Reflections on the "man date"

Both Jonathan Dresner and a reader named Jack sent me a link to this article in yesterday's New York Times: "The Man Date."

Anyone who finds a date with a potential romantic partner to be a minefield of unspoken rules should consider the man date, a rendezvous between two straight men that is even more socially perilous.

Simply defined a man date is two heterosexual men socializing without the crutch of business or sports. It is two guys meeting for the kind of outing a straight man might reasonably arrange with a woman. Dining together across a table without the aid of a television is a man date; eating at a bar is not. Taking a walk in the park together is a man date; going for a jog is not. Attending the movie "Friday Night Lights" is a man date, but going to see the Jets play is definitely not.

I have to admit that I wanted to be dismissive of the Jennifer Lee article.  Her examples, though geographically and ethnically diverse, do seem to be all upper-middle class urban men --presumably the sort of folks who regard the Times as the "paper of record" to begin with.

But Lee is absolutely right that many men do have a "minefield of unspoken rules" for their own one-on-one interactions.    Most of those rules involve taking measures to avoid giving the impression (to others, or too themselves) that their "man date" might have romantic or sexual undertones:

And thus a simple meal turns into social Stratego. Some men avoid dinner altogether unless the friend is coming from out of town or has a specific problem that he wants advice about. Otherwise, grabbing beers at a bar will do just fine, thank you.

Other men say dinners may be all right, but never brunch, although a post-hangover meal taking place during brunch hours is O.K. "The company at that point is purely secondary," explained Steven Carlson, 29, a public relations executive in Chicago.

Almost all men agree that beer and hard alcohol are acceptable man date beverages, but wine is risky. And sharing a bottle is out of the question. "If a guy wants to get a glass of wine, that's O.K.," said Rob Discher, 24, who moved to Washington from Dallas and has dinner regularly with his male roommate. "But there is something kind of odd about splitting a bottle of wine with a guy."

(Lee mentions, in passing, the movie "Sideways" as an example of "one long and boozy man date."  Heck, that's the reason I loved the film so much!  I was moved by what I found to be an immensely touching and accurate portrayal of male friendship, even if the two particular men in the field needed the crutches of women and alcohol in order to justify their time together.)

Lee explains, rightly, that "man dates" were much more common in an earlier period in both American and European history:

Before women were considered men's equals, some gender historians say, men routinely confided in and sought advice from one another in ways they did not do with women, even their wives. Then, these scholars say, two things changed during the last century: an increased public awareness of homosexuality created a stigma around male intimacy, and at the same time women began encroaching on traditionally male spheres, causing men to become more defensive about notions of masculinity.

The wording of that final clause bothers me.  Why is it women who are always " encroaching"  on male spheres, "causing" men to become defensive?   Why couldn't Lee have written:  "at the same time, women began entering what had once been exclusively male space.  As they lost their all-male bastions, many men began to feel anxious about their own masculinity."  Folks, women are not the cause of men's insecurity; unrealistic notions of what it means to be a man are the source of that anxiety.

Still, Lee is absolutely right that it is not as easy as it ought to be for straight men to "date" each other as it ought to be.  I've struggled with this myself.  Until recently, I was  hesitant about approaching some of my straight male friends for lunches or dinners, fearing that they might see my desire to "go out" with them as evidence of homosexual interest.  I have no such trouble with my gay male friends, of course.  It's easier for me to ask a gay man to lunch than it is to ask a straight one.  My gay friends know I'm happily engaged to a woman, but (perhaps surprisingly) my gay friends tend to be much more comfortable with non-sexual male intimacy than my heterosexual buddies.  Lunches and coffee dates at Peet's are easier that way,

Perhaps because she writes for the rabidly secular Times, Lee leaves out another vital reason straight men date each other:  spiritual fellowship.  Most evangelicals I know (and some Catholics and mainlines as well) are big on the importance of male bonding and accountability.  Groups like Promise Keepers encourage not only large meetings of men, but also one-on-one "dates" (they don't use that word) for fellowship and the sharing of intimate details of "what's going on."   When evangelical men get together, in my experience they aren't going to spend much time discussing sports.  More than most, the spiritually mature Christian men are quick to get to the real point:  "How's your walk (relationship with Christ) going?"  "How's your marriage?"  "Are you struggling with temptation in any area?"  Boom, straight to the heart of the issue without beating around the bush.

Of course, Christian conservative men have their own conscious or unconscious homophobia with which to contend.  Rather than saying "I'm going to meet my friend Bill for brunch", we might say "I'm going to be get together with my 'accountability partner' Bill."  "Accountability partner" sounds workmanlike; there's little if any undertone of sexuality and femininity.

