Did everyone catch conservative pundit George Will's "You know how I know you're gay?" moment last night? (Answer: You like to hug the president.) Remarking on members of Congress -- MALE members of Congress -- embracing Obama after his speech last night, Will said:
"I don't know when men started to hug each other, but hug they do, and look at that"
He clearly pines for the days of the Bush administration, when two men NEVER ever hugged in public. (See Dick Cheney and George Bush, Sr. getting their hug on, too.)
I know, I'm being a bit hyperbolic. But this throwaway comment really is indicative of a sad traditional view of masculinity in which two Real Men (read: hetero dudes) never show physical affection for one another. And if they do, it's something to be played for laughs. Just look at almost every one of the Judd Apatow films, every one of them a huge hit, in which this theme shows up: The 40-Year-Old Virgin (referenced in the first paragraph above), Superbad (as the two guys fall asleep next to one another near the end -- and in countless other scenes), the upcoming I Love You, Man. Most of these films are about men who form really close bonds, but are embarrassed to acknowledge the depth of their relationship because that would be, well, kinda gay. This theme has also arisen in a lot of style-section type reporting, with articles on the "man date" and "bromance."
On the whole, I actually think that these movies and articles have made it more culturally acceptable for men to show some affection for one another and acknowledge the depth of their friendship. (Yes, the films might be mocking this aspect of male friendship, as well as playing on homophobia, but overall I think they have done some good to help normalize the idea of meaningful male friendship.) George Will is clearly a product of a different era.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Two dudes hugging.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/12145
In my opinion, George Will is from another planet.
Every time I read one of his essays in Newsweek, I literally think to myself - where in the world does he get these ideas about how the world works?
A planet, evidently, where that horrendous combover hairpiece looks way better than just being bald.
Honestly, I sort of feel like referring to somebody like that as "of a different era" is sort of giving his bigotry a pass.
Who knew that non-physical friendships weren't "meaningful"? I'm 26 and hug my close male friends when the occasion calls for it. My dad is 60, an unquestioning gay marriage supporter, and the proud and adoring father of my bisexual sister. He doesn't hug his male friends (as far as I can tell his female friends initiate the hugs). I can't wait to tell him that those 40-year-old friendships are shallow and inconsequential.
I said the Judd Apatow films have helped normalize the idea of meaningful male friendship. I didn't say the only way to have a meaningful friendship was to show physical affection to your friends.
So if the touching isn't the issue, what is the element of post-Superbad male relationships that make them "meaningful" in a way they weren't normally previous to Judd Apatow? What was meaningless about previous generations of men's relationships other than that they didn't hug enough for your taste?
My male, hetero partner and our good friend who is the same always hug goodbye. They're part of a group of about 6 or 7 friends who have remained close since graduating high school 12 years ago, and they all do it. There is not even the hint of discomfort, and most of them even do a real embrace rather than that macho, concave chest back thump thing. I like it.
Is men hugging a new thing?
I disagree though that Judd Apatow film perpetuation male stereotypes against physical affection. I think they actually in many ways call out men on a lot of the masculine bullshit that goes circling around.
The scene you refer to in "Superbad" is funny for that same reason. Firstly, they're drunk and now suddenly able to be more honest with each other than ever before. So they say their true feelings and the next morning they are awkward as if they had sex & regretted it- because they were suddenly very emotionally vulnerable. It's funny because men aren't usually "allowed" to act that way, but that doesn't change anything about what they said. It's sad that they have to be inebriated in order not to be afraid of having feelings. And I think "40 Year Old Virgin" is definitely not about enforcing the typical male attitude. Firstly, the title & main character says a lot. And all of his guy friends give him terrible, pig-headed advice that get him into more & more trouble. At the end he realized he should have just followed his heart all along. It's really not a macho moral at all.
I'm often disappointed in how many feminists take certain movies at face value & almost refuse to see any positive in them at all.
