The heterosexualization of (straight) men

Young men know that they are supposed to develop a strong enough sexual need, a sexual comfort, a sexual space for women in their hearts/ minds and that time is running out. The bigger sexual need they are able to develop for women, the easier their life is going to be.

No one talks about it, but almost all straight men (except those to whom it comes more naturally) struggle quietly, without letting anyone know of this struggle, to develop a place for women in their life, because unless they do it, they're going to be queers not men. Mere talking about girls can only take them so far. When men's spaces are strong you can get away with just talking about girls till you get married. And you don't really need a sexuality for women to get married, you only need to do the needful. Marriage is more of a social responsibility. No one cares or knows whether you really enjoy the sexual company of a woman. However, the more heterosexualized the society is, the more you're under pressure to develop a sexuality for women, because they want action, not mere talking.

Its the social mechanisms of man's oppression that have generated this need in men to develop a sexuality for women (or face the consequences), and it is the same mechanisms which help the men to do it, for one thing, by placing such huge social value for men in girls. This social value keeps men inspired to run after the girls. In other words, men run after the girls for the social value attached to them, and the social power attached to heterosexuality than for their intrinsic sexual value. The pleasure, and everything else is secondary, which may or may not happen. Sex is a pleasurable sensual activity in itself, and if all the other avenues of releasing sexuality are physically or psychologically closed for men, then the only avenue available automatically becomes pleasurable for you. Technically, you can also develop a sexuality for animals, if they're the only beings you can actually have sex with. It is the same principle that the Forces of Heterosexualization use to explain so-called 'homosexuality' in prisons.

The heterosexual society has created a huge socio-psychological prison for men, where sexuality between men is marginalised into a queer ghetto, severely stigmatized and kept away from the mainstream men's spaces (straight spaces). Thus a sexuality for men becomes inaccessible for normal, regular, masculine guys who are known as 'straights' (in traditional societies, they're just known as 'men' and gays are known as 'third gender'), who are conditioned to fight off and hate any such sexual feelings within them. They are trained to see their sexual need for men (which is biologically a part of being a masculine gendered male), as a burden that they must get rid of, if they want an easy life. Taking on the queer 'gay' identity is out of the question for masculine gendered males, who'd rather die than have to take it -- So, classifying sexual need for men as 'gay' is practically creating a huge wall between men and their sexual need for men, a wall that men can never break. Its a straight line that men will never dare to cross.

Straight men don't care for sexual pleasure or any pleasure

That sexual pleasure in itself means little to men over their manhood, is clear from the fact that in case study after case study, where typical young straight men became intensely but unwittingly, sexually and emotionally involved with another man, short of falling in love, they still fought off these feelings and either avoided having real sex (which in any case often doesn't involve anal/ oral sex) with their lovers (which were acknowledged as just friends) or allowed themselves to have unacknowledged sex with them, but broke off the relationship which was at its zenith, when they were faced with the pressure from the 'lover friends' to acknowledge these feelings. The avoidance of sex as well as breaking off the bond was extremely painful for them, and had it been towards a girl, they would have made quite a show of their distress, and even have contemplated suicide. However, here they just internalize their pain, move ahead and then try to seek the company of a girl to transfer all that heightened but unfulfilled sexual need. So, although, straight men make a huge show of their sexual interest in girl and the pleasure they derive from it, in reality, pleasure means little to straight men. What means is their straight identity, because the straight identity is related with manhood. And the Queer identity is related with a loss of manhood.

Also, in all of these case studies, straight men although became intensely emotionally involved, they did not fall in love with their male lover friends, some of whom were non-heterosexual straights (in non-heterosexulaized societies, masculine males who exclusively desire men are counted as striaghts) or were 'gay', fell in love (which means they were not so inhibited about a relationship with a guy). Some of these straight men went on to fall in love with girls. While some of this love was a put on, others were more genuine. But whether they were fake or genuine, one thing was for sure, they were all, especially flamboyant about their love for the girls and made a great pommp and show of it. They also seemed to be unusually involved with the girls, with unusually heightened feelings and unusual care they showed towards their female partners -- something that they constantly withheld from their male partners. However, even in the genuine cases of these male-female love, men were able to fall in love with girls because they value their relationships with girls, while they did not value their relationships with a man, and you can't fall in love unless you value something. Their lover friends, on the other hand greatly valued these relationships and had a place for it in their hearts as well as their life. Thus they allowed themselves to fall in love, while the straight men did not allow themselves to do that.

Acknowledging their sexual need for or interest in another male may have more than just the social connotations for straight men. They may actually also render the inbuilt socio-psycho mechanisms inside them useless, if they only acknowledged this sexual need even in private (like in a private survey). This is why they NEVER acknowledge their need even with the partners they're having an intense sexual relationship with, or if they, in the heat of the moment, acknowlege it, they make sure to go back on it and deny it later, when they remember to fight with the intimacy. Because, not acknowledging something that exists has tremendous implications. If you consider an existing trait as non-existing it practically ceases to exist, even when it does so. And then it ceases to affect your personal sense of identity as a 'straight' male.

