What is Masculinity
Summary and Response to: What is Masculinity? Chapter 1 of Masculinities and Culture – by John Beynon
This chapter by itself could have been an entire book. The question of what masculinity is starts with the realization that there is no one definition but rather a set of rules and guidelines. Masculinity is in fact the way males interact with each other and the environment. Mr. Beynon tried to make it so everyone could understand this complicated social construction but in doing so he almost trivialized the first chapter of his book. There was a very black and white understanding of some topics leaving out proportions of the community such as Transexual/Transgendered individuals and the influence of race, ethnicity and sexual expression in the masculine world. He does do a very good job explain the lack of biological proof that masculinity is inherent and gives many authors/scientists opinions on the matter but it is all in a every ethnocentric backlighting.
I was very interested in the idea of the nostalgic loss of the ‘young manhood’. I’ve never considered young manhood to be any different in orientation, even though the expectations have change, then male masculinity. The ever-changing ideology and glorification of the true man was, I assume, been spread across the globe ever since the invention of the patriarchal ladder and the ‘breadwinner’ strategy to living and supporting the local economic structures. But young manhood’s history could very possibly be even more confusing and chimerical. As one grows up there are more susceptible to social changes and influences in my mind. So with each new generation of ‘males’ a new definition of manhood and masculinity would have been evolved tangential but not separate from the definitions of their fathers; a form of hybridized masculinity. An ever changing straitjacket keeping the populous from feeling they have no control by allowing slight altercations but in the end it still tries to keep everyone strait.
Now as masculinity changes so does what it means to be feminine for our social structure has set them as dichotomies. When women step more and more into what has been known as the traditional masculine light men have had to adjust as well. Some adjustments have been towards a nullification of gendered stereotypes and others have been towards super-masculinity. These changes are effecting the ever changing straitjacket of youth today for the messages of appropriate behavior are slowly getting altered in two very different directions.
Colonization of the United States
Summary and Response to: Gendering, Racializing Classifying: Settler Colonization in the United States, 1590-1990 – by Dolores Janiewski
It makes perfect sense that the USA would be considered a colonized area. This chapter focuses on the experiences of Native Americans, Mexican Americans, African Americans, and Euro-Americans from 1590 to 1990. Ignoring the fact that America and many white Americans have fallen under the classification of “American exceptionalism” there is still good reason to investigate the United States government of the same atrocities across the gender, racial, and class divides as any other conquers peoples. The trend of land use ranged from mixed settlements, plantations, and then pure settlements. The colonists came to this country to discover a new land but instead found an inhabited one. Though it was inhabited, the current people had few land rights recognized by the conquering government. Now if only they had the power to take away such land and all the rights that go along with being a ‘man’.
The Naïve peoples, who occupied the land now known as the United States, played a crucial part in the early survival of the Euro-Americans. The Native Americans as well as the settlers lived together and lived almost entirely off the land. As more people immigrated over standards of living, life, and society were imposed by the British government as more women started to travel as well as men. Women were sent with the idea that they would raise a new and proper, not to mention loyal, next generation in the American frontiers. Gender divides traveled from Europe to the ‘new world’ and came into conflict with the not patriarchal society of the Native people. This and many other non-Christian/heathen characteristics called for these ‘founders’ to use their new power and “simultaneously legitimated and perpetuated…the plural society of a racially bifurcated colonist America regulated by the normative code of a racial creed.” The colonies changed from integrated to more plantation type style living as there were now more people to ‘properly’ own land. These properties though required people to work on them and to have empty to own.
Systematically Native people where civilized, killed or both. In all occurrences the land that was once native owned was taken and giving to white landowners, ignoring the claim of the indigenous peoples. This land was used to further the travel westward and towards expansion of monetary gains. Tribal governments were abolished and the rights of all Native people where nullified for their were no longer considered people. As compensation the government set up missionaries on land that forced Native Americans to live there hoping for further assimilation. The language, religion, caste ideals, and social interactions where all expected to change in accordance to the local mission. ‘Positive patriarchal’ ways had to be astablished and the only way to do this was to put Native women down as low as possible. Under such strong pressure of assimilation the trend was to do the opposite at any possible point. Their revolt included the survival of Native language, spirituality, identity, and cultural practices that are still to this day shared in communities.
