This article pretty much sums up my first thoughts on the Budweiser ad that has everyone's panties in a wad:
http://thestir.cafemom.com/in_the_news/119525/budweiser_military_ad_swings_both
But I think that, as usual, civilians looking at this ad are missing an important insider perspective.
The military is SUPER queer in that military culture necessarily transcends the rules of civilian culture in many ways. I mean, we're talking about a world where the number one skill/goal everyone shares is the ability to kill, and kill efficiently. Which is up there in the top ten taboos of "civilized" society... Once you subvert an essential social rule like "don't kill people!" all the others go out the window - including appropriate ways to show emotion and affection.
So it's moments like this, where civilian and military world clash (and the tension in this ad was really beautiful, that line between the two guys, the dark emptiness on one side, the warmth of the barn and homely tones on the other, delicious!), that we get this kind of ambiguity.
On one side of the military world, your brothers DO come before everyone else. Gender, sex, all that doesn't even exist in the trench. The guy (and today that "guy" may be male or female) next to you may be the one you go to bed with, or it may be the one whose guts you hate back home. It doesn't matter in that moment, and that moment affects life outside of the trenches.
So the center of speculation seems to be around the question of who is the other guy the soldier calls? Is that is boyfriend? His best friend? His brother? A fellow soldier who already came home? And a big part of this question is why or how dude #2 ranks being what appears to be the first person to get the news of dude #1's homecoming. This is where civilians seem to get really confused.
It actually makes good sense that, whatever their relationship, our soldier boy would call another guy first. It might be too much for him to talk to his parents just yet. That's definitely a huge moment - some vets can't see them fast enough, others need time to prepare for that extremely emotional moment. He may not think he's ready to face the whole town yet, he knows he's about to enter into some major culture shock and he wants to ease in slowly. If the other guy is also a veteran, or at all familiar with this homecoming process, he stands the best chance of knowing what will be good for his buddy; he should know if his friend just needs some peace and quiet for a little while, or if they should throw a big party for him. If there's a wife or girlfriend the same rules apply as with parents, sometimes more so. (Let's also not forget that in the military our families are seen as troopers too! So many vets keep their homecoming a secret because they want to surprise and celebrate the family as much as the family want to surprise them.)
Now, all this is not to say I'm denying the possibility of something deeper there. Quite the contrary, in my head I will definitely look at that moment when they hug with vaguely romantic overtones
because I want there to be gayness not because I think it is or isn't a gay moment.
Whether it is "gay" or not isn't important, there's a lot more going on there in that moment, it transcends and diminishes sexuality to an almost insignificant factor.
Someone somewhere asked "what it's not okay for straight guys to hug now?" Of course we know that's not true, but what IS important is that there are certain rules about how, when, and with whom men (and women!) may show affection, and whether or not you are straight, and what your relationship is with between huggers is often important. Because the rules for the civilian and military world are different, that's what makes this moment so difficult to interpret. But I definitely think that it's more than okay for the hug we saw to happen between two men of any orientation or relationship.
When I look at that hug, I see love there, but more than anything I see relief. I see healing, I see a hard earned connection, I see the need of a human being transitioning from trauma to safety, grabbing the first familiar and friendly source of safety. (Let's not forget the poor kid just made a super lonely journey, only to arrive with no apparent fanfare or welcome, he's probably incredibly relieved that someone remembered he was coming!)
And now a political interpretation. With the repeal of DADT, we are sending a larger message, one that says "it's okay if you're gay". Doing this and integrating queer people into the military and allowing us visibility isn't a way of "celebrating the lifestyle" or "promoting the homosexual agenda" it merely says "being gay is not a bad thing."
Consequently, important moments like this one are more available. A young man returns home from war, if he needs a fucking hug, he and the men in his support network shouldn't have to worry about whether fulfilling that need makes them "look gay." If we're not afraid of "the gay" we are not afraid to be associated with it, and we can get on with our lives.
Aaaaaand I'm officially tired of talking about it!
