On Saturday, May 24th,
2014, Elliot Rodger killed six people and himself in Isla Vista, California
outside of the University of California, Santa Barbara. The initial coverage of
the incident indicated that Rodger was a White male. But according to his
manifesto, Rodger identifies as “Eurasian”. Both mainstream coverage and the
blogosphere did not dive into the nuances of mixed race masculinity, which in
this case was an integral component missing from the overall discussion about
violent masculinity and misogyny in our culture. As members of Men in the
Movement, we need to bring these issues to the forefront.
However, making the
connection between mixed race identity and masculinity can be difficult. My
purpose today is to provide context, insight, and language around the nuances
of mixed masculinity. I will do this by talking about my personal experience as
well as my thoughts on Elliot Rodger’s Manifesto so that we can begin to have
these conversations in our communities. To do this, I will start with basic
gender socialization, then move into how that is complicated by race, while
talking about how that has personally affected me. From there, I will talk
about Rodger’s Manifesto from a mixed race male perspective.
For me, the best way to
think about gender socialization is to ask the question, “What does it mean to
be a man in US society?” I ask this of students in a workshop called “Gender Boxes”
and their answers are generally the same. Just to name a few, men are supposed
to be tough, strong, bread-winners, competitive, aggressive, emotionless (except
for anger), and be sexually successful with women. It is a very heteronormative
framework and this is typically called “The Man Box.” I am a very well
socialized man, and I continue to be well socialized. I identify as cis-gender
and heterosexual. My gender expression is masculine, borderline
hyper-masculine. I like sports, beer, camping, and winning. I can find a myriad
of representations and role models in mainstream media that represent me as a hetero
man.
Another aspect of gender
socialization is what men are called when they don’t fit into the man box or if
they step out of it. There are a plethora of words and expressions we use to
push ourselves and other men back into the man box that are homophobic,
transphobic, and misogynistic. I have certainly been the target of these words,
and I have used many of them as well. I was personally responsible for perpetrating
the man box growing up and I am still deconstructing my socialization today.
The underlying theme is that there is a standard for what it means to be a man,
and if you don’t fit it you are considered “less than” other men, and are
punished for it.
The wrinkle in all this
is that I identify as Asian and White, much like Elliot Rodger. If I were to
ask “What does it mean to be an Asian
man in US society?” the box would look significantly different, and it would
look different for Black/African American men, Chicano/Latino/Hispanic men,
Native men, and so on. What that means is that when we ask “what does it mean
to be a man in US society?” we are actually asking “What does it mean to be a
White, heterosexual, able-bodied, cis-male?”
In general, I think it’s
fair to say that Asian male stereotypes in the US are fairly opposite of White
male stereotypes. Asian men are portrayed as effeminate, nerdy, foreign, and
socially awkward, with maybe the exception of martial artists. However, even
martial arts masters who have many characteristics of “The Man Box” are never portrayed
as “getting the girl” the same way White men are. So growing up I felt like I
had to choose between these two masculinities, emulating White masculinity or
Asian masculinity. For me, choosing a
masculinity is the same as choosing race. For a mixed kid in a predominantly
white area, the choice was obvious.
The fear of being
perceived as “less than” a man was very real for me growing up. So
unfortunately, there was a period of time when I was obsessed with disproving
Asian stereotypes because of the association of Asian stereotypes with weakness,
and it led to hatred for my Asian identity. It also led to practicing
hyper-masculinity. I intentionally tried to posture and act tougher to make up
for being part Asian. Looking back, I truly regret those decisions, but at the
time it was a way for me to survive. Reflecting back on these experiences have led
me to believe that self-identifying as multiracial for many might mean
admitting to being “less than” a race. A common experience for multiracial
people is that we hear over and over that we’re not Asian enough, or not Black
enough, etc., because of our mixed heritage. Perhaps that sentiment of not
being enough racially directly impacts feelings of not being manly enough. In
other words, I’m not White enough to be a real man.
With this framework and understanding
of my own life, I began to read Elliot Rodger’s manifesto. Before I get into
it, I want to express my condolences for the families of the victims. I've seen
what sudden tragedy can do to a family, and no one should have to go through
that.
In addition, I want to
mention that this isn’t an attempt to try and humanize Rodger. In fact, the
goal of his manifesto was to generate empathy for his “cause” and cast
responsibility onto others. He doesn't deserve that and there’s no excuse for
what he did. Even with this in mind, it was very difficult for me to maintain
that boundary because many of his childhood experiences directly mirrored my
own.
