getting heated over heated rivalry
which is really just an excuse to talk about sex
This past month, the internet has exploded with talk of the show Heated Rivalry and as the curious person I am, I decided to check it out. Normally, when sort of kitschy romance shows are being talked about to this degree, I’m not that into them but I always have to give them a try before I make that decision; I’m a firm believer in not being a hater until you give it a shot. But I did hate it. I’m glad that this show is doing positive things within the queer community for representation purposes, but I just found it unwatchable. I didn’t think any of these people can actually act (with the exception of Connor Storrie that man is a star I did truly think he was Russian). I don’t believe that Hudson Williams1 is Shane, and honestly, I don’t care! There was not enough character background given (or even subtle hints from the actors themselves) that made me want to give two shits about the events and the people within the show. Also a 2010s period piece? Get me out of here.
My critiques of plot and characters aside, the main thing that I take issue with is the way in which straight women are treating the show. This isn’t necessarily a novel phenomenon for straight women on the internet to collectively obsess over a romance show; we saw this with The Summer I Turned Pretty fairly recently. But I think the crucial difference is the way in which this show is being treated in the panopticon of public opinion. Let’s be honest with ourselves here: Heated Rivalry is basically soft porn. We may not be seeing dick and balls on screen all the time but we get the picture. There are two sides to this kind of representation: the first is, obviously, extremely positive. It shouldn’t be a novel thing to have a gay relationship in media in 2026, yet it is. The availability and vulnerability to make this show is wonderful and I hope that it allows for the opening of doors for other forms of queer media in the future (which again, this should not be something that I have to say and it should just be happening already without any form of discourse but here we are!) But the other side of this kind of exposure is frightening and what I want to talk about more: the fetishization of gay men by straight women. I feel like I am in a unique position to speak about this, as I am a straight woman who has been told over and over again that my type is gay guys (which is only somewhat true).
It has become increasingly more common for women to pine over gay men in popular culture. Two glaringly obvious examples are Andrew Scott and Jonathon Bailey. Both men have portrayed canonically straight men in popular TV shows (Fleabag and Bridgerton, respectively) and the internet has run wild with their obsessions. My theory for this is twofold: firstly, these shows were written and directed by women, and the love interests are naturally going to be oriented toward what we colloquially call “the female gaze.2” Straight women want to believe that there are men in the world who get them the way these characters are written to understand women. And unfortunately, it’s pretty difficult to find a man out in the world today that behaves in a respectful, non-performative manner (I have major issues with saying “performative” in reference to gender, but that is a conversation for another day). The lines between character and performer are increasingly blurred, and so the Andrew Scotts and Jonathon Baileys of the world become associated with the people they portray. Regardless of any actual similarity in personalities, there is one major difference: their sexual identities. And straight women on the internet seem to want to forget this. This is part one of the problem. Part two is the rise in popularity of romance media. Again, this is not necessarily a bad thing; I’m happy people are reading and finding things they enjoy but we must not kid ourselves. Modern romance media has just become porn. We can use cutesy words like “smut” all we want, but at the end of the day it is pornographic. I’m on Tumblr and AO3; I know it when I see it! The draw of engaging with these materials is the ability for the power dynamics ingrained into women by the patriarchy surrounding sex to shift in favor of women, which is not something that we see happening out in the world.
