We've all met a Bro - that alpha male idiot, usually around 16-28 years old, who is generally inarticulate, belligerent, misogynistic, conceited, and thinks he's way funnier than he actually is. Like boogers, Bros come in all shapes and sizes, but a dead giveaway that you have spotted a Bro is if you can smell the AXE body spray wafting through the air.
Bros are both societal flaws and evolutionary anomalies - detrimental to the general public by way of their refusal to progress. Part little boy, part pathetic beast, Bros frequently refer to sexual intercourse as 'getting the kill,' often ignoring the humanity of women in favor of believing vaginas are something to be conquered and dominated. Besides beer, partying, hooking-up with drunk women, and using the word "fag," rating women based on physical attributes is their number one pastime.
Bro and Douchebag are synonymous.
Bros usually travel in packs to avoid getting picked off by greater foe, such as intelligent women and men. Often times, when a Bro approaches a potential sexual partner and is inevitably shot down, having his Bro Pack nearby gives him the confidence to shout out "Lesbian" or "Fatty" to the disinterested woman.
Some may assume most men in the 16-28 age bracket will invariably partake in Bro Culture, considering it a "Right Of Passage" for young men. That assumption may be encouraged by marketing campaigns targeting that age bracket, such as Carl's Junior, AXE Body Spray, and Guinness to name a few, but the reality is that Bro Culture is increasingly detested among young men with the intelligence and self confidence to see through the seedy sheen of Bro "Awesomeness" for what it truly is: compensation for feelings of inadequacy and sheer idiocy. Sadly, most Bros are oblivious to this truth.
Bro Culture is not to be confused with comedies depicting male friendships such as "I Love You, Man," "40 Year Old Virgin," "Superbad," etc. While those movies focus on male bonding, the main male characters tend to have a combination of traits ranging from honesty, femininity, intelligence, vulnerability, and respect for women (in some cases). Most Bros would consider those traits to be "gay."
Bro Culture represents the worst aspects of perceived masculinity - bullying, egoism, domination, aggression, Neanderthal intellect, and sexual prowling. One might surmise that Bro Culture is an attempt to re-affirm the value of extreme masculinity within the context of women's rights and the progressive role of women in society, but that's giving Bro Culture way too much credit.
I've had enough of Bro Culture, especially the changing of words to include any variation of the word 'Bro' such as Brocabulary, BroBible, Bromance, Bromosapiens, etc. They might have started off mildly endearing and humorous, but now they are simply sad and embarrassing.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Bro Culture.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/16758
Is this technically bro-shaming?
(not that I disagree ... just an amusing observation)
kbz
I can't tell if this is satire, maliciousness masquerading as satire or something else.
At any rate, I really find this offensive and unfunny.
>> "that alpha male idiot"
>> "feelings of inadequacy and sheer idiocy"
Please don't use the term "idiot" as an insult.
If what you mean is boorishness, insensivitiy, lack of common sense, lack of empathy for other people--then say that.
I read the Wikipedia page you posted and I read the Idiot Wikipedia page and I don't see what the problem is with her use of the word "idiot". She used it accurately.
You are doing the same thing she did.
You think it is clever to belittle these a man who is "16-28 years old...generally inarticulate, belligerent, misogynistic, conceited, and thinks he's way funnier than he actually is" by giving him the same label as someone whose "mental age is two years or less, and the person cannot guard himself or herself against common physical dangers."
But what you are simultaneously doing is insulting people with developmental delays, by implying that they are no better than the "Bros" who are actually the target of your insult.
You are being ridiculous.
No, you are being ableist.
Now you're being accusatory.
Seriously, stop it. You know that the original poster didn't use the word "idiot" in the way that you imply, so just fucking stop.
ZOMG, did I just get accused of playing "the race card"?!?! (Or...its equivalent?)
As I said below...this thread is no longer worth my effort.
You called me an ableist because I called you ridiculous.
That's more offensive to me than what you're complaining about.
If you're offended at people calling you out for saying stupid things then stop saying stupid things.
Jesus... I know everyone on this site is hyper-PC, but you just take the cake. Christ.
