Patriarchy and Politics

As I stated several days ago, I believe that patriarchy hurts everyone. This harmful system frames how we view everyone, including our politicians. My personal frames of reference, Canada and India, both offer examples of this.

As soon as Justin Trudeau was voted leader of the Liberal Party of Canada, the Conservatives launched their assault, taking old video clips out of context to insinuate that Trudeau is a dumb, pretty boy who doesn’t know how to lead the country. In fact, taking the theme of this ridiculous video, they created an entire website to show us that he’s “in way over his head.” And then there was this nonsense:

Besides the text, which is basically dissing Canadians who work normal jobs—and in fact shows that Harper hadn’t done much of anything as of that time in 2013—look at the imagery. These are not straightforward, side-by-side photos. Why is Trudeau all sparkly?

Complementing these depictions are the constant references to “Trudumb” and “pretty boy” on social media, and Rob Ford’s alleged reference to Trudeau as a “fag” in his infamous crack-smoking video. This is the same idiotic stereotype that has long been associated with women (i.e. that one is either intelligent or attractive). But that is precisely the point; this gender association adds a deeper meaning. A handsome, clever, introspective man is often seen as effeminate.

But look at this man. No, really, look at him.

It’s not a crime to be beautiful.

Enter the supposed antithesis of Justin Trudeau (on the surface, yes; politically, I have my doubts). Stephen Harper never has to worry about anyone questioning his manliness (unless you believe the rumours about his wife having run off with a female RCMP officer). He is blunt, he doesn’t care about “root causes,” he loves war, and when he puts effort into his appearance, he goes from non-descript to frighteningly corpse-like.

Case in point:

Scary...

Similarly in India, former Prime Minister Manmohan Singh was often criticized for his quiet demeanor. He is a learned man, who had the respect of his international colleagues, like Barack Obama. His stature and personality always made him appear delicate.

Again, not manly enough to please the masses.

Enter Narendra Modi, with his 56" chest. In the run-up to the 2014 election in India, there was so much excitement on social media and in the mainstream media about the “weak,” old PM being replaced by butch Modi. And he played up to his macho image like anything.

Oh yeah, you da man, NaMo!

Patriarchy has convinced people that they need tough guys to look up to. And if a man’s image is more complex than that, no one wants to hear what he thinks or what he has done.

Personally, I have no use for tough guys. I want a leader with intellect and a vision for the whole country, not just a segment of it. These macho dudes work to keep their corporate friends and backers happy. Worrying about the poor or protecting the environment is for wussies. It's all about money and winning. Winning what, I'm not sure. But we must win!

What does this mean for our future generations? Do we want boys who let out their emotions with their fists? What happens to those who aren't necessarily violent, but want to be manly men? They end up like this guy, playing with the lives of innocent people who don't have a puppet as the leader of their strategically important country:

Or this guy, who wants to manufacture the weapons that will inevitably kill the aforementioned people:

I can't leave you with that image. Let's look at Justin again...