There is creased acceptance of gay men most Wtern societi. Neverthels, evince suggts that feme-prentg gay men are still disadvantage
Contents:
- WHY STRAIGHT SOLDIERS CAN’T STOP ACTG GAY ON VIO
- GAY AND STRAIGHT MEN PREFER MASCULE-PRENTG GAY MEN FOR A HIGH-STAT ROLE: EVINCE FROM AN ELOGILLY VALID EXPERIMENT
- "STRAIGHT-ACTG GAYS": THE RELATNSHIP BETWEEN MASCULE NSCNS, ANTI-EFFEMACY, AND NEGATIVE GAY INTY
- ACTG GAY, ACTG STRAIGHT: SEXUAL ORIENTATN STEREOTYPG
- 25 OF THE GAYT STRAIGHT MOVI EVER MA
- STRAIGHT ACTG GAY MEN
- SHOULD STRAIGHT ACTORS STILL PLAY GAY CHARACTERS? 'IT'S PLITED'
- WHY DO SOME GAY MEN INTIFY AS "STRAIGHT-ACTG" AND HOW IS IT RELATED TO WELL-BEG?
WHY STRAIGHT SOLDIERS CAN’T STOP ACTG GAY ON VIO
"Straight-actg" and "gay-actg"-- the end, 's all jt an act. * straight guys acting gay *
" Personally, I believe my performance was worthy of an, when I see gay men state that they are "straight-actg" on plac like the "men seekg men" (m4m) posts on Craigslist, or on ManHunt, I sometim wre them and ask: "If you were 'straight-actg' wouldn't you be postg the 'men seekg woman' (m4w) sectn or on WomanHunt? The very word "effemate, " when applied to gay men, seems to suggt that they're "not like a man" but "more like a female, " and therefore plays right to myths, misnceptns and stereotyp of what is "mascule" and what is "feme.
In jt a few years’ time, ary boys would be enthiastilly filmg themselv actg way ‘gayer’ than dancg to YMCA – and postg on YouTube for the entire world to ’ve probably already seen the vio tribute to Lady Gaga’s ‘Telephone’ ma by US soldiers Afghanistan, which has gone vilently viral.
GAY AND STRAIGHT MEN PREFER MASCULE-PRENTG GAY MEN FOR A HIGH-STAT ROLE: EVINCE FROM AN ELOGILLY VALID EXPERIMENT
* straight guys acting gay *
A lot of people – particularly gays – seemed nvced that the soldiers ‘mt’ all be gay bee they appeared such fact many did like the soldiers the ‘Telephone’ vio – for giggl, for fun, for a dare. The same ele un that the chaps ‘actg gay’ the ‘Telephone’ vio (PG) are latt YouTube vio of soldiers ‘actg gay’ lled ‘The Army Go Gay’ (below) has been curly claimed by some gay blogs as an example of straight soldiers ‘ridiculg’ Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.
There isn’t much if any evince for this readg however – and fact uld be more easily read as an endorsement of the ‘Gay Bomb’ fears of the certaly, don’t have any msage at ’s jt soldiers beg silly and nghty.
"STRAIGHT-ACTG GAYS": THE RELATNSHIP BETWEEN MASCULE NSCNS, ANTI-EFFEMACY, AND NEGATIVE GAY INTY
Some gay men are preoccupied wh tradnal notns of masculy and exprs negative feelgs towards effemate behavr gay men. Var scholars have speculated that such attus by gay men reflect ternalized negative feelgs about beg gay. Th, we sought to asss the importance … * straight guys acting gay *
Whereas most studi on perceptns of feme-prentg gay men have manipulated genr nonnformy via wrten scriptns, rearch suggts that behavural cu such as voice and body-language n migate or exacerbate prejudice toward a stereotyped dividual. For heterosexual men, the preference for mascule-prentg actors was predicted by greater anti-gay sentiment, whereas ternalised anti-gay prejudice did not predict a preference for mascule-prentatn among gay men.
This associatn between masculy and stat endowment has plex implitns for gay men, given the prevailg stereotype that they are more feme pared to heterosexual men (Ke & Dx, 1987; Lippa, 2000; Mchell & Ellis, 2011; Sanchez et al., 2009) Men and the Feme StereotypeSuch a stereotype reflects, to some extent, average differenc genr-typily between gay and heterosexual men. Policg of masculy among gay men is not only self-directed; there is also evince of prejudice toward more feme gay men om wh the gay muny (Bailey et al., 1997; Hunt et al., 2016) Penalti for Feme Gay MenContemporary theori of effective learship have challenged the perceived virtu of masculy.
Theoretil explanatns for the fdgs nsistently foc on the possibily that gay men elic such discrimatn bee of the stereotype that they are feme and are therefore perceived as ls equipped to occupy higher-stat posns social hierarchi, such as the workplace (Ke & Dx, 1987; Lord et al., 1984).
ACTG GAY, ACTG STRAIGHT: SEXUAL ORIENTATN STEREOTYPG
Siarly, Clsell and Fiske (2005) found that subgroup labels for feme gay men like ‘flamboyant’ eliced higher ratgs of warmth, but lower ratgs of petence pared to more mascule subgroup labels like ‘straight-actg’. Th, the rearch appears to suggt that feme gay men are at particular risk of stat penalti, pecially om dividuals who posss anti-gay Sentiment Amongst Gay MenA further qutn regardg potential stat penalti for feme vers more mascule-prentg gay men is how plic gay men themselv may be perpetuatg such prejudice.