Canlord2, we would all really appreciate it if you wouldn't be so insensitive with your use of religious language in commenting. Use of words like "Jesus" and "Christ" as expletives or intensifiers is highly offensive. Thanks in advance!
Whoa whoa. Are we reading the same thing here? I read it twice trying to figure out how you draw that conclusion.
Insulting people with developmental delays is NOT what I'm getting from this piece at all, not even in the slightest.
Another definition of Idiot is "an utterly foolish or senseless person,” which seems to be the correct use of the word in this context.
Words sometimes have different meanings, but using "idiot" is not the same thing as using the word "retarded," nor do I believe the writer intended to imply that those with developmental delays are no better than Bros.
Yes. Words can have different meanings.
For example, the word "retarded" also means "held back" or "not allowed to progress."
Therefore, if I call you retarded, clearly I'm not insulting anyone, right? Because the word has another use, right?
And I *know* the writer didn't "mean" to draw that comparison. My point is that she did it anyway, by implication. Go read some Black and Lakoff. You might learn something.
In no way did she refer to individuals with developmental delays in this piece. She DID refer to the Neanderthal intellect of the Bro, which is absolutely true. Bros have absolutely no common sense and a lack of intelligence - that has nothing to do with a medical condition. People with DD are not idiots and for you to automatically think that those two words are synonymous is completely ignorant.
/sigh
Maybe I'm ignorant...but at least I'm attempting to educate myself.
Which is more than i can say for you.
But whatever. You're evidently not worth the effort.
The difference between "retarded" and "idiot" is that "idiot" has long since fallen out of use as a medical term. "Retarded" has not.
Language evolves. And while there's some language that is fairly explicitly problematic -- "Indian giving," "great white hope," and to a lesser extent, "gypped" -- idiot is not one of them.
"Cunt" used to be a neutral word, no more offensive than "vagina." Now it's considered offensive.
"Idiot" used to describe a specific disability. That usage has been gone for a while. The only place it shows up anymore is in certain state laws, and only then because said laws were written while the word was still in use and no one has bothered to change them.
When everyone needs to be an etymology scholar to speak without offending anyone, we've gone too far.
I think it is important to understand that individuals with Developmental Delays have these delays because of a medical condition. The term "idiot" is a term that has not been used in the Special Education field for a significant number of years. In essence, you have just found a way to re-associate the term within the special education community, something which I find highly offensive. We have made so much progress towards moving away from a deficit-based perspective by utilizing more positive language such as "differently-abled" and "exceptional individuals." This commentary had absolutely nothing to do with individuals with exceptionalities and if think that the terms "idiot" and "developmental delay" are synonymous then I am sorry that you have such a narrow minded view of special education.
The term idiot has not been used this way in any discernible educational, scientific or psychological way in decades.
I'm all for calling out -ist language, but as far as this one goes, I'm calling a bit of fowl because it's like being insulted by being accused of having "loose morals" in an OP criticizing purity pushers.
Audentia, I also think you missed that the direct link to the article literally has the words "archaic term" in it.
for the record, if she called them "retarded" then I'd be all about your comment. Idiot, however, I feel is being hyper-sensitive and PC to the point of ridiculousness.
ALSO, don't use the word "douchebag" as an insult. You're humiliating women everywhere who have been systematically taught by the patriarchy that their vaginas need to be cleaned by noxious chemicals in order to be properly sanitary....wait.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irony_mark
Anyone ever hear of the phrase "choose your battles?"
Presumably you're talking to the OP and not to me?
Hmm, although probably scratch the "boorishness," as it might still have classist undertones (I am not sure, but I'd rather have a more limited usable vocabulary than disrespect human beings).
This comment has been deleted.
Canlord2, I really don't want to seem like I'm singling you out, but I just have to object to your language and attitude here. "Stupid" is obviously an offensive term (as I'm sure you knew - perhaps you were trying to be ironic or humorous? In any case, it really wasn't appropriate). I'll give you the benefit of the doubt in regards to "troll" and assume that you just didn't know that you were shamelessly misappropriating a word that rightfully only belongs to those of Scandinavian descent.
I'll thank you to be more careful with your language in the future.
Considering the Viking and Norman conquests and raids throughout Europe, a great many more people than you might have had in mind are of Scandinavian descent. It's wrong and insensitive for you to deny them their patrimony.
