Historiography by Liam, 2016 - 2017
Material:
Read- "Politics in an Age of Anxiety" by K. A. Cuordileone http://anglais.u-paris10.fr/IMG/pdf/Politics_in_an_Age.pdf Questions to Answer: 1) According to Cuordileone, what was the “crisis in masculinity” and how did women (and the feminine) fit into this crisis? Liam: The crisis in masculinity was a concern primarily of conservatives, and traditionalists. It was a perceived trend of growing weakness that would ultimately infect the U.S. with the evils of communism. This trend can be seen greatly with the growth of sexual modernism. Those of more traditional values were greatly concerned with the expansion of women's rights and social norms outside of the typical roles of American Motherhood and the Cult of Domesticity, with more women taking jobs and becoming contributing members of the home's income, and of society at large. These stronger women, were labeled as aggressive, both socially and sexually. Some on the right began to project a message that these aggressive women were the root cause of homosexuality in men, arguing that it made men sexually impotent and created a "flight from masculinity". Homosexuals, who were considered feminine in nature, while certainly not accepted, did not face quite as much persecution as they had in the past, an alarming trend for traditionalists, and so began greater scrutiny. Many began to baselessly believe that homosexuality was on the rise, and that it threatened the security of the nation by having men who were "weaker and more susceptible to communism". These groups put American masculinity in jeopardy in the eyes of these concerned groups, and resulted in crackdowns and abuses of power by leaders such as Joseph McCarthy. 2) How did big business – and the “organization men” that came with it – contribute to the crisis in masculinity? Liam: 3) How did homosexuality become a national security issue? Why did politicians link homosexuality to political subversion? Liam: Homosexuality was greatly brought into the politics of the Cold War by conservatives, who using Schlesinger's (who was not a conservative) "hard or soft" method of classifying people and ideologies, labeled gays as soft. Conservatives saw only two options, you were either a manly figure who deposed communism, or you were a weak, feminine communist. Joseph McCarthy himself said: "If you want to be against McCarthy, boys, you've got to be either a communist or a cocksucker." The argument was that those who were soft desired to be disciplined and controlled by the state, which would have the strength they did not possess, meaning that they may turn to communism to fill this void. At a time where the United States was trying to strengthen its christian roots to distance itself from its secular enemy the USSR, homosexuality was more negatively viewed than would be expected. Ironically, the tenants of equality under communism may have also been something appealing to this persecuted group. Those who were homosexual were considered morally bankrupt, making them politically suspect. They were said to be subversive, and thus susceptible to the influences of communism. Republican Senator Kenneth Wherry went as far to say that Joseph Stalin had obtained Adolf Hitler's "world list" of homosexual persons that he could use to create new communists around the globe. A Senate investigation was launched with a report known as the Employment of Homosexuals and Other Sex Perverts in Government. The report concluded that gays lacked emotional stability because of their weak moral fiber, the report also found them unfit for government because they were prone to blackmail, and thus a security risk. 4) What does Cuordileone mean when she says that anticommunism “was more than a defense against Communism” (pg. 538)? Liam: Cuordileone claims that this theme of blame and persecution of those who were seemingly weak, and thus communist, was less of an attempt to weed out communists, but rather an attempt to stomp out a changing U.S. population. These assaults on freedom of expression were to limit the emerging traits and trends found to be wrong or immoral by conservatives, including greater tolerance for homosexuals, the growth of a more leftist political movement, atheism, and of course, sexual modernism (a perceived decline in masculinity, the advancement of women in the workplace, the increasing acceptance of reversed family gender roles, etc.). 5) Discuss Cuordileone’s analysis of Adlai Stevenson’s presidential campaign of 1952. Does this example adequately support her thesis of a crisis in American masculinity? Liam: The election of 1952 was the embodiment of Cuordileone's arguments supporting the crisis in American masculinity. Adlai Stevenson, the democratic presidential candidate ran against republican and ex general Dwight D. Eisenhower in a campaign that would ultimately be pulverized by insults and allegations from republican VP candidate Richard Nixon, and Senator Joseph McCarthy (Eisenhower stayed close to the issues, not becoming overly involved in personal attacks on Stevenson). Stevenson was labeled as soft, and his relatively weak demeanor only seemed to help the Republicans' smear campaign. Stevenson had quite the leftist history, and his defense of gay public officials in the past came back to haunt him as he was labeled as a communist and feminine individual. Soon, allegations surfaced linking the democratic candidate to homosexual activity in his past, all but destroying his chances at the presidency at a time where anti-communist sentiments were at their highest. This election completely supports Cuordileone's thesis. 6) What does Cuordileone say about McCarthy, and the liberal efforts to “fight fire with fire?” (pg. 541). Liam: Cuordileone is relatively unbiased in her own interpretations of Joe McCarthy, and instead presents the facts of his smear campaign without her own input. McCarthy is an important figure on this subject, as his campaigns against communism in the US were unrelenting, and a primary target of McCarthyism were ultimately homosexuals and the "soft". In an attempt to counter McCarthy's smear campaigns and anti-communist driven investigations, many in the media, particularly coming from the political left, attempted to (as said by Cuordileone) "fight fire with fire". Somewhat hypocritically, while trying to invalidate McCarthy, those on the left utilized their opponent's own method of demeaning homosexuals. Various media outlets covered stories tying McCarthy to homosexuals, often in ways seemingly as an insult. 7) What do you think is significant about Cuordileone’s article? In your answer, consider Cuordileone’s point that political discourse became polarized (pg. 515). Liam: I found this article to not only be interesting, but extremely eye opening. I clearly didn't fully understand the scope of McCarthyism and anti-communist persecution during the 20th century. The ways in which homosexuals were tied into communism was honestly baffling.
