A good many men, along with a smaller number of women, for whatever their reasons, fervently believe women have no business serving in “this man’s army” – mostly because they aren’t men. On the surface, the good many men and smaller group of women, appear to believe women in combat can only serve to distract the men, or cause the men to gallantly protect and defend the female soldier’s honor, instead of helping the men complete their mission.

Additionally, a good many men, along with a smaller number of women, for whatever their reasons, fervently believe homosexuals have no business serving in “this man’s army” - mostly (once again) because they aren’t men. However, on the surface, the good many men and smaller group of women, appear to believe male homosexuals in the armed forces can only serve to distract the real men by compelling straight soldiers to protect themselves from the sexual advances of one or more members (albeit gay members) of their own army, as well as from the bombs and bullets of the foreign enemy.

Those against homosexuals serving in the military are careful never to specifically claim sexual conduct between men is wrong, or by itself should be enough to keep gays from serving our country by joining the military. Those clamoring for ostracism manage to hide their rank homophobia along with their self styled moral issue, within their conjecture identifying universal sexual conduct as damaging morale, discipline, and cohesiveness in ways interfering with the military’s mission. Their rather slimy conclusion is sophomoric and designed to deflect attention away from their genuine reasons for seeking to exclude gays from our military.

The unacknowledged reasons emerge when examined as an extension of my argument for why some folks don’t want women serving in the military. Among those reasons, homophobia is at or near the top of the list. Sociologist Michael Kimmel says, “Homophobia - the fear that people might perceive you as gay – is the animating fear of American guys’ masculinity”. He continues, “It’s the fear of other men – that other men will perceive you as a failure, as a fraud. It’s a fear that others will see you as weak, unmanly, frightened”. This fear need be ultimately manifested only when in the presence of a gay male. If none are around, the fear still exists only to be displayed in ultra manly behavior in order to “offer constant proof that you are not gay”.

This need to always show that you are not weak and unmanly, extends from the straight man’s recognition that being in the presence of gay men creates the possibility of becoming the victim of a crime he always thought to be limited to women; a crime he here-to-fore only ever considered from the perspective of perpetrator, but never before from the prospects of being a rape victim.

Since we know that rape is among the most often executed war crimes, we know it to be a behavior in which men engage and a behavior men expect as a behavior from other men. Rape is so common that it can clearly be seen as among the ‘spoils of war’.

Scenario one: Once the battle is over and the enemy’s men have been killed, ideally, those left are our men and their women. If however, those left are their women, our male soldiers and our female soldiers, the ability to collect the anticipated ‘spoil of war’ drops significantly. Even though most men are disgusted by rape, their disgust pales next to a woman’s. Even though some men might rape if alone, they are less likely to rape unless rape is a norm (a covertly or overtly agreed upon acceptable behavior) among the men who are present. Those same men who might rape when alone or in the presence of agreeable male others, know that rape is not a norm among women and that women’s disgust for the perpetrators of rape is so strong that it can often limit the incidence of rape. Those same men also know that women are likely to try to stop the occurrence of rape or to prosecute the occurrence of rape – that is, if the men in power are sympathetic with their disgust and abhorrence.

Scenario two: Once the battle is over and the enemy’s men have been killed, ideally, those left are our soldiers and the enemy’s women. If however, those left are our ‘straight’ male soldiers, our ‘gay’ male soldiers, and their women, then how do those belonging to the latter group of gay males (and to whom women are not seen as a prize or bounty), collect on the promise of, to the victor go the spoils?

This is when the fantasies of straight males take over, and while leading them far astray, also lead them to be very afraid.

Some straight males, hobgoblins intact and demanding attention, realize that post victory, the gay soldier will have the same expectations as the straight, is just as super-charged with testosterone as the straight, and is equally as well trained and primed to perpetrate violence. However, unlike the straight soldier seeking victims (who just happen to be in plentiful supply and unprotected), the frustrated gay soldier has no potential victims in sight who are still alive; unless, and by personalizing and invoking the ultimate male fear, your own surviving straight soldiers become his rape victims. In other words, the straight soldier began his day on the offense trying to defeat the enemy’s males in order to procure their women; then to his chagrin, ends the day on the defense, while trying to stop his fellow (but gay) soldiers from treating him as the enemy and raping him as though he were just another surviving lowly female from the enemies camp. And, at least on one level, this big, strapping, well-trained, testosterone crazed, muscular, gay soldier is still male, so he just might succeed. 

Then again, it might be all together less embarrasing (or so their conceit goes), if gays were just kept from joining the military in the first place.

Unfortunately, I don't have this essay completed as of yet. What you see here is the short form of my longer analysis. If you have read my post about women in the military, you will have a good idea of how the analysis will be structured. So stay tuned, there should be at least a few surprises for you.

 

Comments (0)