Some of the most homoerotic dynamics I’ve ever witnessed — including those between my proudly gay friends — exist between the brothers in my ex-boyfriend’s fraternity who, in reality, are possibly the most obnoxiously straight men to exist in this sect of the multiverse. Watching them helped me realize that if, on average, straight women gave each other half of the sapphic attention that straight men do, those interactions would be filmed and sold right back to the latter demographic as porn.
So, why is it that when men flirt with or show physical intimacy toward one another it is funny and satirical, but when women do the same it becomes inherently sexual? What are the implications of straight men who are comfortable with homoerotic advancements from their straight friends, but become agitated by — or even aggressive with — men who are respectfully confident in their homosexuality? Finally, what does it mean that some of the same men who thrive within the bounds of situational homoeroticism lack the emotional capacity for genuine intimacy in their everyday lives?
The answer to my first question is sad and simple, a tale as old as time; To be a woman is to be hypersexualized. When a man eats a banana, no one blinks; when a woman does it, the world imagines how well she can deep-throat a dick. When two men hug, it’s endearing; when two women hug, the male gaze imagines them scissoring. This concept is only magnified when women participate in activities that actually do have some capacity to be interpreted sexually. And because we (unfortunately) live in a society where straight is the assumption, male homosexuality is a taboo and female homosexuality is the top-clicked porn tab, women have grown accustomed to being sexualized through every possible lens. All of this is to say that, until we live through a drastic social or cultural shift, platonic intimacy between males will continue to be viewed differently — less sexually — from platonic intimacy between females.
The second two questions are more interesting to me: Why are so many straight men comfortable being flirted with and touched by their straight male friends, but completely shut down at the slightest whiff of a healthy homosexual or homoromantic relationship between men, and sometimes even with women? The easy answer would be to assume that all of these “straight” men are closeted and coping by projecting homophobia, but that simply can’t be true for the entire population… For at least a few, this energy dichotomy comes from somewhere else.
In my opinion, the comfort that straight men feel being physically and verbally intimate in a satirical way with one another is rooted in the societal assumption of straightness coupled with the ever-persistent and, frankly, homophobic taboos associated with being a gay man. Testosterone-dominated environments like fraternity houses and football locker rooms are so historically a place for straight men, that members of those groups today have been generationally conditioned out of even considering that one of their peers could possibly identify with the LGBTQ+ community. Put simply, many straight men are predisposed to viewing hypermasculine spaces as completely separate from homosexuality when, in reality, these spaces have plenty of overlap (I know many gay members of Greek Life at Cornell, and there has been a recent rise in professional athletes in traditionally masculine sports coming out).
What is at risk when hypermasculinity separates itself from gayness is any chance at a healthy relationship between the two. How are queer men supposed to feel valid and safe in platonic male spaces when queerness is used as a joke between straight men? Not to mention the emotional turmoil that this dynamic has the capacity to foster. Masculinity and homosexuality become like oil and water, which we should be beyond; Gay men should not be made a mockery in masculine spaces.
Another layer of this dynamic is the emotional availability (or lack thereof) of many of the men in question. It is not uncommon for straight men to shy away from genuine intimacy or be characterized by emotional unavailability. In many ways, this dates back to traditional male sexuality spectrum stereotypes: Straight men as tough, masculine and emotionally unavailable; Gay men as submissive, feminine and comparatively in touch with their emotions. But in today’s world, an emotionally available man sounds much sexier, more secure and overall more appealing as a partner than someone who can be jokingly intimate with friends but isn’t in touch with how he actually feels; so why haven’t all the straight men caught up? That’s the million-dollar question.
I am not under any false assumption that homoeroticism in the locker room or frat basement is going to cease to exist for the sake of creating a world where LGBTQ+ people are taken seriously; I’m not stupid. I also don’t believe that straight men should have to sacrifice being emotionally vulnerable with one another. Instead, it is critical to acknowledge the emotional hypocrisy that exists in hyper-straight spaces and embrace male intimacy as something worthy of existing beyond platonic satire. And if, as a straight man, you have caught yourself falling victim to the complex of necking down your male friends while simultaneously being icked by genuine male emotion, reflection is healthy and there is always space to consider the implications of your predispositions and readjust.
Annie Position is a student at Cornell University. Comments can be sent to [email protected]. Let’s Talk About Sex, Baby runs during alternate Sex on Thursdays this semester.
The Cornell Daily Sun is interested in publishing a broad and diverse set of content from the Cornell and greater Ithaca community. We want to hear what you have to say about this topic or any of our pieces. Here are some guidelines on how to submit. And here’s our email: [email protected].