Decisions at the expense of...

Cynthia Enloe did an excellent job at breaking down the ambiguity of making decisions that hold political gravity because it always assumed that these decision makers are prioritizing the rights of all humanity without exception. But the reality is that some men and mostly women are merely actors in the warfare and political moves. When mobilizing support for women she suggests that those in that movement too are participating in militarization highlighting the dire need to strategize and that each maneuver must be closely examined to prevent the same tools from the master's house from being used to dismantle agendas resulting in the false teachings that foster the same issues. She mentioned that without close attention seemingly empowering structures such as all women colleges can even fall victim of misconstrued masculinized norms of hierarchy and competitiveness" (2000, 562). Overall her extensive research was screaming the need for women to not only analyze but to do something with their own analysis to ultimately share with their sisters for problem solving and policy reform. The issue is that many women feel privileged over other women not understanding the underlying commonality that no matter the education or socioeconomic status men or masculinized structures, such as dominating force, are prioritized as the higher class. It is easy to be distracted when on the unrelenting to quest to gain equal "opportunity" in the spaces where your opinions, qualifications, and creativity can be embraced to make legislative DECISIONS or organize in networks such as the UN. The institutions of patriarchy, capitalism, and white supremacy have been so deeply embedded in society's that it often impossible to even recognize when one is being positioned simply for political strategy or militarization not to be egalitarian.
It was interesting to read Enloe's five puzzled questions that resulted from her research. It was as if she realized that it is virtually impossible to strive for change or confront certain institutions with either militarization (obviously in a more subtle context) or exposing someone without incriminating repercussions such as masculine revenge. I did however disagree with her third question simply because I do not feel that it is problematic to break the silence in any instance. I truly believe, and can personally testify, that it is cleansing and empowering for a woman to assert her encounters with sexual violence and either reveal or not reveal her perpetrator. Nonetheless, the victim is given a voice and no longer lives in fear! Her ability to vocalize her pain gives voice to all those too afraid or confined to male dominating manipulation. If the news of the rapes were to inflame masculinized revenge I think that we would have had enough representation in these political offices and coalitions to charge each one! In the end, I took from this reading the demand to critique masculinized behavior before it is internalized and remains unchallenged. The unionizing of all women is imperative to break the constructs of division and stationed women that are unaware. This is the goal of not only militarization but the previously mentioned interlocking oppressions as well all to foster the ideology of needed power over another (group/race, nation, human) to stay unaware of the mirroring oppressions of humanity. Not only are the women being "pimped" as mentioned in the reading where the women were known as "comfort women" under the Japanese regime in the prostitution system. These women were in place, maneuvered by the government, to please/comfort these male soldiers to reinforce the need for war as the men were "cared for" to stimulate their compliance or ability to continue fighting. Each person has a role under the governments strategy to maintain its hierarchy and end the struggle for their envied power...at any and all costs!