disClosure: A Journal of Social Theory
Volume 9 manholes Article 3
4-15-2000
(De)Constructing Daddy: The Absent Father, Revisionist Masculinity and/in Queer Cultural Representations
Andrew Schopp University of Tennessee Martin
DOI: https://doi.org/10.13023/disclosure.09.03
Follow this and additional works at: https://uknowledge.uky.edu/disclosure
Part of the English Language and Literature Commons This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 4.0 License.
Recommended Citation Schopp, Andrew (2000) "(De)Constructing Daddy: The Absent Father, Revisionist Masculinity and/in Queer Cultural Representations," disClosure: A Journal of Social Theory: Vol. 9 , Article 3. DOI: https://doi.org/10.13023/disclosure.09.03 Available at: https://uknowledge.uky.edu/disclosure/vol9/iss1/3
This Article is brought to you for free and open access by disClosure: A Journal of Social Theory. Questions about the journal can be sent to [email protected] Andrew Schopp (De )Constructing Daddy: The Absent Father, Revisionist Masculinity and/in Queer Cul tural Representations
Contemporary cultur i almo l ob e eel with a11 Ab ent Fath r mythology. Whether literal or metaphoric, th Ab e 11l Fath r fi gure in nu merou cultural repr enlalion and ha b n po it d a th e ~ oure of v rything from problem ati c mal e beha vior lo male anxieti es about what it m an to b ma culine. Ilow v r, th e Ab enl Fath r i. an especially troubling fi gu r for gay men. I I t ronormal i ve approach to xuali Ly and p yc hologi ·al developm n t, from Freud 1 lo Jung2 Lo ronl mporary religiou ri ght mini tri that would ''cure" queers/1 have con tructed and maintain cl a cultural paradigm in whi ch th e ho mo xual mal e (mo l oft n een a a male who fail al ma culinit. ) i ~ n to kin oth rm n th mal identification that hi fath r failed lo provid and/or that hi domineering mother im peded. 1 Although thi ideology i hardl. novel, it con titule th ba i of a di turbingly common l reolyp . Giv n th oppres iv ffect of a cultural hi lory and a p y hological tradition that hav o © 2000 dlsClosure: a Journal of social theory often posi l d the Ab en t Fath er a a ca u of (9). Committee on Social homo xuality, it mi ght m inh r ntl probl m Theory, Universi ty of Kentucky, Lexington, KY ali c lo include th Ab nl Father in a tud. of gay male subj cti vi ty. Nonethele , Judith Bull r ha sugge t cl: If it is already true that "lesbians" and
15 Schopp (De )Co nstructing Daddy
\\gay men" have been traditionally designated as impossible iden tities, errors of classification, unnatural disasters within juridico . table arena ( port ' workplac ' bars) and mode ( lap on medical discourses ... then perhaps these sites of disruption, er ctl1 allbyaacckce~o l e n ce competition). However, within queer repre en~a - ror, confusion and trouble can be the very rallying points for a .1 e he' Absent Father ' invite u lo exp lore gay ma l e effort lo revise. certain resistance to classification and to identity as such {16). tb1onoths, th l e paramete1s. ava1· 1a bl for in ti macy between men . and Bthe no1- Butler advocate '"di µ]acing hegemoni · het ro · xual norm " by rcex· mative definitions of ma culi11 ity all men. truggle lo negolliale. e.ca~c.l~e . I I t . ~or gay men ie can p1 ov1 e amining and re-theorizing the di c:o ur e that have empow red hetero· ti 1 Absent Father rema1 n o pro) ema tc , I c . . I . ble a gr aler under lane - sexual hegemony. The Ab ent Father paradigm might constitute one a rich figure for an exam111al1on l ial can ena . . of a identity, of the gay community, and of gay, uch di cour e. Decon lructing thi paradigm can r veal potential lo in n.rn c ~l1n1l! , ~ . I tg ~b· By examinin!T c1ueer cultural representation Ill which tl~e resist it clas ifyin g power and foreground our c ulture' dependence lla1g 1 01 1. o I r · f D d upon both thi paradigm and a fixed method of uncl r landing it. Rich· bsenl Father figure ignificantly, including .t 1e icl101~ o D ~~1 I ard Mohr ha argued that '"the ocial lrealm nl of gay men and le bi eavill and the recent plethora of "erotic'' material exploring .ac y an , in particular th e ocial concept und r which ociety Lri e to cla. on roleplaying fantasy, I demon Lrale that the Ab enl Father ex1 t .as ify lesbian and gay men, affect th e way many dimen ion of oc iely a fraught and schizophrenic figure. 01.1 .th e one hand,. h~ s~rve a a ti~~~ are socially under lood and normatively configur d" (258). Th us, de· for Lh e critique and revi ion of lrad1t1ona~ mascul1111t., on L~1~ o - 111 pile th e problematic Iii ·Lory of th e Ab · 111 Father for gay m 11, th is fig· hand, he almost al ways rcaffi rms hegemonic norm . of ~ cul rni l~ c~f ure provide ~ a cru cial '"soc ial concept" lo b' i11t crrogat cl, c ·pcciall} p1te· va 1·rnn l effort lo r vi uch . norm. .. Thi qurnt . esI entia· Yr for those who are intere Led in how ma cu li11it y i · UllCI J" loocl an d 11 or· postmodern figure reflect th inC'rcc~1hl e d1ff1 culty ~f c.h~I .n~ingl~- mati vely configu red. revi ing cu ltural gender cripts, ~ pce1 al 1. wh n uc:l.1 1 ."1 . 101 ~ 1 ~ 1~ 1 P er- 1 111 1 In attempting Lo explore th e Ab e 11t Fath er and it impact, th ere are me11Led by or a ociat cl "ith, thos who. e xualtty ~ PI a number of area cholar need lo investi gate. For example, il would eived a ~ challenge/thrrat to pow r, id ology and long tty oft ie be useful lo interrogate tho e juridico-me cli cal di ·cour e that hare dominant cript. erved lo foster and perp tuate th e Ab ent Fath r paradigm, including During the past twrnty-five year , th Ab ent Fath r ha been a sexologi cal and p ychological di cour e , and th e di cur ive children significant pre nc in a range of popu~ar and literary work 3II~~:~d they have sired, uch as th e ''curative'' Lhcorie c pou cl by th e rcli· factored infilm sucha the tarWarsfdm (1977,1980,198 ), i gious right. AL Lhe same Lim e, we need hi toricized inv Li gati ons thal of Dreams (1989), Batman (l 989), I he Terminator film (l 98'1·, l 991), examine whether an increa eel cultural in i Lenee on adhering lo the A Perfect World (1993), the mylhopoelic manife to lef!e ~1ds of th e Fall masculine ideal {mo t often characteriz cl by dominanc , aggre5s io11 , (1994), and th e 1110 t recent filmic tr ati 01~ ma cul1111t<, ~~ght. ~~u~ (1999). Tn e Ah 1 1 trengLh, succes in the workplace, comp Li Lion, emotional Loi cism a11d th e film , th nl Fath r both inform. th lite1al 0 .f ~u ralive on' life and a ·L ion and licit. an interrogat10n of nHL ·ulrnit. · distance) has any connection to an increa ingly vi ·ibl gay identi ty thal During thi ame period, qu r lit ratur and erotica have .off r .ar often defie thi ideaJ. !l For th e purpo e of Lhi e ay, however, I am ex d ied representation of th Ab nt Fath r. Leavitt' Family Dan crng amining the gay male ubj ect's relation Lo th e Absent Father and 1hi (1983) and Dale Peck's Martin and John (1993) have explor d the relation hip' potential a both a site of re i lane lo th ma cul ine ·impact of 1m· s111g· f al Iiers on gay son , anc I tl1e p1·oliferllion. ' of. fanta ·Y ideal, and a primary ite in th e Lruggle Lo redefin e th parameters thal configure intimacy between men. cI c p1cl1011· · o r Dac ldy / on ro l payl ·111 gay 10· 11· ca1·11cl1cat ' an 111crca .eel fa scination wi th the Daddy figure. Whil th e cxplo ion of Dadd. rotica . Without questi on, Lh e stereotype of th e Ab ent Father fo reground parall el th e explosion of al l rolica into our culture, thank to ~ ss u e of mal e intimacy: in th e primary father/son r lati onship, intimacy lar~cly lcchnology, th e Daddy' incrca ing pre ne in th pa I Len Y ar 1. trll- is barred both by the fa th er' need Lo demon tra l ucc in the work i11 g. A I argue. below, th Dac Ic I r·1gur ·1.. a cunou· an cl pr I I m '·1t 1c r - place {he is physically not pre ent) and by a culture 1h at prohibits di - pan e Lo the Ab ent Fath rand all h ignifi e . till, w hould not b plays of affection and emotion between men (Lh e father is emoti onally surpri eel to see the increase of ith r Ab nt Father or Daddy r pr - absent, even if phys ically pre ent).Thesc barrier are then reinscribed sentations given th e incr a in di cou r .. about ma c~ linit y.and th in secondary relationship in which intimacy i anctioned on ly in o- Ab ent Father th at liav nter d main I ream cultur , 1nclud111 g aca-
