Actividades del sector

The notion of there being a close relationship between gender performances and sexuality emerged from the data. Whereas masculine-typical behaviour was associated with heterosexual men, feminine-typical behaviour was associated with gay men. The respondents frequently used the terms ‘feminine’ and ‘effeminate’ interchangeably with the words ‘gay’ and ‘homosexual’, therefore, presenting them as being synonymous. This pattern occurred across the classes.

In many cases, a respondent’s statements directly implied that heterosexual men generally associate gay men with feminine-typical behaviour: ‘I think that you

automatically think that if someone is gay that they are feminine’ (Jed; Middle-Class Interview); ‘If you look at gay men… they always lean towards the feminine… direction’ (Nik; Working-Class Interview); ‘You get some men who are… quite feminine… And you get that with the kids… at school… You know which boys are going to… end up…gay’ (John; Middle-Class Interview); ‘The automatic suspicion would be that they’re gay, and all those aspersions would be made about them’ (Graham; Middle-Class Interview).

A distinction between the respondents’ perceptions of gay men as behaving in a feminine way and heterosexual men as behaving in a masculine way was particularly clear during Richard’s ‘recollections’ of past events. When these reconstructions involved him impersonating interactions between gay and straight men, Richard portrayed them very differently. While adopting the role of a gay character, he used an exaggerated effeminate voice and body language and presented them as weak and submissive. In contrast, he used a deeper voice to convey the responses of the heterosexual men, and presented them as hard, protective and dominant:

RICHARD: [deep voice] ‘Bloody hell, Dave, what’s happened man?’… [effeminate voice] ‘Oo, you’ll never guess what’s happened to me, lovey’…, [deep voice] ‘Dave, what? What’s the matter?’ [effeminate voice] ‘Well’, he said, ‘I was walking through the cemetery to come to the club… and this man jumped me and raped me’… And so we said, [deep voice] ‘Well, where is he… Is he still there… Come on, let’s go and get him’. And he said, [effeminate voice] ‘Oh no, he’ll be gone by now, love’ (Middle-Class Focus Group 2)

Many of the respondents seemed to view sexuality as residing at the heart of how men ‘choose’ to comport themselves. The notion that gay men ‘deliberately’ gravitate to the socially pre-established realm of the feminine was a theme that often emerged within the interviews. For example, this was conveyed in comments such as: ‘Generally it is homosexual men who are effeminate […] I think it’s a bit of a… put on’ (James; Working-Class Interview); ‘Some gay men want to be women… but some lesbian women want to be a man…It’s a role they’re playing’ (Nik, Working-Class Focus Group 2); and

‘A lot of homosexual men want to be feminine and they dress in a feminine manner and behave in a feminine manner… But that’s up to them… they don’t have to behave like that if they don’t want’ (Jed, Middle-Class Interview). During the second working-class focus group, reasons were explored as to why the respondents thought gay men deliberately act feminine rather than masculine. The explanations they provided referred to these performances as a strategy through which gay men challenge the existing norms of society and proclaim their right to live to their own way of choosing:

NIK: They’re trying to prove that they’re there… JOE: And that it’s okay to be gay

TOM: Well it’s because they’re gay and they’re proud of it, isn’t it… That’s why they throw that at you (Working-Class Focus Group 2)

As mentioned in chapter three, Bergling (2001) documented a rift between feminine- acting and straight-acting groups of gay men. Corresponding with the above data, this literature implied that a large number of gay men deliberately traverse the socially constructed boundary of the ‘masculine’ as a way of overtly celebrating their social freedom (Bergling, 2001). However, contrasting the data, an equally large number of gay men were suggested to adhere to the masculine stereotype and direct animosity towards feminine-acting men (Bergling, 2001). Nevertheless, in both cases this suggests that, like the respondents, the men from these groups are aware of what behaviours are recognisable as ‘masculine’ and either attempt to adhere to or resist them.

While the data predominantly suggested that gay men tend to ‘deliberately’ act feminine, there were some exceptions. For instance, the respondents from the first middle-class focus group spoke of a ‘very masculine’ gay best friend. When describing in what ways his gay friend is masculine, John made the statements: ‘He’s a black belt in Karate’; ‘He goes to the gym a lot’; and ‘He is like a man’s man’. During their focus group, Ben also commented: ‘He came waterskiing with me when this lot bottled it’. Working-class respondent, Mel, also spoke of having a ‘very masculine’ gay friend. Like the aforementioned middle-class men, his talk of him was punctuated with the comments:

‘You wouldn’t mess with him’; ‘He does martial arts’; ‘He can look after himself’’; and ‘He’s a big strapping lad and a hard nut’ (Working-Class Interview). Therefore, the dominant masculine norm still emerged as being consistent with the ability to transcend physical and emotional vulnerability during relations between men. As these accounts highlighted the stereotypical masculine qualities of their gay friends - thus, distinguishing them from other non-masculine gay men - they can also be interpreted as strategies the respondents used to justify their own associations with them in a way that did not compromise their own masculinity (see Kehily, 2001; Dean, 2011; Pascoe. 2011).

