Heteronormativity in gay relationships

[SpinachWrap]

It seems to me that of all the gay relationships I have ever seen (which is admittedly few), there is still a feminine and a masculine role. For example, a feminine guy, and a more masculine guy being together. Or a masculine woman, and a more feminine woman being together.

Have other people noticed/experienced this? Do relationships need a feminine and masculine role in order to be successful? If this is a genuine trend, what does it imply?

[beckyg]

Nah.... I know several couples who don't fit those molds who are very happy.

[shimmersky]

No relationship I've ever had has fit that stereotype.

[SRSLYMARK]

I think this happens because people think that to have a healthy relationship, they have to conform to a more "normal" style of relationship - one that has an obvious masculine and feminine role. I think that as long as all bases are covered in making a relationship work, that gender roles don't make a difference.

[musican]

Originally Posted by SRSLYMARK

I think this happens because people think that to have a healthy relationship, they have to conform to a more "normal" style of relationship - one that has an obvious masculine and feminine role. I think that as long as all bases are covered in making a relationship work, that gender roles don't make a difference.

I agree. I think that the two people in the relationship should share responsibilities. I don't think that it is healthy to have a masculine/feminine relationship because you become dependent on the other person for things that you can easily do for yourself. I do want my future boyfriend to show that he cares about me and take me out on dates, but I don't think it's fair for him to be "the man" and do things like pay for everything or open the door. I think having a masculine/feminine relationship leads to the people not seeing each other as equals, which is really important in a relationship.

I've seen it in relationships but for me personally I wouldn't want it, I don't want a girlfriend who is overly masculine or feminine but in between like me, probably edging more towards the feminine side.

I am sure that your observations are accurate. However, I would argue that ALL men (gay, bi, or straight) are different, and some will always be more "masculine" than others. I think that is what you are observing...that people are simply different. I am the more feminine in my relationship...but I am not particularly feminine overall.

[Schu]

Most relationships I've seen don't conform to that, and the ones that do, like Kevin42 said, are merely an accident, not deliberate.

And hey, even straight people break the mould: how many times have you heard of a woman being the one who "wears the pants in the relationship"?

some relationships people do tend to think that you have to take roles on whos gonna be who, but for me not really, me and my boyfriend dont have roles we are just two guys who happen to like each other, hes not feminine and nor am i, but we arent too masculine either. and pretty much we tend to just do our own thing without there really being a relationship in which we are feminine or masculine, its pretty equal i say. we just do our thing i guess. so we tend to go bak and forth without really sticking up to the whole roles. People always suggest its gonna be a feminine guy and a masculine guy but everyone is different and we like what we like. so its up to the person

[Beachboi92]

my current relationship is absolutely nothing like this xD i have a lot of feminine and masculine roles in different ways. I like guys, i look for guys with certain more masculine features/tendencies and certain more feminine ones. I think it is more of a situation where other people outside of the relationship put people in it into these places when really it is just because of the more obvious feminine/masculine signs

[Lexington]

Well, let me use some couples as examples.

In couple 1, X and Y both work. But X earns significantly more, Y works less and does most of the housework. So you might say X is the "man", and Y is the "woman".

In couple 2, X is smaller and does all the cooking, while Y works out and enjoys watching sports. So in that couple, X is the "woman" and Y is the "man".

Just one thing, though - they're both the same couple.

In short, I think it's a case of seeing what you want to see.

Lex

[Emberstone]

remeber though, feminane and masculine are purely social constructs. What we are seeing, and not just in the lgbt community, is a disolving of these boundaries overall.

In the end, it probably is a matter that it is 'in the eyes of the beholder.'

I dont consider myself very feminiane, but I have friends who do consider me that way, and others who think I am more masculine then fem.

[Revan]

Sometimes it also just happens frankly. There is no real way, and sometimes people don't even realize they're "conforming".

[Nugget]

I think it's more about face value than really getting to know the couple. For example, one man might seem like the 'man' in the relationship on first impression, until you realize he loves cooking and taking care of kids, thus breaking the initial 'gender box' that he's grouped in. Then you realize that whatever real binary there is between that couple is probably very subtle. When it comes to couples other than you and your partner (who you know best, and thus would never fit this-and-that stereotype), what you see is not always what you get.

I mean, maybe I'd be the more chivalrous one between the two (paying for meals, etc.), but does that make me the 'man'? That I'm the main 'breadwinner' who likes drinking beer and playing golf with the guys and all that stuff? Pfft. It's because I like paying for meals. And on first impression, I wouldn't look like the 'man' anyway, and there might be someone who thinks my partner would pay for them instead because she might look more masculine.

So thus the argument spins itself around.

[xequar]

If you look at gay relationships with the pre-conceived notion that there's a "man" and "woman," you'll pick out the traits to support that notion.

An outside observer might notice that my BF does a lot of the cleaning and doesn't know a damn thing about sports, while I play more video games and love cars. But they would be overlooking that my BF does a lot of his own maintenance on his car, that I enjoy cooking, and that we both pay for meals and stuff, depending upon who manages to grab the check first.

We're two guys, with different characteristics, in a relationship. That's all. Assigned gender roles are so 1950, even in modern man/woman relationships. My coworker is a woman that works to pay the bills, and her husband stays at home to raise the kids. The truth of it all is that all households have certain things that have to happen, and in every relationship, someone will step up to do those things. Someone will clean the house and do the dishes. Someone will tend to getting the cars maintained. Someone will deal with the kids or the pets or whatever. Someone will wire the electronics and tend the yard. It doesn't matter if it's a man, a feminine man, a masculine woman, a woman, et cetera.

[partietraumatic]

ive only been in one relationship but neither of us adopted overtly masculine or feminine roles

[kettleoffish]

I suppose to a certain degree me and my boyfriend have that, but not really. He's a little more feminine than me, but not especially so.

[xballetxbeautyx]

Ehhh, I don't think it's always true. My moms are both... well butch enough to be considered butch, but not excessively so. And the one that is a little bit more girly, less uptight, etc. is also the 'breadwinner' which, if you want to go by tradition, is a guy thing.

In my last relationship, as a joke, my girlfriend and I decided to collect 'man points' - she got them for playing softball and being really tall, I got them for pushing her against a wall once (lol, good times...). We ended up deciding that she was the 'man,' but we weren't being serious at all.

[Pseudojim]

I wouldn't put it down necessarily to gender roles. I'd put it down more specifically to dominant / submissive roles.

Tradition (and genetics) may have led to males having a sort of 'dominance' over females in a relationship. But just like sexuality, this is a spectrum. Some males are submissive, some females are dominant. I think treating gender and dominance/submissiveness as separate entities is a good model for describing the kind of behaviour described by the OP.

[haelmarie]

Originally Posted by Pseudojim

I wouldn't put it down necessarily to gender roles. I'd put it down more specifically to dominant / submissive roles.

Tradition (and genetics) may have led to males having a sort of 'dominance' over females in a relationship. But just like sexuality, this is a spectrum. Some males are submissive, some females are dominant. I think treating gender and dominance/submissiveness as separate entities is a good model for describing the kind of behaviour described by the OP.

Took the words right out of my mouth.

I can't really formulate an accurate decision on this, having never been in a relationship, but the sexual act itself requires one person to be dominant and one to be submissive. Again, generalizing is always going to be a little off base, but it would seem logical that this pattern would extend to the relationship. Of course, there would always be exceptions (like people who switch it up), but I would be surprised if the majority of relationships did not have a dominant/submissive element to them.