problems in girls increased. Furthermore, gender effects were found to vary depending on the outcome measure used (Luthar et al., 1993). As the criteria of youth outcome get stricter, the effects of being female seem to change or disappear, Luthar (1993) and colleagues found a significantly higher proportion of girls who were competent in one or more domains of social competence, compared with boys. However, when the criteria used were more stringent (i.e., children who were competent in one or more domains and were not at the lowest third of any other domain, being a girl was a protective factor an interaction effect of gender).

We can conclude that boys draw on resilient factors in an external sense i.e. more action orientated resources compared with females hence, there is a need to focus on gender and individual based solutions. Social and community-based solutions must be taken into consideration, interventions aimed at promoting resilience need to take account of the relationship between the social environment and the influences of gender construction within society.

For at-risk adolescent boys to be successfully reintegrated into an educational setting the educational environment needs to provide all students with the opportunity to challenge the legitimacy of such masculine performances. In summary, by taking into consideration contributing aspects of the individual (subcultures), protective factors/processes and at-risk behaviours may we begin to understand the impact on gender.

(Bandura, 1981) argued that children develop a concept of their own efficacy in coping with problems, for example, require contexts that provide positive feedback. Whereas, Born et al. suggested that personal characteristics of the individual rather than broader family factors as being central to resilience. One might speculate, that at some point there must be some link between family factors and individual characteristics whereby particular characteristics are strengthened or weakened by experiences occurring during the course of intra-familial development.

Gender issues need to be addressed as many at-risk adolescent boys act out traditional forms of masculinities as a way of empowering themselves (Grossman, Oct 1992). By understanding resilience and, issues of masculinities we can challenge the ways in which these boys acquire their gendered identities within gendered institutions/environments. By gaining insight into their support networks (protective factors/processes) and masculine identity we can contemplate the value of placing these boys into institutions/environments, that specifically allow them to act out gender norms, therefore, reinforcing gender inhabited social situations that contribute to shaping, reproducing, and reconstituting the mark of gender.

Researchers have provided evidence of labels for particular subcultures or individuals that lead to stereotyping, tracking, and lowering expectations for many students in schools which may also create prejudice and discrimination, that is, blaming the mother, valorising the nuclear family, or enhancing the girls vs. boys debate (Lingard, 1999; Mills, 2000). Within schools many at-risk boys are continually labelled as a behavioural problem and seen as a lost cause, therefore, experience discrimination. In many cases these at-risk adolescent boys are powerless in relationships, and attempt to seize power through acts of resistance, especially in school settings. Many boys are continually "policing masculinities" to resist being harassed from peers and facing labels such as "homo" or "faggot". These acts of normalising traditional masculinities often serve only to consolidate the structures that oppress them (Connell, 1994). Therefore, these problem boys that are proving to be distractions are not necessarily going to stop being distractions as they compete for male supremacy within the educational context.

When observing aggressive at-risk adolescent boys we can utilise the concept of hegemonic masculinities to the way in which adolescent boys occupy positions of power and how this relates to groups of adolescent at-risk boys who aspire to positions of power within social relationships. The concept of hegemony is about the winning and holding of power and the formation (and destruction) of social groups. The notion of hegemonic masculinities was constructed and used primarily to maintain the central focus in the critique of masculinities. The public face of hegemonic masculinities is not necessarily what powerful men are, but what sustains their power.

The aim of this paper is to understand the notion of disadvantaged and oppression experienced for behavioural problem boys in regard to a particular social context (alternative program). Within this research the results have found that societal factors have considerable impact on at-risk boys and their role in power relationships, which, contribute to their subjective experience of themselves and their world. In particular, this relates to their masculine values and the gendered nature of emotion, and its role in maintaining power differences within educational institutions.

Qualitative data was gathered via observations, interviews, and closed questionnaires. The interviews consisted of a dialogue between the students and myself. The interviews provided an opportunity for gathering information about attitudes and beliefs after completing a suspension/exclusion alternative program. Similarly, questionnaires contributed to the total picture and provided information on demographics. Four issues were central to the analysis of their masculinities. First, the aim of the narrative was to speak from the boy's subjective experience of themselves and their world. Secondly, the central role of power relationships in our society as a whole, and in masculine values in particular. Thirdly, the gendered nature of emotion, and its role in maintaining power differences for these boys. Hence, an understanding of the implications of traditional forms of masculinities, and the terms of disadvantage and oppression for some of these at-risk boys. Fourthly, the influence of masculinities on a protective process (alternative program) for behavioural problem adolescent males.