17 Comments
Anna Sexauer : 3
4/10/2017 10:23:57 am
The problems that arouse during the Cold War concerning homosexuality not only affected people during this time, this attitude was carried into many future decades. The idea that homosexuality and a liberal view in politics were linked and that these people supported communism was a nationwide belief. During the Cold War, these people faced many problems such as public criticism, blackmail, denial of jobs, and moral scrutinization. This attitude still remains in the minds of some Americans who view liberals as soft or homosexual. This sector of the political spectrum is often associated with these characterizations, even today. During times of fear, people often look for a scapegoat to hide their problems. Because the USSR was far away, people looked to the Homefront for a solution. This was found in the Liberal Party because this sector didn’t necessarily believe in handling communism the way many others did. This led people to believe they sympathized with the communist cause. By persecuting these citizens, others felt the government was working to clear America of communism and thus felt safer. A look back into the government many decades later shows that persecuting these people was wrong and unjust, however, this association still remains.
Reply
Liam Kelly
4/12/2017 09:05:46 am
Thank you for your insightful comment Anna! It's truly interesting to see how associations in the past can form deep-seeded prejudices in a later societies. This was seen with the demeaning of particular races involved in slavery, including the Slavs in Europe, and of course Africans in the new world. I agree with your belief that the modern sentiments towards and the linking of those on the political left, and homosexuals largely takes its roots from this period.
Reply
Olivia Kellam: 3
4/10/2017 08:32:00 pm
The crisis of masculinity had a major impact on the United States short term and long term. The women during this time that had ambition and drive were looked upon as if they were stepping over the line of gender roles. The women that strived for more than being a stay at home mom were looked down upon. The women that went outside of the home to find work could have struggled to find the job they wanted because the men would feel inferior if they hired women to do their jobs. Men who were “soft” were viewed as weak and were demoralized for not being manly enough for the society. Looking back at that period in history, there a clear changes that have been made since then.Today, there a men that stay at home to tend with kids and house while the woman goes out to work. There are still some people that think that the man should be the one that works and brings home an income, but the idea that either gender could stay home or go out to work is evolving. Of course, there are still people that believe that the woman belongs in the house, but the idea of stay at home dads are more common than they were before.
Reply
Liam Kelly
4/12/2017 09:11:51 am
Thanks for responding Olivia, it is truly fascinating to see the great leaps and bounds gender equality has taken since this period in our history, and of course to look forward at the many places it can still improve. I feel as though the Cold War may have been the final great push by traditionalists to suppress the evolving role of women in society. Ironically, I take their suppression as the same fear they would call one "soft" for. It's baffling to think that a society would try to limit half of its work force, its brains, its motivated population simply because of their gender and a perceived idea of weakness.
Reply
Jackson Rose: 5
4/11/2017 07:50:36 pm
I agree with Liam here that the election of 1952 not only supports Cuordileone’s thesis of a crisis of masculinity, but it also is one of the best examples that really shows how being soft on Communism affected politics. Adlai Stevenson was soft on Communism, and this caused him to lose the election in a landslide; Eisenhower received 442 electoral votes and Stevenson only received 89. Because of the fear of Communism and the subsequent fear that all homosexuals were Communists, the political left, which was known to be softer on Communism and therefore more feminine and corruptible in those days, had a lot of trouble getting people elected to public office. Stevenson was labeled feminine because he was soft on Communism, and he defended gay public officials. This led to allegations of Stevenson engaging in homosexual activity in his past, which unfortunately scared off most of his potential voters who had not already been scared off by his “femininity”.
