Resilience Amidst Colonization

Have you ever been completely and utterly disregarded and felt like nobody cared  about you? This is how Indigenous people felt upon the arrival of European settlers in North America.This marked a pivotal moment in history not only for land but also for the indigenous people who had long inhabited it. These encounters brought about a clash of cultures particularly regarding gender roles and societal structures. Indigenous communities embraced a fluid and flexible gender identity whereas European colonists imposed rigid roles based on the Catholic church. This collision of world views led to a suppression of indigenous identities and a loss of cultural heritage as the power of the church grew. Today the repercussions are still felt as the indigenous people navigate their identity in a society shaped by European colonialism.

When European settlers arrived in North America, they faced a never seen gender role situation among the Indigenous settlers who lived on the land. Women were much more important and involved themselves in major decision making. They were the leaders of the house. Both men and women had the same opportunity and could become powerful. These roles shook the Catholic church’s beliefs and therefore were looked down upon by the European arrivers. The indigenous people presented a very hybrid definition of gender without many assigned and specific societal roles. “The connection between gender and the distribution of power are complex, and there was a high degree of variation in gender relations across groups” (Keough 18). In contrast the Europeans were very set on the roles of men and women in their society, making gender quite important in their day to day lives. “The catholic church emphasised the sanctity of the family, in which the husband/father was the firm but gentle shepherd of the subordinate wife and children, who were to obey him in all worldly matters (Keough 21). Indigenous communities viewed the church as a threat to the way they lived and didn’t want to partake in any religious ceremonies. Due to this, it was hard to implant “normal” gender relations and the missionaries met with resistance from some indigenous people who saw Christian ideology as undermining their power. As more and more European colonists came to North America and the church grew in power, these people lost their gender identities and lost their roots.

 This left the native people lost and disconnected to their culture. From the mid 18th century into the 19th, the power dynamics shifted towards European dominance and hasn’t changed since then. But how has this affected the people who are indigenous? Well it’s not easy. Through the video “Trans in Trumpland” Shane Oterga, a two spirit indigenous explains to us the struggles he has living in the society we have today. He says “I have to navigate between this traditional and western world, between the old and the new’’ he feels like he doesn’t belong anywhere. His decisions to identify as 2 spirit sadly penalised his professional path. Under Trump’s leadership, all trans members of the army were let go because it made the country look “weak”. This gave yet another reason for Shane to feel secluded by society as an indigenous 2 spirit. This action by Trump makes the two spirit community feel just like they did during European colonialism. To think that in 2020 we are still discriminating against cultures without considering heritage and community whatsoever is disgraceful. 

Colonialism has destroyed many aspects of the native community but some people stand strong with their identity. When meeting with Mr.Glenn Gear an indigiqueer artist who prides himself on making art that connects with nature and his family heritage. He showed us how proud he is to be indigenous. Through his works, he shows his cultural identity by using animal materials like seal skin and other animal products highlighting the strong connection to nature of the indigenous community. Through Glenn and Shane we see the strength of these people who pride themselves on their roots and keep true to their identities. Even through their journey of being washed away by white people they are able to show pride as to who they are and show activism for their community through art, gender and culture. Representing their community with pride is one of their main meanings in life and allows them to fulfil themselves with a deeper meaning.

In conclusion, European colonialism left a lasting impact on gender roles and cultural identity of the indigenous people in North America. To this day, the repercussions of the church are felt on these communities, leaving them lost and feeling like they are not living in their home. As society becomes more aware of indigenous struggle, there is hope for greater recognition of their needs as a community. Centering indigenous voices and honouring their experiences are crucial steps towards building a more inclusive future.

Bibliography

Glenn Gear, presenter. 29 Apr. 2024, Montreal, Vanier College.
Keough, Willeen G. and Lara Campbell “Gender and Cultural Diversity in the Early Contact Period.” Gender

History: Canadian Perspectives, Oxford University Press, 2014, pp. 16–28

Zosherafatain, Tony. “Trans in Trumpland: Idaho.” Kanopy, The Film Sales Company, http://www.kanopy.com/en/vaniercollege/video/11561418. Accessed 29 Apr. 2024.

Steps towards justice

In the exploration of racial injustices through these works , Jordan Peele’s “Get Out” and Desmond Cole’s “Negro Frolics” stand as powerful examples that depict the disadvantages of black folks in our society and show us how difficult their life is. This struggle is often looked over by white people due to the lack of knowledge and never being put in these types of positions. This essay aims to depict how these two narratives shed light on the nature of racism, ultimately emphasising the need for systemic change and social justice for the Afro American population.

