peversity and identifying personal bias

In class we agreed that the stabbing of Emile by Berbet had homoerotic 0ver tones. The overtones come from the actual physical stabbing but also from the dialogue.

"
There!” he declared all of a sudden showing his knife... “You'll see. What is a paltry little stroke of the
blade? I don't want to kill, you idiot! I'm simply going to prick you... prick you... you won't feel it... I assure you that you'll feel nothing at all... hardly.”" and
“Are you ready?” he questioned. “It'll be done quickly. Don't move.”
Bebert declared: “If you make that row I'll finish you... hein? Do you understand... I'll...”
He collapsed on the floor, screamed louder, quivered with pain. Bebert bent over his victim. He did not sink the blade deeply, but as soon as it touched Emile withdrew it rapidly to stab again...


So why and how did we come to this conclusion?
I think I came to the conclusion because I didnt sense that the men were fight over Irma, but fighting among themselves for a hierarchy.

Is my personal bias clouding my judgement?

Is a link between my minds between masculine violence and sex? Do I have such a limited view on male homosexuals that I attribute violence to sexual acts, not love?

Or that I am still stuck in a heteronormative dialectic mind- that in order for two men to have a relationships one has to be strong and manly (Berbert) the other weak and feminine(Emile)?


Or that I believe that all men fight for their placement in the masculine hierarchy?