(Un)dressing masculinity: The body as a site of ethno-gendered resistance

Data collection

The current study is part of an extensive study based on 60 interviews with soldiers serving in two combat infantry brigades considered to be the most professional in the Israeli army (30 soldiers in each brigade). The interviews were held during 2006–2007. Each lasted between one and two hours and was recorded and transcribed. The interviews were held with soldiers who had completed their compulsory military service one to three years previously, since it is not permitted to interview soldiers during their service. However, since soldiers in Israel continue to serve in the army reserves until the age of 40 (for at least 30 days a year), we assumed that gathering retrospective accounts from our participants after a short period would not significantly affect their accounts. In addition, the relatively short period that had passed since they had become reservists was another way of ensuring accurate reporting of their experiences in the military.

Snowball sampling was employed, such that once the first interviewees had been located in various ways (for example, researchers’ personal contacts or public notices), they then helped us contact other interviewees. In order to overcome the similarity bias of this sampling method, different sources were selected from varied social networks and from various geographical areas (students at a university in Jerusalem, a college in the coastal plains, friends of students, family friends, a notice in the local supermarket, etc.). As a result, the soldiers interviewed were from a variety of localities (villages, kibbutz settlements, large cities, small cities, etc.), had varied lifestyles (socioeconomic status, family background, practices, etc.), were from varied religious backgrounds (religious, secular, atheist) and had different ethnic backgrounds in a way that accords, more or less, with Israeli official demographic reports (almost 40% Mizrachi, 30% Ashkenazi, nearly 30% mixed).

The interviews were semi-structured, and the interviewees were presented with a number of similar questions in order to structure the interview to ensure that, as far as possible, we received all the data we were looking for in our questions. However, interviewees were at liberty to expand beyond what they were directly asked, and they were encouraged to exemplify their answers by telling stories, on the assumption that these stories could enrich the data. All interviews began with a general question about the interviewees’ military service in order to generate a pleasant atmosphere and comfortable setting. We assumed that even the first general answer would disclose relevant information regarding the brigades’ organizational culture. Following this question, the soldiers were asked specific questions regarding the most characteristic features of their brigade, their organizational identity and the perception of a combat soldier. The following questions were presented to the interviewees:

Since ethnicity is a significant component both in the Israeli context and in the organizational cultures of these two brigades—Golani and Paratroopers, often the topic was spontaneously raised in interviews even when we did not directly ask about it. After realizing that ethnicity is a central motif in the interviewees’ identity, we added some direct questions driven from the main topics raised in the first interviews (see the three last questions above). Thus it is important to emphasize that the interviewees’ preoccupation with ethnicity was something that was raised of their own accord.

We could easily communicate with the interviewees due to our own experience in the army (military service in Israel is obligatory both for men and women); however, as female researchers, who did not serve as combat soldiers, we had to bridge the gaps of gender and age with the younger male interviewees. We therefore exerted serious efforts to create a comfortable atmosphere to share their stories by utilizing our own prior knowledge regarding the brigades and by sharing small talk about the army. However, we presume that the gender and age differences had some impact on the answers we got from the interviewees. Even though we are unable to pinpoint the effect, it did at least offer a number of benefits since the status of ‘stranger’ grants researchers qualities not available to insiders [for instance, Lomsky-Feder (1996), indicates the openness, honesty and freedom made possible in the encounter with the stranger, specifically between male soldiers and a female researcher]. Concretely, we found that we could ask about the most taken-for-granted matters that perhaps would have been missed by interviewers with a background in the combat units of the Israeli military (Ben-Ari, 1998).

In addition to age and gender, there was also, in some of the interviews, an ethnic difference between interviewer and interviewee. Since ethnicity is at times evident by skin colour, our own ethnic (white/Ashkenazi) origin was apparent during some of the interviews, and in some cases was directly discussed. However, it is important to note that differences in skin colour are not always evident since mixed marriages (Ashkenazim and Mizrahim) are common in the Israeli context and since ethnic differences are less overt than racial differences (see more detailed explanations in the theoretical section).

