The stud/fag complex
Posted: January 28, 2013 Filed under: Outside the box | Tags: fag, homophobia, hooking up, Kinsey scale, masculinity, sexual education, sexual identity, sexuality, slut, stud, virgin/whore 5 Comments »
Sexuality, then, is fundamental to the Masculinity Conspiracy. By giving disproportionate weight to biological determinism and setting up false binaries in terms of gender values and sexual orientation, sexuality offers a theme through which the conspiracy continually defines and regulates masculinity on its own terms. However, it is surprisingly easy to reject the assumptions behind the conspiracy’s mobilization of sexuality and to open ourselves to multiple and fluid ways of being men and women, masculine and feminine. Once we have started to suitably manifest these diverse identities, we can put them to work in the relationships we have with those around us, the next contentious site of activity in the conspiracy.
From The Masculinity Conspiracy by Joseph Gelfer.
In my last entry, I wrote about how my sex drive is not manly because libido has no basis in biology. I’ll need my male friends to help me out with this one, but I’d like to talk about masculinity & sexuality.
I’ve never been a man, nor do I ever want to be, but I have many relationships with men and perhaps because I am a woman, often see the effects of contemporary, Western ideals of masculinity.
Joseph Gelfer says that our biggest problem with masculinity is its polarity. You’re a stud or you’re a fag. As a woman I can relate to this because I feel the effects of the virgin/whore complex.
Gelfer talks about sexual orientation and masculinity. Homosexuality is something women have an entirely different relationship with than men. For a man, being called gay is one of the biggest attacks on his masculinity. For a woman, being called a lesbian seems closer to a challenge, “how far will you go?”.
Gelfer suggests the Kinsey Scale is a solution to this:
The Kinsey Scale put people into seven categories:
0 Exclusively heterosexual
1 Predominantly heterosexual, only incidentally homosexual
2 Predominantly heterosexual, but more than incidentally homosexual
3 Equally heterosexual and homosexual; bisexual
4 Predominantly homosexual, but more than incidentally heterosexual
5 Predominantly homosexual, only incidentally heterosexual
6 Exclusively homosexual
Gelfer talks about casualness, and the pressure men feel to accept casual sex. In Micheal Kimmel’s Guyland he quotes a statistic saying that more men than women have engaged in unwanted intercourse. Women would classify this as sexual assault, but it’s as if men are being assaulted by society’s pressures for them to be the alpha male. When I’ve brought this up with male friends, none of them are surprised. If you’re a woman you can’t say yes because you’d be a slut. If you’re a man you can’t say no because you’d be a fag.
Ladies, let’s talk to our boys about this problem, because men who are comfortable in their own skins, won’t be intimidated by women who are comfortable in theirs.
Gentlemen, please please please let me know what you think about this.
I think most men find casual sex fascinating and pursue it. For many it is more the satisfaction of seducing a woman than the actual sex. But it is true that men who have great success in this area get’s a lot of respect. So that can make some men feel they have to pursue casual sex even though they aren’t too interested. They are actually pursuing the respect from their peers. But I also find that when you mix alchohol, (married) men and a willingly woman you will find men having sex and regretting it afterwards. I have read the expression that they get a “oh my God what have I done orgasm”. But it is not the sex itself they regret it is the cheating they regret.
Interesting idea! Thanks eroticzeitgeist!
What exactly is Kinsey’s scale a solution to? It doesn’t take away from the interesting nature of his observations, I’m just not clear on that particular aspect of the conversation.
I’d have to agree with Eroticzeitgeist whereas it has more to do with ‘the thrill of the hunt’ than the actual orgasm. Which in my experience anyway, only accounts for a small fraction of the reason why I seek out intercourse in the first place.
However powerful societal influences may be, I believe biology is a much stronger contributor to men’s sexual problematique. Frank A. Beach’s Coolidge Effect, for example, whereby males (and to a -much- lesser extent females) exhibit renewed sexual interest if introduced to new receptive sexual partners,even after refusing sex from prior but still available sexual partners. Indeed, our biological imperative to procreate transcends any societal pressures that may have arisen over the centuries.