“Get Out” and “Negro Frolics” explore the subject of institutional and systematic racism and how it affects Black people and communities on a daily basis. In the movie “Get Out,” a dark story about White characters taking use of Black bodies for their personal gain is used to depict institutional racism. This storyline reflects both historical and modern instances of appropriation and exploitation “You’re so much stronger than all of the other ones. I mean, physically.” -Walter (Peele). Rosa’s brother says this, making black people sound like machines and tools almost dehumanising them. There also includes a scene revolving around black people’s experience with the police. After doing no wrong at all Chris is asked to present his ID to the sergeant. Rosa then gets to his defense as she senses systematic racism being done to her boyfriend Chris .Comparably, “Negro Frolics” by Desmond Cole highlights discriminatory laws and practices that disproportionately impact Black Canadians in fields including work, and law enforcement. It also exposes institutional racism in Canada. The frequent raids on John’s (a black man) art gallery by Toronto police without any justification or warrant serve as a visual representation of the city’s institutionalised racism. After their raid, John lost his art gallery and his dream. His skin tone alone was exploited to incite suspicion of an unfounded crime.In our society, these issues occur daily. Systematic racism is very present and seen through many aspects of our system like the judicial system, police brutality, job opportunities and a ton of other factors. Black males living in Toronto are 3 times more likely to be stopped and asked for identification by police. Racialized Canadians earn 81 cents for every dollar a white person does (Government of Canada, 2020).Together, “Get Out” and “Negro Frolics” illustrate the impact of institutional and systematic racism, to viewers and readers to confront these injustices and work towards systematic progress.

 “Get Out” and “Negro Frolics” are similar in that they both talk about white supremacist practices. But in this case we get from the white person’s side(Rosa’s family) and the black side(Desmond Cole). The Armitage family’s references to Black bodies as superior, that being the reason they want to plant their brains inside them. Along with that, the scene of the slave auction when white people were bidding for Chris. These examples show white supremacist and depict how white’s use black people to their benefit in any way they can.“Get Out” exposes the idea of white superiority and the exploitation of Black culture. “White supremacy designates black people as less than full human beings, as disposable labour, as chattel placed on earth for the benefit of white people”(Cole,8). Desmond Cole’s piece discusses how Black culture is appropriated for commercial gain and how the black and indigenous population have been taken advantage of due to European imperialism. Seeing how these 2 sides fight against eachother is quite interesting as we observe the white people’s intentions through “Get out” and the black populations response in “Negro Frolics”.

In conclusion both these works depict modern and recurring issues related to black people’s lives. Through “Get Out” and “Negro Frolics,” we’re confronted with stories of resilience when faced with racism. Peele’s movie and Cole’s analysis show us the harsh realities of white supremacy and systemic racism and how truly difficult it really is to live as a black man in the western world. From the  auction scene in “Get Out” to the  police raids in “Negro Frolics,” the struggles are highlighted and pure injustice is saw by the audience. But in these stories, there’s also a call to action,a call to break down the  systems chaining down black folks and work towards a more just world. 

References:

Government of Canada. (2020, October 16). Facts and figures. Www.canada.ca. https://www.canada.ca/en/canadian-heritage/campaigns/federal-anti-racism-secretariat/facts-figures.html

Cole, D. (2022, August 2). The Skin We’re In. Anchor Canada. http://books.google.ie/books?id=1hN7EAAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=The+skin+we%27re+in&hl=&cd=1&source=gbs_api

Peele, J. (2017) Get Out, Blumhouse Productions

Hurting People as a Job but Loving as a Person

George St-Pierre, renowned mixed martial artist and former UFC champion, came from a childhood marked by bullying. He was constantly abused by older kids at his school. “Instead of focusing on what the teacher was saying, I was focusing on how I’m going to get out of the class, take my books and reach the bus before the bullies get me and hit me”. 

GSP faced adversity and learned the value of self-defence as a means of empowerment. His journey has led him to become a great example of masculinity for the younger generation.He demonstrates physical strength as a positive thing in masculinity. He also shows that it’s not because he’s a fighter that he loves to initiate fights. This sport has a very deep meaning for GSP. Throughout his career, he has shown traits of respect, humility, and resilience, challenging traditional notions of masculinity and fighters who participate in these sports.

