Rituals of (un)changing masculinity: cohesion or diversity? A study of the fraternization traditions of Swedish cadets’ at the Military Academy

ABSTRACT

This study investigates the cultural expressions of traditional socialization activities that occur in connection with cadets attending the 3-year Officers Programme at Karlberg in Sweden, in order to analyze how masculinity norms in a male-dominated military organization are produced and sustained. A narrative analysis method was used to interpret the meaning of the campus traditions described in interviews made with five cadets together with the student handbook for newly arrived cadets ‘Ruki’. Three distinct traditions were analyzed: ‘The Despicable Philquist’, ‘The Viking Festivity’, and ‘Lifning’. Three themes that describe these traditions, respectively, were identified: separation, homosociality, and fraternization. Separation specifies a formation of a masculine and militarized subjectivity that separates the dichotomous categories of civilian – military. Homosociality describes activities that reproduce masculine norms where men relate to other men. Lastly, fraternization is used to describe socialization activities where the main purpose is to create cohesion. The contribution of this article is that it confirms how performatory rituals in the Military Academy functions to enforce cohesion that is modeled on masculinity norms, while simultaneously identifying a growing dissonance between society’s demands for diversity and the military’s basic aspiration for cohesion.

KEYWORDS:

• Military culture
• masculinity
• homosociality
• cohesion
• hazing rituals

Introduction

‘Overall, I get the idea that it is a tradition, but then again I have also thought; when is it time to break these traditions? […] In some ways, it is a tradition that has survived for a very long time, but at the same time, society is also changing and at what point is it going to end, can you end it, and should you end it?’ (Respondent B)

The quote above is taken from an interview with a female cadet attending the Military Academy of Karlberg in Stockholm, Sweden, who is reflecting on the discrepancy between historically abiding officers-traditions and the changing outlook of society. It articulates a provenance of dissonance that could be seen as symptomatic for the Swedish Armed Forces as a whole, which proceeds from an ambition to preserve a traditionalist idea of what the military profession in its essence is, while simultaneously moving in the direction of reforming an organizational culture that is deeply ingrained in a masculine mold (Hearn, 2011).

The Swedish Armed Forces are working actively to promote a more inclusive organizational climate with a clear ambition to incorporate a gender perspective on all areas connected to peace and security (Regeringskansliet, 2015, p. 14). This work has not been without bumps, however, which became evident in the wake of the army response to the worldwide movement ‘#MeToo’ in 2017, when 1768 women on the 29 of November published a call in one of the leading newspapers in Sweden, Dagens Nyheter, to end sexual violence and harassment in the military (Alvinius & Holmberg, 2019). Several researchers have identified barriers for inclusive policies in the military culture itself, which stresses elitism, coherence, and masculinity norms (Alvinius, Starrin, & Larsson, 2016; Ben-Shalom, Lewin, & Engel, 2019; Kronsell, 2012; Malmio & Nilsson, 2018; Persson, 2011). Cohesion, in particular, has been described as one of the most prevailing concepts in military culture and a vital ingredient in ensuring operational effectiveness (Kirke, 2009). On the flipside, however, cohesion has also been outlined as an unfavorable factor for social diversity, by merging the masculine identity with the idea of what constitutes a soldier, thereby, in effect, disadvantaging women (Alvinius et al., 2016; Ben-Shalom et al., 2019; Persson, 2011). One important institution for the cultivation of military ideals is the Military Academies where character development and fostering of qualities required for the military profession play an essential part (Callina et al., 2019). This has been recognized in a previous study from the Swedish Military Academy as the construction of a collective identification process that is formed by hereditary traditions that sustain and preserve ‘The essence of Karlberg’ (Malmio & Nilsson, 2018). Even though the research on cohesion in the military is substantial, less attention has been devoted to the study of the performatory function of student traditions in military academies and how they contribute to reproduce a military culture described as ‘hyper-masculine’ (Alvinius & Holmberg, 2019; Ben-Shalom et al., 2019; Wadham, 2013). However, this is an important angle to investigate as it elucidates how military masculinities are created and sustained while also approaching the concept of cohesion from a critical perspective. Therefore, the aim of this paper is to deepen the understanding of how masculinity norms are constructed and maintained in a male-dominated organization by investigating the cultural expressions of traditional socialization activities that occur in connection with cadets attending the 3-year Officers Programme at Karlberg in Sweden.

