The Role of Agency in Men’s Performative Sexual Storytelling

By Ekim Luo, University of Southern California

Editor

Building upon Foucoult’s notion that social control is an essential element in shaping our discourse regarding sexuality, Butler expands it further with a critical truth: our existence, and the identity that we have built upon our being, are active processes of constructing gender. Indeed, through analyzing Simone de Beauvoir’s notion of “becoming”, Butler distinguishes sex from gender and points out the element of performativity (Butler, 1986). The notion of performativity is a thought-provoking one: as one “becomes” one’s gender, to what extent is the performative act of “becoming” active or passive? How much of our “becoming” is through our own social construction, and how much has society constructed for us? In other words, what aspects fall into the realms of the subliminal - the unknowing, the unconscious, the non-cognitive - and what aspects fall into the realms of the conscious? Specifically, this paper examines storytelling of sexual activities among men, such as “locker room talk”, as a performativity through which the masculine identity is constructed and reinforced. Moreover, upon examination of the role of agency in the participation of such storytelling, both active and passive aspects of such a performativity exist.

It has long been known that semantics and narrative crucially and, in many cases, subliminally construct and reinforce social hierarchies. For example, an observational study following the in-class storytelling of fifth-graders in Brazil found that the stories being told in schools constructed a masculine hegemony, rendering such schools part of the heterosexual matrix (Moita-Lopes, 2003). Furthermore, the participation in such storytelling meant that the students were actively constructing their gender identity through the explicit and implicit social notions of masculinity and femininity. In other words, participating in such storytelling through active or passive listening establishes a performativity (Jordan, 1989). One such prominent case of storytelling is “locker room talk”, characterized by the stereotypical storytelling that takes place between men and tends to center around their sexual activities. In fact, research has found that such storytelling helps reinforce masculinity through mechanisms of social pressure and male bonding. For example, due to peer pressure that perceives male sexual desires for females and a distaste for homosexuals as important elements to masculinity, studies have found that “locker room talk” generally centered around women, objectified women, encouraged sexism and rape culture (Curry, 1991). In fact, research has attributed gang rape in fraternity houses to the sexual storytelling as a way of male bonding (Sanday, 1990). Evidently, such storytelling among men appears to be a type of performativity with traumatic outcomes for both sexes.

Moreover, sexual storytelling among men have dire consequences for male-female relationships by creating distance between the sexes. Such distance encourages increasingly inaccurate perceptions of other sexes, built on misogyny, excused for as a means to establishing masculinity and male bonding. Consequently, it reinforces an ingroup versus outgroup mentality that divides membership by a binary gender faultline. Indeed, men appear to prioritize male-male friendships over male-female friendships. They cite higher “social fulfilment” and “better conflict resolution” as pros for male friendships while citing the “emotional lives” as cons for female friendships (Robinson et al., 2018). Meanwhile, research has found platonic male-female friendships to be consistently “feminizing”, since male bonding is ingrained in the storytelling of sexual activities (Flood, 2008). Not only is such a misogyny-originated distance dehumanizing to women as well as detrimental to healthy platonic friendships across the sexes, it has meant crippling representation of women on screen from the adult film industry to action movies: women are routinely portrayed under the male gaze and struggles to escape the objectification that comes with their characters on screen. Meanwhile, such a performative reinforcement of masculinity based on patriarchy and abuse obliterates non-conforming gender identities as it fundamentally underscores the binary perception of gender. Indeed, narratives, private or public, play crucial roles in shaping and reinforcing heteronormative gender identities.

It is important to note that such misogynistic storytelling is a form of performativity. In other words, the collective performance of men sharing and listening to their sexual encounters with women constructs and reinforces normative masculinity. Coherent with Simone de Beauvoir’s differentiation between sex and gender, this type of performativity is the construction of gender through both discourse and subliminal power mechanisms. However, given the disastrous effects of such storytelling activities, the question arises: how much of it is active or passive performativity? Is there a sense of agency behind such a performative act, and if so, where does it lie?

