Radical Masculinity

Sometimes I’m convinced that I need to relocate. The air in Tennessee, it seems, breeds toxic and ill-informed rhetoric. Take for example the recent statements of Tennessee State Senator Stacey Campfield (R)¹, who, in addition to promoting the so-called “Don’t Say Gay” bill in the legislature, has recently said:

Most people realize that AIDS came from the homosexual community — it was one guy screwing a monkey, if I recall correctly, and then having sex with men. It was an airline pilot, if I recall.

Wait, it gets better…

My understanding is that it is virtually — not completely, but virtually — impossible to contract AIDS through heterosexual sex…very rarely [transmitted].

and better…

[Homosexuals] do not naturally reproduce. It has not been proven that it is nature. It happens in nature, but so does beastiality. That does not make it right or something we should be teaching in school.

There are so many problematic – and, honestly, downright evil – assumptions layered within these statements that it is difficult to know where to begin. Let us examine the statements of this gentleman – a term I use with only the loosest connection to its actual meaning – through the lens of radical masculinity and ask ourselves the question, “How do these statements support the Patriarchy?”

First, the Patriarchy survives by othering. By separating those members of society who do not conform to the ideological dictates of the ruling class, they are subjugated by and to it. The dictates in this situation ooze heteronormativity. Homosexuals, it would seem, are judged as traitors to their gender and to their roles in society. Men are supposed to act in a certain fashion, and loving other men does not conform to that paradigm.

In this particular instance, the Senator further clouds the issue by conflating homosexuality with zoophilia, which is a particularly ridiculous claim. There is no connection between the two. But by tying them together in the minds of his constituents, the senator is playing upon as many factors as possible to disturb and disgust the delicate sensibilities of his bible belt constituents. This is a particularly useful tactic in the arsenal of the Southern politician, but its success does not in any way validate its use. It is a lie, based in fear and misunderstanding, meant to achieve a particular end.

Further, it would be impossible to overlook the factual inaccuracy of the Senator’s second statement. Given that the demographic population whose incidents of HIV infection show the highest rate of growth is heterosexual women², the statement is, on its face, without veracity. It is nothing more than a desperate attempt to cling to what the Senator would no doubt call “the sanctity of the traditional family” by ignoring science (something at which Republicans and the Religious Right are quite adept, it would seem) in favor of a social paradigm that is dying a slow, torturous death.

As this situation garners more media attention, I’m sure that I will return to the subject. Additional, I’ll follow the “Don’t Say Gay” bill and any other hate mongering legislation that appears in the Tennessee legislature. Unfortunately, I’m sure that I will have a great deal about which to write.

Until next time, dear readers, be good to each other. Namaste.

1 – Which stands for Republican, of course, but could be aptly abbreviating Reprobate, Ridiculous, or Ruthless.

2- See http://www.avert.org/usa-race-age.htm for more information.

Good day, friends, and welcome back. Today I have a few questions for you, but I promise they’ll be quick and easy. As you can see, this blog is not quite complete. Oh, it’s mostly done, but there are a few more finishing touches that I need to add. First and foremost, this site absolutely does not play nicely with Internet Explorer. On some level, I don’t care – and I have no problem at all admitting that – but many of you use IE as your primary web browser, which means I should make some effort to support it¹. Also important, at this time there is no mobile version of this website. If you view the site on a mobile device – be it Android-, iOS-, or Windows- powered – certain areas on the page don’t format correctly. Between those two items, I have plenty to keep me busy as I continue building the site.

Which brings me to my questions for you:

1. What do you think of the layout?
2. What do you think of the color scheme?
3. What do you think of my font choices? (This includes the font itself, its size, and its color.)

I look forward to reading your opinions; I’d rather know now than wait too long and build a site that most readers find unappealing or annoying. Please just leave a note in the comments section of this post or send your thoughts to me via email. You can email me by following the “Email” link in the “Subscribe” section in the right sidebar, or just send a message to radicalmale [at] gmail [dot] com.

Until next time, dear readers, be good to each other. Namaste.



1. Alternatively, I could convince all the IE users to switch to another browser. There are three major, cross-platform options:

1. Mozilla Firefox;
2. Google Chrome; and,
3. Safari.

This list is by no means comprehensive. I haven’t even mentioned the lesser-known browsers like Raven, Camino (although this one isn’t officially supported anymore, it has a fascinating history), and Opera. However, if you’re currently using Internet Explorer as your primary browser, I strongly recommend that you find an alternate browser that suits you.

Good day, my friends, and welcome to Radical Masculinity. This is my new blog where I will post whatever suits me for the day (and, yes, I’m going to try to post at least once per day). Many posts’ themes will undoubtedly be borrowed from some of the blogs listed on the right; these are blogs that read every day, and though I don’t always agree with the author, I often do.

So, I hear you ask, why Radical Masculinity? Good question; thank you for asking. A major part of this blog will be the discussion of politics and current events, which will dovetail nicely with a conversation regarding social dynamics and nuances, from which one cannot but address the issues of the Patriarchy in modern life. For those unfamiliar with the term, patriarchy refers to a “system of society or government in which men hold the power and women are largely excluded from it.” (as defined by Google [here]) Part of this weblog will be a reminder that asking questions is essential in life; this, I believe, is especially true in any society that claims to be free. If we cease to question the political double-speak that is promulgated by our leadership, we lose the ability to hold them accountable for their actions and decisions. The beauty of a Representative Republic (which is not the same as a democracy, but that’s the subject of another post) is that these elected representatives are intended to voice and to advocate for the opinions of their constituents rather than their own. Though, admittedly, the system usually falls short of that ambitious goal, we have an inspiring system of government in the United States. Unfortunately, sometimes our government gets in our way (e.g., Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 558 U.S. 08-205 (2010), 558 U.S. ––––, 130 S.Ct. 876 (21 January 2010)), and we must fight our way past such decisions.

But what does any of this have to do with masculinity, you may ask. The answer is really very simple. In our society, men and women are expected to conform to certain sets of social norms. Women are to be docile, quiet, emotional, giving, nurturing, demure, and subservient. Men are to be aggressive, emotionless (unless that emotion is anger), and dominant. There are, however, other options. Men are not obligated to conform to these social strictures; indeed, a lack of conformity to them is fundamental for being radically masculine.

Am I contending to have all the answers? Not at all; I know that I fall down more often than most people. The concept of the Radical Male is an aspirational one for me. In fact, I cannot even claim the terminology as my own. If memory serves, I borrowed the phrase Radical Masculinity from well-known blogger and public speaker Greta Christina¹ when she used it to describe a class of straight, cis-gendered men who were allies of the LGBTQAI² community. There is, however, more to being radically masculine than supporting gay rights (which, as Secretary of State Clinton has pointed out on more than one occasion, are nothing more or less than human rights). The radical masculinity to which I aspire is supportive and compassionate, honest and open, courageous and fallible. It recognizes the power of privilege, but it refuses to wield that power (to whatever extent that is possible, a debate for another day). It supports the rights of personal and bodily autonomy for all persons, not simply all persons who meet certain socially-elite criteria. Radical masculinity challenges the very system that elevates it.

So, will you be coming back to read more? I hope so. I’ll be here, and I’ll be writing. It could be about anything – technology, pop culture, linguistics, or even Star Wars – but it should be interesting (I hope). And, I hope, the lens through which the daily conversations are filtered will be as revealing and informative as the conversations themselves.

Until next time, dear readers, be good to each other. Namaste.

(1) – You can find her blog by following the link in the sidebar to the right.
(2) – Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, Asexual, and/or Intersex