There’s been quite a bit of buzz in the blogosphere at large about Jennifer 8. Lee’s New York Times piece on “man-dates.” Lee suggests that it is socially perilous for two heterosexual men to meet for dinner, without sports, business, or a bar to defuse the date-like-ness of the meeting. I don’t know how valid Lee’s thesis is in the broader spectrum (and there is some doubt being expressed on other blogs). But even if Lee is right, I think that the phenomenon may be one to which bloggernackers are immune. Or at least, to which I’m immune.
After all, the last time I can think of when I went out to dinner with a guy was . . . oh, a few months ago, when Nate was in town. We had Brazilian food, and we talked about law and blogging and law some more. It was a fun conversation, and I have to say that I found it completely devoid of Jennifer Lee’s bugbears — “undercurrent of homoeroticism” or the “discomfort in socializing” between heterosexual men.
For a while it looked like I was going to have dinner with Gordon in Washington several months ago. As it was, extra guests showed up, and we had a fun conversation with the whole group. But for a while it was just Gordon and I, and again I don’t recall feeling any discomfort.
Maybe it’s that Nate and Gordon and I are law geeks and therefore conversant in the language of law geekiness. Maybe it’s that my own personal gay-dar is sufficiently defunct that I probably wouldn’t know a homoerotic undercurrent if it hit me over the head. (I’m always surprised when an acquaintance says he’s gay, since I have no ability at all to detect homosexuality in others). Maybe it’s that church members are used to talking to each other — we do it with home teaching companions, quorum members, and so on. I’m not quite sure why, but the “man-date” idea just doesn’t reflect my personal experiences at all.
Is this “man-date” discomfort just something that Lee made up for her story? Is it something which I’m immune to, as a generally socially clueless individual? Or is it that the bloggernacle gives me immunity? I wonder.
The man-woman-dates usually gave me the most anxiety, discomfort, and nervousness! In those, there was something at stake. Man-dates? No discomfort, as they are non-threatening situations for a heterosexual. ;)
(Just like a 5’6″ man conversing with a 6’0″ generally feels non-threatening to both.)
Oops… #1 should read:
“Just like a 5’6″ man conversing with a 6’0″ woman…”)
Sorry Kaimi, I have no real comment regarding your real question.
I don’t mind spending time with friends, even if its just two of us, going to restaurants, etc. I would mind going on a “man date.”
It’s the term that’s stupid, not the activity.
I have no opinion, but this post reminds me of the talk about the “Bush mandate” after the election, and what happens when you type that phrase into google.
This sounds like an oblique poaching of the newest Bcc topic- Steve’s description of his man-dates in Seattle.
Scott,
Any T & S-ers who checked the edit menu in the past day can confirm that I wrote this yesterday (in the same fit of boredom that resulted in musings about chiasm) and I future-dated the post because we already had enough on the page yesterday.
That probably won’t keep Steve from carping, but it’s nonetheless true. In other words, he poached me.
I have wondered from time to time about the image projected by our missionaries. What do people think when they see two clean-cut, neat young men constantly together, espressly avoiding any situations putting them in proximity to women? And then to hear them call each-other companions?
STephen: We had to avoid the term “companion” in France just for that reason. We introduced each other as “my colleague” which sounds much more elegant and professional :)
We were under orders to find a new apartment once, and had found a decent place (but way too expensive). The real estate agent remarked that the bedroom was probably too small for a king size bed for the both of us. My comp. didn’t catch it, though he had been in-country longer than I had.
We spent an hour talking to a gay guy who had assumed that all Mormons were gay, since he only knew of missionaries and extrapolated. (On the other hand, a different guy asked us how we got married and produced children and led a normal social life, if we always had to be together. He also had extrapolated, that missionary life= normative mormon life.)
Kaimi, let’s rise above these petty bickerings of who-poached-whom. We all know that T&S poaches everyone else, all the time; once we establish that as our base level, we can move onwards and upwards.
Sounds like a fun night. Did you get pissed drunk, like Aaron and I did?
Bryce, I typed that into Google, but the results were pretty much unremarkable. Any hints?