16 17 Schopp (De )Constructing Daddy
"gay men" have been traditionally designated as impossible iden tities, errors of classification, unnatural disasters within juridico cially acceptable arena ( po~·l , workplace, b~r ~ and m~d.es ( lap 01~ medical discourses ... then perhaps these sites of disruption, er th e back, violence, compelit1011 ). However, w1thrn queer t.epre .en~a ror, confusion and trouble can be the very rallying points for a tions th e Absent Father in vites us to explore gay male effo1ts to 1 ev 1 s~ certain resistance to classification and to identity as such (16). both 'the parameter avai I able for in ti macy between men. and the n01- Butler advocate "di plac ing hegemoni · h lero xual norms" by reex mati ve definitions of ma culinity all men. truggle to negotiate. Be.ca~cl e amining and re-theorizing th e di cour e tha t have empower cl hetero the Absent Fath er remain o problemat1c for gay men, he can p1ov1 e ex ual hegemony. The Ab ent Father paradigm mi ght constilut one a ri ch fi gure for an examinati on that can enable a greater u1~d~r Land ing of gay identity, of the gay community, and of n.rn c~lrn 1t~r, gay, uch di cour e. Decon truc ting thi paradigm can r v al potential lo re i t it clas ifyin g power and foreground our c ulture' depencl enec straight or bi. By examining queer cultu.ral r e~resental1~n. 111 which tl~e Absent Father figure ignificantly, 111cJudmg .the f1ct101~ of David upon both thi paradigm and a fi xed method of und r landing it. Rich Lea vi Lt and the rec en Lp lethora of "erotic'' ma Len al exploring ~addy/ ard Mohr ha argued that '"the ocial treatment of gay m 11 and le bi an , in particular th e ocial concepts und r which oci Ly trie lo clas- Son roleplaying fantasy, I demon trate that the Ab ent Fat~1er ex1 ts .a ify lesbian and gay men, affect th e way many dim ns ion of ocicty a fraught and chizophrenic figure. On the one hand ,. h~ serves a a 1t~ are socially under loo cl and normativ ly C'o11figu rcd" (258). Thu , dr for the critique and revi ion of traditional mascul1111ty; on t!1~ oth e1 spile the problematic hi ·tory of th e Ab nl Fath r for gay rn e11 , thi · fi g hand , he almo l always rC'affirm hegemoni c norm. of m ~ cul rn1t ~ de- ure provide a cru cial '"social cone pt" lo he int rrogal •cl, sp cially pile vali ant effort Lo r vi e uch norn~ ·. Thi quinte e~:ually. f' ·c · fl cl th incredible d1ff1cully of cha llenb111g 01 for those who are intere led in how ma culi11ity i und r toocl and nor po t1110(I rn igu 1 I . I . . . . . I - matively configured. rev i i11 g cultural gender cript , e pec1ally when uc .11e.v1 . 1 0 1 ~ 1 1111 P e._ 1 111 1 In attempting to ex plore th e Ab ent Father and it impac t, th re are mented by, or as ocialed "ith, th o e who. e exualtty ~ elf pei a number of areas cholar need lo in ve ti gat . For exampl , it wou ld ceived as a cha llcng /threat to pow r, id eology and longevity of the be useful to interroga te tho e juridico-m dical discour e th a t hm e do minant cripl. serv ed lo foster and perpetu ate the Ab cnl Fath r paradigm, including During th e pa t twenty-fiv yC'ar , the Ab ~n t Father .ha been a sexological and psychological di cour e , and th di scur ive ·hildrcn significant pre enc in a rang<' of popular and literary woi k ·Ile ~rnd they have sired, such as th e "curati ve'' theories pou cl by th e r li factored in films sue h as lh I ar Wars film (l 977, 1980, 1983), Fie! of Dreams (1989), Batman (l 989), the Terminator film (1984, 1991), gious right. At th e ame time, we need historicized in v Li ga tions th at A Perfect Wo rld (199:3), th mythopo ti c. manife lo Le~e ~ds o( the Fall examine whether a n incrca eel culLural in i l nee 011 adh ring Lo the masculine id eal (mo t often charac terized by clominanc , aggr ion, (1994), and th e mo l rec nl filmic treat1 e 0 1~ ma c ulrnit ~, ~tght. ~~u~ (1999). In the film , the Ab ent Fath r both inform . th lite1al oi .f1t:>u strength, succe in th e wo rkplace, competition, emotional toici m and rati vc on' life and a ·Lion and eli cit an interrogat10n of ma culrnit. · distance) has any conn ection lo an increa ingly vi ·ibl gay id ntity th at Durinrr thi s same period, qu r literature and eroti ca have .offered v.ar- often defi e thi ideaJ. !i For the purpo es of thi s ay, how ver, J am ex ied rebpr esen tat1on· of th e AlJ en l Fa· ti l e1.· Le" a v i u' Family: Dan. cing amining th e gay male ubject's relati on to the A bscnt f alher and th is (1983) and Dale Peck's Martin and John (1993) ~1 ave .exploi d the relationship' polential a both a site of re i la nce to lhe ma c uline · · · · f I 1cl the proltferat1011 of fa nta id eal, and a primary ite in th e truggle to rede fin e th e pa ram l rs th at im pact o( 1111 srng al 1 r on gay on , a1 ...... confi gure intimacy betw een men. depiction of Daddy/ on rol play in ga. rot1ca 111cl1 cal an rnc 1ea .eel fasc 1n· atton· w1l· I1 l 11c D ac Ic I y f'1 gu1·C'. WI lJ· l the explo ion of Dadd rollca . Without questi on, th e stereotype of th e Absent Father foregrounds parallel the explo ion of al l rotica into our culture, thank l a r ~cly to ~ ss u e of male intimacy: in th e primary fa ther/son r lationship, intimacy t clrnology, th e Daddy' .1n crca ·111 g pr n ·e 111· .ti i pa t t n year 1 . tc.ll - JS barred both by th e father's need Lo demons lrat ucc in th work i ng. As 1 arrrue below, the I acid fi gu r i a cun ou and probleniatic 1 e- place (he is phy ically not pre ent) and by a culture th al prohibit di s pon e to thbe Absent Fa ther anc1 a 111 ie 1· gn1'{' i e · t'1l l , ' ve hould not be plays of affecti on and emotion between men (the father is emotionally urpri ed to see the in cr ase of e ilh r Ab ent Fath r or ~a.ddy repre- ~ bse nt , even if phy icaUy pre ent).These barri rs are th en rein cribed e11La t1.on gl· ven tIie ·1n crea 111· ( 1·1 cou1· e about ma cu. lrn1t . and th e Ill secondary relation hips in whi ch intimacy i a ncti oned only in so- Ab ent Father tha t have e ntered mai n tream cultur , 111 ludmg aca-