Participants were three groups of adolescent students totalling 32 who had completed a 6week alternative suspension program called Learning Adapted to Students Educational Requirements (LASER) only two females were placed in the first group, the majority being adolescent male students. Each 6week program I facilitated different programs. Group interviews and worksheets were conducted after I facilitated a program and the questionnaires were distributed before the program. All the students were from the Northern Eastern suburbs of Brisbane therefore placed in an alternative suspension program situated in the Northern Eastern District. The male students were Anglo-Saxon and one female was Indigenous, ages ranged from 13 years to 15 years old, two of the male students fathers were in prison and twenty-seven students lived with single mother families, three males and one female lived with their mother and father and one male lived with his father and grandmother.

The method used in the study was a qualitative narrative to describe the students beginning of their story, living the story, and selecting stories to construct and reconstruct their narrative plots. Narrative enquiry highlights the way in which relationships occur between researchers and participants and how they are constructed between each other, (Jalongo, 1995)) and Connelly, (1997) noted that the best ways to study human beings is to come to grips with the storied quality of human experience, to record stories of educational experience, and to write other interpretative stories of educational experience.

This narrative study describes these boys' views of school, masculinities, and support that provides a window of the larger life picture on how they perceive their reality. Their stories illustrate masculine identity formation and the struggles within their social structure, the doubts they express, the strategies they devise, and the efforts they expend towards self-transformation that they take (Luttrell 1997). Data reshapes the view that individual reflections may be perceived as narrative since narratology passes on knowledge, and allows the researcher to see through the eyes of the participants (Alexander, 1992). It is also recognised that "common or recurring thoughts from the narratives (may be) used to construct condensed narratives as representatives of the collective experiences of the students in the study" (Alexander, 1992), p. 59).

However, narratives or tales of experience must be viewed as displays of perspectives and moral forms revealing numerous truths (Silverman, 1993). These truths arise from our ability to see a situation from several points of view since each frame of reference provides a different view and a different interpretation. By observing certain discursive practices within the field of education psychology this narrative will move through terrains of race, disadvantage, culture, and gender. A narrative lens does not promise me any simple answers, however a deconstructionist approach throughout the narrative exposes practices of power, masculinities, protective/processes/factors and the dynamics of hegemonic discourses that construct these boys sense of subjectivity within a specific time and educational context.

The research reported in this paper presents ways of discovering typical themes/discourses for these boys' after they have engaged with an alternative program. These stories are tools of subjectivity, they tell us new things about ourselves that we would not have known without the story. Therefore, narratology is aimed at reconstructing a story from the point of view of the students after an alternative program has occurred (Hammersley, 1995).

As a method of gathering naturalistic, descriptive data, narrative enquiry is a valuable technique in gaining insights from these students. Therefore, the main focus of the narrative is on the impact of the social environment on students relating to class and gender. By using narrative, the research explored the social-context, questioning its emotional, moral and aesthetic impact on these students. Asking about the social environment within this particular developmental time for the student is associated with feelings they describe and what their origins might be (Schafer, 1981). Hence, narratives have links to the way in which individuals act, think and feel.

There were two main types of data collection, questionnaires, tape-recorded interviews that were collected over a period of one year.

'Act Like a Man: Look Like a Man' with twenty adolescent males. Worksheets: Assertiveness, Anger management, What does the new Millennium man act like and look like?

Data Collection - Questionnaires, worksheets, Group interviewsGroup two

Developmental Art program with six adolescent males and two females Clay Mural Collage

Data Collection - Questionnaires, field notes, one on interviews, worksheets and collages.Group Three

'Act Like a Man: Look Like a Man' with four adolescent males Discussions & Worksheets: Assertiveness, Anger management, What does the new Millennium man act like and look like?

Data Collection - Questionnaires, worksheets, group interviews

For these boys there is no connection or alternative form of emotional expression other than acting out traditional masculine behaviours. They have not developed or grasped skills to connect from internal forms of resilience or external forms of support. The social environment reinforces the notion of disadvantage, oppression, failure and negative behaviours. The resilience literature needs to recognise that for these boys to change their behaviour, a sense of positive male identity and gender exploration within specific social contexts needs to be explored.