From this perspective, men harbour a common, relatively stable representation of what behaviours constitute masculinity and femininity. Otherwise, they would be unable to discern for themselves, let alone concur with one another, what behaviours constitute demonstrations of one or the other. Furthermore, this position refers to agents having some freedom to gravitate to the gendered realm of their choosing. As such, this is consistent with respondent accounts suggesting that common patterns in the behaviours of men and women are influenced by socially pre-established representations of masculinity and femininity (as discussed in chapter six).

To recap, the data made basic distinctions between men as either ‘completely’ heterosexual or otherwise gay, and either masculine via demonstrations of invulnerability or feminine via demonstrations of vulnerability. However, these distinctions between sexuality and gender performance did not emerge as neutral in terms of a man’s status. In many of the respondents’ accounts, heterosexuality and demonstrations of invulnerability emerged as being superior to non-heterosexuality and demonstrations of effeminacy. Even those respondents claiming that they personally felt that gay or feminine-acting men were not inferior to heterosexual or masculine-acting men, spoke of it being a common notion among heterosexual men (This is also documented in the literature; cf. Kehily, 2001; Plummer, 2006; Hunt & Jensen, 2007; Phillips, 2007; Richardson, 2007; Dean, 2011; Messner, 2011; Pascoe, 2011), for example:

GRAHAM: If there was a lad that appeared to have feminine characteristics, then I think there would be a very good chance of them being victimised and jokes made about them, or even worse, they could be bullied… I think there would be elements within our society that would think that he’s not a real man (Middle- Class Interview)

The data suggested that, in the eyes of some heterosexual men, masculine status is unobtainable for non-heterosexual men. This was situated as a personal viewpoint by working-class respondents Nik, Tom and Grant. These respondents implied that the inferiority of gay/feminine-acting men - in comparison to the superiority of heterosexual/masculine-acting men - is their inability to transcend physical and emotional vulnerability. For example, this was conveyed in statements such as: ‘Because they’re that camp… and that effeminate… they can’t fight’ (Tom); ‘Masculine men… are normal, straight, heterosexual, and all your feminine looking one’s… and your weaker men… are all gay’ (Nik); and ‘It’s a touchy subject… coz my brother did actually say that he was gay […] But a lot of it was brought on because he was smoking marijuana… which takes the manhood out of you… and makes you very… submissive’ (Grant).

Nik, Tom and Grant attempted to justify their negative opinions of gay/feminine-acting men by suggesting that their ‘lower status’ results from them deliberately gravitating to the realm of the feminine. In other words, they were careful not to suggest that they were inferior to heterosexual/masculine-acting men due to the biological aspect of their sexuality. Throughout their interviews, Nik, Tom and Grant emphasized the importance of men conforming to the masculine norm, as established by society. Arguably, this relates to the literature suggesting that the transitive dimension of knowledge constrains agents’ perceptions by obscuring or devaluing other ways of viewing the world (Corson, 1997; Wilson & McCormack, 2006; Bergin et al., 2008):

TOM: In a textbook sort of thing, we’re classed as normal… It’s them that’s… that’s got a problem because they’re not acting the way that society is supposed to see them as

NIK: They’re out of the norm (Working-Class Focus Group 2)

In contrast, many of the respondents - particular those chosen to constitute a middle-class sample - provided statements suggesting that gay men can be masculine. Arguably, their positions as a police sergeant, university staff, teachers and company managers might suggest that they are better informed and also more careful to provide politically correct responses. One example of this might have been when Andrew, discussing a contrast between heterosexual and gay men, referred to the former as ‘normal’, and instantly realised the discriminatory connotations encapsulated by the term: ‘Even for a normal… Did I say ‘normal’?… That’s completely the wrong word’ (Middle-Class Interview).

In summary, a close relationship emerged in the data between men’s sexuality and demonstrations of gendered behaviour. Although not supported by the literature (see Bergling, 2001), this sample of respondents suggested that a majority of gay men deliberately resist the dominant masculine norm and perform stereotypical feminine behaviour. Despite this link being more prominent in the data provided by working-class men, it was still apparent in the verbal practices of middle-class men. The chapter will now focus on men’s concerns of losing masculine status by having their heterosexuality appear to be incomplete.