Use policyThe full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that:• a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.Please consult the full DRO policy for further details.

Use policyThe full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that:• a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.Please consult the full DRO policy for further details. 'It's just not acceptable anymore': The Erosion of Homophobia and the Softening of Masculinity at an English Sixth FormThis ethnographic research interrogates the relationship between sexuality, gender and homophobia and how they impact on 16-18 year old boys in a co-educational sixth form in the south of England. Framing our research with inclusive masculinity theory, we find that, unlike the elevated rates of homophobia typically described in academic literature, the boys at 'Standard High' espouse pro-gay attitudes and eliminate homophobic language. This inclusivity simultaneously permits an expansion of heteromasculine boundaries, so that boys are able to express physical tactility and emotional intimacy without being homosexualised by their behaviours. However, we add to inclusive masculinity theory by showing the ways in which boys continue to privilege and regulate heterosexuality in absence of homophobia: we find that heterosexual boundary maintenance continues, heterosexual identities are further consolidated, and the presumption of heterosexuality remains. Accordingly, we argue that even in inclusive cultures, it is necessary to examine for the processes of heteronormativity.

The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that:• a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.Please consult the full DRO policy for further details. Inclusive Masculinity Theory: Overview, Reflection and RefinementIn 2010, this journal published an early exposition of inclusive masculinity theory (Anderson and McGuire, 2010). Since then, the theory has been widely adopted within both the sport and masculinities literature. Furthermore, a large number of other scholars not using the theory have also documented and labelled new masculinity types. There has also been refinement of Inclusive Masculinity Theory, alongside theoretical critiques. In this article we provide an overview of the genesis of the theory and its refinement, before considering and responding to published and unpublished critiques of the theory. We then suggest future directions for research.

No abstract

In this article, I present a new model for understanding homosexually-themed language. By detailing how old conceptualizations of homophobic language no longer maintain heuristic utility in explaining the social dynamics of many sport and educational settings, I situate other conceptualizations of homosexually-themed language depending on the cultural context. I argue that whether language is considered homophobic, or whether it is better conceptualized as fag discourse, gay discourse or pro-gay language, is primarily dependent on the homohysteria of a setting. This model should enable scholars and educators to understand the operation of homosexually-themed language in society and properly evaluate the homophobia of a setting.