To address the role of agency, one may categorize the participation in sexual storytelling into passive engagement and active initiation. Imagine a group of young men standing around in the locker room: a few of them were leaning against the wall, listening and laughing, while one is particularly loud and sharing his most recent sexual encounter with a female peer of theirs with enthusiasm and pride. In this scenario, there are passive listeners, and there is an active talker. It would be tempting to excuse the listeners and to largely allocate the misogyny in such a locker room upon the talker. However, to consider the listener as passive would be to assume the lack of agency on his side. Yet, there appears to be different aspects of said agency in such a scenario: from the perspective of social pressure, manifested in the blatant way in which men may be observed by each other as they shared and listened to such sexual storytelling, it would appear that the observation may take part of that agency away. Indeed, the passive participation in such misogynistic activities, despite their harmful consequences, may be interpreted as an act of social obedience.

And yet, for agency to substantiate its full validity, it must have no limits - the choice of passive participation in social norms, regardless of the nature of such social norms, must remain with the agent. Moreover, one could argue that the nature of social norms is fluid and constantly evolving: a social norm that originated from oppression and the construction of social hierarchy may not necessarily subscribe to the same meaning today. The implications of such unlimited agency extend to a wide range of sociocultural practices. One may choose to wear makeup, one may choose to stay at home for childrearing purposes, just as one may choose to pursue higher education or reject the institution of marriage. For example, the role of agency in women has shifted the perception in feminist scholars focused on non-Western societies. While Arab and Muslim women have been perceived as “passive and submissive beings” for decades, the idea that agency may exists despite the hierarchy that instills oppression, and that it may be considerably more nuanced, has provided an alternative understanding of women’s agency (Mahmood, 2001). Moreover, the processes of performativity that underlies the act of “becoming” necessarily entail that part of such processes remain unconscious, non-cognitive, and as far as social norms go, may not be rational. Therefore, be it a passive or active participation of social norms, the advancement or resistance towards such social norms is irrelevant to the limits of agency: building upon the assumption that agency translates into free will, either negative or positive depending on the costs and benefits of outcomes, and may be both unconscious or conscious. In other words, as Mahmood points out, the sociocultural processes that construct the notion and practice of agency do not originate from a blank slate, but have existed prior to the formation of the agent’s identity.

Therefore, in understanding the subliminal processes behind such agency, it may be argued that the agent of a passive listener may not necessarily “choose” to participate in such sexual storytelling in that such a choice was not made consciously or rationally, but that the choice to participate, and consequently, absorb the oppressive influences of misogynistic activities, was made for them. For example, Leone and Parrot found that the bystander effect specific to sexual aggression has subliminal but harmful effects: higher exposure to peers who engage in sexist acts and hold sexist attitudes increases the likelihood of the bystander effect. (2019). In other words, the passive listener in the scenario mentioned above would be more likely to not intervene when a woman is faced with sexual aggression. To extend it further, one could go on to argue that the passive choice the agent “makes” to listen is within the rights of a free agent with the full capacity of agency.

However, it would be helpful to explore the nuances of agency and distinguish the difference between the subliminal and the conscious. While the unconscious mind absorbs a large amount of information, a small percentage of that information actually emerges in one’s consciousness (Mlodinow, 2013). Classical computationalism provides a relatable framework for understanding subliminal versus cognitive thought processes: imagine the human brain to be a computer, and that there is a working desk. A significant amount of algorithms and computations happen in the background while the working desk does not always show such algorithm (Fodor, 1983). This means that a significant amount of computations and underlying processes may not be accessible to the “working desk”, or the consciousness, which may be interpreted as the cognitive or thinking layer of the human mind. In other words, the power of agency may rest with both the computations that supply the working desk with information and influence the decision-making that happens in our consciousness as well as the algorithm that remains inaccessible to our consciousness.

This analogy points to the fact that there are sociocultural factors that shape normative values, which in turn shape certain normative behaviors and conscious thoughts. However, these factors may largely remain invisible and difficult to analyze as they hide behind our consciousness. As it follows, if agency were to be related to the consciousness instead of being interpreted as the passive choice associated with the subliminal and normative sociocultural factors, then agency must entail the resistance of such subliminal influences that push forward social pressures. This should especially be the case when such social pressures not only originate from oppression, hierarchy and produce harmful effects to the society, but also continue to evolve in the same direction. In other words, given the context that normative values may evolve in different directions despite their origins of either positive or negative social construction, the power of agency may manifest itself in the form of active resistance when the normative culture begins or continues to instil oppression.

In the case of sexual storytelling, then, the bystander, while fulfilling the performativity required socially to fortify their masculine identity, has the power of agency to resist such social norms but may passively decides not to. While their capacity for agency is established, a disconnection between their agency and their subliminal mind exists. In other words, while they appear to have the choice to resist, it would also appear that most choose not to under peer pressure. As a result, they willfully but unknowingly participate in the performative act of “becoming” that instills the irrational social hierarchy and oppression.

