The Problem with Men That Men Should Be

Remember the “unpopular opinion” trend on Twitter? (And that X shudders used to be called Twitter?) Do you remember how the trend was infested with decidedly popular takes? In the spirit of that bygone era when scrolling Twitter wasn’t like venturing into 4chan-lite, here’s one of the lukewarmest takes I’ll give writing for the post calvin: Pedro Pascal is a pretty cool dude.

For ten years, Pedro Pascal’s been on a generational run. After two decades of minor roles, he had back-to-back breakout roles as Oberyn Martell in Game of Thrones and Javier Peña in Narcos. Those led into a string of, if not always good, high-profile roles: sequels to Kingsman: The Secret Service, The Equalizer, Wonder Woman, and Gladiator; acting as Nicolas Cage’s comedic foil in The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent; hitting a theatrical hat trick this year, starring in A24’s Eddington, romcom Materialists, and The Fantastic Four: First Steps back-to-back-to-back; and most famously, typecasting himself as a grizzled father figure in the titular role of The Mandalorian and as Joel in The Last of Us.

There’s no ‘but’ coming. This isn’t an anti-Pedro Pascal screed. I mention this because Pedro Pascal is the latest example of a certain type of male celebrity. I call them Men That Men Should Be. A few more examples should show you what I’m talking about.

Joining Pedro Pascal in being a Man That Men Should Be is the new Superman David Corenswet. When Corenswet’s performance in Superman became the punching bag of both the right-wing culture wars and “Snyder bros,” those in denial that Zack Snyder’s vision for the character will never come to pass, being a fan of David Corenswet as a person and in character became a way of sticking it to the dimmest and dumbest in our society.

Before Corenswet but after Pascal was/is Harry Styles. Styles, as a former 1D member, would likely have a dedicated female fanbase no matter what. His leaning into a feminine fashion sense as his solo career took off and being a proud ally (and possible member) of the LGBTQ+ community has certainly helped.

Kansas City Chiefs tight end Travis Kelce gained a massive female audience overnight by dating (and while I typed this up, getting engaged to) Taylor Swift. And he’s been a supportive, healthy partner, best I can tell. A lot of guys would be insecure or jealous if their partner was as mega-successful as Taylor Swift. Kelce isn’t one of them.

Last of all, there’s Pete Davidson. Like Pascal, Davidson’s career has thrived in the last decade, jumping from being an SNL mainstay to a seeming checklist of starring roles: in dramedies (The King of Staten Island, Big Time Adolescence), horror films (Bodies Bodies Bodies, this year’s The Home), superhero films (The Suicide Squad), and animated voice roles (The Angry Birds Movie 2, Marmaduke, Dog Man). Relevant to being a Man That Men Should Be is his dating life. Davidson, with his unconventional looks, has been engaged to Ariana Grande and dated the likes of Kate Beckinsale, Margaret Qualley, model Kaia Gerber, and Kim Kardashian fresh off her and Kanye West’s divorce.

What makes these five Men That Men Should Be? A couple of things.

First, they’ve defied traditional masculinity. Pascal and Davidson have disregarded “men don’t cry”: Davidson’s been open about his borderline personality disorder (BPD) diagnosis and having contemplated suicide in the past, and Pascal’s openly discussed his struggles with anxiety and panic attacks. Kelce has seven inches and dozens of pounds on Taylor Swift, but he’s made it clear he’s OK with Swift taking the lead in their relationship. Styles and Pascal have both spoken out for humanitarian causes: advocating for the LGBTQ+ community, standing with Ukraine, calling for a ceasefire in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. And Corenswet portrays an emotional, vulnerable Superman in stark contrast to Zack Snyder’s brooding, debatably heroic Supes.

Most of them have been called out by the traditionally masculine. You don’t need to look hard to find red pill types labelling Pedro Pascal a beta soyboy insert homophobic slurs here. (Normally, I’d link examples, but that gives credence to some of the most horrid imbecilic people on the Internet, so take my word for it.) Donald Trump turned his pettiness on Taylor Swift (and, by proxy, Travis Kelce) when she refused to endorse him for President last year. As previously mentioned, Fox News and their hive mind dogpiled on David Corenswet’s Superman, and Ben Shapiro quickly followed suit, calling this version of Superman “weak”, “woke” and “too political.” And men, sincerely and disingenuously, wonder what’s so attractive about Pete Davidson.

All five men fit into the Female Gaze. As opposed to what many men think appeal to women–biceps as big as footballs, washboard abs, “alpha male” energy, etc.—these five are masculine in ways that women actually desire. They’re good partners (Kelce and Davidson), aren’t afraid to be vulnerable (Davidson and Pascal), like women as people, not as sex objects (Kelce, Davidson, Pascal), and have so-called “soft boy energy” (Corenswet) and a sense of humor (Davidson). There’s a protectiveness to their masculinity (see: Harry Styles helping closeted fans come out or Pedro Pascal defending his trans sister against the world’s most famous transphobe) that women eat up.

And, most importantly to the point I’ve been leading up to, these five are who non-men say that men should look to as role models. This is an honor bestowed upon them, rather than one they invoke. They’re not self-proclaimed male feminists like Neil Gaiman or Joss Whedon, or championing healthy masculinity like Justin Baldoni.

Here’s where my problem begins.

