Cover not available
Article published In:
Journal of Language and Sexuality
Vol. 13:2 (2024) ► pp.154–177

Examining gay male discursive practices in hook-up apps

A study on mediated intimacies and aggressive sexual behaviours

| University of AlcaláMadrid, Spain
Whilst there is a growing body of literature on the normalisation of abuse in youth digital sexual image exchange (Ringrose, Regehr & Whitehead 2021), mediated intimacies and sexual harms among men who have sex with men (MSM) in online contexts still remain largely neglected (Dietzel 2021). The present study builds on Russell’s (2021) study on male discursive practices and investigates sexual and gendered ideologies in 600 online dating profiles gathered from Grindr and Wapo. The discourse analysis of these profiles, on the one hand, sheds light on the existing violent nature of gay Alpha imaginaries in the short-term sexual encounters that these dating apps facilitate and, on the other hand, gives evidence of how discourses of hegemonic heteronormativity, and rape culture, seem to inform MSMs dating app profiles.
Keywords: male discursive practices, AlphaGay imaginaries, sexual script, rape culture
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.(Gay) masculinities, sexuality and mediated intimacies in dating apps
  • 3.Method
    • 3.1Grindr and Wapo
    • 3.2Sample data and participants
    • 3.3Analytical and ethical position
  • 4.Analysis
    • 4.1Sexualized organs: Objectifying Self- and Other-Bodies
    • 4.2AlphaGay sexuality: Constructing hegemonic understandings of violence
    • 4.3Feminine enactments: Competing discourses of gender and sex
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 12 July 2024
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/jls.00035.gar
References (55)
References
Altman, Dennis. 2013. The End of the Homosexual? St. Lucia: University of Queensland Press.Google Scholar
Baker, Paul. 2005. Public Discourses of Gay Men. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Barker, Meg-John, Gill, Rosalind & Harvey, Laura. 2018. Mediated intimacy: Sex advice in media culture. Sexualities 21(8): 1337–1345. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bogetić, Ksenia. 2021. Co-opting the neoliberal manhood ideal: Masculinity, normativity, and recursive normalisation in Serbian gay men’s digital dating profiles. Language in Society 50(1): 93–123. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cama, Elena. 2021. Understanding experiences of sexual harms facilitated through dating and hook up apps among women and girls. In The Emerald International Handbook of Technology-Facilitated Violence and Abuse, Jane Bailey, Asher Flynn & Nicola Henry (eds), 333–350. Bingley: Emerald Publishing Limited. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Candelas de la Ossa, Abigaël. 2016. ‘Talk, listen, think’: Discourses of agency and unintentional violence in consent guidance for gay, bisexual and trans men. Discourse and Society 271: 365–382. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Connell, Robert Williams. 2005. Masculinities. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Davis, Dane Anthony. 2018. Understanding the Motivations Behind Dating Applications: Exploring Future Predictions. Master’s Thesis, Kansas State University.
Degen, Johanna & Kleeberg-Niepage, Andrea. 2022. The more we Tinder: Subjects, selves and society. Hu Arenas 51: 179–195. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dekker, Arne, Wenzlaff, Frederike, Daubmann, Anne, Pinnschmidt, Hans & Briken, Peer. 2019. (Don’t) look at me! How the assumed consensual or non-consensual distribution affects perception and evaluation of sexting images. Journal of Clinical Medicine 8(5): 706. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dietzel, Christopher. 2021. “That’s straight-up rape culture”: Manifestations of rape culture on Grindr. In The Emerald International Handbook of Technology-Facilitated Violence and Abuse, Jane Bailey, Asher Flynn & Nicola Henry (eds), 351–368. Bingley: Emerald Publishing Limited. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2022. The three dimensions of unsolicited dick pics: Men who have sex with men’s experiences of sending and receiving unsolicited dick pics on dating apps. Sexuality & Culture 26(3): 834–852. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2024. Clickable consent: How men who have sex with men understand and practice sexual consent on dating apps and in person. Journal of Sex Research 61(3): 481–494. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dobson, Amy Shields & Ringrose, Jessica. 2016. Sext education: Pedagogies of sex, gender and shame in the schoolyards of Tagged and Exposed . Sex Education 16(1): 8–21. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Farrell, Anee-Maree, Shackleton, Nicole, Agnew, Elizabeth, Hopkins, Samantha & Power, Jennifer. 2023. Regulating tech-sex and managing image-based sexual abuse: An Australian perspective. Information & Communications Technology Law 32(2): 189–206. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fileborn, Bianca. 2016. Doing gender, doing safety? Young adults’ production of safety on a night out. Gender, Place & Culture 23(8): 1107–1120. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
García-Gómez, Antonio. 2020. Discursive representation of masculinity and femininity in Tinder and Grindr: Hegemonic masculinity, feminine devaluation and femmephobia. Discourse & Society 31(4): 390–410. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gavey, Nicola. 2005. Just Sex? The Cultural Scaffolding of Rape. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Gillett, Rosalie. 2019. Everyday Violence: Women’s Experiences of Intimate Intrusions on Tinder. PhD dissertation, Queensland University of Technology.
