Patriarchy and the ‘Crisis of Masculinity’ by Sam de Boise

[ismnotwasm]

Very decent read.

The idea of patriarchy is, furthermore, complicated by the idea that ‘men’ and ‘women’ do not represent mutually exclusive, or even natural, categories. Our knowledge of sexual difference is itself rooted within specific forms of knowledge that do not necessarily tally with experiential realities. The ‘two-sex’ model, or the idea that men and women represent fundamentally different bodies which determine our opportunities, are themselves a product of numerous historic changes in medical, legal, scientific, economic and social professions. As intersex and transgender individuals have also demonstrated, supposedly ‘natural’ sexual differences, defined in terms of reproductive organs, are open to contestation.[7]

As Raewyn Connell argues, men’s notion of ‘masculinity’ is constructed not in relation simply to women or ‘femininity’ but in relation to other men along axes of class, race, ethnicity, disability and sexuality.[8] Her theory of ‘hegemonic masculinity’ suggests that adherence to certain cultural constructs of gender is the means by which some men protect their privileged positions. The initial formulation of patriarchy, based on a binary of men and women, was too over-generalised; white, heterosexual men (over the course of the 20th century at least) tended toward denigration of gay and black men’s practices to construct their own gender identities, not just women.
Furthermore whilst some men dominate military, economic and social institutions, this is not the core issue; it is the means by which culture shapes and legitimises men’s everyday behaviour into appearing natural that enables certain inequalities to continue. Barriers to economic opportunities for women are often no longer (directly) legislative, however informal barriers are still maintained through how men act in their workplaces; this is not determined by their genitals, but through years of reinforcement. The importance of this is that it places the focus on men’s practices, at all levels, as explanations for continuing inequalities without resorting to essentialist ideas of sex differences. In this case, relations of domination and subordination are much complex and often unconsciously reproduced than the concept of patriarchy allows for.

In Defence of (the Concept of) Patriarchy

So far I have suggested that gender oppression is not the only form of oppression, ‘men’ and ‘women’ are contestable categories, and gender identity is constructed in relation to myriad social factors, not just the ‘opposite’ sex. In addition, the fact is that some men do not have economic power over some women, and some men have been made distinctly economically powerless. Since the 1970s we have seen heavy industry and mining (areas of ‘traditional’ working class male employment) decline and the 2007 financial collapse and ensuing austerity measures have impacted on male employment figures. Similarly some women’s rise to elite positions has given the appearance of ending men’s virtual occupational monopoly in many professions, despite the fact women are still in the minority.
However this does not render the concept of patriarchy obsolete; neither does it suggest a crisis of masculinity.

http://www.newleftproject.org/index.php/site/article_comments/patriarchy_and_the_crisis_of_masculinity

[Laelth]

1. k&r for exposure. n/t

-Laelth