These social activities, generally referred to as ‘traditions’, are described as student events which occur outside of the classroom while still on campus with the main purpose of creating fraternization¹ among the cadets. A principal aspect of fraternity is the performance of bonding rituals, involving a range of different initiation practices, often referred to as hazing (Wadham, 2013). However, today’s version of the traditions at the Military Academy is far from fitting the negative connotation that hazing implies and has a more playful and voluntarily character than what they had in the past (Hellspong, 1991). Hazing and initiation rituals are not exclusive for the military arena, but exist in most places where there are social groupings (Campo, Poulos, & Sipple, 2005; Winslow, 1999). What makes the Military Academy notable in this regard is how elaborate and distinctive many of the traditions that occur on campus are, as is the strong masculine connotation that encloses them.

The Military Academy Karlberg is located in the capital of Sweden, Stockholm, and has ever since 1792 served as an educational center for officers in the Swedish armed services. Women were accepted to the Program in 1980, and in 2020 the number of female candidates accepted for entry constituted a new record with ∼25% out of 214 cadets in total, being female (Försvarshögskolan, 2020). Since the beginning of the millennium, the education of officers has been made into an academic discipline and both the Swedish Armed Forces and the Swedish Defense University are responsible for its maintenance. The High Council at the Military Academy is mainly responsible for the preservation of the traditions observed on campus and is a student-led association consisting of ∼20 seats (Ruki, 2018).

The structure of this article is as follows: I will first give a brief theoretical overview of the gendered aspect in military culture while also describing elements of hazing and rites of passage. After that, I will describe the findings and explore the three narratives in further detail. Lastly, I will discuss the wider meaning of these traditions while also highlighting dissonances in response to those traditions that come from a military organization embedded in a societal transformation process.

Military culture and the construction of masculinity

Culture can be defined as a wide-ranging phenomenon in the social world that relates to values and priorities in life, which, from an organizational horizon, can provide affective energy for mobilization and inclusion while also serving exclusory purposes, due to the intimate connection between social identities and the institutions in which they are embedded (Hinojosa, 2010; Soeters, Winslow, & Weibull, 2006). Military culture is a good example of this kind of identification process, where the cultivation of qualities like cohesion, bravery, and elitism often are emphasized (Alvinius et al., 2016; Sasson-Levy, 2003). One aspect that has stirred a lot of attention in studies of military culture is gender, due to the substantial association between military and security activities with norms of masculinity, heterosexuality, and racial conformity (Hinojosa, 2010; Kronsell, 2012; Persson, 2011; Wadham, 2013). One way of explaining this exclusory element is that military organizations represent a specific occupational culture, which is secluded, self-preserving and loyal to traditional ideals (Kronsell, 2012). Cadets and recruits get their training in specific schools and academies, where a sense of uniqueness is emphasized (Soeters et al., 2006) and military qualities are cultivated (Callina et al., 2019). All those traits combined indicate a strong link between the military’s social construction and its authoritarian form of social organization that provides the operationalizing of its unique mandate (Kovitz, 2003).

The military sector is seen not only as a masculine institution due to the number of men involved in its maintenance, but also constitutes a major arena for the construction of masculine identities, which consequently affect the shaping of masculinity norms in society at large (Alvinius et al., 2016; Connell & Messerschmidt, 2005; Sasson-Levy, 2003). The quintessential form of hegemonic masculinity resonates strongly with qualities highlighted in militarized masculinities such as conflict, bravery, and military authority (Christensen & Rasmunsen, 2017). This connection has been described as so conspicuous that it obliterates the gendered association, thus making it hard to detect. In this way, military institutions incarnate the very concept of masculine hegemony (Hearn, 2011).

Another important preserver in hegemonic systems is homosociality, which highlights the reproduction of patriarchal structures through seemingly inculpable everyday rituals maintained for exclusory purposes (Lipman-Blumen, 1976). This theory has been supported by a number of studies on ‘masculine’ professions, Persson (2011) has described how the ‘band of brothers’ concept is constructed from homosocial acts where cohesion is expressed by a number of homoerotic rituals. In his research on Swedish firefighters, Ericson (2014) has identified homosociality as an important component for male bonding while Mellström (2004) has studied the embodied connection between mechanics and their machines as a form of homosocial practice which maintains a highly gendered social space.

