by Tristan Bridges and C.J. Pascoe
Every year, since 2009, the men of England’s Warwick University’s Rowing Team pose nude together in a series of photos that can be purchased individually or collectively as a calendar. The sales from this calendar go toward supporting their team and to raise awareness about bullying and homophobia among youth. This year, however, the team received international attention (prompting the development of a twitter account, a website, and a store to sell the photos and other team paraphernalia—like their 2013 film, “Brokeback Boathouse”). At first glance it may seem surprising that (presumably) straight men would pose naked with one another to raise money. But, when looking at other straight, young, white men’s stances on homophobia it becomes clear that, ironically, part of what is happening here is a shoring up of a particular form of heterosexual masculinity. Indeed the Warwick Women’s Rowing Team produced a similar calendar without the same amount of media attention (significantly, however, the attention they did receive was more often condemnatory).
The attention the Warwick boys received echoes that directed at Seattle-based hip-hop artist Ben Haggerty (Macklemore) upon the release of his hit song “Same Love” in 2012. The song, a ballad of support for gay and lesbian rights, was recorded during the 2012 campaign in Washington state to legalize same-sex marriage. It reached 11 on Billboard’s “Hot 100” list in the U.S., and hit number 1 in both New Zealand and Australia. The single cover art features an image of Ben’s uncle and his partner, Sean. Macklemore, who “outs” himself as straight in the song’s opening, claims that the song grew out of his frustration with hip-hop’s endemic homophobia.*
What do the Warwick University men’s rowing team and Macklemore have in common? They are all young, straight, attractive, white men taking a public stance against homophobia and receiving a lot of credit for it. This development seems to contradict a great deal of theory and research on masculinity (as well as conventional wisdom) which has consistently shown homophobia to be an important way in which young men prove to themselves and others that they are truly masculine (see here, here and here for instance). Upon first glance it seems that Macklemore and the Warwick University Rowers are harbingers of change – young, straight, white men for whom homophobia is unimportant and undesirable. That is, homophobia is no longer a building block of contemporary forms of masculinity. Indeed, such a reading may be part of the story.
There is, however, another way to read this transformation. These young men may be doing what sociologist Laura Hamilton calls, “trading on heterosexuality.” In analyzing the popular phenomenon of same-sex kissing among young women at college parties, Hamilton found that this popular practice of same-sex eroticism is, ironically, consistent with a kind of homophobia. Young women who identified as lesbian (and thus would presumably kiss other women) found these party environments to be unwelcoming and hostile. The explanation for this seeming contradiction, Hamilton argues, lay in the meaning of the act, not the act itself. When heterosexual-identified women kissed, they did so for men’s pleasure. These women “traded on heterosexuality,” strategically relying on their ability to symbolically and performatively indicate their own heterosexual identities (in spite of these same-sex practices) to garner attention, status, and better treatment than other groups of women (such as lesbian women). Other scholars argue that pornographic representations of same-sex sex between women have a similar effect – undergirding the naturalness of heterosexuality by positioning this eroticism for men’s pleasure rather than challenging its inevitability.
Could the Warwick men be doing something analogous? That is, could posing provocatively and sensually to fight homophobia work to undergird their own heterosexuality? Their heterosexuality is so overpowering that any notion they might actually sexually desire one another is laughable. Similarly, Macklemore’s support of GLB rights and recognition in “Same Love” actually bolsters his heterosexuality rather than calling it into question. C.J. Pascoe refers to this as a form of “jock insurance.” That is, young men who have (in whatever way) “proven” their (heterosexual) masculine credentials can engage in this sort of gender transgression and remain beyond reproach (see also here). These young men not only “get away” with gender transgressive behavior; their transgressions work in ways that prove exactly how heterosexual they are.
Sociologist Pepper Schwartz argues that for heterosexuality to be successful, it needs to be applauded and celebrated by others (here). The reactions to the Warwick men’s rowing team and Macklemore illustrate a sort of digital “applause.” From twitter, to facebook, to news media, the internet was alive with celebration of good looking, talented straight men’s authentic support for GLB rights. Indeed, for the Warwick team’s and Macklemore’s anti-homophobia to be consistent with heterosexual masculine identities, they need to be interpreted in this way by others.
