How Heteronormativity Saturate Society Michael Kimmel

556 V. BE THE CHANGE
Will Shrinking Federal Aid Affect
the Gender Gap? continued
Melanie Corrigan, assistant director of the Center for Policy Analysis at the American Council on Education, women are more often eligible for aid because they are
more likely to return to school as a single parent and because, in general, they earn
less than men. Additionally, more women apply for financial aid.
While everyone receiving financial aid from programs determined by the DOE
formula-Pell grants, subsidized loans and some state or institutional assistancecould feel the pinch, the change might do the most damage to those families earning
$35,000 to $55,000 per year. They are often on the cusp of being eligible for Pell
grants and other aid for lower-income students.
Experts in the field do not predict sweeping dropouts or a widening of the college
gender gap due to the new calculation, and they point out that other economic factors should rebalance the formula in the future. But for now, financially struggling
women-and men-will have to work even harder to stay in school.
~-56
Man-lfesting Gender
ABBY L. FERBER
For the U.S. white nationalist movement, “white
men are this nation.” This movement is not only
concerned with issues of race and class, but just as
centrally, with gender. Traditionally, scholars studying the movement have ignored issues of gender,
and it was the work of Kathleen Blee who first
raised the issue of gender by recovering the history
of women in the Klan of the 1920s. In her most recent research, Blee focuses on women in the contemporary movement, and has found that many organizations are specifically targeting women for
recruitment.
However, gender shapes the lives of everyone,
not just women. If we look at a social movement
and find that it consists primarily of men, that itself
is an issue worth investigating. Sociologists argue
that gender is something that we all “do” or “perform” on an ongoing basis. The white nationalist
movement is one arena where white men perform
their masculinity. Masculinity is not something that
one can prove once and for all, it is something that
has to be proven again and again. For example, we
know that the vast majority of hate crimes are carried out by young white men, and if we look at hate
crimes directed against gay men, for example, the
perpetrators often report that they felt that their
own masculinity had in some way been threatened
by the victim. Hate crimes aimed at gay men are
one means, then, by which young white men display and “prove” their heterosexuality for others.
American society has experienced tremendous
social change in recent decades, sparked by the civil
rights movement, women’s movement, and gay and
lesbian movement. More recently, debates over
affirmative action, multicultural curriculum, welfare,
and other contentious topics have been perceived
by many white men as attacks against them, not
only against their racial privilege, but their identity
as men as well. Our traditional conception of
masculinity teaches men that they are to be in con1 aggressive, strong, obeyed, and the bread · trO, . . winer of the family. White men are taught to feel not
~nlY that this is ~eir responsibility, but their entitle-
!Ilent. But what It me~ns to be a white man is no
longer secure, an~ white male privilege no longer
oceeds unquestioned. Many feel under seige and
pr ~- ” .. f vu1nerable, 1acmg a cnsis o masculinity.” We have
seen the rise of other men’s movements, like the
Promise Keepers, for these same reasons. As a result of these social and cultural changes, as well as
economic dislocations and insecurity, many white
men believe they are being denied the opportunity
to achieve the American dream, which they see as
their birthright.
My own research has focused largely on the discourse of this movement, and now that this discourse is reaching a far wider audience than ever
before via the world wide web, it is more important
that we pay close attention to it. When I began my
research on this movement I was shocked by its entrenched gendered ideology. None of the studies I
had read had discussed gender as a central issue for
the movement. Yet I found white nationalist publications were filled with images of white girls and
women with headings such as “endangered species”
beneath them. Clearly white womanhood was being
used as a symbol to motivate white men to action.
The more I read, the more I began to see how central this gendered ideology is to the movement. It is
not simply that the movement is sexist, and images ~ . Women are employed by the movement to gain
con · vens, but I began to see that this movement IS
~bout gender, in very profound ways. Clearly what
it means to be white is tied to certain notions of
rnasculinity and femininity and vice versa. For exam 1 ‘ • Pe, the relationship between white men and
Women· · · f the Whi 18 seen as a sign of the supenonty 0
blac~ race. And the strength and independence of
th . Women is identified as a key component of
t1· e inferiority of the black race where gender rela-
%s a ‘ th rn re supposedly “unnatural.” Furthermore, e
se~~~lllent’s fear of white genocide leads to an ~band r n With controlling white women’s sexuality
Cproduction.
