Mary Renda’s treatment of paternalism and its connection to the conception of the nuclear family has interesting implications for the effects of social change on this system. While the system of paternalism claims to be rooted in the “natural” order of things, this selfsame order is enabled by paternalism.
In Renda’s discussion of Marines and conceptions of masculinity, she brings up several different ways in which the dominant ideas about masculinity affect the Marines’ experiences in Haiti. For example, she states that fatherhood was one of the key indicators of masculinity, and that this idea of fatherhood enabled Marines to think of themselves as father figures for the nation of Haiti. This then enabled the Marines to assert their masculinity despite the fact that many were not fathers at all. This assertion enabled both the Marines themselves and the society that sent them off to Haiti (and the war in Europe) to feel comfortable with the situation. A society so steeped in the role of the father as the protector might not feel entirely certain of itself if it could not cast its young men acting as protectors in the same light.
Renda also discusses the ways in which sexuality and sexual activity called into question the masculinity of the Marines. Historically a man’s masculinity was unblemished, and even enhanced, by engaging in penetrative sex with another man, so long as he was not the one being penetrated. But the changes in conceptions of masculinity happening at the time of the occupation made engaging in sex with another man unmanly, regardless of which partner was being penetrated. This, then, was another threat to a Marine’s masculinity which had to be countered by identifying more thoroughly with the paternalistic discourse.
Social change can thus affect the kinds of behaviors that are incorporated into the framework of paternalism and the kinds of behaviors that are considered threats to this framework. Paternalism, as has been shown in Renda’s book and other analyses, is not anything close to an ideal method of understanding and dealing with difference. In order to dismantle this framework, several approaches can be used. The direct approach of pointing out the negative effects of paternalism has its benefits. But I believe that working towards social change can strip paternalism of its metaphorical foundation and weaken it in ways that are more subtle.
How might working for recognition of different kinds of marriage or working to dismantle the social institution of marriage affect the paternalistic framework? In what ways might an effort to weaken the boundaries of socially-defined gender categories work to collapse this framework?
No comments:
Post a Comment