David
Coad, The
Metrosexual: Gender, Sexuality, and Sport (Albany: State
University of New York Press, 2008), $16.95, 216 pages, ISBN 9780791474105—Georges-Claude
Guilbert, Université François Rabelais – Tours
David
Coad is the author of Gender Trouble Down Under: Australian Masculinities
(2002), a must for anyone interested in Australia and Gender Studies.
Coad is an authority notably on Men’s Studies, which to this
day is still much rarer than Women’s Studies, for various historical
and epistemological reasons which are quite obvious.
The
Metrosexual: Gender, Sexuality, and Sport is not limited to Australia.
It deals mostly with the US, the UK, and Australia, but quite a few
other countries are mentioned. One is tempted to feel sorry that David
Beckham does not grace the cover (the result of legal considerations
no doubt), but as it is, this partial reproduction of an aussieBum
advertisement is rather fitting, inasmuch as metrosexuality has a
lot to do with male underwear, as Coad amply demonstrates, and aussieBum
is a particularly metrosexual brand of underwear (if one may be so
bold as to apply the adjective to something other than a person).
Such a cover also adequately signals that metrosexuality (and therefore
this book) is concerned with the display of male flesh, indeed even
of male pulchritude.
Bibliographically
speaking, every writer one expects to find in such an essay is summoned:
Susan Bordo, Judith Butler, Richard Dyer, Michel Foucault, Marjorie
Garber, bell hooks (in a chapter entitled “Black Bodies”),
Laura Mulvey (her “gaze” and “to-be-looked-at-ness”
are highly useful here, of course), Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick, etc. Even
Germaine Greer makes an appearance, without causing too much cringing
in the feminist reader who finds himself agreeing with her only once
every ten years or so. The one writer Coad uses most profitably is
naturally Mark Simpson, who very largely invented metrosexuality,
or at any rate was the first to write about it intelligently. His
Male Impersonators: Men Performing Masculinity (1994), notably,
is highly recommended.
As
far as examples taken from pop culture (including sports) are concerned,
the book is extremely thorough. It goes back to such interesting examples
as the Nick Kamen Levi’s commercials of the mid-1980s and sweeps
its way through every NBA flamboyant idol, baseball wonder or soccer
star. The passages on Dennis Rodman—who briefly dated Madonna—are
particularly interesting. Alex Rodriguez—who is dating Madonna—is
also evoked. The Swedish soccer player Fredrik Ljungberg gets a very
adequate treatment. No photographer or designer who may be said to
have contributed to the metrosexual phenomenon is forgotten: David
LaChapelle, Steven Klein, Herb Ritts, Bruce Weber, Abercrombie &
Fitch, Giorgio Armani, Calvin Klein, Ralph Lauren, Gianni Versace
and various underwear companies (taking in Californian 1950s “beefcake”
peddlers)…
Last
year this reviewer supervised an MA dissertation on metrosexuality,
whose central question was: do metrosexuals actually exist? The answer
being, of course: it depends. As a new category of male individuals
who multiply enough to bring an end to wife-beating and queer-bashing,
it does not exist (yet). As a convenient tag to refer to specific
sportsmen / role models who renew the world of sports, it is more
than acceptable.
Coad
is pleasantly methodic, covering the subject as a seasoned researcher.
First come the historical context (all the way back to the ancient
Greeks) and definitional concerns, then the specific examples, from
the “protometrosexuals” to today’s athletes who
sign juicy contracts with Italian fashion designers; then race and
sexuality are covered (what lies beyond appearances and Calvin Klein
underwear Times Square billboards), taking in the “gay gaze,”
rugby calendars (and their coffee table book counterparts prefaced
by—who else—Madonna) and, of course, David Beckham himself,
the Ur-metrosexual. It is strongly advised to google one’s way
through the pictures Coad describes; most of them are easy to locate
in cyberspace and complement Coad’s text and sixteen illustrations
adequately.
Coad
announces very rightly: “Like other complex concerns, metrosexuality
defies easy explanation.” [18] Then he takes up the challenge,
and attacks misconceptions: “One widely held but mistaken assumption
will be addressed in this chapter: the idea that metrosexuality reveals
the feminine side of a male.” [18] The author is mostly constructionist
in his approach, obviously, but sometimes perhaps not radical enough
in his denunciation of metrosexual athletes’ appalling (and
alarmingly frequent) justification / explanation of their atypical
behavior as the consequence of the fact that they are “in touch
with their feminine side.” Such boring essentialist notions
do nothing but reinforce society’s antifeminist stance that
there is something in women’s genes that make them compulsively
shop, pluck their eyebrows, shave their legs or moisturize—and
journalists or pop psychologists do not help! So metrosexuality will
never contribute to a significant change in mores as long as its principal
illustrations utter such nonsense, even though metrosexuality does
queer the usual codes of masculinity. Incidentally, Coad himself of
course occasionally queers his subjects, notably when he tackles the
well-known Australian underwear company Bonds. Now and again, the
book contains gems like: “At its most basic, underwear is a
piece of clothing designed to hold in testicles and to soak up viscous
fluids. All other discourses on the subject, like this chapter, are
potentially fetishistic.” [115]
Coad is generally proficient when it comes to vocabulary. From “jock
culture” to “homosocial,” “homoerotic,”
“heterosexual contextualization,” or “spornography,”
most of the expressions needed for such research are explained, and
their etymology or derivation at the very least alluded to.
One
does not always agree with him, however. There is cause to be suspicious
of such declarations as: “It is worth noting that the term ‘macho
culture’ is the British and Australian equivalent of the American
‘jock culture.’” [9] One could also object to “heterosexual
outing”: one understands why Coad resorts to such a phrase to
speak of athletes who feel the need to reassure their fans, evidently.
But it is problematic: in the first place, he speaks of outing oneself
rather than coming out, which is slightly awkward, in the second place,
there is no closet wherein the heterosexual sportsman is safely hiding
before he decides to tell the world that he is heterosexual—even
if he enjoys daily facescrubs and never wears anything non Versace
after work. The whole of Western society is heterosexual.
The author neglects to elucidate notions such as a “pumped-up,
Muscle Mary body” [98] (does every reader know what a Muscle
Mary is?), or “the self-assured cops in their drag” [110]
(is every reader familiar with this use of “drag”?). He
does, though, clarify: “rough trade, an expression used to signify
male prostitutes (who may identify as heterosexual) looking for male
customers” [189]. Readers will not necessarily approve of his
use of “camp” in sentences such as “the underlying
camp, or even queer dimension of a gaggle of heterosexual males, bent
on looking ‘real cool’ together.” [129-130] There
are a couple of misprints, possibly due to the publisher’s editor:
“Dolce, and Gabbana” [130], “an inhibition”
used in the sense of “a lack of inhibition” [148]. Besides,
perhaps the book forgets repressed homosexuals, concentrating only
on heterosexuals and closeted homosexuals. Otherwise The Metrosexual:
Gender, Sexuality, and Sport will be highly welcome in any library,
and in spite of the word “sport” in the title, let it
be clear that it may be enjoyed even by people who have never watched
a match of anything in their life.
So
is a metrosexual simply a vain heterosexual man with money to spend
and a taste for shopping? Does it make a difference when athletes
like Fredrik Ljungberg or David Beckham actively court the gay gaze?
One of the sentences in the book’s conclusion announces: “Metrosexuality
is replacing traditional and conventional masculinity norms,”
then the “metrosexual future” is evoked [198]. It is just
as well Coad is not telling his readers exactly how many years, centuries
or eons this will take, or he might be accused of rampant optimism.
©2009
Georges-Claude Guilbert & GRAAT.