This week we talked a
lot about groups of people who are impacted by gender-based violence other than
cis-gendered women. In exploring these experiences, we challenged the deeply
held belief within our patriarchal society that sexual assault happens in a certain
way, to certain people; we attempted to work through the insidious barriers
that exist between hegemonic patriarchy and reality. To what extent is
patriarchal hegemony responsible for the lack of recognition of various ‘types’
of victims? What is it about society’s values that determine who is allowed to
identify as a victim or survivor of sexual assault?
One of the most pervasive
ideas that controls which victims or survivors of sexual assault are recognised
is the idea of masculinity. Under the umbrella of patriarchy, masculinity is
valued above everything else. As a result, anything that de-masculinizes
someone who is ‘supposed’ to be masculine is unacceptable and virtually
ignored. As seen in Weiss’ piece about male sexual victimization, “men who are
sexually victimized may not recognize what happened to them as crimes or may be
reluctant to admit to being victimized by incidents that are not supposed to
happen to ‘real’ men” (pg. 289). Even men who have experienced sexual assault
are unlikely to recognize or admit it on account of their desired masculinity;
how less likely, then, is it that someone on the outside would recognize it? Weiss
goes on to demonstrate that even men who do recognize their sexual assault “may
attempt to frame their situations in ways that allow them to repair, reclaim, or
reassert masculinity” (pg. 289). That male victims of sexual assault are so
concerned with upholding this idealized masculinity (which is valid and
understandable) demonstrates how deeply embedded it is in our society.
Along the same lines,
victims of sexual assault who identify as trans*/non-binary or genderqueer are
faced with an abundance of challenges. The idealized masculinity that is so
deeply connected with an inescapable hegemonic patriarchy has created a binary
which narrowly defines categories for people to fit into. As said by Truit in
her column regarding the problems with essentializing sexual assault, society
has “a very hard time recognizing and understanding sexual violence that
doesn’t fit the standard narrative”. In this way, many experiences and people
are ignored.
In both of the cases above,
the underlying issue is that patriarchy has decided what is ‘truly important’,
and anything that doesn’t go along exactly with its standards is swept under
the rug; forgotten and ignored. As more experiences are shared, the threads which
hold patriarchy together will begin to unravel and fall away to reveal the
truth: anyone at any time can be affected by sexual assault.
I like what you're exploring about the confines of our understandings of masculinity and patriarchy which limit our willingness to recognize victimization. While this certainly confuses our cultural perceptions of what victims look like/act like, I think it's important to also look at how this, in some ways, can almost explain the social motivation for sexual violence.
ReplyDeleteAs feminists, our focus is generally on the "patriarchy" and gendered inequalities, to such an extent that we sometimes forget about the hierarchies within other social groups. Even with an intersectionalist lens (or one which considers interlocking oppressions, or matricies of oppressions) I sometimes feel as though we don't always attend to these as much is necessary.
One thing that I sometimes have trouble remembering when focusing on gendered inequalities is how this interlocks with other inequalities on a structural level. Like, if we are thinking about the patriarchy as a overarching hegemonic force, we have to recognize the ways that posits masculinity as an extremely narrow category, excluding people based on gender, race, ability, sexuality, etc. And because of this, it is able to influence the structure of our relationships. If men rape because they are exercising masculinity through dominance, any type of sexual assault can be understood to be an attempt to reenact or embody the power and control associated with masculinity. Even when the gender roles are seemingly subverted. So I think that the truth of, “anyone at anytime can be affected by sexual assault” is really only accurate because of the existing framework of patriarchal hegemony.