The African-American story has few positives it seems. With the need for cheap labor and low class Euro-Americans immigrants not immigrating fast enough to service the entire need Africans where captured and transported to the ‘new world’. I found it interesting that the way in which slavery operated is very vast. I had always seen simply a rich white land owner and his property. Early on slaves where not considered full property but could pay their way out of servitude. The ownership of the slaves children and bodies was not as extreme in the beginning as it was later on. It seems the main confrontations started to occur when ‘free blacks’ would travel around towns, want to earn money in occupations other then domestic/physical labor, own land, and fill positions that where previously for the European settlers. This fear of successful people who didn’t hold true to the British/Christian, and white ideals would become successful caused for laws to be passed that limited the knowledge/education permitted to slaves, they became indentured property making their children, their bodies, and any possible recourse for mistreatment unavailable. They were no longer allowed to purchase land and the social prejudice kept any person of American decent locked in a box with little to no opportunities. In such conditions rebellion was guaranteed. Some more overt gestures such as physical violence, running away, and destruction of property were less heard of then rebellions of cultural submission. Keeping songs, stories, and even languages alive on plantation as well as slow downs and crafts that held knowledge in pictures and colors of histories. The idea that Africans were ‘naturally’ adapted to be slaves and nothing more infiltrated the majority of the culture. When slavery was abolished the south decided to lock its doors and keep it’s ideals in slavery and the caste strong. When Civil war broke out more then 20,000 free black men where enlisted. They fought for a country where everyone was free and that every man had the right to vote. This war would determine if they were allowed access to land, education, mobility and citizenship. But nothing is every that simple. A backlash occurred within the white community and organizations such as the KKK believed it their duty to keep old ways and thought in place. Even though slavery was abolished doesn’t mean that the law recognize people as equals. To this day the African-American community struggles for acknowledgement as true citizens in the US. Organizations brought to light suffrages during the civil rights campaign and continue today to educate and find a road out of the dark hole that was dug so long ago.
As American settlers found the need for more and more land the travel west was the only option. Eventually settlers ran into a new form of native peoples. Those that lived in what we would now call the SW United states. Just 40 years after the United States had established it’s independence Mexico established their independence from Spain. With the influx of white settlers crossing the country Mexican officials tried to control the number of Anglo-American settlers coming into their land but traders managed to come and soon flowed settlers. With these new settlers came new ideologies of what was proper and the caste system, which was established in settler colonies put Mexicans at the bottom just above the African slaves, which were used to work their lands. Of course in the patriarchal system established Mexican women where even lower in the caste. With all of this tension soon a war erupted ending in more then half of Mexican land being incorporated into the United States. Treaties and agreements where signed and made that should have insured the safety of Mexican native ways, language, and customs but the way the Anglo courts interpreted the agreements differed over time in the end resulting in the loss of so much that Mexican self determination was near impossible. They were now in the American economy but placed at the very bottom of it.
Immigration issues and boarder conflicts now encompass the majority of issues between the United States and Mexico. With the interventions of NAFTA Mexican debt keeps rising and rising with no end in site. The creation of sweatshop on the Mexico-American boarder where created to attract business to the area with the promise of low costs and minimal regulations. To this day there is a fight to maintain Mexican rights as people and the indigenous peoples of a good portion of this country
Final Project Abstract
Abstract: The intersections of race and gender in militarized zones across Okinawa Japan.
I will conduct research about the past and present situation of military stations across the island of Okinawa. By doing this I hope to find intersections between race and gender that will help me understand the conflict currently at large in the Far East. I will blog my research to ensure not only easy access but also ease of understand and processing. The blogging process will help me organize and systematically examine the history of the conflict. I plan on using multimedia sources found on the web including video, music, and webpages as well as readings from the assigned list. I will analysis these sources using the ideology of the cage introduced by Marlyne Frye, the ‘Common sense theory, and the Five faces of oppression.
