#it uproots his entire narrative and his entire dynamic with peter to leave it out

[theopolis]

How parksborn defies masculine resentment

Society expects men (primarily white abled cishet men) to stick together on a superficial level solely due to their gender and with no regard to ethics. But it simultaneously pits all men against each other because mainstream masculinity at its core is a competition. Add in the repression of vulnerability that is socially expected of men and you get lots of male interpersonal relationships that feel like being locked in a compound where you constantly have to prove yourself to be worthy - more often than not by outdoing another man, therefore making him look unworthy by comparison.

There is a unique kind of insecurity tied to always being the man who is outdone, always being the bottom feeder in the perceived hierarchy, and it often comes with bitter jealousy of your more “adequate” male friends, with the creeping conviction that they must look down on you on some level. The social (and in his case especially paternal) influences that lead to toxically competitive friendships between men have heavily affected Harry and his feelings for Peter. But their relationship is ultimately a huge counterexample.

Because here we have the archetypical manly man - handsome, muscular, stoic, standing up for others as well as himself - as the hero, pitted against the archetypical "failed" man - scrawny, fragile, insecure, sensitive and petty, overall riddled with qualities commonly perceived as feminine with stark negative connotations - as the villain. And yet at the core of this dynamic, both from a character and narrative standpoint, is not the heroes alleged superiority over that man. Instead he harbors deep, unwavering, gentle love towards him and they are both rewarded in a sense for giving in to that love eventually.

Not only is Harry's lack of tradtional masculinity not framed as wretched or pathetic but respectable and potentially edifying by the narrative, its actively cherished and admired by Peter who in turn is actively critical of the abundance of traditional masculinity which Harry envies him for.

At his lowest, Harry pushes for an aggressive, violent, "masculine" solution to their conflict that must see one of them being overpowered and annihilated by the other. And that is wrong not just because Harry is the villain, not just because Peter didn’t actually take Norman's life, but because it goes against Harry's nature and against the nature of their true feelings for each other.

Normans convictions which he passed on to his son, the evil force in this story, the stand-in for society’s toxic ideas about manhood, are conquered by love and compassion and chosen vulnerability. Parksborn destroys the imposed idea of a male social hierarchy because it sees two men coming from opposite ends of that perceived hierarchy bonding together against it - even when it’s cornered them in a seemingly inescapable spot.

Because Peter embraces him as he is, Harry breaks several shackles of gender roles. He overcomes his masculine shame and insecurity, casts aside his gender envy, rejects the concept that he owes his father a certain model of manhood, and instead finally allows himself to release his tenderness, to revel in the love that blossomed and continued to thrive between Peter and himself against all odds.

tl;dr: men loving and comforting instead of fighting and degrading each other.... yeah.....