Confessions of the Bartending “Manslut”:
The Negotiation of Sexuality by Heterosexual Male Bartenders in Amsterdam
Evi Rooijakkers 6172326
MSc Sociology: Gender, Sexuality and Society Supervisor: Margriet van Heesch
Second Reader: Dorine Greshof August 15, 2014
Acknowledgements
This is probably my only shot at writing something “Oscar acceptance speech”-worthy. So I am going all out.
First and foremost, I would like to thank my family who have been there for me throughout this process. Mom, for convincing me that “good enough is the new perfect”. Dad, for offering to write it for me when I was near to giving up. Tineke, for sweetly correcting some of my work. Jos, for providing me with dinner, Oreos, wine, cigarettes and everything else I needed when I locked myself in to write this. Marieke, for choosing “boobie” over “booby”.
Friends, of course, my friends. I apologize for all the days you had to listen to me whine about my thesis. However, you guys managed to lift my spirits every time. Also,
luckily, you were always willing to join me in my observations at the bars. A special shout out to “All the Single Ladies” for their white chocolate brownies delivery and our JGL + RG movie night. It was just the push I needed.
I could never leave out my respondents. You guys are some of the funniest, most charming and ridiculous men I have ever met. I had so much fun conducting these interviews and visiting you at work. (I also appreciate the free shots).
Margriet and Dorine, you have been wonderful. I am sorry for bothering you during the holiday months and I hope you enjoy reading this.
Table of Content 1. How to Study Male Promiscuous Behavior in Amsterdam Nightlife 1
1.1 Have You Ever Been “Wham-Bam-Thank-You-Ma’am-”ed? 1 1.2 “Bartender, Pour Me Another One”: Method of Data Gathering 2 1.3 Talking the Talk, Walking the Walk: Method of Data Analysis 4
1.4 Hooking up with a Sexually Liberated Women in the Amsterdam Nightlife: Historical, Cultural and Sexual Background 4
1.5 He’s a Stud, She’s a Slut: Theoretical Framework 6 1.6 Thesis Outline 7
2. Theoretical Framework and Media Analysis 9 2.1 Sexual, Masculine Bartenders 9
2.2 Sluts and Players: Sexual Double Standard 10 2.3 Tough Studs and Sensitive Duds: Masculinities 11
2.4 The Aristocrats of the Working Class: The Portrayal of Male Bartenders in Popular Culture 13
2.5 “The Waitresses Hate Me”, “You Just Wait Until You’ve Given Them Crabs, Then You’ll Really Know Hatred”: Cocktail 14
2.6 “The Man’s Got a Harem”: Cheers 16
2.7 “In Bars, People Get Laid. At Least, In Bars We Design”: Hey Bartender 17
2.8 “If You Want Good Service, Send a Bartender” “And If You Want a Good Fuck, Go Home with One”: Sex and the City 19
2.9 The Role of Masculinity and Sexuality in the Representation of Male Bartenders in Popular Culture 20 3. Heterosexual Standards within the Amsterdam Nightlife 22
3.1 It Takes a Village… 22 3.2 Homo, Hetero, Bi 23
3.3 Just Another Notch in His Bedpost 26 3.4 On, behind or in Front of the bar? 27 3.5 Outside the Box 29
3.6 Living up to the Standard? 31 4. Love and Women’s Role 32
4.1 Bad Girls, Bad Bartenders 32 4.2 Monogamy and Mistrust 33
4.3 Promises of Honesty and Desire for Affection 35 4.4 Popular Preferences 37
4.5 The Temptress 39
4.6 Bartenders Love Women 40 5. Expectations Among Male Bartenders and Women 42
5.1 The Desiring and Desirable Bartender 42 5.2 Easy / Sleazy ? 43
5.3 Crazy, Sexy, Cool Bartenders 45 5.4 What Women Want and Do Not Want 46 5.4 Expectations from and of Male Bartenders 48 6. The Negotiation of Sexuality by Male Bartenders in Amsterdam 49 Bibiliography 52
Rooijakkers 1
1. How to Study Male Promiscuous Behavior in Amsterdam Nightlife
1.1 Have You Ever Been “Wham-Bam-Thank-You-Ma’am-”ed?
I was sitting on the couch at a friend’s place when his roommate walked in. I had known him for a while and he is an infamous bartender, known for his sexual escapades. He once had three girlfriends at the same time and still brought home a different girl every other night. That day I was sitting on the couch, he apparently a new girl had joined him the night before. He explained: “I’m taking out the scum and bringing home a new one tonight, ha!”. I was utterly shocked by his exclamation. When my friend started laughing, I decided to leave. It was not only the to me vile objectification of the girl he had been with that night but also the fact that I am quite sure she was able to hear him, that left me feeling thoroughly disgusted. I wondered: “Do they all treat women like this?”. Counting on my seven years of experience with working in the Amsterdam nightlife and my friendships with quite a few bartenders in this scene, I thought: “No, not all. But a lot!”.
To me the incident shows that this man’s particular treatment of women but it is part of a broader ongoing discourse in Amsterdam nightlife; that most bartenders are promiscuous and objectify women. Nonetheless, they are considered to be desirable to women. This was not my first experience with demeaning utterances by young men about a girl somebody had slept with. I had been witness to many ‘tough guy’ conversations about which girl these bartenders “wham-bam-thank-you-ma’am-”ed the other day. Unfortunately, the reality of the situation never ended with a “thank you, ma-am”; a figurative kick out the door was usually the most a girl received.
It seems that, in these situations, men are still evidently dominant over women; they have the power to convince them to go home with them, just for the night and no strings attached. I say this not to insinuate that these girls did not have a say in the decision but the treatment of them afterwards implies that the men are the powerful party. It also posits the men as non-vulnerable human beings, reiterating the discourse on masculinity which does not allow men to have emotions and feelings. Rather, the opposite is praised: toughness and indifference. Women, on the other hand, are expected to immediately attach sex to love and are therefore viewed as the beguiled party in these scenarios. The double standard: men have to be sexually active and women sexually passive and attractive.
It also seems, from my experience, that these sexual escapades are prestigious
Rooijakkers 2
reward each other for it. These accomplishments can be viewed as a way to establish
dominance over their male peers, a way to gain status and respect. This behavior, then, has all the elements of a performances of dominant masculinity which is negotiated through
(hetero)sexual acts and positioning towards men and women. It raised the following central question to me: How do heterosexual male bartenders based in Amsterdam negotiate
sexuality? The objective of this research is to find an answer to this question within the scope of narratives on masculinity and heterosexual standards.
This research is important because this particular subject has not yet been investigated in this way and, therefore, it can lead to new insights in the fields of masculinity and
sexuality. Research has, for example, been done on bartenders with regard to male and female bartenders as help-agents (Cowen, McKim & Weissberg 1981), female bartenders/waitresses and restaurant hierarchies (LaPointe 1992) and the sexualization of female bartenders (Avery & Crain 2007) but these researches are restricted to the USA. The Amsterdam nightlife setting has been researched concerning, for example, drug use (Benschop, Nabben & Korf 2012) but my specific research group of male bartenders and their sexual behavior in the Amsterdam nightlife has failed to be examined. I believe this is an interesting case to investigate because it will provide us with a telling example of how some men negotiate their sexuality and the significance of their occupation and its setting within this negotiation.