16 17 Schopp (De )Constructing Daddy demi c L~di e of ma culiniLy, religiou Lreali exploraL10n of ma c uliniLy and male wound 'and a range of self-help Profemini Ls critique the a sumption underlying lhe 111 . thopoeL's ma Arguably, Lh e mo L prominent of Ll1 1· jor argum ents, in cluding lh ir di cus ion of lhe Ab cnl Father. While " prof ermm. .s t " cholar and ,. LI . c I co u r e a 1.e s Lu cl. 1 es IJy my lopoe Lr c me n's m ,, . profemini ls acknowl edge th e potential emotional effects of th e Ab cnl Tl1 ese two ''camp " ff . i·r·r .· ove 111 e11l wrrL cr·.', r o e1 t I ie1rn g re µon c Lo LI J ll Fa ther, they question both th mpha is mythopoets place on th i iemini L cholar like Al' J· ·cl · le c Hl ngc po ed by ' ice m rn e who have ·1 k / wo und and th eir curati ve approache . Clallerbraugh expl ai ns that bo d y-coded male[ ]'' ab l LI · .. I '. . " ec men lo peak "as . . ou ieu 1e atr on hip ·ft r: · " . "wherea it i landarcl fare in µro-fcmini l per pective lo explore the van ety of is ue includ . d . I r . . 'Cff 1er1emintsm, Lo a wide . ' mg eaLi, 1et1 111 111 lhe I 11 1 inju ri es lo men from havin g Lo be Lh e be l, lo take control, lo be the Jty and de ire (61-62) 1 WI ·i . 1 . . ' P la us, 10mosexual- . . · 11 e p101enum L Lu
18 19 Schopp (De )Con structing Daddy 10 culture. A a communi ty, we developed within a oci Ly that failed to provide model of male intimacy other than the dominant model of . 0 ther but hi mother re i ls, claiming, '"I am very and hrs lover on the ' k · I ,, ( S) The talc end wi th the lov- male bonding that l nd Lo prohibit emotional intimacy. Thu we need B I on ly la e o muc 1 2 . . . tolerant.... ut can I . f . f Lure in which the old Lernlory to examine th e extent Lo which the Absent Father con Li Lut es part of the rrs retu rn to their hom ' 10p111g. 01 a u f· ·1 - can be forged . gay male' inheritance from our dominant cultur , th effect of uch I . I cl w lernlory - a new aim y ca nbe leftbe 1111c a t~ ane ·I I .ti the Lory"Declieatecl,''inwhich inheritance, and ffort at re i Lin g uc.: h i11h rita11c . Although queer Leavitt' coll ct10 11 ~o n luc . wl I 1. ·I otl1e.1· and the female friend studie a a whole ha tended lo hy away from overt di cu ion of the · ti r ro cs w1 l 1 eac 1 l\\O lover negotiate 1 I h r 'fhe Lale depict the truggle of thre.e Ab ent Father, contemporary gay literature and que r eroti ca fr qu ently who brought cl" Lo a traditional hierarchy, or a trad1- explore the effect thi fi gure ha on gay mal e ubjectivity (a nd 011 then·1ul~~e~ic~l people who are sti . · p a they forge new ter- ma culinity in general), and within th e e rcpr ntation the Ab e11t . I · · t ·per ona1 re 1allon 111 ' Lion of hierarc 1y, Ill 111 e1 . I I f Nathan' parent who are Father manife l th e · ame cycle of wound and repair vidcnt in the I l k place 111 LH' 10mc o c • main lream th eoreti cal di cu ion . ritory. T le Lory a e . c ll . b l Thu in both of the e fra111111g co nspicuou ly and perpelua y al en ~ · . I '1 ub ti tu le - the family . I I f ther or t 1e pat1ia1c ia In what follow , I exa mine Da vid Leavitt' fi ction and contemporary 11 arrati ve , CJ t lCr l le a . . l · a father who Daddy erotica to demon Lrale how th e Ab ent Father com ment upon . . . ·I all of th slon Ill between con a1n . - I mt mg. Near y . l l or a ertion of cxuality. male ubj cctivity and heteronormati ve a umption · about exuality, and I 1· . .e cl ·1 Lh ca r a C'C' l c e n ' c is absent cue lo c ivorc.' c ' I the action in almo l every Lale a refl ect th e Lru ggl to ov rcome barri r Lo i11Lima c-y. I low vc r, I also In fact, th e ab nl patriarch C'ompc I c::l ·e111a·111 ·1ft r the father ha examine th e way tlw ·c l<'x l refl ·t th queer ·uhjt• ·r 's (o r for lliut 111 ut th e drama ancI l I1 con n.IC ·L c· 11ter 011 w rn 1 c ter, the qu er community'·) c.:o mpli city wilh uc.: h clomi11ant cl fi11i1i o11 t-i. left. . I ·11 t ·· L" KaJ·a ilv rman' claim that While we might ec in th e e repre enlation of id •11tity-in-flux a r si ~,_ I · ' ·k ff (' 11 V I U S I d " ' . ,eavr ll s wor . he it '"faith above all eL in th u111t. tance to '" reproduced'' and "inherited" cultur , and whil Lhi re ·i - lrnlria rchal cu ltur nc cl . 10 P ' . . · I ··t (I cultural lance mi ght erv e a a ite for reconceptualizing male ubj clivity (ga y ) 1 . , family 1 a potent 111ie11 of the fami ly'' (l 5-1 6 . .... rav1tl . 1' ·1· .. or· clcalh hm o l n. ibly or traight) vis-a-11is the que Lion of intimacy, trxt uch a Leavi LL ' al o . I I 110I I 1e even w lcn c I vo1 c " 11arrat1v l rn t
20 21 Schopp (De )Constructing Daddy
roles, evidenced by Danny' mother' emotional breakdown, and Danny' retreat into a world of daydream trol over the family. L avill' r pre cnlalion al o uggc L that attempt to repair th e wound the C' fa th er inflict leads either to cl lruclion . Le.avi~L empha ize family roleplay and ritual in order Lo illustrate (Da nny and hi mother) or to a reaffirmation of traditional gender roles theff brndrng nature, and he demon lratc the power and limit of such (Na than and Andrew). 11 is Lori ren ct the desire lo configure new roleplay mo l eff ctively in th e culminating tal ''D di catcd.'' Andrew roleg but detail the near impossibility of the task. Where Kaja ilverman and Na~han' romantic relation hip i con Lru cted around which rol e sugge t th at we put our faith in th family and the adequacy of the male ea~ h \::t,l play - dominant or ubmi iv . Andrew expl ain at one point, Im not uppo eel lo put him in hi place. I'm not uppo ed to subject, Leavitt' coll ection r veal both the inadequacy of thi faith i do that" (195). Andrew' latemenl reflect a lack of agency that hold . and dearth of al ternali ves ' eem Lo have. Leavitt' depiction of th ubjecl' in ve tment in " rolepla. ing,'' of true. for bo~h men: Nathan i a bound Lo hi role of aggre or; Andre\\ th e power hi erarchies reinforced by uch roleplay , and of the relation Lo hi s pa, •. 1ve role. Andrew explain that during th eir fir t intimate en between uch roleplaying and th Ab ent Father fore hado" the Daddy counter, 1~ wa under lood that he was more experienced and he would in the Daddy/ on rol pla. ing and iconograph. that ha proliferated make Lhe .fir Lmo ve" (196). In part, Leavitt illu trale the difficult of construclrng new form of male intimacy that do not rely y wit hin th e gay community al large, and e pccially within the '"Leather" 0 11 and '• Bear'' sub-culture . Gi v n that th Dadd_' increa ing pre ence hel} eronormaliv . e .mod ls whi ·hare based 011 etllJ. u 11z· ec I ge ne Ier c1 1-. paral lel th at of conlC'mporary masculinity Ludie , it is tempting to c 1otom1 ~ Lh a ~. llp~l~t e, ~ltat on.e 1 ~art11 r i th " ma ·cul in "uggre sor; asse rt that Dadd y/ on rolC'play and Dadd_ repre enlation rve a an Ll~ e. othe1, Lh e fe m111111 ~ ub1111 ~ 1ve. L ·uvi tt'· ('hura ·t 'r' c; ling to tra attempt, via fanta y, to "hcul'' tlic wouncl ' of th Abs 11l Fath r. But if d1t1.011 b~cau e no alt rnat1 ve e m po · ·ibl • in li ght of th ir aclh crenC'c thi i the ca e, w mu st a ~ k ho" thi ffort al h aling cliff r~ from oth r Lo rnhented conception of ma culinily For xa 111 µ1 A cl I N I ' · · ' , n rew am - for exampl , fro111 mythopo ti c healing ffort . at ian. pnmary n~od.e of ~nlim a l e conn ection i ''battl ," in whic;h th ey In many way , th Daddy pro id a u eful an ~ w r lo th Ab en l u ~Ce lia a a med1atrng figure. Thu , they participat in a tradition in Father. Mo t repr ntation "ithin eroti fiction, film and art reflect which, as E:e edgw ick and Gayle Rubin have di cu eel, 11 a ·h o en a de ir for a "father'' ' ho i emotionally and phy ica ll pr nt, and female m ~c h a t es bet ween men wh o arc cementing th ci r homo ocial/ thu the Daddy provide all that actu al father in our cultur cannot. h~mo e