Another thing that is evidenced from the case studies is that, men who naturally develop enough sexual feelings for girls, that is, they did not have to struggle a lot to achieve this, they are less macho, often softer, than those who struggle a lot to develop these feelings. But they also tend to be more open about relating sexually with other men, especially once they 'prove' their heterosexuality, and have lesser hassles in doing so than men who have had to struggle a lot, and especially those, who're still struggling.

This struggle to be heterosexual tends to take a lot of toll on the health of straight men, who tend to age much faster than males who don't have to struggle so much. This is one reason why gays tend to look younger than straight males of similar age. But, straight men are willing to pay any price to be heterosexual, as long as it is required for 'manhood'.

Sexuality for men a great threat to straight men

In inumerable case studies, where young straight men in their late teens or early twenties, with yet undeveloped heterosexuality, fell unwittingly into relationships with men -- (and this happened not only in cases where men's spaces were strong, but also in heterosexualized spaces, and even in the former cases, there was enough opportunity for young men to court women in private, although, there were lots of opportunities for close intimacies to develop between men) -- men saw their increasing involvement with a male lover, a big threat to their heterosexualization process. They realised, without anyone having to tell them that, if they allowed their sexual feelings for men to develop and gave it a 'valued' place in their lives, (a place they want to reserve for girls, because of the social pressures, even if the sexuality for girls is not fully developed yet), they may never be able to develop an adequate sexuality for girls. Because, in order to develop this sexuality your 'sexual' zone should be vacant. If it is filled up with need for a man, it would be almost impossible to change this in the future, if the sexuality for men takes root. Therefore, in 100% of these cases, men fought with their desire for their male lovers and tried to kill their growing emotional and social intimacy with them. It was an extremely painful process in all of these cases as these men really cared for their lovers at the sametime. So, it was a unique struggle where they were torn apart between a hatred of their sexual feelings for men and a very strong desire for their male lovers. Of course, in the end the social mechanisms won, and the bonds, all of which were extremely intense broke, sometimes without being 'consumated' at other times after a long sexual involvement.

Straight stated definition of 'gay' is different from straight 'practised' definition of 'gay'.

Straight men are forced to acknowledge the defintion of 'gay' given by the Forces of Heterosexualization. But for all practical purposes, they have their own functional definition of what comprises 'gay' and what comprises 'man' or 'straight' male.

When asked straight men will use the definition of 'gay' given by the formal society -- those who like men are 'gay'. However, in practise, it is not the liking of men that makes you gay. It is acknowledging that liking that does. And each straight society has different levels of freedom it allows to unacknowledged sexual acts between men. For example, in buses in Delhi, India, men can feel up other men, even masturbate them using their elbows, while making it seem casual, but using your hands is 'gay'. As 'wierd' as it may sound to western gays, no one will think of you as 'gay' if you quietly felt up another man using your elbow or any body part, except your hands. It is something straight males do to each other quietly. You will be thought of as 'gay' if you acknowledge your interest or cross the straight codes of sexual conduct with men, or showed a sexual disinterest in girls.

Spaces for straight men to give vent to some of their suppressed sexual need for men:

But men do create silent, unspoken and unacknowledged, fearful spaces within the heterosexualized spaces, where whenever they get a chance (which is rare) they give vent to some of their suppressed sexuality for men, but always taking care to camouflage their sexual acts by hiding behind socially acceptable excuses like non-presence of girls, losing inhibition after drinking, watching girl porn with guys, or just doing it because they're getting bored (always letting it be known that they have no real interest in men). These acts of giving vent to their sexual feelings for men often doesn't include things like oral/ anal sex, but rather stuff like seeing naked, feeling up or masturbation. It most certainly never involves more mushy things like kissing or embracing -- which are held decidedly 'queer' (Its clear that what the men want to do with other men sexually is determined by what is allowed within the straight identity/ manhood roles, rather than what they really desire deep within). Also, men never cease to take advantage of socially approved occasions like hazing (ragging) or handling of prisoner of wars in army, etc. to give vent to their sexual feelings for men. These excuses provide men a space where they can indulge in sexuality for men without being threatened to be burdened with the 'gay' identity. Even within the heterosexualised straight spaces, men sometimes are able to find or make for themselves pockets of men's spaces... and whenever they do, their sexual interactions with other men become more open and blatant. This is why the Forces of Heterosexualization are too keen to put girls in every personal space of men, (i.e. heterosexualize their spaces) so that they don't get any excuse or opportunity to give vent to their sexual need for men. The more they are able to suppress this sexuality for men, the more it becomes possible to channel this sexual need into 'heterosexuality'. When they attempt to 'cure' homosexuality, this is actually what they seek to do, to suppress a man's sexual feelings for men and to channelize it into women, although in most cases it is too late. You have to do it before the sexual feelings for men get too developed. Doing it after these feelings become developed is almost impossible.

