Violent Manhood

134 Pages·2020·1.751 MB·English

by  J. E. Sumerau

Violent Manhood
J. E. Sumerau
ROWMAN&LITTLEFIELD
Lanham•Boulder•NewYork• London
PublishedbyRowman&Littlefield
AnimprintofTheRowman&LittlefieldPublishingGroup,Inc.
4501ForbesBoulevard,Suite200,Lanham,Maryland20706
https://rowman.com
6TinworthStreet,LondonSE115AL,UnitedKingdom
Copyright©2020byTheRowman&LittlefieldPublishingGroup,Inc.
Allrightsreserved.Nopartofthisbookmaybereproducedinanyformorbyany
electronicormechanicalmeans,includinginformationstorageandretrievalsystems,
withoutwrittenpermissionfromthepublisher,exceptbyareviewerwhomayquote
passagesinareview.
BritishLibraryCataloguinginPublicationInformationAvailable
LibraryofCongressCataloging-in-PublicationData
Names:Sumerau,J.E.,author.
Title:Violentmanhood/J.E.Sumerau.
Description:Lanham:Rowman&Littlefield,2020.|Includesbibliographicalreferencesandindex.|
Summary:“Thisbookcriticallyexaminesthewaymenconstructandexplainrelationships
betweenviolence,manhood,andinequalityinsociety”—Providedbypublisher.
Identifiers:LCCN2020012610(print)|LCCN2020012611(ebook)|ISBN9781538136485(cloth)|
ISBN9781538136492(paperback)|ISBN9781538136508(epub)
Subjects:LCSH:Men—Identity.|Masculinity—Socialaspects.|Violenceinmen.
Classification:LCCHQ1090.S8762020(print)|LCCHQ1090(ebook)|DDC305.31—dc23
LCrecordavailableathttps://lccn.loc.gov/2020012610
LCebookrecordavailableathttps://lccn.loc.gov/2020012611
TMThepaperusedinthispublicationmeetstheminimumrequirementsofAmerican
NationalStandardforInformationSciencesPermanenceofPaperforPrintedLibrary
Materials,ANSI/NISOZ39.48-1992.
Contents
1 EncounteringManhood 1
2 DefiningManhood 17
3 ExcusingViolence 33
4 ArmingManhood 47
5 SexualManhood 63
6 ProtectingManhood 77
Conclusion 91
MethodologicalAppendix 103
Bibliography 111
Index 127
AbouttheAuthor 129
v

Chapter One
Encountering Manhood
Although I do not recall ever wanting to be a man, scars on my mind and
bodydailyremindmehowmanytimesotherpeoplehavesoughttoconvince
me I was supposed to become one.1 When I hear certain sexual and gender
slurs on television or elsewhere, for example, my mind races back to the
moments such words foretold or times such words arose in the midst of
conflict and violence of too many varieties to count. Likewise, when the
weatherischillier,Icanfeeltheachesinmylegs,shoulders,andbackwhere
somemarkersofpastviolencecanbeseenwhileothershavefaded,atleastin
avisiblesense.Similarly,whenIlookinthemirrorevenyearsaftermultiple
surgeries, I sometimes still see the facial injuries that once made it hard for
meto look atanymirror formore thanafew moments. I may not have ever
wanted to be a man, but that never seemed to matter to the people trying to
convincemeotherwise.
At the same time, my experiences navigating this world as a non-binary
trans woman misdiagnosed as male at birth served as an advanced class in
gender. I think about the times when my body and mannerisms allow me to
beseenbyothers2asapotentialman.Insuchcases,peoplearemorelikelyto
listen to what I say, ask for my opinions, defer to me in terms of bodily
spacingandverbalarticulation,andlaughatmyjokes,nomatterhowpoorly
I execute them. When I am seen by others as a potential man, however,
peoplearealsomorelikelytoreactinangerwhenIshowaffectionforothers
who may be interpreted as men, when I show any emotion at all, when my
voice leaves my mouth in a higher octave, or when I flip my wrist while
discussinganespeciallybeautifulsongorlandscape.Thesemomentsrepeat-
edlyremindmeoftheexpectationsandnormsforwhatitmeanstobeaman
intheeyesofotherpeople.
1
2 Chapter1
Ofcourse,thereareothertimeswhenpeoplerecognizemeasthewoman
I am, and in so doing, continuously remind me just how differently most
peoplereacttowomenandmenintheUnitedStates.IthinkaboutthewaysI
suddenlyreceivelessrespectformypersonalspaceandhavefeweropportu-
nitiestobeheard.Ithinkabouthowquicklymyopinionsbecomeamatterof
emotion or something to be discarded, argued against without pause, or
merely anoverreaction to agivensituation.I think of howmuchmore often
peoplewillcommentonmyclothing choices,my bodyandwhattheymight
want to do with parts of it I may or may not possess at the time, and my
flowinghair,thoughIalmostneverrequestorinvitesuchcommentary.Ialso
thinkabouthowI amsuddenlyexpectedto havemanyemotionsconcerning
any particular topic, and how at the same time, such emotions are seen as
evidence that my own body and mind might not be worthy of respect or
consideration.Putsimply,thesemomentsremindmeofthepervasivesexism
embedded within U.S. social relations, and bring such patterns to life as I
mentally compare my treatment as a woman to the ways people treat me
whenIamseenasapotentialman.