Aleks, you are absolutely right, and I wholeheartedly apologize to anyone I may have offended. I will continue to strive to be more sensitive in the future. =)
Your use of the word "wholeheartedly" is cardionormative and others both grinches and hydrozoans.
Cardionormative is maybe the best word I've heard in ages.
Also, I would like to point out that I refrained from calling you out on your earlier use of "patrimony."
(Mainly 'cuz I felt like you were just lobbing that one over to me.)
Well, presumably it was Nordic men who contributed the Scandinavian genes throughout Europe, so patrimony is simply accurate.
No babe, all you.
Personally, I like Melissa at Shakesville's explanation of using the word "douche" as an insult:
http://shakespearessister.blogspot.com/2004/10/inside-jokes-faqs-wev.html#click10
"Actually, douching was a terribly anti-woman practice designed to make women feel ashamed about their natural body odor. Repeated douching can wash away the lining of the uterus, making it not just pointless but dangerous. So, when one needs a word to describe, say, our pointless and dangerous former president, one would be hard-pressed to find a better word than douchebag."
... so we're pretty much not supposed to use ANY insult anymore? Because iirc all English's mid-level insults are based on old-timey mental health language...
Next, Audentia is going to get offended by the word "penny-farthing."
The funniest thing about all this "game" bullshit is that even if you "score," you're still a loser.
Not even a little offended by this, but I honestly don't think stereotyping anyone is ever particularly helpful. I'm not sure this is the place for your rant.
That said -- and I WILL get internet-yelled at by someone for recommending this -- check out the Bro Rape vid on YouTube. I feel like you'll appreciate it.
I'll stand by you on it. I do find that video hilarious. I'd love to be able to justify it and say that the notion of bros turning on bros is subversive, but I don't think anyone can make that case.
I don't think this was meant to be funny. It's meant to be, and is, terrifying. Because "bro culture" is exactly what advertisers are selling to men. Go watch PBS's "The Merchants of Cool." Come back when you've finished weeping.
Kate -- totally!
That documentary is amazing. People, MTV sends out pseudo-anthropologists to turn all of our diverse forms of cultural upbringing into as many different types of commercial products as possible.
The point that the OP is making is really important. As for the above issue, I am confident that the people with disabilities who are reading this are intelligent and strong enough to recognize that the author means to use the term "idiot" to criticize the intelligence of people who buy into this culture -- but the point is that they can be educated out of it. If their "idiocy" were congenital, there would be no point in attempting to change things, would there?
I'm linking to this documentary since the entire thing is available online--
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/cool/
Omg, seriously, thank you SO much for that link. I can't believe I haven't seen that before. :D
GREAT link!!
That is an eye-opening documentary. I actually just watched it last week and it does an excellent job of breaking down how MTV promotes and sells the Bro or "mook" culture by feeding adolescents an images of themselves, which they see and emulate.
I feel that this post is really meant to address the problems with Bro culture and I don't find the language particularly offensive because the author isn't referring to people with development issues. If that were the case this post would be unacceptable. I agree with Kimberry13, maybe just because I'm tired of hearing these misogynists shout degrading things at and about women and gays on campus. Fortunately, Bros make themselves known and are therefore rather easy to avoid.
Kate -- exactly!
If I were to make a similar post mocking a particular type of women or person of color that I didn't like, I would be banned.
Interesting point, but I think if you could prove that a group was the latest symptom of male-dominated subjection of women and all the other -ions that it entails, then you might be able to get away with mocking that group. Besides this kind of venting the op is doing is good when dealing with the oppressive nature of patriarchy.
The thing is, I don't really understand posts like this. Young girls are annoying as hell too, just in a different way. Teenagers and young people are insecure, unintelligent, and crave social acceptance, and thus they form loud, overcompensating, enormous groups in an attempt to collectively feel powerful. With "bros", it is indeed "bro culture" (although I'd argue the OP is exaggerating). With women, it's "clique culture" led by the "queen bee" or the "bathroom gossip crew", generally discussing another woman and what a slut she is.