I had expected the
ramblings of a madman, but first half of the 137 page manifesto was not that at
all. It was organized by what he remembered from every year of his life since
he was five years old. He was a shy kid and at the age of nine, realized with
some horror that he wasn't one of the “cool” kids. This led to his first
thought about being mixed race: “This revelation about the world, and about
myself, really decreased my self-esteem. On top of this was the feeling that I
was different because I am of mixed race. I am half White, half Asian, and this
made me different from the normal fully-white kids that I was trying to fit in
with” (p17). Since I grew up in a predominantly White area, this was very
salient to me as well. The idea that Whiteness or being “fully” something is
“normal” is something that needs to be intentionally interrupted. It took me a
long time to figure that out. It’s difficult to find value in myself when
there’s a skewed standard of what is considered “normal” in our society.
Compounding this feeling
for Rodger is that he talks a lot about being shorter, weaker, and having a
general lack of physical capability and athleticism compared to other boys.
When there’s too much emphasis and value added to being big, strong, and
athletic in “The Man Box” then it’s difficult for many boys to value
themselves.
There are two other lines
that really stood out to me when examining the manifesto through the lens of
Asian/White masculinity. When talking about his parent’s divorce, he writes,
“The family I grew up with has split in half, and from then on I would grow up
in two different households” (p10). This stood out to me because it was another
representation of being “less than” to his peers. For me personally, I have the
privilege of parents who remained together. And there was still a feeling of
being split. For example, when we went to my White father’s family reunion, I
got the same othering experiences from my family in terms of my race as I did
in every other social sphere. When we had the privilege of travelling to Japan
with my mother for family over there, most people would speak English to me
first and then be fantastically surprised at how good my Japanese is. For me,
the idea of “home” was pretty shaky beyond my physical home where we lived
growing up. This has an impact, again, on feeling “normal” or “less than” other
people, and I believe that when he felt like his family “split in half” it
continued to compound feelings of inadequacy.
The third line that
resonated with me was when Rodger writes, “I was like a nomad, moving from
group to group and trying to fit in with each one, but never fully integrating”
(p23). This actually corresponds to my experience as well. I can’t remember
having consistent friendships until high school. I have always wondered if this
was influenced in some way by my mixed race identity. I’m not saying that
because Rodger experienced the same thing that it is a commonplace experience
for mixed race children. It may be just a common experience for children in
general. Either way, it’s an area to consider when thinking about mixed race
stories.
The blatant racism and
misogyny of Elliot Rodger’s thoughts and actions is disgusting, but I’m not
sure that they’re unusual. If I’m being completely honest, there have been
points in my life where I have said and thought many of the things that he has.
There are elements to his story that other people have explored. For example,
some of those elements have to do with the privilege of his socio economic
status, perhaps some sort of disability (mental or learning), gun control, and
video game addiction. To get the full picture of Elliot Rodger is to get the full
picture of the society we are cultivating.
As a community of men who
critically examine the world around us, we have to start engaging in these
conversations from our dominant perspectives in the right way. We have much to
offer social justice movements. But we have to be humble. We have to understand
the skepticism that is associated with our perspectives. This ultimately means
recognizing and understanding how our own privilege operates. For example, when
I speak as a person of color about multiracial issues, I have to be aware of my
masculinity so that my message isn't lost on women and LGBTQ folks in the room.
I often wonder if the more masculine I present, maybe the more White I am
perceived, therefore my message could be lost. These complicated identity
dynamics are important to be aware of if we’re going to be effective social
justice advocates.
At the same time, I can
navigate many different spaces because of my racial ambiguity (or if I name it
for what it is, it’s my biracial White privilege). That doesn't make my
experiences with oppression any less significant, but it’s a really important
factor in understanding myself and initiating important conversations to better
support and challenge each other as a community of Men in the Movement. To me,
most conversations around identity in most higher education spaces revolve
around fairly privileged concepts. I never once read the world
“microaggression” in Rodger’s manifesto. And I don’t think he cared that he had
the opportunity to check two or more race boxes. And although those concepts
are important to contextualize the experience of mixed race individuals, at the
core, Rodger and many like him don’t feel supported as a person. As we we
continue to evolve as a community, we have to find ways that will push the
discourse of identity in order to better support ourselves and others in the
movement. This includes understanding the complexities of the intersections of
our identities, but also finding a way to make those conversations more
accessible. It’s bringing the nuance of identity to the forefront in
conversations about serious topics such as sexual violence or the case of
Elliot Rodger. It’s constantly examining how our own identities impact the
world around us. It’s creating spaces for others and ourselves to talk about gender
based violence and finding opportunities to impact our campus and the
surrounding community. And it’s leaning on each other to help create and
maintain a safer future.
No comments:
Post a Comment