It is no secret that the media loves to “push the envelope” by attempting to bring “humor” out of situations that, for whatever reason, they believe the “straight male” will find humorous; particularly, the depiction of gay kissing, groping, etc. Clearly evidenced by the recent movie “I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry”, it is clear that there is a fascination with man on man action, and whether it is used to attempt humor, or whether it is used to simply make fun of, one thing is certain; it definitely garners attention.
Many times, the attempt at “humor” will bring negative attention from the gay community, like with the Snickers ad that was played during the Superbowl; mostly because it crosses a line between being funny, and instead, seeks to make fun of someone/something. I think that regardless of where that line may lie, there is no denying that there is a constant obsession on man-on-man action; which is clearly evidenced by this ad campaign. The campaign is trying to get Londoners to come to Paris, and in this ad, they are showing how Paris is not only the city of love, but that it is also the city of humor. However, I have to ask; how is this ad humorous? Is it funny that men would kiss and grope one another in a clearly sexual position?
While I will admit that I am not an expert with regards to rugby, I know one thing for certain; rugby is a really hot sport to watch, and the players are a real distraction (i.e., they are hot). The grittiness of this contact sport, practices like a “scrum”, and the other close cornered activity that goes on during a match make this a visual delight for men that are sexually attracted to men (regardless if that is the intention or not). Additionally, I would argue that seeing the activities of the sport acted out, undeniably provide a visual display that borderlines on porn (or as Mark Simpson brilliantly calls it: sporno). What I find interesting, is that the men that are viewing these games and images of this sport (and others), along with the advertisers and the sports promoters, continue to pretend that these images and portrayals of “sporno” are not interesting to them sexually; even though they go the extra mile to portray them in such a sexual manner. I have to wonder; is it really done for humor, or is there some part of them that really thinks that it is just hot? If not, then why the emphasis on the more attractive men, and more sexually charged advertising?
I will gladly admit that this image is a distraction for me. I could just stare at it for a long time. I don’t think many would deny that this image is very sexual, and to many, extremely hot. I also think that was at least, at a bare minimum, part of the point, and I find it interesting that the motivation to make it so hot is there. This is especially interesting, considering the fact that straight men are “supposed to” “lack” sexual interest in the situation. I mean, you’ve seen a Men’s Health magazine, haven’t you? You can’t tell me that the images that they use in that magazine are geared towards men who are “so-called” “disgusted with the thought of gay sex”! It is practically a skin mag!
I mean, if men want to continue to deny that they are not looking because at least a tiny part of them is interested, intrigued, or at least on a small level, attracted to the image of the male form, that is fine, I actually have no problem with that whatsoever. However, I do ask that they keep bringing the goods, without crossing that line I mentioned earlier. I don’t care if they created this image for their ad campaign under the potentially false guise that it was “humorous”; because it clearly shows that there is a continued fascination with man-on-man action. The best thing about this ad, is that it does it in a way that is both subtle, as well as fucking hot.
I will always be fascinated by the fact that there is so much obsession with the male body, and even man-on-man sex, from straight men, especially when you consider that so many men will wince at the thought of two men kissing. It’s like the line that Christina Ricci delivered in the movie the Opposite of Sex:
Can I just say to all the girls out there…if you’re with a guy who groaned or made some crack during that little kiss…you’re with what we call a closet case. That’s the number one tip-off. Number two is if they freak out about gays in the military. You know, if they can’t discuss it without giggling about showering with guys…and bending over for soap and stuff. That’s not good. Real straight guys don’t spend a whole lot of time thinking about wet naked men, if you ask me.
While I think that she really has a point, I don’t think that just because a man thinks about other men, it necessarily makes him a closet case, or even gay. I think that we all have a fascination with the physical body, and men are naturally visual creatures. Also, I think that it would be correct to assume that men can appreciate, and possibly even enjoy, the visual aspects of the male body (or the actions in which it partakes). Regardless of the potential for wincing and making lewd comments, all while (possibly) secretly thinking that, “yeah, well, that is kinda hot”; I am just glad that they didn’t cross the line, and instead, went the extra mile for those of us that actually do enjoy seeing images like this. I for one, am very, very happy.
You’ve heard my spiel, so I want to know: what do you guys think? Do you think that there can be an appreciation for the male body without having to believe that you are gay, and therefore, freak out about it? I mean, there is so much homo-erotic subtext in sports, fraternities, and other male bonding rituals, that it can’t just be coincidental that men think about other men in “that way”; even though they don’t necessarily want to act on it. I think that if more men would just be okay with the presence of a potential “gay” feeling every now and then, the world would be a lot better place, you know? I would love to hear your thoughts on this; being the eternal anthropologist, this sort of thing is my bread and butter.