George St-Pierre’s childhood in St Isidore, Quebec, was shaped by his early experiences with physical fitness and discipline. Growing up in a farming community, GSP developed tolerance for hard work and perseverance from a young age. Despite facing bullying and intimidation from older peers, GSP’s dedication to fitness became a source of strength and empowerment. Encouraged by his father after being aware his son was being bullied, George immersed himself in martial arts as a way of defending himself . Through rigorous workouts and strict discipline, GSP not only developed physical abilities but also  mental resilience, laying the groundwork for his future success as a mixed martial artist. This early emphasis on physical fitness and discipline laid the foundation for GSP’s journey toward becoming a champion athlete. Also, his use of this strength not to show how masculine and strong he is, but rather just to protect himself from being harassed. This speaks loudly about his humble nature as a man.

 Throughout his career, George St-Pierre has redefined traditional notions of masculinity through his actions both inside and outside the octagon. Despite his physical stature and success as a fighter, GSP’s portrayal of masculinity emphasises values like respect, humility, and integrity. Unlike stereotypical values of masculinity that prioritise dominance and aggression, GSP’s use of physical strength is never intended to intimidate or harm his opponents. Instead, it serves as a symbol of resilience and determination in beating adversity.By owning these values, GSP challenges harmful stereotypes and inspires men to embrace a different definition of masculinity, one that values empathy, compassion, and respect for others.
George St-Pierre’s journey from victimised child to martial arts champion shines a bright light on the transformative power of positive masculinity. Through his dedication to self-defence, respect for opponents, and commitment to integrity, GSP challenges traditional notions of masculinity and inspires men to embrace vulnerability, empathy, and resilience. GSP reminds us that strength comes in many forms, and true masculinity is defined not by physical prowess alone but by the content of one’s character and the values they uphold.

Blog 2: The Effects of Masculinity on Others

Examining the harmful impact of toxic masculinity on society through a humanities lens has allowed me to see how degrading and harmful the consequences of it are. Toxic masculinity, characterized by behaviours such as violence, dominance, and misogyny, poses significant challenges to individuals and society. This essay shows that the effects of toxic masculinity not only harm men themselves but also perpetuate inequality and violence against marginalized groups. Through real-life examples and scholarly blogs, I will demonstrate the urgent need to challenge and end toxic masculinity to have healthier and more equitable communities.

Will James presented \Toxic masculinity as 5 things men do. Being violent,

projecting dominance, being sexually aggressive towards women and not displaying emotion. These characteristics are all achievable by any man on this planet, correct? So, if every man would just check these 4 boxes off, they would be the “greatest” man in our society? Of course not. The competitive aspect this brings along makes men degrade others just to be at the top. “We’ve managed to disempower the overwhelming majority of American men by other means such as discriminating based on race, class, ethnicity, age or sexual preference.” When reading Michael Kimmel’s “Masculinity as Homophobia” he displays the degrading nature of toxic masculinity and how psychologically men feel stronger and better about themselves after hurting someone else. An amazing real example of this comes from the Charlottesville documentary where the viewer is shown men screaming “fuck you faggots” to homosexuals, talking about “ethnic cleansing” in America and chanting “Jews will not replace us”. This hatred is exactly what Michael Kimmel talks about. Classes have emerged over decades of how men have beaten down each cultural, and sexual class for them to feel more powerful. 

            Misogyny has also been another aspect with which men fuel their toxic egos. By degrading women, they pick on their most valuable characteristics: appearance, sexual purity, sweetness and submissiveness. This rage usually comes from a deeply negative experience with women. Whether it is betrayal, cheating or being rejected. Men do not want to display emotional damage and instead of achieving mental peace by letting this unfortunate event sink in they build negative thoughts attached to women. The most extreme examples of this are presented in the video “Inside Incel”. Firstly, Alex Manassian, whom we see kill 8 women in Toronto after being motivated by the misogynistic incel leader. Alex was a man with no criminal record, but also nobody around him. He was picked on a lot in middle school and was always rejected by girls. His loneliness and angriness towards women and society made him explode and kill.  The leader of the incel is the same sad story, Elliot Rodger, who has never experienced happiness, and says his problem is girls. “I will slaughter every single spoiled, stuck-up blond slut. You will finally see that I am in truth the superior one” This degradation towards women is fed by the fear of humiliation. After their negative experiences, they have just hidden from society and isolated until exploding and killing people. This way of coping is unhealthy and has caused huge issues, especially among incel group members. Michael Kimmel discusses this issue as well in his article saying how “Exclusion and escape have been the dominant methods American men have used to keep their fears of humiliation at bay”. This issue arises from how men aren’t supposed to display emotion and keep it all inside. However, some people are unable to do this and must seek help.

