Gender and History Essay: Manifest Destiny Versus the Meaning of American Manhood and Womanhood

Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?

We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.

You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Gender and History Essay: Manifest Destiny Versus the Meaning of American Manhood and Womanhood

Manifest Manhood was very popular during the period between the United States – Mexican War and the Civil War. Manifest Manhood is the study of competing ideas to show masculinity which drove territorial expansion. Many men pursued frontiers as goldseekers, travelers, and most commonly filibusters. Martial men and restrained men both had the same goals but had different techniques in achieving these goals. Martial men showed violence to show their masculinity and power while restrained men who showed responsibility, religion, temperance, and the domestic influence shown by women. Territorial expansionism was specifically justified because it was domesticated. These men were from very different areas but still showed a common interest which was expansionism. In Manifest Manhood, Amy Greenberg states that there were generally two types of men living in Antebellum America which were martial men and restrained men.

Martial men were Greenberg’s main topic in her study rather than the restrained men. Martial manhood would allow men to show their masculinity through violence, physical strength, domination, and aggression. Amy Kaplan states in her book summary ‘ martial men sought new settings for the redemptive expansion of the self and the nation, rather than identification with purportedly primitive others.’

With this being said, it was proven that martial men were focused directly on expansion and how it will affect them being known as heroes to the nation and them not being worried about anything but that. Any common man could be a martial man. This could be a fireman, merchant, politician, and sometimes even militia leaders. These men could also become a restrained man as well depending on which side they would choose to decide. Furthermore, Irishmen and southerners that were laborers would often choose to pick a side as well, and it was much more common for them to choose to be a martial man.

A wide variety of men chose to be martial men from different social classes and different regions. Men believed that being a martial man would be the most effective way to show their dominant masculinity. In Greenberg’s book she said ‘ this book contends that aggressive expansionism, defined here as support for the use of war to gain new American territory, between the U.S. – Mexican War, through the filterbustering of the 1850’s, and up to the Civil War, was supported by martial men, and that debates over Manifest Destiny also were debates over the meaning of American manhood and womanhood.’

Martial men believed the only way to accomplish expansionism was through war and violence. Martial men had the largest participation in Manifest Manhood and even larger Manifest Destiny, and according to Greenberg, they also made the largest impact to the expansion of the United States and even America.

Filibuster’s were a very common name for extreme martial men during expansionism during Manifest Destiny. Greenberg defines Filibusters as men that are members of a private army that would invade other countries without official sanctions of the United States government in Central America and the Caribbean. Filibusters were men who on their own initiative went to war against foreign nations, often in the face of open hostility from their own governments. The term filibusters was also used in reference to the invasions as well.]{dir=’ltr’}[^4] [The tactics and actions of filibusters was illegal but they didn’t care because they had conquered a large amount of territory from Mexico so it made them look like real patriots. Men were very supportive of filibustering, participated in filibustering, and had knowledge of Latin America due to their part in gender practices.]{dir=’ltr’}[^5] [In Greenberg’s book, she states that aggressive expansionism, defined as support for the use of war to gain new American territory was supported by the martial men and filibustering. Men joined into filibustering because they believed it would show their manhood. One famous filibuster figure during this time would include Willian Walker. The other well known filibuster was Narciso Lopez. In 1850, Narciso Lopez led a group of American mercenaries in an assault on Cuba. Their main goal was to take over the Cuban government and and try to become part of the United States. Their attempts to invade small countries or states and allowing independence was known as filibustering as well. The United States government didn’t like the technique of filibustering as an attempt to expand our nation’s borders and felt that there were other ways to accomplish this. Walker was inspired by Lopez’s attempt and decided to use it to seek out and conquer the Mexican states of Sonora and Baja California. Walker was able to capture the capital of Baja California with a forty-five man army. He renamed the state the Republic of Lower California and declared himself as the president. With this, he believed in pro-slavery and applied the laws of Louisiana to allow slavery to be legal. He became famous in the United States and American’s reacted and wanted to join his army and participate in his expedition which earned his the nickname ‘the gray-eyed man of destiny.’ After Walker’s death in 1860 which was caused by a firing squad of Honduran authorities. Walker left a legacy and it is even celebrated in Costa Rica still today.]{dir=’ltr’}[^6] [With the filibusters, it is shown that they did in fact take pride in their work and accomplishments. Their attempt to take over Central America was meant to display their dominance and show how much power they had and what it was capable of doing. These men were both very popular figures and even though their attempts to take over new land failed, their expedition showed white manhood as martial and aggressive, and would lead other white men to join these expeditions so they could display their manhood. As Greenberg said ‘the martial activities of filibusters like William Walker and Narciso Lopez ultimately the very fact that other men joined these quixotic missions in the first place, and that they were lauded even in failure, reveals the degree to which foreign relations and gender norms were linked in the antebellum era.’

