How People’s Rights are Alienated by Falsified Realities

Matt Davies

            Many people truly believe they know what is right and what is wrong.  In addition, there are many people who so strongly believe they know what is right and what is wrong to the extent that they want to share their enlightened ideals with others.  However, in an attempt to share their superior wisdom with the rest of society, this fortunately enlightened group of people often becomes forceful in trying to bring their ideals to life.  The forcefulness they exhibit leads to the oppression of the people upon whom they are trying to thrust their ideals.  In “Women and Cultural Universals” Martha Nussbaum gives a detailed, and oppressive, proposition of imposing universalist ideas and morals on people of different cultures.  While the goals of universalism are aimed towards global equality based on human rights, we see an identical situation on a smaller scale in a South Carolina military college.  “The Naked Citadel” offers an in-depth inquiry of the college that continues to sustain a patriarchal society.  Susan Faludi investigates the school and its restrictive policies regarding female students, as well as the harsh way cadets act towards both each other and towards women.  What these two authors fail to integrate into their works is the internal resistance such oppressive authorities instigate.  Azar Nafisi gives a first-hand account of such a rebellion from authority in “Selections from Reading Lolita in Tehran.”  Her underground literature class is a perfect example of what people resort to when ideals are forced upon them.  Their oppressors are so caught up in their dreams to create realities based upon selfish moralistic ideals that they fail, or choose not, to see the tyrannical societies they have forged.  By falsifying reality, people alienate and revoke the rights of the others whom are trapped in these aesthetically assembled societies. 

            In attempting to bring their dreams of an ideal world to life, the “creators” of reality have to force their beliefs on the other people of their society.  This oppressive way of introducing ideals into society is quite “imperialistic” (Nussbaum 368).  However, it is also inevitable when attempting to make such a drastic change.  When people are set in a way of life and others completely change the world they are used to being in, the reality that is so familiar to them, it does not allow people to live their lives how they wish.  Instead, they become “figments of someone else’s imagination” (Nafisi 352).  Martha Nussbaum wants to pursue her universalist beliefs even if it “involves assault on many local traditions” and if it does, “so much the better” (Nussbaum 360).  Describing the spread of morals as an “assault” certainly hints at the idea that this falsification of a universalist reality, would have no choice but to infringe on the freedoms of some people whom it affects.  It is apparent that Nussbaum does not mind attacking people’s lives and cultures as long as she succeeds in spreading the morals that she ‘knows’ are right.  In a microcosm of such a situation, the Citadel has successfully created a reality based on their own ideology. 

            The Citadel exemplifies the type of alienating, falsified reality Martha Nussbaum proposes to create herself.  For various reasons, the Citadel wants to maintain their identity and tradition of being an all-male college, while recreating a patriarchal society in the twentieth century.  The Citadel is “the image of [an] illusory past” (Nafisi 355) that refuses to adapt to society and resists any change from the outside world.  As Nussbaum feels that her personal beliefs should be universally accepted, the Citadel feels the same way about their college.  Men are strong and dominate society.  In order to maintain this “hundred-and-fifty-year-old all male policy” (Faludi 134), this reality, the cadets at the school are supposed to be molded into strong men.  The Citadel’s dream to have men dominate society, however, is implausible, and therefore they must find another way to fulfill this desire to dominate.  Within the confines of the college “the rules of gender [can] be bent or escaped” (Faludi 163).  Therefore, “if they couldn’t re-create a male-dominant society in the real world, they could restage the drama by casting [freshmen cadets] in all the subservient feminine roles” (144) and achieve their dream-like goal.  By falsifying reality, the secluded world that is the Citadel, isolates a group of people that is part of that reality and imposes negative situations on them. 

As a result of this isolation, young students face harsh hazing and abuse while “every taunt [equates them] with a woman” (144).  This is the only way they can have their ideals brought to life.  Nussbaum’s universalism will also result in such an isolated group of people.  Because some people have chosen to live in societies like the ones Nussbaum wishes to change, universalism would “[fail] to respect the right of people to choose a plan of life according to their own lights” (Nussbaum 368).  Nussbaum wishes to help some at the expense of others.  As a result, by creating one falsified reality, another one is spawned by the people who are being oppressed. 