Hazing rituals and rites of passage

The historically strong emphasis on fostering masculine unity among soldiers has been explained by a need to foster cohesion (Kirke, 2009), and has played an important function in the enactment of different initiation rituals (Firestone & Harris, 1999; Soeters et al., 2006). Previous studies have pointed out that there is a linkage between hazing activities and masculinity norms, where the purpose is to introduce new members to the organization’s ideals and moral standards on one end, while also strengthening notions of brotherhood and exclusiveness at the other (Campo et al., 2005; Pershing, 2006; Wadham, 2013). In this way, hazing rituals can also be seen as acts of ‘doing gender’ (West & Zimmerman, 1987), which from a Butlerian perspective recognizes a reproductive function where qualities socially associated with gendered norms are reinforced in a performative manner through actions concurring in everyday activities (Butler, 1990).

Hazing rituals also have the purpose of strengthening the individuals commitment to the group, as was highlighted in an experimental study performed by Aronson and Mills in the 1950s, which revealed that an initiate who endures severe hazing is likely to find membership in that group more appealing (Aronson & Mills, 1959). The impact of initiation rites in the military is a classic example of this since, in these rituals, soldiers prove their readiness to participate in the group regardless of personal cost. Hence, a lot of conventional army training is designed to intensify the power of group pressure within its ranks by teaching recruits the need for teamwork (Kirke, 2009; Winslow, 1999).

Winslow (1999) has further suggested that an important aspect in these rituals is the connotation of ‘rites of passage’, where an individual is transformed from one social category to another, in the military referring to a separation of the former civilian identity to the new military persona (Pershing, 2006; Winslow, 1999). The idea of an archaic prototype of rites of passage was elaborated by Arnold Van Gennep in the beginning of the 20th century, who recognized that an individual’s life consists of a series of transitions which can be expressed as three stages: separation from the old role, a liminal period between roles, and the assumption of the new role (Van Gennep, 2019:1909). According to van Gennep, the purpose of the rites of passage was to ‘ensure a change in condition or a passage from one magico-religious or secular group to another’ (2019:1909, p. 11). In this way, rites of passage materializes basic elements of genuine change, such as death and rebirth, which marks a radical altering of a person’s mode of being, while simultaneously connecting the present individuals with the origins of the group in the past (Meade, 1994).

Method

This study was conducted as a qualitative interview research using a narrative analysis. Narrative methods focus on storytelling in order to answer the question of what is included in a shared perspective of ‘normality’ and is as such a central theme in feminist research (Wibben, 2011). Stories also bear deep associations with organizational change, since both intertwine with notions of temporality and addresses complex processes where multiple characters, agents, and contexts overlap and interweave. The premise that people lead storied lives is deeply linked to issues of knowledge, sense-making, communication, and identities (Brown, Gabriel, & Gherardi, 2009).

The data collected for this study consist of semi-structured interviews and open interview questions (Bryman, 2015). Another important source of information for the analysis is the ‘Ruki – Instruction book for Rukor’ (Instruktion för Rukor), which was released in 2018 by the High Council (Höga Rådet). This booklet is released every year and is handed over the junior course by the senior course as set of instructions and guide to the campus traditions, and therefore functions as a transmitter of traditions from one generation to the next.

The material in the narrative analysis consists of five interviews with cadets attending the Officers’ Program that took place in May–June 2019. Two of these cadets were female and three were male, the ages ranged from 23 to 28 years and they were all active students at the Military Academy during the time when the interviews were conducted, two of them belonged to the course number 224, and was subsequently in their last year of the program while three belonged to the course number 226, which means that they conducted their first year. Access to interview persons was provided via a contact currently working at Swedish Defence University. The choice of informants can be described as a comfort selection since the participants were picked among those available during the time when the study was planned to take place (Bryman, 2015).

The interviews, during which the cadets were asked to describe in their own words, the different traditions, and what they thought the significance of them were, lasted for ∼45–60 minutes. Quotations in this article are taken from these interviews if nothing else is stated. The interviews were originally carried out in Swedish and then translated into English by the author. Purely colloquial expressions have been somewhat modified in order to promote a better flow in the written text. In connection to the interviews, the informants were also given information of the ethical principles described by Bryman as the requirements of sound science-information, consent, confidentiality, and usage (Bryman, 2015). In order to ensure anonymity, the informants are referred to by means of capital letters A–E, with their rank and military unit left out. Informants A and B are female and are first-year students while informants C–E are male. Informants C and E are in their final year of the program.