However, building upon the understanding that the power of agency entails active and conscious resistance, the argument that the bystanders or listeners may not be held responsible, or that the speaker actively sharing their latest sexual encounter may be excused as they were merely participating in the normative culture which is invisible, subliminal and largely inaccessible, becomes fully invalidated. One may argue that this notion of agency associated fully with the conscious, the cognitive and the thinking conflicts with the idea that agency must by nature entail no limits on the range of choices that one makes. For example, consider a woman who faithfully believes in the sanctity of a sexually and emotionally monogamous marriage. One may argue that her agency is compromised as her choice is passive due to its conformity to normative values. However, it is important to note that conformity does not automatically entail unconsciousness, and that agency does not equate choices that resist normative values. In fact, full agency should entail a range of choices that may conform or resist normative values on a spectrum, and that agency should entail thinking.

The process of thinking can be seen as the process of bringing the subliminal into the consciousness. It is the transformation of the invisible, the unconscious, the norms that underlie the construction of society and create oppression as well as privilege into the knowing, the cognitive, and the conscious. Therefore, to examine the role of agency in a performative act, one must tease apart the level of consciousness involved in such an act. A woman who has considered her options and chosen a monogamous marriage to vest her faith in still retains her agency, and a bystander who is aware of the nature of sexual storytelling that takes place in the locker room still retains their agency. It is in the conscious thinking, the examination of what is subliminal and invisible, and the questioning of the normative values and behaviors that insidiously hide behind the “working desk” of the human mind that resistance lies. For without such questioning, the awakening cannot begin, and the resistance cannot substantiate into reality.

Since the Age of Enlightenment, the rational thinker has long been framed as a worshiped and uniquely human face. On exploring the role of agency and the argument that sociocultural factors may convolute the power of agency, it is important to argue that the role of agency and resistance do not lie in the level of conformity to normative values, but lies in the level of thinking and the processes beneath the cognitive efforts that transform the subliminal to the conscious. In the scenario of a misogynistic performance such as the “locker room talk” where men reinforce their masculine identity and bonding, numerous researchers have identified such acts as detrimental to male-female relationships. Indeed, such storytelling solidifies the objectification of women, reinforces the oppression of women, yet evades adequate social scrutiny as it hides behind the seemingly valid argument that there was simply a lack of agency due to the peer pressure - that it was, in fact, “just locker room talk”. However, upon exploring the nuances of agency and the role of necessary resistance, it becomes clear that while sociocultural factors subliminally reinforce sexism and toxic masculinity, the rational thinker must leap forward with much-needed questioning in order to consciously push the discourse forward in a positive direction.

---

References

Butler, J. (1986). Sex and gender in Simone de Beauvoir's Second Sex. Yale French Studies, (72), 35-49.

Curry, T. J. (1991). Fraternal bonding in the locker room: A profeminist analysis of talk about competition and women. Sociology of sport journal, 8(2), 119-135.

Flood, M. (2008). Men, sex, and homosociality: How bonds between men shape their sexual relations with women. Men and masculinities, 10(3), 339-359.

Fodor, J. A. (1983). The modularity of mind. MIT press.

Jordan, B. (1989). Cosmopolitical obstetrics: Some insights from the training of traditional midwives. Social science & medicine, 28(9), 925-937.

Leone, R. M., & Parrott, D. J. (2019). Misogynistic peers, masculinity, and bystander intervention for sexual aggression: Is it really just “locker‐room talk?”. Aggressive behavior, 45(1), 42-51.

Mahmood, S. (2001). Feminist theory, embodiment, and the docile agent: Some reflections on the Egyptian Islamic revival. Cultural anthropology, 16(2), 202-236.

Mlodinow, L. (2013). Subliminal: How your unconscious mind rules your behavior. Vintage.

Moita-Lopes, L. P. (2003). Storytelling as action: Constructing masculinities in a school context. Pedagogy, Culture and Society, 11(1), 31-47.

Robinson, S., Anderson, E., & White, A. (2018). The bromance: Undergraduate male friendships and the expansion of contemporary homosocial boundaries. Sex Roles, 78(1-2), 94-106.

Sanday, P. R. (1992). Fraternity gang rape: Sex, brotherhood, and privilege on campus. NYU Press.