Overall the boys acted out extreme violent and aggressive behaviours towards teachers and other students. Attendance related to school brawling, which was a reaction to frustration to academic failure, boredom, and peer group acceptance. From their response there is non-conformity to school rules acted out through violence, they would not conform at all to schools rules or curriculum. For some boys, school authority is an alien power and they start to define their masculinity in a confrontationalist way against it. Adolescent males with behavioural problems are especially vulnerable to adopting goals that may lead to non-conforming reputations. In fact, getting into trouble was an implicit goal of all these boys. (Connell, 1997) emphasised the effects of masculinity on males by stating hegemonic masculinity as a cultural ideal, different from a generalised male sex role. For these boys hegemonic masculinities are heterosexual, aggressive, competitive, and homo social (excluding women from its social networks).

A1: Swear at teachers, kick people down the stairs. Don't do my work. Don't go to the store room when I get sent there to do something for the teacher.

A4: Fight with other kids and not do what the teachers ask me to do.

A3: Just never go to school ... my Mum doesn't care.

A3: Shit! Yeah.

A4: I wagged a lot. It was also a cool thing like one of my mates and I would wag school and take off.

A1: Teachers. They just speak all this bullshit.

A2: Just smack them in the head ... listen to me alright!

A1: Whenever we start speaking they say, 'hoi who told you to speak?'

[everyone talking]

The boys express their boredom or failure within school and talked about generally being labelled a behaviour problem and getting no help within the classroom. They are bored with the work and see no relevance in school work. The boy's talk about the aggression from teachers. They clearly want teachers to stop harassing them and to start treating them in a egalitarian manner. They clearly communicate that they are not sure how they want the teachers to change except making a statement to be treated the way that their parents treat them. This is a little contradictory as most of the boys' fathers are violent both/either physically, or emotionally, absent.

A1: Get fucked! (Group all agree)

A1: Listen to what you say like if you say no, 'cause we have already done the same crap for the last two years.

A2: You put your hand up. But if you put your hand up then they won't even help ... if dumb people put your hand up they won't come over to you.

A3: They go over to the smart people

A1: The teacher's are saying treat us with respect and they don't care about you when you do treat them with respect.

A2: 'Cause they're fucking idiots.

A3: Teacher speak so much crap!

A1: I get bored and stuff because teachers go on and on.

A3: If something in class happens it's like, always you ... they don't like to think it would be anyone else. Everybody else does something wrong and they know that they aren't going to get into trouble, even though you didn't do it. But because you are a suspect...never changes and if you try then you just don't bother any more because they just don't care if you try because it always come back to you anyway.

The boys stress how schools, families and sporting environments are social sites where abuse is experienced and learned. This suggests that it is imperative for school education to take a positive role in changing the damaging and abusive attitudes before they are refined and institutionalised. Hence, there is scope for exploration of some of the problems and rituals in advance and a better understanding of the dangers to intolerance of difference and the effects of marginalisation within group dynamics.

The boys believe that traditional masculine performances such as aggression, large physical size, and strength were forms of success and popularity amongst peers and society. The belief of having money, many material possessions such as, the latest clothes, a attractive young model looking "chick" on their arm, and a big car projects a powerful admired male in society. Male friendship was orientated around belonging to groups or gangs who performed tasks and activities such as participating or watching rugby, boxing or martial arts, drinking and doing drugs at parties, having fights at parties in front of the girls, and always showing tough, aggressive behaviour in front of peers.

A3: In front of girls, ya more worried about being cool.

A1: I don't. I do what I want to do. I don't care about what people think about me, I'm just me and if they don't like me then it is too bad.

A4: Friends don't expect you to change in the way that you do things.

A2: Well you definitely have to in front of girls.

A2: Arnold Schwartzneger.

A1: My big brother.

A3: Ya gotta be a big muscly bloke and then life is cool with girls.

A1: Be good at sports.

A1: I don't know. There is this one fella and his name is Luke ... I don't know him that well but all the girls are always talking about him. Some wog fella'. They all like him because he has lots of money and gold jewellery.

A1: He has lots of money and he has these gold chains and stuff, gold watches, and shinny shoes.

The following statements accentuate that male dominance/subordination relations are often worked out through the use of physical violence. Such violence is premised on beliefs about the importance of aggressive and violent acts for gaining and maintaining status, reputation, and resources in the male group. It is used to sustain a sense of masculine identity and as a form of self-protection. It clarifies the pecking order, establishes who is on top and who is not, who is in and who is out. The move from the outer to the inner can often require a violent rite of passage. These boys who are from class minorities use various forms of violence to demonstrate their power and potency may find that it pays off in a group leadership, popularity, pride, friendship, excitement, and other resources that may not be available to them in other setting outside the group or gang. This suggests that those males who are most marginalised in society are most susceptible to violence and who subscribe to such values and are victims of such values. They are Connell's (1987) "shock troops," those who do patriarchy's "dirty work."

