Homohysteria: Definitions, Context and Intersectionality

Abstract

(2014) 'Homohysteria : denitions, context and intersectionality.', Sex roles., 71 (3-4). pp. 152-158. Further information on publisher's website:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11199-014-0401-9Publisher's copyright statement:The nal publication is available at Springer via http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11199-014-0401-9.Additional information: 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. In our original article (McCormack and Anderson 2014), we discussed six key ways that heterosexual men's gendered behaviors had expanded. These were: 1) the social inclusion of gay male peers; 2) the embrace of once-feminized artifacts; 3) increased emotional intimacy; 4) increased physical tactility; 5) erosion of the one-time rule of homosexuality; 6) eschewing violence. We advanced homohysteria to explain these changes, and also explored how the concept might be applied in other ways. 2We are grateful for the opportunity to respond to the commentaries in this Feminist Forum. We are encouraged by the four papers, and now take the opportunity to use the commentaries and some of their primary critiques to further articulate and refine homohysteria as a concept. Motivation for HomohysteriaThe concept homohysteria was originally developed as part of inclusive masculinity theorya theory that provides a way of understanding the stratification of masculinities in contemporary U.S. and U.K. cultures (Anderson 2009). We highlight that the 'inclusive' nomenclature of the theory relates to inclusivity of homosexuality among heterosexual men.It recognizes that social power is located within heterosexuality, and changing levels of Insert figure 1 here Engaging with the Feminist Forum CommentariesIf homohysteria is to be of utility in the social sciences, further empirical support is required.In their paper, Parent et al. (2014) offer three areas that they think need to be addressed in developing the concept. They call for 1) clarity of definition; 2) recognition of the diversity of sexuality; and 3) incorporation of an intersectional and international approach that extends the concept beyond heterosexual men in the U.S. In the rest of this response, we engage with these issues. Definitional ClarityParent et al. (2014) argue that definitional clarity and falsifiability are necessary for theoretical utility. Adopting a sociological perspective, and contrasting it with Parent et al, wehighlight that concepts and theories do not need to be precisely measurable in order to be useful tools for macro-cultural analysis. The concept of hegemonic masculinity, ...

Twelve not so angry men: Inclusive masculinities in Australian contact sports

“…They were able to use cosmetics, wear tight and colourful clothing and engage in activities (such as school subjects) that would've previously only been acceptable for girls. They recognised that style had changed over time, something we suppose is as a response to diminishing cultural homohysteria (McCormack and Anderson, 2014). This is not new, with other research showing the increase in meterosexuality (Coad, 2008) and effeminate styles in sport (Adams, 2011).…”

“…We must recognise that homohysteria varies between contexts, times and social institutions (McCormack and Anderson, 2014) and it's not our intent to imply that our findings are reflective of men globally. We are instead suggesting that masculinities are significantly more complex and therefore further research needs to continue to establish male behaviour in a variety of environments.…”

“…Our results supported this. Thus, we utilise Inclusive Masculinity Theory (Anderson, 2009), to explain the decline of cultural homohysteria (McCormack and Anderson, 2014) in this setting. This is because we find that, among the young men interviewed, they were happy to engage in homosocial behaviours, espouse pro-gay attitudes and present in highly effeminate manners (Anderson, 2014;McCormack, 2012;Morris and Anderson, 2015).…”

“…The softening of masculinities has also allowed athletes to improve their homosocial relations, primarily via emotional openness and physical tactility (Anderson, 2013(Anderson, , 2014Anderson and McCormack, 2014). Emoting is emerging as a key component of inclusive masculinities in times of reduced homohysteria (Anderson, 2014).…”

“…For example, cuddling and spooning (close cuddling in bed, often wearing only underwear) was found to be ubiquitous among university team sport athletes in the UK (Anderson and McCormack, 2014).…”