Discursive Constructions of White Nordic Masculinities in Right-wing Populist Media

Abstract

Using superordinate intersectionality as a theoretical framework, this article explores notions of men and masculinities within right wing populism. It is attentive to how the right-wing populist media in Finland and Sweden construct white Nordic masculinities through discursive interactions across several axes of difference: gender (masculinities); sexuality (heterosexuality); social class (elites); and race (whitenesses). Employing Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) as methodological approach, we show how the discursive constructions of white Nordic masculinities are context contingent, rendering them subject to constant reinterpretation and repositioning, at times privileging some axes of social structuring over others. By drawing out the subtle similarities and discrete differences embedded in the discursive constructions of right-wing populist media, our approach gives a more fine-grained understanding of the nuance to men and masculinities in the study of right wing populism. By focusing on the European Nordic semi-periphery, our comparative analysis makes an original contribution, not only to the masculinities literature in general, but also to the growing scholarship concerned with the `crisis of masculinity' in the wider context of neoliberal globalizing tendencies.

The Politics of Pity versus Piety

“…From this theoretical root, it can be argued that intersectionality has grown into a landscape in which many categories of differences interact with additional identification of the overarching ideas and culture, the social structure, the political terrain, and interactions between individuals. While intersectionality is sometimes believed to be only relevant to oppressed groups (Alexander-Floyd 2012), I align with other authors that believe in intersectionality's potential to assist in the understanding of relationship of dominance to subordination as well (Sherwood 2010;Madfis 2014;Sarah & Hughes 2018;Norocel et al 2018). I am careful to caution that while intersectionality is in itself a reaction to essentialism, we must be careful not to essentialize the group as a result of a single intersectional combination.…”

Performing ‘us’ and ‘other’: Intersectional analyses of right-wing populist media

“…There are not many studies comparing these constructions in Finland and Sweden, and they usually display a rather narrow focus on the matter. Some of these studies focus, for instance, on the ideological dilemmas manifest in political blogging (Pettersson, 2017(Pettersson, , 2020Sakki and Pettersson, 2016), national identity constructions (Pyrhönen, 2015), or the construction of white masculinities in the discourses of the two parties (Norocel et al, 2020). Some previous studies have explored the complex linkages between gender equality, women's rights, and populism (Askola, 2017;Mulinari and Neergaard, 2014;Sager and Mulinari, 2018), albeit not comparatively.…”

“…Gender equality is proclaimed an inseparable part of the Finnish welfare system, and feminist politics are deemed unnecessary (see also, Keskinen, 2013;Pettersson, 2017;Sakki and Pettersson, 2016). The type of equality defining the inner native core actually reproduces the essentialist 'natural complementarity' between men and women within the traditional Finnish family -acknowledging the importance of both parents in family matters, albeit with a clear division of roles based upon Lutheran teachings -at the level of the whole nation (Norocel et al, 2020;Pettersson, 2017). Consequently, the constant stating of rank-and-file party members' marital status, the regular column by a Lutheran priest in the newspaper along with abundant biblical references, and an insistence on the complementarity of the party's women's organisation to the wider party structures suggest that the Finns Party aims to portray itself as a constitutive part of the identity construct of the (Lutheran) 'us' (Finns) (Perussuomalainen, issue 4/2007: 10, elections issue /2011: 10, issue 4/2011: 10-12).…”

Counter-talk as symbolic boundary drawing: Challenging legitimate cultural practices in individual and focus group interviews in the lower regions of social space

“…Many scholars agree that different modes of disruptions, deviances, refusals to elaborate on given topics, uncomfortable silences or inappropriate laughter actually contribute intrinsically to the meaning of the interviews (Bengtsson & Fynbo, 2018;Nairn et al, 2005;Vitus, 2008). One could argue that our interviews elicited so much counter-talk because they touched upon cultural practices, a perhaps somewhat sensitive or even provocative topic in our era of growing social inequality and lifestyle politicisation (Hellström, 2016;Norocel et al, 2018). An additional layer to this means returning to reflect upon the role of the (typically middle-class) interviewer.…”