Australian Army Journal

GENDER AND SEXUALITY
Sexuality, Cohesion, Masculinity and
Combat Motivation: Designing Personnel
Policy to Sustain Capability
33 L. Liesen, ‘Feminists Need to Look Beyond Evolutionary Psychology for Insights into Human
Reproductive Strategies: A Commentary’, Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, Vol. 6, No. 12,
2012, pp. 1–7.
34 P.P. Giorgi, ‘Not Killing Other People’ in Nonkilling Societies, Pim (ed), p. 91.
35 Johnson, D.D.P., et al., Overconfidence in wargames: experimental evidence on expectations,
aggression, gender and testosterone. Proceedings of the Royal Society, 2006. 273: p. 2515-
2520.
36 Traditional constructions of hegemonic masculinities include risk-taking, self-discipline,
physical toughness and/or muscular development, aggression, violence, emotional control and
overt heterosexual desire. R. Hinojosa, ‘Doing Hegemony: Military, Men, and Constructing a
Hegemonic Masculinity’, The Journal of Men’s Studies, Vol. 18, 2010, pp. 179–94.
37 Browne, ‘The relevance of sex differences in risktaking to the military and the workplace’, p. 122.
38 The central thesis of David Grossman in his book On Killing: the Psychological Cost of Learning
to Kill in War and Society, Little Brown and Company, Boston, 1996.
39 L.N. Rosen, K.H. Knudson and P. Fancher, ‘Cohesion and the Culture of Hypermasculinity in
U.S. Army Units’, Armed Forces & Society, Vol. 29, 2003, pp. 325–51.
40 Across different cultures, warrior tribes have been observed to become sexually aroused before
going into battle. I. Eibl-Eibesfeldt, The Biology of Peace & War Men, Animals & Aggression,
Viking, New York, 1979.
41 M.L. Roberts, What Soldiers Do: Sex and the American GI in World War II in France, University
of Chicago Press, 2013.
42 G.T. Woods III, Women in the Infantry - The Effect on the Moral Domain, United States Army
Command and General Staff College, 1992, p. 17.
43 B. Wadham, Mogan Hunts and Pig Nights: Military Masculinities and the Making of the Arms-
Corps Soldier, Australian Sociological Association, Melbourne, 2004.
44 M. Flood, ‘Men, Sex, and Homosociality: How Bonds between Men Shape Their Sexual
Relations with Women’, Men and Masculinities, Vol. 10, 2008, p. 339.
45 N. O’Dochartaigh, ‘Bloody Sunday: Error or Design?’, Contemporary British History, Vol. 24,
No. 89, 2010, p. 89.
46 A. King, ‘The Existence of Group Cohesion in the Armed Forces: A Response to Guy Siebold’,
Armed Forces & Society, Vol. 33, No. 4, 2007, pp. 638–45.
47 G.L. Siebold, ‘The Essence of Military Group Cohesion’, Armed Forces & Society, Vol. 33,
2007, p. 291.
48 A. King, ‘The Word of Command: Communication and Cohesion in the Military’, Armed Forces
& Society, Vol. 32, 2006, p. 493.
49 Noting that this does not exclude hyper-masculine culture in some Special Forces.
50 Smith, The Most Dangerous Animal, p. 82.
51 Dentan, ‘Nonkilling Social Arrangements’, p.134.
52 Worldwide, a small proportion of children’s genetic fathers are not the purported father. M.
Gilding, ‘Rampant Misattributed Non-paternity’, People and Place, Vol. 13, 2005.
53 M.D. Baker Jr and J.K. Maner, ‘Risk-taking as a situationally sensitive male mating strategy’,
Evolution and Human Behavior, Vol. 29, 2008, pp. 391–95.
54 M. deYoung in Women in the military, Rita James Simon (ed), Transaction Publishers, 2001, pp.
155–60.
Australian Army Journal
Culture edition 2013, Volume X, Number 3 Page 76