Different aspects of the afore-mentioned masculine performances need to be investigated and highlighted in order to fully understand the subject. Firstly, a theoretical framework has to be established: how do we theorize male sexual behavior in Amsterdam nightlife? This will be combined with an analysis of media representations of male bartenders. After discussing this, the actual gathered data can be explored, starting off with an exploration of heterosexual standards in the Amsterdam nightlife: what role do narratives on
(homo)sexuality, sexual activities and amount of partners play? Following this, the focus will lie on love and women’s role: how are discourses on romantic love, monogamy, affection, honesty, women and seduction evoked to negotiate their sexual life style? Lastly, I will discuss expectations among bartenders and women through exploring women’s expectations, the bartender image and the sexual double standard. Combining the conclusions of these topics will lead to the eventual goal of answering the general question on how the bartenders negotiate their sexuality
Rooijakkers 3
I have researched the subject through semi-structured interviews and some participant observation. The participants were Dutch, Amsterdam based, 21-33 years old, heterosexual, male bartenders currently living in Amsterdam. As I already had established contacts within the Amsterdam nightlife because of my own profession (I am a waitress in a cocktail bar), accessing the bartenders did not seem difficult. However, many men were unwilling to participate. Even with the promise of complete anonymity, they did not want to share their experiences. Those who were willing to participate in the research were difficult to make an appointment with. They stood me up multiple times and nearly all of them cancelled or rescheduled (at least once). Eventually, I gained access to the respondents by the snowball effect: I interviewed some of my acquaintances and asked them to ask their friends and colleagues. Also, I asked my coworkers to help me get in touch with possible respondents. Regardless, it was a long and tiring process. I ended up with eight respondents which I will now shortly introduce:
- Andrew: the youngest.
- Ben: DJ’s on the side and hosts his own club night.
- Dave: started and quit four different majors, then quit school all together. - Jasper: has 15 years of bartending experience, the most out of all the bartenders. - Kees: used to work at a bank.
- Lukas: did not drink until he was 22.
- Mike: works in a bar with bottle service and gold diggers. - Sander: has recently gone back to school.
The names I use to refer to the respondents are pseudonyms. Also, I purposefully give limited additional information regarding their characteristics and circumstances in order to guarantee their anonymity.
The nightlife setting the participants work in are bars that generally attract an audience of in between 21 and 30 years old, where they play loud music and there is a dance floor. This will lead to the so-called ‘party cafes’ and clubs which are open until 03:00-05:00 (these opening hours will be explained later on). This causes the interactions between the bartender and the customer to be more focused on bodily and facial expressions rather than actual conversations. Dating is most commonly associated with getting to know somebody through talking but this setting does not allow for that. Therefore, it was interesting to see how this was performed when considering ‘hooking up’ and, especially, hooking up with the bartender or, in the bartender’s case, with the customer.
Rooijakkers 4
My intent was to combine participant observation and the individual interviews to compare the observed behavior of the men with the things they explicitly reveal to me about this behavior. The observation, however, proved to be much more difficult than I thought. With the lack of respondents at first, I observed the men after I had done the interviews. If I was in the bar, they were well aware of why I was there and they could have toned down or exaggerated their behavior. Nevertheless, some observations I made were essential to the research. These observations and the interviews together form the bartenders’ individual narratives on the negotiation of sexuality. I analyzed these narratives in order to formulate some answers to my question.
1.3 Talking the Talk, Walking the Walk: Method of Data Analysis
I analyzed the bartenders’ narratives formed through the data gathering using discourse analysis. This was the best choice because of the focus on power structures and
contradictions, which is key to this research. Are the things they say and their actions contradictory? How is power negotiated in these situations? A discourse analysis of the interviews proved crucial to finding out their explicit or implicit opinions on the various subjects.
Discourse analysis is based on the idea that we build and rebuild the world through language; we give meaning to our own perceived reality. There are different categories to this meaning building but the most important one for this research is the way in which the
bartenders’ discourses construct identities and relationships (Gee 1999). These constructions have to be analyzed through a contextualization of the discourse because context is imperative to discourse analysis. This is based on the idea that different meaning building occurs within various contextual settings. When this is achieved, we will see how narratives shape their identities, those of others and the (power) relationships between these. Because of the importance of context, I will now set out a brief outline of the historical, cultural and sexual background of the research.
1.4 Hooking up with a Sexually Liberated Women in the Amsterdam Nightlife: Historical, Cultural and Sexual Background
The sexual behavior of Amsterdam male bartenders is a topic that can be located within different historical, cultural and sexual situations and concepts. I have narrowed it down to three: ‘hooking up’, the Amsterdam nightlife and sexual liberation in the Netherlands. These
Rooijakkers 5
are the most important ones to consider because they give a further explanation of and dimension to some of the issues dealt with in the interviews.
One key concept with regard to the background in which this topic is situated is ‘hooking up’: the practice of sexual relations occurring outside of committed romantic relationships, or even casual dating. In recent years, this concept has been investigated in various sociological studies (Kalish & Kimmel 2011, Manning, Giordano & Longmore 2006, Owen, Rhoades, et al. 2008). Most of the research is based in the USA and focuses on the experiences of college students. Nonetheless, it is an important concept to keep in mind with regard to the negotiation of sexuality by bartenders because it is a subject that will be
discussed in the interviews. This research can provide an example of how ‘hooking up’ works in a Dutch urban setting instead of in the USA. Also, it can be an illustration of how
Amsterdam nightlife works, rather than college nightlife and, additionally, the role of the people working in this nightlife.
An investigation of the nightlife setting is necessary to situate the topic in a more specific cultural background. How can the Amsterdam nightlife and sexual behavior of its participants is be described? Amsterdam is the biggest city in the Netherlands with around 800.000 inhabitants.1It is the most popular city of The Netherlands for tourists; 12,7 million international tourists visited Amsterdam in 2013.2 Also, a lot of Dutch people from other cities and villages go to Amsterdam for a day out or for the nightlife. Because of its size and status as a tourist city, there are many nightlife opportunities: 1.515 bars/cafes and 16 discotheques1. These are divided into three different kinds of establishments: daytime, evening and nighttime. Their opening hours are explained in figure 1 below.
Establishment Sunday – Thursday Friday-Saturday
Daytime 7:00 – 01:00 7:00 – 3:00
Evening 9:00 – 3:00 9:00 – 4:00
Nighttime3 9:00 – 4:00 9:00 – 5:004
Fig. 1: Maximum opening hours of establishments that serve alcohol
1 http://www.iamsterdam.com 2 http://www.nbtc.nl
3 1 July 2012 – 1 July 2014: These establishments can ask for an exemption on closing hours five times a year
but for the timespan of July 1st 2013 until July 1st 2014, the city introduced a pilot which allowed for bars around Rembrandtplein and Leidseplein to request this 12 times a year, granted that not more than 4 establishments implement this on the same night, around the same area. Also, a schedule of the exemptions must be provided.
