|
From
Article on Homosexuality in volume 1
Homosexuality, which has existed in every culture across the span of history, presents an interesting challenge
to the study of masculinity. Male homosexuals, in modern times thought to be effeminate, “failed”
men, have not always occupied that position in societies around the world. In recent times, gay men have helped
to redefine masculinity, to emphasize the idea of multiple masculinities even within the gay community, and have
overturned the idea that they do not qualify as masculine.
Homosexuality, the sexual and affectional attraction between members of the same sex, has been and continues to
be part of every culture and society in the world. Throughout time and in different places societies found a role
for homosexuals and developed expectations for behavior and demeanor. Among the upper classes in ancient Greek
societies, male homosexual relationships played an important role, were accepted as normal, and was part of the
education of young males. Elaborate rites in some Greek city-states had young males chosen, “kidnapped,”
and placed into the tutelage of an adult male for months. Homosexual sex was an integral part of these rites and
was considered a masculine coming-of-age endeavor. In ancient Rome, attitudes toward homosexuality varied. Among
Romans, however, there was little concern about the object of sexual penetration; it was the act of penetration
which defined manhood. In early Christian times even Christianity had a place for same sex relationships until
approximately the Tenth Century. (Boswell,1980)
In Eastern societies, homoerotic relations were also important. In China homosexuality was accepted, more so in
some eras than others, but on the whole was not condemned. In the Han dynasty the “passion of the cut sleeve”
was the reference for male homosexual behavior which was common in Chinese society until the Nineteenth Century.
In Japan, Samurai warriors and Buddhist monks both incorporated homosexual elements. India, likewise, had an active
homosexual culture with legal boy prostitution lasting until Indian Independence in 1948.
From
Article on Male Strippers in volume 2
Male strippers revolutionized the way men are viewed and through their objectification
of the male body. Their presence and the avenues they have opened for further opportunities to objectify the male
presents a significant challenge to traditional masculinity.
The earliest accounts of male go-go boys and/or strippers come from gay bars and clubs in the 1960s but their
presence and performance was limited. After the beginning of the Gay Liberation Movement in 1969, male go-go dancers
began to appear in more clubs. Scantily clad dancers, used as decorative elements in bars, transisted into strippers
which was something radically different for men. Women had been strippers for many years, so much so that it was,
and often still is, thought of solely as women’s work. Yet it was not until the early ‘70s that strip
clubs for gay men began to spring up. The Gaiety, the Show Palace and others in New York City were among the first
such all-male strip venues. Soon, other establishments appeared in San Francisco, Chicago, and other large cities.
In 1979, a new trend began – male strippers for women. The Chippendales came into existence that year and
since then many such troupes have been formed. Likewise the strip-o-gram was invented in which strippers (male
and female) are hired to deliver messages as they strip. More recently, individual entrepreneurs have established
agencies which farm out male and female strippers to bars and clubs and private parties.
Through their objectification of the male body, male strippers challenge hegemonic masculinity because they allow
the male to be subjected to “the erotic gaze.” Women have always been the subject of the gaze which
reduces them to objects for the pleasure of viewing. This objectification implies submissiveness, pliability,
subjection to the observer, and existence merely for the pleasure of the observer. But traditional masculinity
demands that the male be the dominant participant in sexual situations, therefore only the dominant partner in
a relationship is the masculine force. To be a man is to be in control and not to be controlled by anyone else.
As a subject of the erotic gaze, some argue, men risk their masculinity; anxieties about feminization are the
result of this objectification. The male stripper is the object of the viewer, the seemingly passive participant
in the customer-performer relationship. This is a role that does not conform to masculine rules whether the observer
is male or female.
|
