Rugby and the Queer Mind

Marten Weber

Marten Weber is of mixed parentage (a man and a woman) and has lived in more countries than he can count on hands and feet together. He speaks several languages, and believes in multiculturalism, tolerance, and free champagne in economy class. He is the author of the best-selling 'biography' of Casanova's gay brother Benedetto, dealing with the lives, the lust, and the adventures of men. www.martenweber.com

What do images of hard-bodied muscle hunks have to do with the disappearance of homophobia? No, I have not gone bonkers. But I have just spent a weekend talking to six adorable straight men about homophobia, homoerotica, homosexuality, and rugby—which is enough to drive any self-disrespecting queer mad.

It was wonderful, insightful and there was nothing going on at all in the showers (that I know of). So, what did we conclude after 48 hours of male bonding and philosophizing about the state of the world?

We found that being a bloke in a 21st century Western society is rather like being at Oxford in pre-war England. Traditional male pursuits happen in video games, Africa and Afghanistan, while at college everyone’s speaking in funny voices and wants to sleep with Sebastian. Too many literary allusions? Well, here it is in plain English: the male fascism cults which dominated the early last century have given way to a feminization.

Feminine values such as showing your emotions, caring about others, and peaceful conflict resolution, are dominant traits of the West, whereas the traditional male values of self-sufficiency, stiff upper lip and war mongering are now playing the role of the enemy: they exist primarily in societies the West is actually or potentially at war with (the Arab world, Iran, etc. you take your pick.) Members of society espousing these values are termed traditionalist, retrograde, old-fashioned or zealous; men who talk, touch, and tickle, are termed modern, intelligent, and progressive.

We now have the first generation of men who do not learn later in life that their male traits are undesirable in a modern ‘dialogue society’, but know that from the very beginning. We have male sex symbols and male beauty pageants, and everyone with abs and a full set of teeth has done porn (or plays rugby, or both). Heteros embrace and kiss, half the guys I meet are bisexual anyway, and admitting to a bit of male fondling on the side seems to be de rigeur in trendy pubs. The straight members of the English rugby team who were filmed kissing each other intimately shrugged it off with a cool ‘so wha?’ They are an entirely new generation of men, feminized from the womb on, and thus making a wonderful mockery of the distinction between male and female traits in the first place.

At the same time, the feminization process has allowed the male body to be fetishized in a way that was formerly limited to clandestine gay words. Imagery of muscle-hunks are now ubiquitous, we concluded, not because gays are more excepted, but because a more feminine world can cope with the stylized fetish of the hard male body. In other words, whereas at the beginning of the last century, we lived in male worlds, suffered male wars, and idolized soft singing women, we now live in a feminine world, in which dialogue, joint dish-washing and equality are the norm. So the muscled firefighter, or the French rugby hunks from the Dieux du Stade calendar, become the fetish our soft and flabby, but essentially peaceful, world lacks.

I have always wanted to know what straight dudes think about the Dieux du Stade calendar. I know what I am thinking when I look at them, and I know what my girlfriend Sylvia thinks: “I’d do him… and him… oh, yes him definitely. And him. Oh wait, I’ve done him!”
But what effect does erotic—homoerotic? —imagery have on the straight male? The answers will surprise you.

All of my test rabbits agreed that there were certain images of male bodies which were erotic. They agreed that some men are attractive, that it would be acceptable and even desirable to touch such a man, feel his muscles, delight in the beauty of the human body. Frank admitted that he had a fetish for powerful partners—he enjoys the fact that his girlfriend is taller and heavier than he is, and he loves to actually feel the hard body of a rugby player come down on him. I did not try to get any of them to commit to a particular sex act, but we did rate body parts according to homoerotic desirability by the straight male: facial features, chin, necks, strong arms, and ripped abs. All six would like to touch (caress) another guy’s abs or biceps. Four of them his legs. Two of them his buttocks. None was after his dick, understandably. All six agreed to kiss a hot rugby player. Kissing another man is way more acceptable to straight blokes than touching his wiener. Hmm.

Curiously, all six guys were a little annoyed by the way gay men ‘objectify’ male athletes. We stand accused of only seeing the body, and not the achievement of the man. Other than that, it’s quite alright for gay men to watch rugby with a slightly different angle; and all agreed that more athletes should come out of the closet—it would not reduce the attractiveness of the sport at all. Or of any sport, on the contrary. Agreement there.

As for the reasons why straight males of today can admit to erotic fascination of the male body, whereas any such talk 100 years ago would have been almost certainly ridiculed?

“Because these days, you don’t have to be the tough guy anymore. It’s much more liberating to be just a human being first, and a man second.” There are certain expectations of a male role (toughness, resilience, uprightness, yadda yadda yadda) which ruled male behavior for centuries and are now gone. Men who are able to adore or appreciate another male body without hangups, and—more importantly—who are able to talk about it openly, are less likely to start wars. It is male societies which create the problems of this world. False pride, priggishness, the focus on power-relationships, these are all ‘male’ traits which are rightfully left behind.

The final frontier then: gay sex, gay partners, gay stuff. Why did David buy my book Benedetto Casanova and bring it to the seminar? Mostly because he was interested in the time—the 18th century, and Italy. He decided to ignore the gay bits in the book and focus on the historical aspect.

“Ultimately, I found that I can enjoy the descriptions of gay sex too. It may not be my cup of tea, but you know—it’s just sex, and it kind of works the same way, minus the breasts. It wasn’t too bad.” What did the others think of queerness? Not much, really. Flippancy or outrageous dress did not bother them, neither did two men kissing on the bus. They are all a bit embarrassed by ‘girly men’ or female impersonators, but “even they can be fun”. The one thing everybody agreed on hating was gays who shove it in your face all the time, who have no other subjects to talk about than gay stuff.

I understand guys. So, let’s talk rugby instead. Enough queer stuff. England-Wales weren’t half bad, ay? Smashing game. Oooh, and ah do fancy that Owen bloke. Inne looking brave in them tights! Pwoah!

 

Images from Dieux du Stade.

Related Post