EX TENEBRIS CRESCIT FLOS
PATRIARCHY: A SCATHING CRITICISM OF PROFESSIONAL WRESTLING
March 1, 2005
Patriarchy
"A society is patriarchal to the degree that it is male-dominated,
male-identified, and male-centered." [1] Johnson's definition says it all.
American society has been highly patriarchal from its inception and, in spite
of some challenges to the patriarchy, remains so to this day. To maintain
the patriarchy, it is necessary for gender roles to be strictly defined and
this is especially true in the case of men, as those who do not follow the
set male role can be seen as threats to the general order. As Kimmel [2]
explains, the masculine ideal has changed with time, but there has always
been a strict ideal. Today's ideal is "Marketplace Man", the ruthless and
successful capitalist, clawing his way to the top. By this definition, a
man must be strong and not outwardly emotional. Emotions are, of course,
the domain of women and "fags" (as they see it). The "real man" is aggressive
and competitive. Above all, the "real man" will never behave in a way which
would confuse his identity with that of the subordinate gender - women. So,
as long as a man behaves like a "real man", he is entitled to all the privileges
of the patriarchy. But since numerous other men are competing for power and
control, he must constantly prove himself. He must not do anything which would
give other men ammunition against him. If he is seen in any way to act like a
"weak-willed, emotional woman," other men will pounce on him like a weasel on
a wounded rabbit.
Wrestling: An Exaggeration of the Patriarchy
An exaggeration of this is seen in the activities of WWE (World Wrestling
Entertainment). As seen in the video documentary, "Wrestling with Manhood" [3],
society's definition of masculinity as raw power is laid out for all to see.
Of course, as is widely understood, the wrestling matches are all staged,
with outcomes predetermined, but the performances are a striking reflection
of today's social norms.
The performances, in general, involve three basic classes of people:
heterosexual men, homosexual men, and women. All are expected to perform
according to set standards. After all, the WWE would never want to offend its
loyal fans.
Straight Man vs. Straight Man
First, consider the example of straight man vs. straight man. Here the motto
"may the best man win" applies. Certainly, the "best man" will be the stronger
and more aggressive of the two, and when he gets the upper hand, he will
proceed to humiliate and emasculate his opponent in any way imaginable;
for example, he may sit on his opponent's face, taunt him, or even accuse him
of being a sissy or gay. In the larger society, a man who has been defeated
in competition especially by an overbearing bully (i.e. a supervisor at work)
may identify with the defeated wrestler, although he would never admit it.
The "fear of other men", Kimmel's [2] novel definition of homophobia, is at
work here.
Straight Man vs. Gay Man
Next, consider the example of straight man vs. gay man. The WWE has a few
token homosexual wrestlers, certainly there for the entertainment of the fans.
The gay wrestler must never win. Why? This is every "real man's" worst
nightmare, to be bested by a man who is a weak-willed sissy, no better than a
woman and probably worse because he has betrayed the masculine ideal. The
worst humiliations are saved for the gay wrestler. This essentially
constitutes staged gay-bashing, a caricatured reflection of the brutal events
of real life, i.e. the Matthew Shepard [4] murder or the Gwen Araujo murder [5].
Man vs. Woman
Finally, consider the example of man vs. woman. Women in the WWE are presented
as scantily-clas sex objects, willing to do the bidding of their masters.
Those who "step out of line", are bullied and humiliated by the men until they
relent. Male domination is total. Domestic violence is acted out on stage,
and the men in the audience love it. The ugly reality is presented on stage
as entertainment, reinforcing the belief that the patriarchy is intact, and that
men have the absolute right to dominate "their" women.
Is This Harmful?
The previous three examples depict the patriarchy in all its hideous glory
acted out on stage to the adulation of millions of fans. This puts the strong,
aggressive male - the bully - on a pedestal to be admired by one and all.
Why would this be disturbing? After all, it is just scripted entertainment
performed by skilled actors and actresses. Many in society are disturbed by
this for many reasons, but foremost among them is the glorification of the
male bully. This could be providing inspiration and justification to
schoolyard bullies, gay-bashers, and wife-beaters across the country. Is
this likely to inspire people who would otherwise not engage in these crimes?
This is hard to answer, but anything in the popular culture which glorifies
these activities has the potential to cause harm.
Conclusion
In conclusion, professional wrestling may show an ugly caricature of the
prevailing patriarchy, but reality is bad enough. Domestic violence,
gay-bashing, and tranny-bashing happen with frightening regularity, and
discrimination against women and "inferior" men is all too common. Could,
for example, the Wal-Mart discrimination and sexual harassment case [6] be
culturally connected at some level with the exaggerations of the WWE? It
would be hard to argue that it is not - both are stark manifestations of the
patriarchy hard at work, preserving male power at all costs.
Sources
[1] Johnson, Allan, "Patriarchy." In Rothenberg, Paula S., "Race, Class, and
Gender in the United States, 6th Ed." New York: Worth Publishers, 2004,
pp. 165-174.
[2] Kimmel, Michael S., "Masculinity as Homophobia: Fear, Shame, and Silence
in the Construction of Gender Identity." In Rothenberg, pp. 81-93.
[3] Jhally, Sut and Jackson Katz, "Wrestling with Manhood - Boys, Bullying, and
Battering." Video. Media Education
Foundation, 2002.
[4] www.matthewsplace.com - Matthew's
Place. See the section on Matthew's Life.
[5] www.transyouth.net/stories/gwen_araujo.html - In Memory of Gwen Araujo.
[6] Cox, Meg, "Wal-Martyrs." In Rothenberg, pp. 231-232.
All contents of this site, unless otherwise noted, Copyright 2002-2008
Heather Harrison. All rights reserved. Permission is granted to accredited
educational institutions to copy and use this material as desired, in whole or
in part, provided that proper credit is given.