Yeah, I guess the difference here is that there hasn't been effective institutionalized slavery of "bros" by "queen bees" for the past two-thousand years... in every walk of life. But the reverse is indisputably, historically the case with the patriarchy. Check sex trafficking stats. Check genital mutilation. Check pay gap. Check sexual assault statistics. Feminism 101.
But even then, joke's on y'all, because prior to The Era of Jesus most hunter-gatherer societies were actually supported entirely by breadwinning women! And also grandmothers were what made the entirety of civilization possible. Don't believe me? Read a book by Pulitzer-prize winning biologist Natalie Angier, called "Woman." I'm not kidding. She's awesome.
Wow, I wasn't aware that 20-year old backslapping "bros" were responsible for the history of the world. Or indeed, much of anything. We're talking about obnoxious behavior from a group of people who are almost exclusively concentrated in the Western nations, the most tolerant culture in the history of the world. So terms like "genital mutilation" and "enslavement" really are totally irrelevant to this discussion and I don't know why you brought it up.
Oh yeah, and to address the even more irrelevant second half of your post, Natalie Angier is an idiot. Her article on Bee Movie was one of the stupidest things I've ever read.
BTW, the pay gap is a myth.
If you're trying to help me...
stop.
This comment has been deleted.
Yes. You mentioned "young girls" and "teenagers." Bro culture, however, reaches well into the 30s.
Rarely.
Why couldn't you post about how much you dislike Queen Bees? I don't think there is a rule that posts have to be constructive. You can just point out how something sucks, right?
Please point out a group of people who are free of, and completely absent any symptoms from, patriarchy.
I guess symptom means an indication that something else exists so really all groups are affected by patriarchy. I didn't mean it that way; I meant "manifestation," as in: bros are part of the dominant group now and are a manifestation of male dominance in our time. And yes, bros are not responsible for oppression since the time men and women started walking around, but bros are a current form of the dominant male group. Any group that is not connected as part of this dominance is probably off limits to intense mocking as in the op, since it just sounds mean or like one of the -ists. Does that make more sense qtiger? Sorry I was vague earlier.
I didn't mean it that way; I meant "manifestation," as in: bros are part of the dominant group now and are a manifestation of male dominance in our time.
Dominance of what, where? The cafeteria?
Any group that is not connected as part of this dominance is probably off limits to intense mocking as in the op
Privilege is not a binary; everyone is a part of the dominant group. All of us are posting about feminism on the internet, implying both education and socioeconomic status. There's plenty of privilege to go around on Feministing. Where do we draw the line as to who we are 'allowed' to insult? Host an Oppression Olympics and all medal winners get an 'insult whoever you please' card? Or do we just assume that penis = dominance?
If you don't think men are still in control of our society, then my post is nonsense. You can insult whoever you want to, but this site is about feminism, so it seems that insulting a group that has controlled or abused women over time can be insulted. You can say whatever you want, but on this site people might report abuse. Do I really have to explain what patriarchy means in detail? Dominant as in they dominate how men look at women, how they interact with women, what women should expect from men, maybe other stuff I am not thinking of. Women have many privileges. I do not think women have equal status with men in intimate relationships. That is where bros dominate. Men active, women passive.
"so it seems that insulting a group that has controlled or abused women over time can be insulted." should be "so it seems that insulting a group that has controlled or abused women over time is alright."
If you don't think men are still in control of our society, then my post is nonsense. You can insult whoever you want to, but this site is about feminism, so it seems that insulting a group that has controlled or abused women over time can be insulted.
You're arguing a point I haven't made. I know what patriarchy is, and I'm not saying it doesn't exist. What I am saying is that in order to insult someone like this, you have to draw a line and say 'everyone more privileged than this is worthy of insult.' So what is that line? Whiteness? A penis? Both?
Like I said, on this site, I would draw the line at that white male group or people might get offended. If you want to vent about another group, like "girly girls" or idk something like that, people on this site might get offended, because it doesn't look the same. The line is arbitrary. Now, if you support your mocking with some evidence or whatever and refrain from insulting women needlessly, you might be ok. If you were offended by this post, then maybe it isn't alright to mock anyone in this manner. Again, there is no clear line. But targeting women to mocking like this on a feminist website might be tougher.
Also what did you mean by we are all part of the dominant group? I thought you meant men and women are equal in all respects. My apologies I didn't mean to condescend.
