Backstage Discourse and the Reproduction of White Masculinities

Abstract

This article documents the shared patterns of private white male discourse. Drawing from comparative ethnographic research in a white nationalist and a white antiracist organization, I analyze how white men engage in private discourse to reproduce coherent and valorized understandings of white masculinity. These private speech acts reinforce prevailing narratives about race and gender, reproduce understandings of segregation and paternalism as natural, and rationalize the expression of overt racism. This analysis illustrates how antagonistic forms of “frontstage” white male activism may distract from white male identity management in the “backstage.”

NOTES

Notes

¹ I have intentionally left the “thick description” of these two groups barer than I would prefer in order to protect their identity. Identifying their relationship to other nationalist and antiracist organizations (inclusive of their ideological and membership lineage), their particular regional focus, or the reasons for their interclass (blue- and white-collar) membership, together runs too high a substantial risk of identifying them. So also, I have intentionally refrained from quoting much of their printed materials as simple Internet searches of their prose would identify their group and sometimes, individual members.

² J. Phillip Rushton's work has been the subject of much debate. His research procedures, analysis, and conclusions have been called into question for their dubious claims and for his selective dismissal of work that contradicts his own findings. To a large extent, his ideas are discredited among many within the scientific community (cf. The Nazi Connection: Eugenics, American Racism, and German National Socialism by S. Kühl; The Funding of Scientific Racism by W. H. Tucker; “Rushton Revisited” in The Ottawa Citizen[1 October 2005] by A. Duffy).