Thoughts on male relationships
Right now, the number one post on my personal Reddit feed is this: https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/9bryj8/straight_guys_of_reddit_whats_the_most_intimate/
Reading through this made me feel quite a few different emotions, but I would say that my biggest takeaway is disappointment.
I'm pretty young, being in my late twenties, but I know that the largest Reddit demographic is younger than me. And it terrifies me to see that people who are probably less than 15 years younger than me appear to be far more stricken by toxic masculinity than I was when I was their age. Right now the top response is a story about someone scratching his friend's back during a military deployment. He later mentions that his comrades gave him a hard time for it. Is the idea of machismo so fragile that we cannot take simple actions - even to provide relief to a friend?
I'll be the first to admit that a single AskReddit thread is not going to be an accurate representation of the levels of intimacy men actually give each other. But the simple fact that it's full of jokes, to me, makes it appear that they are using humor as a defense mechanism.
The fact that young men have so many barriers preventing them from building bonds with other men in a society often partitioned by gender deeply concerns me. I worry that this is the beginning of a societal issue in the same vein as racism was for our parents and grandparents and will only cause more problems as we age and gain political sway.
I'm bringing this up here because I would like some perspective on this. I've always been very sympathetic to other people, and my views as a gay man are obviously going to be different from straight men. Where is this toxicity coming from? Is there a way we can stop it, or is it already ingrained in the collective psyche?
According to my observations, 2 things don't exist in a society at the same time: acceptance of gay men and publicly intimate male friendships.
In Western society over a hundred years ago the concept of being gay was very obscure, and men had friendships like on the historical photos here https://www.artofmanliness.com/articles/the-history-and-nature-of-man-friendships . Also in modern India being gay isn't really accepted either and male friends can walk holding hands there. But once the Western society discovered homosexuality as a subject of psychology and eventually accepted it as a variant of the norm, for some reason straight guys have been feeling a need to clearly show they are not gay.
That's especially strange these days, when people know that being gay is fine but still are like, "don't touch me I'm not gay" when physical affection really isn't always sexual. Hopefully this will improve in the next decades.
That's so strange, maybe it's the circles I associate with but the guys I know have no problem with touching each other. Hugging, arms around the side and even mildly sexual butt touching isn't uncommon, noone is insecure enough to have to follow it up with a disclaimer that we are not looking to take them to bed.
Actually @Nitta's observation is mostly right, but lacking a bit of nuance. In my observation, there are three types of culture:
Male homosexuality is invisible. Male-to-male affection is okay because noone is gay.
Male homosexuality is visible and not accepted. Male-to-male affection is bad because noone wants to be seen as gay.
Male homosexuality is visible and accepted. Male-to-male affection is okay because it doesn't matter if you're seen as gay.
I assume you live in a culture of the third type.
I thought men initiating any form of public affection was generally frowned upon in the antipodes.
With a possible exception if you just won the footy.
It depends what region/culture/demographic you're talking about. It varies. For example, two old farmers in a country town wouldn't hug, but I've seen a fair few young straight men being physically affectionate with each other in my city. And it's no coincidence that the two old farmers would be more strongly against gay men than the hipsters who hug each other all the time.
I think it has to do with generally signaling your environment that you’re looking for a (heterosexual) relationship. It’s the way you dress and the way you behave (even if just stereotypically).
I hung around rather “open” places when it comes to these things and my best (male) friend, who is very hetero, loves to dress rather flamboyant and I know a ton of girls initially thought we were gay for hanging out with each other. In these environments, it’s no hindrance to meeting girls (maybe even the opposite since it’s a conversation starter) but I can see how you could be afraid that it’s just another way it can lower your chances.
Women today have photos just like the ones in the articles you shared, but gay women are just as well-known and accepted as gay men. Why is it that men stopped displaying this kind of affection, but women continue to? Is it really acceptance of gay men, or is it knowledge of and discomfort with gay men?
It doesn't sound like these people know that being gay is fine, or at least they're uncomfortable with the idea that they might exhibit signs of being gay.