Men often feel freer to indulge in their sexuality for men when they are in a position of power over other men who are in a vulnerable position. This is one situation where they would not be afraid of being 'queers' simply because they have social excuse, plus they are in a position of power over the men they are sexually exploiting, and thus more 'manly'. Queers can only be powerless, unmanly, sissies. Also, straight men have usually mutilated most of the softer, positive sides of their sexuality for men, and in any case, what they allow themselves to enjoy in these situations are hardened, negative, exploitative aspects of their sexuality for men, that has survived. The negative things often survive, when the positive aspects of a human trait have been killed by the society.

We all have images of how the Western armymen behaved with Iraqi men they captured in war. The first thing they'd do would be to strip them, to feel them up, to make them masturbate, to make them indulge in sexual acts with other men (or even with the armymen). And indeed to watch them being sexually humiliated by women, that has a special sexual value for straight men. The armymen had a perfect excuse, and they never failed to take pictures and videos of their sexual exploitation of prisoners to keep with them forever.

Stripping and sexually humiliating men before others, especially in front of girls, has immense sexual value for straight men. There are various reasons for this, which would be a topic for another analysis. Those in power in the Western society, have kept enough spaces and excuses for them to indulge in this fetish, and when it is so given sanction by the mainstream society, it ceases to be 'queer'. Therefore, in western culture, men are often made to strip down for medicals, often in public situations like army recruitments etc. when there is no apparent need for this humiliation. Women, on the other hand are not required to go through such humiliation.

Seen in this light, the stripping of four youths in full public view by the US army takes on another dimension, that the society will never want to acknowledge. Straight male sexuality for men often finds quiet, unacknowledged vent in social, non-sexual situations like stripping or feeling during medicals, in search operations, etc. There is a cover for men in such situations and the society considers only acts or men that involve anal/ oral sex to be 'queer' -- or at least an open acknowledgement of an interest in men. The social cover provided by these situations mean that men can indulge in sexuality for men without acknowledging their needs. Many of us are aware of this, but we aren't really able to conceptualize it, because it is not recognized in the society as such, and social acknowledgement/ non-acknowledgement makes a lot of difference in our ability to comprehend the reality.

Since there is no social space for normal, regular guys to talk about or acknowledge the pain that straight men go through while mutilating their sexual need for men, men too don't really lament over what they've lost or what they've suffered. There is no scope for complaining. Indeed, they don't see it as loss, they're socially conditioned to see it as a gain and a big relief from having to be queers.

Another aspect of straight male sexuality for men, is that although they feel freer to give vent to their hardened sexuality for men when in a position of power over vulnerable men, they tend to give vent to the softer side of whatever has remained of their sexuality for men, when in sexual situations with men who are more powerful, manly or macho than them. Of course, to be powerful and macho implies in heterosexual societies that neither of the two sides ever acknowledge their interest in each other. They indulge in the acts, often in the dead of night or behind an excuse, and pretend as if nothing ever happened.

PROBLEMS IN AWAKENING STRAIGHT MEN ABOUT THE ISSUE OF THEIR OWN OPPRESSION

Even when straight men are so oppressed by the mechanisms of social oppression, many of them, like a typical victim, are allegiant to these mechanisms and directly and indirectly support and strengthen them. This is ironical, yet true, and one of the biggest impediments in doing any work around this issue.

Men feel grateful to these oppressive mechanisms for being helpful to them in fighting with their own sexual needs when they are the most vulnerable against these needs. Ironically, men tend to see their own sexual feelings aS their enemy and the mechanisms that help them fight themselvs as their 'friend'. This is because, they see, the manhood = heterosexual connection as inevitable and biological -- something which is inalterable, as if they owe their manhood to these social mechanisms without which they just cannot be 'heterosexuals'.

What they don't realise is that if there were no anti-man social mechanisms, there would be no connection between manhood and heterosexuality and no need for men to fight with their real sexual needs as it is their real selves that can procure them their much needed manhood. When straight would mean not heterosexual but a male who is simply masculine gendered, although loving another male would be acknowledged as an integral part of this manhood, as it is in nature.

But most of all, men are scared to be labelled as 'gay' to associate with this sort of work/ campaign.

ENDNOTE
Its true that most men eventually develop a working heterosexuality, but even if they don't, they get the manhood status, embedded in the straight identity and that is the only thing they really care about (it would be just easier on men if they can develop a working heterosexuality, because it would be less stressful for them then). However, this is not a need that was provided by the nature, neither is this connection between heterosexuality and 'manhood' or 'sexual interest between men' and queerhood real. These connections as well as the need for being heterosexual is created by the society.

Therefore, if we can do away with the social need to be heterosexual, men will not have to feel happy about killing an important part of their own selves.