4 Night establishments based around Leidseplein and Rembrandtplein are allowed to have ‘cooling down hour’
on Fridays and Saturdays, to give their customers a chance to leave calmly, granted that before the start of this hour the lights are on, alcohol is not being served anymore and no new people are let in.
Rooijakkers 6
Most of these establishments are located in the city center which is divided into five different regions by the municipality: 1011, 1012 (categorized by postal code), East, South and West. The focus in this research will mostly be on the Southern area of the center which includes
Leidseplein and Rembrandtplein. These are two of the main going out areas, well-known
among tourists and locals. The bars in which the respondents work will be evening as well as nighttime establishments.
Lastly, an important notion to take into consideration is that of Dutch sexual
liberation. In a recent study on sexual health in the Netherlands it was found that women are ‘catching up with men’. The study was based on a survey held in 2006 and compared to one that was held 15 years before that. The researchers came to the conclusion that women were more sexually liberated and free, based on questions about, among others, masturbation, sexual partners and sex outside of a long-term relationship. However, they also noted that sexual guilt was more common than it was in the past, without specifying whether this guilt applied to men and/or women (Vanwesenbeeck, Bakker & Gesell 2010). The sexual liberation that the Netherlands is apparently internationally known for seems to come with
consequences and contradicting discourses. A complete analysis of the sexual liberation of the Netherlands, and Dutch women in particular, is far beyond the scope of this research but it is critical to take this into consideration with regard to situating the topic within the cultural background. Through the eye of the bartenders and their sexual escapades, we can find out how sexually liberated men and women are in the current Amsterdam nightlife and what role various heterosexual standards play in this (supposed) sexual liberation.
1.5 He’s a Stud, She’s a Slut: Theoretical Framework
The two most important subjects in this research are men and sex. As such, I have chosen to use Connell’s theory on masculinities combined with theories on heterosexual masculinity and research on the sexual double standard.
Firstly, the most important theory to be discussed is that of Connell on hegemonic masculinity; a type of male power which revolves around dominance of certain men over women and other men. This notion of hegemonic masculinity is placed within the theory that there are multiple kinds of masculinities; that masculinity is not a static concept with one particular definition but that there are gradations to be distinguished which vary cross-culturally. In this, hegemonic masculinity is the most desired variant, others being, for example, marginalized masculinity and complicit masculinity (men that benefit from the hegemonic structure without falling into the category of hegemonic masculinity) (Connell
Rooijakkers 7
2005). What is specifically relevant to this research is the concept of hegemonic heterosexual masculinity (Frank 1987) because it is important to consider that amongst the characteristics of this hegemonic masculinity, heterosexuality is fundamental. Within the concept of
masculinities, homosexual men are labeled as falling within the category of subordinated masculinity and some researchers have argued that performing hegemonic masculinity inevitably includes expression of homophobia (Herek 1986). An exploration of hegemonic masculinity is, then, vital to my research because it is specifically focused on heterosexual men and heterosex. Combining this research with the notion of hegemonic masculinity will answer the following question: how is power negotiated through sexuality with regard to women and other men?
What is directly related to hegemonic masculinity and sexuality is the concept of the sexual double standard: the idea that men are allowed more sexual freedom than women. It was first researched in the 60’s by Ira Reiss and has since been a phenomenon discussed by several researchers. This prevailing standard of ‘sluts’ and ‘studs’ reiterates the dichotomy of female promiscuity and male toughness which has, in recent years, led to the popularization of the term ‘slut-shaming’; the bullying or degrading of women who do not conform to the standards regarding sexual behavior and dress of their society. Slut-shaming has caused international outrage an resulted in SlutWalks since 2011; protests where women try to take back the word slut. The main concern in these protests was the idea that women ‘ask for rape’ when they wear ‘sexually provocative’ clothing (Dow & Wood 2014). Consequently, there seems to be a recent revolt against the discourse of the double standard. The question is: is this revolt actually exhibited? And if so; how? If not, how is this double standard maintained in the setting of Amsterdam nightlife? I will attempt to answer these questions after a further exploration of the sexual double standard within the theoretical chapter.
1.6 Thesis Outline
In chapter two, I will begin with a discussion of the above-mentioned theories and their significance for the topic combined with an analysis of the media representation of male bartenders. This will give a better understanding of the underlying theories of the research combined with an interpretation of the expectations people have of bartenders as based on the media. Then, in the following chapters, the gathered data will be analyzed with regard to heterosexual standards specific to the Amsterdam nightlife in chapter 3, including issues of homosexuality, amount of sexual partners, sexual activities and breaking the norm, and love and women’s role in chapter 4, centering around matters of love, monogamy, affection,
Rooijakkers 8
honesty, and seduction. In these chapters, I give an overview of the men’s interpretations of and opinions on different matters relating to sexuality. The fifth chapter will be an analysis of the data with regard to expectations among the bartenders and women. Here, the image of the bartender and gossip comes into play. I will discuss which expectations they think people have of them and how they talk about women. Finally, chapter 6 will be an overall conclusion of the findings and some thoughts on further research or discussion.
Rooijakkers 9
2. Theoretical Framework and Media Analysis
2.1 Sexual, Masculine Bartenders
“He’s a bartender?”. “He works there?!”. “You better watch out”. These were some of the reactions of my newfound Amsterdam friends when they found out where my (now ex) boyfriend worked. It did not matter that I had met him at university. Nor that he had not been a bartender in Amsterdam for the first half year we were dating. Nor that I recommended him at the bar where he was hired as I had been coming there for two years already. He was an Amsterdam bartender now and that was bad news. Their advice for me was to stop by as often as possible to see what he was up to during work. This was quite conflicting with what I experienced when I went out. In the bars and clubs we went to, my friends were all over the bartenders. Twirling their hair, leaning over the bar, even changing shirts with them (this is a ‘tradition’ in certain bars on Leidseplein). I was confused: did they want “the bartender” or not? On the one hand, my boyfriend should not be trusted because of his profession but on the other hand, they seemed drawn to men because they were working as a bartender. I had no clue what it all meant at the time but later I realized the distinction: it seemed to me that they saw bartenders as one-night fun and nothing more. Or as they explained to me: “One-night material, not boyfriend material.”.
How do people create expectations around the male bartenders central to this research? This question can be split into many when we take into consideration the different
characteristics of these men: heterosexual, male, between 21 and 33 and working as a bartender. All these aspects lead to different expectations and put together, they form the image that people have of them. In order to investigate this image, I will first explore theories that analyze heterosexuality and masculinity together with a media analysis of bartenders.
Firstly, I will discuss how the sexual double standard is theoretically explained. The first documentation of research on this double gender standard is from 1964. It entails that men are allowed to be openly sexually active while women are condemned for the same behavior. Gossip about women will be a main theme in the analyses of my data and the double sexual standard plays a big role in this gossip. Secondly, thoughts on masculinity are indispensable when studying male behavior because of the focus on gender and expectations. Therefore, exploring theories on this is vital. I will explore Connell’s theory on masculinities. Additionally, I will discuss thoughts on the part that hetero- and homosexuality play in this. Lastly, I will provide an analysis of the representation of male bartenders in the media in
Rooijakkers 10
order to explain what people’s expectations of bartenders might be. These three explanations combined will provide a background for the investigation of male bartenders based in
Amsterdam.
