Joey and Chandler. Matt and Ben. Bill Clinton and…Al Gore?
The Seattle Times on Monday explored the “bromance” — “the complicated love and affection shared by two straight males,” as defined by urbandictionary.com.
More than one woman I know has had momentary suspicions — even if only fleeting — of her boyfriend’s closeness with his roommate, teammate or co-worker.
The “bromance” assures women that men — tada! — can be close and still straight!
Wait. Is this news? Isn’t this article not so much about an amazing new social phenomenon as about a new word coined to describe, well, men who are FRIENDS?
The article says one of the reasons behind the popularity of the “bromance” is that the average man is getting married later, at an average age of 27, according to a 2007 report by the National Marriage Project at Rutgers University. The average marrying age in 1960 was 23. The study also found that men with more education were tying the knot even later, in their 30s.
All of this apparently is rolled up in the dreaded “quarterlife crisis”:
Experts say the prevalence of these friendships can in part be explained by the delay in major life milestones. Fifty years ago, a man could graduate from college, get a job and get married all within a couple of months. But today’s men are drifting, as opposed to jumping, into the traditional notion of adulthood.
“The transition to adulthood is now taking about a decade longer than it used to,” said Michael Kimmel, a sociology professor at Stony Brook University in New York whose upcoming book is called “Guy Land: The Perilous World Where Boys Become Men.” One set of men Kimmel interviewed for the book were fraternity brothers at Dartmouth College. Following graduation, seven of them squeezed into a two-bedroom apartment in Boston.
The article also links the “bromance” trend to changing perceptions of homosexuality in America:
According to Peter Nardi, a sociologist at Pitzer College who specializes in male friendships, all these phrases are safer than they used to be because men are less afraid of being perceived as gay. It has become more acceptable for them to show some emotion. Al Gore and Bill Clinton hugged when they won the 1992 election and sports figures cry on camera when they’re busted for steroids, Nardi pointed out.
Finally! So, straight men are relieved of the burden of worrying about others thinking they are gay, and can just admit that they like other men and show some emotion!
Women: I hope this doesn’t create confusion about who wears the pants in the relationship.
Have you heard of “The Game“? It’s like the Bible for the male and socially awkward.
“The Game,” written by former New York Times reporter and critic Neil Strauss, is an autobiographical work that tells of Strauss’ exploration into the world of pick up artists — men skilled in the art of meeting women, who he collectively calls, “the seduction community.”
Upon its publication in 2005, the book was on the NYT Bestseller List for two months and skyrocketed almost immediately to the #1 seller list on Amazon.com.
In 2004, Strauss wrote an article about his experiences in the NYT. “The Game” also inspired a 2007 reality show on VH1, called “The Pick Up Artist” (contestants/protegees pictured above), as well as a set of pick up artist jargon and methods:
PUA -Pick Up Artist. A man skilled in the art of picking up women.
AFC - Average Frustrated Chump. A guy who has historically had issues with meeting and talking to women. May or may not be a virgin.
The “Neg” - a playful insult, the purpose of which is to “momentarily lower a woman’s self-esteem and to suggest an intriguing disinterest. (’Nice nails. Are they real? No? Oh, they look nice anyway.’)”
Peacocking - standing out in a room, often by donning louder clothing. May or may not include fuzzy hats, platform boots and black nail polish.
What gives? Do men suddenly need a new vocabulary, a book, a TV show and kohl eyeliner to get women to talk to them? Whatever happened to “Hi. What’s your name?”
At first, as a female, after doing some research about the “seduction community,” it was hard not to feel partially amused, partially enraged. Enraged, because — let’s face it — the strategies used by men described in “The Game” and on “The Pick Up Artist” objectify women. Girls in social situations, just waiting to be picked up by men skilled at the trade, might as well be bottlecaps, or some other shiny object to be collected. There is also a heavy emphasis on how to be not only a Pick Up Artist, but a seduction artist, which suggests that men aren’t exactly embarking on the experiment to find a perfect mate, but to see how many women they can sleep with.