Public proclamations of support on the part of heterosexual men to end homophobia are significant and important in changing opinion about GLB identities. But, asking what these men are getting out of the performance complicates such an easy analysis. This sort of “bro-ing” of anti-homophobic stances does not necessarily have the effect of challenging the naturalness and inevitability of sexual and gender categories. Much like the anti-Chick-Fil-A video made by two straight, white men to protest the restaurant’s homophobic policies, Macklemore and the Warwick Rowing Team’s gender and sexual practices and proclamations reinscribe their heterosexuality as so powerful and inevitable that even an anti-homophobic stance can’t call them into question.
While important steps forward, both Macklemore’s “Same Love” and the Warwick men’s rowing team fundraiser work to individualize a much more complex issue. They ignore the ways their performances of protest are – in some ways – produced by the same heteronormative ideals that help us make sense of their anti-homophobia as a heterosexual performance of masculinity. In the end, they’re actually strategically relying on the very discourse they claim to oppose.
________________________________
* This assertion has been critiqued as a narrow and racist reading of what constitutes hip-hop.
Comments 52
Mark McCormack — November 6, 2013
Hi, I'd be interested to know what you think equality looks like: That is, how would heterosexual men demonstrate support of homosexuality and/or condemnation of homophobia in a way that is positive?
It's worth also noting that the studies you cite about men's homophobia are US based, whereas the Warwick team is based in England, where research documents a withering of this link -- that the team aren't harbingers, but are instead fitting in with the dominant trend in British youth masculinities. It's not just heterosexual men with high levels of 'jock insurance' or masculine capital who are anti-homophobic and engage in soft tactile behaviors - it is the regular behaviors of normal men (see my work and Eric Anderson's on this).
I've called the consolidation of heterosexuality through proclamations of homosexuality 'ironic heterosexual recuperation' -- of course identity work is going on with these young men (when isn't it?), but I argues that this is compatible and, indeed, complements anti-homophobic/pro-gay perspectives.
Steve — November 6, 2013
This piece seems to be conflating intentions and outcomes, and only speculating on both. In a way what is being said reminds me of Demetriou's ideas around appropriation of key elements of subordinated masculinities by the 'hegemonic bloc'. Yet, there is much to take to task here...
'Asking what these men are getting out of the performance complicates such an easy analysis' - this might be right, but why don't you ask them instead of speaking on their behalf?
Moreover, why try to draw a connection between expression of support for LGBT colleagues/ peers/ friends/ strangers and a more wholesale 'challenging [of] the naturalness and inevitability of sexual and gender categories'? The internal hegemony might be shifting, even if external hegemony is not. My own research indicates even in the latter there is something of a wavering of the strength of this, even among lower educated groups of young men. The point is that they're not 'strategically relying on the very discourse they claim to oppose' at all, because they are opposing homophobia, not necessarily misogyny. (but they still might be... Let's go crazy and ask them)
And, as the old saying goes, don't bring me problems, bring me solutions. If you know how to better show support for LGBT issues beyond what is being said, then please set them out so we can all encourage them to occur.
syed — November 6, 2013
an fyi to readers, here are short pieces by mccormack (commenter above) and pascoe that deal with such issues: http://contexts.org/articles/winter-2013/the-hearts-of-boys/
peddster — November 6, 2013
This is either click-bait or very poor argumentative writing. The prognosis seems to be: heads you're homophobic, tails you're homophobic. Why? Because you're not a high-brow academic like we smart blogwriters are.
Whereas what goes unsaid is how the authors' own performance of challenging "the naturalness and inevitability of sexual and gender categories" is somehow exempt from the charges they weigh against others. Let's see, does their performance strategically gain them applause among an audience of like-minded blog readers? Yep. Earn praise for "authentic" protests of homophobia? Yep. Is their personal protest embedded within a particular discourse of sexuality? Yep, this is true of all our performances. Are there intersectional dimensions of their own identities that we could draw out to undermine anything they argue? Yep, sure could.
I either agree or am sympathetic to all the studies and writers you cite, but I cannot buy your overall argument, which seems to land on affording yourself the ability to perform "genuine" performance of protests over and above anyone else trying to do so. This is merely an exercise of defending one's own (academic) privilege of doing "authentic" performances and then policing other performances to point out their shortcomings. It's disappointing to see this quality of argumentation on such an important topic.
