His body, his choice? Patriarchy, discrimination against men and protective masculinity at war

Abstract

In March 2022, as we, the editors of NORMA, were working on the first editorial on men and masculinities in the context of the Russian war against Ukraine (Wojnicka, Mellström, & de Boise, 2022), we were hoping for a quick resolution to the war and that we would not be compelled to write about it ever again. Sadly, this hope has not yet materialized, as the war drags on with no end in sight. Since then, however, several scholarly papers analyzing the gendered aspects of this particular armed conflict have been published (Gaufman, 2022; Peng, Whyke, & Zhang, 2022; Shand, 2022). This is because this particular situation has illustrated, again, the mechanisms of patriarchy (Walby, 1990), whereby a war is used as the ultimate tool in enabling the reproduction of gender inequalities and hierarchies, where all genders are subjected to different forms of discrimination. We would like to continue to contribute to this discussion, this time focusing on men, male bodies, and discrimination against them in a time of war. However, due to both the complexity of the theme and the rather limited form of the editorial, we will focus only on signaling the salient issues that we believe will require more in-depth analysis in future studies. In critical men and masculinities scholarship it is already a platitude to state that patriarchy is differently but equally harmful to all genders, (hooks, 2004; Jenden, 2017; Scambor et al., 2014). This is particularly evident when it comes to armed conflicts, where people with ‘male bodies’ (both cis men and people with penises) are subjected to certain forms of gender-based discrimination, as having a particular set of body parts condemns them to the necessity of endangering their lives and health in combat. This obligation is strictly connected to their biological sex, as women and persons read as female are not forced to do so and (often) can choose whether they want to fight or not. The example of the current war in Ukraine illustrates this mechanism very well. Several days after the Russian army invaded the country, the Ukrainian authorities passed an ordinance under which almost all men 18–60 years old (with some exceptions) were forbidden to seek refuge abroad. Unlike women, they have been forced to stay in the country and be at the ready to protect it as solders, regardless of their experiences, plans, values or decisions. Women and children, rightfully, were allowed to seek refuge. These double standards have been also applied to migrant Ukrainian men who decided to stay in their host countries, as according to some oral sources they are seen as traitors and cowards who should go back to Ukraine at the risk of life and limb, only because they are (and are perceived as) men. However, discrimination against men in wartime is not limited to one country, as it happens, for instance, in Russia as well. The partial military mobilization announced by Putin in September 2022 obligated thousands of Russian men to physically support Russian aggression, regardless of their attitudes towards the war, which means, in practice, to be forced to risk their lives and health and to kill other people. Moreover, men who have refused to participate in the war and attempted to escape Russia are often not even considered refugees, as many countries refuse to define them as such, expecting them to engage in the fight against Putin’s regime instead of protecting their own lives.