2.2 Sluts and Players: Sexual Double Standard
The sexual double standard is the idea that men are permitted to brag about their sexual conquests while women have to keep their sexuality hidden from plain sight; that it is approved for a men to be promiscuous but not for a woman; that men have more sexual freedom than women. Basically, the different sexes are to maintain different sexual standards. This is a cultural phenomenon which is difficult to pin down through research. Here, I will discuss one of the first occurrences of the sexual double standard in research as well as some recent studies on it in order to give some overview of it.
The introduction of this notion goes back decades; one of the first mentions of it in academic research dates back to 1964, when Ira Reiss, an American sociologist specialized in sexuality, set up the Reiss Premarital Sexual Permissiveness Scale. He created this through a survey that illustrated people’s attitudes towards promiscuousness and premarital sexual acts (kissing, petting and coital behavior) by themselves and by others in several romantic and non-romantic situations (engaged, love, strong affection, no affection). These were placed within the dimensions of permissiveness and equalitarianism, using the so-called Guttman scales. Reiss came to the conclusion that there was a double standard expressed throughout people’s answers; he found that what was assumed to be permissible for men was not deemed acceptable for women. He was the first to talk about a double standard in a time where
sexuality was supposedly perceived different from the present day but this double standard seems to have persisted through time.
Since then, research on the sexual double standard has mainly confirmed Reiss’ findings, primarily with regard to adolescent behavior. Kreager and Staff, two American sociologist, for example, verify it in their study on adolescent peer acceptance with regard to sexual behavior. They describe the standard as the following: “Boys and men are thought to receive praise and positive attributions from others for nonmarital sexual contacts, while girls and women are believed to be derogated and stigmatized or similar behaviors” (Kreager & Staff 2009:143). They showed that acceptance of schoolmates with multiple sexual partners was higher for girls than for boys. Additionally, studies regarding women’s image with regard to sexuality show that women are raised in an environment of shame, where sexuality is something to be embarrassed about and therefore must be hidden (Shoveller, et al. 2004).
Rooijakkers 11
Girls have to be proper while boys will be boys. In their study on two decades of research on the double standard, Crawford and Popp explain that the double standard causes confusion among women: “Sexuality and the desire to be attractive as a dating partner present
conflicting ideals for women. Girls learn to look sexy but say no, to be feminine but not sexual, and to attract boys’ desire but not to satisfy their own” (Crawford & Popp 2003: 24). Boys, on the other hand, are taught to flaunt their sexual activity and to be tough. The sexual double standard, then, falls in line with the discourse of objectifying women. Women ought to be the object, men the subject; the prey and the hunter.
The sexual double standard is arguably still present in today’s society. Research has mainly been done on its effect on adolescents. However, how does this double standard develop when these adolescents have reached their twenties? This being the main group of interest in the Amsterdam nightlife, this research will show whether or not the sexual double standard affects this particular setting, through analyzing gossip amongst bartenders and, therefore, their views on this standard. This is also crucial in order to answer the question of whether or not sexual conquests are a demonstration of masculinity, a subject that I will discuss further in the following section.
2.3 Tough Studs and Sensitive Duds: Masculinities
I once asked twenty of my male Facebook friends to tell me what it meant to be a man in three words for a presentation I had to give on masculinity. With the exception of one, who decided to be poetic and write half a page on how being in the woods and surviving of your own freshly caught fish was the definition of masculinity. In the other 3 word reactions words such as “tough”, “straightforward”, “dominant” and “powerful” were mentioned a lot. How does this explain society’s expectations of men? Is there such a thing as masculinity? Is there a certain standard to which men must comply? What does this imply for men and their behavior? Answering these questions is an area of special interest within the field of sociology and, specifically, gender studies; researching masculinity.
One of the most famous theorists on masculinity is the Australian sociologist Rywean Connell. Her theory has been one of the most important ideas in studies on masculinity for the past decades. Key to this theory is the concept that masculinity cannot be defined as such but that there is a plurality of masculinities, which work together in different ways; hegemonic masculinity being the dominant masculinity. In addition to this, other researchers have focused on masculinities and the link with sexuality, specifically regarding the acceptation of heterosexuality and condemnation of homosexuality. Below, I will explore Connell’s
Rooijakkers 12
approach to hegemonic masculinity and its consequences for occupational or class-based masculine standards as well as the role of sexuality, as explained by Frank and Herek.
Hegemonic masculinity concerns practices, which assure male power and female submission. It is a consequence and confirmation of the patriarchal society, centering around men’s claim to authority through dominance and power. There are many characteristics that are generally associated with hegemonic masculinity: authority, reason, competitiveness, toughness, risk-taking, aggression, etc. Hegemonic masculinity, according to Connell, cannot exist without different variants of masculinities. All masculinities are established in constant interaction with each other, they shape each other:
To recognize diversity in masculinities is not enough. We must also recognize the relations between the different kinds of masculinities: relations of alliance, dominance and subordination. (Connell 2005: 37)
For example, complicit masculinity occurs when men do not embody hegemonic masculinity but benefit from its standards. This kind of masculinity, then, cannot be established without a form of hegemonic masculinity on which these standards are based: it would simply not exist. Hegemonic masculinity, thus, sets the standard for other masculinities and centers primarily around male domination over women and other men.
Connell’s concept of masculinities has consequences for masculinity with regard to class and occupation. Masculinities can be defined within certain classes and among them, causing differences in the relations of these masculinities. Dominant practices in one group can be subordinated in the other. One big threat for class-based masculinity since the
advancement of capitalism is, according to Connell, “the rise of knowledge-based industries, the growth of higher education and the multiplication of credentials, the influence of
expertise, and the occupational culture of professional and technical work” (Connell 2005: 165). This caused working-class men to become more subordinated because of their position in society. Even though they embody certain aspects of hegemonic masculinity, such as strength and toughness, they lack in others, such as success and wealth, leaving them out of place within their masculine identities.
Regardless of class and status, heterosexuality is an integral aspect of dominant masculinities. All of the characteristics most generally associated with dominant displays of masculinity are also directly related to heterosexuality. Masculinity paired with
heterosexuality is something that is so integral throughout everyday life for men that it is nearly habitual, as Frank discusses it in his article on hegemonic heterosexual masculinity:
Rooijakkers 13
“Gender obedience to heterosexuality and masculinity is a human activity, a social product embodied by individual men in their everyday, routine set of social relations” (Frank 1987: 161). The link between heterosexuality and masculinity is so ingrained in society that people are not aware of it. It is generally not questioned but simply accepted.
