Legitimizing Power Through Militarized Masculinity in Post-Soviet Russia: A comparative analysis of the political rhetoric of Boris Yeltsin and Vladimir Putin

In contemporary Russia, strict patriarchal structures reinforce widespread acceptance of gendered stereotypes, in turn allowing sexism and misogyny to be leveraged to legitimize political authority. Current political discourse... [ view full abstract ]

In contemporary Russia, strict patriarchal structures reinforce widespread acceptance of gendered stereotypes, in turn allowing sexism and misogyny to be leveraged to legitimize political authority. Current political discourse in Russia is marked by militarized masculinity and heteronormativity. This study examines how the presidencies of Boris Yeltsin and Vladimir Putin manipulate conceptions of gender to serve the Russian state, drawing connections between political rhetoric and power, masculinity, nationalism, and militarism in post-Soviet Russia. It explores how masculinity is used to consolidate and legitimize power and how masculine failure is leveraged to undermine opposing authorities. The comparative analysis of Yeltsin and Putin focuses on military and campaign rhetoric sourced from the Kremlin website and Timothy J. Colton’s 2008 book, Yeltsin: A Life, specifically examining speeches and statements regarding the two Chechen Wars. Analysis of the texts examines the gender binary framework in which stereotypical male traits (strong, brave, aggressive) are juxtaposed with stereotypical female traits (weak, natural, domestic), paying close attention to references to Mother Russia as well as Russian soldiers, militaries, political enemies, and other symbolic representations of militarized masculinity. Political rhetoric is the object of analysis rather than popular discourse because of strict censorship laws influencing the credibility of Russian media and lack of reliable English language translations. Dmitry Medvedev, the Russian president serving between the terms of Yeltsin and Putin is not considered in this study because Vladimir Putin served as Medvedev’s prime minister and is widely regarded as the primary power within the Kremlin during Medvedev’s presidency. This research highlights how Russian political leaders use popular notions of masculinity to legitimize their own power while simultaneously undermining the authority of the opposition by exposing their perceived femininity. It argues that Boris Yeltsin’s inability to sustain a militarized masculine persona created widespread opposition to his presidency and contributed to his 1999 resignation. It also finds that Vladimir Putin’s constant embodiment of ideal Russian masculinity strengthens the Russian hypermasculine image and gives him political legitimacy in 21^st century Russia.