There are many traditions present in the cultural milieu at the Military Academy, out of these I have chosen to focus on three traditions, ‘The Despicable Philquist’, ‘The Viking festivity’, and ‘Lifning’. These traditions were selected on two grounds: they are the most prominent ritualized student activities observed at the Military Academy, and they also represent different aspects in the cultural expressions of the military profession and thus, help to explain how militarized masculine subjectivities emanates.

The limitations to this study are the empirical data, which consists of five interviews that can seem quite meager. However, in narrative research, the focus lies on analyzing individual stories rather than collecting large quantities of data and it is, therefore, more important to make a meaningful analysis than to collate a large number of interviews (Holton & Walsh, 2017). It is also worth noting that getting access to respondents was a challenge when this study was conducted, which is often the case when researching an area that is connected to security, characterized as a secluded environment (Belcher & Martin, 2019).

Findings

In this section, I will go into further detail in describing the three traditions chosen for the analysis of this article. I will start by first outlining the general description of what the tradition is all about and then proceed with a deeper analysis of what this means in terms of reproducing masculine norms evident in the military culture. The three traditions chosen for the analysis are as follows: The Despicable Philquist, which signifies a separation, The Viking Festivity, which focuses on homosociality, and lastly Lifning, a hazing ritual that emphasizes aspects of fraternity and dissonance.

The despicable cadet Philquist – a narrative of separation

The tradition of the despicable Philquist is said to be one of the oldest still conducted at the Military Academy, and dates back to 1867 when the first cadet was appointed to Philqvist. The official story behind the tradition is that cadet number 55 Holmqvist received the derogatory term after slacking under a Willow tree (Willow in Swedish is translated to ‘Pil’), while his comrade Frunck, was working on a chore originally appointed to them both. Frunck was then so frustrated that he allegedly said: ‘Holmqvists’ and ‘Philqvists’ are not useful for anything!’ (Kindström, 1988, p. 81). The tradition is performed during the first year of the cadets’ training and ends with the christening of Philqvist in the spring semester. Philqvist is chosen on behalf of his cadet number, 55, 155, or sometimes 255, and according to the interwieved cadets a woman has this far never been assigned with the task. It is one of the most cherished of all traditions organized at the school but has been up for serious deliberations throughout the years as it contains parts that historically have been associated with penalism and bullying (Kindström, 1988). The story behind Philqvist has in the students own narratives received a far more elaborate and imaginative interpretation than the original version and was told to me like this:

‘It began with a story about a cadet, number 155 Philquist who according to the legend was most despicable and who could not succeed with anything that he sought to accomplish. Poor outcome in school, poor in practical things, poor at most things in fact’. (Respondent C)

‘At some point, he supposedly went on a night bender on the other side of the canal. On his way back to the school he was in a hurry to get in time for an exam, made a shortcut over the ice, and accidentally went through the ice. As he is laying in the icy water, he gets an epiphany:

“I am truly despicable; I have to man up and become the best”. And in his journey towards improving himself, he becomes that’. (Respondent D)

The journey of Philquist begins with fellow students assigning him with mostly quite harmless tasks such as carrying food trays or getting someone a beer or a coffee. The important thing according to the tradition is that Philquist cannot refuse to do anything that he is being told to do, and he also tends to screw up mundane things, like wearing his uniform the wrong way, or shouting aloud in a specific passage where you are supposed to keep quiet. The first feature, however, is described nowadays as being quite moderate; if there is something that Philquist does not want to do, he is able to refuse. Philquist also has two guardians, carrying cadet number 154 and 156, assigned with the task to watch over him, described by some of the cadets as a sort of safety net in case things are taken too far. The element of a social upbringing is therefore strong:

‘For me, it’s about the course together raising a cadet, who in this case does not perform so well’. (Respondent A)

The second feature, which can be described as a trickster aspect, is depicted as an individual trait, where some of the cadets chosen to be Philquist put on a big show and wholeheartedly act the part of ‘being despicable’. Therefore, being able to distance himself from the situation is described as an important quality:

‘He can put himself outside of the situation and understand that it is not about him as a person, it is only about the tradition of which he is a part of’. (Respondent C)

