Spectrum of Male-to-Male Bonding: The Emotional-Physical Beyond Labels

Extending from one of my previous posts on “Demystifying Sexuality,” I now wish to delve into theorizing about the spectrum of male-to-male bonding that is made of the intersection between the degree of emotional bonding and the degree of physical bonding between at least two biologically male beings (referring to a sex category) or two men (referring to a gender category). By “bonding,” it means closeness or intimacy. In the above post, after a series of literature reading and my own self-exploration and self-understanding, I choose not to label myself sexually. If anything, my sexuality or sexual orientation is non-denominational in that I simply live myself with as a sexual being with its complex nature and I do not wish to oversimplify it (as I understand better the sciences, historical accounts, and scriptural touches combined). In the post, I also mentioned about my realization of the need to engage in male-to-male bonding (despite & exactly because of my heterosexual marriage arrangement - I am married to a woman, with kids). After more explorations, I’ve understood now that I am not the only one. In fact, scientific evidence suggests that there are many men - regardless of their declared sexual orientation - who need and enjoy deep bonding or intimacy with other men and that it is a natural process.

Some of the theoretical backgrounds of my exploration of the male-to-male bonding are:

1. Similarity attraction theory. People are generally interested in being those of the “same kind” as them. There is a degree of comfort when being with people of the same kind. This can be based on any social identification such as country, ethnic group, language, and gender or sex category.

2. Nature of self-construal. Men tend to have a self-construal of being independent, as opposed to being interdependent. Even when men are in a relationship, men tend to maintain an independent mindset, in the sense that they do not depend on others for making decisions. Nevertheless, men in a collectivist culture may be more inclined to be more interdependent. As we see cultural shift, many men now embrace being interdependent while many women embrace being more independent. This means that while men tend to be independent, we also need a sense of connection with others.

3. Short-term vs. Long-term. Men tend to prioritize short-term (versus long-term) gains, including in the context of sexual experiences or experiences related to our sexual nature. This can relate to the idea of commitment one has. Naturally, male beings’ sexual endurance is more short-term than female beings.

4. Physical vs. Emotional experiences. Men tend to initiate physical touch more than women, see physical touch as a primary source of affection, and seek more physical comfort than emotional comfort.

Aside from literature review, AI-enhanced search, hundreds of movies exploring relevant themes, and my own personal involvement or engagement, I theorize that male-to-male bonding covers a spectrum from low to high in two directions (i.e., the physical and the emotional bonding, intimacy, closeness, or transparency), resulting in four main quadrants and one central integration of all quadrants as the fifth. This type of theorizing is similar to many other models in social or behavioral sciences such as conflict management and many others. To note, the men engaged in any type of bonding can be found married to or partnering with a woman. The woman may be aware of such types of bonding happening to her male partner. In many cases, the woman can become insecure, angry, or unaccepting of such bonding. Nevertheless, in some cases, when there is a great deal or sense of security between the couple, the male-to-male bonding can be accepted as a fact of life and even embraced, having the function to even support their relationship.

Quadrant 1: Low Physical, Low Emotional

You can find this type of bonding in a strictly professional context. The only physical activity that one can see is perhaps handshaking. While emotional connection can happen, it is not something that makes the two men engage in the sharing of personal experiences that leads to deeper understanding. In other words, while a sense of appreciation, admiration, or any form of emotional positivity can be present, the emotional bonding is at the surface level, which in a way can be seen as strategic. This is because the two men do not wish to interfere in each other’s business to a large degree. Not wanting to be transparent, either emotionally or physically with each other is a sign of respect. Each man appreciates the boundary of the other man. They do not engage in hanging out, and other types of bonding activities. The bonding - both physically and emotionally - is there, but low to non-existent. If any, the bonding at this stage is imaginary or exists only in the realm of imagination.