Like I said, on this site,
I was more wondering what was "right" as opposed to socially acceptable.
Also what did you mean by we are all part of the dominant group? I thought you meant men and women are equal in all respects. My apologies I didn't mean to condescend.
Everyone is dominant. There is always someone with less power and less privilege than you. Privilege and power are a spectrum, and not just have or don't have.
For someone who doesn't like binaries, you are pretty caught up with right and wrong. In this context socially acceptable is right. Power might be on a spectrum but dominance is different. Dominance works on a hierarchical structure and refers to large groups not individuals.
For someone who doesn't like binaries, you are pretty caught up with right and wrong. In this context socially acceptable is right.
So if I go to a klan rally it's "right" to hate people of color? It would be socially acceptable in those surroundings.
Power might be on a spectrum but dominance is different. Dominance works on a hierarchical structure and refers to large groups not individuals.
That doesn't make any sense. What about a lower class white male with a disability? Clearly he belongs to more than one group, some of which are 'dominant' and some of which are not.
Does your hierarchy reflect every possible combination of social, economic and educational factors? Sounds like a big chart. I bet it would be simpler if you were to just graph it, with coordinates reflecting relative dominance. It could go from low on the bottom left to high on the top right, each step being a gradual increase. What would that be called... oh right, a spectrum.
Well the klan would be a different context then, wouldn't it? Large groups. Large trends. Not groups that are relatively small. Not individuals. Spectrum isn't relevant here.
But yes, going to a klan rally is more wrong than this post, to me.
BTW, you're right, this patriarchy is unbelievably oppressive. It's probably only a matter of minutes before the post gets deleted by the MAN POLICE for insulting he masculinity of young men.
Oh wait...
lol. trying to mock us by biting on my style...
Oppression does not just mean a system of outright slavery or cruel enforcement. It can also mean burdened or weighted down. I get that our problems are not as bad as other nations and what they are going through and that sucks, but there can be other forms of oppression.
Right on, Kimberry13! Screw those bros and their bro culture! The world would be a better place if we all went out and killed a bro today. Dudes don't deserve to live!
And like you said, especially screw those bro-based words! That's like, the icing on the bro cake. I mean, the fecal frosting on the bro s**t-cake.
If you ever run for public office Kimberry13, you'll have my vote on your anti-bro platform. Rock on and spread the good word!
(am i doin it rite? I don't actually understand the rules to this game)
Wow.
Thanks, I'm trying.
Bro-creation? Bro-choice? Bro-feminism?
you win! especially for "bro-choice."
LOl This thread is perfectly indicative of the problems with this site.
The pay gap is a myth, huh. You should tell the countless people who've done countless studies that prove conclusive that there is one, cuz clearly, they wasted their time. Bitchez should be shut up and be glad their allowed to work at all!
LOL. Thanks trolling Canlord. You pathetic-ness gave me giggles.
This comment has been deleted.
I'm surprised by this thread. I didn't find much offensive or wrong in the post. To me it was venting frustrations about a stereotypical group of young men (remember there is some truth to every stereotype) who pose particular problems for feminists and women. Fits into the blog!
Not that I find the original post extremely offensive - though I did find its generalizations a bit problematic - but just to play devil's advocate, would you have accepted "(remember there is some truth to every stereotype)" as an excuse to engage in stereotyping of another group - say, African-Americans, or gay men, or feminists?
I don't have a problem with criticizing "bro culture," particularly given its adverse effects on just about anyone who isn't part of it, but it's probably healthy to check on ourselves whether or not we're engaging in speech that we would really find problematic in a different context.
Good holy gravy.
People being willfully ignorant about ableist language?
Feminists condescendingly calling each other "babe"?
Multiple personal attacks puncutated with "fuck you"s?
Can we just send this whole thing to the trashcan and grow up a little bit? It's embarassing to witness.
Most of these comments are 10 times more amusing than my post, though some are quite disturbing. Apologies to everyone offend by what I wrote.
Almost anything would be ten times as amusing as a post that characterizes a group as "beasts", "un-evolved", "douchebags", "Neanderthals", and "anomalies".
