The Irony of "Bromance"

Like Sasha, I also have a problem with many of the examples of bromance that were brought up. What exactly constitutes a bromance, and what makes that different from a "normal" friendship between two guys?

I agree with the author that the show Bromance does, at times, establish itself as gay-friendly. For example, having Michael on the show is not an issue at all and is depicted and received as natural. However, the show also proves to be the opposite (for example, the "awkward" and "uncomfortable" hottub eliminations).

There seem to be some Foucauldian elements here that would prove that Jenner's show is not as gay-friendly as it may seem. The whole bromance theme that we see in the show as well as the times it pops up in sitcoms like Seinfeld further emphasizes the social stigma attached to homosexuality and that we must classify ourselves as gay or straight and perform our sexuality as such. Just the fact that we had to coin the term "bromance" suggests that homosexuality is still not as "normal" as heterosexuality. The term suggests that there is a grey area between male homosexuality and heterosexuality, but that men in this grey area are not (I repeat, NOT) gay.

Men in these shows get very defensive and make sure others know that they are not (God forbid!!!) gay. They are constantly checking themselves to make sure that their friendship or bromance is not crossing the metaphorical line between buddies and lovers. They often say things like, "We're not gay... not that there's anything wrong with that." ...Except that the characters in the examples given go out of their way to explain and prove to others that they are straight.

If our society was completely free of homophobia, there would be no desire for straight men to prove to others that they are straight and not gay. I even think that the term "bromance" would not exist.