When gay men were nonted about wrg ‘no Blacks’ or ‘no Latos’ on their profil, many of them beme fensive.
Contents:
- VERY FEW PEOPLE SAY “NO WH”: GAY MEN OF COLOR AND THE RACIAL POLICS OF DIRE
- PERCENTAGE OF GAY UPLE HOEHOLDS U.S. 2021, BY RACE OF HOEHOLR
VERY FEW PEOPLE SAY “NO WH”: GAY MEN OF COLOR AND THE RACIAL POLICS OF DIRE
* gay racial *
Specifilly for gay men, a slim hairls body may provi men who posss those tras wh sexual currency at a “Twk bar, ” but those same tras would have ls currency at a “Leather bar, ” where burlier bodi are nsired more sirable. While a number of different typ of sexual fields that n be found the gay muny have been discsed the amic lerature as well as the popular prs, there has been ls attentn paid to the ways that erotic words are socially anized (Mart and Gee 2006). To do so, we brgg together the sexual fields perspective wh the growg lerature on sexual racism, an act of eher sexually excludg non-wh as potential partners or cludg racial mori as sexual partners based only on racial several scholars have noted, ntemporary gay life is marked by high levels of racism directed towards gay men of lor by gay whe men, wh much of the racism maniftg self as negative sexual attus towards, and sexual excln or fetishizatn of, non-whe men (Armstrong 2002; Bébé 2001; Epste 1996; McBri 2005; Tenunis, 2007).
After examg onle personal ads and terviewg gay men, Robson (2015) found that gay whe men often exclu gay men of lor as potential sexual partners while nyg that their racial preferenc are racist nature. In fact, several studi have shown that gay whe men were much more likely to prefer their own race and actively exclu non-wh as potential sexual than gay men of lor (Lundquist and L 2015; Ph and Kfman 2003; Rafalow, Feliciano, and Robt 2017; Smh 2014). Dpe gay whe men’s sistence that sexual excln was not racism but rather personal preference, and that the personal preferenc have nothg to do wh racism, Collanr and his lleagu (2015) found that attus toward sexual excln were related to almost every intified factor associated wh racist attus general.
PERCENTAGE OF GAY UPLE HOEHOLDS U.S. 2021, BY RACE OF HOEHOLR
Th, sexual racism should be unrstood not as personal preference, but as “problematic ndns that stcture the very formatn of romantic relatnships” that is neher benign nor trivial (Bedi 2015: 998) the ia of sexual racism has been wily discsed the popular prs, and amic studi have also documented the racial hierarchy of sire the gay muny, there have been fewer attempts to systematilly exame how such racialized hierarchi of sire are unrstood by gay men of lor and, more importantly, the impact the racial hierarchi have on them. Wh any sexual field, some dividual e to be seen as more sirable than other dividuals pendg on the tras that they posss that are valued by the specific sexual field which they discsg gay sexual fields, Green (2008; 2011) intifi a number of potential tras that fluence the level of sirabily that any given dividual might posss.
As evinced by Green’s own acunts of his field work, and the statements ma by participants his study, race plays a pivotal role fg attractivens and sirabily across var sexual fields wh the gay muny. Whether the specific field qutn is a gay leather bar or a gay sports bar where different typ of drs, different amounts of body hair, etc., may be emed more sirable, race remas a nsistent, and nstant, marker of sirabily.