Even though we were concerned at first that soldiers from a different ethnic origin would find it difficult to share their stories with us—two middle-class Ashkenazi women—we discovered that, ironically, the interviews with soldiers from the same ethnic origin as ours required much more effort. The main reason for this difficulty stemmed from the fact that Ashkenazi soldiers expressed doubts regarding the validity and relevance of ethnicity in contemporary Israeli society. Such an attitude corresponds with the theoretical literature on whiteness and other hegemonic groups, where ethnicity becomes transparent and apparently irrelevant (Dyer, 1997; Frankenberg, 1997). Ashkenazim, who served in the Golani brigade, where team members constantly reminded them of their difference, were attentive to their ethnicity, but those who served in the Paratroopers were mostly indifferent to it. In contrast, Golani soldiers were very aware of their ethnic identity in both cases. As a result, the interviews with Golani soldiers were longer and more detailed, and provided a richer platform for analysis in the current study.

Despite these difficulties, we believe we succeed in drawing out the interviewees to talk about their ethnic and masculine identity by asking more questions without implying our own assumptions and without insisting on evoking camouflaged emotions that the interviewees did not mention by themselves.

Background of the case study: the Golani Brigade and the Paratroopers Brigade in the Israeli context

In order to better understand the social and historical context from which our interviewees draw their interpretations, we shall briefly sketch the historical ethos of both brigades. It is essential to the understanding of our case study to link this historical heritage with the previous section, where we elaborated the ethnic structure of Israeli society, since they are both echoed in the process of identity construction of both brigades as well as exemplifying the link between extra-organizational and intra-organizational identities.

This research project is based on a comparison between two leading combat infantry brigades in the Israeli army–the Paratroopers Brigade and the Golani Brigade–which were chosen as research foci due to their identical designations (they are assigned the same equipment, undergo the same training and are used for similar missions) but with very different organizational culture and image. On the one hand, as both are infantry brigades, they are combat soldiers required to do physical work, and they engage in combat and operational activities. On the other hand, the army has for years replicated the ethnic structure of Israeli society and, as a result, each of the brigades still has a very different cultural and ethnic image. They are also perceived very differently in Israeli public opinion. The long-standing rivalry between the two units as well as the existing stereotypical perceptions of the identity of each group was the main justification for choosing these brigades as our research foci.

The Paratroopers Brigade is perceived as prestigious and elitist and is marked by the army itself through distinctive symbols: it is a volunteer-based brigade, reached through a meticulous selection process; its members wear a different uniform (Paratroopers wear their shirts untucked and cinched by a belt); they have different coloured boots (most soldiers have black boots; the Paratroopers wear brown boots); their beret is red and is considered prestigious; and finally, the parachute course qualifies them for Paratrooper’s wings. The Paratroopers brigade was established before the founding of the State of Israel in 1948 and was initially composed of volunteer immigrants from European countries (i.e. Ashkenazim). In time, it defined itself as a distinguished brigade, with a particularly selective admission process and memorable operational successes throughout Israeli history, creating a celebrated heritage which remains at its core. Despite the ethnic diversity that characterizes the brigade nowadays and the unbiased selection process, it is still perceived in Israeli public opinion as a reputable unit with an ‘Ashkenazi’ character, probably since ‘Ashkenaziness’ is still grasped in Israeli society as a status symbol and because of the soldiers who self-select to serve in a unit that matches their own cultural background. However, it is important to note that formally the army does not assign only Ashkenazim to the Paratroopers.

The Golani Brigade had also already been established when the State was founded, but from the beginning it was branded ‘the people’s brigade’, a trademark that has remained a significant motif in its ethos to this day. Golani is not volunteer-based, has no selection processes and is perceived as a brigade that accepts anyone. However, many soldiers want to join Golani due to both its family-like tradition and its ‘Mizrachi’ organizational culture. In contrast to the Paratroopers’ Brigade, which stresses values of excellence and quality, the organizational vision of the Golani Brigade is based on family-like values, mutual support and on ‘management from the heart and soul’ (cited from the military website). Despite the high level of professionalism of both brigades, Golani is known for disciplinary problems among its soldiers, and the press often publishes news stories of mutinies, disobeying of army rules and partaking in other undisciplined behaviours. Therefore, Golani soldiers have become synonymous in Israeli society with wild behaviour, vulgarity, lack of discipline and rebelliousness. Nevertheless, they are still perceived as highly professional soldiers who achieve significant results on the battlefield.

Since all Jewish and Druze citizens in Israel are recruited into the army at age 18, the army has always been perceived as a neutral entity based on impartiality and equality as it provides all citizens an equal opportunity for recruitment and is based on universal objective criteria. However, the various military brigades differ not only professionally but in their organizational and ethnic identity.