Casey — November 6, 2013
while a applaud that you are seeking to ask new questions, i find this article highly problematic, and in the end, though what you're describing can show up to varying degrees and in many colors, and though i do think there is some stuff in here we should talk about as a people, i think for the most part the short answer to the questions you're asking here are... "no".
Don — November 6, 2013
While this post is intellectually interesting, I find it counterproductive and hypocritical with respect to the progress of social justice. Macklemore and Warwick University's rowing team provide access points for a huge cross-section of the population who would otherwise ignore or work against social progress for minorities in the realm of sexuality. Attacking the collateral benefits to the folks who provide these bridges of support from the majority to the minorities risks discouraging further support from the majority. I almost got the sense that the author resents support from heterosexuals, a sentiment that is absolutely not shared by many others in the minority - myself included.
Eivind — November 7, 2013
This gets awfully close to "damned if you do, damned if you don't", for example:
"pornographic representations of same-sex sex between women have a similar effect – undergirding the naturalness of heterosexuality"
In other words, representations of heterosexual sex serves to represent heterosexuality as the only natural thing -- and representations of homosexual sex serves to do exactly the same thing ?
Young men who are homophobic, serves to enforce heterosexuality as the only natural thing -- while young men who act deliberately NON-homophobic have the same effect ?
Really ?
I have a more positive interpretation.
When people who take a strong non-homophobic stance get "a lot of credit" as you say, it's because there's a lot of people in the world who are sick and tired of homophobia, and which are therefore enthusiastically pleased at seeing people working to put an end to it.
And Macklemore ? He says he made the song out of frustration with rampant homophobia.
I see no reason to doubt him. Is that really so bad ? Are you really certain you want to attack people who see injustice in the world, and make a song to protest against the injustice ?
Tammi — November 8, 2013
Gay women would "presumably" kiss other women? What do you mean "presumably"? Um, they're LESBIAN! That means they are homosexual. So OF COURSE they would kiss other women. And only women.
Kaitlyn — November 8, 2013
While I think too much of this smacks of a "damned if you do" approach, there is something to be said about the trading on heterosexuality issue.
At the same time, I'm not sure the author really communicated an understanding of what the issue is and why it's important or relevant.
Trading on heterosexuality, as in the example given of straight girls at a party, involves implying (on the part of the participants) that heterosexuality is the only natural, normative state. In this context, the act of kissing someone of the same sex is immediately understood to have no direct sexual/romantic value between the two of them. This is what makes it degrading to someone who actually is lesbian: the heavy implication that there is no actual meaning to such a kiss, except as a deviant exhibitionist act for the audience meant to showcase the sexual nature of the participants without blocking their presumed availability by featuring someone who could be a sexual rival. There is an implicit understanding that neither woman is a rival for anyone in the audience in this case, because the implicit state is that /of course/ they are straight and just showing off, and the kiss actually means nothing beyond showcasing that they can be sexual.
I think there is a difference between showing security in your own sexuality by entering situations where someone homophobic would be put off versus engaging in what would otherwise be deeply sexual acts just to trade on one sexuality by implicitly marginalizing any other. It may be difficult to discern where the boundaries lie here, but the primary importance is in recognizing the validity of the other sexualities than the one you fall into, and recognizing them as essentially normative rather than deviant taboos.
Max Coleman — November 8, 2013
Since so many people are critiquing this article, I just wanted to lend my support for it:
First of all, the authors are not accusing these sports teams (or Macklemore, etc.) of homophobia. It is totally possible to recognize the efforts of these men while also pointing to their negative consequences.
In sociological terms, we can critique the destructive "function" of this bro-porn while still recognizing its good intentions.
Second of all, there is something very heterosexual about bro-porn, and that is its assumption of ASEXUALITY. That is, by taking naked photos together, teams of (allegedly) straight masculine men show that they are not afraid of the homosexual implications of the photos. In asserting their fearlessness, they are demonstrating the impossibility that anything homosexual exists between them -- it's all good, straight, fun.
By turning a sexual scene (a group of naked men) into a friendly asexual one, they are actually delegitimizing the possibility that any one of them is gay. They are so confident in their straightness, that is, that being naked together means nothing.
