Brothers and Lovers in Arms: Negotiating Male Homosexuality with Military Masculinity in the New People’s Army, Philippines

Mainstream scholarship on gender and violent conflict has mostly marginalized issues of men, masculinities and sexualities, particularly heteronormativity. Studies on military organizations have shown little interest in gender, despite the fact that it is very much a gendered institution. This paper aims to contribute to the theorizing of relationships between military masculinity, and heteronormativity, in the context of a revolutionary movement with a Marxist/communist ideology, and thus open a new agenda for research. Specifically, this exploratory research examines the Communist Party of the Philippines’ (CPP) recognition of same-sex relationships and marriage, especially in its armed wing, the New People’s Army (NPA). In looking at how male homosexuality, in particular, is negotiated with military masculinity in the army, the issue is analyzed at different levels: ideology, institutions, subjective identities, and symbols. The author argues for a rethinking of essentialist views of gender and sexuality. As separate but mutually constitutive domains of power, both are regarded as products of specific histories, and thus highly fluid and variable. Applied to military institutions, the concept of a hegemonic ‘military masculinity’ tied to compulsory heterosexuality is challenged, and a space for the recognition of plural military masculinities is opened, as demonstrated by the NPA experience. Finally, the author advances the use of situated intersectionality as an analytical concept to address gender and heteronormativity in their particular socio-spatial context, such as the New People’s Army. Relevance to Development Studies: For so long, development was seen to be a gender-neutral process. While there is now growing scholarship on gender and development, there is still a lack of methodical and analytical consideration of the relationships between gender and heteronormativity that constitute the lived realities of people. This paper highlights the need to rethink gender in development as a field that not only narrowly addresses “women’s issues”, but should also encompass the study of men, masculinities and sexualities as part of gender(ed) relations.