rol1 c bond . Celia comment al one point that "her happinc · Richard Mohr' analys is of hyp rma cu linily off r u ful in ighl into WI th N atha~1 and Andrew cl epe ncl ecl upon Nathan and Andrew being thr Daddy figure and its potential for adclre ing the wounds infli cted unhaµpy with ea~ h other'' (204). Leavitt' tory illu trat s what can by the Absent Father. Mohr a rt that "hype rma culine'' repre enla ?ccu.r ~vl.1 e n one Ln e l.o forge new relation ·hip pullern , within a de pl y Lio11s like th e Daddy chall nge dominant ideologie of ma culinity by rntei na~iz e d hegemo111 c heteronormati ve ma cu Ii11 i ty. While "Terri LOI'} " ap propriating the icon. of masculinity and male authority Uock, end s with a en e of ho1J for the f utu1·e , ""Delli· ·c..'' l l I" cone I Ul Ie wit·I 1 lea th er, motorcycl , uniform ) and tran porting them into th r aim of a sen e L.h at we r ~ m a in caught in th e clutches of the pu t. gay male exual xp ri encc. Thi, appropriation effaces the houndar Ii~ hi co ll ec lt0~1, Le.avill i11L erroga t th e gay ubject' complicit), between "appropriat ''ma cu linit_ . uch a port and war, and ''inap c~ n sc w.u s OJ~ not, with his ~ ultural inh ritanc cl spite alJ attempts to propri ate" or "failed" ma culinity such a gay male xual xp ricnc . ?i e~ k fi ~e fi.om th e con Lra111L of uch inheritance. The mo Lcli stu rb Following th e lin of Mohr' rca oning, then, th Dadd. I on ro l play rng unplication of hi collection i nol that th nu clear famil y breaks reflect both ad ir for patriarchal au thorit. (tradi ti onal masc ulinit_ ) down or. needs lo be ~· c lructurecl, but Lhat such rcstru ·Luring ha Jilli e and a revi ion of thi authorit y. The ve ry act of roticizing th fa ther/ ~ ffe~L given the patnarchal legacy of power relation r CT clccl in and son role could revi or at IC' a. t chal l nge traditional cone ption of ~nfli cled by Lh e ritua li zed hi erarchies that t ncl to hape a ll form s of authority by foregrounding both the d ir cl allribu l of ma culinit. int e rp ~ r s.? i~ al rela ti onship - famili al, romantic, gay or Lrai ght. It is and numerou g nd r allribul th at hav be n xcl ud cl from th cat- not s ui P1 isrn g that tho e characters who seem to Lru g(Tl the least are egory of th e ma cu Ii n . thoI se fathers ' ab cnl t0 vaiyrng. · · cegreeI , wI 10 moti· vabt e th e action in l le e Lal e · Gay or Lrai ght, Lh ese fathers can con tru ct new li ve for Not urpri ingly, how v r, th 1 adcl y figur aLo oft n app ar~ a them elves, whil e still exerting emotional and omelime financial con- th e "phal1u '' inearnat and har som di turbing haracl ri tic with th e mythopoeli c re urr ction of the Earth Fath r. Many m. thopo ti c
22 23 Schopp (De )Constructing Daddy
cholar , like Aaron Kipni in Knight Without Armor, e k a more ''au thentic" ma culinily by turning Lo ancie nL culture , tribal practi ce ancl F ran illu tration of th Daddy' conflicted nature, consider ~h e . ° . t Colt Ludio pecial I ue Oh Daddy, a photo collec t1 on icon that con Li Lule a re urreclion of the Earth Father, th mi ing male rntroc1 ucl10n o . 20 4 O· ':\ principle who e purpo e, fun ction and relation lo Lh e Earth Mother Lh al include Dad di e ranging Jl1 age from abou l - . (note the heteronormaLiv e underpinning ) ha ve beco111 e culturally mi - Big Daddies under Lood. The mythopoeli c empha i 011 Earth Fa ther refl ec t hoth the ignificance of th e phallu for the e cholar and a deeply embed Oh yes they'll take you in hand all right. If you deserve it. Usu ded ca lration anxiety. l ipni acknowl clges, for exa111pl e, that he in- ally th~y're there when you need them to help, to lea~ on, to be tincti vely knew ''the phal1u wa holy" (64), and he later explain Lhal: k d b (and if you're very good you can sit on their laps, but the heroic male in quest of strength cut away his softness. With s~~ h~ve io be very good to do that). They're patient and under it he also lost his sensitivity. Life was diminished. Feelings be ;tanding men with strong and enveloping arms, and a~ways m~s came less rich. The feminized male, in cutting away his hardness, culine. Such are the extraordinary examples of machismo we ve lost his fierceness, his capacity for committed action and success assembled for this special edition. in the world. So we must be careful (97). (Description of models) Clearly, the phallu ha been Jo l and mu I b recove r cl. Thu Ki pni Lri ve Lo resurrecL "th e ph alli c, half-animal , magical, wild , da 11 ei 11g, So sit up straight, finish your dinner, don't t~lk back - and ~ust mu ic-ma ki11 g man'' (12 J ). Thi effort al re ' U1Teclio11 has cultural pre cedent, however. wait till your father gets home. He's going to give you such a lick- ing. Kaja 'ilverman de cribe th e primacy of the ignifi r phallu /pe ni in our culture, contend ing that '" within our clo111i11 anl fi c ti on the phallus/peni equation occupi e a b olute pri 24 25 Schopp (De )Constructing Daddy parli~ ularl y problematic in l~1 e e producl a Lh ey oflen incorporate attributes (aggre i ve and au thori tali ve) with lrad i Lionally ·"feminine'" ~h y 1cal abu e or .rape fanta 1e . 11 Th e line b Lw een fan La y and rcal- 1Ly become e p cially Lenuou wh en di cu ing exual role pl ay as op ( genlle and nurturing), un fo rlunat ly, a i Lh e ca. e wilh o man.y men's po ed to Lh e con umplion of textual fan la y. On e elf-defin ed HDadcl " moveme nt scholar , thi s melding ofl en results 111 fo regrou nclrng and . . I y, affirmi ng these construct cl cli cholom ie . Aaron Kip nis' Lu dy, fo r ex f or examp l e, 111.1 tee upo~1 the healing ff ct that hi " 'on " experi- enced by renewing th e parn of hi s ''fath er' "abu e and then rece· · ample, seeks to rev i e what he call "feminized ma culinity.'" l ~owever, } · · . . l Vlllg tie rnt1macy and affect10n Lh at hi s fath er nev r off r cl but that h · . hi s un critical use of the l rm "f mi nized'' renect the es e11 L1 alt zecl and '"D Id ,, l 26 27 Schopp (De )Constructing Daddy is manife Led in the relation betw een young gay men and older gay men nd if necessary, get hurt or even die (a mentoring relation hip that she ee being deva lated by AIDS and manner; to mounft a dtefet~sneg~h: people who are depending upon tha t parallels th e me ntoring proce mythopoe ti c Ludi e often advo in the process o pro ec I cate). Califia' Daddy here i all about th e n eel Lo a lvage ma culinity and helping you (13-14>. before it i de Lroyed by the "demon izat ion of 111 11 th at ha be n an ugly . . from thr ntl cnc and nurturing of the open- The move 111 th1 pas. age . g t · .t of problem olvin g and food counterpart to the I iberation of women" (1 3). h i11 i L tha t th ese sto· I l cal ma c u 1in ia1 ing to L1e stereo yp1 . . . f I ·t'al ideal paradoxicall y ad vo- ries do not romantic ize ince L but are in lead a bout th e ''unfi ni shed . · I I · f1 cat1on o l l mar l e. bu ine " of '" integrating th e vulnerable child- If with th e adult ego prov1 1011 to .t 1cl g o1~ r in c rib cl tra ditional ma c ulinily. B eca~1 .e and libido; and about receiving wha t we ne cl from our partners and cates a rev1sec an . . ,. . 