Q: Who is the most popular bloke in your school?
A3: We have this big Samoan dude.

A1: Because nobody wants to get beaten up.

A3: He is a thug! ... He would be about year nine and it's not fat it's all muscle. At Kelvin Grove High.

A3: Because nobody wants to pick him.

A1: I'll pick him. bring him on!

A3: He is like the leader of the Samoan gang.

Q: Is he popular with the girls?
A3: I think so ... guys fear him and chicks like him.

A1: I don't fear nobody. I don't care if I get flogged up!

Many of these boys feel the negative force of other relations of power and prestige based on class, race, and age or, for example, size, sporting prowess, intelligence, and academic achievement. In these contexts, and according to these criteria, many are not obviously successful, advantaged, or powerful and certainly do not feel so. The argument goes that for males who are in poverty, from racial and ethnic minorities, educationally disadvantaged, homeless, and unemployed, risky and violent behaviours provide almost the only way of obtaining status and cultural resources. Therefore, physical violence may be most pronounced among those who have more to gain and little to lose. This is most likely to occur among those outside the mainstream of education, employment, and stable relationships. For these boys their behaviour provides "an opportunity to exercise personal power under conditions of minimal structural power a mode of influence of last resort" (Archer, 1994, p. 317). A lack of power and status at the structural level can result in the exercise of violence at the individual and group level.

A2: The Samoans and the aborigines and all the tough big blokes who can fight.

A2: Because if you mess with them then you mess with getting your head smashed by millions of them.

A4: There are so many wogs, if you pick one of them then you pick like fifty of them.

A3: Yeah, all they different colors hangout in gangs.

A1: He flogged me up on New Years eve just because I had like three bucks or four bucks and I wouldn't give it to him.

A3: All the grade 12s from last year ... all the girls hangout with the older boys ... I don't know why.

(Connell, 1996) drew on Gramsci (1981) class theory to understand the operation of masculinities in relation to social power. This theory suggests a process that extends beyond the contest of brute power into private life and cultural processes. For example, many of these at-risk males are unable to dominate and control others through the climbing of educational hierarchies and obtaining material possessions. Hence, for many of these at-risk males the doors to power within these hierarchies are locked, especially for those living in low socio-economic or ethnic communities.

Therefore, many at-risk males are outside the legitimate mainstream and, therefore, seek other forms of identity, power, excitement, and pleasure. Hence, alternative forms of traditional masculine acts emerge for some at-risk adolescent males through the exercising of brute power by using coercion, force, homophobia, and violence. These may be achieved through antisocial behaviour such as drug taking, theft, gang involvement, and violent behaviour. This, in turn may lead to punishment such as incarceration in youth detention centres or specific government institutions in which programs are designed to both punish and rehabilitate.

The boys associated their support networks with the school guidance counsellor, psychologist, mothers or older siblings. All fathers were either absent emotionally or physically or both and the boys became extremely aggressive when asked questions about their Fathers. The boys perceived school and teachers negatively. This was associated with punishment, labelling, continual failure academically and a cycle of a self fulfilling prophecy of negative behaviour. They felt the way to cope with school was to not go at all or be totally subordinate, for example "shutup and be nice," "do ya work," "don't pile shit on the teachers and stop fighting with other kids." The boys thought they had no incentive there was nothing to gain or value in changing their behaviours within the home or educational environment.

A4: Don't go near em.

A2: Don't swear at them everyday ... I don't know ... don't jump out of a window when you don't want to stay in. (laughter)

A3: Don't throw chairs at them.

A1: Don't be such a smart arse.

A4: Don't go near the wankers!

The boys seem to have no ability to problem solve or communicate a negotiating process to reinforce a positive outcome. They believe by not going near teachers or not going to school or just totally conforming to the school and teachers demands is the answer.

A1: Pay attention. Don't talk to anyone.

A2: Take some books to school.

[laughter]

A3: Take school equipment to school.

A2: Don't throw chisels at them ... They don't like it. Don't tell them they are crazy.

A4: Stop fighting with other kids.

A1: Don't tell em their psycho.

Education has a legitimate role to assess critically the scope of the positives and the negatives of these boys. Such work will need to promote genuine, empathetic listening, and a clear understanding of gender performances and individual psychological factors. Once a common ground is established for effective communication may there be possibilities of exploring issues around abusive behaviours within and between groups. Alan Jenkins (1990) states; "invitation to responsibility", a behaviour pattern that is not innate, but is learned through engagement in sound social relationships.