Settler Society – Canada
Summary and Response to: Fractious Politics of a Settler Society: Canada – by Daiva Stasiulis and Radha Jhapan
A history of genocide through violence for the purpose of land, wealth, and power is one I hoped and almost made myself believe was brief. The genocide of the Native Americans was not an isolated incident. Genocide played out around the world. Taking place anywhere there were countries yet to be named and continents yet to be owned by ruling men with the need itching their fingers. The rising of a flag on the ‘new world’ was happening again and again influencing every native population on this planet. It amazes me how similar each story is in justification and means; mostly in the loss and then fight to be recognized as people and the denial of those rights. Canada shares this basic history having ‘celebrated’ the 500th anniversary of the Columbian invasion of the Americas in 1992 and finally the inclusion of aboriginal right, linguistic duality, racial and ethnic equality, a new third level of government to accommodate aboriginal self government, and the equality of women in the Charlottetown Accord rhetoric. Now I do realize that just because the rhetoric states something as true and followed does not mean that it is but the basic rights are down on paper and that has to be a step forward. Well it would have been if it had passed.
The aboriginal peoples of Canada have suffered ‘suppression of the land, civil, political, cultural and religious rights’ violation since explores of the ‘new world’ started to become independent and able to take care of themselves. The country itself is today considered to be built upon a settler’s society which considering that history is written by the victors not the dead could be seen as true. Part of this settler society construct is the fact that the goal building in Canada was to create a New Britain as far as replicating the social behavior and identity of the colonists. To do this the ‘white Canada’ immigration policy was enacted which recruited only the ‘best classes’ of British men and women. Everyone else was excluded unless they were being transported for labor purposes. By holding up these “shared framework(s) of civilization and moral and material standards.” the crown offered rewards to keep the colonies going and the love and loyalty for Britain high. This obviously had a strong detrimental effect on the native population of the area who wanted little to do with the British ideology of society or so it seemed.
There seem to be very few mentions in history books of the aboriginal or Metis (mixed blood) people before the civilizing of them occurred. The fact that the indigenous people played a large role in the early success of the colonizers is never heard. Maybe if they are pictured as anything but savage, uncivilized, and unclean the fact that they were killed off for sport would be too disturbing. There story gets even more complicated when you throw in the fact that not only was Britain trying to colonize Canada but France had its flag in the dirt as well. These compete forces seemed to care very little about the aboriginal and Metis people who stood in the way of their land hording. Each had their own ideal civilized person with their own mannerisms, language, and religions to force upon the un-civilized. Neither could claim cultural hegemony in the country and their fore no native person could rest easy in any one culture for each was under the impression that recognition and assimilation strategy was best suited.
Assimilation did not mean integration though. Those that intermarried or where ‘civilized’ by changing their language, their lifestyle, and their religion was still judged on their outward racial classification. Kept to the lower strata of the economic scale, especially women, their lives seemed to only get worse. This story seems to be told again and again. In every country there are indigenous people who are considered the uncivilized and the free to be abused. The women are the lowest on these ladders and suffer the most. Yet in this cause and many others there are uprising. In Canada, at least on paper, legal decimation based on your ancestry is no longer possible and women suffrage movements, particularly women of color, have made a path. It is important that we congonzize that each indigenous people have suffered differently but the connections are haunting. Why must exploring have such a bloody toll?
Reviewing Ross’s Blog
Review –
Overall I really like how Ross’s blog is set up. It’s very easy to find what I wanted and the website decorations did not distract but added to the personality of the page. He has one link on his page, which leads to RAINN, which seems to be a national organization helping victims of rape, abuse and incest. It is a very informative website and I learned quite a lot in the time I was able to look around. It’s nice to see where he places his interests as far as organizations go. I wonder if there are other places, blogs, or projects which hold some interest or even tell a little about where he’s coming from.
