'There’s too many gay categories now': discursive constructions of gay masculinity

Ravenhill, James P and de Visser, Richard O (2017) 'There’s too many gay categories now': discursive constructions of gay masculinity. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 18 (4). pp. 321-330. ISSN 1939-151X

[img] PDF (This article may not exactly replicate the final version published in the APA journal. It is not the copy of record.) - Accepted Version
Download (660kB)


“Masculine capital” refers to the social power afforded by the display of traits and behaviors that are associated with orthodox, stereotypical masculinity. Men who are concerned with their masculine identity may utilize these traits and behaviors to increase their overall masculine capital, and to mitigate “failures” in other domains of masculinity. However, their success at accruing and trading masculine capital may be limited, because different traits and behaviors are not equal in the capital they convey, and their value may vary depending on the social context in which they are deployed. Research suggests that heterosexuality contributes more to masculine capital than other stereotypically masculine characteristics: The possibilities for gay men to accrue and trade masculine capital may therefore be particularly limited, especially in heteronormative contexts. Focus groups were undertaken with gay men, straight women and straight men living in a coastal city in the south of England to explore discursive constructions of gay masculinity, and to examine gay men’s possibilities for accruing and trading masculine capital. Discourse analysis identified constructions of gay masculinity in reference to hegemonic masculinity, where gay men may acquire masculine capital in similar ways to straight men. However, the meaning and value of this capital may also vary, because certain characteristics and behaviors may have different value for and between gay men than they do for straight men, and in heteronormative contexts. The analysis also identified discourses of gay masculinity where it was not constructed as a singular entity, but rather as complex, multiple and diverse.

Item Type: Article
Schools and Departments: School of Psychology > Psychology
Depositing User: Richard De Visser
Date Deposited: 13 Jul 2016 13:09
Last Modified: 24 Jul 2019 15:31
URI: http://sro.sussex.ac.uk/id/eprint/61467

View download statistics for this item

📧 Request an update