Consequently, hegemonic masculinity excludes homosexuality and contains
homophobia. Masculinity is partly defined by what it is not and this is evidently the case with regard to the role sexuality plays in its definitions. Herek explains this in his text on
heterosexual masculinity: “Homophobia is thus an integral component of heterosexual masculinity, to the extent that it serves the psychological function of expressing who one is not (i.e., homosexual) and thereby affirming who one is (heterosexual)”(Herek 1986: 572). Hegemonic masculinity is, then, based on accepting heterosexuality as the norm and rejecting homosexuality.
There are some key aspects to hegemonic masculinity which include the treatment of other men and women, class and occupation, and attitudes towards homosexuality and heterosexuality. Later on, I will interpret how this the bartenders in Amsterdam deal with these aspects but first I will analyze how these different aspects of masculinities are represented in the media with regard to male bartenders.
2.4 The Aristocrats of the Working Class: The Portrayal of Male Bartenders in Popular Culture
Where does the bartender fit in in the above-mentioned discourse of masculinities and the relation between sexuality and class? Many would define the bartenders as working class, considering the physicality of the job. They also seem to be in a position of power, however, especially when it comes to women, if we believe the tales. Many of these tales might come about through personal experience but it is my opinion that the media also play a part in this. People can create certain expectations of people and situations through what they see on TV and in the movies. I will, therefore, analyze the representation of male bartenders in popular culture. How are narratives on masculinities exhibited in these examples, especially with regard to treatment of women and views on their occupational status. The question to explore is: how are male bartenders represented in popular culture with regard to manifestations of masculinity and sexuality? To answer this question, I will analyze four different examples of bartenders in popular culture: Cocktail, a movie centered around a bartender trying to make it in New York City, Cheers, a TV series about a bar in Boston, Hey Bartender, a documentary on bartending and its history in the United States, and, finally, Sex and the City, a TV series in
Rooijakkers 14
which one of the main characters is in a relationship with a bartender. I will analyze the four different examples of male bartenders in popular culture in order to come to a conclusion on the portrayal of masculinity and sexuality within these.
2.5 “The Waitresses Hate Me”, “You Just Wait Until You’ve Given Them Crabs, Then You’ll Really Know Hatred”: Cocktail5
The movie Cocktail is a Hollywood success from 1988 starring Tom Cruise. It centers around Brian Flanagan, a young men who moves to New York City in order to become a successful business man but ends up thriving in the bar scene. He initially sees bartending as a part-time job, which allows him to get through college, but it eventually becomes his career, taking him from New York City to Jamaica and back. His journey includes affairs with ‘cougars’ and flings with young girls leading to unexpected pregnancy. As most 80’s movies, it has a happy ending in which Brian has changed his ways; he is starting a family with the girl he
impregnated, Jordan, marries her, owns his own business (a bar) and starts a ‘normal’ life. However, apart from the ending, the movie is filled with objectification of women, sexual conquests and striving for financial gain.
The tone of how to view women and especially in their relationship to men is set early on in the movie. Doug, Brian’s mentor and his boss at his first bartending gig, explains to him how to make money in a bar:
The name of the game is woman. The little darlings come in here panting; their hearts are pitter-pattering for the handsome, all-knowing bartender. And in their wake, a parade of slobbering geeks, with one hand on their crotches and the other hand on their wallets. You get the women and you get the bucks.
This quote by Doug displays various discourses on how men and women supposedly think. It implies that all these “little darlings”, a derogatory phrase which compares women to young children, want some attention from the bartender, who is consistently handsome and all-knowing. This is visually represented throughout the movie as well; most of the women that are at the bar when Brian and Doug are bartending are ogling them, laughing just a bit too loudly and flipping their hair. Furthermore, it insinuates that all men who are not bartenders are just “slobbering geeks” who will spend their money in order to get a chance with one of these women. The bartender is the one who can control everything; the women and other men
5 Cort, Robert W., Field, Ted (producers) & Donaldson, Roger (director). (1988). Cocktail. United States
Rooijakkers 15
are subjugated to them and their own primal instincts. With regard to women, this is reiterated by Doug later in the movie: “I don’t care how liberated this world becomes; a man will
always be judged based on the amount of alcohol he can consume. And a woman will be impressed, whether she likes it or not”. Women apparently have no control over their feelings; they must deal with being in awe whenever a man can drink much or works behind the bar.
A bit later in the film, Doug comes to his high point of objectifying women with regard to sexual conquests. While playing a basketball game, Brian brings up his new love interest, Coral. Doug responds with: “Why do you think these chicks are always named after inanimate objects?”. When Brian reacts with: “There’s nothing inanimate about Coral”, he says: “Hot mama, huh?”. Doug tops this off by asking Brian: “How could you feel anything for an assembly-line hump that does the book on the first date?”. Not only does Doug here imply that women are just objects and one should only be interested in their bodies rather than their minds, he reaffirms the notion of the sexual double standard; it is acceptable for Brian to have sex on the first date but not for Coral. The women that have casual sex or sex on the first date are not worthy to feel anything real for, they should only be appreciated for their bodies. These women are basically inanimate, dishonorable objects who are not deserving of any thoughts or feelings. Brian seems to have a different take on this. When he’s seducing Jordan in Jamaica, she asks him if it’s “one-night-stand time”. He responds with; “It doesn’t make you a bad person, you know”. However, this does not necessarily indicate that he believes this to be true; it could be just a strategy to get in her in bed. Whether it comes to one-night-stands or love interests, these sexual conquests are certainly an important aspect of the lives of these bartenders and go hand in hand with objectification of these women.
Another concept of investigation for this movie is that of the role which class plays in it. Brian moves to New York City in order to gain financial and occupational success but finds himself ‘trapped’ in the bartending profession as a way to pay for his education. This is a result from failed interviews in which they tell him that in order to have a successful career, you need a degree. When his education suffers under his bartending job, he drops out of college. He, then, turns to rich older women in order to fulfill this financial need, as lead by example by his mentor. Not gaining any satisfaction from this either, Brian eventually owns his own bar. Throughout the movie, Brian is looking for financial gain and status which, apparently, cannot be fully achieved by a bartending job. In order to be content, one must at least own the bar rather than just working in it. Only then can the bartender settle down and start his life.
Rooijakkers 16
Masculinity play a big role in this movie on bartenders and there are several aspects which exemplify it; objectifying women, reiterating the sexual double standard and a focus on monetary and professional success, all tied together by profession and personal relationships. In these ways, Cocktail is the perfect example of performances of hegemonic masculinity in the media representation of male bartenders. It reiterates discourses on the subordination of women and encourages displays of masculine domination and how to achieve this
domination.
2.6 “The Man’s Got a Harem”: Cheers6
Cheers was a hit American TV series that ran for 11 seasons from 1982 until 1993. It centers
around a bar in Boston which is owned by Sam Malone, the main character, a recovering alcoholic and an ex-professional baseball player. Alongside Sam, the main characters are others that work in the bar and regulars. Throughout the eleven seasons, characters come and go; relationships start and end. Throughout it all, Sam is most specifically known for his affairs with beautiful women and his several little black books. This brings out discourses on objectification of women and intellectual capability.