Many have said in the comments: Well what is a well-intentioned straight athlete to do? A great example is the nonprofit You Can Play, which tries to recruit gay athletes to sports teams: http://youcanplayproject.org/
flynnie — November 8, 2013
Dear feminists: please stop getting offended on our behalf and alienating allies so you can feel smug and progressive. I am very happy to have attractive young men (some of whom may be gay themselves) stripping off in defiance of an aspect of culture that is notorious for homophobia. Solidarity makes a lovely change from alienation, contempt and outright aggression. Ally alienation does not help the cause of the people on whose behalf are you are getting offended.
Sincerely,
A gay man whose is thrilled to have allies like the rowing team and Macklemore
Braendyn — November 8, 2013
I have to say, this is hands down the most glowingly intelligent comment thread I've ever had the pleasure of encountering.
My reaction to the article coincides with the majority of commenters here. I find this interpretation of these actions deeply problematic.
Behind such behaviors intent has to matter. The effect: receiving accolades and bolstering the subjects heterosexuality; doesn't describe the cause: frustration of perceived systemic homophobia.
The motivating factors cannot be ignored nor the desired outcome as stated by the subject.
However, I do feel this interrogation of motive behind those who profess alliance to a cause which they, in a certain sense, don't have a direct stake in, is necessary to the process.
Weekly Feminist Reader — November 10, 2013
[…] straight white men stand up for LGBT […]
Bro-Porn: Heterosexualizing Straight Men’s Anti-Homophobia | Social (In)Queery — November 11, 2013
[…] Original posted at Girl w/Pen! […]
Jason — November 11, 2013
There's a silly game being played by a lot of people in the academic humanities.
It's a game of one-up-manship.
Anyone who can find something to be offended about gains points.
It's the same two tricks over and over again.
1) "You're actually part of the oppressive discourse! You didn't even realize! BAM!"
or
2) "How dare you write about group X as a homogeneous entity! There is group Xa, Xb and Xc!"
I'm getting bored of these tricks. I think authors just fall back onto them when they are under pressure to publish a something fast.
Eric Anderson — November 13, 2013
I wish sociologist (of which I am one) would spend more time collecting and analyzing data, and less time philosophizing without it.
I wish sociologists would spend more time interviewing people and understanding the world through their eyes than supposing to know what they intend.
How did sociology move from a field of listening and reflecting; to one of supposing without listening? Feminist sociologists of gender and sexuality (again, of which I am) increasingly look like they belong in the humanities; and not in social 'sciences.'
Can We Celebrate Queer Lives And Activism, Too? | my sociology — November 14, 2013
[…] (not) sorry, but can we hold up on celebrating every white straight cisgender man who does anything minimally non-homophobic/biphobic/transphobic? I appreciate these efforts. […]
Bro-Porn: Heterosexualizing Straight Men’s Anti-Homophobia | Masculinities 101 — November 15, 2013
[…] posted at Girl W/Pen by Tristan Bridges and C.J. […]
Bro Porn: Heterosexualizing Straight Men's Anti-Homophobia Stances | Safe Schools | Desert Cities — December 7, 2013
[…] This post originally appeared on Girl w/Pen! […]
Heterosexual Normativity and Privilege: Another attack on Macklemore. — thomascwaters.com — December 7, 2013
[…] found a provocative and interesting post by C.J. Pascoe and Tristan Bridges, published first on Girl w/Pen! and then republished on HuffPost Gay Voices (link below). The authors have some great points that […]
karl — December 14, 2013
As has been pointed out in the previous comments, the information given is not sufficient to determine what the intentions of the models were. This seems to be common ground in the comments, in the sense that defending the article involves saying: we are not talking about why they did those pictures, but what effect such pictures have. So I want to assume, that the article really only talks about what effects such pictures have on society (although the article in my view is ambiguous as to whether we talk about intentions or consequences).
The article suggests two possible "readings", either the pictures lead to an understanding, where homophobia no longer is a "building block of contemporary forms of masculinity", or they are perceived as reinforcing the heterosexuality of the participants. That seems to me to be an interesting question and the most useful reading of the article for me is to assume, that this is in fact an open question (although the article seems to favor the second answer). I find theoretically the second answer more challenging, since -- as pointed out in the article -- it leads to a lot of follow-up questions concerning the conceptualization of homophobia as reinforcing the own heterosexuality. E.g. Under which circumstances is one able to perform seemingly homosexual acts, that in other circumstances would qualify oneself as actually being homosexual?