Data analysis

To answer our research question about how these two brigades construct and embody their identities, we have based our analysis on an interpretative approach and according to a hermeneutic reading which involves searching for repetitive patterns in order to decipher concealed meanings (Denzin and Lincoln, 1994). Based on Age (2011), we adopt the interpretative approach as our philosophical orientation to grounded theory as a methodology. This approach allowed us to build our understanding of the soldiers’ experiences and interpretations rather than impose a particular framework upon them. We analysed our data in five stages, as illustrated in Figure 1.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 1.

The methodological stages of data analysis.

In our first reading of the interviews, we noticed immediately that soldiers often mentioned their outer appearance as the most prominent factor that differentiates them from the other brigade. We collected all quotes related to daily physical practices, including their references to how to wear their shirts, how to hold the weapon, where to put the beret, how (and whether) to shave and how to expose (or hide) their body, etc.

In the second stage, each of us carried out a second meticulous reading of all quotes and classified them into three main categories: uniform, body maintenance and skin colour. We corroborated these categories by comparing our two separate insights (see exemplary quotes in Appendix A). Even though we noticed that additional practices were used by the soldiers to stage a unique identity, we do not report on them in this article since we agreed that they were related to linguistic aspects rather than to purely bodily practices (e.g. accent, music, jokes).

In the third stage, we noticed that soldiers of both brigades referred to the same three bodily categories but in a completely different manner, marking the unique identity of their brigade. In order to make these differences very overt to outsiders as well as to themselves, they stressed repeatedly that these practices reflect totally different organizational identities. Both of us separately noted these ‘identity markers’ of each brigade, and then we identified similarities between our interpretations in order to validate them.

In the fourth stage we realized that ethnicity played a crucial role in the process of constructing two different professional versions of the same occupation, and was not only a means of demarcating the brigade’s uniqueness. Rather, we found that ethnicity itself as an ‘identity marker’ was used, especially by the Golani soldiers, to stage and show off their own version of the combat soldier. To corroborate this interpretation we returned to some of the interviewees to deepen our understanding of the role of ethnicity both as an ‘identity marker’ and as posing (an)other professional identity that challenges the dominance and prestige attributed to the Paratroopers. We also noticed that soldiers defined the brigade’s ethnic identity both by echoing the ethnic discourse in Israeli society and the particular ethnic heritage of the brigade. These interviews validated not only the importance of ethnicity in staging their identity, but also the role of ethnicity in posing a competing professional organizational model in the military.

It was in the fifth stage that we became aware that ethnicity is not simply a neutral ‘identity marker’, but rather it is used by Golani as a means of resistance to the dominance of the Paratroopers. While the Paratroopers, as mentioned before, did not refer much to ethnicity, as for them it had become transparent, all of the Golani soldiers, including those who are not Mizrachi, referred to ethnicity (and the bodily staging of it to the outer world) as a tool to articulate their resistance to discipline, to the military establishment’s rules and to the dominance and prestige attributed to the Paratroopers.

These five stages (Figure 1) became the basis for our theoretical model, which will be explained at the end of the results section. Moreover, the process of data analysis and sense-making provides a further validation of the interrelation between professional and ethnic identities as well as the ways in which they are all constructed, maintained and resisted through the body, as we show in the section on the findings.

Uniform

One of the most prominent resistance strategies emerging from the findings refers to the soldier’s uniform and its utilization. The Israeli army, like other armies, has clear and strict rules regulating the attire required of its soldiers: an identical, pressed and clean uniform, elastic bands for boots, berets, shirts tucked in, etc. are all aimed at presenting aesthetics of restraint, neatness and well-organized masculinity, projecting power as a direct result of this self-discipline. These regulations are intended mainly for soldiers headed home for vacation and are usually not applied to daily life and training, when combat soldiers dress carelessly, get muddy, daub their faces with camouflage paint and forego order and cleanliness. In practice, this has created two types of military aesthetics: representative aesthetics—defining dress and hygiene rules required from soldiers when encountering civilians in order to represent the army to the non-military surrounding and indoor aesthetics—defining dress and hygiene rules required for training and other daily duties. The indoor aesthetics is implied and unspoken, and therefore generates a ‘grey area’ where rules are equivocal. This aesthetics is not supposed to be seen from the outside, because the soldiers’ ‘dirty work’ is not supposed to be too visible [see also work on butchers by Simpson et al. (2011)].