Sam’s womanizing escapades are a key theme throughout the series. From the first episode onwards, it is made clear in what way Sam treats women. A woman calls the bar, Diane picks up and Sam tells her to say that he is not there. The woman on the phone tells Diane to give a message to Sam: “You’re a magnificent pagan beast”. In the second episode, a different woman calls and the message is: “You are a lying piece of garbage and I never want to see you again”. It is evident from the outset that Sam seduces various women but does not stick around. Preferably, Sam’s women have to be unintelligent but beautiful. He is quite honest about the fact that these are the women he desires. In the third episode, we first encounter Sam’s seduction tactics in action. There is a gorgeous woman in the bar and he is making her moves on her until he starts discussing the situation in the back with Diane, to which he says: “She is a tree stump … A total airhead; incredible body, no mind. To you, Brandee is just a one night women build for a cheap laugh, wild times and easy sex … I don’t want to do better”. It seems that in Sam’s mind: dumb equals fun. One specific episode perfectly exemplifies Sam’s opinion on women; “Uncle Sam Wants you”, from season 9. In this episode, Sam realizes that he wants to have children after spending some time with
6 Burrows, James, Charles, Glen & Charles, Les (producers). (1982-1993). Cheers. United States: Paramount
Rooijakkers 17
Frasier’s son. He then proceeds to go through his multiple black books filled with women’s numbers. He is looking for a woman that will carry his child but will not want to have any involvement after that: “The picture is; get pregnant, have the baby, give it to me, go away”. He is looking for a baby carrier, “a breeder”, “an incubator for his seed”. Considering he is just an “aging playboy” without any prospects of carrying on his name, this seems like the best solution. Women are apparently there to be used by Sam; whether it is for sex and some laughs or to bear his child. They are solely objects.
Sam also pursues intelligent career women in the series but these relationships fail because of their supposed intellectual incompatibility. Diane, a graduate student, is the prime example of this. In the beginning, Diane assumes that Sam is unintelligent because of his profession but is still attracted to him, much in the way that Sam is attracted to his typical woman. They get together several times throughout he series but do not end up together. It ends with a short fling in the last season which is ended when they realize their intellectual incompatibility is detrimental to their relationship. They realize they will get bored of each other because they don’t have the same interests, mostly due to the difference in educational background and profession. In this situation, a smart woman can supposedly not be happy in a relationship with a bartender, even if he owns it. Or, relationships do not work when it is not the woman but the man that is being objectified. Women are to be the pretty face and if not, they are expected to be with a man that is their intellectual equivalent or superior.
The masculinity aspect in Cheers is evidently based on Sam’s pursuit of women, whatever woman that may be. There are several discourse on the difference in priorities; appearances or intelligence, from Sam’s point of view but also that of the women. The series ends with Sam still being single and going to therapy for his sexual addiction. It, then, is implied that his sexual escapades were unhealthy and needed to be changed, as determined by the authority figure of the therapist. Sam fails to live up to the standards of hegemonic
masculinity: he is unhealthy, has ruined his dream career by constantly battling addictions and cannot sustain a long-term relationship. The only thing left for Sam are his little black books and perhaps some sexual adventures which will allow him to retain some of his masculinity.
2.7 “In Bars, People Get Laid. At Least, In Bars We Design”: Hey Bartender7
Two very different bartenders are the focus of this documentary from 2013. The first is Steve Schneider who works in ‘Employees Only’, located in New York City. He is an apprentice
7
Rooijakkers 18
bartender at this successful cocktail bar. Then, we have Steve Carpentieri, bartender and co-owner of ‘Dunvilles’ in Westport. Their stories are being told as an illustration of the revival of the cocktail and the bartender profession in the United States, told alongside stories about this by professionals of the industry. Hey Bartender tries to give a realistic representation of how US nightlife and what the profession of a bartender entails. This representation,
especially in the case of ‘Employees Only’, comes with distinct narratives on the relationship between bartenders and women and the view on the uneducated part of this line of work.
In the exhilarating scene that is the New York nightlife, and specifically in cocktail bar ‘Employees Only’, the bartenders are the “rockstars” and the women appear to be their
groupies. Dushan Zaric, bartender and co-owner at ‘Employees Only’, is speaking to an audience at a conference when he tells them that bars are inherently sexual and that this is exactly the objective of a bar: to get laid. He illustrates this with a credit card receipt on which a woman had written “You guys make a girl want to take her shirt off, meow”. Instead of tips, she wrote down: “blowjobs”. Later, Dushan explains the audience what it is really like to be a bartender while we see images of Steve and a woman engaging in a sexy photo-shoot:
You get a young guy behind the bar and girls are throwing themselves at you. You start to buy into the reality, that this is a real situation. Your ego just want to believe that’s true and that is not so wise: to follow that urge.
The bartender’s sexual desirability appears to be an illusion, a false reality which he has to resist in order to take his job seriously. Dushan is insinuating that even though the nightlife is designed for sexual escapades and bartenders are the capital factor, the bartender should not fall into the trap of promiscuous behavior with customers because it is a distraction.
According to him, the almighty bartender has to create some distance between himself and the customer; this is not achieved when sexuality interferes. Dushan here insinuates that the male bartenders are in control rather than the female customers; they decide on the amount of distance which is created between these men and women.
The issue of education is thoroughly discussed in the documentary. The topic is first introduced when the evolution of bars in the US is examined: “In the 50’s, after the G.I. bill, you’ve got Americans with college educations for the first time and suddenly, a job that you didn’t need a degree for was a dead-end job”. The bartending profession went from being a prestigious position in society to being considered as just a part-time job in which people ask you: “What are you going to do when you grow up?”. Many of the bartenders tell us that they have a college education but started working in service as a part-time job and ended up loving
Rooijakkers 19
the job and devoting their life to it. This, however, did not come without any dilemmas: “Yeah, it’s hard, I mean, how do you tell your parents that you’re going to be a bartender? ‘Forget about the degree that you paid for, I’m gonna stand behind the bar and poor booze all night’”. The discourse on bartender, then, still involves being not considering it to be a “real job” or a way to spend your life.
Hey Bartender provides us with a more practical representation of the life of
bartenders. There are two apparent narratives to this life: sexuality and education. These bartenders have made a conscious decision for their profession even though society is still often telling them it is not worth their time. Meanwhile, they have to decide how to negotiate their sexuality with regard to their female admirers on the other side of the bar. Their displays of masculinity are based around a pride in their career choice and dedication to the life
alongside the power to determine their sexual affairs.
2.8 “If You Want Good Service, Send a Bartender” “And If You Want a Good Fuck, Go Home with One”: Sex and the City8
Steve Brady is a recurring character in the successful TV series; Sex and the City. This New York based bartender is featured throughout the series because of his on-and-off relationship with Miranda, one of the main characters. Eventually, Steve and Miranda have a child together and get married. They battle many obstacles: testicular cancer, the unexpected pregnancy and unfaithfulness. However, in the beginning, the biggest obstacle to overcome in their relationship is that Miranda, as a successful lawyer, finds it difficult to be in a
relationship with a bartender. This is based around the discourse that class differences matter in romantic relationships, especially when it concerns a bartender.