Besides, I find it hard to imagine that males somehow are victim of a system that was engineered over the centuries by males, for males and that is still being run in large part, by males.
Institutions like marriage for example, one that was created by men largely as a safety measure, to know that the child a certain women would bear was actually yours. That did not prevent males to constantly seek intercourse outside of wedlock, it has, up until recently, always been widely accepted that this was simply the natural order of things.
Of course, marriage has only recently been branded as a monogamous affair. While an overwhelming number of anthropological studies have demonstrated that polygamy has always been the norm. Cultures from all over the globe, the animal kingdom included, have had their males seeking out sexual intercourse with multiple females until physically incapacitated.
Recent obsession on monogamy that largely prevails incidentally, in the moral bankruptcy that is the western world, has blinded us to what has always been and has weakened our gender.
Hi Leviathan! Thanks for your comment. Here’s what I think:
“What exactly is Kinsey’s scale a solution to? It doesn’t take away from the interesting nature of his observations, I’m just not clear on that particular aspect of the conversation.”
The Kinsey scale is a solution to the hetero/non-hetero binary in our culture. Men are so afraid of being labelled “a fag” or just not heterosexual that they feel the need to constantly reaffirm their heterosexuality by having sex with as many girls as they can (hence the “it has more to do with ‘the thrill of the hunt’”) and then telling their friends about it. Sort of like, “How can you call me a fag, when I’ve had sex with so many girls? I’m obviously heterosexual.” Basically if you were less afraid of being called a fag because you believed that all people are somewhere on a scale of hetero to homosexual, you wouldn’t need to constantly prove how masculine you are to your friends.
“I’d have to agree with Eroticzeitgeist whereas it has more to do with ‘the thrill of the hunt’ than the actual orgasm. Which in my experience anyway, only accounts for a small fraction of the reason why I seek out intercourse in the first place.”
The stereotype is that many men are more interested in the “thrill of the hunt” than the actual orgasm because they’re more interested in dominating as many girls as possible to reaffirm their masculinity.
“However powerful societal influences may be, I believe biology is a much stronger contributor to men’s sexual problematique. Frank A. Beach’s Coolidge Effect, for example, whereby males (and to a -much- lesser extent females) exhibit renewed sexual interest if introduced to new receptive sexual partners,even after refusing sex from prior but still available sexual partners. Indeed, our biological imperative to procreate transcends any societal pressures that may have arisen over the centuries.”
Don’t you think this is because women are discouraged from saying that they like sex (read any of my other articles), especially since the Coolidge Effect is based on a study from 1955?
“Besides, I find it hard to imagine that males somehow are victim of a system that was engineered over the centuries by males, for males and that is still being run in large part, by males.”
Not all males want to subscribe to this system. Therefore, those who do not want to subscribe, but who are forced to, will fall victim to it.
“Institutions like marriage for example, one that was created by men largely as a safety measure, to know that the child a certain women would bear was actually yours. That did not prevent males to constantly seek intercourse outside of wedlock, it has, up until recently, always been widely accepted that this was simply the natural order of things.
Of course, marriage has only recently been branded as a monogamous affair. While an overwhelming number of anthropological studies have demonstrated that polygamy has always been the norm. Cultures from all over the globe, the animal kingdom included, have had their males seeking out sexual intercourse with multiple females until physically incapacitated.
Recent obsession on monogamy that largely prevails incidentally, in the moral bankruptcy that is the western world, has blinded us to what has always been and has weakened our gender.”
Monogamy has not weakened your gender. Modern “masculinity” has weakened your gender. Our obsession with monogamy has come as a result of modern “masculinity”, obviously through the idea that men “own” their wives or girlfriends.
Super interesting! The social acceptance associated with Male polygamy makes a huge amount of sense when put in the context of the stereotypical ‘male situation’. Men are meant to spead their seed as far and as wide as possible. As with lions, the dominant male breeds with all the females and kills any cubs which are of a rival’s bloodline. My train of thought is that traditional (read: old-school) marriage works much the same way: men are meant to spread their seed while the women, who birth their children, are means to be retained solely as a property that no other male can have. Hence why divorce is such a no-no.
I have absolutly no idea if this is actually a realistic notion of how things are, but thanks for getting me thinking