While often celebrated for its romantic entanglements and picturesque summer settings, The Summer I Turned Pretty quietly reinforces and raises poignant questions about gender, particularly concerning the perception and portrayal of masculinity. This popular series offers a nuanced lens through which to examine societal expectations and the often-unseen struggles of male characters navigating these complex dynamics within the framework of their relationships and personal growth.
The pervasive nature of traditional masculinity is evident throughout the series, manifesting in the behaviors and interactions of all male characters. However, it is not merely their individual actions but the broader societal reactions to them that truly illuminate the show’s deeper commentary. These reactions reveal how deeply ingrained certain ideals of maleness are, influencing how characters are perceived and valued, both by those around them and by the audience.
A critical examination of characters like John Conklin highlights society’s problematic upholding of a specific type of masculinity, often labeled as toxic. Despite his emotional maturity, sensitivity, and intelligence, John is frequently sidelined or underestimated. This narrative choice inadvertently suggests that qualities traditionally associated with “softness” are somehow lesser, especially when contrasted with the more assertive or even aggressive displays of masculinity embodied by characters like Adam.
Laurel’s interactions with John further underscore this societal bias, as she unwittingly invalidates and even emasculates him. His gentle nature, emotional openness, and seemingly passive qualities are mistakenly equated with feminine attributes, thereby challenging antiquated views of what constitutes a “man.” This dynamic serves as a powerful reflection on how deeply ingrained gender stereotypes can impact relationships and individual self-worth, even within seemingly progressive narratives.
Similarly, Steven’s perception of his father, John, as somehow “less of a man” or less worthy of aspiration, despite John objectively embodying healthy masculine traits, reveals the generational impact of these ingrained ideals. Steven’s desire to emulate an alpha figure, rather than appreciating John’s balanced approach to life and career, demonstrates the insidious nature of societal conditioning that values dominance over emotional intelligence and sensitivity.
Jeremiah’s character also grapples with these societal pressures, particularly through Adam’s influence. While Adam condones Jeremiah’s athletic prowess and a casual approach to relationships, aspects he deems “masculine,” he simultaneously struggles with Jeremiah’s softness, sensitivity, emotional vulnerability, and queerness. This dual standard not only highlights Adam’s narrow definition of masculinity but also sheds light on the compounded devaluation faced by queer men whose emotional openness is often stigmatized as “neediness” or femininity.
The recurring theme across these character arcs is a deep-seated societal conditioning that categorizes emotional traits like sensitivity, vulnerability, and openness as distinctly feminine—and, by extension, as weaknesses in men. This conditioning often elevates repression and stoicism as markers of strength, romanticizing them even when they lead to emotional abuse or arrested development, as seen in the relationships within the series.
Ultimately, The Summer I Turned Pretty offers a compelling, albeit sometimes uncomfortable, look at what masculinity means on screen and how audiences react to its various manifestations. By showcasing the devaluation of soft masculinity, the policing of vulnerability, and the glorification of toxicity, the series prompts a fascinating and necessary examination of contemporary gender dynamics, inviting viewers to question whether it merely reflects societal norms or actively critiques them.
