General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhat The Malheur Occupation Teaches Us About Masculinity
Last edited Sun Feb 7, 2016, 12:36 AM - Edit history (1)
From the beginning, the men who occupied the refuge engaged in macho posturing with their display of guns and their blatant disregard for the law, the environment and the communities around the refuge. These are not successful men as traditional masculinity requires them to be. Many of them don't hold down regular jobs. Several have declared bankruptcy. Many have criminal records, from felony driving with a suspended license to second degree murder. Most left their families elsewhere in order to parade around with guns and wreak havoc on a remote wildlife refuge. They have felt powerless in their struggles with the federal government.
...
Not surprisingly, even as we watched this toxic white masculinity play out in public, women were in the background of the occupation taking on the gendered roles assigned to them within patriarchy.
A recent story by Oregon Public Broadcasting went behind the scenes with the few women at the refuge. They were cooking, cleaning, organizing supplies and doing laundry. They served the roles women often do in conflict -- they created normalcy and offered emotional support so the men could convince themselves that what they were doing was all in a day's work, even as they committed unlawful acts, threatened violence, and defiled a public refuge. Not that some of these women didn't share the radical ideology of the men, but they defined their role in the occupation as helpers and supporters.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/susan-m-shaw/what-malheur-occupation-patriarchy-masculinity_b_9116064.html
===================
One thing that I think gets lost in articles like this and the "amosexual" interpretation of the guns story is that loss of control not only threatens their masculinity, it threatens their adulthood - or rather their ability to see themselves as adults. They have got to have the guns and the swagger in order to feel grown up. Otherwise they are just little whiny kids in their terrible twos
PeoViejo
(2,178 posts)I don't know what that will do to their Masculinity, but the NRA is sure to object.
MH1
(17,600 posts)I gather that those are some of the charges against them.
Generally speaking - not just for these guys - If someone who is not legally allowed to possess or carry a firearm, is caught with one, does the government confiscate it? Does it get sold and the money go to defray the costs of enforcing the law? (seems like it should) Or just melted down? (that would be a shame in the case of a genuine antique or something with sentimental value to, for example, non-criminal family members)
awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)and actually think that these yahoos would actually obey them.
MH1
(17,600 posts)since they broke those gun laws.
Works for me.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)I mean really. Leaving out that very important fact is reckless and seems agenda driven.
Ford_Prefect
(7,897 posts)That would be disrespectful of their faith and likely to offend an armed and dangerous sect. We won't mention decades of aggressively opportunistic land purchases and colonization of the surrounding western states.
We can't have that in modern journalism any more than basic research into supporting historical information. We don't want to insult those who cannot think for themselves. It would alienate our revered sponsors and corporate masters.
jpak
(41,758 posts)losers'
yup
Rex
(65,616 posts)Usually authoritarianism and masculinity go hand in hand.
Glassunion
(10,201 posts)The patriarchy is quite evident in the roles on display.
Number9Dream
(1,561 posts)Secure enough in masculinity to comfort sick dog:
Glassunion
(10,201 posts)point, that it was only in the water could the poor fella sleep.
Number9Dream
(1,561 posts)Don't need an AK-47 to be masculine.
romanic
(2,841 posts)It's machismo, masculinity mixed with false pride, that's the problem.
snooper2
(30,151 posts)Was in multiple videos with her rifle sitting around the fire READY FOR BATTLE!
Monk06
(7,675 posts)Public lands.
Finicum was a foster care abuser who had 10 kids assigned to him by CPAs and was being paid $30,000 per kid to care for them
They are all developementally challenged kids that is why the fees for caring for them were so high
That's $300,000 per year he was pulling in with no medical or social work qualifications
Now you know how he paid for his ranch and his guns and his trips to all these militia events
ashling
(25,771 posts)a link for sources. I knew some of this, but would like to follow up.
Monk06
(7,675 posts)site is NoThiefsAllowed.org
Mod Keven said he was out at the Bundy ranch and there were 30 kids running around and one guy Cliven
He also said these guys are poligamists who have sister wives that they don't talk about in media He was referring to Finicum and the Bundies