Can the experience of internment camps, discussed by Espiritu, be compared to slavery, as Marable presents it? Why or why not? If these are comparable, how did these two event impact/shape masculinity of these two groups of men?
I don't think the experience of internment camps can be compared to slavery. I say this because Asian and Black men had different experiences which resulted in being seen differently. Because of the internment camps Asian-Americans had lost everything, and when they had left the camp, they had to find a job in order to live. "Most men found work as janitors, gardeners, kitchen helpers, and handymen..."(Espiritu, 37). These jobs were seen done by women, so Asian men were seen as weak and fragile. Black men were slaves and had masters that had them do all the physical labor, while Black women were seen doing the housework. Manning Marable says "Black men were only a step above the animals--possessing awesome physical power but lacking in intellectual ability" (18). Black men were seen more masculine not because people said they were strong, but also because people actually saw them do the work. Asian men were seen doing things that don't require much strength which is why they were seen as a woman.
Interesting contrast. So you are claiming that what the Black and Asian men experienced at the hands of white men, contributed to two very difference images of masculinity where Black men are seen as excessively masculine, while Asian men are seen as not masculine enough, or effeminate. So would you say that Black men have it easier and are more respected as men unlike Asian men? Or are both groups of men seen as not living up to the dominant masculine standards? Is race a factor here?
ReplyDelete