On the other end of the spectrum, their were the restrained men. These men showed responsibility, religion, temperance, and the domestic influence shown by women. Restrained manhood was more popular in the North and the South, while martial took more popularity in the West, and they grounded their identities within their families, displayed a great passion in Protestant Faith, and were generally successful in their business fields. These men were very domestic and were better examples of womanhood rather than what could be called a martial man. Restrained men were strong believers that the domestic household belonged at the center of the world and that their wives and mothers were their main driving aspects. They would do everything in their power to follow all guidelines set by Jesus Christ himself and would do all they could to avoid committing sins. Restrained men would never drink until they were drunk and would pursue to encourage laws that would put a stop to the distributing of any alcohol in other states. They were not violent men and were still brave, dependable, and very moral.

Usually all restrained men could be found participating in a political party whether that be the Whigs, Know-Nothings, or Republican’s. If these men chose to participate in the Whig party, they would be likely to stand up for Women’s Rights and would allow females to be a part of their political campaigns.

In comparison to martial men, most restrained men would also come from a normal lifestyle like a firefighter, merchant, or politician. Unlike Martial men, restrained men believed that the Manifest Destiny hadn’t yet been completed and they felt it could be done without force and rather with social and religious action. Even though restrained men didn’t show as much progress as martial men during expansionism, they kept their dominance as men while martial men ended up losing theirs after becoming unsuccessful on their side of manhood. In account Hawaiin missionaries, it was shown that restrained men were more successful at bringing Hawaii into America rather than the martial men who failed filibustering missions that took place in Hawaii.

This showed that violence wasn’t necessary to impact expansionism and that it could still be done effectively.

Though Amy Greenberg focuses mainly on martial men, it still cannot be completely proven that they were more productive than restrained men. Martial men seemed to show that they were more dominant and manly, but they also encountered a lot of failure and felt that violence was absolutely necessary. On the other hand, restrained men didn’t show violence and were less outgoing, but they seemed to be just as productive, even if they didn’t accomplish as much as martial men did. Martial men gained a lot more popularity due to the fact they they were showing violence to expand and restrained men didn’t get this popularity which kept them more hidden than the outgoing martial men. Without the display of bravery from both restrained and martial men, the whole concept of Manifest Destiny could’ve been changed as well as the topic of expansionism. Martial men and restrained men both played a large role in Antebellum America and is still a popular concept today.

References

Kaplan, Amy. ‘Restrained and Martial Manhood.’ *Diplomatic History* 31, no. 3 (2007): 567-69. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24916089.
Amy S. Greenberg, ‘*Manifest Manhood and the Antebellum American Empire*’ , (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 14.
Kaplan, Amy. ‘Restrained and Martial Manhood.’ *Diplomatic History* 31, no. 3 (2007): 567-69. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24916089.
Amy S. Greenberg, ‘*Manifest Manhood and the Antebellum American Empire*’ , (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 5.
Amy S. Greenberg, ‘*Manifest Manhood and the Antebellum American Empire*’ , (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 14.
Minster, Christopher. ‘Biography of William Walker, Ultimate Yankee Imperialist.’ ThoughtCo. https://www.thoughtco.com/the-biography-of-william-walker-2136342 (accessed November 6, 2019).
Amy S. Greenberg, ‘*Manifest Manhood and the Antebellum American Empire*’ , (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 28.
Amy S. Greenberg, ‘*Manifest Manhood and the Antebellum American Empire*’ , (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 12.
Amy S. Greenberg, ‘*Manifest Manhood and the Antebellum American Empire*’ , (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 12.
Amy S. Greenberg, ‘*Manifest Manhood and the Antebellum American Empire*’ , (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 279

Click Here To Order Now!