One important person in the tradition of Philquist is the ‘Spiritual Advisor’ (Thess Sielasörjare) who is sometimes described as a sort of quasi-religious character and sometimes as a sort of therapeutic person and is highly involved in making sure that Philquist becomes a better person (Ruki, 2018). At some point, however, it is obvious to everyone that Philquist is beyond all help and patience with him begins to crumble. Therefore, the Spiritual Advisor concludes that the only thing that can save Philquist is a christening. For that purpose, Philquist is captured, and has to wear a symbolic ball and chain for a few days until he is finally locked up together with his guardians for 24 hours. During this time, he gets small assignments that include drinking a lot of alcohol, which, according to one cadet, is in order to slow him down the next morning when the hunt for Philquist starts. This hunt starts as Philquist makes an escape from his ‘prison’ and the whole grade collectively searches for him. After he is captured for a second time and subsequently put in a ritual costume described as a toga, he is christened in the canal by the Spiritual Advisor, who during the ceremony chants some phrases in fake Latin. Thereupon:

 … Philqvist realizes his misdemeanors and is transformed from being ‘The Despicable Philquist’ into becoming ‘The Impeccable Pihlqvist’. (Ruki, 2018, p. 17)

In general, the classic phases of initiation rites as defined by Van Gennep (2019:1909) are separation, liminal inversion, and reintegration. All of them are present in the tradition of turning the despicable Philquist into a divine cadet. Separation occurs, as Philquist is captured and put in isolation. The period of liminal inversion, or being on the threshold, takes place during his time of captivity and ends as he is captured and put forth to the initiator, the Spiritual Advisor. The baptism itself can be seen as a form of ritual death, where Philquist is absolved from disgrace, and when Philquist has undergone the ritual he is transformed into a new being, one that is divine and impeccable (Ruki, 2018). Subsequently, the new immaculate Philquist is offered to sit on a throne in the mess hall positioned higher than the portrait of the King and the Queen, which is a marker of his new ‘divine’ status. From now on, no one can tell him what to do, instead, the Divine Philquist has the privilege of telling everyone else what to do, and this time no one can refuse him.

What does the story of Philquist in its essence signify? Philquist, as I see it is a representative of all the cadets as they enter training to become officers. In this stage, they are all regarded as despicable since:

When you start here you get the title ‘Lousy Ruka’, and Ruka is apparently an old word for a small pile of shit, coming from horses, and, thereof the youngest cadets are referred to as ‘Rukor’ until something else has been proven. (Respondent D)

On the front page of Ruki (2018), the handbook for new cadets it is also stated that:

You are a Ruka; you have no rights only obligations

‘Ruka’ in its original meaning refers to 'a small pile' associating the cadet with someone who is as insignificant as a small pile of feces (Hellspong, 1991). This demeaning comparison holds a mere symbolic significance these days and is more a reminder of the cultural heritage of the old days (Ruki, 2018). Being a lousy Ruka is something that is simply nt tolerated however, hence all the cadets, not only Philquist, have to strive for accomplishing the elitist standard of the impeccable officer. At the heart of the tradition lies a transformation process where the masculine identity is reproduced to fit the image of a flawless officer, as the embodiment of the most honored way of being a man (Connell & Messerschmidt, 2005, p. 832). As a trickster character, Philquist puts on a show of how cadets should not behave since the result of the wrong behavior evidently leads to ostracism. In this regard, Philquist embodies all the disgrace of his grade, and as he is cleansed, all members of that community are cleansed as well. The bottom-line here is, there is only one way to acquire acceptance in the officer ranks, and that is by being impeccable. The christening of Pihlqvist also implies a separation where the civilian attributes are abstracted from the military persona. Seen in this light, the christening of Philqvist can be said to symbolize the birth of an idealized masculine identity fashioned from a military mold. As Philquist emerges from the water, he is absolved and becomes a new person, one that is divine and thus free from his previous civilian life.

The Viking Festivity – a narrative of homosociality

‘Vikinga Blothet’, the Viking Festivity is another prominent tradition held at the Military Academy since the beginning of 1960s (Kindström, 1988). Its origins emanates from one cadet who was attending the Military Academy during this time and who had a dream about a clash between Vikings. This person is referred to as ‘The Original Viking’, and is still physically present at every performance, where he makes a small speech before the clash begins. The Viking Festivity takes place at the beginning of the autumn when the new cadets have arrived to the campus, and the purpose is to make the junior and senior grade become more acquainted with each other.