Soldiers are expected to distinguish between these two kinds of aesthetics, to maintain a clear distinction between them and to know when to display each one. However, soldiers in the two brigades differ in their attitude to these rules: while Paratroopers mostly obey the organizational demand to distinguish between the internal and external aesthetics, Golani soldiers blur the distinction between these two aesthetics and ‘disrupt’ their uniforms and boots to display their unique masculinity, rather than adhere to established military rules. However, since they are key contributors to the core mission of the organization, the military often overlooks these ‘identity expressions’ (see also Anteby, 2008). One tactic utilized by Golani soldiers is to roll up their sleeves and expose manly muscles. Rami, a Mizrachi who served in Golani, describes how Golani soldiers dress when on leave:

When we go home, elastic bands are down and shirts are untucked … Unlike the Paratroopers, we dress sloppily, the dog tag at the back, and we wear second-rate uniforms [work uniforms worn only on base], and we don’t mind having a charge filed against us by the Military Police if necessary. It’s no big deal.

The dress code described by Rami presents a clear grasp of the ‘appropriate’ appearance of Golani soldiers when leaving the base for home. In contrast to Paratrooper soldiers, Golani soldiers wear work clothes intended for internal purposes and show them off even when outside the base. This dress code reflects their refusal to embrace the representative aesthetics of the dress and conduct codes required by the army, and thus expresses a resistance tactic aimed at establishing a different, distinct and alternative identity to that of the combat soldier as exemplified by the image of the disciplined paratrooper. Eliran, a Golani soldier of a mixed ethnic origin, interprets this dress style as part of masculine identity:

In Golani we are men … we roll up our sleeves to show our muscles. We are not very particular about our shirt buttons either … it’s manly and I even used to like it … Today I say to myself what a jerk I was … even in the winter, in the snow, freezing cold—I wouldn’t roll down my sleeves… because I’m a man, I have my dignity, I won’t roll down my sleeves.

Eliran’s words demonstrate how masculinity is presented both by displaying the male body and the aesthetics of exposed muscles as well as by the display of physical endurance in extreme cold. The masculine identity of Golani soldiers, even at the price of physical suffering, is symbolized by rebelling against formal military rules that forbid such exposure of the body. In contrast to the theoretical literature claiming that male bodies are less visible and projected (McDowell and Court, 1994), in this case, it seems that exposure of the body not only has no detrimental effect on masculinity but rather reinforces it and marks it according to the Golani soldiers’ perception as the more appropriate and fitting masculinity. Muscles—symbolizing strength, force and toughness—emphasize the outline of the body, which is partially exposed and capable of bearing the pain and suffering of hard labour in difficult conditions, highlighting its endurance and its manliness.

Radicalization of male performance by displaying the exposed body or by ‘disrupting’ the formal uniform is intended not only for resisting institutional authority, with its strict disciplinary requirements, but also as a means of protest against the dominant model of masculinity represented by the Paratroopers. Resistance to the Paratroopers’ dominant masculinity is, in their eyes, resistance to the establishment, as the Paratroopers’ masculinity is perceived as a symbol of what the establishment defines as the ‘proper masculinity’.

One of the manifestations of resistance against the Paratroopers’ dominant masculinity is the Golani soldiers’ feminization of the Paratroopers. Liran, a Mizrachi soldier serving in Golani, describes the process of feminization as follows:

The Paratroopers are all dandified whities with permanently neat and pressed uniforms … They have a special type of shirt that you wear untucked with a belt over it—it looks like a dress … like a kilt. We laugh at their dress … and the color of their beret, our brown looks much prettier than theirs. [The Golani beret is brown, the Paratroopers’ is red.] What is that red color? It’s like a menstruation on the shoulder … Golani is the exact opposite … when you think of Golani, you immediately think of combat soldiers who make a big mess. Their clothes are always sloppy and the gun is thrown over the shoulder [the gun is supposed to be carried crosswise]… The pants are low … Golani soldiers resemble an Arab Sheikh, a man. [the interviewee used further Arabic expressions to describe the soldiers’ behaviour]

By feminizing the Paratroopers’ masculinity, Golani soldiers reverse social power relations by using traditional gender relations between men and women, and implying an alternative hierarchy. As evident in Liran’s statement, Golani soldiers define their identity while comparing themselves to the Paratroopers, an identity that is constructed mainly on the basis of negation and degradation; the Paratroopers do not compare themselves to other infantry brigades. The feminization of the Paratroopers is aimed at challenging the existing hierarchies in Israeli society which historically allocates more prestige to the Paratroopers.