But the amusement came from the realization that, hey, men do kind of have it rough when it comes to interacting with the opposite sex. Of course most females nowadays like to think of ourselves as The Independent Woman, but our society still relies on men to make the first move. And part of the reason why I watched the characters on VH1’s “The Pick Up Artist” with amusement and even a twang of sympathy is because I see my own guy friends in all their hesitance and adorable awkwardness trying to talk to beautiful, confident and successful women in social situations. And I gotta tell you, I feel for them.
And yeah — boy, do I feel lucky to be female.
For some men of course, “The Game” will always be about impressing your friends and seeing how many women you can sleep with. On the other hand, I suspect (I hope, at least) that there are men out there who employ the techniques because they want to meet their perfect match, who still see”The Game” as about “meeting” and “getting to know,” and not “scoring.” Call me romantic. Or at least just female.
I can say this for certain: I’d hate to see any of my sweet, slightly-awkward guy pals turn into Master PUA’s. Heck, they might start stealing my eyeliner.
Hang on. I’m not THAT socially awkward. I have been in a relationship. I’ve just never been “In a Relationship” on Facebook.
Facebook, the internet social networking site created and launched by a Harvard drop-out in 2004, has 64 million users today. It got its name from college “facebooks” — actual printed booklets given to freshmen with mugs of other students and faculty which are supposed to help them get to know people on campus. (Personally, we just used ours to look up cute guys…)
Facebook used to only be open to students at certain colleges. But as of Sept. 2006, it is now open to anyone over 13. Anyone who signs up for a Facebook account can message other Facebook users, write on others’ pages (”the wall”), or list their favorite books, movies and quotes alongside millions and millions of pictures of themselves.
But on this Valentine’s Day, Facebook is changing — or complicating — the dating scene with features that allow individuals to publicize their relationship status. One feature allows two people to show on each of their pages that they are “In a Relationship.” (Useful if you’re browsing the site for attractive singles.)
Besides “In a Relationship,” you also have the option of choosing “Married,” “Engaged,” “In an Open Relationship” or “It’s Complicated.”
All of those options are not as binding as the last option, which shows “In a Relationship” and then adds “with,” after which you can add the name of the person you are seeing. In order to show the “with” option, both people must agree that they want to make it “Facebook official.”
The wonderful — and complicated — thing about this is that Facebook doesn’t discriminate. For example, I could be “Married to” my best girl friend tomorrow, as long as she agreed.
Right now, one of my guy friends is “In an Open Relationship” with Jessica Biel.
You can imagine that this can be used for good as well as evil. Two of my friends, a guy and a girl, went to Bangkok for spring break last year, took tons of pictures together, changed their Facebook “relationship status” and convinced everyone that they had gotten engaged. The next day she received dozens of messages: “You look so HAPPY! This is soooo exciting! CONGRATS!!!”
That’s actually hilarious and harmless. But according to this article, obsessions with checking Facebook, especially your partner’s page, can promote jealously in long-distance relationships if one person suspects the other may be receiving too many messages from other Facebook users — especially if the other users are cute.
Photos can be another source of problems. For your stalking convenience, another feature allows you to view all pictures posted on Facebook in which a certain person appears. I’ve heard of relationships going to pieces after a friend posted risque photos of someone’s significant other having a little too much fun over spring break.
For myself personally, I avoid posting my relationship status on Facebook or dozens of photos of myself and my significant other, because I believe things like that don’t really need to be publicized. Posting my relationship status, determining whether we’re serious (or not serious) enough to be in a relationship as well as “In a Relationship,” seems to me to be just one more complication in the already complicated game of love.
I can only imagine what Facebook is doing to high school relationships, where the idea of being “official” is everything — even if it’s just a label. When I was in high school, two people could walk past each other in the halls, barely talk, never go on dates and still be “in a relationship.” Now they can do all that AND be Facebook official!
This article in the NYT on Monday caught my eye. It’s about couples whose relationships are tested when they have to make the big decision about whether to move in together.
Since apartments at reasonable prices are so hard to find in New York,
(s)ome couples move in together rather quickly just because a lease has run out. Some can’t decide who moves where because neither wants to give up a good deal on an apartment. Others make the leap and marry because they fear that a co-op board will reject them if they are just living together. And there are people who rule out potential partners simply because of where they live.
