On November 12, 1993, I and about four other guys descended in to the poorly lit, wood-paneled basement of one of my best buddies. He had ordered a pay-per-view special called the Ultimate Fighting Championship, billed as a no-holds-barred fighting event, pitting the best fighters from various martial disciplines against one another for supremacy in the ring.
A skeptic even at 17, I half-expected it to be nothing more than a glorified wrestling show. I also had to shell out some of the cash to pay for the thing so I was out of pocket, too. I dived in to the Cool Ranch Doritos and prepared to make it a lackluster night.
That is, until the sumo wrestler appeared in what would ultimately be the shortest match of the evening.
Teila Tuli took a vicious kick to the face, dropping the 400 lbs Samoan to the ground as if he'd been shot. Tuli's opponent, Gerard Gordeau, then proceeded to pummel the living daylights out of the near comatose giant. It was over in 30 seconds.
I laughed, in the way teenage boys laugh when cartoonish violence assaults their senses and fills them with glee. That's just how I saw it, too, the fighting almost Bugs Bunny-like in its absurdity but immensely entertaining.
As the night progressed and the matches wore on, all of us were hootin' and hollerin', spilling Coke into the shag and Doritos crumbs on to the couch. We were just guys being guys watching other guys beat the hell out of each other.
It was fun.
---
Somewhere along the way, men forgot what it’s like to be a man.
I'm not sure when the we lost sight of who we are but I'm going to guesstimate it started, perhaps ironically, not long after UFC1 first aired.
In the mid 90's, there was a trend among advertisers, television writers and others to portray men as bumbling idiots unable to find their way out of a wet paper bag. We were clumsy, ignorant slobs, incapable of independent thought.
We were spoon-fed a diet of our own ineptitude: you don't know how to dress; you don't know how to keep a clean home; you don't know how to communicate intelligently. Those that bought in to it that ideology and changed their ways became known as metrosexuals, a term coined back in 1994 in an article written by Mark Simpson in the British paper The Independent:
"Metrosexual man, the single young man with a high disposable income, living or working in the city (because that’s where all the best shops are), is perhaps the most promising consumer market of the decade. In the Eighties he was only to be found inside fashion magazines such as GQ, in television advertisements for Levis jeans or in gay bars. In the Nineties, he’s everywhere and he’s going shopping."
And shop they did, buying up designer labels by day, daintily nibbling on sushi and tipping back Zima's at night.
The metrosexual male had nice clothes and kept a clean, IKEA-furnished condo. His rise gave rise to Oprah and Dr. Phil, who taught him how to cry, how to communicate and how to form a symbiotic relationship with his feminine side.
22 comments Last one added 11 months ago — Leave a Comment
Robert DesRoche about 1 year ago
O SHI--
This article is good. Really good.
Edit Comment Cancel
Tim Parent about 1 year ago
Thanks Robert!
Edit Comment Cancel
Robert DesRoche about 1 year ago
Really well written. It explains the more primitive reason some of us are fans rather well. Sure we like to see great athletes displaying the skills they've worked so hard to improve, but that's not all there is to it. I don't know about you guys, but when I watch a fight, I get pumped. I usually start jabbing/wrestling/horsing around whenever I watch.
Edit Comment Cancel
Derek Bolender about 1 year ago
I'm with robert. After watching an MMA event a black belt magically appears around my waist. I will also admit to drinking starbucks on occasion during MMA events. I'm not proud of it. It's just really good sh*t. I guess that would be an oxymoron though. Regardless, I still have a burning desire to fight afterwards.
Edit Comment Cancel
Tim Parent about 1 year ago
I'll admit, I don't have the burning desire to fight afterwards but, as Rob eluded to, you do get pumped up when you got a really good battle going. As guys, we shouldn't feel guilty or ashamed for getting pumped up either.
Edit Comment Cancel
Jad Semaan about 1 year ago
Be honest Tim: did you really watch UFC 1 live?
Just kidding, this is an excellent article. I took a cultural studies course at Uni (it was a summer class, and I needed it for my minor) and we discussed this exact same problem. In academic circles, it's called the crisis of masculinity. You can read about it online, but I want to discuss it's relevance to MMA here. (Please forgive my academic nerdiness, and feel free to ignore what I have to say).
Basically, after WW2, veterans came home to find a domestic landscape that had changed. They came back to a life vastly different from the promises of glory in battle and brother-forged camaraderie. Gone was the rugged, outdoor handy-man, and gone was any appreciation for his abilities. Gone was the noble, heroic John Wayne type, replaced by a businessman in a suit. Daily life was took place in a cubicle, and the usefulness and masculinity of the average man was called into question, as he was feminized and ostracized for his new role in society.