1· . ,, and the c pec1f1c 111 Ca li fia' introduc tion imp I iels thl a.l ma cau11 d1n::~ m e n he i ' Lo ome care taker " (11-12). ignificantly, she rev a l our all-Loo-common · · I l I be va u c 111 111 11 ' • • characten Li es lOU c l cl . nmenls Ye t her uncn llcal commitment Lo traditional gender cli chotomi wh 11 he a erl that be · cl ' t' g n er assig · ' coming an adult meant ''choo ing Dad in Lead of Mom , th e world instead ex tent, conte Lrn g l.ra .1 .10 n~ 1 menl of ma culinity ignore the li ke- of th e Home, action and ambition over attachment and intimacy" (1 2). acceplance of th e t.1 ad1t1 ona Ie · 11 perpetu ate the condition ' th e lihood that the scnpt he a vage will Like the myth opoeti c Of cour e, a she ay , for most of u , Dad wa either literally or figu· I D d I f t ·1 y u pp o e c y 1l e a 1 . . . wounds, L 1e a c y an c. . 1 I 1·rr· culty of even im ag1n111 g ratively ab ent, and thu we could not under land thi choice between . c ,. f' ' I0 " l l 1011 r v a s t le ( I I world and home th at we were forced Lo mak . Th Daddy fi gure and the studies, a I ia s exp' r' . . el of conventional attribute . Daddy fanta y can thu allow one to confront und xplor that absence ge nd er role that d?n l confo1l m ~~ ~th Fath er ugg ~ t that the onl y way and all th at it ignifie , and in many in lane I a111 ure tha t they do. The my th o 1~or t1 c l urn to ~ - ~ r J el l . : i to tum to th e past and re - to fo rgr something nr w and authe ntic 11 l l 111 ·1 c·uriou way, Lill, Ha rry Brod ha hown th a t ma ny m n' movem nl Lu die . . I ti · l)C'C ll!HC um a)y 0 . c urrrct a ma cu I 1111 t t 13 hlS ... I al the effecti vely blame th e vic tim (in thi ca th ·on ) for th father 'di· · ) I I 1, . I play m to ac ' oc the Daddy eroti ca and t.h r I acc. o.n Daddv rroti ca and rol play lance (he cite Bly' claim about the 011 ' coll aboration with th e mother I~ same kind of lurn. Whtlr con . um c 1 ~ l o l r. . ·ti . F ·1 th r th do look against th e fa th er) and concomitantl y deny th fo th r's a counlahili ty . . cl t l ·11 to ·111 r 1 nt ln rn rJ a 1 l ' ' • l)arl1 c1panl o 110 ui ' • to ,,. ore tradi- (94). imilarly, while th c fanta y roleplays mi ght enahl a d rnmali . I r . . I" .,)' by r turning u 111 "forwa rd '' lo a new k111c o mct scu 1111 1· 't . 11 1' 11 ·1 dominant zation in which the fath er accounts for hi ahanclonm nt (a mong other . , t. fmacu1111 "'' c. tional , hyperm a cu lIll COllCC' (> 1011 0 r I 1 a ure I it any sins), th e son s till take on th e burden of ffecting the repair (perhap fi gure overpower anol IH ' r f01 . t I1 pu rpo . o mu" t LI. a pI ' L· I le· on th at he has no other option) by educing the fath r or by voluntaril y ubmit ·r· 1· 5 ti 1c cl ire to tL11n t 1e a l surprise that Call ia c 1..cu . tl '•cock ucker'' Lin g Lo Da el ' a uthority or by reversing rol e of victimization and becom ,. b 1·1 5I · ti 1 f·1 ·t th at h 1 no' 1 mea n old man Y r ling ' c. . • ti l dear· old dad ing the son who ''outfa the r " Lh e father and a erl C'o11trol, power, and · (14)? 1 1l a urpn ia ' th at he accu eel hi on fl rn g · . I . f nurturing rea dominance. In all ca e , lraditionally ma c uline allribute are reaf ° ) th e hy perma cul inc fa gba her, now pro IC • a. ... !~ a c e ° [' . et till firmed. De pile Califi a' claim th at " the r arc a many script a th ere I I I i and wi h to v1c t1m1 z t 11 igu1 , ura ncc, anc Lia l we c P (.. . . , l 'f' · · l tha t viole nc are boys and girls," and Lh a t "wha t's important i Lh al peopl e are being long fo r hi caring and nurtunng? Whd a (1l13a) indI I 'le 11 ,. r·h elo- nurtured, plea ured and bonding witl1 one anoth r" (15), mo l of thi . f .1 1 l' ·1y . an w 11 and oppre ion are ig11 of a1 c ma LI in1 f ' . I l co1111ot·1tio11 introduc ti on- in fa ct th e literal center of thi introduc tion-allempls lo .k •• k k r" o any 10 n c. ' ri c tri e to trip te rm l 1 coc uc I . ·e n ct fa n- salvage a cultural " cript" tha t has fi gured prominently in the creation . . . . I . . ti 1 logy anc 1 w 1 t I ma ny of th e erotic Lon e 111 1 1 a 11 1 . · I ol her of the concli Lion for whi ch th ese olher cri pl bccom ncce sary. . . I. I " D lei ' s" ·incl " on ,. take turn dom111at1n g ac 1 Las1es 111w11 c 1 ac 1 ' ~ ·I •• w'ithin th se Li sten to her description of th ee scnce of ma culinity: and in extr me ca , v1ct1m1zrn. . . . g cue I1 other· 1 1 1 t 1 1o11 . . . 111 Lori' e al mo Lalway rol1c1z pa111· , 1· I rncc and do1111nal,, 1011, vcn it is the choice to be gentle even when one is stronger than oth 1 I . . I . I I nk OU l th xual a l. ers; to care for one's dependents and nurture the young; to devise t 1e Lon es 111 w 11 1 l 1 . on " I . I · Lli·,L re ult . th c zop 11' 111a u ... rites of passage and train our charges to pass through them suc In many way the Da(11 c rm I)OC I1 11 • t cessfu I ly; to help those who are in trouble; to work hard and fro m attempt Lor J. l or r . v1 . a r u I tuia. l " c ript" that c.onl1nu I .· . o perform well; to provide food even in a time of scarcity; to deal info rmthecon Litutionoflh cont mpoi.a i.. mal , ult. ural Ill 1IC 11t ancce,th- with problems or emergencies in a courageous and effective and th1. rnform . , .111 both pt . cI uc t1v· a. ncI P1· oble111at1 ' a·y ' l 1c 111 28 29 Schopp (De )Constructing Daddy ods by whi ch we live with that inheritance. The Daddy, whether in . ·e tion of ma culinity that do not merely r e~ li cate erotica or enacted in roleplay, foreground the difficully of repairing the rad1 cally new cone p sl fir l recognize th e unde rlyrng a - wounds inflicted by th e Ab enl Father and uggesl the di lurbing like tradition. But lo do so mlean we 1~1u l""l.1011 s and we must reme mber . I l ke L 1c c rcpt e n " ~ ' " lihood that the desire Lo heal such wound i mitigated by a desire to sumplton t rn ~v~ I . I .1 wound are real, th ey are alway acquire th e power a ocialed with traditional masculinity. Mu ch as the Clalterbraugh' ms1 tence L1 ~1 l ": 11 I · · I . d in L1tullonal conl xt · Earth Father function for th e mylhopo l a a m ans of repairi ng a emb ecldet in soc 1a an I I . I I ·1 the ti gma of th Ab ent symbolic ca LraLion, the Daddy provid a temporary reparation: the I I to have demonstral < l 1a w 11 I I . . rnp e · · · holarl in vesti gation into thi figur anl llS tm- individual not only find emotional or p ychic uccor, but has th e op Fa ther may rnh1b1t c I.. y l . .l elf i hi ghly in ve ted in arti culat- . cu lture t 1 cu Lu1 c 1 . . portunity to regain and a ert the phallu by inhabiting th e pace and pact o~1 q.uee1 . '. . l Thu while thi figure i certa111 ly tm- the power of Lh e Daddy whether by enacting the Daddy or by enac ting ing tins figure and ll ll~lpa c . . ' r ity and it effect ' it remain the Son who a ert hi own dominance and '"feminize '' the Fat her, porl anl for all who have rnlcr sl in ma c ~ m f ·1 e eriou di cu - rendering him the new '"cock ucker." of articular importance for gay m n w 10 o l n I enc . l a urable . p [ti Ab ent Fath r, '"hi IC' imullaneou ly c11ac t111.g p ." , Nonethele , the chizophrenic nature of th e Daddy, which mim s1ons o ie . . . f dealing wlth h1 legacy. ics the chizophrenic character of th e Ab enl Fath r, can help us un bu t problemati c sexual fan la ics as a mean o l . I l to ad- These re rescntalions ugg st that rather than mere y to p ~y . derstand th e political signifi cance of th e Ab nl Fath r. The Absent Father' mutually contradictory role of critique and rein criplion can dress th:Absent Father, and rather than fanta. izc t';ou·t.an '::a~~~~~ serve a au efu l ch ck for our effort lo re- nvi ion masculinity. We can form of masculinity Lo a Li . fy C"x ual and . mol1on a c e i'. e.' to uncler a k to what ex tent rep re ·entalions of th i figur for •g round the cyde of use the every bodily and emotional exp n en_c~s a th bd 1 1 t rivi- 1 • 11 f ll y r i th ' soC' ial and poltl1cal proc s c t rn p wound and repair that eem o central lo co 11Lemporary ma cu linil). \~ e slanc , am 10pe u ..' I I ·ivilt' , ork illu Lrat Lh 1 can al o u e Lh e figure lo determine the ex l nl Lo which we are collec le ge l ra cl i t i o 11 a I 111 a c u l 1111 l Y· I t h 0 u g , " . . .. cl . . . I ff . . , . gen d r c n pt ' 111 lo I I e an tively able lo heal th e wound of hi lo without reaffirming the icl e cl i ffi C' u I LY of rn cl ' v I d u a e o t ls t o i ' t ~ . • I tv' I ·1 . L . . 