I love women, but i’m thinking of giving in
I love women, but what’s the point of arguing
With the men from boarding schools and building sites
Who’ve told me I’m a homosexual all my life.
One stop past Embankment and the coughs begin
Hell hath no fury like an insecure Englishman
You don’t need psychoanalysts to translate this
There is an open homosexual in our midst.
Momus, The Homosexual
Homosexuality and Masculinity
They’re not difficult statements to imagine. We hear them all the time.
“I’m not homophobic, but I just wish they’d keep to themselves.”
“I’m not homophobic, but do we really need to have the parade again this year?”
“I’m not homophobic, but why can’t they be normal?”
It seems that the ones who have to defend their openness are usually the ones locking themselves away. Yet, even in the knowledge that discrimination breeds segregation, as a society we continue to condone the modes of thinking which bring about such prejudices.
There is an old argument which I’m sure you would expect to follow such a statement; a railing against the prevalence of homophobia in today’s society. But honestly, haven’t we reached a point where that line of information is falling on deaf ears? The need for change is valid, and heavily expressed, but what good is a change without conviction. Without knowing the root of the problem, a change is temporary at best. A smoker will give up his habit momentarily if you push the issue enough, but until he realises first hand the ill-effects on his health, he’ll likely to take it up again. So rather than complain that the world is, for the most part, homophobic, I’m going to explain the deeper issues I think contribute to the discrimination against male homosexuals that have nothing to do with the religious (or necessarily heterosexual) order. Rather, issues stemming from the upholding of masculine tradition within an evolving and more expressive sexual society.
I’ll admit it, I was privileged enough to be treated to a private school education. Feel free to jump to your own stereotypes, I’ve heard them all and yes, I’ve also seen them in private schools. The problem with stereotypes is that they limit people, and they claim to be exclusive. The truth is I have seen the elevated ego and pretentiousness that has long been associated with private schools in exponents of the public school system, keen to prove themselves better than their more financially supported counterparts. The stereotypes which exist in one system also exist in the other.
The values which private schools seem to perpetuate are that of the conservative right wing, including those of sexuality. It is a common insult in the playground to be called ‘gay.’ At its peak, most of the boys who use gay as an insult have not even come into their own sexual identities. They do not know what it means to be of homosexual persuasion in any other way than the biological, but they know that it’s not something a teenage boy would want to be. It’s a surefire insult, based more on the perceived otherness of a ‘failing’ masculinity, than the attraction of one entity to its same. The insult is not based on sexual preference, but a criticism of the rejection of the hegemonic value system.
Men date women.
Men have sex with women.
Men are strong and emotionally restricted.
Men are in charge and not vulnerable.
Men are drab where women are extravagant.
Men are reserved where women are flamboyant.
Men are strong where women are weak.
These heterosexual values, normalised as ‘natural’ by those historically in charge, are upheld in all facets of society and any practice which disassociates itself with the natural order is ridiculed, feared and persecuted. Often, homophobia is a fear, not of same-gender intercourse, but a fear of the misunderstood; a way of life which clashes with such a well-defined societal structure. We are socially trained to fear that which is different. What strikes me as odd is that the heterosexual homophobe can classify homosexuality as ‘unnatural’ while at the same time stipulating that sexuality is an intrinsic human experience, one which is undecided. Why, when the hetero male understands that he did not have to make a decision to be hetero, does he fall so short when trying to understand the indubitable nature of homosexuality as equally natural.
In the ubuweb liner notes to The Homosexual, Momus explains the background to its composition.
“Mike Alway was negotiating with some major label, and some sneery A&R man was dicking him around… teasing him for his effeminacy. Then suddenly this man’s wife left him… for Mike. That delicious revenge (for the indie against the major, for the effeminate against the macho, for the musical against the tone deaf, for the post-feminist against the pre-feminist) powers this song…a venomous song, a punchy song that hits below the belt, a sweet, hot revenge song.”
The power which the A&R goon holds over Alway is a battle for normalcy. The masculine male in all his glory, denigrating the effeminate man to the status of ‘homosexuality’, a comment made completely free of sexual endeavour. The irony is not lost on Momus, but I have little doubt that the sleaze would still refer to Alway in the same way, even after he lost his wife. For it is not in the sexual acts that this kind of discrimination exists, but in the stripping of masculine pride from another individual.
I implore you to look at the way you operate. Take a step back to realise the trials and tribulations people go through on the basis of gender, skin colour, or sexuality, trials which one inherits because of one’s genetic make-up, not because of personal misgivings. Ask yourself if the way you think is helpful to a more accepting future, and if not, make a move in a positive direction.
There is no way to change the way people are treated except individual change occurring on a mass scale.
Make a splash in a small, individual way, and pray you start a tidal wave.