Quadrant 2: Low Physical, High Emotional

This is about male friendship, but without much physical touches. The two men engaged in this type of bonding typically share very intimate stories about and with each other, their vulnerabilities, their struggles, and they are connected simply by the presence of each other. They joke around, they feel safe around each other, and they support each other’s endeavors. The most intimate physical interaction may only be hugging (usually with clothes on), and handshaking (with potentially a variety of forms). This is what the “typical” bromance looks like. They simply share love for each other, without the need to go physical with each other. They may share something physically intimate, but they have no desire to be physical with it. While there may be cases of this type in a professional setting, this type of bonding seems to be enabled for development more likely in earlier stages of life of the two men, all the way through the stage of college. Given the potentially different paths of life of the two men, such bonding may stay or not.

Quadrant 3: High Physical, Low Emotional

If you have come to places where men can meet each other and engage in physically intimate activities (e.g., male saunas, male-to-male massage places), this is where you can find this type of bonding. The emotional bonding is generally low to non-existent as there is a lack of commitment in maintaining a relationship. What is heightened or intense is the physical activities that one may experience, upon consent. The physical (i.e., sexual) energies being exercised are temporary. Nonetheless, the physical intimacy can be very deep. Low emotional intimacy does still mean that one man respects another man and his boundaries. Everything comes with a consent or an agreement. You can see practically “all” types of men (sexual orientation becomes irrelevant) in this type of spaces, where physical transparency is something that is very much embraced. It is about men enjoying something deeply personal and exciting with each other, without the need for emotional commitments. This type of bonding does not happen only in the above mentioned spaces, but also through social media applications and other channels aimed at allowing men to experience short-term physical intensity (i.e., bonding) without commitments. This is also made possible perhaps because of men’s tendency to be more independent.

Quadrant 4: High Physical, High Emotional

This type of bonding can be seen regardless one’s declared sexual identity. Emotionally speaking, whether the men identify themselves as S, G, B, or any, the two men develop affections for each other. This means that the men want the best for each other. They can engage in deep admiration towards each other’s characteristics, whether physical or personal. They may or may not want to live together or have a romantic relational arrangement (i.e., allowing themselves to express love openly). They can remain simply very close friends as well, but with a deeper physical intimacy. Such intimacy can be naturally sexual as well - meaning, involving sexual urges or releases. At the core of this type of bonding is deep appreciation & care for each other, physically and emotionally. Overall, the two men have a deeper understanding of each other both emotionally and physically, regardless of the type of relational arrangements between them.

Central: Medium Physical, Medium Emotional

This type of bonding can be present predominantly in a professional setting where the nature of relationships among people is very collegial or friendly, including (for examples) a sport-team context and the likes - where physical and emotional transparencies are usually enabled, but only to a compromised degree. Emotionally, for any two men (or potentially more, including women as well) involved in this type of bonding simply means that they like hanging out with each other, say, during lunch. Many light-hearted jokes are thrown at each other to create a friendly environment, but they don’t typically share deep, intimate, stories with each other - which is usually an ingredient for high emotional bonding. They could, but it is not the default. They keep the emotional intimacy moderate as to respect each other’s boundaries. Physical touches can still be seen beyond formal handshaking, such as occasional hugging, lightly tapping on the upper part of the other man’s leg while sitting side by side while exchanging stories, opinions, or ideas, or touching parts of the other man’s upper body like the back or the shoulder. Sometimes, to replace physical touches (when such touches are seen as awkward), direct (rather deep) eye contact signals the physical connection.

