Gary Mucciaroni has written a brilliant book called Same Sex, Different Politics: Successes and Failures in the Struggle Over Gay Rights. It was published in 2008. I’m not even done reading it yet, but I feel like I have learned so much, which is saying something, considering how often I write about LGBTQ issues. The book, as the title suggests, covers the successes and setbacks  (and the reasons behind them) in the areas of homosexual conduct, adoption, military service, marriage, civil rights, and hate crimes.

Right now, I’m reading the section on the military ban/ “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” and it’s coinciding with what I’ve been reading in Robert Jensen’s book, Getting Off: Pornography and the End of Masculinity. Jensen’s book (I’m about halfway through it) is about how pornography devalues female sexual desire and promotes violence toward women, and how such portrayals are challenging males to “live up to” a debauched and dangerous vision of masculinity.

The place where Jensen’s book and the section on the military in Mucciaroni’s book connect is the theory and standard of masculinity. In pornography and in the military, men are expected to be aggressive, in control, dominate, forceful, and, above all, never to be submissive or in any way considered feminine. Such expectations led to the homophobic Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy in the military (which attempts to cover the fact that gay  men- whom they consider to be un-masculine- are serving right beside them as part of an institution they consider to be “for real men only” and look to as their own proof that they are themselves “man enough,” based on their inclusion and participation) and the violence against women in pornography (as men prove their dominance by using women as objects- objects with no desires of their own, making them worth only what men chose to make of them).

Male soldiers look at their inclusion in the military as their masculinity merit badge. Being in the military makes them “real men.” So, if the military allows those whom aren’t considered “man enough” to serve openly in their ranks, then, to them, the military is no longer an indicator of masculinity.

From Same Sex, Different Politics:

 Maintaining the illusion of a homosexual-free zone of social interaction reduces  male anxiety. Military service is not simply a job for many men in the military; it  also helps to affirm and strengthen their masculine identity. -p. 185 (emphasis is  mine)
 
 The stimatization and stereotyping of gay men serves to distinguish the real men  from the others. -p. 186

 Thus, individuals’ discomfort with gays and lesbians is not simply a homophobic  reaction; it reflects the fear that the organization will change in ways that do not  permit it to bolster masculine identity and sense of superiority. -p. 186

But, it gay soldiers are forced to hide their true identities, the straight soldiers can pretend that none of their comrades are gay and that their service still proves their masculinity.

This is why the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy has lasted so long. This is what they mean by “disrupting unit cohesion.” They’re not worried about the actions of gay soldiers; they’re worried about the presence of gay soldiers. But more than that, they’re worried about themselves and their idea of masculinity and how their military service contributes to that idea.

It’s also important to consider that even though public support has continued to rise for lifting the ban, the military does not have the same level of diversity as the country at large.

From Same Sex, Different Politics:

 The military is disproportionately male, conservative, and Republican, all groups  with lower levels of support for gay rights. -p. 184

 Today’s smaller military, made up of volunteers and careerists, is less  representative of the public than in the past and less open to infusions of civilians  and changes in their attitudes. -p. 184

In pornography, the fears of being without a strong sense of masculinity are similar, but there are no “codes of conduct” to restrict their behavior. Also, the insecurities aren’t directed toward gay men, but women. The way that men treat women in pornography (physically, verbally, and mentally) is deplorable, and should never be viewed as an example of how men should interact with women, physically or otherwise.

Let me say that I do see a difference between pornography and erotica- specifically erotic literature. I think there’s a difference between reading an adult-themed romance novel and what the pornography industry has become. Reading, or even watching, representations of love and lust in their physical form in a way that celebrates and values and desires of those participating is not what I am criticizing here.

I’m also not criticizing every pornographic film ever made. This is about the current mainstream majority. Honestly, having only a very limited experience with “soft-core” pornography, I didn’t realize how dangerously misogynistic  the industry was until reading Jenson’s book. Again, to be clear, it’s not erotica in general that I have a problem with- it’s misogyny. And, admittedly, I am basing my information solely on Jenson’s book, since I haven’t witnessed the films myself. But I’ll take his word for it.

Now that I’ve explained that, to have a better understanding about why men treat women as objects in pornography and why that has become a normalized standard- I would suggest reading Jensen’s book- Getting Off: Pornography and the End of Masculinity.

But basically, if a boy is taught that to be a man is to be aggressive, and that sex is something you work to acquire (the woman gives, the man takes), then any man who is denied sex isn’t being aggressive enough or isn’t working hard enough to “get some.” Then, images of men in pornography having sex with women who appear to be in pain and who are having things done to them that “a girlfriend wouldn’t do” show that 1) women actually do like it when you do and say whatever you want to them, and 2) your girlfriend will like it too if you’re aggressive enough in convincing her.

But why can’t sex be something you share? Why can’t it be about what you both want? Why do men feel that it’s okay to watch pornography in which the male has to degrade the female in order to feel in control and get off? Why does anyone have to be in control? Why, in pornography, is sex only good if the woman is humiliated? (I’m tempted to give examples, but I’m not sure how graphic I want to get here. For full examples, read Jensen’s book. It includes quotes from pornographic films and interviews with “actors,” producers, and directors from the pornography industry.)

I will end with these questions: Why are men so afraid of losing their masculine identity? What are they so threatened by? Why would openly acknowledging the existence of a gay or lesbian soldier make them any less of a man? Why would respecting a sex partner’s desires and dignity make them any less masculine? Why do men need institutions and industries to make them feel like real men?

I think that it is these questions that are at the heart of homophobia and misogyny, and we have to answer them (or at the very least acknowledge them) before we can make any real headway in ending DADT and other discriminatory laws and ending violence (especially sexual violence) against women.

~ Samantha
 

* Note: I want to acknowledge that I wrote about the military as a male institution. Twenty percent of today’s military is female, but since that means that eighty percent is male, and since the military is still widely seen as a “male institution,” and since men are generally more homophobic than women, I decided to refer to it as such for the purposes of this entry.