From the outset of Steve’s appearances, the most highlighted aspect of him has been his profession. He is mostly even referred to as “Steve, the bartender”. Miranda meets Steve when he’s working behind the bar and she takes him home to have sex. After the intercourse, Miranda is rude to Steve in the way she sends him away. She explains to him that he does not have to pretend that he is interested in her, that she “knows what this is”. Because he is a bartender, Miranda assumes that it was just a one-night-stand. Steve continues to pursue her and they start dating but they have issues which revolve around their contrasting careers: their work hours do not match and Steve is less wealthy than Miranda. However, the biggest issue Miranda has with Steve is his lack of motivation to change his life: “He’s just happy being a
8
Rooijakkers 20
bartender, period. He has no aspirations beyond shaking the cocktails and filling the peanut bowls … His entire future is based on tips”. She tells her friends this and it results in a discussion on classes. Steve is said to be working class and, therefore, he will never be an adequate match for Miranda because of their difference in professional background and education.
The main thought on bartenders and relationships in Sex and the City is that successful women should not be involved with bartenders because their relationship will be doomed. Steve’s first occurrences in the show center around his supposed inadequacy as a long-term partner for Miranda because of his profession. The assumption is that a bartender cannot fit the needs of a successful businesswoman. So, why did they get married eventually? One can speculate about the effect that Miranda’s pregnancy has had on the development of their relationship or about it being true love. However, an important factor could be that Steve opens up his own bar. Suddenly, he is not “just a bartender” anymore but a business owner, an entrepreneur. This changes his placement in the supposed class system and he evolves into a suitable partner for Miranda. Supposedly, being in a relationship with a bartender is solely acceptable when he is not just standing behind the bar but he runs it as well. What’s
specifically interesting about this is that it involves only the women’s point of view and their expectation of a man. It seems that in order to be masculine, one must be successful.
2.9 The Role of Masculinity and Sexuality in the Representation of Male Bartenders in Popular Culture
Women and men are upheld to different standards when regarding their sexuality. The sexual double standard indicates that it is generally condemnable for women to be sexually active while it is encouraged for men. For men, being sexually active is part of living up to the masculine standard, specifically the standard of hegemonic masculinity. This is the most dominant masculinity in which the male exudes power over women and his peers. The standards of this masculinity can vary throughout different contexts concerning, for example, cultures or classes. The main factor of this masculinity is, however, heterosexuality.
In the four examples of representations of male bartenders in popular culture given, many manifestation of masculinity and sexuality are present. They have different implications in every one but overall: promiscuous women are sluts and bartenders are heterosexual, lower class and objectify women. These are some of the persistent stereotypes which can be drawn from the above exploration of theory and media. These examples have different focuses on masculinity and sexuality but nevertheless, these themes play a big role. Different types of
Rooijakkers 21
masculinities are displayed through these discourses and establish the masculine standards for and, therefore also, people’s expectations of these male bartenders. The theme of class, education and prestige is constant throughout the different examples and has an influence on the perceived masculinity of the men. This seems to be compensated by a great desire for sexual escapades and objectification of women. The bartender, the rock star, the all-knowing, the working-class man, or whatever you want to call him, loves his women and loves his job. Manifestations of masculinity, the sexual double standard and media representations all work together in order to provide us with certain expectations of male bartenders and the way they treat women. Now it is time to bring these together in the analysis of the gathered data. Who will be the Steve Brady, the bartender craving a relationship but who is seen as an unworthy partner? Is there a real-life Sam Malone, ogling beautiful women and carrying his black books around? Can we find a Steve Schneider, a bartender rock star who pays much attention to all his groupies? Let’s find out.
Rooijakkers 22
3. Heterosexual Standards within the Amsterdam Nightlife
3.1 It Takes a Village…
From the moment I moved to Amsterdam, seven years ago, I have worked on Leidseplein., one of the main going out areas in Amsterdam. Slowly but surely, the area of Leidseplein became like a village to me. When I went out, I started recognizing the bouncers and
bartenders. These bartenders were giving me free shots and asking how I was doing because they knew where I worked. I recognized links between people and bars on the square and it became clear that, somehow, everybody and everything was connected. It also seemed to me that everything was possible which was something I was not used to. At work, my coworker showed off her clit piercing to everybody. Supposedly, this was normal. My friends back home reacted shocked when I discussed some of my stories with them but I felt like I was becoming an insider, a resident of this little village. Eventually, I became aware of the fact that this area had its own rules and if anybody broke the rules, everybody knew about it. For example, when that colleague with the piercing was in a bar after closing, she laid down on the bar naked. Her best friend then proceeded to stick an empty champagne bottle in her vagina. Somebody videotaped this because, apparently, that was not normal behavior. It was aberrant and therefore had to be shared with others, with the aid of this video. Soon,
everybody knew about it.
How do certain heterosexual standards prevail in the Amsterdam nightlife through the thoughts and behaviors of the bartenders? Throughout the interviews, my respondents
reaffirmed my view of the village within the Amsterdam nightlife; the bartenders referred to the square they work in or even specifically their own bar as a village in which everybody knows each other well. The rules of the outside world do not apply. In the Amsterdam
nightlife, you can do what you want up to a certain point. People are still constantly watching you. Your behavior is constantly watched and judged. This leads to certain expectations of the people who work in this nightlife. How do the interviewees explain expectations people have? How do the inhabitants of the village negotiate these expectations? How do interviewees explain the norms upheld in this context? In order to answer these questions, I divided the information into four themes: homosexuality, amount of sexual partners, sexual activities in the workplace and breaking the norm.
Homosexuality is key to this subject because it emphasizes the heterosexuality of these standards. I wanted to find out how homosexuality was perceived in relation to their
Rooijakkers 23
heterosexuality and behavior towards homosexuals. In analyzing their answers, it was highly important to include the tone with which the respondents answered combined with their facial and bodily expressions. Even a simple “no” can have different implications when taking these into consideration. Using these answers, I wanted to find out whether the norm of
heterosexual masculinity and homophobia is being upheld by the bartenders.
The amount of sexual partners was an important question because it represents firstly what the norm is in this nightlife and profession and secondly, because it could give me some impression of how they speak about their sexual conquests. My interest was not just in the numbers but also whether the men seem to brag about it and if they defend their amount. This can represent how they view women: are they just a number, and addition to their black book, or also a person?
What sexual activities occur in the workplace could give me some idea of the actions that are considered normal during and after work. Additionally, when talking about the sexual behavior of the women they encounter, some additional conclusions can be drawn regarding their view on these women. Also, it was important to find out in their answers regarding this was whether these activities were a way to gain prestige and status among their peers. As notions of hegemonic masculinity revolve around not only power over women but also men, this was a way to represent the power relations between men and women as well as among male coworkers.
Lastly, asking the bartenders about crazy stories was a way of getting a representation of what does not qualify as a standard. Consequently, figuring out what it means to break the norm is a way of emphasizing what it means to obey the norm. In this way, things that were not discussed in the previous topics could be excluded from or included in the heterosexual standards.