‘It is about one Viking tribe who came over the canal to conquer the other, and they solved the dispute by marrying the youngest daughter to a son of a general from the other side. It is the junior course who does the invading and the senior course who stand up against them.’ […] First, you put quite some time into creating a Viking costume; you make weapons that you dress with foam rubber so you can hit each other without doing any damage. After that the ceremonial disembarkation takes place when you paddle in a canoe on the canal, its approximately eight people who does the paddling. After that, the whole course goes up to meet the senior course who are standing on a field waiting for them. First, you stand there and shout insults at each other and then the fighting starts. […] the whole thing is set up to the advantage of the senior course who always wins. (Respondent D)

One part of the Viking Festivity that stands out is the ceremonial wedding which takes place at the end of the fighting and is described by one cadet below:

Someone is being chosen as a predecessor from the course to act as the Viking of that course, and he and the Viking from the junior course are married in order to make peace, and there is a wedding that is enacted by the Spiritual Advisor and the Original Viking is also attending. Usually it is two men, who gets married, since the Viking of the course is chosen for his size; he is supposed to look like a real Viking and walk in the front line. […] In my course there was one man and the other man was acting as a woman, but the talk was still as if both were men, however, the person acting as the girl Viking from the younger course, he became sort of feminine. The kiss was enacted as the male Viking put the other Viking in his arms. So they made a small scene out of it. (Respondent B)

Persson (2011) has found that different homoerotic rituals many times characterize cohesion. In what she terms ‘repair work’ these rituals quickly revolve back to heterosexual norms so that no misunderstanding can occur. By marrying off the youngest daughter to the son of the Commander of the victorious team, peace among the combatants is achieved. This ceremonial wedding in reality, however, means that two male contestants chosen for their physical appearance to fit the stereotypical image of the Viking, in itself a symbol strikingly apt to the elite notion represented by ‘masculine hegemony’, constitutes the couple who are taking part in the wedding. Bearing this in mind, the battle of Vikings could be identified as a homosocial act in which ‘markers of manhood’ are used to enhance the masculine warrior identity. Furthermore, the fighting itself can be described as a gendered drama ultimately aimed at seeking the approval of other males, both in terms of identifying with and competing against them (Kimmel, 1994).

Lifning – a narrative of fraternization

Lifning is an old tradition observed at the military academy since the 19th century, where the original meaning allegedly was: ‘to force someone in an inferior position to undergo certain performances in order to put the “life” into him’ (Hellspong, 1991, p. 156). According to the instruction book ‘Ruki’ (2018), the tradition referred to as ‘Lifning’ is a time when the senior course will pass down all of its knowledge to the junior course, who will continue the work of maintaining the traditions after the senior course is gone. This tradition is said to vary from year to year, but the idea is that the new recruits have to undergo certain tests, which will then be followed by a fraternization. It is also stated that: ‘a certain intake of substance can appear’ (Ruki, 2018).

There is something that is called ‘Lifning’, and I would say it is a sort of hazing …  This is one evening where the plutons get divided into smaller teams and you have a couple of cadets from the older course who walk you through different stations in the park, and you perform different tasks, but it is purely drunkenness with different tasks that render you more or less to drink. After that and as you are feeling kind of horrible the day after you are no longer a ‘despicable Ruka’, but a proper Karlbergare.² (Respondent C)

The purpose behind the tradition ‘Lifning’ as well as in most of the other traditions at the school is to create fraternization, commonly referred to the Swedish word ‘Förbrödring’ that in its direct translation signifies activities that promote unity among men. The expression which is strongly gendered in favor of the masculine has been open for considerable debate at the Military Academy the last few years, especially after the big #MeToo movement that erupted in 2017 (Alvinius & Holmberg, 2019). The interviewed cadets displayed sentiments of dissonance concerning the application of this word where it was on one hand perceived as a harmless expression of social communion, stressing the neutrality aspect of the concept, characterized by the following quote:

A lot of the things that we do … we are not like the rest of the society. Firefighters, police officers, military officers, we belong to a different category of the society and because of that; you want to create an identity, a group cohesion. And the fact that it is called ‘Förbrödring’ is something I never heard of before I came here, so it is a terminology that belongs to Karlberg’. […] My personal opinion is, if you get offended because it is called ‘Förbrödring’, then you are in a far too good position and we have to find the root of the problem somewhere else. […] We also have a tradition called ‘Lifning’ and its main purpose is to get as wasted as possible, but it also creates fraternization because misery and heavy exercises creates affinity. I can still feel fellowship and loyalty towards the people that I have suffered with and that has suffered with me. It creates a feeling that you cannot find anywhere else. (Respondent E)

