#homosocial interaction

[jjcunygender]

"Fag" is not necessarily a static identity attached to a particular (homosexual) boy. Fag talk and fag imitations serve as a discourse with which boys discipline themselves and each other through joking relationships. Any boy can temporarily become a fag in a given social space or interaction. This does not mean that those boys who identify as or are perceived to be homosexual are not subject to intense harassment. But becoming a fag has as much to do with failing at the masculine tasks of competence, heterosexual prowess and strength or in any way revealing weakness or femininity, as it does with a sexual identity. This fluidity of the fag identity is what makes the specter of the fag such a powerful disciplinary mechanism. It is fluid enough that boys police most of their behaviors out of fear of having the fag identity permanently adhere and definitive enough so that boys recognize a fag behavior and strive to avoid it.

Judith Pascoe, ‘Dude, You’re a Fag”

[i-kn0w-my-valu3]

“ Welcome to the Men’s Club: Homosociality and the Maintenance of Hegemonic Masculinity”

When speaking about homosociality you need to consider that this means that same gendered individuals would interact with each other however, there would not be anything sexual at all. An example of this would be the fact that some women would have girls night out while men have guys night out. When thinking about this it occurred to me about other countries and their form of greeting and friendship. Meanwhile, hegemonic masculinity is the expectations that are set for men so for example it is expected that a man be dominate, tough, heterosexual, protectors, and providers. “Homosociality refers specifically to the nonsexual attractions held by men (or women) for members of their own sex.”

[i-kn0w-my-valu3]

“Household labor and routine production of gender;”- Coltrane “Domesticating Masculinity and Masculinizing Domesticity in Contemporary U.S. Fatherhood Politics”- Gavanas

When reading these articles many thoughts came to me. First of all I had no idea at all what Fatherhood Responsibility Movement meant all, let alone that it simply existed at. It seems the Fatherhood Responsibility Movement (FRM) is a movement in which fathers are taking the role of contributors to their family. This overall sounds amazing since it should be that both parents take full responsibility for the care of the child whether they be a heterosexual or homosexual family.

However, the most oddest thing while reading this is the fact that the way it is expressed, and it clearly not expressed as if it is good rather it seems to criticizes the entire movement and in a way I kind of agree. For example I never knew of the men’s right movement which wants to restore the right of men based on the advances of women rights. To me it sees as if men are marginalized they don't completely except that at all so they created the FRM to make up for the lack of attention. Although I think FRM had negative intentions to keep the men at the center of the topic by teaching men to be true father and how it give to the heteronormative society of man only being able to teach their offspring manly things, I believe it has the potential to be something greater than be viewed as this movement to hegemonic masculinity. Another aspect in which I am not content with is the fact that FRM is marketed to men of color, which also shows that there did intersectionality because since its target is towards men of color shows that the stereotypical dead-beat dad is viewed to only occur in families of color.

“Both mothers and fathers said that the father received more credit for his family involvement than the mother did, because it was expected that she would preform child care and housework, Since parenting is assumed to be ‘only natural‘ for women, fathers were frequently praised for preforming a task that would go unnoticed if a mother had preformed it:”

“In the 1990′s, a men’s movement-the fatherhood responsibility movement (FRM)- mobilized in the United States around the necessity for men in families, making claims on the state as well as a individual men. This movement simultaneously supports and resists feminist demands,”