About a week ago, I slept over at a guy’s apartment.3 We’ve been in an on-off situationship for an embarrassingly long time and I don’t need to get into those details but just know that it simultaneously sucks and is wonderful at the same time. I am getting ghosted right now but it’s whatever. Crucially, though, we have not had sex,4 and most of the time when we see each other I straight up tell him “I am not going to fuck you.” We get closer and closer to actually fucking every time, but I always stop him. I don’t want to have sex with him unless we’re actually dating, which is just a boundary I have set for myself. I don’t feel the need to explain why I have that boundary, nor should I feel like I have to. He does respect this, but I know he doesn’t really understand. While we were laying in his bed all cozied up, I reminded him of my “rule” and asked him if he thought virginity was a construct (I do; not physically obviously breaking the hymen is a physical change but the idea of virginity as something a woman should lose or as something that can be taken from her that she needs to protect). He agreed with me, but then said something very interesting that I have been mulling over all week and I will paraphrase for you here: “Most guys care about being the one to take someone’s virginity; they care about purity and all that bullshit. But I actually don’t want to be someone’s first time. I feel like it is a weird power dynamic thing. Girls who are virgins are younger too and I don’t want the age thing to be weird either.5 I want to be with someone who has experience and knows what they like. I don’t care about how many bodies someone has and I think it’s weird when guys do care.” I explained to him that I want to build a relationship of trust and respect before I decide that I want to have sex with someone, to which he responded: “I think you don’t need to be dating someone to do that. I respect the dignity of women, and you can build a relationship of trust and respect with someone in one night. Like clearly your bodies are physically attractive to one another and if you already respect people, then it shouldn’t be hard.” I continued to push (maybe problematically but whatever) and circled back to the idea of creating a power dynamic and asked him why he felt like there had to be a power dynamic. He said “Well, like, I’d just be teaching them what I like which doesn’t feel fair.” (again, all of this is paraphrased but this is the gist of the conversation)
A couple interesting things here: number one this is RICH coming from a guy who has directly stated many times that he wants to fuck me (knowing I am a virgin). He says he doesn’t care about how many bodies a girl has unless the number is zero? Make that make sense. Number two, and more importantly, the implication of a need for a sexual power dynamic is wild to me. I did say this to him but I feel it is more important and emphatic to state here: when you are peers with someone, I don’t see engaging in sexual behaviors as inherently engaging with a power dynamic. True equal standing requires communication in any form of relationship and that communication removes the teacher-student dualism. Is it wrong to learn from your peers? That is how we go about life! We have to learn things so that we can figure out what it is we like and dislike. We have socialized straight men and women to believe that when having sex, women are always going to be at a disadvantage. This is a very misogynistic stance to have, especially for someone who claims to see the dignity in women. While yes, when engaging in penetrative sex, one person is penetrating and the other is penetrated, but that doesn’t have to mean that the penetrator holds all the power. This idea is exclusionary to other forms of sex (the non-heteroconformative kind) and just plainly untrue.
This conversation really clicked into place why I didn’t like Heated Rivalry (remember when I was writing about that? yeah me too). The way straight women treat this show comes from the same place of internalized misogyny toward sex. They don’t understand that their own experiences (and I am making a generalization here) with sex have the potential to be void of power dynamics in the same way fictional media portrays it. Queer media tends to be less focused on sexual power dynamics and more focused on relationships between peers.*I was trying to think of a comparison to make between 50 Shades and an equally kinky queer movie that isn’t just porn, but I literally could not come up with anything and I think that alone says a lot. Appropriating these ideals is not a bad idea, but it can be extremely harmful if you don’t go about it properly. Which is what the internet is doing. Hypersexualizing an already hypersexual show is perpetuating the fetishization of gay men, which, again, is not a new thing. Straight women always want to have a “token gay friend,” but would NEVER say that about any other minority group.
In my Gender Psychology class last semester, we had a guest speaker come in to talk to us about allyship. She was a trans woman and a drag performer, who we later went as a class to watch perform (it was awesome I had so much fun it was cowboy theme night and I had one of the best cigarettes ever on the back porch of the bar in the rain--truly magical). She said something which has stuck with me a lot: “You cannot call yourself an ally. Someone has to tell you they think you are one.” This sentiment is so simple and yet I don’t think it has reached the minds of the general populace. You can’t claim to be an ally of a group of people without actually proving it; words mean less than action. When you prove to that group that you are an ally, they will be the ones to award you with that title. You have to earn it, not give it to yourself. Otherwise it means nothing. If you want to engage with queer media (which you should), it is important to think about how and why you do so. Is it a celebration of positive representation, or is it just an excuse to talk about two boys kissing? And if it is the latter, maybe do some self-reflection to figure out why you feel the need to obsess in the way you do.
if anyone out there is a dream interpreter i would really appreciate your interpretation of this dream i had last night: i was at a gas station that was also just a void with mr. situationship and when i went to pay, the guy behind the counter who looked like evil white jesus started choking me and saying that i was an evil slut who needed to die? and mr. situationship literally thanos snap-style dissolved into the void and i think evil jesus actually killed me in dream bc it faded to black and i woke up hyperventilating and crying. i do think it is pretty straightforward but maybe i’m missing something. any thoughts?
anyway my recommendation is to be mean to men when they deserve it and getting a good night’s sleep. god knows i need that.
i do feel the need to state that i am aware that hudson williams’ character is autistic, and this aspect was taken into account when critiquing the show. that being said, i still think all the acting was bad—just because you have big beautiful puppy dog eyes does not mean you know what to do with them
and as much as i take issue with using this term in normal life, i actually feel like it is necessary and applicable here. woo film theory!
this piece was written a little while ago and i hate to admit that the reason i’m publishing it now is because i was over at his apartment again last night and am pissed about things unrelated to this but they did remind me to re-read this. so. a little fun background tidbit for you footnote clickers.
still true! virgin alert going strong
sidenote: i am older than him by a couple months