The problem is patriarchy. If we believe that people are socialized to act in certain ways then the issue isn't genetic at all. It's not about evolution or the fact that "Bros" are part animal and part human.
The way you portray people who are, to some degree, cultural victims of patriarchy as animalistic is hateful and utterly useless. It serves no purpose and offers no remedy but scorn and hate.
If a post like this were made about women who over-adopt traditional gender roles and called these women beasts and un-evolved women it would be easily recognized for what it is: vile, hate-filled rhetoric passing itself off as comedy.
I think the OP was intending to mock (and I think it was quite effective) those who buy into the Bro mentality. That mentality is very hate-driven towards women as she pointed out several times and it is very animalistic. Perhaps it serves no purpose to you and offers no remedy to the problem, but it does highlight how Bro Culture is damaging both to women and men.
Saying Bros are "cultural victims of patriarchy" is in many ways excusing their behavior. Being a Bro is a choice. Period.
Venting about a stereotypical group of young men who demean women and act like assholes may not be your cup of tea, or even "useful," but I think this post represents the frustrations many of us have when dealing with Bro Culture.
"Saying Bros are "cultural victims of patriarchy" is in many ways excusing their behavior."
Um, no it isn't. It's saying their behavior has a reason behind it, and that reason is normative gender roles. The same is true of women who hyper-adopt normative gender roles. It's not an excuse. It's a reason. Of course boys and men choose to be Bros, but this choice doesn't occur in a vacuum, and to pretend it does is to ignore the basic tenets of feminism.
Bro culture isn't a good thing, but it exists for a reason. It's a response by confused young guys who pine for the ol' days patriarchy in some ways but in other ways are confused about where to derive their masculinity.
That's why the Bro culture is so rife with misogyny and homophobia. The goal there is to define one's self by what one isn't and denigrate others, which is really the result of being scared, uncomfortable, and indoctrinated.
There's nothing wrong with venting. There is something wrong with calling human beings beasts, Neanderthals, un-evolved, and societal defects. That kind of terminology is beyond problematic. It's hateful, and hateful representations of other people don't do anyone any good.
Bro culture is patriarchal, not animalistic, and it's practitioners aren't animals any more than women who buy into traditional gender roles.
If a post with this much vitriol was "mocking" stay at home moms who cede familial authority to their husbands Feministing would be in a (completely justifiable) uproar.
The whole "patriarchy hurts men, too" is a tired trope, bordering the cliche here, but it's still true, and to call human beings animals because of the effects of patriarchal culture that they were indoctrinated with is wrong.
There are many cultures besides Bro culture that are just as bad to women, if not worse, yet if we described some of them in the terms used in the original post the obvious hatred and wrongness would be readily apparent.
Venting? Useful. Hating? Not so much.
It’s obvious that I don’t read this post with the same perspective as you, but I can respect your point of view. Hating in general is a waste of time and hurtful in the long run, but it is a natural reaction to cruelty and frustration. I definitely feel the OP’s frustration and I enjoyed reading the sarcastic humor scattered through this post. I even signed up to comment for the first time on Feministing because of this post.
I took the comparison of Bros as “beasts, Neanderthals, un-evolved, and societal defects” as sarcastic exaggerations. I took it as a “Friday Fuck you” Bro Culture!
And you are right, I would be offended if a post using this language mocked women who chose traditional roles, but I’m not in the least offended by this post. Maybe I’m a hypocrite, but Bros seem to be fair game for mockery and hate because of how much hate they spread.
If nothing else, the post inspired many debates.
you were great, don't let the word police discourage you, your post was spot on, and as a man, I basically agree with your analysis or bro's/douchebags
Wow.
This post has a LOT of comments. Unfortunately, while we could be analyzing the post, "bro culture" or even any other culture, everyone is arguing about whether or not "idiot" is an offensive term.
Personally, I think this post is good. I've met quite a few guys like this, both within my own family and at school. The "bro culture" is NOT a healthy one, and the only way to change it is for people to start talking about it. Which is why posts like this are important.
Maybe someone should write a post analyzing the "Queen Bee" culture as well?
I agree. It’s upsetting to me that people are trying to shame the OP for writing (albeit heatedly) about this subject. I’m incredibly irritated with Bro Culture and know so many people (both male and female) who are as well. It’s everywhere and to not speak out against it is to allow it to become normalized behavior.
