In the upcoming documentary Lover of Men: The Untold History of Abraham Lincoln, director Shaun Peterson embarks on an exploration of the intimate relationships of one of America’s most celebrated presidents. The film revisits long-standing debates about Abraham Lincoln’s private life, examining his deep connections with several men and the homosocial bonds that characterized the 19th century. While the documentary doesn’t aim to label Lincoln as gay, it dives into the emotional intimacy that often transcended conventional norms of friendship at the time.
What stands out is the historical context that shapes the discussion. Scholars in the film emphasize that behaviors now classified under modern categories such as homosexuality were seen differently in Lincoln’s time. Sharing a bed with another man, expressing admiration, and exchanging deeply affectionate letters were not uncommon among men of that era. The film features prominent historians who argue that Lincoln’s relationships, particularly with Joshua Speed, point to an emotional connection that likely surpassed the platonic friendships often described in previous accounts. This nuanced approach invites a reconsideration of how we understand male intimacy in history, with scholars pointing out the absence of key letters that may have revealed even more about Lincoln’s relationships.
However, the documentary also highlights how contemporary reactions to Lincoln’s relationships reflect ongoing prejudices. Harvard historian John Stauffer, who appears in the film, notes that the idea of Lincoln being involved in same-sex relations has sparked backlash. He points out that Lincoln scholars, who often regard him as the ultimate statesman, struggle to reconcile that image with the possibility of him engaging in what today might be classified as queer relationships. This reluctance reveals a broader societal discomfort with embracing historical figures as complex, multifaceted individuals, particularly when issues of sexuality are involved.
The documentary does more than question the labels attached to Lincoln. It also challenges viewers to consider the ways in which modern sensibilities are projected onto the past. As one expert in the film notes, reading historical records often means deciphering what isn’t there—acknowledging gaps in the archival evidence that might speak volumes. Such gaps, like those in Lincoln’s correspondence with Joshua Speed, may have intentionally been erased to protect their privacy or out of concern for how they might be interpreted.
For today’s audiences, particularly younger generations more accustomed to fluid understandings of gender and sexuality, these interpretations may seem obvious. Yet, the film underscores how previous generations of scholars adhered to an “insanely high standard” when it came to acknowledging same-sex relationships in historical figures. By focusing on Lincoln’s private life, Lover of Men offers a timely reflection on how evolving cultural perspectives influence the way we write—and rewrite—history.
Ultimately, the film leaves viewers with more questions than answers, which might be its strongest feature. It reframes Lincoln not as a distant political icon, but as a deeply human figure navigating the same complex emotions that define us all. As our society continues to grapple with its understanding of identity, Lover of Men provides a powerful lens through which to examine both the past and present.