Reply
Liam Kelly
4/12/2017 11:21:58 am
Thanks Jackson! You're right, this election is crucial evidence for Cuordileone's thesis. I found it interesting to research, especially seeing Nixon's role in the slander campaign. It was an unfortunate turn for Stevenson, who as you pointed out, lost in a landslide.
Reply
Emma Booker: 3
4/11/2017 08:37:25 pm
As homosexuals, women, and other suspected “communists” did, many racial and religious groups faced persecution at the hands of the American government since the beginning of the nation. From the beginning the United States has held major prejudices and racial discrimination against both African-Americans through slavery and Native Americans by relocating them to various reservations and in some cases taking said reservations from them as well. As the New Immigrant wave spread in the early 20th century, eastern and southern European immigrants faced brutal scrutiny by the general public and the government itself through discriminating immigration laws caused by a fear of the spread of socialism and communism through the immigrants into the United States. While stating the need for democracy and freedom worldwide during WWII, the United States government authorized the internment of over 120,000 Japanese-Americans into internment camps spread across the West coast, effectively stripping them of anything they own and their rights as citizens. The rise of fear of communism caused by the Cold War sparked anger in the American people towards anything going away from the normalities of society, as new ideas do. Anything unlike the typical standards must be bad and related to other bad things, therefore, must be pummeled before it rises to overpower the good.
Reply
Robby Parker: 4
4/11/2017 09:04:34 pm
I agree with Liam’s perspective on how anticommunist movement or stance spreading throughout America was less than an attempt to weed out communist, but rather as an effort to change the diversity of beliefs rising in the America. Conservatives during this period used the anti-communist stance as a partisan weapon against liberals, homosexuals, or anyone with unamerican views. Instead of being a movement to combat rising communism caused by the hysteria spreading around the Red Scare or Red Wave, anti-communism sought to go beyond the boundaries of communism and to fight the spreading of tolerance of homosexuals, atheism, a more leftist political movement, and sexual modernism. I believe when Cuordileone said that anti-communism ““was more than a defense against Communism,” she was explaining that this new movement sought to do more than it was initially intended to accomplish, and it had a domino effect on what our society thought was an American belief versus that of a Communist idea. The comparing of different ideas had caused the movement to take away many rights of expressing oneself that varied from what was traditional during this time.
Reply
Rose
4/11/2017 09:09:59 pm
I find the post-WWII and early Cold War era anti-communism tendency to label people as either masculine and capitalistic or feminine, homosexual, and communist completely baffling and illogical. The idea that people can be sorted into two categories with such disparate characteristics within the categories or the idea that one’s sexuality is linked to one’s political leanings or education level seems so nonsensical to me. What seems even more outlandish to me is the lengths people who supported this rigid binary of educated and homosexual communist versus capitalist and patriotic American went to and the flawed logic they used in order to justify their prejudices. The fact that so many people bought into this ideology shows just how rampant the fear of the spread of communism and of the rise of the power and influence of the USSR really was in the Cold War era United States. This mindset also seems to still vaguely persist in today’s society through the uneducated, aggressively masculine, redneck Republican stereotype and the way society perceives more educated people as more likely to be Democrats.
Reply
Samantha
4/11/2017 09:21:21 pm
This is an interesting topic, as I had heard of McCarthyism before but had never heard of the “ crisis of masculinity” and its connection to the threat of communism, during this time period. It is fascinating to me that society of that time so easily placed the blame for the increase in homosexuality among men, on women who were looking to work outside of the home and have careers. People, in turn, also believe that weak men were easily lead to communism. Of course women had to be the cause of the weakening of the male population! It is almost funny living now in 2017, to think that people would even believe such things. However, in the 1940's and 1950's, the threat of communism was very real to Americans. Leaders of the time played on people's fears. People, like Joseph McCarthy, use those fears to try to control people and for a period of time it worked.
Reply
Jazmine, Question 3
4/11/2017 10:08:11 pm
I think that it is interesting that such a strange link was made to be seen between sexuality and political position. I also seems that it served as a cover-all accusation that would have been uncomfortable and embarrassing for whoever was accused. This shows clearly that McCarthyism had such a weak grounding that claims that were completely unrelated to communism were considered serious accusations. This sort of logical fallacy seems to be used a lot in cases without significant evidence in order to draw listeners attention away from the issue at hand and towards something that is more subjective and fascinating. I think that Anna presented an interesting point when she commented on how these viewpoints have left their imprint on our current views of political groups. While I cannot speak for the majority of our country, in my personal experience I have notice that the Republican party tends to be portrayed as a more masculine group then the Democratic party and these accusations may be part of why I have observed this.
