Media Girl commented on macho and conservatives the other day; she has since added to that discussion, and has been joined by the great folks over at Pandagon. I have
commented a number of times as to my observations/fears that the evidence of creeping fascism in this country is evidenced in the general crisis of masculinity at work in the U.S.

I’m a fan of  Klaus Theweleit’s two-volume study: Male Fantasies. Theweleit builds an argument that links fascism with a hatred of the body, its desires, and its weaknesses.

Fascism, then, waged its battle against human desires by encoding them with a particular set of attributes: with effeminacy, unhealthiness, criminality, Jewishness–all of which existed together under the umbrella of “Bolshevism.”

If I re-write that particular sentence the following way:
Christo-Fascism, then, waged its battle against human desires by encoding them with a particular set of attributes: with effeminacy [as in lesbians/gays/feminists], unhealthiness [bogus claims about abortion causing breast cancer or condoms not preventing HIV or all STDs], criminality {street crime], Jewishness [I think Muslim is the new Jew for the time being]–all of which existed together under the umbrella of “Liberalism.”

It’s working for me. Does this analogy work for you?

Of course, not all women are evil: Christian women, who are subservient to their husbands, or else lunatics like Malkin or Coulter (doesn’t that look like Annie on the back of that rocket?)–they’re okay. But the rest of us are just fucked. So to speak.
More from Theweleit: all quotations from Vol II

Clearly, then, what the fascist understands by the term “unity” is a state in which oppressor and oppressed are violently combined to form a structure of domination. For him, unity denotes a relationship not of equality, but of domination. Equality is considered synonymous with multiplicity, mass–it thus the precise opposite of “unity,” since “unity” rigidly fuses these baser elements with what is “above them,” “interior” to “exterior,” and so on. Unity allows the soldier male access to pleasure; it protects him from the death of splitting or decomposition. What seems to hold the masculine-soldierly body together is his compulsion to oppress the body of another (or bodies, or the body in his own body). His relation to the bodies he subordinates is one of violence and, in extreme cases, of murder.

The concept of nation can be seen, then, as the most explicit foundation of male demands for domination…Nation is the opposite of mass, femininity, equality, sensuous pleasure, desire, and revolution.

The Bible shows on a consistent basis the impact that having a body has. And the Old Testament, with its God who does not even allow representations of him to exist (Thou Shalt not Make Any Graven Images…), emphasizes that NOT having a body is the way to power. The body is the key to destruction. The doorway to death. And we all know who opened that fucking door.

So, if you’re still following me on my meandering path here, we live in a nation whose President wants us to unite behind him while we defeat the evils of terrorism, Fundamentalist Christians who want us to give up all worldly pleasure unless it serves a heterosexual marriage-covenant to produce offspring, and a certain contingent in our country who still wants to kick someone’s ass for 9/11.

The president does not want a unity that comes from equality and civil rights; he wants a unity that comes from everyone subjugating themselves to the state, to our leaders, who know how to “stay the course,” and know what’s best for us. Only the troublemakers, sinners, and perverse don’t want to be part of this great unity. And, because pleasure leads us away from this subjugation–personal pleasure is selfish–we’ve got a “state” religion that emphasizes mortification of the flesh. And, as has been pointed out in a number of posts above, macho rhetoric is running crazy.

After listening to the Blow-Roviator the other day, my paranoia about being a mouthy woman in this country gets a little less tinfoil hat-based, and a hell of a lot more based on my understanding of history.

I’m waiting for the moment that Bush or Cheney or Rumsfeld feels compelled to whip out his member in public. But Jesus, is this getting tiresome.

Cross-posted at CultureKitchen

0 0 votes
Article Rating