1· I I . . lo ach1 vc c rnngC'. "' 11 e t ologie that keep him neces arily ab enl. We houlcl r member Da h' th e Daddy figure al o llH icalc l lC" c s 11 C' ~ . . I . I TL to is tempting Lo read these r prC"sr nlution a affirmrng l 1 1 \ discu ion of th e need lo integral individual h aling and collect ive ma~~ create change, 1 think we hould ins LC' ad read _th. ma f~r grounc mg 11 e progre s. Certainly, th Daddy rcnccl larger ocial and political i ~:, LI C ' - i.e., th e djfficully of jmagjnjng '" new" definition of ma culinit), the need to reevalual how we approach ma cul1111l! Lud1 LI. oic that desire for th e power a ociated with traditional ma culinity, th e collec On the one hand, eholar IH' cl to rccogn1z _a ll 11 1· l ·b- . , l° 't 1 Lil co ntribute lo Lh e d1 cour on ma C'U 1111 ), epec1all · l10f CC I I J tive inve lmenl in gend er cripl - while imultaneou ly fun cti oning . 1· . l ate th e cycl o wounc anc ingly popular voice who ... Luc 1 P 1P Uc I I l 1 primarily as a means by which individual addrcs per onal p ye hi c 0 . . 1·11 t1" le Ontheol1 r rn1H,wea ... wound . AL the same Lim e, Da h' argumenL l ad me Lo a k whether we re pa ir that the e repr s nlalions u a · . . · l llec- mi ghl work Lo bridg th divide bctw 11 inch iclual h ali ng anc c~ I . can confi gure a respon e lo th e Ab ent Fath r oth r than Lh e Dad dy, or · · I I ··1Lion of wounc 1 can pet Mp at lea La re ponse that f u nclions ou L idc of a fan La sy pa ' . Li ve progres . l11dulg111g 111 P r 01u1 ex p Ole . . I I- I II Liv 1f" hop Lo c rn The mythopoelic exploration , th e L avilt stori and th e Daddy help to "heal', th individual, >Lii, a a eo ' . lenge the cultural factor that crralc LI1 s wou ncl ' " n C'C 1 Lo . 1 Icog- representatjon ugge t Lhat we are so culturally invested in traditional 1 111 nize what these rcpr entation of wound and Lh ffort... lo rcp~tr ltl '. masculinity, a masculinity ejther pres um ed lo L (hy the mylhopoets) or r ' I I .11 . for po' r pccrn o1 unsuccessfully performed (the label attached to gay men), that our ef Lell us: in Clallcrbraugh s t r111 s, t 1c c . ' . I . I 1. · l c 1·'' like! con l1tul t 1 forts Lo revise gender cripls cannot help but return Lo tradi tion, espe "in Litutionalized oc1al anc po ilica pow . · I . ,, S?) If cause "of th e cost of ma culinit "(" M thopoeli Foullc a~.1 ° 11 l I ,, · cially since that tradition i both powerful and the ver.r seat of power. 1 11 I I00 k be ond the 0 ac c anc Profemini sL mod els do suggest some ah ernati v s, however, s in ce th eir we really want lo see change, we c lo , . i·cat . . . . I I I 1. on I ruct l 1m l con1 t t p i " claim s about th e mythopoels can be appli ed Lo the c queer represen try to 1m agme th u111mag111a) : g nc c . I l traditional hi rarchi ; a ma culinity that i not, al tl cor 'a )OU tation . In other words, rather than merely empha izing and indulging power; perhap ev n a world without ma cu linil_ . . . in th e wound inflicted by the Ab enl Father, we might instead exam . ? p I I I l ch a ma cu l1111l Jll l an- in e how th e articulated response to this figur µ ak Lo tl1e need for Is such a world utopian. rornJ · u .. f other fantasy, at lea t for t I1 mom n t?. M o l l'1 k e I · I l 0\ v r, 1 l 1 a an - 30 31 Schopp (De )Constructing Daddy La y Lh at look forward Lo omethinrr uni ma in d 1.. I1 1. . to a tradi Lio I l b g ' al e than backward Notes l 1 w lo e egacy we know all L 11 WI ma culiniLy look like? I am i10L . I k oo wed . mt would such a · u le now a n I a i l l llenry Abclove reports that al th ough Freud was relati vely sympatheti c lo ho k now atLhi Lim e A 1011 rra 1·. ' 11110 ure\\Ccan · b ma cu 1111L y rerna· . I 1 mosex uals and did not consid er homosexuality an illness, Am eri can p y power, iL may be th aL all we ca11 l1ope fo. . ll1 d cu Lura code for choa nal ysts working after Freud insisted that ho111 osex uality be decreed I 1 a more I r ·1 . of Lh at power or a more ec1uita bl I . ]· I qua c I tn Ju t1 011 a mental ill ness. Irving Bieber, clai111in g that all psychoanal yti c th eo ri es · . . e )a ance Jetw c 11 tho ·I .. . · L1 c trad 1LJ011 all)' a oc1·aled 'ti ti c iaiac.ten . '"ass ume that homos x11a lity is psychopathogeni c,'' argued that homosex u wi 1 rn L pow r and ti I I tl~ a_L power. till, examining figure li ke the Da 11 10· µ:· c. uc eel from alit y ''derived primaril y from a cert ain ort of bad famil y situation: a domi mlJon of the hi erarchical i1 a t . f cc. y ie u L Ill a recog- neering moth er, a cold father" (:390). 1l owevcr, Mi chael Warn er argue th at m e o power r la t 1011 · · ma culinity a nd Lhu peak to ti I [ . a. ociated wll h Freud's di cussions of homo ex uality include heteronormati ve a um pti on hierarchy. Profemini t in i t th:~ \:1:eloc okott g~nd .r ~npt that re i I that po it a present father fi gure a nece ary fo r proper development of o 111 L1Lul1 onal and ·I the ego-ideal. a development that eventually culminate in th e "normal"' context ; I1owever, wi Lhi n our patriarchal cultu r th J • • •• socia condition of heterosexuality (Warner, "J lomo- arcissi m"). conlexl remain hierarchical and thu ff . i· 1' I lllaJ011ty of thee · l l · · 0 e r ill l p No1 ti l tal ier Lian g1vrn g up or returnin ...... t e ice , 2 See, fo r exampl e, Gu y Corneau, Absent Fathers, Lost ons: Th e Search for recognize the cycl of cl clg Lo t1 ~d 1t1 011 agam and again, we can Masc uline I dentit y ~ Aaron R. Kipnis, Kn ights With out Armor: A Pra ctica l woun an repair ·c · I · Lh e alLernati ves seem to b I I . ' l cogn1z 10w unimaginable Guide f or Men in Qu est of Ma sc 11li11 e oul: Moore a11d Gil et le. King War e, anc u t 11 knowledge . . . a e the evolution of m· . . 1· . I a w contlllue lo rior, Ma gician , /_,ove r. These and oth er men' movement asse menls of a cu 1rnty anc trugcrl 1 , · • · I . 111 asc ulinily base th cn1 sclv s loosrly on Jung·s heteronorn1ati ve archetypes th at do nol merely re1Jl'c · t t 1· . b o 11v1 10 11 a t nrnl1vc 1 a e rac1 t1 on. ancl compl ex s, e.g., th e 111 td <' animu and th fem ale animus, th e moth er/ fa ther complex. Whilr mu11 y of th rse texts may not explicitl y link impropr r development lo homosC'x uality, th ry oft en impl y thi , and th eir account of masculinity cannot ac·c·omn1odat ho1110 exual de ire. These tex t ug ges t that th e lark of father r 5. ults i11 an overdevelopC' cl fe male principle or, in Corneau's trrm. , 111.othrr complex. By implicati on th en, many of th ese tex t perpetuate th e c11lt11rnl 111 yth that dominant mothering and wea k or Absent Fa th ers ''ca11 " homos xu ality in men. 3 Fro 111 personal experi ence I can attest to th e fa ct th at man of th e ''mini - tri es" po it lack of proper mal e rol mod l as th e cause of homo cx uality. i Fo r exa mpl e, in th eir chapt r on ''M oth erbound Mal e ,'' Vogl and irridgc claim: "For a good many homos x11al mal s, th eir relation hip with th eir fa th ers wa s so absent th at . 