Cohn: Sex and Death in Defense Intellectuals

Sex and Death in the Rational World of Defense Intellectuals

• The author, Carol Cohn, recounts a summer workshop on nuclear weapons attended by defense intellectuals.
• These intellectuals use the concept of deterrence to rationalize the possession of nuclear weapons, even though those weapons could potentially lead to disastrous consequences of mass incineration.
• Their language, termed "technostrategic”, obscures the realities of nuclear war.
• Cohn highlights the prevalent use of euphemisms and abstractions in these discussions to minimize the potential for mass destruction.
• The author observes a lack of emotional response and moral outrage within the discussions on nuclear strategy.
• The author details the consistent use of phallic imagery in relation to nuclear weapons.
• The author uses the phrase "clean bombs" as a potent metaphor
• Key terminology is used, such as "counterforce attacks", "collateral damage," "first strikes," and "minimum deterrent."
• The article notes that weapons are given human qualities or personalities and spoken about as if they were objects of affection.
• The author also describes how the same analysts refer to weapons as possessing traits like "survivability" and "vulnerability."
• The article portrays the detachment of these analysts from the real-world consequences of their statements.

Defense Intellectuals' Discourse

• Defense intellectuals are often male-dominated.
• Their language is filled with metaphors
• Defense analysts often use euphemisms, abstractions, and acronyms, which minimize the potential for mass destruction.
• The language is used to distance oneself from the destructive nature of nuclear war.
• Terms such as "collateral damage" or "tactical advantage" are used to obscure the human cost.
• The concepts of "deterrence" and "strategic stability" are used to justify the necessity of nuclear weapons.
• The analysis displays a disconnect between the theoretical discourse and the human consequences.

Additional Points

• The author argues that this language is part of a broader cultural phenomenon, reflecting a specific type of militarized masculinity, whereby male analysts maintain a sense of control and authority when discussing nuclear war.
• The article describes the use of imagery that conflates creation with destruction.
• The discussion includes images of male birth that are used as metaphors for nuclear creation.
• The article argues that the very language used creates a sense of detachment from the real world implications of nuclear weapons.