How straight ‘bromances’ can harm the LGBTQ+ community Dandy Follow Feb 17 · 4 min read

Photo by Thiago Barletta on Unsplash

In a world where masculinity is confined to very specific actions, mannerisms and personality traits, friendship among males is complex. While male friendships may appear simple and single-faceted on a surface level in many cases, the minefield that is masculinity and all the expectations attached to it can make friendships difficult to navigate, resulting in their simple outward appearance.

As such, many male friendships manifest in much the same way. That is, minimal displays of platonic affection and physical contact, conversation being limited to what is deemed traditionally masculine (and therefore acceptable), and avoidance of ‘too much’ emotional display. This is the traditional archetype of the straight male friendship, at least in the cultural context of the west. There is, however, a rarer form of male friendship that seemingly contradicts this archetype- the ‘bromance’.

Bromances are characteristically the opposite of what one would expect of a male friendship. They appear to involve increased physical contact and displays of emotion, with an emphasis being on platonic love (hence the term ‘bromance’). Even more paradoxically, these forms of friendship are often if not exclusively intentional and intended for public display. Despite the shame associated with these facets of friendship and their perceived incompatibility with masculinity, the most intimate aspects of bromances tend to be deliberate and on full view.

Because of this, many people view bromances favourably. Those whose values are progressive and are used to challenging societal norms surrounding masculinity hold bromances in high regard and even celebrate them. It is particularly women who support such friendships, possibly due to the refreshing nature of men allowing themselves to be seen as happy, caring and loving creatures. While breaking barriers of what society views as masculine is a positive thing, there is a problematic if not toxic aspect to bromance culture that sometimes arises, and it affects the LGBTQ+ community, particularly gay men.

The combination of society’s limitations on masculinity and the performative aspects of bromances result in questionable activity on the part of those who participate in them. In particular, allusion to homosexuality or at least homoeroticism is a theme that seems to occur in many such friendships. This aspect is purely for the consumption of those ‘viewing’ the bromance- in the case of everyday people it’s for the people in their immediate personal spheres, whether in person or on social media. For celebrities, it manifests as subtext in whatever media they are featured in. In most cases, the intention is not to be progressive or to break barriers.

The motivations behind such friendships vary. For some, these displays are designed for women, while for others the intention is to be funny for other straight men. In the majority of cases, the latter is how witnesses to bromances perceive these homoerotic themes, and it plays into a societal discourse that still sees homosexuality as an abnormality and something to gawk at. Overplayed, easy stereotypes of queerness are often played up and exaggerated in bromances. As a result, women admire the progressiveness and bravery behind the friendship, while straight men spectate and laugh, and gay men are subtly ridiculed in the process.

This sort of thing is by no means a new theme that queer people are dealing with. Aspects of queer culture are often seen as degenerate or depraved until they are appropriated by non-queer people and become fashionable or desirable. In this case, displays of affection and emotion which are seen as inappropriate or immoral when performed by gay men are taken and repurposed by two straight male friends who are able to capitalise socially by performing them. It is also no coincidence that the men who are involved in bromances are often those who are the most stereotypically masculine in appearance and personality, and thus they are able to perform acts associated with queerness in a way that doesn’t arouse suspicion of actual queerness. In this way, straight men are able to capitalise on aspects of queer culture while perpetuating barriers faced by queer people and thus limiting their progression in society.

All of this speaks to society’s strict gender roles which limit masculinity to a nearly impossible standard and holding that standard in high regard, while designating certain aspects of personality such as showing emotion and affection to femininity and therefore queerness. If masculinity was not confined to such standards there would be no need for the performative queerness seen in bromance friendships to be used as a veil for a genuine platonic connection. Essentially, straight men wouldn’t have to ‘act gay’ to make their friendship acceptable.

In the majority of cases, it can be assumed that the intention behind this performative queerness is not to harm the queer community. However, it is important for straight men to reflect on why ‘acting gay’ is so funny to them and why it tends to attract admiration from women. This is what makes finding a solution to this issue even more difficult. While the queer community and feminists are comfortable with discussing gender roles in society, straight men are often the most reluctant to contribute to this discourse. Dialogue surrounding gender expression puts straight men in a precarious position, because while their perception of masculinity is so limited and restricted, adhering to this narrow form of acceptable masculinity provides a level of protection from possible scrutiny or ridicule. It is a double-edged sword of masculinity being beneficial in terms of social hierarchy while not allowing room for introspection or questioning.

Even if they are aware or willing to question this behaviour, it is unlikely to have any effect. On a small scale, this sees the continuation of performative queerness in bromances. On a larger scale, this perpetuates the marginalisation of queerness and femininity while promoting ‘acceptable’ masculinity. Straight men deserve love and meaningful friendship as much as anyone else, and should be free to allow these things to manifest naturally. Toxic masculinity is harmful for everyone, including those who adhere the most strictly to it.