Affection is seen as a feminine quality, so it's okay for women to be affectionate. But for a man to show affection means he's effeminate - which is equated with either weakness or homosexuality.
Be careful of hive think and reddit. The population on the website (especially the most vocal/voting one) skews white, male, straight, and tech. This particular subset of people often don't have the greatest social skills, so physical intimacy is probably lacking in their life - intimacy with both men and women.
Plus, the thread is sort of leading to response bias. Of course you're going to get people posting things that aren't very intimate as their "most intimate" because they're the kinds of people who want to respond to this question.
TL;DR: I wouldn't read into the responses too much. Is male on male intimacy discouraged among the straight culture in the US? Absolutely. Should something be done about it? Probably. Is it as big a problem as you think? Hard to say, but don't jump to any conclusions.
True, but it does still skew that way and I'd be careful about selection bias.
I get that, and that's why I was saying that it wasn't going to be a very good reflection on society as a whole.
I should clarify when I talked about it being the next racism, I didn't mean to expect regular lynchings. I was trying to say that it is a major societal force with negative effects. One that I hope will be as visable as racism is today so that we can seek to minimize it.
I think this has some to do with identity politics. When "gay" became an identity with certain stereotypes attached to it, men automatically had to be not-gay (I suppose, that is). I recall reading about how colonialism has brought to India the hate of homosexuality (albeit it should not be overlooked that at least some of that homosexuality was inconsensual and was in the form of paderasty). Homosexuality was also widespread in the territory that makes today's Turkey, and still is, but supposedly homophobia has peaked in the more recent decades. In Turkey we touch each other quite a bit, and generally, among friends, it's not homosexual if it does not involve at least one party's genitals, or intimacy/tenderness in some cases. Same goes with verbal communication. Also, kisses never happen between straight men, but instead straight women do kiss on cheeks. Gays are often objects of ridicule.
It's maybe something introduced by the abrahamitic religions and then lots of confusion and complex behaviour and taboos ensued. IDK, but I'm kinda jealous of how women in general can be way more intimate while still not being sexual. Maybe that has to do with the predatory roles traditionally associated with masculinity with regards to sexuality: he is more powerful and he is the conqueror, the encounter of men is that of multiple active parties, whereas the encounter of females is that of passive parties; the former can conquer one another, whereas the latter cannot. That aligns with the traditions of paderasty and oriental homosexuality / male sexuality where the parties of sexual intercourse are not primarily equal lovemakers seeking more or less similar joy, but one active party that's the penetrator and the other whose role is to be the passive object furnishing the penetrator with joy. So who is "gay" and who is not is fluid, and men that want to remain straight need to firmly assert their masculinity through the assumption of not-gay traits.
Good god is society twisted! According to the principle of least effort we should just hug our pillows under some cover and dream fun dreams...
Can you provide some examples of what you saw as toxic?
And I ask this legitimately. I grew up in a hyper masculine household. As long as I can remember, I can remember my father, a former Marine and police officer, telling me and my brothers that he was “raising warriors! Not pussies!” As an adult, I recognize that it’s not a healthy mentality but I legitimately have difficulty seeing some things as being toxic. So I’m looking for some education
I read through quite a bit of that thread and while I didn’t read every comment to every reply to the OP, I can’t say I saw an over abundance of toxic masculinity.
To address your example about the man scratching another guys back during a deployment, I couldn’t find it myself so I can’t speak exactly to it but I did want to say you have to remember the context.
A military barracks or deployment can often look like little more than a frat party with guns. It’s an environment that breeds and supports hyper masculinity because any sign of weakness is something an “enemy” can exploit.
There it is, that's the toxic bit. What an awful environment.
I wouldn’t say that’s the best example to use though. That’s an environment devoted to turning young men into soldiers and killers. It’s not designed to be anything but hyper masculine. It is awful, I don’t disagree necessarily, but that’s an outlier environment, not the status quo for most of us.