There are worrisome undertones to the praise heaped upon Men That Men Should Be. Some of it is the weirdly smug feeling to some of it. For example, this bit of Pete Davidson meat riding from BuzzFeed, where so much wordspace is snickering at how much Pete’s popularity with the ladies irritates men. But I think it’s the hyperbolic nature of some of this praise that really bothers/worries me.

Spanish newspaper El Pais calls Pedro Pascal “more than a man, a movement,” and Carolina Meloni, a philosopher quoted therein, says that “[Pedro is] the man every heterosexual or bisexual person would like to have at their side.” Betches magazine says Pascal is “hotter” than other male celebrities because “he’s a rejection of toxic masculinity.” He’s a “blueprint” for positive masculinity and “the dream guy in the rom coms…and in every universe.” Back in 2023, Men’s Health called Pascal a “symbol of modern masculinity” who is “defying machismo and setting a new example for Latinx men.”

Grazia magazine says that Harry Styles is “rewriting the rules of masculinity on his terms.” L’Officiel similarly says Styles is “defeating toxic masculinity.”

All of these lofty declarations feel like building pressure, pressure that is guaranteed to burst at some point. My concern is this: in the rush to dang near deify Men That Men Should Be, you take away any chance for them to be what they are, regular-degular dudes.

I’m not insinuating that any of these men (or other MTMSB—you can think of your own examples) are trying to fool us. I don’t think Pedro Pascal and Harry Styles are LGBTQ+ allies to win “woke points” or get laid, it’s because it’s the right thing to do. I don’t think Travis Kelce and Pete Davidson are abusive behind closed doors or that Twitter (sorry, X) users will unearth an old account of David Corenswet’s dedicated to rape jokes. With that being said, question: what’s going to happen when they mess up?

If Pedro Pascal’s tongue slips and he refers to his sister Lux with male pronouns, do you think El Pais and Betches magazine will: a. run articles saying he made a mistake, or b. run articles saying Pascal’s a closet transphobe and a fake ally? If David Corenswet makes a joke in poor taste about his Jewish heritage, will Superman: Man of Tomorrow consequently bomb worse than The Flash via Ezra Miller channeling Eobard Thawne? In the early days of Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce’s relationship, I joked that it’s a win-win: either they’d stay together and Swift’s famously turbulent love life gets some equilibrium, or they break up, and we can indulge in schadenfreude from watching in real time as the Swifties who became overnight Chiefs fans pull an Orwell-style unpersoning of Travis Kelce and the Chiefs. Am I being facetious or does that sound plausible?

This might sound like me clutching my pearls, but if you haven’t noticed, the sharpest-toothed critics are often former acolytes. Ever notice how the atheists who have the harshest things to say about religion tend to be former church kids? Or, since  I mentioned JK Rowling earlier, how some of the fiercest anti-Harry Potterers are former fans who learned through Rowling’s actions and sigh X’s that they weren’t welcome at Hogwarts? Is it unreasonable to think that the power of disillusionment combined with the Internet’s love of mob mentality and cancellation and hatred of nuance will lead to disaster?

When these guys make a mistake—and it is when, because again, they are regular dudes who don’t get it right one hundred percent of the time—through no fault of their own, the same people and news outlets who raised them on their shoulders as standouts of masculinity will be the ones castigating them for not living up to the standards they never asked to be judged by.

There are other aspects of this I could talk about. It hasn’t escaped my attention that all five of these guys women say they want their men to be like are some combination of wealthy, conventionally attractive and either white or white-passing. I do wonder (even though I know the answer) if a less conventionally attractive male celebrity—say, Nick Frost or Gabriel Iglesias—made all the same moves as Harry Styles or David Corenswet would women and female-oriented publications be bowing at their feet. But, by and large, I’ve made my point.

Good men are hard to find, and I’m saying that from a male perspective. I can only try to understand how for women, femmes and AFABs, looking for a good man can feel like a lost cause. And, if I haven’t made it clear, I’m not looking at women’s love of these five and other Good Men™ from an outsider perspective. To my knowledge, any “controversies” these five have been involved in are either social gaffes, i.e. Harry Styles putting his foot in his mouth trying to talk about the movie he’s starring in, or bad actors nitpicking their behavior trying to make unproblematic celebrities problematic, i.e. people (morons) saying Pedro Pascal harasses women because he held Vanessa Kirby’s hand during an interview. In a world of rapist presidents, predatory executives reshaping entire industries to funnel victims to them, and Internet spaces where thousands of men swap stories of sexual assaults, male celebrities who are reputable for being good boyfriends, using their privilege for the good, and showing that masculinity doesn’t have to mean destroying everything around you to make yourself feel powerful are something I appreciate.

But I need women, and especially feminist women, to realize the irony: that in stacking, stacking, stacking pedestals and placing men like Pedro Pascal and Travis Kelce on them, they’re subjecting these men to the same double-bind that, whether they can name it or not, is the bane of so many women’s existence: the Madonna-whore complex. In the same way that men only seeing women as pure virginal Madonnas or dirty whores smothers so much of women’s humanity, designating a male celebrity as a Man That Men Should Be objectifies them, makes them liable to face blowback when, without meaning to, they take off the mask that’s been put on their faces and show that they are…guys, as capable of saying or doing something stupid as you or me.

So make your Pedro Pascal “daddy” edits, place your bets on who Pete Davidson dates next, and get your tickets to Chiefs games now, because once Travis Kelce and Taylor Swift tie that knot, “available Chiefs tickets” will become an oxymoron.

But do so while remembering: the bigger they are, the harder they fall.