While on the other hand, being seen as an expression, which has its place in history, and should therefore not be stressed as having such a central position in a modern military organization, as exemplified by a quote from another cadet:

I think that is so silly and weird. However, I believe it comes from the army. […] These kind of expressions such as, we are going to do a ‘Förbrödring’, it’s like, don’t even bother it is not so important in that context, just call it activities for socializing. My impression is that it comes from the army, where there is a lot of talk about brothers. In the navy I never noticed any differences between men and women like that, no one ever said “Hey brothers, let’s go out and sail the ship”. (Respondent B)

While another cadet lifts the requirements of ‘trust’ as a basic prerequisite for the military profession:

The bond you get to one another is much stronger here then if you attend a civilian education. Because we live closely together and do our field training together. We do many of these activities both within and outside the profession, and it’s the traditions that make you bond with your colleagues, which is one of the most important requirements for this profession … The purpose is to build a basic trust for each other, a friendship, so that we in times of crisis and hardships can trust each other. (Respondent A)

The fraternization culture on campus described as ‘Förbrödring’ consists of overall social activities with the main purpose of creating a common social identity among the cadets. As the cadets start their training at the Military Academy, they have to prove themselves in order to become someone worthy of a name, and the social activities are instrumental for that purpose. Fraternity is a highly masculine concept, which fits neatly into the hegemonic image of exclusiveness, where one important facilitator are rituals designed for ‘bonding’ (Winslow, 1999). According to McCoy (1995), bonding occurs as a lasting form of group identity and is brought about from an experience of shared suffering. ‘Förbrödring’, is furthermore explained as a gender-neutral expression meant to encompass all the cadets, both men and women alike. The way of describing a highly gendered word as neutral conforms with masculinity norms which are pervasive yet go undetected (Connell & Messerschmidt, 2005). Wadham (2013) suggests that ‘Brotherhood’ is the very basis from where masculine homosociality emanates. It is also an essential feature of cohesion, which on a positive note strengthens and maintains teamwork, but also carries an inherent element that can lead to polarization. Being that the word for creating social affinity, in reality, singlehandedly refers to masculine cohesion means that women who want to take part in this community also have to separate themselves from the realm of feminine qualities.

Discussion

The aim of this paper is to deepen the understanding of how masculinity norms are constructed and sustained in a male-dominated organization by investigating the cultural expressions of traditional socialization activities that occur at the Swedish Military Academy. For that purpose, three traditions were chosen for analysis, The Despicable Philquist that signifies separation, The Viking Festivity that illustrates homosociality, and Lifning, which incorporates fraternization, while also identifying sources of dissonance. I will now continue to discuss, from the context of a Military Academy what these traditions imply in terms of fostering cohesion based on masculinity norms. Another theme that I wish to address is in what ways prevailing culture norms are challenged in times of change, and how this transformation is creating ambivalence and dissonance within the military organization itself.

To begin this discussion I will start by addressing the most obvious question: what is the purpose behind these rituals?

From a purely military point of view, the answer is that these traditions facilitate the construction of a collective social identity focused on maintaining strong cohesion, which is an important prerequisite for the work conducted in military units (Kirke, 2009; Soeters et al., 2006). The centrality of the concept has been framed as an underlying logic of the military mission and is expressed as an exaltation of brotherhood that permeates the very foundation of military culture (Wadham, 2013). However, a more critical interpretation of these traditions could suggest a different picture.

According to Hearn (2015), hegemonic masculinity is a ‘common sense’ sort of domination, created and recreated in concrete everyday life and through institutional practices. Rituals and organizational traditions are part of those institutional practices, and therefore facilitate the reproduction of a masculine culture. One essential way in which this specific type of masculine culture present in the Military Academy functions is through a historical bind that connects present students with cadets attending the academy for more than 200 years ago, and thus serves as an identity preserver that reproduces the cultural heritage still present at the Military Academy today. This sentiment is expressed as an exaltation of the old and golden days and is materialized in the observance of traditions originating from a time imbued by social inequality (Hellspong, 1991). Cohesion in this way, is inherited and maintained from a hierarchical ladder that promotes loyalty and continuation, where the older generation of cadets has the responsibility for putting the new recruits on the right track, which practically means; leading them on the path to become impeccable representatives for the military conduct. This type of cohesion facilitates the maintenance of a hegemonic system that becomes increasingly hard to mitigate. For a concept to be solidified as hegemonic, cultural norms must be supported by institutional power, which means it is aided by powerful social institutions (Kronsell, 2012).