The feminist movement also made men feel guilty for expressing their true nature. There have been numerous appeals for men to take back their status as the protector and bread-winner in the family, and one possible solution is a return to the violent masculinity that defines manhood in the first place. Some feel that it is the only way for men to feel needed and secure in their masculinity again, and this is where violence and MMA comes in.
Edit Comment Cancel
Jad Semaan about 1 year ago
Historically, men have always needed to find a way to express violent instincts, whether it be through war, jousting, gladiator games, or sports. And regular people need to do this also, and sports such as football and hockey satisfy our primeval bloodlust and desire to see violence. Instead of hurting people in real life, we see someone get hurt on t.v. and that satiates us for the time being.
MMA takes this to the next level, where the purpose is to defeat your opponent in a fight by hurting him in some manner, not just to tackle him like in football. It is the most direct expression of violence possible, and yet it is an extremely safe sport. It makes us fans feel more masculine watching it, and curbs our more violent tendencies in the real world. That is definitely one reason why is has been successful.
Modern society has made men feel guilty for expressing themselves (hence the development of the unmanly metrosexual) and sports in general provide a solution to the competitive spirit and desire to dominate that fuels men. We have to feel needed and important (not to sound too emo) and watching MMA is an opportunity for the average Joe to regain his sense of manhood and satisfy his innate need for violence and blood. And sometimes we just want to get together and have a good time. Those points are at the heart of your article, and that's why I wanted to elucidate upon it.
Forgive me for waxing long-winded. I had to get that off my chest :)
Edit Comment Cancel
Tim Parent about 1 year ago
Jad! Loved the commentary. You brought up some really excellent points that I would've loved to have put in the article. Thanks! Glad you enjoyed it!
Oh, and yes I did actually witness UFC 1, live on PPV back in the day. I can't believe that was 15 years ago!
Edit Comment Cancel
Bryan Trafford about 1 year ago
really good article. ill probably read it a few more times in the next few days. Before MMA I was starting to become metrosexual myself. I was falling out of love with boxing because the best werent fighting the best, and I had stopped watching WWE because I am a grown ass man now.
But then the UFC came along, and I started thinking, hey wait, I can do this too. Its an organized outlet for violence in a controlled setting.
Besides some of us just have anger issues and wanna kick some ass!
MMA provides us the means to do so, with respect and honor.
Edit Comment Cancel
stu pane about 1 year ago
this is the best article i have read on bleacher. Period.
Edit Comment Cancel
Tim Parent about 1 year ago
Wow, Stu, thanks!
Edit Comment Cancel
The Founding Father about 1 year ago
Great read.
Edit Comment Cancel
Tim Parent about 1 year ago
Thank you, sir!
Edit Comment Cancel
Todd Parmelee about 1 year ago
I suddenly feel smarter . . . I havent felt like I was in college in a while.
Edit Comment Cancel
Tim Parent about 1 year ago
I'm here to both inform and entertain!
Edit Comment Cancel
ryan latham about 1 year ago
What terrible analysis. You've put a 20 year or less frame of reference on a problem that has been an issue for men and masculinity for thousands of years. Women like dandies and musicians, women like risk taking and what you understand are 'manly' men. These two groups have emerged as distinct and mutually exclusive, but I think artificially so. Limiting the definition of masculinity as a set of norms associated with violence and bro-mance is as ridiculous as limiting the definition of masculinity as a set of norms that encourages good grooming and haughty, effeminate manner. For whatever reason some men who subscribe to the latter set of norms are doing well with the ladies- which isn't necessarily all that matters, but in some respect any set of norms we choose to live by that doesn't get us laid is, well, useless. I think the cliche answer is that neither side of the coin is the whole of it- risk taking, male-centric behavior is important to shape an idea of what a man should be independent of women, but to attract a woman you're going to have to... attract a woman- put the doritos down, take a shower-- you don't have to get a manicure, and you might even find a girl that puts up with or even enjoys MMA, but if you're just "a guy being a guy" and you spill coke on her rug, adios.
Metrosexuality, I think, is taking those effete norms and amplifying them... The typical problem with the metrosexual, from the women's point of view, that we all understand from his appearance in pop culture is the lack of risk taking and independence. We also know all to well from pop culture what happens if you subscribe too much on the side of the violent and world of the bro- you might die Achilles' death and be a hero, but your prospects with females and life expectancy go down... and let's be honest, the chance you're going to be remembered like Achilles is next to nothing. So, I think we do need to revitalize what it is to be a man, but that metrosexuality AND your MMA watching, coke spilling bromancing need to both hit the road. My suggestion for a man: independent risktaker deeply involved in culture and the sciences, who pursues knowledge and the realization of his ideas in the physical world, who can both protect his interests and see the benefits of reciprocal altruism, and carries out his activities with humor and confidence.
