I recently read an excerpt form a book by Alan G. Johnson, The Gender Knot: Unraveling our Patriarchal Legacy, which he dispels the ideal that warfare is justified and essential “to understanding the ‘natural’ gender order” (Johnson). On November 11th many of us, myself included, paid tribute to members of our military. I am supportive of people who choose to serve in the military. However, a question I use to ask my fellow soldiers in 1975 was, why did you join up?
According to philosopher and author, Sam Keen,
the reason many men participate in warfare is to uphold the principles of the patriarchal
system and in doing so men would go into battle to ensure the safety of those
they held close and to fight against tyranny.
This idea is further supported in the recruiting advertisements
throughout the years which specifically target ideals as deemed by society as being
masculine; protecting the family and keeping the chaos and evil from reaching
our shores. Men are depicted as heroes -
defenders of our cultural morals and values.
While these lofty ideals may be why some join, it couldn’t be further
from the truth for a large number of military personnel.
As the article points out, if the epitome of being
masculine is to be self-sacrificing and ready to go to war to protect their
country and loved ones, then, we should see more of a cross section of our male
society in the military. Instead, in the
enlisted ranks, what we usually see are young men who hail from middle and
lower class families versus those privileged white males who are educated and
financially secure. Patriarchy is definitely
at play however it is the hierarchy systems that usually defines who will most
often join.
To circle back to what I often heard when asking, why
did you enlist? The answers were often,
education, learn a trade/skill, to provide for family and structure. I never heard the answer, go to war overseas and
defend my country – maybe it was just the era although I doubt it.
Johnson, Alan
No comments:
Post a Comment