After reading the articles about Friends and Smallville I have come to a conclusion about male relationships in TV shows.
The media has portrayed male characteristics for so long, and in such a way, that anything that deviates from that norm is considered a homosexual tendency. If someone was asked to describe traits that are associated with masculinity, they may come up with things such as, strong, unemotional, breadwinner, handsome. So when any hint of emotion or weakness is attributed to a television character, it is automatically assumed that they have homosexual tendencies. In reality, men are emotional, weak, and vulnerable at times, it’s just that this is not how men are portrayed through the media, and therefore not how we typically consider men. It also makes men themselves feel like they cannot display this type of behavious without being labelled “queer”. (I really don’t like that word)
I think that if you look hard enough at any same-sex relationship of whatever kind you can find characteristics that aren’t going to match what we typically think of, and therefore you will be able to label in a homosexual manner. I believe this is the case for both of the articles. Because the relationship between two males (in both cases) isn’t the norm of how we think men should interact with one another, they get articles written about hidden gay characteristics.
It’s time to step up to reality and realise that the sexes don’t have to reproduce the characteristics associated with them based on media images. Women can be tough and athletic and successful if they want, without having to be a lesbian! And men can be emotional and weak and vulnerable at times, without having to be gay!
If I was with a man who didn’t show any emotions, who didn’t feel worried and overwhelmed, or who wasn’t vulnerable once in awhile I would be worried, because he probably wouldn’t be human.
Hey Christee, I completely agree with you. What I was saying in my blog this week is that women have so much freedom when it comes to expressing themselves whether it be through the gifts they give, the clothes they wear, or the emotions they show. Men, on the other hand, are expected to abide by far stricter rules in which they are limited in their expression of emotion and what they do, say, and wear. From reading the articles this week, it almost seems like being male is tougher than it seems, because quite frankly, there are a lot of unwritten rules. I mean, if we even think about the way us women sit. We can sit however we want, legs crossed, open, etc, and not be questioned about it. By, if a male sits in a way that is not considered acceptable than they are automatically given a label such as homosexual or simply, they are not considered the “norm” or what is normal in society.
Im all over it….my ex boyfriend was so plaggued by his emotions it was aweful, he couldnt express himself for fear of being weak infront of his women…endearing to some but annoying to all. One time he cried in front of me and then wouldnt talk to me for 3 days…that says alot about the men I pick ..pathetic I know…but it also makes a sad case for masculinity.
This was a really good blog! I completly agree with you that men may have a harder time showing their emotions in real life because of how they are depicted in the media. It’s like if a guy cries on a TV program he is less of a man??? What is up with that?
I find it interesting how a movie like “Brokeback Mountain” played out in the theatres and in the rental stores… I always thought that the 2 main characters would be viewed different in reality after I saw the movie because society is not always so accepting… It was really great to see however all the attention that they recieved because of the role they played. I feel like society is slowly becoming more and more accepting.
I also thought you brought up a great point about how women can act manly etc… and not be labelled a lesbian. I think that is so true… women have more freedom in this area I believe then men do. Women can deviate from their “role” in the media more so then man can without being called a homosexual!
This was a really great blog!!!
this is quite true, the media portrays the eastern culture and people as femenine, chaotic and sensual otherwise known as homosexuals while they portray the west as masculine, the muscular christian. it’s all orientalism in a word according to Said
Nice post! You really talked about some really important things. First of all I completely agree with you on all of the things you brought up. The media needs to get with the times and realize that first of all the slightest sign of emotions doesnt mean someone is gay and second of all that in todays day and age it is OKAY to be gay. Media forms seem to be slow to open up to these possiblilities.
The reason the scenes discussed in the Friends article were funny was because we had been previously assured of the characters heterosexuality. For the characters then to show emotion and attachment to one another was a contrast to how television as a medium would sterotypically describe this relationship. That was why it was funny in my opinion.
I didn’t read this article, I thought we were supposed to read about video games, but I figured I would throw out my thoughts.
I feel that male heterosexuality is much more narrowly defined than female heterosexuality. Thus, like you said any deviation from the stereotype of masculinity is noticed. Why is it that two girls can hold hands, grind on each other, and even make out with one another without having their sexuality questioned while if two men did any of these things it would be considered to be homosexual behaviour?
I always like bringing it back to the clothing men and women are allowed to wear. A woman can wear anything from a suit to dress and still be viewed as a heterosexual woman. Yet if a man wears anything but a man’s shirt and a man’s pair of pants/shorts you can bet his sexuality is being questioned. Of course there was a time when it was not socially acceptable for women to wear pants but we are well past that… so why the double standard with men, why can I not dawn a dress if I so choose – as a young boy I use to like to play dress up with my older sister and I loved wearing dresses with nothing else underneath… weird? Why should it be weird – if it feels good do it right? Wrong, there is no way in hell I would strut around wearing a dress today, unless I was in some special situation where it would be socially acceptable to do so (ie: in a play, at a halloween party).
I agree with what ‘dustinthewind’ said above, while at the same time agreeing that there are definitely gender roles on both sides that are deemed un-heterosexual. As a male, maybe I just notice what my experience in defining gender roles is more than the opposite. I remember, though, the first time I ever saw my father in a vulnerable situation when I was young, and it was a very shocking incident. It was one of those moments that is engrained in your memory forever, and I think mainly because of the role that he was supposed to play as a father. I find it facinating how situations like that, which are usually very irrelevent for most, can become so significant on the personal level.