You must log in or register to comment.
Most of men touch is contextualized in violence, from fathers beating sons, to only having physical contact during combat sports or training for team sports with pushing and shoving techniques. As a result men tend to be hyper aware when they are touching other men and unless it’s sexual(and they are gay), do not tend to find joy in it. Platonic touch gestures do happen, but it’s simply not something men are raised to enjoy, and so long as society necessitates that men be available to serve as soldiers, I find it highly unlikely that same society will restructure how it raises men so that they may enjoy platonic touch contexts. Having a population frustrated enough to be capable of violence if needed is still useful enough to keep its undercurrent themes alive in the background. Until there is no organized violent conflict, men will be always raised with the understanding that “just in case” they must be raised with some sort of violent touch
Additionally, this way of framing up men in society causes us to internalize homophobia. If we experience platonic physical contact, we ask ourselves if the other will consider it gay and how that affects their perception of us. We fear the rejection that comes with someone else’s internalized homophobia and the reactions it generates in them, and therefore fear the repercussions of actually enjoying physical male contact. Fearing our own rejection for being queer or even just the perception that we are internalizes that homophobia in ourselves.
What about the Roman Army and their practices?
Good point but a little different because Roman/greek lover soldiers were specifically selected and segregated and celebrated away from rote regular troops.
But there is a model for male touch and camaraderie within a militaristic society we can learn from
A slur warning might be appreciated.
Being a Serbian is now insulting, folks.