I served my mission in Chile and confronted this situation a few times. Once our district went to Pizza Hut and the waitress asked if any of us were heterosexual. It was funny to watch everyone start grunting, trying to act masculine. I agree the word “companion” is no longer a good word choice. But just going to dinner with a buddy? I wouldn’t worry about that.
i’m pretty certain that mormon missionary themes have come up in gay p0rn all of the time. i remember seeing a gay couple dressed up as mormon missionaries at halloween in west hollywood, and they were getting cat calls from all over the place.
regarding man dates, i’ve wondered before if people think i’m gay when i’ve had dinner or gone to a movie w/ a guy friend, but i really don’t care if they think i’m gay or not.
i remember one day when i was w/ a man-friend and his daughter, who was in a stroller at the time. we were at a popular outdoor shopping area, and decided to walk around together pushing the stroller and holding hands just to see people’s reactions. it’s LA though, so no one’s really surprised by anything. but i think that it could be great fun in utah.
I work in the architecture/interior design business where, it seems, there are a disproportionate number of gay professionals. I’m probably stereotyping now but it seems that the creative fields attract gay men especially. The other day in a coversation with a consultant I am currently working with, I mentioned that I was previously employed by a certain large international firm and he replied, “my ‘partner’ is a principal in the firm.” When he first said partner, I immediately thought he was about to say something about his business partner, who I know and who is a woman. But then when he finished the sentence I realized what he meant by “partner.” I immediately remembered that when I first met this fellow I had assumed he was gay. He fit my stereotype – a stylish dresser, thin and he spoke with an effeminate articulation. Of course, and especially in my profession, I know other men who meet this visual standard but who are heterosexual.
I find it interesting that I don’t hang out with male friends but my wife has several different groups and individuals that she often meets one on one or in a group. I’ve always assumed that was just a basic difference in our personalities. I cherish being alone sometime and otherwise I like to do things with her. I remember going to a lecture at the National Building Museum with my closest friend a couple of years ago and we ran into a woman that I work with. I remember wondering what she thought when she saw me with my male firend. Now that I think about the whole situation I wonder if my reasons for limiting my association with male friends has anything to do with avoiding the wrong perception.
What’s interesting is the fact that I remember having conversations with male churchmembers when I served as bishop in the confines of the bishop’s office. These were some of the most intimate, sensative and sometimes tearful conversations I’ve ever had with anyone. I never ever felt uncomfortable expressing those heart felt feelings in that situation. I have had other emotional conversations in one on one circumstances with other male associates that remain very meaningful and satisfying to me. These too were in private settings. And yet I share some of the feelings expressed in Jennifer Lee’s article. Isn’t it a shame that conditions in the world rob us of meaningful and worthwhile relationships and experiences that would ultimately make us better?
We had a friend come from out of town recently. Since he went on a mission to Spain I took him and my infant son to a tapas place on a night when my wife had to work. The waitress said, “My, what a lovely baby you have!” It was clear that she meant “you” plural. We laughed. It certainly wasn’t uncomfortable.
On my mission there were constant stories (urban legends?) of missionaries on a crowded bus being approached by a pretty girl who tries to kiss one of them. When he resists the entire bus begins to chant derogatory comments about homosexuals. I always thought that the stories were funny, since the missionary that was the object of affection has his own high standards turned against him to portray him as something that he would consider worse than kissing the girl.
Some of the men in the ward here occasionally have a Man Night. It is a group of guys getting together to bbq and watch action movies. Maybe it is the manliness of the event or the large numbers, but I’ve never felt any discomfort. Similarly I go out to lunch with men from the ward on occasion and it is often one on one.
I also hang out with a former roommate from college on a one on one basis and it is perfectly normal.
To be honest, I am much more uncomfortable going out to dinner one on one with a member of the opposite sex that isn’t my wife, which has happened when traveling for work.
If this topic was poached from BCC, I have to thank whoever did it. BCC is so dull and uninteresting since that conference discussion.