My friend "Clive" and I get together regularly for lunches and breakfasts.  Thanks to our schedules, we often have very early (6:00AM) breakfasts during the week at a local diner.  We're both believers, so we begin our meals with prayer.  We don't ever go "dutch" (something Lee suggests men on "man dates" generally do.)  Instead, we take turns treating the other.  We have a rule:  "He who pays, prays."  The guy who says grace picks up the tab.  It's fair and easy and avoids the ridiculousness of haggling over the bill.  "Clive" and I talk about faith, politics and theology.  We also talk about our relationships -- he's married -- and about his kids.  Sometimes, we discuss Matilde.  There are few things he doesn't know about me, and I'm fairly confident that that's mutual.  We generally shake hands to say hello and we hug to say goodbye.  It works for us, and has for about four years now.

Despite these minor problems, Lee's article is a savvy one.  I especially identified with a Jeffrey Toohig, whom Lee describes as dividing his male friends into two groups:

"good friends who I go out one on one with, and guys I go out with and we have beers and wings."

No question, I've got guys in both categories.  (Oh, I don't eat "wings", of course, but you get the picture.)

If I were to look at the myriad ways in which my life has improved in the past decade or so, I would say that few things have meant more to me than the "getting and keeping" of several good male friends.  Years ago, all my close friends were women.  Today, outside of my relationship with my fiancee, I am far more likely to rely on other men for emotional and spiritual support.  That's been an immensely beneficial shift in my life, one that has not come easily or quickly.  But I shudder to think where I'd be without these fellows today. 

It's spring break this week.   I've got lots of grading to do, and want to make sure to get in plenty of time on the roads.  But I've  also got a "man date' for brunch tomorrow morning, another for Thursday breakfast, and a third for Friday lunch.

Comments

[Ron O.]

What a weird concept. I've had plenty of man-dates, but never considered them as such. The rules sound odd too. What people will go to not be considered gay is amazing. I've worked as a waiter and this never entered my mind when seeing two men dine. When the diner's sexuality was apparent it was about as pertinent as the color of thier shirt.

I shouldn't be too critical; I've been insecure about plenty of things, but avoiding dinner and just going to a bar because someone might see you and might think you are gay seems like excessive worrying about a non-issue.

Most women don't have this problem. Sounds like some men could learn something from them.

Now that I think of it the only time this did come up was when I was invited to shoot pool with a gay collegue. After I accepted, I worried that I had just led the guy on - I wasn't sure if this was a date or just shooting pool. I handled it by being honest & telling him I liked him as a friend but didn't have a romantic interest, I hope I didn't lead him on, etc. Turns out it was a date, so he was a little disappointed, but no big deal. We remained friends.

[Anonymous]

I understand that you are a feminist man. But I must ask, "Do you have any positive views on male masculinity?" Consistently you talk about male masculinity in a negative tone. You may not "say" negative words but your writing tone suggests otherwise. Why cant men find a balance?

[Amanda]

Consistently you talk about male masculinity in a negative tone.

Must....resist...can't.... Uh, "male masculinity"? The fact that it's denoted like that demonstrates we have a serious problem with understanding that being male is "masculinity" when you get down to it. But go ahead and think you're more of a man, anon, if you are scared to death that someone will think you're gay. Waste your time and energy at "masculinity" if you think it means something.

[Lisa]

I haven't gushed at you for a while Hugo, so I'm just going to gush. I love your blog. Love it, love it love it! Thanks for writing it, it makes me happy.

[davejones]

Amanda,

For the purposes of this discussion I believe masculinity would be best defined as "the trait of behaving in ways considered typical for men." Some men are more masculine than other men, just as some women are more feminine than other women. Since Hugo rails against and laments typical male behavior (yup, masculinity), I think Anonymous had a fair question. But thanks for jumping to the homophobic card so early in the discussion.

[Michael]

      Well after reading Jennifer Lee’s article and then Hugo’s comments about it, I got to say you two certainly overcomplicate male friendship and the concept of dating.

        Ron O. already said it more or less. But “dating” has always been a term that describes at least for me, two people getting together for romantic interests. No matter the sex of each participant.Going out with a buddy for dinner and conversation, no matter how intimate, is not a date. Sharing a bottle of wine or any other “non-manly” (wine is unmanly? I’m in trouble) activity is just that, an activity. It’s silly to confuse the two.

Amanda and Anon..

       Being male doesn’t make everything you do or are masculine. Being a woman doesn’t make you feminine.  There are levels and combinations of both in most people.  One of the things that makes us all different.We all got some of both really, but  the notion of what is masculine, or the fear of appearing feminine, does cause a lot of guys to do a lot of negative things. I think that is the point that Hugo generally makes about masculinity or at least that is what I get out of it. Nothing wrong about male masculinity. Or female femininity, although they can be subjective terms.

      But I do think kids are bombarded and pressured with all sorts of messages about being masculine or feminine, but precious few of those messages really teach positive ways of being so.

      Children need positive role models and something besides the TV teaching them how to become young adults..

[mythago]

Whether or not it's 'silly,' there's an unspoken fear of creating that confusion, and that's what Lee's article was about. For most straight men, the consequences of being suspected of being gay are pretty serious.