Reply
Kevin 6
4/11/2017 10:09:21 pm
I believe the evidence found on this question is the perfect summary of the attitude towards the homosexual community during the 1950's. Even being lightly associated with homosexuality could hurt a political party or figure's popularity. This essentially ruined any chances of gaining any rights or respect in any aspect of social or political life for the homosexual community. This stigma has only recently started to wear off, this is made evident with the dying off it the more conservative people who carried the traditions of the less tolerant past. With the stigma's demise came the rise in rights of marriage and miltary participation, among other things. This goes to show that one of the most important things in the political world, is a strong backing in the social one.
Reply
Madison :3
4/11/2017 10:13:53 pm
I agree with the points that Liam introduced. The crisis of masculinity occurred after World War II and at the beginning of the Cold War. The changing roles of women within the workforce and in the household made it challenging for men to maintain their “masculinity” as businessmen and the primary breadwinners of the household. The problems that arose as a result of that thought process not only affected the United States government and society back then, but continues to affect how men are viewed today. If a man doesn’t like to get dirty or displays a feminine side then he runs the risk of being identified as a homosexual and of being criticized or ridiculed by his peers. A “manly-man” by today’s standards is viewed as a hardworking man who provides for his family and likes to take part in “manly” activities, such as watching football, basketball, or NASCAR; or going fishing and hunting; or working on his truck. Unfortunately, in today’s society, another trend has also developed – violent crimes and attacks are being carried out by men who link masculinity to gun violence. Many of these are teens or young adults who have not had positive role-models or have let their own smugness, apathy, or isolation get in the way of advancement, but they don’t see it for what it is, and they are angry. For them, masculinity is not about being human but about inflicting their pain onto others
Reply
Palmer Smith
4/11/2017 11:06:29 pm
I found this topic of relating masculinity to McCarthyism and the anti-communist persecution of those who were thought to be more feminine very interesting. I didn't realize that these topics even correlated. The mind blowing thing is that this attitude that homosexuals are weak and outsiders in a way has carried from the 1950s to 2017. I also agree with Liam that the election of 1952 encompasses Cuordileone’s thesis perfectly because it exemplifies how being soft or weaker on communism can actually affect political outcomes. The election of 1952 was Democratic candidate Adlai Stevenson running against Republican candidate Dwight Eisenhower. Because Stevenson and many other people politically left were considered to be soft on Communism and therefore more feminine, Eisenhower won the election by 353 electoral votes mainly due to how most people viewed Stevenson and others that were softer on communism. This ultimately ruined any other chances of him running for any other memorable positions because rumors of prior homosexual actions surfaced after he was said to be more feminine and corruptible.
Reply
Courtney Floyd
4/12/2017 06:49:32 am
I agree with the answer given for question 3 because in this time of accusing people of being communists, the homosexuals or people who were thought to be homosexual were often targeted because people somehow thought they could link one's sexuality to their political position. This was in part because of the Conservative view of classifying people, "you were either a manly figure who deposed communism, or you were a weak, feminine communist." The homosexuals were also targeted because of the strengthening of Christian roots in America, which led to more of opposing view of gays because to some, being homosexual was a sin. Because gay people were viewed as being weaker and having an inclination to be controlled by the state, it was thought that they would be more susceptible to succumb to the ideas of communism. This attempted link between sexuality, or supposed sexuality, and political position just shows how they were willing to try to accuse any "weak" group in this time of being communist.
Reply
Daniel
4/12/2017 08:07:27 am
I found the topic about relating anti-communism to a defense about us as Americans. When dealing with sexuality, Cuordiloene described "anti-communism as a defense against America". At first it confused me because I couldn't understand how the author could make a statement like that. But with the words that Cuordileone used to back up the statement, I slowly got what the author was trying to say. From the perspective that I looked at it, the statement was about how anti-communism attacked multiple things in America. It was more than communist that was being attacked; the movement caused many people to start viewing others and their ideas differently and making them feel wrong. The movement transformed views on sexuality when it was not suspose to be about homosexuals.
Reply
Katie
4/12/2017 01:27:41 pm
The crisis in masculinity is very interesting, and the ideas and beliefs that were generated during were passed down through generations and are still present today. Homosexuals were seen as feminine and therefore weak and soft and therefore more susceptible to communism. It was argued that those who were soft wanted to be disciplined and controlled by the state, which had the strength that they did not have. This meant that they would turn to communism. Strong women who worked and contributed were perceived as aggressive and were blamed for homosexuality. Basically as soon as the traditional gender roles were threatened, people are labeled as communists and threats. People outside of the social norm and traditional gender roles were discriminated against. During this time when the United States was trying to strengthen its Christian roots in order to distance itself as far as possible from its enemy the secular USSR, homosexuality was very negatively viewed.
Reply
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWelcome to Liam's Blog. Liam is participating in an independent study of history this year part of which requires him to interpret historical arguments. Archives
April 2017
Categories |