Since we are talking about an effect on the whole society, a first, and in my eyes necessary, step to answer this question would be empirical data as to whether the pictures are perceived as depicting heterosexual behaviour depending on the assumption that the models are heterosexuals. Even when the viewers assume, that the models are heterosexual, I'm not convinced that most of the viewers would view this as enforcing their heterosexuality, but rather as something that has repercussions to the status of the models as being heterosexual. But again, based on the information in the article, this seems to be an open question.
Queer Ally For The Straight GQ | eve massacre — December 15, 2013
[…] To make it a main statement of the campaign that it takes courage for men to kiss each other is the ‘no homo’ of this campaign. At first glance the pictures might look erotic but the surrounding texts and the ‘making of’ clip have the clear message: “It’s really hard for us to do this but we overcame our disgust to show solidarity with you – aren’t we great?”. It is so explicitly stressed that the kisses are fake that it robs those kisses of any shadow of gay desire. The interviews are there for the kissers to state how hard it was for them and that they like kissing women much better. The ‘making of’ clip shows some of them breaking down in laughter when trying to kiss, etc. Parts of this are dangerously close of even redemonising gay sexuality as disgusting and unnatural, no matter if aiming for the opposite. Surrounded by all this talk about how they are fake the actual pictures become a deeply desexualised bro-thing. Thus the kiss does more for reaffirming the kissers heterosexuality than actually being the homoerotic protest they want it to be. (For more on this effect I recommend reading “Bro-Porn: Heterosexualizing Straight Men’s Anti-Homophobia”, by Tristan Bridges and C.J. Pas…) […]
Queer Ally For The Straight GQ | Breaking The Waves — December 16, 2013
[…] Protest zu sein, den sie erzeugen wollten. (Für mehr zu diesem Phänomen empfehle ich “Bro-Porn: Heterosexualizing Straight Men’s Anti-Homophobia”, von Tristan Bridges und C.J. […]
Why We Should Care How Straight Allies Benefit From Their Support | Inequality by (Interior) Design — December 17, 2013
[…] one can best be an ally has recently come up for debate in the blogosphere (see here, here, and here). Indeed, being an ally is a tricky business. It requires careful thinking through […]
Schaut her, wir sind nicht schwul! : pressekompass — December 23, 2013
[…] bewertet auch Tristan Bridges auf thesocietypages.org Aktionen, bei denen Männer ihre Heterosexualität durch eine anti-homophobe Haltung bekräftigen […]
Corin — December 23, 2013
first, the comments to this post have been an enlightening read so thank you for that, But ultimately the original post has left me with a question for Tristan. While I understand how continuously affirming ones own heterosexuality can undermine a statement of support for the homosexual community I'm not sure that "Same Love" meets that criteria. The lyrics clearly describe a young heterosexual male confronting stereotypes of masculinity and sexuality within his peer group and ultimately rejecting them as false. The context of his affirmation is one of self reflection and personal understanding not "strategically relying on their ability to symbolically and performatively indicate their own heterosexual identities". Setting a positive example for young straight men to understand their sexuality and the sexuality of others seems a worthwhile act and in no way undermines the cause. How does this particular affirmation fit your critique?
Sladoled — December 25, 2013
I agree, this article is just one upmanship. Academic 'readings' by smug university students finding a problem with everything.
I am gay and don't find the rowers (whom i view to exude masculinity and not heterosexuality per se) or the Macklemore song 'problematic' at all.
Bro Porn: Straight Males Fight Homophobia | The Quire — January 9, 2014
[…] This post originally appeared on Girl w/Pen! […]
Making Sense of Changes in Masculinity* | Inequality by (Interior) Design — April 3, 2014
[…] means to be an ally and changing views on gender and sexual inequality—primarily among men (see here and here). We recently published an article thinking through changes in contemporary definitions […]
Bro-Porn Revisited: Heterosexualizing Straight White Men’s Anti-homophobia (again) | Inequality by (Interior) Design — November 4, 2015
[…] episode we had written about who were engaging in seemingly same sex activities in a post we called “Bro-Porn.” In that post we addressed the way in which two straight comedians kissed at Chick-fil-A to protest […]