Moreover, the masculinity that Golani soldiers construct by means of their body and clothes is not neutral, but rather reflects existing ethnic distinctions within Israeli society. Their masculine performance is linked with behaviour perceived as characteristic of Mizrachi culture and masculinity within Israeli society. Mizrachi culture and its masculinity are perceived as contrasting with Ashkenazi culture and its masculinity which, in turn, is represented by the Paratroopers through the aesthetic performance and the neat appearance of their uniform. The coquetry that Liran attributes to the Paratroopers and the comparison between the red colour of the beret and menstruation expresses not only condemnation of their submission to the demands of the establishment but also a certain diminishing of the Ashkenazi body of the Paratrooper. Liran’s words undermine the dominance of the Paratroopers by ‘reducing’ their Ashkenaziness to femininity, thus questioning the power and dominance of the model they represent.

In contrast to the model of the restrained soldier embodied by the clean aesthetics of the Paratroopers, Golani soldiers forge an untamed, wild and uncontrollable masculinity through their undisciplined body. It is anti-establishment, non-normative and nonconformist masculinity, and its features are usually attributed to the non-dominant ethnic group (yet not a minority group) within Israeli society, the Mizrachim.

Even though this masculinity is often delegitimized within Israeli society (Shohat, 1988), it is adopted by all Golani soldiers regardless of their own ethnic origin and in spite of its so-called inferior status. Thus, adopting this model of masculinity should be regarded as a resistant identity against the dominant Ashkenazi masculinity represented by the Paratroopers. The uniform serves the soldiers as a particularly convenient medium for displaying an alternative model of proper masculinity which is no less professional and even more effective since it is not concerned with defying strict rules. Moreover, the ethnic identity Golani soldiers assume is further exaggerated and taken to an extreme when they adopt an Arab identity, which in the Israeli context constitutes an act of exceptional resistance.

Golani soldiers embrace Arab identity for several reasons: first, it serves as a strategy of resistance against the Paratroopers, since by adopting the image of the dark-skinned enemy they challenge the dominance of the white ‘dandified’ paratrooper. By assuming this dark-skinned identity, they set an alternative model of masculinity which is equal to that of the Paratroopers and which holds a potential threat to them. Moreover, Golani soldiers attempt to pose a much more professional martial model than that of the Paratroopers since they assume that the cultural similarity with Arab culture grants them a military advantage. They thus become more threatening; and, consequently, better soldiers.

Second, and at the same time, this strategy is also aimed against the Arab enemy, as they are transmitting the message that they can be just as ‘wild’ and ‘uncontrolled’ as their Arab enemies are. This message is understood in the Israeli discourse in an ambivalent manner as, on the one hand, it is perceived as an efficient way of deterring and fighting against the Arab enemy (especially against terrorism) but, on the other hand it, is criticized as an uncivilized model of action that is not appropriate for the Israeli army.

Third, from the theoretical perspective of Orientalism studies, the comparison with Arabs exemplifies a fascination with the Arabs (including the admiration of their power and their threatening image) along with a reduction and degradation of the Arabs’ perceived inferiority (including their primitiveness, crudeness and immorality). This dual attitude will be further elaborated in the next sections; however, it is important to note that while Golani soldiers take part in a hegemonic model of masculinity (the warrior’s model of masculinity), they run the risk of Mizrachiness being identified with the lower class in Israeli society. The Arab identity that they assume is portrayed in the form of pride in their manhood, but, at the same time, they occupy a socially inferior and disadvantaged position. Interestingly, the Golani soldiers don the mantle of this so-called disadvantaged, coarse and vulgar identity themselves: it is not forced upon them by the Paratroopers or any other brigade.

Body maintenance

The second practice utilized by the soldiers as a resistance strategy is body maintenance. The soldier’s body is his ‘work tool’, and therefore the army has clear and strict requirements regarding body maintenance (Godfrey et al., 2012). In other words, in addition to the rules of representative aesthetics required of the soldier’s clothing, the army has rules governing the representative aesthetics of the body. Expectations of body maintenance are identical in both brigades: soldiers are required to maintain personal hygiene by washing, wearing clean clothes and maintaining hair and shaving standards. Rules of the body aesthetics are summarized, according to the soldiers, in the form of two demands that have become a common linguistic idiom in military slang: shaving (the face) and shining (the boots). ¹

The demand for body aesthetics refers both to maintenance and to control of the body: the body of the combat soldier is required to have physical strength and the ability to withstand hardship, but soldiers are also expected to restrain their corporeality. Soldiers are not allowed to grow beards without a special permit, as they (and hair in general) signify a masculine, untamed and uncontrollable nature (Harding, 2002) which the military organization strives to control in order to encourage conformity and conservatism. Thus, just as we might expect an employee wearing an ‘organizational uniform’ to display more obedience than an employee who chooses his/her own clothes (Rafaeli and Pratt, 1993), we would expect a soldier to dress neatly and meticulously.

