Helpful heroes and the political utility of militarized masculinities

Abstract

This article was named the winner of the 2019 Enloe Award. The committee commented:

This article, which draws upon Enloe’s central ideas on militarized masculinities and enriches/refines the literature by focusing on the “helpful hero” trope utilized to justify the Canadian military intervention in Afghanistan in 2001–2014, is innovative in its framing and methods. The author’s discourse analysis of “helpful heroes” and her broader analysis of “helpfulness” opens up new pathways for thinking about militarized masculinities in less binary terms, and for theorizing the deeply embedded, intertwined experiences of militarization and humanitarianism, particularly the white, Eurocentric savior complex in international conflicts. It is a very interesting article for thinking about how justificatory tropes of heroism obscure the practice of violence.

ABSTRACT

This article discusses how models of militarized masculinity can be mobilized to justify the use of violence internationally. I first trace a model of militarized masculinity – the “helpful hero” – that emerged during the Canadian military intervention in Afghanistan in 2001–2014. I demonstrate that this ideal type emerged from competing preferences for “warrior” or “peacekeeper” identities of the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF). The helpful hero model functioned to legitimize participation by the CAF in the Afghanistan War due to the positioning of soldiers as helpful, rather than as overtly aggressive or militaristic. I argue that the helpful hero ideal was not simply another ideal type of militarized masculinity, but also a symbolic trope that functioned politically to erase and obscure actual military violence. The article concludes by problematizing this model of militarized masculinity and noting the violent and imperial effects of war that cannot be seen when we imagine the military according to gendered mythologies.

KEYWORDS:

• Militarized masculinities
• warrior masculinity
• national identity
• peacekeeping
• helpful heroes

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Notes on contributor

Nicole Wegner is a Postdoctoral Research Fellow in the Department of Government and International Relations at the University of Sydney, Australia. Her primary research focuses on socio-political forces that contribute to militarism. She has published research on militarist myths related to international peacekeeping and feminist theories about war, and is currently working on a collaborative project examining veteran suicides and military sexual violence.

Notes

1 The images are available at www.veterans.gc.ca.

2 Canada-as-peacekeeper is a myth in the sense that it is factually overstated, but also because the political leadership used the associated symbolism of this set of narratives to define a soft-power role for Canada’s military internationally. The myth, imbued with symbolism about the “non-violent” or “peaceful” nature of the Canadian military, fails to properly account for the violent attributes of peacekeeping missions, including a dark history in Canadian peacekeeping missions involving sexism, racism, and unauthorized violence both within military units and towards others (for discussion, see Razack 2004; Whitworth 2004).

3 Examples of this commemoration include the Reconciliation peacekeeping monument in Ottawa, several municipal parks commemorating Canada’s peacekeeping missions, special-edition Mint currency items including a 1995 $1 coin and the 2001–2013 $10 note that featured a blue-bereted soldier, and postage stamps with peacekeeping imagery. Consider also, the designation of August 9 as National Peacekeeper Day.

4 Over a number of years, the majority of poll participants indicated a preference for “traditional peacekeeping,” defined as “keeping two conflicting sides apart,” over “peacemaking,” defined as “fighting alongside other UN [United Nations] forces to force peace in a disputed area” (see, for instance, Environics Research Group Limited 2002; Environics Research Group Limited 2004; Ekos Research Associates Inc. 2005). Despite the option for multilateral “peacemaking” (which more accurately described the type of policies being carried out in Afghanistan), poll respondents reflected a preference for the traditional role and activity of “peacekeeping.” In addition to polls, an internal Department of National Defence Study revealed that the public was not particularly receptive to combat-assertive rhetoric about Afghanistan and foreign policy and cautioned the Harper government to avoid this rhetoric in order to bolster public support for the mission.