A1: 'Cause I misbehaved at school.

A2: Ummm ... 'cause I had problems with the school work (laughter).

A3: I had problems with my school work and I got into a fight and almost broke some fella's jaw and then I got suspended after I wagged school.

A 4: Fighting ... I wagged too much and I didn't do my work ... basically.

The alternative program (Learning Adapted to Students Educational Requirements; LASER) was time out from school to have fun, surf, play rugby, artwork, and gain some work experience in a profession they enjoyed. The program relied heavily on individual psychological rehabilitation factors and projected minimum awareness of the impact of gender. Therefore, a program should take into consideration the impact of gender, targeting the entire social system as well as the individual factors. The boys believed that LASER teachers had more individual time and spoke to them in a more respectful manner compared to teachers, but generally believed that the male facilitators at LASER still lacked egalitarian forms of communicating or role modelling. In some cases, alternative suspension/exclusion programs may increase the likelihood that the abuse will reoccur and increase the student's feelings of alienation. Hence, many at-risk males feel labelled as a "behavioural problem" and feel socially defeated when they are reintegrated back into the original educational setting that they were suspended from. At worst, it escalates the problem particularly when alternative programs are viewed as a punishment only and the application of systemic power.

Just before we had the following break, three teachers proceeded to stand in the middle of the classroom and have a very loud conversation. It was extremely disruptive for the flow of our discussion. The students found it extremely distracting and upsetting considering they were disclosing some important and personal issues. No matter how much I glared at the teachers they seemed unwilling to yield their power and control over their domain.

Many programs and teachers appear to reinforce this privileged position of males in society. The design of appropriate programs for at-risk boys raises important pedagogical issues for teachers who want to avoid authoritarian teaching methods but do not have the primary intent of empowerment of these boys. Therefore, it is imperative that male teachers address issues such as gender and violence, unlike advocation of males as a oppressed group, communication needs to begin from the premise that men are privileged within the current gender order and that masculinity interacts with class and ethnicity. Male members of staff have to create the bridges between educational approaches and their personal lives and recognise their powerful messages of masculinity that they transmit to teenagers. An alternative vision of equity cannot be achieved unless male staff accepts this challenge in their own lives.

Male teacher (LASER): Listen here bro! Sit down and start being talkative!

As I called for an interview break the boys proceeded to turn the tape on when the male teacher (LASER) and I were out of the room. The conversation was about the mood the male teacher (LASER) was in and how it was affecting them for the day. The boys quickly turned the tape off when we returned to the room and the male teacher (LASER) proceeded to reprimand them. My impression after listening to the conversation on the tape was the boys felt they had to accommodate the interviews with positive comments of the program and teachers facilitating them because the male teacher was present at this group interview. This affected the validity of my data to a degree.

A1: What the fuck is up Bruce's arse today?

A2: Don't know, he's been a real pig today.

A4: He probably had a tiff with his Mars.

A2: He probably didn't get a bit this morning. (Laughter)

A1: We can't even play our CDs without him getting up our arse.

A3: I think David (student) gave him shit yesterday (the student wasn't there today)

A2: He sucks! Why take it out on us?

A2: He probably didn't get his surf this morning.

A1: Fuck nos!

Many alternative programs reinforce the current gendered relations of power favour boys' interests over those of girls and the answer to improving the welfare of boys requires empowerment of boys. Therefore, working against their interests, this approach often reinforces mythopoetic masculinity politics. That draws heavily upon men being the victims of a reversion to the traditional gender roles created by the women's movements of the 1960s and the 1970s. Such a perspective ignores issues of power and privilege for men. These politics promote and normalise traditional construction of masculinity. The mythopoetic movement has simplified the complexities of masculinities by focusing attention upon new gender inequalities. However, socio-economic and cultural factors within their literature are not mentioned. Many programs and teachers' appear to reinforce this privileged position of males in society. The design of appropriate programs for at-risk boys raises important pedagogical issues for teachers' who want to avoid authoritarian teaching methods but do not have the primary intent of empowerment of these boys. Therefore, it is imperative that male teachers' address issues such as gender and violence, unlike advocation of males as a oppressed group, communication needs to begin from the premise that men are privileged within the current gender order and that masculinity interacts with class and ethnicity. Male members of staff have to create the bridges between educational approaches and their personal lives and recognise their powerful messages of masculinity that they transmit to teenagers. An alternative vision of equity cannot be achieved unless male staff accepts this challenge in their own lives.