At the same time, combat duty requires fieldwork which often includes lengthy stays in the field, thus part of the job demands include indoor aesthetics, which in this context means the ability to cope in an unsanitary environment over long periods with no showers or shaving. Soldiers are also often required to paint their faces for camouflage purposes during operational activities. If so, the job definition implicitly encompasses unsanitary and disorderly conditions which contrast with the formal requirements of order and cleanliness. These covert requirements, which enable soldiers in the field to dress in contrast to the representative aesthetics and to forego hygiene rules, are embraced by Golani soldiers as their rule of conduct on leave as well. Although leaving base requires soldiers to display the aesthetics of an organized body, Golani soldiers choose to show off their fieldwork and their disorganized body. Chen, a Mizrachi soldier from Golani, speaks of the brigade’s cleanliness requirements:

Our soldiers never shave and never shine their boots. Everybody asks for a beard permit; even those who do not have a beard permit say they do … We would never shine our boots, because shined boots look new; a nice boot is a scuffed boot, a boot that shows how long you have been in the army.

Chen refers to the body concept of soldiers leaving the military base for home (for civilian society). Unlike the Paratroopers, going on leave for Golani soldiers does not necessitate a metamorphosis from field appearance. Control of the body is determined according to social and not material standards, and it therefore has to do with attempts to control social chaos and disorder. Based on Douglas’s (1966) argument that dirt undermines the social order, we can understand the Golanis’ refusal to maintain their cleanliness as a resistance tactic, especially when they leave the area in which dirt is legitimate and enter the area in which it is not. In fact, Golani soldiers are unique in this ‘disrupted’ appearance (unlike other brigades, especially the Paratroopers), so that dirt and disorder has become the trademark of their brigade.

The above quote demonstrates how the norm in Golani calls for soldiers to display their work outwardly, and thus present an alternative professionalism, which centres on the portrayal of physical labour, the main means of performing combat duty (as distinct, for example, from the work of pilots or intelligence officers). In contrast to the Paratroopers who, as required by the establishment, present the neat and organized symbolic image of combat soldiers, Golani soldiers choose to display a different part of their duties, the part that is supposed to remain backstage. Golani soldiers ‘take their work with them’, engraved on their bodies and clothes, and display a professional model of ‘labourers’. While it is customary to leave symbols of physical ‘dirty work’ (Ashforth and Kreiner, 1999) within the limits of the organization and not display them outwardly (for example, surgeons do not leave the operating room wearing clothes covered in blood), here, Golani soldiers choose, consciously and intentionally, to project the dirty aspect of their work outwardly. Their professionalism is measured on a dirt index. While displaying sloppiness usually lowers status, here, the soldiers perceive the displaying of the dirty aspect of their work as empowering, as lending power.

This is manifested in the words of Yaron, an Ashkenazi who served in Golani. He describes the tension between the army’s requisites of order and cleanliness, required from those who represent the army ‘outwardly’, and the job itself, which involves danger, dirt and disorder:

You are in Lebanon and you know that any moment a charge can explode in your face, you have mud on your boots, you’re dying to get home because you haven’t slept, and then you go on leave and a military policeman comes and tells you that your appearance is disorderly and you haven’t shaved. You have to be very calm not to lose your temper in such a situation. Of course you shouldn’t behave violently, but yes, yes, I agree with the regiment commander who rejected the complaints of those military policemen and backed the combat soldiers.

Yaron portrays the contrast between the danger posed by his job and the demand, perceived as ridiculous, to maintain a neat appearance. From his point of view, demanding soldiers to be shaven, have short hair and shined boots, is not reasonable: shaving does not create professional soldiers; brave soldiers are not the product of shined boots; soldiers do not acquire physical and mental endurance by keeping their hair trimmed. However, these are major demands of soldiers in general, stemming from the army’s fear of losing control of the body. The army is concerned that facial and body hair will grow unchecked, and that the body will become and remain dirty, as will clothes and boots, so a significant effort is invested in controlling the soldier’s body. Control of the body by demanding cleanliness is perceived by many Golani soldiers as reflecting the norms of the establishment, which is represented by the Paratrooper. For example, Vladimir, of Russian [Ashkenazi] origin, who served in Golani, explains why Golani soldiers do not shave:

There was a rule that said that you don’t shave; hair grew wild. We look like men, not clean-shaven and dandified like the Paratroopers.