* Hell Awaits You image courtesy of Danny Hammontree
* MOMUS has put up five of his albums (including Tender Pervert which includes ‘The Homosexual’) on Ubuweb. I highly recommend them. Although they are quite dated musically to the 80s, he is an endlessly interesting lyricist. Download them here
Sam, although I understand the point you’re triyng to make about ‘traditionally masculine’ homophobes distancing themselves from the ‘effeminate’ nature of homosexuality, I think you’ve run into a wall by not addressing the fact that being gay is not antithetical to being butch. The distinction between homosexuality and masculinity is a false one: by suggesting that the two are contrasting topics, you (or rather, your language) automatically assumes that to be masculine is to be straight, and to be homosexual is therefore not to be masculine. This is hardly what you’re trying to argue, and yet by choosing to infer this conclusion rather than stating it outright, you leave the door open for misinterpretation.
In common parlance, femininity and masculinity are shorthand for the base, stereotypical differences perceived to exist between men and women, but ultimately, they are hollow behavioural descriptors which apply in totum to a minority of people. Girls who wear stilettos, pink and bling can still love their footy. Boys who love cars and red meat can still like watching Australia’s Next Top Model. That’s the problem with stereotypes: no matter how many people fit one or two criteria for a particular ‘type’, it’s rare to actually encounter the walking embodiment of a straw man. Which is why, to come at this masculine/homosexuality dichotomy from the other angle, I don’t believe it’s a valid comparison. You’ve taken one absolute state of being – homosexuality – and contrasted it with a nebulous tradition of ideas, behaviours and assumptions which, by virtue of your point being correct, can apply both to those who are homosexual and those who aren’t. More understanding is always in order, but by speaking through stereotype as a way to address homophobes, I feel you’re starting on the back foot. Because just as being masculine doesn’t make you homophobic, neither are all homophobes overtly masculine.
Foz, I agree with the points you have made.
You have indeed pointed out something worthwhile, “The distinction between homosexuality and masculinity is a false one: by suggesting that the two are contrasting topics, you (or rather, your language) automatically assumes that to be masculine is to be straight, and to be homosexual is therefore not to be masculine.”
I do not believe that homosexuality is the opposite of masculinity at all. I do however believe that a great deal of homophobia is based around the misconception that to be homosexual is to be more like the opposite sex. Lesbian women are treated as if they must be butch while gay men are treated as if they must be effeminate. This isn’t the case with sexuality, if anything, sexuality has very little to do with homophobia but a stigma which has been raised around the stereotype of homosexuality.
I’m not necessarily saying that to be homophobic is to be masculine either, but to point out that a great deal (NOT all) of homophobia is based on the fear of the other, whether the other be effeminate or gay, masculine or straight.
If anything, this article actually has very little to do with homosexuality itself except in its connection with homophobia. The discrimination that I am speaking of is not purely a homosexual issue, it occurs within the general male population, homo, hetero or otherwise.
Thanks, as always, for the comment. I have come to expect great insight from you and I am never disappointed.
Interesting article, Sam, and some good points – especially about the negative adjective use of ‘Gay’ in school yards.
I wonder if you’re aware of the significant scientific debate regarding the genetic origon of homosexuality. The earlier studies have since been shown to be lacking, and the evidence seems at the moment, that there is no such thing as a so-called ‘gay gene’, that while there may some biological factors, it appears to be more from environmental factors. (Have a read of Peter Tatchel’s article in the Guardian: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2006/jun/28/borngayormadegay )
So it seems slightly fallacious to compare sexuality to race or gender. Even so, most people don’t chose their sexuality, however it comes about, and harassment and stereotyping is not helpful, which I think is your main point.
Hi Sam,
There are some valid questions/points that you raise. James Baldwin had a pretty good thesis for the production of homophobia and homosexism. In order for the homophobic heterosexual construct of masculinity to produce itself as a hegemonic discourse similar to whiteness vis-a-vis race there must be a homoproductive relationship (between male other (sex-gendered male e.g. homosexual male, and the masculine self) where the homosexual subject is negated in order for the masculine object of desire (femaleness/reproduction of heterosexuality) to be reproduced. From this, the heterosexual subject reinstates itself as masculine, harnessing the power of masculine subjectivity and fending off the threat of otherness. The result of this is an effeminate homosexual subject that is not threatening to the ‘whiteness’ of the masculine heterosexual subject, and can be easily viewed as lesser/feminine. This is the origin of the stereotype of the effeminate gay man comes from, and is given up by society as the alternative for the homosexual man. Racism works in a similar way (replace homosexuality with ethnicity) and portrays black men as subhuman, criminals, crazy, rapists and black women as whores, tramps, wenchs, sexual objects or a sexual repulsion (which may very well turn them on more than their white wives). It happens to be the case that this actually reinforces the behaviour in black communities that are victims to the homoproductive relationship of whiteness and blackness (such as in the South of America), and in a similar way, the gay community plays with the tool of the effeminate, and in similar contexts embraces it, solidifying the stereotype.
A difficult concept to get your head around, but is brilliant in that it emphasises the abstraction of identity, over the literal nature of sex/ the physical symbolism of sexual functions and organs. Baldwin explores this in the short story “Going to Meet the Man.” It is important to bear in mind that not all ‘heterosexual’ male identities do this – it is the homophobic, heterosexual male that does this.
With this issue it’s so hard preventing your arguments from getting bogged down in social observations that attempt social scientific ends when the issue is far more complex in hypothesis, and result. Foucault’s theses are also really pertinent to masculinity and homophobia.
David.