Boller, William
Professor M. Pearson
English M01C; 71535;
MW2:30PM-3:50PM
17 September 2008
It’s
Not Mutually Exclusive, Folks:
Can’t Being a Man and Being Homosexual be
Separate?
Choosing
a societal issue that appeared in the Muy Machoproved no easy
task because the complexity and depth that are conveyed spark many
different topics which catch my attention. The variety of topics
froze me in a state of indecision, but it soon became clear to me
that the best topic was one that was personal. I am faced daily with
a curious myth in American society: Heterosexism.
Merriam-Websterdefines this as "discrimination or
prejudice by heterosexuals against homosexuals" ("heterosexism"
1). This is more a definition of homophobia than what I find
heterosexism to be: the expectation and pressure of a society for its
members to appear (as well as be) heterosexual. Often the result of
heterosexism is that homophobia. Heterosexism and homophobia make up
a perceived fear among men that they could possibly be any less of a
man, and these fears are frequently referenced in Muy Macho,
particularly in Ilan Stavans' "The Latin Phallus" and Luis
Alberto Urrea's "Whores." What is amazing is that although
Muy Machocenters on the Latino definitions of masculinity;
this disorienting conflict between homosexuality and masculinity
applies on a more contemporary level.
We
are obsessed with placing ourselves into a box, label, or myth that
we believe will serve us by giving us placement among a group and
greater purpose. Urrea makes reference to a 'Macho Box' which is how
Latino men prove to each other they were macho by self-electrocution
(Urrea 106). In the macho box these men hope to infuse and shock
masculinity into their spirits when in essence they are really slowly
killing themselves from the inside out. I find this to parallel
closeted men and women, those who can not reconcile their own
homo-erotic impulses, whom constantly are trying to show the straight
world a façade of heterosexuality.
Urrea was brought into a whore house because his
father believed him to lack machismo and because of this perception
his father believed him a "faggot" (Urrea 102). I don't
believe being labeled with a stigma could have helped Urrea's
self-esteem. The use of hate speech effects both homosexuals and
heterosexuals by creating an air of insecurity and vulnerability and
reinforcing the stigma and ill-regard towards the target of the hate
speech. Urrea's tone suggests that he was embarrassed by his father,
and showed the vulnerability being called a faggot caused him. Urrea
was then forced to compare his current, calm behaviors with the
stigmas of homosexuality, and contrast it all with the aggrandized
ideal of masculinity.
In his essay, "The Latin Phallus",
Stavans makes an interesting conclusion about the role of masculinity
in that the symbol of the penis creates purpose and drive to repress
homosexual culture (Stavans 164). All these Latino men's efforts to
provide the presentation of being a man fail because they often loose
sight of where true strength comes from. Being a 'man' is viewed as a
complete exclusion from homosexual desire, and any homo-erotic
impulse is seen as a sign of being less of a 'man'. A
homosexual's sexual desire is at direct odds with the mainstream's
opinions of masculine sexuality, and in effect homosexual culture is
repressed by that perception of masculinity and assumption of
heterosexuality.
Stavans confronts this stigma on homosexuals by
exposing that gay men often still play important roles from laborers
to governmental members (Stavans 154). Heterosexism is the standard
that assumes everyone is heterosexual, and when a homosexual is
discovered to hold an important role in a heterosexist society it
becomes a huge controversy. I find this strange because that
individual's sexual orientation was probably constant; his
orientation did not change. The only change was the discovery
of his taboo orientation, and this changed the public's opinion of
him, and striped him of his public favor.
In a recent study of college students to measure
levels of homophobia the highest homophobic response occurred in men
whose standards for masculinity were rigid and high, but perceived
themselves to not be meeting those high standards (Lance 791). This
leads us to believe that a lot of what causes homophobia is
individual insecurity regarding masculinity. When faced with the
knowledge that someone they know is gay, their own insecurities of
themselves are brought to the forefront of an awkward situation.
I think the problem is that the assumption that
being a "man" is exclusive from being a homosexual and
because no thought is put into allowing the two to co-exist or
co-habituate. The instinct for machos is often to over-do the
more desired masculine response using brutality and violence. To
many, being a 'man' is what gives self esteem. For example, in the
ghetto slums of young urban America, "manhood and respect are
flip sides of the same coin; physical and psychological well-being
are inseparable, and both require a sense of control, of being in
charge" (Anderson 179). Yet this assumption has exception when I
use myself as an example, because I feel I can be respected for both
being a 'man' as well as being attracted to other men. In fact,
I find a few feminine qualities sexually unappealing. Of
course, I have been in a setting where my well-being was not
threatened when I came out. This is why I find it important to
spread a level of tolerance and education in a community where
heterosexuality is falsely assumed onto its members.
Back to the study of college student's with
homophobia. It was interesting to find that the more time
students with homophobic tendencies spent with homosexuals in a
non-threatening environment, the more they slowly came to accept
homosexuals. This is called the "contact hypothesis" and is
based upon demystifying heterosexism by recognizing common ground,
beliefs, and values (Lance 792). This gives me purpose and reason to
not be afraid to and to "out myself" in a college class
environment. I'm aware that if homophobic students are simply exposed
to me in a non-threatening way then their tolerance of homosexuals
will increase, and heterosexist assumptions will decrease.
I
find the sacrifice men make simply to preserve the status that they
are “Macho” amazing. Of course, the entire concept of
masculinity and heterosexism goes far beyond what I can tackle in a
short essay, but I found it interesting to consider the
inseparability that is contained in the male psyche between respect,
masculinity, and sexual orientation. This fusion is referenced
frequently in the essays in Muy Machoand simply skimming some
of the other essays I see the references to overriding masculinity. I
found Stavan and Urrea’s essays most comparable to the issues
of heterosexism and homophobia that are related to my own personal
struggle with society.
Works Cited
Anderson, Elijah. "The Code of the Street." Readings for
Sociology. Ed. Garth Massey. Boston: W. W.
Norton & Company,
Incorporated, 2005. 171-83.
"Heterosexism." Merriam-Webster
Online Dictionary. 2008. Merriam-Webster Online. 8 September
2008.
<http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/heterosexism>.
Lance, Larry M. "Social Inequality on the
College Campus: A Consideration of Homosexuality." College
Student Journal. 42.3 (Sept 2008): 789(6). General OneFile. Gale.
Moorpark College Library. 10 Sept.
2008
<http://find.galegroup.com/ips/start.do?prodId=IPS>.
Stavans, Ilan. "The Latin Phallus." Muy
Macho: Latino Men Confront Their Manhood. Ed. Ray Gonzalez.
New
York: Anchor Books, 1996. 143-64.
Urrea, Luis Alberto. "Whores." Muy
Macho: Latino Men Confront Their Manhood. Ed. Ray Gonzalez.
New
York: Anchor Books, 1996. 99-110.