It's definitely an outlier, but it is absolutely part of our society, and a lot of men take that attitude home with them. Anyway I'll let OP speak for themselves, I was just trying to emphasise the example they'd already given.
In my understanding, "toxic masculinity" isn't able to be identified as any single event. You can't point to a particular party or a single interaction between men or a single event involving a man and say "that's toxic". The toxicity comes when certain aspects of character which are associated with masculinity become emphasised over a long period of time across a large group of people. It's tropes like "real boys don't cry", and "real men don't express their feelings", and "men are entitled to take sex because they need it more than women", and so on. When boys and men are raised in this environment, they're being soaked in masculine stereotypes to a toxic degree.
The topic seems to still be quite active, given that it seems to still be changing quite a bit. I highlighted that one because it directly showed the toxic behavior, but most of them showed the effect rather than the direct cause. This one is a decent example: https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/9bryj8/straight_guys_of_reddit_whats_the_most_intimate/e55j1dk
This one is a little more typical of what other popular posts are saying. And to be clear, I am not saying that there is a problem with these experiences in and of themselves, but rather the fact that it shows a lack of intimacy as a whole. With this specific moment, the commenter himself is being intimate by showing his vulnerability to his friend (weather or not he was able to control himself), but his friend is not reciprocating at all. He doesn't mention having any physical contact or even being talked to, let alone being actively consoled. I have had relative strangers be more intimate with me than that.
I guess what I'm having trouble with is why that's a sign of toxic masculinity. Maybe the friend wasn't sure how to handle the situation, maybe he was uncomfortable with such display of emotion, and the friend doesn't seem to have any issue with that. There are entirely too many variables to assume it's a result of a toxic masculinity. Had it been me, I would've done what I could to console my friend but at a certain point, I'd have been useless. I'm not emotional by nature and emotional responses often have me confused to the point of not knowing what I should or shouldn't do.
But that's why I'm asking the questions. I know the environment I grew up in absolutely would be considered toxic but I'm trying to learn and adjust my world view to avoid that environment for if/when I have children of my own.
Here's my take on why @Akir's example demonstrates toxic masculinity.
The commenter's best friend took the crying man away from other people: "Real men don't cry!"
The best friend didn't try to offer support: "Real men don't talk about their feelings!"
The best friend didn't hug or hold the commenter: "Real men don't show affection!"
The best friend didn't ask the commenter if he wanted to talk about it: "Real men don't talk about their feelings!"
The best friend, and I assume the commenter, have never discussed the incident: "Real men don't talk about their feelings!"
Every single aspect of that interaction is just reinforcing the idea that men should hide their real feelings. Hide the crying man from public view because crying is embarrassing. Don't actually talk about what's going on. Just be stoic and stand/sit by him while he cries it out.
The only thing I would disagree with is that he was taking care of him because he was embarrassed about his friend crying. Taking him home was a sympathetic act. He was supposed to be his best friend, after all.
And of course I wouldn't say this is deliberately toxic in any way. I am just saying it would be better for everyone's mental health if more intimate and sympathetic actions like those you mentioned were not taboo.
But the best friend didn't take the crying man home. Not straight away:
He kept his friend away from prying eyes. I don't think it was because he, himself (the best friend), was embarrassed, but because he would have believed his crying friend would be embarrassed to be seen crying in public. So he was helping by giving him a place to cry privately - not at the party and not at home. Because real men can not be seen to cry.
Of course not! It's not deliberately toxic. It's just that both those men have been raised to believe that real men don't cry and real men don't show their feelings, so they did what seemed right within the limits of what they've been taught.
The toxicity comes from the fact that those men were raised to behave this way.
I think one of the top comments contains part of the answer:
As men, we continuously reinforce to each other not just what is 'manly', but also what isn't. And I think to many of us we eventually start feeling like you can't afford to step outside of those boundaries, to make the 'mistake' of not conforming to some poorly communicated masculine ideal, without being shunned and ostracized by your fellow men. It's like a return to high school cliques: you adjust your behavior to your group and publicly shun any deviation from that norm because, more then anything else, you fear being rejected and ending up alone. Because you don't know how to handle something like that.
