I really need to be writing any number of other things right now, but none of them are working for me at the moment and I'm hoping that cranking this out will get the juices flowing again. In any case, I think that this is an interesting topic and one worth talking about briefly, so without further ado, here we go (warning, gross generalizations ahead).
A few months ago, I was talking with a friend about something or other and mentioned that I had a new man-crush brewing (in this instance, it was Rick Bayless, who is my culinary man-crush). She laughed a bit and commented that, for as much as I and others talk about man-crushes, there was no real female analogue. This made me sad, as I can't imagine life without the stupid grin I get when I think of Captain Mal Reynolds. What made me sadder, though, was when I realized that no analogue to the man-crush meant no analogue for bromance. Lord, life without bromance *and* having to deal with menstruation? Talk about short end of the stick! No wonder women tend to be more high strung than men.
To explain exactly what I mean by all this, I suppose I need to quickly break down a man-crush and explain how it relates to bromance and why, exactly, bromance is such an awesome thing. In short, to me, a man-crush is basically a deep seated admiration for another man. A recognition that, if you could, you would echo the abilities or attitude of that individual in your own living. Sometimes man-crushes lead towards emulation, but more often, a man-crush acknowledges that the desired skill or trait is somehow inimitable. That doesn't mean that we don't strive for advancement in admired area; just like a normal crush, the a man-crush motivates us to improve ourselves in hopes of earning the mutual admiration of the crush.
Another way in which man-crushes and normal crushes are alike is that our strongest man-crushes tend to be directed at unattainable individuals. We learn to see the flaws of the people who are actually in our lives, and therefore we cannot idolize them to the same degree; but we can definitely have man-crushes on our friends. And, just as romance arises from a mutual crush between two individuals, bromance is the end result of a reciprocated man-crush. And just as actual romantic relationships far exceed the benefits of a simple one-sided crush; bromance improves our lives vastly more than a simple man-crush.
For one thing, there's something incredibly empowering about knowing that a man you admire admires you. Perhaps more important, though, is the knowledge that somebody has your back. It's simple fact that men desire to protect the people they care about. Failing to at least make an effort take care of your own is reprehensible, and no man would risk the respect of a person he admires by not being there for support when shit goes south. Again, the comfort that comes from knowing that you've got unwavering support when things start to fall apart, whether that support comes in the form of a drinking buddy or a wingman or a second cannot be overstated.
Now, I know that all of this sounds kind of sexist. I know that women admire and support their friends, too, but there's a difference. Not all male-male friendships result in bromance, and we certainly still support and respect those friends. In those friendships that can be described as bromantic, though, there's just a certain...purity and earnestness that seems absent from normal male-male friendships and virtually all female-female friendships. Those few women I've talked with about this seem to agree with this assessment.
I offer the following thought experiment as inadequate proof. I was watching Superbad today, and there's a scene towards the end of the movie where one of the characters, drunk as can be, picks up his passed out friend and carries him as he runs from a party that the police are busting. For most of my friends, I would try to rouse and warn them. I would wonder if they got away safely and call them later to find out. But I would not pick them up and run with them. For my truest friends, though, this is exactly what I would do; and they would do it for me (you know, if they could). Women out there: can you honestly say the same? If not, well, :(
3 comments:
I'm in the somewhat strange spot of not having many female friends, so it's a bit difficult to comment on whatever the female equivalent "bromance" is.
There are definitely people I admire, but my best friendships with other women tend to be based on a mutual reliance and trust, and not quite on mutual admiration (though that does not mean I don't admire them). The female-female relationships in Steel Magnolias come to mind as good examples of such friendships.
I will say that I think perhaps you have not talked to enough women, or that perhaps they didn't understand what you meant. Close female-female friendships are what I might call a "sismance." The woman I know will defend me if other women spread rumors are spread about me, for example, is such a person, as is the woman who is there, quietly supporting me when I need her. Perhaps the female bromance is just that, a quieter sort of friendship than the male version. It is not easy to create, but I would argue that it is no less of a bond than the bromance you praise here. I would also argue that women, too, desire to protect those they care about, though we do it in different -- quieter -- ways.
Tongue-in-cheek, I know I couldn't carry a friend out of a party; I'm simply not strong enough. Seriously, though, for my close friends, I can say that I would "carry" them whenever they needed me to.
As usual, my initial writing had plenty of gaping holes. I didn't mean to imply that close female-female friendships lack their own nuances or value that are absent in the sorts of male-male friendships that fall under the "bromance" label. But I think that the loudness, to work off your language, of bromance is part of what makes it what it is. It's blunt and straight-forward, and that creates an explicit confidence in its presence and power.
I think that the closest way you could provide a female equivalence to bromance would be to describe both in a much vaguer way. The best bet would basically be friendship as non-sexual romance (which may make some people squeamish). That concept can exist in male-male, female-female, or male-female pairings; but each one is going to look vastly different. I tried to provide a glimpse of what makes the male-male version of that relationship unique among the mix.
I'm sure that whatever values define a female-female relationship are wonderful. I'm sure that, considering the obvious differences between the sexes, they work to meet whatever needs you have just as well as bromance does for men. But, from what I've seen, it's still something very different; and I can't help feeling sorrier for women not experiencing bromance than I do men for not getting "sismance" (which, sorry, just doesn't work as well :P).
On a final, tangential note, I think we've talked before about male protective instincts; and I think that we can agree that there's a difference between the way that men and women take care of people. I don't in any way want to downplay the sort of support I get from my female friends. It's wonderful and irreplaceable. But it's different from male support, which is good in its own right. Neither is better, they just meet different needs.
Also, sorry, but I didn't mean that example to be "carry" in a metaphorical sense. :P
I mean, if you were physically capable of carrying your friend away, would you do it? And would you be 100% confident that that friend would do the same for you? In a situation that wasn't life-or-death but merely "in trouble" or "home free"? Again, this sort of boldness is fundamental to my understanding of bromance.
Post a Comment