The way Bros talk about women is absolutely terrifying. It’s a disgusting anti-woman and anti-gay culture.
Having a “just shut up and don’t be angry or resentful about this” attitude towards the OP is very telling about some of the commenters’ psyche.
And I laughed while reading this post, so the comedy wasn’t lost on me.
I understand the frustration and annoyance behind this post. I am currently a college student and everyday I'm assaulted by the horrors of "bro culture."
We need to vent sometimes so that we don't commit violent crimes against people. All I see this as is an angry vent session with a bit of comedy thrown in.
I can't tell you how many times I've walked past a group of these "bros" antagonizing an effeminate man, calling each other gay/fag/homo, punching each other in the arm, and making disgusting comments about women. It really can make you want to hurt one of them.
I laughed when I read this and it released my anger at situation involving a "bro" from earlier today.
"but Bros seem to be fair game for mockery and hate because of how much hate they spread."
I think that might be a bit of a rationalization, though.
This mockery was very specific in the language it chose to describe Bro culture, which is by all accounts a misogynistic and homophobic culture built on normative gender roles.
However, what if the original poster had replaced Bro culture and its descriptors with traditional Abrahamic religion culture or the cultural norms of an ethnic group?
Surely that's not to say that criticism and even mockery of these things wouldn't be allowed, but had someone described traditional Islamic culture using words like beast, Neanderthal, and un-evolved there would be considerably more backlash, even though both Bro culture and traditional Islamic culture both would fall under your conception of "fair game".
I think there's a class element to this. We give the original poster more leniency because her target is a group of affluent, mostly white males, and therefore the connotations of Neanderthal or un-evolved aren't as strong, but I'd argue that they still matter in the context of describing males in general.
Word choice counts, and there's no doubt that this mockery has a clear set of descriptors meant to evoke an image that I think is problematic and unhelpful, the image of a man as part-beast, incapable of self-control, and incapable of behavioral change, hardwired to be a Bro and therefore deserving of hate for their very being.
It may feel nice to other people this way, it may even seem funny to some folks, but it goes beyond not being useful when it starts labeling a group in the way it does. This kind of attacking (and that's really what it is) is detrimental.
I agree that hate is a natural reaction here. But hate the culture, not the people indoctrinated with it.
Woops, this was meant to be a reply to laurenb's post above.
"hate the culture, not the people indoctrinated with it" was what I got from this post. I didn't feel like she was hating anything else but the culture. She never mentioned Bros as "a group of affluent, mostly white males." In fact, she never mentioned race or class. I have been around so many guys I'd consider "Bros" and they are not all white guys who come from money.
I agree that word choice counts, but for me, the language and tone do not take away from the point of this post, which is that Bro Culture is bad in many ways.
I suppose if the OP didn't want to offend anyone she could have censored herself and just simply written the PC version: "Bro Culture is demeaning to both men and women.”
Just because not every Bro is an affluent white male doesn't change the cultural perception of a Bro, though, does it?
The stereotypical Bro is white and affluent, which in turn is part of the reason why the poster here is getting a free pass on some really problematic language that wouldn't get by normally if we associated the words she used more with her targets.
Neanderthal, un-evolved, social defects, this type of language is part of a set meant to make a group stand out as somehow biologically inferior on a genetic level, bound by biology to be incapable of changing. Obviously that's not the case here, as Bro culture is cultural, but if the OP had characterized another less affluent or powerful culture in this manner we'd be more likely to see the problems in the language of the post.
I don't think this in any way takes away from the point that Bro culture is bad, but it does add another layer to the mix here: why did the OP use the language she did, why has its use gone largely unnoticed here, and does that constitute tacit approval?
The overt point of this post is that Bro culture is bad, but the underlying point is a lot more hateful, and bound up in terminology that's really problematic when we look at normative male stereotypes. In some ways her post serves to reinforce Bro culture with her use of these words. Because hey, if someone's un-evolved what can they do? It's biology, not culture. That's an excuse that many men and women use for a lot of problematic practices, including some aspects of Bro culture.