As a 20 year old, straight white male, I think these kinds of friendships are largely based on region. In a Bible throwing, god fearing, gun toting southern region of the USA, that toxic friendship thing might hold some weight. However, I have a group of 6 friends that I've known since high school and we're all pretty damn close. A very popular thing in male relationships (in my experience) is not shunning homosexual behavior, but rather being gay (not a thing, I know, but bear with me) around each other. Usually acting out homosexual actions is more common. We'll occasionally joke around and go "Gimme a kiss" and blow kisses, and several of us have kissed one another on the head or on the hand or shit like that. We're generally pretty comfy with our sexual orientation so it doesn't faze us. Hell, a friend and I actually full on lip to lip kissed each other (he jokingly leaned in for a kiss because I usually play the straight man but I leaned in that time a little too close and then boom). We laughed it off and went back to what we were doing. I'm also able to sit down with any of these friends and have a good heart to heart, talk feelings, and hug it out. I think it's just a community based thing where the place you grow up affects your interactions
As another 20 year old, I have to agree. I have a good group of friends from various backgrounds, and both male and female. These friends I see as brothers and sisters, and we do what I've read from older people on not doing; talk what is on our minds, physical intimacy (e.g. hugging), heart-to-heart conversations like you said.
I read a lot on Reddit about people lacking this sort of connection but most, if not all are 10 years older or more. I don't see this issue from what I can see from other groups of people I am friends with but not close with either. It may also be a region thing, but I like to say Generation Z doesn't appear to have this problem.
I got very lucky that my brother and I are best friends. We can show a lot of affection for each other that I don't think would be "acceptable" if we weren't blood. We've had people think we are a gay couple (we're both straight) in the past, including a guy that tried to get into a threesome with us. Because of this stroke of luck, I haven't had to deal with a lot of the problems a lot of men my age (late 30s) have had with not having any intimate moments with guy friends. It just makes me sad when I read about lonely guys that can only find friendship with groups of guys that call each names and hide their feelings behind ironic gay jokes and stuff like that, which a lot of dudes in our broader circle of friends would do regularly.
A lot the toxicity comes from fear of being perceived as gay, as @Nitta mentioned. I think it was Dan Savage who mentioned that straight men have more fear of being accused of being gay than closeted men. I think that's very correct. I was born and raised in a very rural area, literally on a farm, so I had a lot toxic masculinity in the culture around me. Fortunately, my dad is a very soft spoken and kind mind, so I never got called gay as an insult by him or anything like that casually, but I had friends that did have fathers that did just that. Straight males in a lot of cultures in the states are absolutely terrified of being perceived as gay, despite the strides in gay equality.
But, like I said, I'm not an expert on it because I have plenty of male intimacy in my life. So, I haven't had to examine it as much as others.
I don't think that's unusual. That describes me pretty accurately. I'm also fairly introverted. But I also think that touch is an extremely important interaction.
One of the better memories of my miserable childhood was after I had a breakdown in the middle of class. Two of my classmates - not ones I had ever had any meaningful interactions with before, either - came outside the door to console me. Why would I say this is a good memory? Because one of them rubbed my back when they were talking to me. To me, that was an affirmation of worth that no amount of words could ever match.
For another example, the only time I can remember having physical contact with my father after age 10 was when he was trying to restrain me, and we haven't talked for about 10 years now. The idiom "actions speak louder than words" is an understatement.
For those with whom physical contact with people comes naturally there is no active thought process you describe. When you are establishing an emotional moment with another person it just happens. The only time I would say I actively think about it is when it's with someone I know or suspect is uncomfortable with physical contact or I don't know that well.
It varies greatly, some people are touchy-feely and some are not at all. Also depends on particular society: for example people in Pakistan generally have smaller personal space than in Norway. By the way, friendship is a kind of relationship and it is a love relationship, just not romantic/sexual one.