Ann, after reading your comment above, I realized I may have misinterpreted what you said in your original post. I apologize for that.
Ann, after reading your comment above, I realized I may have misinterpreted what you said in your original post. I apologize for that.
Ann, after reading your comment above, I realized I may have misinterpreted what you said in your original post. I apologize for that.
Whoa, sorry for triple-posting. The site went all mad for a moment there!
Danyell,
I think you and I saw two different movies.
The "40 YEAR OLD VIRGIN" that I saw basically ridiculed a man for not losing his virginity as a teenager as every ["REAL MAN"] is required to do by law!
Of course, in the end, he found "true manhood" by marrying a woman who already had two kids (hurrah for the Instant Family) so he could redeem his claim to ["REAL MANHOOD"] 40 years late.
Don't read your gender politics into a sexist movie!
Apatow is no feminist!
I would argue that this trend has not made male-male touching any more acceptable. I don't think it helps men show physical affection but rather only allows them to make jokes using touch. The only times when it is okay to "intimately touch" another man are those in which you can chuckle immediately afterward. If a man were in need of comforting, affection, or any other situation where he might enjoy physical contact with another man, he would be out of luck, since at that point it is not "the comedy hour".
I would argue that this trend has not made male-male touching any more acceptable. I don't think it helps men show physical affection but rather only allows them to make jokes using touch. The only times when it is okay to "intimately touch" another man are those in which you can chuckle immediately afterward. If a man were in need of comforting, affection, or any other situation where he might enjoy physical contact with another man, he would be out of luck, since at that point it is not "the comedy hour".
I would argue that this trend has not made male-male touching any more acceptable. I don't think it helps men show physical affection but rather only allows them to make jokes using touch. The only times when it is okay to "intimately touch" another man are those in which you can chuckle immediately afterward. If a man were in need of comforting, affection, or any other situation where he might enjoy physical contact with another man, he would be out of luck, since at that point it is not "the comedy hour".
While I think that these films are rather misogynist (most mainstream media is), I'm on the fence about whether they're homophobic. I think they use low-brow humor to express that just because you're straight doesn't mean all of your actions and emotions are going to be heterosexual/heterosocial. I think it's essential for men in our society to know that. There's a huge amount of fear around the world of "gay," and it needs to change. Young men may be fine with their gay friends, even just as comfortable with them as they are with their straight friends - but with their own homosocial feelings? No, don't even go there.
Also, I find that the more "masculine"-identified my male friends are, the more homosocial they tend to behave. My college buddy T, who drinks tea, appreciates art, fashion, and has mostly female friends, doesn't tend to act out on his homosocial side with his male buddies. No ass-slapping, dick grabbing, etc. The "rougher" guys I hang out with - sailors, carpenters, ex-prisoners - do subscribe to this behavior. They're also more likely to utter, "You're such a fag, dude (but I love you, especially last night)." I think that homosocial behavior is just something deeply ingrained in society, and it becomes more evident in lieu of sexual restrictions. Sexuality is a construct, after all.
I'm not much of a hugger in general, and so don't hug my male or female friends unless they initiate it. Hugging my fiancée is about the limit for me.
But there is a lot of perception among straight guys that too much male-male contact veers toward the land of gay. Generally, though, I find that the more a male is worried about how others might perceive his sexuality, the less comfortable he himself is with it. E.g., only my deeply closeted friends (hey, I live in Texas) are uncomfortable with male-male contact to the point where they purposely avoid it.
You might have just as well declared that you eat puppies.
George is from a specifically narrow era. A short while ago BoingBoing ran the earliest recorded security footage. Some film of a British street, with cabs, and folk going about their daily business. The men being watched hugged, as did other men in the street who met each other. Men and women walked arm in arm, and people put their hands on their friend's shoulders in general camaraderie.