V. Be the Change 557
Despite the growing numbers of women in the
movement, it remains centrally concerned with preserving white male privilege. It is not only about hatred of others, but about defining identity for its
members and maintaining white male power.
Therefore, one of the central foci of the discourse is
defining both racial and gender identities as rooted
in nature, either biological or God-given. By defining race and gender identities in this way, they are
stabilized and naturalized. After all, if something is
rooted in nature you can’t change it. And this assumption undergirds the movement’s critique of
contemporary America-things are falling apart all
around us because we are trying to change people’s
essential nature. Their response to all of our current
social problems, whether discussing terrorism,
crime, or teen pregnancy? Restore the natural social
order of white men on top.
White nationalist ideology thus offers itself as the
antidote to these problems, promising to empower
men who feel they no longer have any power. The
movement seemingly offers white men the chance
to prove their masculinity. One frequent ploy is to
attack white men as wimps, and then offer them the f
chance to prove their manliness and virility by joining the movement. White men are repeatedly attacked throughout far right publications for becoming feminized (and unsettling the natural order),
and are encouraged to become real men by standing up and protecting white women, reasserting
their place in the natural hierarchy, and taking over
the world.
* * *
The Turner Diaries, perhaps the best known
manifesto of the movement, . .. provides a plethora
of examples. The novel portrays a society where
white women and girls are constantly attacked by
black men, yet white men never protest out of fear
of being labeled “racist.” As the narrator explains,
“Even when gangs of Blacks took their children
away or raped their women before their eyes, they
offered no significant resistance” (152). The novel
implo,res white men to take up arms to protect
white womanhood and the world. Movements for
race and gender equality are seen as distorting the
558 V. BE THE CHANGE
natural race and gender order, and ultimately tied to
the New World Order,s elimination of national
boundaries. The destruction of race, gender and
national boundaries go hand in hand, and it is only
through a revived white, American manhood that
these can be saved.
The gender issues involved are here numerous
and raise many new questions for us to think about.
In terms of who joins the movement and why,
women and men may be drawn to the movement
for different reasons, and also may be drawn out of
the movement for different reasons. Gender is central to understanding this movemenfs attraction
and hold on members, and may be key to developing more successful strategies of resistance. We
cannot fully understand this social movement without exploring its deeply gendered nature.
B. INSTITUTIONALIZING
SOCIAL CHANGE
Uprooting Racism
PAUL KIVEL
AFFIRMATIVE ACTION
Affirmative action has been one of the primary
public policy controversies of the last thirty years.
Even now debates about its effectiveness continue.
Following is an overview of some affirmative action
issues as another example of how to think critically
about public policy issues.
Affin_native action is more than a legal issue . . ..
impact on our lives. Yet today we have a vocal minority who are saying we should stop affirmative action not only as a legal remedy, but also as a social
commitment. They are saying we have gone too far
in correcting racial injustice. Of course, they are not
challenging traditional forms of preference and discrimination that favor the rich, the educated, white
people and men.
Affirmative action is practiced in many areas of
our society. We have hiring and recruiting preferences for veterans, women and the children of
alumni of many universities, special economic incentives for purchase of U.S.-made products, import quotas against foreign goods and agricultural
and textile subsidies. These practices have led to a
huge overrepresentation of white people, men and
people of middle, upper middle and upper class
backgrounds in our universities, in well-paid jobs
and in the professions. One indication that attacks
on affirmative action are part of a white backlash
against equality is that affirmative action in the form
of preferences that primarily benefit white people is
not being questioned.
Many forms of discrimination in our society are
illegal. The federal government mandated affirmative action programs to redress racial inequality and
injustice in a series of steps beginning with an executive order issued by President Kennedy in 1961.
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 made discrimination
illegal and established equal employment opportunity for all Americans regardless of race, cultural
background, color or religion. Subsequent executive
orders, in particular Executive Order 11246 issued
by President Johnson in September 1965, mandated affirmative action goals for all federally
funded programs and moved monitoring and enforcement of affirmative action programs out of the
White House and into the Labor Department.
These policies and the government action which
followed was a response to the tremendous mobilization of African Americans and white supporters
during the late 1950s and early 1960s pushing for
integration and racial justice.
Eve~ng yo~ do . .. [to eliminate racism] is an
afllrmative action. Affirmative action to end racism
s~ould be the_ challenge and responsibility of every
single person in our society, as well as of the institutions and organizations which have such a large There are many ways to attack racism . .. . I
would like to address the particular legal remedy