Infact,theseobservationsbecomeevenmoreclearinthemanycasesand
situationswhereIappeartootherssomewherebetweenawomanandaman.
Insuchmoments,thecombinationofabeardonmyfaceandaskirtflowing
around my knees may lead someone to exclaim—in fear, confusion, or
both—and wonder aloud what I am. At other times, the combination of my
feminine body language and my broad shoulders may lead someone to slam
meintoabathroomwalland/orcallmeanabomination.Therearestillother
times, in rural and urban areas alike, where a small child who appears to be
dressed as a boy may comment kindly on my skirt only to then hear their
parentorguardianinsultme(usuallysomeonewhoappears to beapotential
man) or tell me I should be ashamed of myself (usually someone who ap-
pears to be a potential woman). In these situations, my inability to be easily
categorized or read as appropriately performing either manhood or woman-
hoodfacilitatespanic,anger,andpotentialviolencefromotherswhorequire
binarygendercategorizationtomakesenseoftheworld.
At the heart of each of these examples lies the interactional processes
wherebypeoplesociallyconstructthegenderofthemselvesandothersbased
onaspectsofappearance,behavior,and/orothersociallyrecognizablecues.3
Since gender itself has no natural properties,4 people spend much of their
daily lives—consciously or otherwise—searching for clues that will allow
them to determine the gender of others and perform their gender identities.
Likewise, since people rarely see other people naked in social life, such
effortsrelyheavilyonnotonlydeterminingthegenderofanotherpersonbut
also on assuming that determination of another’s gender also tells us some-
thing about the composition of said other’s body. It is within the context of
such interpretive work that what we call gender is both established and
EncounteringManhood 3
assumed throughout the entirety of our interactions with ourselves and oth-
ers.
In this book, I interrogate the social construction of one aspect of the
genderspectrumincontemporaryU.S.society:manhood.Specifically,Iout-
linethewaysthatcontemporarynotionsofU.S.manhoodareoftenpredicat-
ed on and deeply tied to the performance, or at least threat, of violence.
Utilizing interviews with cisgender, heterosexual, middle- or upper-class
white men concerning prominent gendered and sexual debates in society
today,IteaseoutthewaysviolencefindsvoiceincontemporaryU.S.notions
ofwhatitmeanstobeamanaswellaspathwaysforsocialchangerevealed
by the possibility of disaggregating violence and manhood in the minds and
actions of people who identify as men. To this end, I draw on a lifetime of
experiencesliketheonesnotedabove, as well as my ownandothers’ schol-
arly work concerning the social construction of men and masculinities over
time.5
The central goal of this book is to identify how people who are assigned
malearetaughtto beviolent as part of learning howto claim theiridentities
as men. Further, I outline the ways that these lessons about violence as an
essential elementof manhoodemerge in men’s reactions to violence against
women;peopleofcolorregardlessofgender identities; lesbian, gay, bisexu-
al, and transgender (LGBT) people; and one another. I also outline men’s
opposition to efforts to lessen violence in society. Finally, I illustrate some
waysthattransformingsocietalnotionsofwhatitmeanstobeamanmaybe
essential to the success of any program, policy, or reform targeted at reduc-
ing violence in the United States. In developing these ideas, I encourage
readers to shift from viewing violence as “just something men do” to some-
thingpeoplewhowishtobeseenasmenembracetoberecognizedbyothers
as men. As such, I argue that challenging violence ultimately relies on not
onlychangingthethingsmendo,butalsorevisingwhatitmeanstobeaman
incontemporaryU.S.society.
HOWAPERSONBECOMESAMAN
One of the hallmarks of gender scholarship over the past half-century is the
recognitionthatmenarenotborn—theyaremade.6Althoughthismaysound
strange to anyone socialized by contemporary American notions of inherent
or essential manhood, the vast body of research on gender continuously
revealsthatwhatitmeanstobeaman—oranyothergenderidentity—arises
fromacomplexsetof individual, organizational, and structural patterns that
depend on what people do, think, and affirm within and between groups.7
Especially for readers who are less familiar with these empirical observa-
4 Chapter1
tions, it may be helpful to start our discussion with the processes whereby
peoplebegintobecomemen.