0111 r of th eir bod y longing arr trunsf rrecl lo another male. In so doing, th e ho111osexual 111 alr ar hi e' cs so111 of th e lo l bonding with a mal e . 11bstilulc and k cp. th e moth r relati on hip afr , co nstant and unchallenged'' (39). 5 Most studies of contemporary ma culinity claim that th e opprc iv eff ct of masculinity havC' beco111 e 111ost pro1101111c d for men inc WW ll. In hi s in trod ucti on lo Al xandcr Mitschcrlich's ocietr With out th e Fath er. Rob ert Bly describes th e contcmporor. ''sibling o ~ i c t y " (one without a patri arC' h) as "only fo rt y to fift. yC'ars olcl" (xiv). Al o, Vogt and irridg<' explain that th e Absent Fath r r suited, all a t in part, from th fa ct that 111 en, since th e L940's, hav been s nt off to war, to work, to th club or lodge. (I 0). ince WW Tl , Am erican c11lt11r ha al o seen an increa eel develop ment of both a gay/le bian comn11111it and a vi ibl , although markedly 32 33 Sch opp (De )Constructing Dadd y shifting, gay icl enti Ly. (As just one example, ee John D'Emilio, Sexual Politics, Sexual Co 111111 u11 ities: Th e JlJaking of a flomosexual Minorit) in the k Men Re pond" (Co ntemporary Perspectives .0 11 Ou tside: Ga y and Bl are· E I . I HBeyoncl ex and Gender: Mascul1n - United fates 1940-1970.) Drawing upon a th cor ti cal 111 odel offered bi l . . ) See also tm •< wares. 1· f Mascu uni )' . . .· I Theor ,, This is not lo ignore slue ies o mas- criti cs such as Eve edgwi ck, Michel Fo ucault and Jeffrey Weeks, we need ity, Ilomosex ualtty and oc 1af I . Wa ll ace llooks, Reed. Gates), or to consider wheth er tlt e Ab ent Fath er paradigm, when exami ned wi thin r r ulinity pertain ing.to men o ~:sot a ·7;1e11 or mc,11 of color (e.g., Morga.n's its histori ca] contex t (e.g., th e McCarth y era lo lonewa 11 to the RcagarJ coll ecti ons th at stnve lo add1e.il,f g. y B one a ncl Caclcle n's Enge11 derwg Bush era), ignifie th e inverse of its ow n claim . Fo r xa mple, ha · the . M cga I's I Otll ,, ot ion, o . ., Discol'erwg en , . I s iggesting that "mainstream pa thologizing of desire and intimacy between men ·ausecJ, or at l ea~t con· · l' Mi 's l iues) l am 1111p y 1 Wen, K1111m e s I . f I Al sent Fath er, generall y ha' e 1•e tero- tributed to, an Ab ent Fath er phenomenon th at ha had profound impact st11cl ics of mascul1rnt~ ' . y, ~ anc o t 1c> J on male ubjectivi ty (to some degree rcgardle of ex ua l idcntit))? . al and race-specific ba. cs. scxu c l 6 In adapting Kenneth Clatt erbraugh's terms "profemini t" and "men's move· . , ''I lentil , and Politic in a 'Postmodern' Gay u - 10 Steven Seidman s essay, c ) I ., offers an excellent un1111 ary ment,'' I am defin ing th e fo rmer as those assessments whi ch chall enge a Ir . l and onccptua oles, ~ lure: ome iston ca . . I nd rra , identity. T borro" th e term. traditional hegemonic masculinity and the la tt er as those that oft en eek of the debates surroundlllg ga,. cu ltur~ af . b ~ ic h ae l Wa rner' paper "69: a return - conscious or not - to normati ve conve ntions. Kenneth '·inherited.. and "reproducNI cu tu1 e 10 111 Cla LL erbraugh' Contempora ry Perspectives 011 Masculinity divides contem· Sex in Public." porary th eori es into: Conserva ti ve, Profeminist, Men's Right s Movement, I H I · "T ffi cki ng in Wo men'' Spiritualist , ocialist and "Views from Outside" (i.e. gay and men of 11 See Sedgwi ck, Between Men anc u Jtn , ra color). For the purpose of th is es ·ay, I am placing the ''lllcn' rights move· 12 See fo r examp le Abi.ga .il . o 1o mon-Goc leau'.s " Male Trouble.'' ment," " mythopoetic men's mov ement" a11cl "s pirit ualists'' into thr ('al· . , of th magazines that cater to Daddy/ egory of mythopoctic approache . Clatt crbraugh explains th at hi s catego· 13 This is actually q111t c co 111111 on. 111 111lu'.1 )l t.t t 50 ilercC'nl of th e 111 aga- ri es overlap, and mi ne clearly do as well . I ·so11 ·l l uc ls (" 11 r 1 cons 1 " · I Son fa nt asy, t 1e pr i ' • I . . . rre bcha,•ior and alti tude t rnn zmes. ) re fl eet tl1 c fa' ct th at Dacie) is mo1c inmb , 7 Non eth eless, I wonder if work produced prior to Jarclinc's 1987 challenge ha physical I ) pe or age ra nge . been overlooked, especia ll y \\ ork that do es not adhere to an appropriate . . t th e norm 111an\ I) ac 11c y to n· fo und in agenda or to an assumed level of theo retical sophisticati on. The J 995 pub· 14 Whi le such rape fant a ir ate n ~ ·. . , ra lC' .violencc and v n rape. lication of Co 11 stm cti11 g Jltfa sculinity makes th is q11 cstio11 al l the more per· Drumm er and l!a11 cljobs nrnguz 111 C's 111 ro1p o R ,, .T om Bank ' H ew tinenl, since th e coll ecti on as a whole fai ls to ack11ow lcdge or incorporate Sec, fo r exampl e, Hand y Boyd's '' Hrst R o~ 111 o111 p, o1 any wo rk clon e by eith er ''prof emini t" scholars or "lllyth opoeti c" writer. Boys in the Cell Bl ock,'' both from l/ancf:Jobs . As one of th e contribut ors ex plains, •·the auth ors were asked [by th e edi· . . I , f . I cscnt ed an initial, rough ve r ion of tors] to imagine th e goals of a criti cal men's 111o vc 111 c11t" (Fung 292), a · if 15 Th is ca ual in terview orcurrcc u tr 1 pr • . 1· . HT u y s uch a movement did 11 01 already ex is t. the current essay at I I1 c con f r i. c ncc.. . Contes ted exlla lites _ _ . Bin ghamto n, March 199--k 8 This resistance is omewhat un der tandable. Alice Jardi ne suggests that 111e11 · ti · t his u c of ''fr 11 11. 111 . z cl'' ~ houl d not be mi taken for have said no th ing yet, or nothing ha been said as it shoul d be said, \\hich 16 A1 tI 10 11 g Il I1 e c Ia 1111 s rn · , . li on (often via women "f .. e'' (77) but instead Oll i) rcnrct. men epata l .. l " raises th e issue of whr th er men's voices wi ll be lt carcl by wolll en, fe minist , cn11n111 ...... al earth y mascu 1111 Y , 1ll ) from th c 11 trac 111 ion . academi cs, un less 111 e 11 arc saying what th ese overlappi ng gro ups wi h to and tI 1 e women movcni . . I" . fl ct ·•f minine'' ge nd er hear. This is a clear conc· crn fo r ma ny of th <' oftc11 li osti]c 111 c 11 's 111 ovc>111c111 (78) the charactcri ti cs h lists ti ''fen11111 zec ic . ·t ons icl er also ' I . . 1tl c oa th erer, conso1 . writers, especiall y tli c men's ri ghts advocates. In her introducti o11 lo stereotypes: soft, 11 lmts. ive, g 1 ' b · I , a tl1ru tin" · I · I ''Mountarn s la\ c. 0 Wo men Respond to th e Men 's Mo ve 111 e11t , for exa n1 ple, Kay Leigh Haga n, Kipnis' later descriptions of 11aturr in w '11c I I 111 IJ1·acinrr nu rt ur- I ·1 va ys rn ve an c b ' reiterates Ka thl een Ca rlin's observa ti on th at "gath erings where 'men talk erec t maleness about t1 1 c 111 · · · w 11 c Tl Politics r Jl1a11/i ood, . . . . f ·1 f .. ·1 ,. (111 ) Thro11 rr11 out ie 0'J lo men about men' are nothing if not ordina ry in our society'' (xiii). Whi le mg, 1nv1tmg f'rl1 e m111111 1 Y · b . l. vid nt in th e profemini st cri ti cs cI oc uni n t ti 1r ra111 1)an.t e sentI' 1a t cen1 rn nbo t xces- her point is un derstandabl e, it also ignores th e fa ct th at lllalc ga therings ~ 11 in whi ch men di scuss th eir ex peri ence as gendered ~ ubj eC' t s arc hardly the works of mythopocts, <'S peciall y Bl y. Jed. D10n01~ 11 c s col 1 ~ 16) .. many of th . t .th tancl1n rr ( 1a111on< • ' c • staple of cultu ra ll y sancti onecl male bo nding cxperie 11 C' cs. sive acucl cn11 c trea t111 cnts no wt • ' b . · , th eo reti ca l men's movement I xts cou 11c 1J C' ne f°l1 from "a more .:d en . . I\ f cl r a 1 9 Clallerbra ugh makes this marginali za ti on explicit in hi s chapter ''A View from understanding of gender, . p c1. a II B1i tler' th eon za t1 011 o ge1 perfo rmance. 