Rise of the bromance bad for women?

[rubecube]

Article on a study that suggests that the rise in intimate, platonic male-male relationships could lead to less traditional relationships down the line. It's a bit of an interesting study because one of the things that many modern day feminists have been arguing is that men need to be more emotionally intimate with each other (something that's been backed up in other studies as well), but this study seems to indicate there could be some unforeseen consequences for women as a result.

http://nationalpost.com/health/rise-...tionship-study

The bromance may not be the progressive expression of enlightened masculinity, as it is sometimes described and portrayed in movies, said Adam White of the University of Bedfordshire in Britain.

Rather, it may be a regressive development, with especially worrying results for women. His research, based on interviews with male undergraduate students, concluded that men saw their female romantic partners as judgmental, and as “the primary regulators of their behaviour.” This led to a generalized disdain for women, and a view of romance in which men feel they are “constantly posturing and self-monitoring, not only to achieve desired heterosexual sex, but to prevent relationship destruction.”

The rise of the bromance “is very, very good for men,” White said. It offers young men the opportunity for, as the research found, “elevated emotional stability, enhanced emotional disclosure, social fulfilment and better conflict resolution, compared to the emotional lives they shared with girlfriends.”

“But it’s not necessarily benefiting women, and in fact it may well be disadvantaging them,” White said.

[Itse]

Single studies, especially in social sciences, are an extremely unreliable source of information.

Even further, the article doesn't offer a shread of actual data to back up the idea, and doesn't suggest that exists in the "study".

So really if you ask me, this is just some guys saying some things that sound like complete bollocks without nothing real to back their ideas up.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Itse

Single studies, especially in social sciences, are an extremely unreliable source of information.

Even further, the article doesn't offer a shread of actual data to back up the idea, and doesn't suggest that exists in the "study".

So really if you ask me, this is just some guys saying some things that sound like complete bollocks without nothing real to back their ideas up.

I didn't really delve into the study itself because I don't care that much. Just thought it was an interesting topic to discuss on a Friday afternoon.

[CliffFletcher]

I don't know how credible this study is, but it's pretty well established that cultures where young men owe their primary allegiance to their peer group, and remain unattached to partners well into adulthood, tend to have problems.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I didn't really delve into the study itself because I don't care that much. Just thought it was an interesting topic to discuss on a Friday afternoon.

Yeah I get that, sorry to throw such a negative opinion here.

[2Stonedbirds]

Every peer to peer relationship is different and unique, I'm not sure how strong relationships between men hurt women when the two are not intertwined?

Between all my friends, each relationship is different, and never had any bearing on romantic relationships with women.

What I got out of this study/article is that guys don't give a #### if your guy freind shows up with messy hair, or a 5 o'clock shadow... But they resent women for having to present themselves in a manner that leads to exchange of bodily fluids? Hasnt it always been this way?

[You Need a Thneed]

Are “Bromances” really rising? The general idea has existed forever.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by 2Stonedbirds

Every peer to peer relationship is different and unique, I'm not sure how strong relationships between men hurt women when the two are not intertwined?

Between all my friends, each relationship is different, and never had any bearing on romantic relationships with women.

As a polyamoric person, it's my experience that even simultaneous romantic relationships don't take anything away from each other. If anything, having more strong healthy relationships in your life strengthen each other by strengthening the people in those relationships.

(I think I can speak for most polyamorists in this.)

[2Stonedbirds]

I agree, my experience has been the same.

Typically, male friends and girlfriends/lovers end up hanging out and enjoying each other's company anyways. Birds of a feather and all that. I guess maybe the jist of the study is that guys are easier to please or be around, and that in a romantic situation men resent women for having to work harder on appearance ect than just 'having a few with the boys?'

To me it's always been this way. Maybe people are reacting to it differently now?

[octothorp]

Originally Posted by Itse

Single studies, especially in social sciences, are an extremely unreliable source of information.

Even further, the article doesn't offer a shread of actual data to back up the idea, and doesn't suggest that exists in the "study".

So really if you ask me, this is just some guys saying some things that sound like complete bollocks without nothing real to back their ideas up.

Yeah, regardless of whatever the conclusions of the study are, (personally I'm skeptical that 'university residences are full of young men cuddling', but that's totally fine if they are), focusing on this as bad for women seems really misguided, in part as you say because it's something that doesn't seem to be suggested in the study, but also because it seems to suggest a pretty zero-sum idea of relationships.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by octothorp

Yeah, regardless of whatever the conclusions of the study are, (personally I'm skeptical that 'university residences are full of young men cuddling', but that's totally fine if they are), focusing on this as bad for women seems really misguided, in part as you say because it's something that doesn't seem to be suggested in the study, but also because it seems to suggest a pretty zero-sum idea of relationships.

Not only that but how does it address homosexual men? Most of the gay men I know have much different relationships with their partners than they do with their platonic male friends, so if there is an issue it's probably within the dynamics of a romantic relationship rather than a men and women issue.

[SebC]

Just because it does not benefit women does not mean it's regressive.

[Muta]

I enjoy hanging out with my buddies while keeping the odd, ahem, female companionship here and there. Unless something drastic changes, don't really plan on changing that either. We're all having a blast. I can see what that article is suggesting.

[troutman]

don't need no booze
Don't need a virgin priest
But I need someone I can cry to
I need someone to protect

Oooh making love and breaking hearts
It is a game for youth
But I'm not waiting on a lady
I'm just waiting on a friend

[GGG]

I think the phrase benefit women is a misnomer.

It does not benefit women who want a traditional heterosexual monogamous relationship leading to marriage and children.

I also suspect the female friendship relationships have also strengthened in the age of bromance.

Essentially as you break down the requirement of a permenant relationship for sex you can now be more selective in both.

[OMG!WTF!]

I can't imagine anything much worse than an intimate, platonic male-male relationship. Ladies...you are safe.

[blankall]

Men resenting wives for "changing them" is nothing new and occurs with or without interaction with other males. I'd argue that the men who don't get to cut loose or maintain strong male friendships feel this way even more. Of course many men are just jerks and many of their feelings of being held back are just them shirking responsibility. In the real world things are rarely black and white.

[Bunk]

When did plain old “friendship” become “bromance”? One of the stupidest words of all time.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Bunk

When did plain old “friendship” become “bromance”? One of the stupidest words of all time.

The article addresses that:

A key theme of the bromance, on the other hand, was the freedom to express themselves without judgment, and to engage in emotional intimacy without fear.

The key historical context of the bromance is the recent decline in homophobia, the paper argues. “We contend that the male preference for emotionality between other men, rather than women, has come about due to a significant cultural shift in the structure of masculinity,” reads the paper.

The paper notes that in the late 19th and early 20th century, men posed for photographs together in physically intimate ways, wrote “endearing” letters to each other, and even slept in the same beds in non-sexual contexts.

But the increasing social visibility of homosexuality let to a climate of hysteria and stigma. “To prove that we were not gay, we acted hyper masculine,” White said.

As a result, men began to distance themselves from each other emotionally. The paper quotes one scholar to the effect that men “have not known what it means to love and care for a friend without the shadow of some guilt and fear of peer ridicule.”

Again, I can only speak anecdotally but I think I have a much closer group of friends than what my dad's and grandad's generations had.

[Northendzone]

Finally, women are going to have to go without, or develop a strong right hand.