Fabulous apartments at equally fabulous prices are so hard to come by in New York that the possession of one, or lack thereof, can easily tip the balance in a relationship. While major life changes like marriage and children influence real estate decisions in all parts of the country, the scarcity of New York real estate bargains actually seems to cause life changes, or at least push them along.
After reading the article, I wondered if the same principle could apply in Hawaii with our high housing costs. Although, many young people here still live with their parents and are content to do so for a decade or more BECAUSE of the high cost of rent or buying a place. For some reason, there doesn’t seem to be the same mad rush among young Hawaii residents to find their own perfect little studio when the option of just living at home is still available.
How much should real estate be considered when you get into a relationship? If both of you are living in separate apartments, you might want to move in together, split the rent and save hundreds of dollars a month. But then the question is, who has to move?
And what if both of you are still living at home? Would you want to have a little more privacy and rent or buy a place of your own?
Then, the big question becomes: At what point should you move in with your significant other? You’d have to consider not only your financial situation, but whether the experience would make or break your relationship.
I’ve personally seen good and bad examples of couples moving in together. Some still have great relationships and are working through the little sources of friction that suddenly appear when you move in with someone. Other couples haven’t fared so well, and are left with a sticky housing situation when the relationship goes sour.
Anyone have experience? Thoughts? Fairy-tale endings? Horror stories?
When the idea of this blog first came up, it was suggested that, among other things, I would write about dating.
Well, that idea was quickly put to rest.
Until now. Actually, I wanted to talk about a certain conundrum facing twenty somethings in particular as we find ourselves fresh out of college and preparing to enter the real working world. And, yes, it has to do with relationships. Or rather, starting them.
A few weeks ago, following a conversation about this topic, a friend sent me an email:
“Your question about finding it difficult to meet people now…revise that to be ‘meet quality people’ and the answer is a resounding ‘yes,’” he wrote.
Single, out-of-college, early-to-mid twenty year olds sit at an awkward crux of the dating world. Having left college, we are no longer surrounded by a cohort of boundless single, like-minded individuals of shared affinities and aspirations. But, we are not yet at the point of desperation that would necessitate online dating and other “well-intentioned, but thrown in the towel”-type dating services. Which leaves them in the middle of the two awkwardly treading through the “social scene.”
He managed to hit on a big issue for the average quarter-lifer: meeting “quality” people out of college.
At this point in my life, my friends are pretty much either single or in long-term, soon-to-be-married-but-still-denying-it types of relationships. The only ones who are actually dating are in graduate school, which is the same concept as college: an abundance of like-minded people and the existence of situations where you can actually get to know someone without having to shout at them over blasting music.
I’d also argue that as far as meeting people, Hawaii’s social scene is pretty limited. Maybe Kawehi, the Advertiser’s entertainment writer, can point me in the right direction, but I was never that big on clubs, as it seems that on the dance floor, guys can’t even be bothered with conversation anymore.
Honolulu’s trendy bars are like clubs anyway, and — again — have the same blasting music problem. And I think we should just cross dive bars off the list without getting into the specifics.
There’s also the problem of the people you meet if you do ever venture out there to Chinatown or Waikiki on a weekend. Most of my friends work good jobs and are looking to meet a mate who is gainfully employed, or at least has solid plans to be in the near future. They’re not eager to meet someone whose biggest commitment right now is going to clubs and getting wasted five nights a week.
Unfortunately, BECAUSE my friends are all working full time, most are too exhausted to do the club or bar scene after work, and I suspect that’s not unusual. So, if few of the gainfully employed singles are going to clubs, then what are the odds of actually meeting one there?
Where does that leave us. Concerts, yes, lots of young people there but again — same loud music problem. Co-workers? Most often turns out messy. Bowling alley? Hey, it works for some people. The beach? That just adds to the layer called ‘physical attractiveness’ which only further complicates the situation.
Part of the trauma of quarter life is being tossed out there, away from your dorms and roommates, away from the comfortable routine of homework and grades, and into the real world, where you feel, well, just a little alone.
Joey and Chandler. Matt and Ben. Bill Clinton and…Al Gore?
Have you heard of “