Another important function behind these activities is to manifest a symbolic separation of the former civilian identity from the new military persona, exemplified by the christening of The Despicable Philquist. This separation can be seen as part of a subjectivity process, aimed at creating ‘the military man’, which also materializes the separation of diversity and cohesion. The subjectivity process is hereditary, functional in some ways and dysfunctional in others, and deeply embedded in the hegemonic system where rituals function as performatory acts that maintain the separation between different categories and in that process reproduces a masculine culture.

The traditions currently held at the Military Academy today have a more symbolic and playful meaning, and there are also noticeable signs that times are changing which is revealed both in the attitudes of the interviewed cadets, and in the instruction book that is handed out to the newly arriving cadets. The cadets that took part in this study shared quite positive attitudes toward the on-campus traditions. They all thought they were fun, social gatherings that bring the students together while simultaneously uniting them with a long line of cadets attending the academy before them. On the flipside, however, there is the ambivalent nature of change, and this causes dissonance where being proud of the noble heritage emanating from being next in a long line of officers, is contrasted by changing paradigms in society of examining the functionality as it appears today, to that same heritage. This dissonance was in most parts communicated in sentiments that reflected the problematic meaning behind these traditions, in the way that theyfacilitate the construction of a masculine culture, for men and by men.

The military organization today is under heavy internal pressure, which in the case of its military academy is evident in the attitudes regarding the status of the traditions. This is expressed as an ambivalence in response to promoting an organizational historical heritage that one can be proud of while keeping up with the progressive forces of a modern world, where demands for inclusion and gender mainstreaming run in the opposite direction. This produces an overall feeling of dissonance where seemingly harmless on-campus traditions portend a collision at the intersection of social change and organizational continuity.

The conclusion of this paper is that masculinity in the military is a complex and multifaceted feature, where one particularly important arena for its maintenance is the different socialization activities that occur at the Military Academy, where cadets are trained to become officers. Furthermore, because masculinity norms are so intimately intertwined with basic notions of what it means to be part of the military, they contribute to the formation of a self-image and identity that promotes the military organization as a distinctive and peculiar organization liable to its own set of rules and ethics. However, the military is not an isolated island consisting of its own set of traditions to be preserved for generations to come. It is also a very potent factor in the real world were demands on equality are making their way into the very heart of the military culture.

The contribution of this article is that it highlights a paradoxical tension that lies within the military organization itself; how can the organizational goal of creating a more diverse and inclusive organization be achieved while an old paradigm that uplifts cohesion as a fundamental military trait is still pursued? In this way, the transmitter of culture functions as a neutralizer in that it normalizes a subject of concern (Wadham, 2013). It also points out how the observance of playful on-campus traditions functions as a transmitter of hegemonic systems, which essentially leaves the member who wants to belong to that system with two choices: exclusion or assimilation. The solution might not be to abandon all expressions of cultural heritage in favor of a more egalitarian agenda but to acknowledge the fact that there is an important tension between these conflicting goals: cohesion or diversity.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Irja Malmio

Irja Malmio is a university lecturer at the Swedish Defence University and a doctoral student at the Department of Systems Science for Defence and Security (in collaboration with the University of Lund, Department of Risk and Security). The title of her PhD project is “Systems Science for Defence and Security and Social Sustainability”, where she will approach sociotechnical defense systems from a norm critical perspective. Her research interests are based in the field of STS and Critical Security Studies, where she is primarily interested in the social effects produced by normative assumptions connected to securitized technology. Research interests also include Sustainability, Gender Studies, Epistemology, Pedagogy, Leadership, Socio-technological perspectives and Masculinity studies. She has previously a MA in East Asian studies, and holds a BA in Leadership under Demanding Conditions.

Notes

1 The Swedish word is ‘Förbrödring’ direct translation ‘to become brothers’.

2 Name of someone who is a cadet at the academy, referring to the name of the site of its location.