Protective Masculine Norms: Civilian Norms and Violence in eastern Democratic Republic of Congo

Scholars have established that harmful gender attitudes and practices emerge in armed groups as combatants organize, bond and engage in war (Morris 1996, Cohen 2013, Wood 2018). Others suggest that these harmful gender norms and practices spill over to affect norms within the civilian population (Haglund and Richards 2018; Østby, Leiby, and Nordås 2019). Yet, the nature of gender norms among civilian populations has been more often assumed from existing literature rather than specifically theorized or examined. In this chapter, I introduce the concept of protective masculinities and demonstrate that protective masculinities are not equivalent to violent masculinities. Building upon the concept of masculinist protection and its paradoxes in the feminist literature (Young 2003, Runyan 1990, Hunnicutt 2009), I describe protective masculinities as one form of hegemonic masculinity that not only accounts for the behaviors that men undertake to protect their communities, but also the violence that men perpetrate against women. Using original interviews with civilians in eastern Democratic Republic of Congo, I describe the nature of masculinities and how they change in contexts where community security is prioritized. Male violence and hot-headed responses to conflict are viewed as liabilities for the community; rather, protective acts are revered and prioritized. Civilian men gain status as men by demonstrating that they will not tolerate violent men in their communities, essentially performing community protection. However, the ostracization of violent men only occurs when men’s violence is perceived to be a public security threat. Consistent with what Hunnicut (2009) calls “the paradox of masculine protection,” civilians tolerate men that perpetrate violence in their households, because that violence is perceived as a private affair rather than a public, threatening crime against which to protect. This chapter urges scholars to consider alternative forms of masculinities (beyond the violent, warrior-like masculinities often described) when considering how armed conflicts affect masculine norms among civilians.