Yeah, the men-can't-touch thing is a decidedly mid-20th-century thing. I'm in the middle of reading "Team of Rivals" by Doris Kearns Goodwin, a book about the men in Lincoln's cabinet, and it's full of descriptions of those men's close friendships. They hugged all the time. The circuit court lawyers shared beds to save money while traveling. Some of their letters to each other sound like love letters, because they had such deep affection for each other. In some instances, they are much more loving to their best friends than to their wives.
Personally, I blame the 1950s (and the 80s, too, I suppose) for creating a culture so focused on heteronormativity that it squeezed out so many forms of expression between men. It's good that it's finally becoming acceptable again. (Although I'm not all that fond of the word "bromance". Why can't straight guys just have best friends like the rest of us?)
As a man, I find most hugging that goes on to just be excessively emotional, regardless of sexes. I don't hug other women except my girlfriend, either, and I consider no hugging to be as phony as that of two politicians, since I find it unlikely that they really have the kind of grand emotions for each others that a hug would imply. Don't some people just take hugging a bit too far?
...hmmm, slow news day...some guys, some women are just uncomfortable showing emotions & hugging, etc...can't we let them be them w/out psycho-analyzing it to death?
George Will is really referring to the fact that Bil Clinton reeeally popularized the man hug during his Administration. To men of a certain age its still a bit odd. But who could forget the picture of that famous Bush-McCain hug?
From what I've experienced, it's ok for men to hug as long as they are not actually hugging. One time, two 20 year old make friends of mine hugged each other, and made sure to tell me and another girl there it wasn't a hug, it was a man-hug. Yeah, doesn't make sense, I know. I told em it was still a hug, regardless of putting the word 'man' in front of it, and told them to stop being homophobic. And they are homophobic. In more ways than the hugging part. I'm pretty sure the one has gotten better, though...
Anyway, I also disagree for the most part that films have made male affection more acceptable. While it is true they have made male affection acceptable in certain situations, that does not mean they are acceptable period. Not to mention, these scenes are funny BECAUSE two men are showing affection for each other. So I guess I'm half and half on the issue. I guess in the end, something like this takes baby steps.
When my boyfriend and his roommate say affectionate/sexual things to each other, they are not saying it's okay to seriously say those things. They are saying it is funny when they talk as though they are showing affection for each other. This doesn't mean they think gay men shouldn't talk like this to each other, it's only funny when straight men do it. And since they are both straight, they aren't showing affection for each other, they are mocking the idea of showing affection for each other. I personally can't say whether this is problematic or not. Is it homophobia? Is it mocking masculinity? My bf would say it's mocking masculinity (btw, if you're reading this Richard, sorry if it seems like I'm criticizing you! ) and I'm sure his roomie would too, but I just don't know.
My guy friends in high school used to joke about the "man hug" - which usually requires slapping your buddy on the back. One of them said, "See, I'm hugging you, but I'm also hurting you. So it's still manly!"
Of course, they meant this is a completely tongue-in-cheek way. We were a pretty touchy-feely group :D
*side note*
even though I disagree with most of what George Will stands for, i still have so much respect for him. He is a true conservative, who holds true to his beliefs. Will does act the social conservative role, but holds to the more historic conservative ideals. He doesnt pander like so many really social conservative, nor is he nasty and attacking. He knows where he stands, but is respectful and interested in the other side.
So it makes me a little sad to call out George Will even if he did have it coming. (Plus Wills thoughts/ books on baseball are great)
I've always found it oddly endearing that Will, worshiper at the feet of wealth, power and privilege, was a fan of the humble Cubs. I also agree that he is a conservative rather than a Republican Party hack.
I really liked Superbad because I thought it showed how pornography and heteronormativity hurt relationships.
The porn ideal made it harder for the boys to have meaningful relationships with the girls. Heteronormativity pushed the boys into relationships with girls at the expense of their own relationship.
I really loved that ending scene when the boys looked back at each other so wistfully -- they were excited about the future but sad they couldn't mourn the past.