34 35 Schopp (De >Constructing Daddy 17 Tl · .· f :1efi 11ab1~~ ~ th e Daddy/ on erotica found in flandjobs, Dru111111 er, Doin Works Cited . Da~rl aH .l and. on the In Lernel reflect a on who wi II i ngl y u bmi L Lo i h~ c y. ?wev.e1, Ollie stones depi ct a on who either has to forc e D·1clcl Abelo ve, Henry. "Freud, Mal Homo cxualiLy and th e Am ri can " to recognize h1 own desire, or has to '" turn th e lables" D I I r , . y · · J • on ac Jy 1orc111g The Lesbian and Cay tudies Reader. Ed . Ilenry Abelove, I11111 1 rnto t l e passive. rol e . More i. gn1T i cant l y, t I1 e rl1 cton. . u ed is alm a wa y one of clolll111ance and ubmi ion , a11d th e I . . f o t Michele Aina Baral , David M. Jl alperin. NewYork: Routl edge, connected to watching Dad abdicate some of hi s po!: e r~ t ~ 11l ~so 1 01,~. sce111 · 1993. 381-395. Banks, Tom. "New Boy in th II Block." Handjobs eplember 18 To sodm e ex,·tent, I would agree, especia ll y in Califia's coJl ec tion. In Handiobs (1998): 26-33. fantasan on t. 1e el ' howeve . r ' th e m· ce t '· pretty c I ea r. In many instances 'J the Be rge r, Maurice, Brian Wa lli and imon Wat on, eel . Constructing inhab/~ i.s about a literal boy, not a fi gurative role an adult male or fe1:1 ale Masculinity. New York: Routledg , 1995. Bly, Robert. Iron John. R acling, Ma aehu ell : Addi on-We ley, 19As justoneexa. mple ' see Pl11. l CIu1 ..st1an ',,Truckerclacl Part 2 " . ,, . I I 1990. Son descnbes th e pain/plea ure he experi ences as hi s D·' m" 11 c 1 ~ ie Boone, Joseph A. and Mi cha I Cadden. Engendering Men: Th e fu cks him and nearl y chokes him. ad spanks 111 111, QLLestion of Male Feminist Criticism. New York: Routledge, 1990. Boyd, Randy. "Rest Room Romp.'' /landjobs December (1997): 43- 46 Brod, llarry. '"Th PolitiC' . of the Mythopo ti · M 11'. Mo v menl." Ki lllmel Politics 89-96. Butl er, Judith. ''Imitation and G ncl r In ubordination.'' In side/Out: Lesbia n Th eories, CaJ Th eories . Ed. T iana Fu . N " York: Rau t I edg , 199 l. l :3-:3 l. Ca lifia, Pal. Jntroclur ti on. Doing it .for Daddy: hort and exy Fiction about a Verr Forbidden Fantas_y. Bo Lon: Aly on Publication Inc., 1994. Clui ti an, Phil. "Trurk rel ad Part 2. '' llandjobs March (1998): 42-45. Clallcrbraugh, Kenn th. Contemporary Perspecti1 es on Masculinity: Me n, Wom en and Politics in Modern ociety. Bould r: W Lvie' Pre , 1990. - . ''Mythopo ti c Foundation .'' Kimm I Politics 44-63. Corn au, Gu y. Absent Fath ers, Lost ons: Th e earch for Ma scu lin e lde ntitr . Bo ton: hambhalu Pr , 1991. Da h, Mike. "B tw n and B I\ ixl in th M n' Mov m nt.'' Kimmel Politics 355-36 J. Dia mond, Jed. '"Twcnty-F iv ars in th Men' Mov 111 nt.'' K1mm el Politics 313-320. D'Emilio, John. exual Politics, exual Communities: Th e Mahng of a Homos exual MinoritJ' in th e United tales 1940-1970. hi cago and London: Th Univ r it . of hi cago Pre , 1983. Edward , Tim. " Beyond x and G ncl r: Ma culinity, Homo xualil and ocial Th ory," in Men Masculinities and ocial Th eory. Eels. Jeff Hearn and Da id Morgan. London: Unw in and ll_1 11 ian 36 37 Schopp (De )Constructing Daddy Ltd., 1990. 110-123. . "Gazi ng into Men's Middle : Fire in the Belly and the Fung, Richard. '"Burden of Repre en la lion, Burd n of Respon ihil Sa bo, Do n . . . 61] 72 ity." Berger, WalJ i and Wa t on 291-296. Me n's Mo ve ment.'' Kimmel Politics ·- . ' Hagan, Kay Leigh. Women Respond to th e Men 's Mo vement. an Schwa lbe, Michael. Unlocking .'he !Cro~ Cage~ T; e/:r.~~ ~:r~:~;l ~ ::t~ Franci co: Pandora' Pre , 1992. Gender Politics, and Amen can u lure. . Hearn, Jeffrey and David Morgan. Men, Masculinities and ocial vers ily Press, 1996. . . d M l S I . k E e Ko ofa ky. Betw<'e n Men: English L1t eraillre an a e Th eory. London: Unwin Hyman Ltd., 1990. ec gw1c ' .J v. l D . . Nnw York· Columbia Uni vc r ity Pres ' 1985. Jardine, Alice. ''Men in Femini m: Odor di Uomo or Compagnon de /lomosocia esire. \. . l U . - . The Epistemology of th e Closet. Berk eley and Lo Ange e : n1- Roule?" Ed . Ali ce Jardine and Pa ul mi lh. Men in Feminism . New York: Routledge, 1987. ver ity of California Pre , l 9~ 0. . . . . en Slo w Motion· Changwg MascuhnLl), Changing M . Keen, am. Fire in th e Belly: On Being a Man. New York: Bantam, Seg a l , L y nn e . · 1991. London: Vi rago Pre ' 1990. ' C l Kimmel, Mi chael, ed. Th e Politics of Manhood: Profeminist Men Seidman, Leven. "lclcnlily and Politic in a 'Po '.'.nocl ~rn G;y Qu:er Respond to th e Mythopoetic Men 's Move ment (And the Lure: ome Hi lori cal ancl Conceptual Not s, in. ea~ ;, a. . Planet: Queer Politics and Theory.' Ed. Mythopoetic l eaders Answer). Philadelphia: Templ e Uni versity o~ia l M1 ~ h ae -~~,;~ i. Pre , 1995. Mi nneapolis: Univ r ity of Minne ola Pi es.' 1993. lO~k 1 Sil verman, Kaj a. Ma le ubjectivit y a l th e Margins. N w 101 anc Kimmel, Mi chael and Mi chael Kauffman. ''We k ' tHI Warrior : Th e New Men' Move m nt. " Kimm el Politics J5-4: 3. London: H.ou ti dg , 1992. . l Al)t .g<.1..1 1 • '" M,· ll Trouhl .'' Berge r, Wa ll1 ~ allC Kimm el, Mi chael and Mi chael A. M s 11 r, ds. Men 's Lives. Bo Lo u: Solomon-Coc I rau, Allyn and Bacon , 1995. \Vu tson 69-76. .1 L 'k Faiher· Vogl Gregory Max and lr phcn T. irriclg . L i ~·e on, Lye ·k· Pl . Kimmel, Mi cha l and Thoma E. Mosmill r, eel . Against th e Tide: ' . d . M , l , s New or num /lealing the Fath er-.. on Woun rn en s Ll e · · Profeminist Men in th e United Stales 1776-1990, A Documentary History. Bo ton: Beacon Pre , 1992. Pre , 1991. . t· ,. · Engen- Warne r, Mi cha l. ''Ilomo- Narci . i ~ m; or, l l . l . ro e~ u.a .'L y, 111 Kipni , Aaron R. Knights Without Armor: A Practical Guide f or Men 1 derin g Men: Th e Qu eslion of Male Femt111 sl Cnltcism. j in Quest of Masculine Soul. Los Angele : Jcr my P. Tarch r, Inc., E;I 1991. Joseph A. Boon and Michael Cadd n. N w York: Rout cg ' - . "The Po Lfe mini l Men' Mo ve ment. " Kimm el Politics 275-286. 1990. 190-206. - . "69: ex in Pub Ii c ,'' pr en Led al th Uni ver i I. of Roche Ler, Lears, Jack 0 11. No Place of Crace: Antimodernism and th e Tran sfor Roc hester, NY. D cemb r I , 1993. mation of American Culture 1880-1920. New York: Pa11tli co11 Boo ks, 198 1. Lea vi LL , David. Family Dancing . New York: Wa rner Books, ] 983. Mitscherlich, Alexand er. Society Without the Father. N w York : Harper Pere1111j al, 1993. Mohr, Ri chard D. Gay Ideas: Outing and Other Controlle rsies. Bo ton: Beacon Press, 1992. Moore, Robert and Douglas Cillete, ed . King, Warrio 1 ~ Magician, Lover: Rediscovering the Archetypes of the Mature Mas culine. an • Francisco: J l arper, J 990. Morgan, David J l.J. Discovering Men. New Yo rk: Routledge, J 992. Rubin, Gayle. '"The Traffic in Women: No le Toward a Po litical Economy of ex." Toward and Anthropology of Wo men. Ed. Rayna Reiter. New York: Mon thly Review Pres , 1975. 157-210. 38 39