You have to admit, next to my idea of what it is to be a man, your notion looks like an ignoble shit.
Edit Comment Cancel
L.J. Burgess about 1 year ago
You need to edit this ... absolutely badly. great stuff but it needs to be broken down in structure.
Two big paragraphs muddle the eye and you end up skimming while missing some of your stronger points that lay buried in the mass of words.
A change, a pause, perhaps four paragraphs at the least, six if possible, would entice the eye to explore further rather than scurry for the "door" of your "ignoble" punch line.
Also, I see no reference in Tim's article to "the ladies" that you've interjected nor any allusion to "getting laid". Perhaps you spied some short line that I can't find but ... if "getting laid" and "the ladies" crossed Mista Parent's mind while outlining this, he more than likely saved them for a sequel to this prose.
If you feel the need to expound on the sexual nature of "bromancing" (outstanding term I might add) you might do a re-write and hit "save as" until the aforementioned sequel hits the front page of the Bleacher Report.
No thanks needed, I've graded English Lit and composition papers for years. it's almost a habit now.
To re-cap and in closing , which I am loathe to do, your prose is outstanding but you need to maintain your grasp of the proverbial blue pencil 'cause your structure sux.
Edit Comment Cancel
L.J. Burgess about 1 year ago
On second thought ... after re-reading your, rather lengthy and unwieldy, comment I realize that getting "laid" with "the ladies" IS what it's all about ... and that I am that man you seek ... I am the man that all women seek ! (confidence)
I am a self-employed (independent) Chef / Owner (creative risk-taker) and I have my front room done in Italian Modern (culture moderne) and my bedroom in 19th century American Oak (accountable *bonus*) and the kitchen is my industrial war room (protecting my interests).
The house has various architecture tomes , 18th century receipts cookbooks, avant-garde crystal and Art-Deco bronze scattered about (deeply involved in culture) (culturally expansive *bonus*) with ex Pound Hound (reciprocal altruism)
My latest tests have been a berries, balsamic with chive compound sauce (risk-taker) and perfected bread (the sciences) and a return to line cooking (pursuit of knowledge). My menus have always been HUGE success' (realization of my ideas in my physical world)(confidence)
Since I am the best Chef I've ever known (confidence) , I can afford to self deprecate without guilt or fear. (humor and confidence)
I think that covers all if not more (extra credit?) of your criteria and, if anything, I'm flush with humor and if cocky = confidence ... then I'm there for you and all of woman-dom (reciprocal altruism)
Conveniently, for some bizarre reason (available *bonus*), I'm single (independent) at this very moment.
Bring it ! (risk-taker)(confidence)(reciprocal altruism)(pursuit of knowledge)(realization of ideas in the physical world)
*As an added bonus , every time i punch some jackass at the Bar at work for assaulting one of my girls I get beat up AND laid ... works every freakin' time. (risk-taker)(reciprocal altruism)(bromancing)(emotionally available *bonus*)
Now, fix me a sandwich (protecting my interests) ... ;oP
Edit Comment Cancel
Chris Le about 1 year ago
As Ryan says, there are certainly types of males that are just as bad as the metrosexual, and the ignorant, violence-loving bro is one of them.
In fact, enjoying UFC only further perpetuates the stereotype of the North American male you despise: Thousands of years of philosophy and improvement of mind and body through martial training has to be compressed down to a form that adolescent males can "appreciate (comprehend)" best - beating the shit out of each other. If North American males were to break the mold of "Cro-Magnon Man" as you said, they would spend the time to embrace the history and philosophy behind the martial arts, instead of enamoring themselves with the senseless beatings inside "the octagon". I mean, really, any dumbass can sit on top of another and hit them until their unconscious.
MMA is only ruining adolescent males by telling them beating up people is enough without having a valid reason to do so, and that nothing matters but results; and you, sir, have fallen into that trap.
Edit Comment Cancel
L.J. Burgess about 1 year ago
Ryan called ... she's looking for you.
Edit Comment Cancel
Dorothy Willis about 1 year ago
Don't you feel that GSP, who loves Dolce and Gabana, loves his mother, was bullied at school and yet now kicks ass is loved and appreciated by men and women everywhere, fuses these two extremes into one hell of an interesting and exciting real man's man?
Edit Comment Cancel
John James 11 months ago
Mark Simpson, the father of the metrosexual you quoted in your piece, has just written a piece about the gayness of UFC and GSP's metrosexuality for Out magazine. It's caused quite a stir in the MMA community.
http://www.out.com/detail.asp?id=23937
Edit Comment Cancel
Leave a Comment
You must register to post a comment.