Man-dates are a great thing, if you’re completely secure in your heterosexuality. When you’re secure in your heteroness, you can hug, pat on the butt, go to a movie, and do all kinds of things that would give less manly men some “confusing” feelings. Two extremely hetero men can do these things without feeling awkward because they know that no man-date could possibly bring them out of the Bermuda Triangle of Men’s Thinking: sports, machines, and b**bs.
Whilst a teenager in conservative Northern Florida, I was in a play along with my best friend. He had a car and I didn’t, so he usually drove us home after the play had wrapped up rehearsal or a performance. We usually stopped at Burger King or Taco Bell to get some food on the way home. We always laughed at what they must of thought of two young, clean-cut men, heavily made-up, ordering dinner together every night for a few weeks.
It’s strange — and this may be on my end of things — but I’ve noticed that when I’m in small group or one-on-one outings with guy friends, it seems that the ones who know I’m gay are _more_ comfortable than the ones that think I’m straight (or haven’t a clue). It’s funny. I even joke with them: “you realize that with me here, everyone thinks we’re a couple”, and they always chuckle and say they don’t care.
Hm.
Ryan —
Ok, if you really must know, it’s the first link returned (try “I’m feeling lucky”). Be sure the text is “bush mandate”.
Inspired by Jennifer 8. Lee, I have decided to change my name from Bryce Indefatigable Galapagos Mouse to Bryce i. I was considering Bryc3 I, but I am not 1337, and furthermore, imaginary numbers are much more interesting than the rationals.
Is Jenn. 8 related to Seven Costanza?
Good points, Mr. i. And besides, ask yourself —
Is Bryce rational?
I think the answer to that question is readily apparent.
“Is Bryce rational?”
No, but I’m certainly complex.
A few years back, my wife and I were at a concert (Kronos Quartet, I think) with her uncle and his wife. The “uncle” is misleading: this couple is about our age and (when we lived in the same part of the country) we used to couple hang out all the time.
The uncle and I were having a conversation about twentieth century composers as we walked the lobby at intermission. Our wives were powdering their noses. An old friend of his approached. Struggling to explain our relationship, Andrea’s uncle said: “he is my friend, relative, err … whatever.” The old friend turned to being extremely understanding and accepting: “oh … it’s ok, you don’t have to explain. I understand exactly what you mean.” He patted us both on the shoulder and shot us a knowing smile.
I almost bursted into laughter. “No, I don’t think you do understand!” I explained. “I am married to his neice! Our wives are in the restroom!” I was amused but also annoyed at how quickly this guy jumped to that particular conclusion. I think it is a shame that two well-dressed men with good hair discussing avante guard music at an artsy concert can’t fumble over explaining their distant relation by marriage (or whatever) without raising suspicions. I mean really.
But seriously, I am concerned about the general loss of shame regarding certain sins—and the pervasive socialization through mass media that seems to fuel that loss of shame. I think this may encourage those who seem all too willing to make unwarranted assumptions about men who hang out sans macho crutches.
I am more likely to schedule a night out with a girl friend, “Let’s go out to dinner on Friday night.” My husband doesn’t schedule dinner dates with his male friends, especially one on one. He does go to lunch.
Part of the reason one on one dinner dates for female friends is common is because women enjoy talking as a sole basis for a friendship. What better way to spend an evening.
Men will go ahead and spend time together and if they need to eat, they’ll eat together. Meeting for lunch is the only availabe time to meet in the day. And you have to eat, right? After work, though, why not go DO something. My husband has a friend who invites him to go to Sams club, or exercise. But the “dinner date” is only if they are out anyway and its time to eat.
I’m just wondering if, as it seems to me, that the NYTimes article is sort of “made up”. And if it is, how will it affect two men who want to hang out and catch up on a “man date”. I’ve been doing this sort of thing since high school, and I’ve never been concerned about it. Maybe there is a real basis for this, but I’m actually more interested in the power of this idea which has been connected to a high profile source to affect how people think and act. Do you think we’ll see a decline in “man dates” because of this article?
Of course, noting a decline would require data, and I wonder if I could hit up the National Science Foundation or some other big time foundation to fund it. Any ideas on where to go to get the funding?
Just say you play Halo. I’ve known gay men to grunt and talk about sports. I’ve yet to meet one that plays violent video games.