[Jeff]

davejones:

For the purposes of this discussion I believe masculinity would be best defined as "the trait of behaving in ways considered typical for men." Some men are more masculine than other men, just as some women are more feminine than other women.

The problem is that when we do this, we conflate the descriptive use of the terms "masculine" and "feminine" (i.e., "this is what men tend to be like") with the normative use ("this is what men should be like"). I suspect many of the behaviors considered "masculine" are *not* in fact exhibited by most men, but are nevertheless expected of them.

Michael:

Being male doesn’t make everything you do or are masculine.

I utterly disagree with this statement. If I, as a male, do something considered "feminine," it's not a sign that I'm less of a man; it's a sign that that activity is not innately female.

[mythago]

Objectively, yes. As far as social norms go, doing something that is considered 'feminine' is seen as demeaning to you and inappropriate.

[Anonymous]

Amanda,

I guess attacking me and my supposed sexuality makes your argument a lot stronger huh? To clear things up, I just want to say that I am not a homosexual as you presume. I wish you you wouldn't focus on the word "Masculinity."

I simply wanted to say (and should have said a lot clearer)is that as men we need to take both the positives of Masculinity (there are some) and the positives of feminism.

The word I was hoping you would focus on was BALANCE. I think we as men(heterosexual or not) need to have a balance in both aspects to become "whole" men. I apologize if I offended. That was not my intent. I hope this clarifies.

[mythago]

I just want to say that I am not a homosexual as you presume

Why was it important to point this out? Would it matter if you were?

[davejones]

Jeff,

If "the behaviors considered "masculine" are *not* in fact exhibited by most men", Hugo would spend most of his time blogging about chinchillas and bike shorts.

[Ron O.]

I think the fear of the consequences is far greater than the actual consequences. I don't give a damm if someone thinks I'm straight, gay or bi. So what. It's noone's business but those I'm intimate with. I've faced some consequences when people have made an issue of their assumption. All they did for me was reveal their rotten character.

[Anonymous]

Why was it important to point this out? Would it matter if you were?

Amanda,

No it is not. Again, you did not focused on the BALANCE. I guess for a feminist it is really difficult to think that there can actually be a good man who has both positive aspects of "masculinity" and "femininity." But that's ok, keep deciphering the other words. I guess ignorance is bliss.

[mythago]

Amanda,

I'm not Amanda. And again, if it's not important whether you're gay or straight, why did you feel it was so important to point it out? Throwing a silly tantrum that feminists can't imagine a certain kind of man (irony check--stat!) isn't an answer.

Ron, it depends a lot on where you are and who you are. If you're in a conservative part of the country, or if your workplace is very 'traditional,' then the consequences--even if they aren't actual violence--can be pretty negative.

[ScottM]

It's annoying, if nothing else. For quite a while I was harassed by neighborhood kids, who spontaneously decided I was gay. [For clarity: I was a 25-30 year old, the kids were 8-14 or so] It was difficult; while it's not (in the abstract) an insult, it was clearly intended to be.

I never did find a good solution; ignoring them decreased but didn't eliminate the jeers, toneless correction was ignored. I hate to dismiss/ ignore kids, since that's all too common, but I did. I wonder if there's a better solution.

[Glen]

I need men as friends. I routinely eat breakfast with a couple of men from church, either several of us or with any one of them at a time. I would use the word date as a synonym for appointment not with any other emotional baggage. Some men go golfing together, eating at the clubhouse. I like to go bicycling—I have a couple of buddies with whom I do this. It provides a lot of time for talking, relating, laughing, sharing the sometimes intimate details of our lives. This activity has been part of my life for as long as I can remember. My wife encourages it and she has her own friends.

I guess my point is that I didn’t even know there was controversy or social stigma around it.

[Mr. Bad]

Glen wrote: "I need men as friends. I routinely eat breakfast with a couple of men from church, either several of us or with any one of them at a time. I would use the word date as a synonym for appointment not with any other emotional baggage. Some men go golfing together, eating at the clubhouse. I like to go bicycling—I have a couple of buddies with whom I do this. It provides a lot of time for talking, relating, laughing, sharing the sometimes intimate details of our lives. This activity has been part of my life for as long as I can remember. My wife encourages it and she has her own friends."

"I guess my point is that I didn’t even know there was controversy or social stigma around it. "

Glen, there is no controversy or stigma about men behaving normally (e.g., going out on "man dates" or whatever the feminist pejorative du jour is for such things). The only people who seem to have a problem with it is feminists and others (mostly women) who are threatened by men who 1) band together, and 2) don't seek women's approval for their behavior.

To me, Ms. Lee obviously doesn't have a clue about how most normal men behave, otherwise she would have immediately understood what a silly bit of twaddle her article is.

[The Gonzman]

I'm curious as to why it is that those who nost frequently assert that "There is nothing wrong with being gay" are often the first to accuse someone of being a closeted homosexual in an effort to dismiss or discredit them, or to try to shame them into shutting up.

Things to make you go, "Hmmmmm."