The blogs themselves are very insightful. He seems to have a lot of passion when it comes to the crossing of youth education and media. His review of Disney movies and cartoons was very inspiring. This was an amazingly well thought-out piece with some examples that I have never seen used in this type of analysis before. Drawing on matrix ideologies to bring together the representation of racism, tokenism, and racialization of characters and link it to the public climate and it’s representation in the media showed a larger picture of oppressive ideologies. These ideologies push us at a very young age to grow up and identify with these characters in one way or another. He continues on in other blogs discussing the ever changing faces of racism and how even though it starts early it certainly doesn’t end there for there are many factors guiding us not only in childhood.
Ross’s ability to explain and examine the patriarchal systems of oppression and privilege are very compelling as well. He is able to see the system as just that, a system, and with that lens observe it from a distance allowing for an accurate representation of the parts and their functions. Working from personal experiences he is able to show discovery not only through text but in an everyday arena. I really appreciated the personal view point grounding the text. It is very easy to read and then forget that the words describe systems that are playing out all around us and not just in the pages.
As it all wraps up I fund that I would like to know more about how he personally fits into the systems in which he writes about so passionately. I feel that the piece ‘Racism in Children’s Entertainment’ was a turning piece for him and there is much more to be said from his particular lens. Granted I have to keep in mind that the structural systems influencing my life are not necessarily the same as the ones he sees and I review this website based on what I believe is eye catching and makes me stop and think. In the end I find that possibly pulling in more inter-sectionality in the form of sexuality and class issues as well as keeping global ideologies and methods in mind even if it’s the absence of them will open the analysis for further reviews.
Movie Review – The Boondock Saints
Review Of: The Boondock Saints
If you flip the cover of Boondock Saints over it reads “Brothers. Killers. Saints.” This shows the basic progression of the movie in as few words as possible. The main characters are the Macmanus brother, Irish catholic immigrants, who have no family known to them besides each other. They are low class, live in illegal loft apartments in the ‘Irish neighborhood’, and work at butchery. There devotion to their religion is made obvious and there devotion to each other even more so.
There are some very typical and some very atypical stereotypes portrayed in this movie. The brothers themselves are Irish with thick accents. They are poor and work at a meat factory and also seem to enjoy drinking. All of these are stereotypical characteristics of the Irish immigrant. Although, they are not the image of the uneducated worker but rather are very educated both in the traditional book sense and in the life sense. The bothers speak at least 4 languages and are able to think very quickly on their feet.
Very typical masculine roles are played out in this movie. The brothers are kind of goofs and seem to get into scuffles quite often. Although it is always portrayed in good fun when the fighting is over the masculine ideology is still present. The brothers are portrayed as being able to handle almost any confrontation, have a large knowledge base in weaponry, and are able to take massive injury and keep on going. When they start the transformation to killers, they had previously killed two men out of self-defense, they are represented with a god sent message while they slept that they are to “Destroy all that which is evil, so the good may flourish.” They take this message to heart and take it on themselves to be the judge and the jury for people who are ‘evil’; In this case members of the Russian and Italian mob. The portrayal of power and privilege is almost intoxicating but never questioned by either brother. More interesting is the idea that power/privileged is placed on two individuals who seem to seldom have either in life. They are given an opportunity to do something and they decide to take it with god’s permission.
Their first planned killing, although not going as planned, is successful and 8 men are killed. The brothers show very little emotion over the killing of these men and in a matter of minutes they are playing a joke on a friend. The brothers keep killing members of the mob and eventually get caught by the leader of the Italian mob. They are held in the basement and beaten and forced to watch their friend bleed to death. To get out of the situation one brother breaks the other ones hand by smashing it to allow the hand to slip out of the handcuffs. The idea that these boys can do anything and because of that and the fact that they are killing people the general public believes to be ‘evil’ allows for the title of Saint; Men who kill and are verified for doing it.
The only female character in this movie is a woman who works at a strip club and a butch lesbian who is to start work with the brothers at the meat factory. Both are obviously negative images for the feminist lesbian gets insulted and starts a brawl in the factory over an comment concerning the ‘rule of thumb’ and the stripper gets knocked unconscious and molested.