            In order to escape from the aesthetically created world they are forced to be a part of, the alienated group of people must create a reality of their own reality, or “paint […] the colors of [their] dreams” (Nafisi 341).  This is another inevitable result of people falsifying reality.  While living in a “stern [Iranian] ayatollah” (355) Azar Nafisi decided to fulfill a dream by conducting a secret literature class in her apartment in Tehran.  After the class stopped meeting when Nafisi moved from Tehran, all Nafisi had  were photographs of the girls who were in the class.  These were the last links she had to “the world inside the living room” (352) which she had created.  While this class was something Nafisi had always wanted to conduct, it is unlikely that she would have acted on her dream had her life not been ruled by “[an] absurd fictionality” (353).  By living in such a situation, Nafisi and her women-only class had to escape to allow themselves to feel free.  Only in this class were they able to experience the “rare mood of jubilance and optimism” (342).  Even though Martha Nussbaum and the Citadel do not wish to force people into such situations, it is unavoidable when forcing others to live in someone else’s reality.  In fact, the Citadel is creating the reality of their school for the same reason Nafisi creates her literature class.  They want to escape from a society they do not feel good about living in.

            By falsifying a reality, people can hide from the world they do not wish to be a part of, whether it is a falsified reality or not.  Clearly, this is what Nafisi attempts to do in creating a literature class in the privacy of her apartment.  However, the Citadel does the exact same thing despite their role as ‘oppressor’ and is a perfect example of the same institution being the one to escape and be escaped from.  The Citadel hides behind the proud tradition of being an all-male military college which produces what they feel to be a strong, military-like man.  During World War II when soldiers were generally accepted and liked for the war they were fighting, the Citadel became less strict towards their cadets because the world around them was a more comfortable one.  Conversely, when American society showed much hostility towards war and the military in period of the Vietnam War, the school became stricter than it had ever been because it did not fit in wit the rest of society (Faludi 141).  When society embraces military and soldiers, the Citadel no longer needs to falsify reality within the college because they can experience it in the outside world.  Since today’s society brings men and women to a more equal playing field, the Citadel feels it must not allow female students into their aesthetic world.              The Citadel alienates prospective female applicants by not admitting women into their school.  Despite the fact that other military colleges have allowed female students to attend their schools and even “made an effort to recruit and accommodate women” (137) the Citadel remains unshaken in its quest to remain an all-male institution.  When a female applicant named Shannon Faulkner attempted to gain admittance to the college through legal efforts, the school initiated a fitness test required in order to graduate.  However, the test was not made a requirement until “after Shannon Faulkner filed suit” (134).  This is a desperate attempt to sustain the falsified reality they had created by forging another policy.  “The Citadel was by no means free of women,” (132) but they were only part of the college as teachers or to serve food in the mess hall.  Even though these women are part of the school, they were not respected by the cadets or male faculty.  Female teachers as well as the dining hall staff are regularly harassed by the students, while the administration does nothing.  One female teacher reported that “a professor […] stood by one day while his students harassed her” (146).  This is allowed to happen because it helps to prolong the patriarchal reality that has been formed.  By doing this, the Citadel is viewed as an oppressive institution; another consequence of falsifying reality. 

            When realities are created or falsified, the ones who attempt to build the reality are often perceived as oppressive.  Nussbaum and universalism, for example, are accused of “neglecting the otherness” (Nussbaum 365) of the cultures they wish to reform. The Citadel is seen as a school who wants to oppress women and their equality with men by not allowing them into their college, while the college accuses the people who want to reform the all-male policy as the “enemy” whom are trying to attack the cadets at the Citadel (Faludi 136).  These accusations are not entirely correct.  While universalism does ignore “otherness” of different cultures, its goal is to better the lives of the people it affects.  The Citadel does not hold men and women on an equal level in terms of being part of the student body, but it is not their goal to bring about such a tyrannical result; nor do the people who want to change the Citadel’s policies.  A former administrator of the Citadel even “believes that women are smarter than men,” (Faludi 154) while another claimed that “excluding women had enhanced his gentlemanly perception of the opposite sex” (145).  As Nussbaum says, “we are not pushing individuals into the function:  Once the stage is fully set, the choice is up to them” (Nussbaum 375).  To an extent it is almost as if they do not realize the harm they are doing to this “assaulted” group of people.  Clearly, neither of their goals is to offend the people who are hurt in these circumstances, but such a situation is the result when falsifying reality.

            By “painting the colors of [their] dreams” falsifiers of reality alienate those who are forced to be part of their created worlds.  When a society reflects the ideals of some, the rights of others are compromised as they are forced to be “figments of someone else’s imagination.”   In order to cope with the tyranny forced on them, the alienated people must falsify reality themselves to escape their oppressive world.  Often, the original falsified reality is created in order to escape as well.  Although this is viewed as an act of oppression, the intent of the people who falsify reality is not subjugation.  When morals are forced into being the basis of a society, negative results surely follow, as we see in “The Naked Citadel” and “Selections from Reading Lolita in Tehran.”  Universalism will produce similar consequences if people like Martha Nussbaum “assault” the traditions of others.  These undesirable situations are inevitable when falsifying reality.