Victorian vs. Contemporary: Female/Female and Male/Male Relationships

Even in this contemporary age, interactions between women and interactions between men differ. Women can be closer and more affectionate than men can be with other men, without being accused of being gay. This reaches back to the Victorian era when women were often depicted in fashion plates with arms intertwined, and in poses that could be construed as intimate, while there was no male equivalent. These concepts led to differences in the way that male-male relationships and female-female relationships are viewed.

Someone in class brought up how he and one of his male friends went out to dinner on Valentine’s Day one year, and some other people assumed that they were out on a date. While there was nothing that would technically suggest that they were on a date, it was assumed because they were both male and did not have any other friends with them.  Conversely, when my girlfriend and I go out to eat, or to a movie or some other date, most people don’t assume we are a couple. We can hold hands, sit on the same side of the table, or pay for each the other’s meal and still be deemed as “straight” friends. I think this is a good example of how our codes for femininity are not much different from Victorian codes, in that they both under-sexualize female relationships.

Nearly the only time female-female relationships are depicted as sexual in contemporary times is in pornography; however, they are often hypersexualized, and only viewed in certain circumstances.  Female-female pornography is only viewed if the women are both stereotypically feminine; female-female pornography generally doesn’t depict a feminine woman with a masculine woman, or two masculine women. In Victorian women’s magazines, the whipping of girls by older women had erotic undertones, that were often reprinted or were inspiration for pornography magazines. These women were always dressed in the fashion of the time, and were not considered “masculine.” People often argue that female-female relationships are more “accepted” by society than male-male relationships, when it really has more to do with our codes for femininity and masculinity. They are more “accepted” because they are either under-sexualized, or hyper-sexualized.

Male-male relationships are seen as less accepted by society because we still have strict gender roles, and many of these relationships don’t adhere to these roles, but also cannot be seen as “friendship” like the female-female equivalent. Our emphasis on hyper-masculinity affects our perception of these relationships and how they are presented by society. A difference between male-male relationships and female-female relationships is that male-male pornography has more variety in the masculinity of those involved. There can be two masculine men, or two feminine men, or a combination of both. While men often arguably have stricter gender roles to adhere to, the way we treat homosexual relationships of each gender differs. These social codes are similar to those from Victorian times, due to the focus on hyper-masculinity. However, due to the lack of a specific homosexual identity in the Victorian era, it is possible to analyze the differences between each society as well.  

All of the above exemplifies how Victorian and contemporary perceptions of interactions between women and men affect perceptions of female-female and male-male relationships, and the similarities and differences between each society’s model.