One of the most interesting representations of non-stereotypical roles is that of the FBI agent Smecker. Although his sexuality is not stated out right, we do see him sharing a bed with another man, his gestures are very effeminate as is his walk and even at some points the ways he uses words. When he first arrives on the crime scenes he takes all the local police down a notch by insulting their skills. After that he put in his head phones and listens to classical opera while dancing around the crime scene and investigating it. He comes up with the murder scenario in less then 5 minutes. Agent Smecker uses his supposed sexual orientation to make all of the local police uncomfortable but also they all seem to evolve as police investigators during the time that he is with them. Agent Smecker’s feminine representation of self never seems to bother the Macmanus brothers though. Through this strong representation of comfort around a person not performing typical masculinity the brothers come off as stronger characters.
Later in the movie agent Smecker finds out the Macmanus brothers have been captured and rush to their rescue. To do this agent Smecker dresses up in drag and presents ‘herself’ to a member of the mob to get access to the house. Although the plan itself doesn’t work out the ideology of a powerful man without a powerful position on the patriarchal ladder is intriguing. This man is, overall, represented as a strong and very capable character.
All in all, this movie was a vigilante thriller with a twist of life thrown in for fun. It brings up question about the rights of individuals to make decisions for the many. At the end of the movie the brothers, and there father, are seen warning the public to toe the line of evil for evil will be punished by the three of them. In our world it is a nice thought that there would be people willing to take justice up and protect ‘the people’. Unfortunately, all of the social structures that have affected our lives from our first days until now make us unable, in my mind, to determine a dichotomy of evil and good. For if these men truly did exist I would want them to have the same believes and values as me and I assume that is true for everyone.
Towards the Definition
Summary and response to: Towards the Definition of Patriarchy – by Heidi Hartmann
Patriarchy is a structure. It’s not a person or even a company but rather an entire institution pushing women, men, boys, and girls to fit the ‘normalized’ roles that there sexes and associated genders prescribe in today’s society. It’s important to note that the patriarchy is hierarchical as well as oppressive. No two people are going to experience patriarchy in the same ways. There are people who have other advantages that work to raise them up on the patriarchal ladder and others which place them towards the bottom.
The major division is drawn through the perceivable sex. This line pushes a dichotomy into play where if you are on one side of the line therefore you must opposite of what is on the other. While male identified people are strong, independent, and emotionless, women are emotional dependent on men, and considered less physically able. While men are considered the positive women are considered negative and therefore to be a man with feminine characteristics is unthinkable for a hetero-normative society. For women to be masculine is to be pushy or bitchy.
The labor force of women is highly unrecognized both in and out of the home. While a majority of women pull double shifts at home and then at work their unpaid and paid labor is seldom recognized. The work force is just one of many institutions that holds up the patriarchal backbone of society. Marriage is another. The idea behind the need for a women to be with a man to provide for her puts untold amounts of stress on both sexes, and others who do not identify within the hetero-normative culture. These stresses come from religious organizations, family, mass media, etc. The common sense of it all seems to justify ones personal experiences until you truly look into the history behind the systematic oppression of women’s rights and see that if this many people are suffering that is holding the end of the stick.
We as people fit into this hierarchy like puzzle pieces and it’s not until you can see the big picture that the world starts to fall apart. It’s strange that you can be so content to be like those around you, integrated into a system. The problem is that the system itself is forever changing and unless you’re carefully falling into it again and again is possible.
Something About the Subject
Summary and response to: Something About the Subject makes it Hard to Name – by Gloria Yamato
In the ‘axis’ of oppression racism plays a huge part. Race as developed into something that everyone willing or not, has to play a part in. There are many races but the majority of the influence revolves around the white vs. non-white. Then outside of your own micro level definitions and placement there are others that place themselves around you. It’s amazing how structured something so arbitrary can make our lives. Racism or the “monster” has made the majority of us believe that it simply is how life has always been and always will be. Some of us take it a step further and internalize the oppression. This allows us to believe in the stereotypes and assumptions of who we should be, how we should act, and who/what we should believe as truth. We end up being our own gatekeepers and without much work the dominant culture has ‘normalized’ our behavior.