25 OF THE GAYT STRAIGHT MOVI EVER MA
Whereas most relevant rearch has ed heterosexual sampl, both lab and field studi on romantic partner preferenc amongst gay men highlight a monplace sire for mascule over feme tras potential partners (Bailey et al., 1997; Clarkson, 2006; Laner & Kamel, 1977; Sanchez & Vila, 2012; Tayawadep, 2002). Such a nnectn suggts that the extent to which gay men ternalise societal stigma about beg gay may fluence their treatment of dividuals who posss stigmatised is a nsirable lerature monstratg that gay men discrimate agast more feme gay mal beyond the romantic ntext (Brooks et al., 2017; Ravenhill & Visser, 2019; Sánchez & Vila, 2012; Taywadep, 2002). (2016), when gay men received bog feedback that they had rated below-average on a masculy measure, they were more likely to show a creased sire to associate wh a feme – but not a mascule – gay male target.
The perceived femy/masculy of gay male targets was manipulated g wrten scriptns of their tras, terts, and qualifitns, which tapped to tradnal, stereotypil notns of masculy (henceforth masculy for simplicy). This effect among gay men mirrors siar fdgs observed among heterosexual participants (Aksoy et al., 2019; Frank, 2006; Pellegri et al., 2020) that also ed analogue tasks, which masculy/femy of gay male targets were manipulated via wrten scriptns.
Provid important advanc offerg elogilly valid monstratns of the rctn stat btowed upon feme men by heterosexual dividuals, important unaddrsed qutns rema about whether gay dividuals also show such a bias, g d-visual stimuli, and what psychologil mechanisms might expla such bias. Demonstratg that gay men are as likely to discrimate agast feme gay men as heterosexuals would ntribute to the emergg awarens of tramory prejudice as an area of ncern for the gay Current StudyThe aim of this study is to explore whether a relatively feme-prentatn negatively impacts stat attament for gay men g a more elogilly valid methodology that allows meangful parisons of the reactns of gay and heterosexual men.
STRAIGHT ACTG GAY MEN
Moreover, the study aims to tt psychologil mechanisms that may unrly the hypothised reluctance to endow stat to feme-prentg gay relevant lab studi to date have measured stat attament g direct measur, such as subjective ratgs of learship effectivens or behavural tentns.
SHOULD STRAIGHT ACTORS STILL PLAY GAY CHARACTERS? 'IT'S PLITED'
Though not rmg primary hypoth, we also examed whether sexism may mediate preference for more mascule gay ndidat, given that Sanchez and Vila (2012) found that antifeme attus predicted a preference for mascule-prentg romantic partners.
Six cis-male, Whe-Atralian profsnal actors, 25 to 35 years old (who all intify as gay real life) were filmed performg an intil vox pop script two ways; 1) once where they were directed to manipulate their voice and body language (VBL) to be more feme, and 2) once where their VBL was to be more mascule. ” (Actor lghs)The script ma no reference to the ndidate’s qualifitns, occupatn, skills, tn, or hobbi (that is, rmatn that may be nsted as genred by participants; Lippa, 2000), while makg the ndidate’s homosexualy explic (by mentng a same-sex partner). 3Frequency of Vot for Each Actor by Heterosexual and Gay Participants (N = 256)Full size imageMeasurStat EndowmentA sgle forced-choice em askg participants to select their preferred ndidate read as follows:“Please now vote for the actor you thk should be st the Ad Campaign promotg tourism to Sydney.
WHY DO SOME GAY MEN INTIFY AS "STRAIGHT-ACTG" AND HOW IS IT RELATED TO WELL-BEG?
Internalised Anti-Gay Attus (Gay Participants Only)The 3-em ternalised homophobia subsle of the Lbian, Gay and Bisexual Inty Sle (LGBIS; Mohr & Kendra, 2011) was ed to asss negative attus toward onelf as a gay person. Usg 5-pot Likert sle where a sre of “0” dited “Totally agree” and a sre of “5” dited “Totally disagree”, gay participants were asked to rate how much they endorsed the ems, “I wish I were heterosexual”; “If were possible I’d choose to be straight”; and “I believe is unfair that I am attracted to people of the same sex”. The average of each participant’s three rpons were lculated to create their Internalised Homonegativy Attus (Heterosexual Participants Only)To measure anti-gay attus we ployed an adapted 6-em versn of the Morn Homonegativy Sle (MHS; Morrison & Morrison, 2002), as ed by Morton (2017), to exclively asss ntemporary negative attus toward gay men.
Usg 5-pot Likert sle, where a sre of “0” dited “Totally agree” and a sre of “5” dited “Totally disagree”, heterosexual participants were asked to rate statements such as, “Gay men have all the rights they need”; and “Gay men seem to foc on the ways which they differ om heterosexuals, and ignore the ways which they are siar”. The average of each participant’s six rpons were lculated to create their Homonegativy Sexism (All Participants)A 5-em subsle om the Morn Sexism Sle (Swim et al., 1995), asssg ntemporary negative attus toward women was ed. Fally, logistic regrsns examed whether a preference for mascule vios was predicted by pre-existg levels of ternalised homonegativy (for gay participants) and homonegativy (for heterosexual participants), followed by exploratory analys also g logistic regrsns.
Contrary to expectatns, among gay participants, the logistic regrsn mol examg the effect of ternalised homonegativy on likelihood of selectg feme vers mascule gay actors was non-signifint, χ2(1) = 1.