As for offending people I doubt anyone would have tolerated a post this vitriolic and hateful if not for its target, but I do find it offensive to characterize men in the way she did, as it feeds into and reinforces broader stereotypes.
Bro culture is bad, but sometimes one can cross the line from venting to doing something that is also bad, in this case reinforcing male stereotypes and using a type of characterization that's flawed and useless.
I think you have made thoughtful, interesting points about my post and made it very clear how unamused you are by what I wrote. Did I use spiteful language? Yes. Did I attack a culture? Yes. I can see how those two things are problematic. The “what if this was about some other less affluent or powerful culture” question is a valid one.
As for the biological elements of my post (“beast” “Neanderthal-intellect” “evolutionary abnormality”) those would be the first thing I’d edit if I could. It didn’t even cross my mind that those words reinforced Bro Culture.
Thank you for pointing out the many flaws. This was written out of anger and frustration, two things that blur logic and intellect. I wrote it after a series of horrible experiences with my girlfriends, one so horrific I would not even know how to write about it without crying.
I wrote it for my girlfriends and for myself. One of them suggested I post it here. I can see now that it was a mistake. Some of them made comments here defending it, but I think everything you pointed out was valid.
I am happy to see that this got people talking nonetheless. Bro Culture is such a terrifying thing to me and sometimes the only way I know how to dull that fear is by mocking it.
Thank you again.
Thanks for listening, and thanks for taking it in the spirit in which it was intended. We all slip up sometimes and get angry.
While I'm not too fond of most "Bros" with whom I come in contact, I can't help but confess that I started giggling maniacally when I heard the phrase "Bro-Magnons".
That is all.
wow there ARE a lot of comments...i never really thought about "bros" much before, i'm a little older so I don't seem to encounter too many "bros" in my everyday travels, but occasionally i do notice a herd of em catcalling or gay-bashing on the on the street...I also can't deny that the marketing is all over this $*#%...channels like MTV, Comedy Central, etc. are completely saturated with it. The FRONTLINE doc. gets it right. But what almost made me loose my lunch was when I googled "bros" and "bro culture" i unfortunately came across some "bro" talking about how he is a victim of, get this...
"brocism" and "bropression"...
i. just. don't. have. words.
Just to comment. That idiot commentary was "idiotic".
That is all.
( I mean no offense and I can only speak from my experience so I would hope that what I have to say is taken in the spirit in which it is intended.)
In so many ways we live in a society where men are not taught how to be men. Perhaps it's possible to make the argument that "broism" is a sign of patriarchy gone awry but I don't think so.
The type of little-boy-man described in this post is one who hasn't grown up. As a young man it's relatively easy to fall into the type of behavior described above. Young men mistake machismo for manhood, lust for real attraction, and a brittle hardness for strength of character.
If a young man doesn't have any role models in his life it's easy for him to stay trapped in such a place. Increasingly we have a culture of men who are living into their twenties, thirties, forties, and beyond who do not know how to be men, and so they remain little boys. The difference between a man and a little boy, or a bro is that somewhere along the way a man learns that he can be both gentle and tough, that there is strength in vulnerability, and a security in knowing himself and knowing his limits. However to become a man in such a sense a boy needs a role model. Such men are made, and without strong men in their lives who have learned how to be gentle, tough, and secure they may not ever reach the place where they can be such. A "bro" is not an alpha-male a "bro" is a cocky scared little boy who hasn't learned how to deal with his emotions. In so many ways beneath the surface of these young men are scared and frigthened little boys who need someone to teach them how to be men.
(forgiveness if I offended through extensive use of the masculine pronoun, but there was no other way to say what I wished to say.)
Kimberry and remember bro culture is very bad for men.
Every single man I know who is really smart, works really hard and achieves much, was bullied by bros at some point - pushed, harassed, his stuff stolen/messed with, and in some cases beaten up. The bros cannot aspire to be the geek - who I think somewhere deep inside they know will one day be performing a bypass on their beer-filled arteries - so they try to pull him down. A lot of very smart men never achieve their full potential because they are terrorised for years any time they show any positive behavior at all.
What are everyone's thoughts on how girls reinforce bro culture (eg by also picking on the nerd, by admiring jocks and frat boys), and what can be done to prevent this?