{"id":3137,"date":"2010-02-02T08:37:21","date_gmt":"2010-02-02T15:37:21","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/thesocietypages.org\/sexuality\/?p=3137"},"modified":"2010-11-18T21:45:41","modified_gmt":"2010-11-19T04:45:41","slug":"fox-news-struggles-with-sexual-identities-of-afghan-men","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/thesocietypages.org\/sexuality\/2010\/02\/02\/fox-news-struggles-with-sexual-identities-of-afghan-men\/","title":{"rendered":"Fox News Struggles with Sexual Identities of Afghan Men"},"content":{"rendered":"

On Thursday, January 28, 2010, Fox News published a news article titled \u201cAfghan Men Struggle with Sexual Identity\u201d <\/a>and made the absurd claim that an entire ethnic group (at at times, the article suggests that the whole \u201ccountry\u201d)\u00a0is \u201ccoping with a sexual identity crisis:\u201d<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>\u201cAs if U.S. troops and diplomats didn’t have enough to worry about in trying to understand Afghan culture,\u00a0a new report suggests an entire region in the country is coping with a sexual identity crisis.\u00a0An unclassified study from a military research unit in southern Afghanistan details how homosexual behavior is unusually common among men in the large ethnic group known as Pashtuns — though they seem to be in complete denial about it.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The article goes on to describe the “study” which was \u201cobtained by Fox News\u201d which:<\/p>\n

\u201cfound that Pashtun men commonly have sex with other men, admire other men physically, have sexual relationships with boys and shun women both socially and sexually — yet they completely reject the\"\"<\/a>label of “homosexual.” Fox news reports that the \u201cresearch\u201d was conducted as part of a longstanding effort to better understand Afghan culture and improve Western interaction with the local people.\u00a0The \u201cresearch unit,\u201d which was \u201cattached to a Marine battalion in southern Afghanistan, acknowledged that the behavior of some Afghan men has left Western forces \u2018frequently confused.\u2019\u00a0\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

According to this “study” of unknown authorship, the men do not perceive that they are at risk for STDs (HIV is not mentioned in the article) because they do not relate to the Western category known as \u201chomosexual.\u201d The article relays this information by reporting that \u201cin one instance, a group of local male interpreters had contracted gonorrhea anally but refused to believe they could have contracted it sexually — “because they were not homosexuals.”<\/em> (Hmm, this sounds similar to U.S. men who have sex with both women and men.)<\/p>\n

The article does not clarify who ran the study or collected the data (we sure would love to see it!)\u00a0nor is it clear why FOX news \u2014or the US troops\u2014are confused; <\/strong>the Afghan men themselves likely have a fairly clear idea about what is going on. The report even underscores that \u201cOne of the country’s favorite sayings, the report said, is “women are for children, boys are for pleasure\u201d and that \u201cwidespread homosexual behavior stems from several factors, including the “severe segregation” of women in the society and the “prohibitive” cost of marriage.\u201d<\/p>\n

We are not sure why Fox news is using a particular locale or one ethnic group to make a claim that the entire country (see below about favorite sayings in the “country”) <\/strong>of Afganistan is “coping with a sexual identity crisis.”<\/p>\n

When I\u2019m done shaking my head with shock at the way that Fox news framed this story, I\u2019ll try to write something more.<\/p>\n

For now, let\u2019s just say that it seems that Fox news and the U.S. soldiers interviewed for this study haven\u2019t heard of the idea that sexuality comes in many forms. Indeed, the world includes not just homosexuals and heterosexuals\u2014or transgendered\u2014or transsexuals\u2014but also bisexuals. And there are also all sorts of other sexual systems and sexual classifications that don’t fit those too. The ancient Greeks organized their sexual system in a very similar way to what the men describe in this article. Sex was structured based on public status, and well, women and young boys had lower status than men. Sexual desire and sexual object choice was not set up by the gender of the participant, but rather, on the role that each participant played in sex (boys and women were more submissive, and high status men were active penetrators).<\/p>\n

Thomas Almaguer\u2019s\u00a0work (1991) on Latin American sexual systems has shown us that the more masculine \u201cmacho\u201d who penetrates the more submissive man known as \u201cjotos\u201d are also not in denial or confused, but work within a different sexual system. Machos do not necessarily identify as gay, and they often have sex with both women and men. Walter Williams (The Spirit and the Flesh, 1986)<\/span> has \"\"<\/a>written about the Native American Berdache, biological men, who take both husbands and wives\u2014and they are revered as a third gender. They\u2019re not confused. And quite a large number of men who have sex with both women and men are in the US\u2014they too do not identify as gay (See Brian Dodge, 2008a, 2008b). They are not particularly confused and enjoy having sex with both sexes. In fact, some argue that heterosexuality itself is constructed, for example, Johnathon Katz (The Invention of Heterosexuality<\/span>, 2007) \u00a0shows that \u201chetero\u201d used to mean what we now understand in the U.S. as \u201cbi\u201d sexual. Heterosexuality did not even come to mean the nuclear family and opposite sex partner relationships (with child bearing as \u00a0the pinnacle goal) until the turn of the 19th<\/sup> Century. This was when work-family institutions were restructured according to the fault lines of white middle class privileges.<\/p>\n

I could go on and on with nice citations to read up on that explain all sorts of people who are not confused across all kinds of sexual systems around the globe. However, Fox News and some U.S. soldiers sure sound confused to me. The best thing to do right now it seems would be to ask what purpose this kind of news coverage serves. Indeed, in times of war, the US has long been known for making muscular claims about the type of masculinity we produce in the US military (see Montez de Oca 2005, and Armitage 2005) when seeking victories while \u201cfeminizing\u201d and sexualizing (as other) the troops of other men. This is particularly the case in the war on terror, where authors such as Jasbir Puar in her 2007 book Terrorist Assemblages: Homonationalism in Queer Times<\/span> argues that\u00a0 \u201c \u2018homonationalisms\u2019 are deployed to distinguish upright \u2018properly hetero,\u2019 and now \u2018properly homo,\u2019 U.S. patriots from perversely sexualized and racialized terrorist look-a-likes\u2014especially\"\"<\/a> Sikhs, Muslims, and Arabs.\u201d She argues that such dichotomies help to justify when the US decides to capture, cordon off, or detain \u201cother\u201d men in the war on terror. Such work reveals the ways in which heterosexuality is deployed as a weapon to feminize and exoticize \u201cother\u201d men during times of war. At least we\u2019re not confused by that.<\/p>\n

Bibliography\/Recommended reading:<\/strong><\/p>\n