According to Vladimir, filth is perceived by Golani soldiers as a ‘masculine’ characteristic and cleanliness as a ‘feminine’ characteristic. Golani soldiers construct their masculinity through mess and filth, while simultaneously delegitimizing the Paratroopers’ cleanliness and order by presenting this requirement as a characteristic of femininity.

Liran, of Mizrachi origin, adds another dimension to the demand to avoid shaving in Golani: ‘To be a Golani soldier [means] not to shave, to get a beard permit, to look like an Arab’.

The norm adopted by Golani soldiers to avoid shaving attests to the resistant attitude against the establishment and against the Paratroopers as well as the role of ethnicity in this resistance. Not shaving is perceived by Liran as a characteristic of Mizrachi masculinity. Moreover, in contrast to the expectation that looking like an Arab be perceived as degrading, this is a source of pride for Golani soldiers. Once again, Golani soldiers take on an ‘inferior’ identity in the Israeli context, the identity of the Arab enemy, in order to resist the Ashkenazi establishment.

By objecting to the establishment’s demands to look and behave according to the model of the dominant soldier, Golani soldiers present an alternative organizational identity that produces alternative aesthetics contrary to formal aesthetics. For this purpose, they use ethnic characteristics. In the process of producing ethnic-masculine aesthetics, the soldiers not only produce an alternative masculine identity, but also undermine the characteristics of the most prestigious masculinity of the Paratroopers.

Nevertheless, Golani soldiers construct their masculinity in a most dialectic manner, as their masculinity is based on negation as well as on high commitment. This dialectic identity is manifested, on the one hand, through their embodiment of their resistant identity, namely the portrayal of ethnic corporeality and dirty work. They ‘blacken’ themselves and resist the abstractness and metaphysicalness of the Paratrooper image, such that while the Paratrooper is the ideal image of the combat soldier, the Golani soldier is his corporeal manifestation. This process exposes not only the corporeality of ethnicity, but also the notion of ‘doing ethnicity’, as the same body could change its ethnic affiliation through alternative body maintenance performed by the soldiers themselves. On the other hand, the Golani are highly committed soldiers, who are ready to sacrifice themselves for their brothers-in-arms and their organization. Their resistance does not delegitimize the army and its aims (nor does it challenge the superiority of warrior masculinity over any kind of femininity) but rather sets an alternative model of masculinity for the infantry warrior. Indeed, they are regarded as excellent soldiers. Such devotion attests to Fleming and Spicer’s (2003) suggestion that Golani soldiers might dis-identify with the dominant cultural prescriptions, yet still comply with them devotedly.

Skin colour: black soldier, white soldier

The third resistance strategy utilized by the soldiers to structure their ethno-gender identity is skin colour. Colour is an important and central component of the process of constructing ethnic identities: colour is imprinted on the skin, highly visible, permanent and unchangeable. It is the most conspicuous external mark and it therefore has become a criterion by which we judge people (Fanon, 1967). However, the significance of colour is not in the shade itself, as blackness and whiteness per se have no meaning, but rather in the experience of colour and the meaning given to colour (Mishani, 2006). ‘White’ and ‘black’ are unlike all other colours, as they serve as an initial criterion for ethnic labeling. They are used as a label that is not culture-neutral since each colour is associated with an entire world of expectations and meanings in regard to cultural and behavioural manifestations by ‘white’ or ‘black’ people (Bhabha, 1990; Fanon, 1967). Thus, even before one behaves or speaks in a certain way, a process of labelling takes place and positions one as part of a certain ethnic group, thereby arousing expectations of behaviour perceived as compatible with this group. In the Israeli context, skin colour is even more complex, since the difference between Ashkenazi and Mizrachi is not always so overt, and is often perceived as symbolic and cultural. Ehud, of a mixed ethnic origin, served as an officer in the Paratroopers, and links colour to behaviour:

When I became a team commander, I was certain that it would be very easy, that everybody would be blonde and do as I say. When you imagine a paratrooper, you think of a blonde soldier with blue eyes while Golani soldiers are ‘Yemenites’ [he means dark-skinned people]. This is expressed by their mentality: Paratroopers are white, they do everything by the book. For example, they put elastic bands on their boots … and Golani soldiers are perceived as those who do as they wish with no elastic bands, they don’t give a damn about the Military Police … you know … like, I’m a man, I’m an Arab, black …

Ehud adds colour to the stereotype associated with the Paratroopers and Golani Brigades, but whiteness and blackness are not actual colours but rather cultural signifiers of difference. The process delineated by Ehud may be divided into two stages: at first, he positions the blonde soldier in the Paratroopers and the Yemenite (black) soldier in Golani; in the second stage, he bases his conclusions regarding behaviour on colour. This process is compatible with that described by Bhabha (1994), where difference is first marked by colour and then rooted by stereotypes (manifested by the appropriate behaviour for each colour).

In this case, the stereotype has a double function: it determines the Ashkenazi paratrooper as the norm, as the ideal and the soldier favoured by commanding officers, and the Golani soldier as one who resists the norm, with the implication of being a problematic soldier. As with any stereotype, Ehud ignores any diversity within each group, as for him being a paratrooper inevitably means behaving like a ‘white’ person and being a Golani soldier means behaving like an ‘Arab’, or in other words, like a ‘black’ person. Ehud’s words express the force of the stereotype, where despite the actual diversity and variety within each brigade, we still expect and imagine homogeneous figures matching the stereotype.

Nevertheless, according to Ehud, colour serves not only as an ethnic mark, but also as a sign of the different masculinity required in each of the brigades.

Oren, a Golani soldier whose mother is Mizrachi and father Ashkenazi, describes the interrelations between colour and masculinity in similar terms:

I remember that I had one squad commander who was just a Nazi, he was really bad. One day Shai Grossman [this pseudonym is a typical Ashkenazi name], an Ashkenazi with glasses, arrived from a kibbutz, and I remember what the squad commander did to him at roll call. ‘You whitey, you female, come here. Until you paint your face every morning and come here black like a man, I’m going to tear you apart’. When you see one such example, and another and another, at some stage, even unconsciously, you undoubtedly begin to think in a certain way, you say that black is good, and being Mizrachi in the army is good.

Oren implies that black masculinity is more ‘appropriate’ in Golani, so that Grossman’s Ashkenazi masculinity is unacceptable and therefore he is required to undergo a real change to fit into the group. Grossman’s appearance, origins, and even place of residence, reflect what is perceived as Ashkenaziness: this is not tolerated in Golani and triggers a violent reaction. Grossman is required to change his appearance, as he cannot be ‘white’ or ‘Ashkenazi’ in Golani. He is required to conceal, in Fanon’s (1967) terms, the tattooed markings of colour on his body. However, this marking is not only ethnic marking but also the mark of masculinity, as in order to be a ‘real man’, Grossman is required to be black. Such an imperative was evident in other interviews, when some Golani soldiers reported that they would tan their skin during weekend leaves in order better to fit their brigade’s ‘aesthetics’.

The two soldiers quoted above show that ethnicity is characteristic of a certain type of masculinity. It is precisely because body colour is engraved on the skin and unchangeable that it reinforces ethnicity’s part in establishing the masculine identity, as body colour supposedly attests to authentic, innate masculinity. Similar interpretations emerged in other interviews as well, in which disorderly clothing, sloppiness, lack of rules and lack of discipline are portrayed as features of the Mizrachiness and ‘Arabism’ characteristic of Golani soldiers (see additional quotes in Appendix A). In contrast, the Paratroopers are characterized as disciplined, coming from a high socioeconomic level and ‘white’. However, colour markings and type of masculinity do not remain signifiers of difference alone, but are transformed into an organizational demand, enforced both by the soldiers themselves and by their commanders. In contrast to the Paratroopers’ body, which is perceived as white, disciplined and obedient, the body of Golani soldiers is highly visible and corporeal, and its masculine dominance stems specifically from this visibility. Interestingly, the black skin the Golani cloak themselves in is enforced on them neither by nature nor by the Paratroopers, or by any other brigade, but rather is willingly self-imposed. Our interviews reveal that the Paratroopers do not refer to themselves or the Golani in terms of colour, and they do not construct their professional identity by comparing themselves to Golani. This data corroborates the literature on ethnicity which suggests that whiteness is tacit, transparent, and taken for granted (Dyer, 1997).