Redefining Romance as the Pinnacle of Intimacy

I argue that the way we understand “romance” or the way it is used in our daily conversations tends to be restricted in its meaning and it does not allow for the term itself to do its job. In a heteronormative society, where “intimacy” is usually strictly conceived of as between a man and a woman, we replace it with “bromance” to connote the “non-sexual” aspect of the relationship between two men (at least at the surface level). In reality and substantially, “bromance” and “homosexual relation” are not much different. Many forms of bromance can also involve sexual activities, whatever these are. The difference is usually one’s conscious identification of the commitment one has for the other. This means that bromance does not require a commitment to stay together. Nevertheless, because emotional intimacy can also be present in both, sometimes men in a “bromantic” relationship can find it difficult to let go off the other man if he chooses (for example) to move to another city where meeting up will become difficult. All in all, whatever it is called, when deep intimacy is present between two men, it is naturally romantic. Based on ChatGPT, these are some of the aspects that constitute romance:

1. Emotional Intimacy

2. Affection and Care

3. Connection beyond Physical Attraction

4. Thoughtfulness and Consideration

5. Passion and Desire (this is simply about the energy we bring to the relationship)

6. Shared Experiences

Men have been long prejudiced to not need any form of intimacy from other men. This is one major misconception. The label we attach to the relationship is generally, I argue, unhealthy for the well-being of men overall. With suicide rates among men higher than women around the world and the general tendency for men to be “disengaged” with their emotional states, men need to be encouraged to be intimate with other men, simply because no one understands the psychology and physicality of men other than fellow men, whatever they label themselves sexually. The challenge is the space we have for this type of exercise. Similar to the connectedness needed between a father and a son, male-to-male affections (either physically or emotionally) are mechanisms that help men or male beings to develop a fuller and healthier sense of self. In our lives, being able to explore all types of male-to-male bonding is a means to create both connection and independence.

What is the Opposite of Male-to-male Bonding?

The answer is aggression, which can involve wars and any destructive means of living. Men who do not appreciate male-to-male bonding. Desire (i.e., something that drives choices) that is based on deep appreciation is fundamentally different from desire that is based on hate. While the former can lead intimacy, the former can lead to aggression. Nevertheless, they may overlap such as in the context of male hazing in some university contexts (e.g., some sport teams or other male-dominated contexts), where men or male students experience aggression by other (more senior) male students in the context of creating intimacy or bonding among them as a group. Male hazing is generally seen as unhealthy as it promotes physical harm, emotional trauma, humiliation, toxic masculinity, and other side effects.

Conscious vs. Unconscious Bonding

Just like in any other type of bonding, male-to-male bonding can be conscious or unconscious. Unconscious bonding typically involves expectations towards the other party, while conscious bonding’s base is a sense of internal security. Such expectations in unconscious bonding can include wanting the other man to “always be there” for him, demanding that he is always supportive, not able to let go off the other man, or wanting the other man to be always able to do something for the self. These expectations are generally unrealistic and based on either physical or emotional impulses. Conversely, conscious bonding allows and encourages freedom of the other man and promotes respect. This is enabled through a more rational process involving realistic considerations. Overall, while unconscious bonding relies on attachment and insecurity, conscious bonding relies on engagement and voluntariness.

Conclusion

I argue that male-to-male bonding is critical to the health or well-being of men overall, similar to (but not entirely the same as) the father-son bonding. Based on Meta-AI’s answer, some of the challenges of male-to-male bonding are toxic masculinity, homophobia and heteronormativity, and competition and aggression. My own (ethnographic) experiences engaging with men (of various orientations) across spectrums mentioned above have given me so much perspective on my own nature as a male being, including the need for connection and paradoxically the need for my own independence. I’ve experienced both unconscious and conscious processes and gained valuable insights into the nature of men in relation to other men that I would not have been able to get if I had not been in such situations or spectrums. Something in me that I had not been able to regulate well in the past is now much more regulated, leading to a more conscious decision-making process. My exploration could have something to do with my own past or something missing in the past. Whatever it is, I have accepted everything and I have fully accepted who I am. Learning - in its purest form - has always been a fascinating frame to understand life overall and it should fundamentally get rid off all the judgments (usually linked to dogmas, or any judgmental stances) associated with any form of life realities. When we still judge, there is still something missing or something hidden in us that we’re not yet conscious about.