When you normalize behavior you become able to categorize people and their behaviors. This also works with racist behaviors. Yamato classifies 4 types of racist behaviors: aware/blatant, aware/covert, unaware/unintentional, and unaware/self-righteous. Out of those categories I would personally hope that the people around me were unaware/unintentional, so that though education thoughts could change. I find that the easiest to deal with, on a regular basis, are the aware/intentional because at least they’re honest about it and realize their prejudice. You know where to not go and who to not deal with, but in a sense this is another form of internalized oppression. Granted it is better to have someone who is socially minded and trying to overcome racist believes then any of the other categories. The most difficult would be the last category, unaware/righteous. The idea that one is colorblind in a society that seems to see only in color and yet that every colored person should therefore identify strongly with their race origin. This feeds internalized oppression ideals that we are not yet Asian enough, African enough etc… to be Asian or African. These ideas are strange for we are not asking them to step forward and do a traditional Irish dance or where the clothing of the noble British Empire. There is a one-way street in those kinds of conversations showing the connections between privilege and power.
In the end racism isn’t just an individual level system. There are hundreds of years of history and the founding of many nations on racist ideologies. Wither you can categorize people as racist is semi irrelevant, it seems, when it is obvious that we all have preconceived notions thrown at us from institutions all around us. “Racism must be dealt with on two levels, personal and societal, emotional and institutional.” Each person has to find a space where they can identify as they please and from there invite people in to that space that will prove to be healthy additions. When there are enough people you can manage to create societal change and later institutional change.
What Every Indian Knows
Summary and Response to: The Forward and Introduction of Conquest Sexual violence and American Indian Genocide – by Andrea Smith
What Every Indian Knows
Auschwitz ovens
burn bright
in America
twenty-four million
perished in the flame
Nazi
not a people
but
a way of life
Trail of Tears Humans
Ends in Oklahoma
an Indian name of
Red Earth
Redder still
Soaked in blood
of two hundred
remove tribes
the ovens burn bright
in America
Ancestral ashes
sweep the nation
carried in
Prevailing winds
Survivors know
The oven door stands wide
and some like mouse
cat crazed and frenzied
turn
and run into the jaws
at night
the cat calls softly
to the resting
us
-Pam Colorado
I feel that is poem is a very appropriate starting place for a discussion on race and gendered based violence. The history of a people is its backbone and there are some things that only a few members of society can truly understand. It is obvious that the author has suffered for her fight and designation as Native American. She brings to the table the fact that every woman who is considered non-white is subjected to stereotypical behavior guidelines and the marginalization not only of your person but of your mental capacity and knowledge base; The colored point of view. Forever you will be known not as a person but as a colored person and some who that changes what you have to say. I agree that this happens. The fact that I am Chinese does not mean I can tell you what your zodiac sign is or the data of the next new years. But it is expected of me to know. It is expected of me to be able to hear an Asian accent and understand what the person is says or even to be able to respond in that language.
The term “ethno-stress” is used in Smiths case to describe the continuous taking from the naïve people. There land, there traditions, there bones, there right to a cultural education are all still slipping though the communities fingers as they fight so hard and are almost completely unheard by the general public. This process marginalizes the community further and slowly strips away the entire ‘threat’ to the government, patriarchy, and social structures.
When you bring in gender the questions get harder. Smith says that gender violence is basically just another tool for the oppression of the treat hiding in the corners of the patriarchal system but also in racisms and colonialism. To this day the United States and the Native Americans have a tired and thread bare relationship. Gendered based violence is another kick to keep them down. They do this by using state level limitations to make the Native peoples not people at all but concurred. They are inherently “rapeable.”
Although like Smith says they are still active and even after over 500 years of genocide Native Americans are one of the groups at the forefront of racial and gendered arguments. The message that Smith portrays is of warriors who have been so beaten down that their own bodies are not even theirs but with such spirit and drive to accomplish that disappearing is not an option. This book was written truly for anyone who wishes to experience that kind of power for in her writing you can very much feel her presence.