To become a man, first one must be born into a social context where
somethingreferredtoandknownasa“man”alreadyexists.8Putsimply,one
cannotbecomeamanunlessthereisanidentitycategoryalreadyinexistence
that others will recognize and accept as a man. As identity construction
scholarshavelongnoted,9thedevelopmentofanytypeofselfrequiressome
social understanding of the possibility of such a self. Those seeking to be
thin,orbeautiful,orasoccerplayer,forexample,mustfirstlearnwhatanyof
these things are from other people before they are able to become them. At
the same time, there must be something these things are not (fat or average,
ugly or plain, or someone who doesn’t play soccer) to distinguish between
what one is (soccer player) and what one is not (not a soccer player). Since
social life builds on the identities and meanings of previous generations,
someone can only become a given gender identity (man, woman, gender-
queer, agender, etc.) if there first exists recognition (within a specific group
ormorebroadly)thatthegivengenderidentityexistsandthatthereareways
todemonstratethatoneisthatgivengenderidentityandnotadifferentone.
Anillustrationofthisprocessof“becoming”anytypeofsocialidentityor
member of a category may be useful here. If, for example, a person is born
into asocialcontext(a family, acity, a town, a culture, or other location) in
whichthereisnothingpeoplealreadyknowaboutcalledaDreadnought,then
that person has no way to become a Dreadnought. If, on the other hand, a
person is born into a social context in which the members of that group
(family members) or residents of that location (people who live in that city)
are devoted fans of a messiah-type, supernatural being called Dreadnought,
thensaidperson could be encouraged by others to act like Dreadnought and
someday develop into a Dreadnought-type being or character. In fact, it
would not be surprising if some readers right now are asking, for example,
“What is a Dreadnought?” or “Is a Dreadnought a real thing?” while other
readers recognize this reference right away and might wish to be like this
character type in their own lives and behaviors.10 In either case, as social
psychologists have long noted, a person can only become a given type of
“thing” or “person” or “object” (i.e., develop an identity as a man or a
Dreadnought)ifthereisalreadyaversionofthatthing,person,orobjectthat
others recognize and thus may encourage said person to emulate and, over
time,become.
Emerging studies of relationships between religious and non-religious
children, families, and communities provide another example of this type of
process at work.11 If, for instance, people are raised in households where
familymembersbelieveinahigherpowertheycallagod,thenthese people
arelikelytounderstandatsomepointthatthereisagodintheirhome,there
arewaystoactgodlyorgod-likeintheirownlives,andtherearepeoplewho
EncounteringManhood 5
expectthemtoactinsuchgodlyorgod-likeways.Atthesametime,howev-
er, when people are raised in households where family members do not
believein or even mention a higher power of any type, they may not under-
standthatthereisagodinotherpeople’shomesorthattheycouldorshould
actinawaysuggestedbysuchgod.Forpeopletoknowaboutagodandthus
become godly, there must first be a type of god created, promoted, and
evidencedintheirownsocialworld.
In the contemporary United States, this first step in becoming a man is
rarely noted in conversations or discussions about the topic of manhood.12
Thisisbecauseassertionsoftheexistenceofanidentity namedmanandthe
wayspeopleshouldbehavetobeseenbythemselves andothersas manly or
man-likeareconstant,widespread,andnormal.13Whetheronelookstorelig-
ion, science, media, politics, or other cultural meaning systems, said viewer
will find narratives or scripts for what a man is, how a man should behave,
and how others should behave around such manly or man-like beings. Al-
though the type of manhood promoted by a given source of authority or
influence may vary dramatically, both newly born human beings and those
whoare ushering such beings into our world will consistently be taught that
there is something called a man and specific ways a given person may be-
comeone.14
Within this context, most American media, religion, science, and other
powerful systems of meaning align manhood with being assigned male by
societyatbirth.15Althoughmanypeopleliveas,areseenbythemselvesand
othersas,andidentifyasmenwithouteverhavingbeenassignedmaleatany
time or by any social authority, contemporary U.S. society typically defines
manhoodinrelationtomalesexassignmentandoftenclaimsthatonewhois
assignedmalebysocietywillandmustbecomeamanwithinthesociety.As
Candace West and Don Zimmerman16 note, this assigned-sex to performed-
gender pathway is a quintessential element in the social construction of the
identity man, the articulation that such an identity exists, and that this man
identity contains specific behaviors, beliefs, practices, and expectations in a
givensociety.
Assuch,thesecondstepinbecomingamaninvolvesbeingassignedmale
by social authorities, usually at birth and by medical doctors. When people
are assigned male by social authorities, such authorities alongside parents
and other significant relations will generally expect them to become men,
will identify them as boys who will become men in their own interactions
andmentalexpectations,andwillworktocreatemanlyorman-likequalities
andbehaviorsthatthepersoninquestionmustperformtoavoidpunishment,
criticism, or other negative results. As Barrie Thorne17 observed almost 30
yearsago,muchofchildhoodthusinvolvessocialauthoritiestrainingpeople
who have been assigned male to learn how to think, behave, and react in
waysculturallyexpectedofthosewhowillidentifyasmen.