3.2 Homo, Hetero, Bi
Earlier on, I stated that Frank and Herek argue that masculinity is directly related to
homophobia, or at least a definition of oneself that excludes homosexuality. I was wondering whether this was the case for these bartenders and if they expressed seemingly typical
hegemonic masculine thoughts on hetero- and homosexuality. Consequently, it was important to discuss the matter in the interviews and find out how the bartenders respond to
homosexuality in and outside of their bar. I asked them question such as: “Have you ever done anything sexual with a man?”, “Do men flirt with you at work?”, and, if so; “How do you react to that?”.
Rooijakkers 24
All the bartenders declared to be fully heterosexual but this did not mean they had never done anything sexual with another man. Kees, who is fairly new to bartending, told me he had kissed one of his friends in order to make two girls kiss each other as well. He had also had a threesome with a male friend and a girl recently but that “didn’t count” because the men did not touch each other. Two men participating in a sexual activity is still regarded as
heterosexual if the men do not engage in any activity together. It is also apparently still heterosexual when the intention is to get closer to women. Andrew also shared a story revolving around getting more attention from women through homosexual activity:
I was working behind the bar with my best friend for a while and we had a game, which was called ‘gaychicken’. It was about this: you pretended to kiss until you would really kiss and the first one who stopped was the ‘gaychicken’. Eventually we both got so good at it that we would be making out behind the bar. Then we started telling people we were bisexual and, for some reason, that went over well with the ladies. So then we were bisexual behind the bar. Of course, men would come by, hear the story and try to hit on us but ‘you’re not my type, I’m a bit pickier’. They didn’t have a problem with it and they understood. And for us it was a good way to pick up chicks. However, when a guy gives me attention behind the bar, I’m also flattered. It’s not like I’m a homophobe, or anything like that. I’m just not going to respond to his advances.
In his case, appearing bisexual increased his chances with the ladies. Bisexuality and
homosexuality are seemingly nonconventional sexual identities for male bartenders, as most said that all their colleagues are heterosexual and you will only find homosexual bartenders in the gay bars of Amsterdam. These two men, then, use this atypical identity to become more attractive for women. Regardless, they identify as fully heterosexual because the aim was not their own sexual pleasure but the pursuit of women.
Jasper, who never wants to quit bartending, was the only one who confessed to having had a sexual experience with a man without the desire of it leading to attention from women. He told me he had tried it out in high school because he felt like you can never be sure of something unless you have tried it. He explained:
I have been very curious. I cannot say that I like something or not if I haven’t tried it. I am 100% sure that I am straight but only because I have tried it. I was sixteen, one thing lead to another. It happened, I don’t regret it but I wouldn’t do it again. People are simply sexual beings. These kinds of things are part of it. Especially when you are beginning to explore your sexuality. I think you should also try out these kinds of things.
Rooijakkers 25
Jasper, then, believes that sexuality can only be acquired through experience. His
heterosexuality is defined as non-homosexuality because he has ruled out homosexuality, and bisexuality, through experimentation at a young age. A onetime sexual experience has set the tone for the development of his (hetero)sexuality.
In other cases the question of same-sex experimentation was met with subtle disgust or offence. However, most of the bartenders did confess that they got male attention while working but they all said that it did not make them feel uncomfortable, even though some had had just been slightly appalled when asked if they had experiences with other men. They reacted shocked at the insinuation that men flirting with them would make them feel uneasy: “Why would that make me uncomfortable? That doesn’t make any sense. That does not make any sense to me at all” (Ben). As long as homosexuality was not discussed with regard to their own sexual identity, everything seemed fine. They told me they got along with homosexuals and they did not make them feel uneasy. Most of their answers were quite essentialist. They spoke of how nice homosexual men are and that they always had beautiful women with them. No one shared a story about an individual they knew; they spoke of all homosexual men being a certain way.
Some made a clear distinction between what they accept at work and in their private life; at work it is simply part of the job and they deal with it but in their private lives, the men should keep their hands to themselves. Sander, a self-identified true ‘Amsterdammer’,
referred to a time when he was at an after party with a couple of homosexual men and he felt like he had to stand with his back against the wall: “You never know, GHB in my drink or something. No, but other than that; they are great”. Apparently, even though he claimed not to have a problem with gay men, he was slightly scared that they might rape him. He continued on saying: “No, but I would find it very strange if I were to do that. It would violate my masculinity. Really deeply on the inside”. It seems that he believes that a homosexual experience would be something done to him, not something he would do. Same-sex acts are something passive which would be done to a heterosexual man whereas homosexuality as an identity is active.
The bartenders I spoke with were keen to project an image of heterosexuality. Their specific way of dealing with homosexuality is solely aimed at tips or attention from women. Most of them do not want it to be implied that they have same-sex desire or attractions; it should not come too close and the men should literally not come too close. They do not want to be associated with homosexuality besides making clear that they are tolerant of them. A masculine bartender is therefore a heterosexual bartender, which falls in line with the
before-Rooijakkers 26
mentioned expectations of hegemonic masculinity. Next, I will explore what this heterosexual masculinity means for the expectations of the amount of bed partners.
3.3 Just Another Notch in His Bedpost
Much gossip surrounding bartenders revolves around them being sexually promiscuous and having many different sexual partners. To find out how sexually active these men actually are, I asked them about the amount of sexual partners they had had. This was vital, not just to have the actual number but also to see how they reacted to the question; if there was any hesitation in sharing the information with me or whether they had to count the amount over in their head rather than having an exact number ready for me. I wanted to find out whether they took pride in this amount and whether it was important.
The amounts ranged from twelve (or thirteen) to hundreds and their reactions to my question varied. Lukas, the person with the lowest number, ridiculed it a bit: “It is very low compared to normal bartenders … You didn’t expect that, did you? Especially for somebody who has been a bartender for five years”. He also found it important to explain how many of these girls had been girlfriends and which ones were regular scharrels.9 He referred to himself as a “good guy” with certain standards, an exception to the rule when it comes to bartenders. From what I have heard and experiences, this is clearly his decision. I have been to his bar several times and I watched many girls swoon over him. He has just decided not to live up to this stereotype. By emphasizing that he is so different from other bartenders, he is reaffirming the stereotype that bartenders are sexually very active. As the exception to it, Lukas proves this rule.
Lukas was the only one who answered the question with an exact number; the rest of the men used “more than”, “less than” and “around” to describe the amount. The vagueness surrounding the numbers made me believe that, in fact, the women were solely a number, and these were conquests rather than actual experiences with people. The oldest of the bunch, at 32, had the highest number. He did not know the exact amount but enthusiastically turned it into a math problem:
9 I will use the Dutch word scharrel more often. It is a specific Dutch word and used by most of my respondents.
It is similar to the English ‘fling’ but has some differences in connotation. ‘Fling’ implies an affair that is not serious but does not last very long. Also, the afore-mentioned term ‘hook up’ is not desirable because this indicates a single occurrence. A scharrel, on the other hand, can last for a long time but simply means that the two people are not committed; it is not a relationship.