In conclusion, toxic masculinity causes a cycle of harm and oppression that affects both men and women. The dehumanizing attitudes towards certain groups, fuelled by the desire for power and dominance, only serve to promote inequality and division within society. To break free from the cycle of toxic masculinity, we must encourage people and communities to stand up against and break down the unfair systems that support these harmful beliefs. It is important to eliminate systematic segregation by separating people into different groups with different statuses. Everyone is equal and putting down people doesn’t make you better. Let us unite and challenge toxic masculinity and dismantle the systems that uphold it, striving towards a society where equality, respect, and compassion prevail for all genders.

Build Yourself

In the narratives of “Invincible” and “Guys club” we see the profound impact of external influences on the behaviour and identity of the protagonists. Both characters adapt to societal expectations of masculinity that cause them to hide their true selves and conform to gender norms. Through their stories, we see the complexities of identity, the pressures of society, and the struggle to hide your inner truth from external expectations. In both stories, the young men lived with influences that caused them to adapt their behaviour. External factors were linked to character change in both cases. 

In “Invincible” the protagonist Marc has some behavioural problems. Although we don’t know the cause, he was placed in a youth institution where he goes around and causes trouble. The way he acts isn’t his personality but rather to rebel against the system and the institution he’s in. He doesn’t feel loved, or appreciated, and ultimately feels like a disgrace. The institution isn’t there to help the kids but rather to scare them from coming back. They don’t support the kids. For example, Marc has nobody to talk to in his life, not even a counsellor at the institution and the one time we see him attempting to express his emotions in a poetry class nobody reacts and tries to support him. I believe his suicide could’ve been avoided if someone was there to listen to him and what he was going through.

He acts tough and “bad boy” style on the outside but during his narrative, you can tell he’s a sweet kid. This is shown quite clearly when he is playing with his younger sister and skipping stones. He was so happy and looked extremely joyful. As he returns to the youth center his behaviour changes drastically. The influences around him at the youth center don’t help his behaviour. The lesson everyone is trying to teach those boys is to man up and surpass their problems. Marc needs more support. Being told to man up isn’t helpful in any way, and if support had been provided maybe Marc wouldn’t have taken his life. 

In the short story “Guy’s Club” by Carlos André Gomez, a young boy named Carlos is introduced to masculinity norms at an extremely young age. When seeing his sister and aunt painting their nails, Carlos thought it would be cool to do him as well. His aunt laughed and said, “That is a thing for girls” (Gomez 1). After seeing how disappointed he was she decided to paint his nails in the end. When Carlos shows up to the soccer field for a game, his teammates see the nails and say, “Why are your nails painted are you a faggot” (Gomez 2)? Immediately everyone gathered around Carlos, and they were all laughing at him. He felt like an attraction. This incident led to Carlos’s learning about masculinity and how toxic other guys act when seeing weakness. After skipping down his life a bit, we see that Carlos still struggles with his masculine identity. Although he does all the “classic” things like sex and hooking up with girls and bars he also has some moments where he truly isn’t “masculine”. When visiting Zambia, Carlos was amazed by the difference in masculinity judgements and openness. He liked the fact that you could hold hands with your friends in the streets and not get called a faggot. During the trip, he finds himself kissing his friend during sleep. He wakes up from his dream and his lips are hovering over the other man. He doesn’t know what this means but it confuses him even more. “Was I gay? Did I have something inside of me that was trying to break free (Gomez 15)? This trip opened his eyes to who he truly was. Not who Western civilization wanted him to be. He found himself again after living his entire teenage years being somebody who was formed not by his own will, but by society. 

These 2 characters for sure have something in common, in both narratives, the young men find themselves following masculine norms that don’t align with their true selves. Despite their inner qualities/desires, they are compelled to adapt their behaviour to fit societal expectations of masculinity. In both cases, they’re prone to hide their true selves to navigate the expectations of masculinity imposed by society across the world. Despite their internal struggles and qualities, external influences force them to conform to a narrow definition of masculinity, causing them to ignore aspects of their identity and behave in ways that are not their true nature.

In conclusion, the experiences of the young men in “Invincible” and “Man Up” underscore the influence of societal norms on individual behaviour and identity. Despite their inner goodness and unique qualities, both protagonists are forced to suppress aspects of themselves to conform to societal expectations of masculinity. These characters serve as reminders of the importance of self-acceptance and the need to reject gender norms, allowing us to embrace our true selves. As society continues to evolve, may these stories inspire reflection and dialogue on the enduring quest for personal authenticity and liberation from the confines of societal expectations.