(Connell, 1995a) also emphasised the importance of exploring masculinities in terms of different social settings and social classes and the danger of thinking that there are coloured masculinities or working class masculinities. Hence, the milieu of class and race within masculinities needs to be considered as well.

The boys have a dislike for law enforcement, but admire the notion of the Military and its routine/structure. They like the idea of being told what to do and when to do it The notion of being paid to be trained to be tough, fit and use weapons represents an admiration for traditional aggressive masculinities.

A1: Go to the army.

A1: Not go back to fucked school!

A2: Because you get heaps of money for the rest of your life.

A2: You don't get killed. There are not many wars on.

A1: Be more mature

A1: Play footy, do heaps of muscle training.

A2: You get paid lots of money for being in the army but you don't get paid lots of money for being at school.

A1: Exactly.

A1: It all comes down to money.

A1: You don't have to pay rent or food when your in the army.

Here the focus is on gendered-job theory, on the ways in which certain types of work actually carry within them certain definitions of what it means to be male and female. For example, the height and weight of machinery and equipment may be scaled to a male or female average. Often this form of machismo workplace definition takes is governed by social class, as Willis's (1977) study of working class lads and workplaces shows. Willis study accentuates the ritualised, masculinized mateship and vocabularies of sexist abuse and the normalised misogyny, which is part of the macho violent vocabulary in gendered job theory. The epitome of the military, manual arts, computers, and male dominated sports. For example, working with machinery which could be invested with aggressive definitions of male behaviour and sexuality. Certain instruments and machines can be regarded as representations of masculine power and as subordinating extensions over women. This is not to suggest that males from other social groupings are non-violent, rather it is to offer an explanation for the relatively high levels of violence among less powerful and disadvantaged groups.

A1: I will be older but.

A2: We will be getting paid to be yelled at ... What's the difference at school?

A3: Yeah...we'll be able to flog the cops then 'cause we'll be in the military.

A1: No, I'm talking about going to school and then when I finish school I want to go to the army.

When discussing future careers, intriguingly, the boys had a fascination with joining the military and yet they despised law enforcement (e.g., "coppers, piggers are the enemy, they make our fucking lives a misery, they're out to get us"). The military epitomised the idea of masculinised mateship (gangs) and admiration of male power in the form of weapons, aggression, and violence. Overall, avoiding school work, the military was offering training and money to be physically big, strong, and powerful. Surprisingly, they liked the idea of been given orders and conforming to expectations of routine and structure.

The boys' live in a fantasy about how having a million dollars or being rich would solve all their problems in life. They believe to be a successful male is to have money, here the interplay between masculinities and class is apparent. The above statement is obvious evidence that there is a milieux of different masculinities according to different social settings and social classes.

Overall, the students within the study showed that they can at times take responsibility for their own life decisions, if given respect and positive direction. Within these programs facilitation and time in developing this ability was limited in helping the students cope better with their emotional/physically abusive environments and understandings of their male identity. They generally saw the program as a "bludge" from doing boring academic school work but still had to conform to authoritarian figures similar to the institution of school.

In terms of discipline, the issue of who controls whom was a major topic of discussion. The students made it clear how much they respected parents and other adults who really lived up to what they believed and were "cool" positive role models. When this could be done without being treated disrespectfully themselves, they particularly wanted contacts and dialogs with egalitarian adults. Extending on the issues of real respect for the integrity and individuality of these students would make it possible for them to approach and communicate with adults. Many of these students see current social reality for youth more clearly and know what questions should be asked, hence working with adults who are good problems solvers and communicators may bring some major problems to light for all.

Therefore, the students valued a form of discipline that let them know exactly where the adults around them stood without being 'beaten over the head with it'. They did not want issues forced down their throats, but they also did not want to be treated with the condescension implied in being continually labelled negatively as a 'problem kid'. Hence, the vigorous protesting in gaining any type of attention from family and school authoritarian figures. Another factor that affected the value of discipline was the degree to which the adults really lived what they pretended to be. Too often the disciplining adults demanded controls or behaviour of the students that they themselves did not practice or live up to. Therefore, finding majority of the students' perceptions of teachers or any form of authority as unimportant role models in their lives. Many of the students considered school and schooling as something entirely separate from their real lives.

Discourses of power and gender influence how these males think and solve problems, and traditional forms of masculine performances have a major impact on supportive environments (protective processes). Therefore, the resilience literature needs to take into account the impact of gender in educational environments.