I do freelance graphic design at a high end cosmetic company and the only other straight man I work with is a fellow BYU grad. Otherwise, every single other employee is interested in men.
I worked for an advertising agency one summer, and I know for a fact that gay guys can enjoy violent video games. But I’ve never met a gay guy who is interested in sports. I’ve heard they exist, though.
As many conversations as I’ve had with gay guys, I’ve occasionally been able to draw them into the Bermuda Triangle. But they have their own Bermuda Triangle, and it’s a place I cannot go.
When Steve E. and I went out to Cheesecake Factory the other night, it didn’t even strike me that people would think we were gay. In fact, it wasn’t until Steve squeezed my knee for like the 5th time that it even occurred to me. :)
I’ll never forget going to a computer store in Cambridge with my cousin-in-law, just before my IL year, to shop for a laptop. The salesman was giving his pitch about a particular machine, and made some off-hand comment about my “wife” and how it would be a useful tool “for her too.” I rolled my eyes and looked knowingly at my cousin. My glance was meant to convey something like “Yeah, like I have a wife!” to him, as we had just been talking about my marital status (single). The salesman saw the glance and misinterpreted it, thinking I was meaning something like “Oh my gosh, can you believe the heterosexism of this salesman!” Trying to backpedeal and take his foot out of his mouth, he stammered…. “Uh, I mean, … or for HIM,” gesturing towards my cousin. The salesman clearly thought we were a gay couple, which I thought was funny. My cousin didn’t notice, and when I told him afterwards, he was not at all amused.
Two guy friends should be able to go out for a night on the town without everybody assuming they’re homosexual, but when you go out with your effeminate college roommate, you decide to visit the Sunstone Symposium, and you try to buy your tickets at the Affirmation table by mistake, you are HIGHLY LIKELY to be viewed as gay. I know from experience. My advice: if this happens to you, and the guy at the table asks if you’re a couple, just say “yes.” I tried saying “no,” and it was a lost cause, believe me.
Aaron B
Chris:
Lee’s article is par for the course in the Sunday Times “Style” section. A writer has an incipient insight or personal experience, calls a bunch of people like him or her to get quotes on their similar thoughts or personal experiences, calls an academic/writer that can give a quote, comes up with a catchphrase and voila, the Times has spotted a faux-trend (Untucked shirts are in! Ironic karaoke is cool! People do crazy things to get their kids into the right school! Moms blog! ) . Not a week goes by without an article like this.
I think that one fundamental problem in this common mistaken (gay)dentity situation is that many people make associations drawn from entertainment, hollywood, and media. “Will and Grace”, “ER”, “Six feet Under”, and “Sex and the City” along with hollywood films all seem to promote the popular gay stereotypes. Well-dressed, articulate, educated, creative, friendly, compasionate…. all of these positive attributes that church members are encouraged to embrace (as everyone should embrace) are dog-eared as ‘gay signposts’. Not all gay people carry these attributes, and not all people that match this description are gay. However, people tend to correlate them as inseperable and that is where I see the confusion. The ‘man-date’ is not the ‘gay’ thing, it’s just peoples perception of it that labels an innocent situation as such. It amazes me that people can be perceptive enough to notice my attire, appearance, and demeanor enough to label me gay, but ignore the wedding band on my finger which I would hope clearly labels me as NOT. Too bad that gay men don’t get mistaken for LDS…
For what is, I think, pretty much the definitive smack-down of this patently ridiculous article, click here. (Warning: extreme crude–and funny–joke in the title.)
…………hope the ‘man-date’ doesn’t start to added to the list of things that has acquired the ‘appearance of evil’. I have just a few acquaintances that condemn even the most innocent activities because of that phrase!
When I read the article last week I realized I’ve been doing these “man dates” for years without realizing it, most recently just last week with a mission companion who was in town. From here it sounds like I’m not alone.
I wonder if this is because of the Word of Wisdom? Were we drinkers, we’d more likely meet up at a bar with our buddy. But since we’re not, and since getting together to drink Diet Cokes together just isn’t the same, we eat meals together instead. This of course holds true even if you don’t drink but the friend does.