Ging, Debbie. 2019. Alphas, betas, and incels: Theorizing the masculinities of the manosphere. Men and Masculinities 221: 638–657. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hale, Sadie E. & Ojeda, Tomás. 2018. Acceptable femininity? Gay male misogyny and the policing of queer femininities. European Journal of Women’s Studies 25(3): 310–324. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hall, Kira, Levon, Erez & Milani, Tommaso M. 2019. Navigating normativities: Gender and sexuality in text and talk. Language in Society 48(4): 481–489. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hasinoff, Amy A. 2014. Blaming sexualization for sexting. Girlhood Studies 7(1): 102–120. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2019. Image-based sexual abuse: It’s not ‘revenge’ and it’s not ‘porn’. In The Dark Side of Media & Technology: A 21st Century Guide to Media and Technological Literacy, Edward Down (ed), 142–153. New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Henry, Nicola & Powell, Anastasia. 2014. Preventing Sexual Violence: Interdisciplinary Approaches to Overcoming a Rape Culture. London: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Holmes, Dave, O’Byrne, Patrick & Gastaldo, Denise. 2006. Raw sex as limit experience: A Foucauldian analysis of unsafe anal sex between men. Social Theory & Health 41: 319–333. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hoskin, Rhea A. 2017. Femme theory: Refocusing the intersectional lens. Atlantis: Critical Studies in Gender, Culture & Social Justice 38(1): 95–109.Google Scholar
2019. Femmephobia: The role of anti-femininity and gender policing in LGBTQ+ people’s experiences of discrimination. Sex Roles 81(11): 686–703. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hoskin, Rhea A. & Hirschfeld, Katerina L. 2018. Beyond aesthetics: A femme manifesto. Atlantis: Critical Studies in Gender, Culture & Social Justice 39(1): 85–87.Google Scholar
Levon, Erez. 2012. The voice of others: Identity, alterity, and gender normativity among gay men in Israel. Language in Society 4(1): 187–211. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Llovet-Rodriguez, Carmen, Carcelén-García, Sonia & Díaz-Bustamante, Mónica. 2021. Children’s sexualization on the Internet: Kids’ perceptions of digital images. Icono 19(2): 339–362.Google Scholar
Ludeman, Kate & Erlandson, Eddie. 2004. Coaching the alpha male. Harvard Business Review (May 2004): 2–10.Google Scholar
McKie, Raymond M., Davies, Adam W., Nixon, Kevin D. & Lachowsky, Nathan L. 2019. A theoretical examination using governmentality to understand gay men’s risk and sexual behaviours. Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality 28(3): 343–354. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Messerschmidt, James W. 2018. Hegemonic Masculinity: Formulation, Reformulation, and Amplification. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
Migliaccio, Todd. 2014. Typologies of men’s friendships: Constructing masculinity through them. Masculinities & Social Change 3(2): 119–147. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Milani, Tommaso. 2014. Theorizing language and masculinities. In Languages and Masculinities: Performances, Intersections, Dislocations, Tommaso M. Milani (ed), 8–33. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mortimer, Shaez, Powell, Anastasia & Sandy, Larissa. 2019. ‘Typical scripts’ and their silences: Exploring myths about sexual violence and LGBTQ people from the perspectives of support workers. Current Issues in Criminal Justice 31(3): 333–348. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Naezer, Marijke & van Oosterhout, Lotte. 2020. Sexting ist für Schlampen: Sexuelle Standards in der digitalen Zeit. Betrifft Mädchen 31: 112–116. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Papageorgiou, Alana, Colleen, Fisher & Crossa, Donna. 2023. “It just sends the message that you’re nothing but your body”: A qualitative exploration of adolescent girls’ perceptions of sexualized images on social media. Sexuality & Culture 27(2): 462–481. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ringrose, Jessica, Regehr, Kaitlyn & Whitehead, Sophie. 2021. Teen girls’ experiences negotiating the ubiquitous dick pic: Sexual double standards and the normalization of image based sexual harassment. Sex Roles 85(9): 558–576. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ringrose, Jessica & Regehr, Kaitlyn. 2023. Recognizing and addressing how gender shapes young people’s experiences of image-based sexual harassment and abuse in educational settings. Journal of Social Issues 79(4): 1251–1281. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Russell, Eric Louis. 2021. Alpha Masculinity: Hegemony in Language and Discourse. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Said, Iman & McNealey, Rachel L. 2023. Non-consensual distribution of intimate images: Exploring the role of legal attitudes in victimization and perpetration. Journal of Interpersonal Violence 38(7–8): 5430–5451. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sarson, Charlie. 2020. ‘Hey man, how’su?’: Masculine speech and straight-acting gay men online. Journal of Gender Studies 29(8): 897–910. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Setty, Emily, Ringrose, Jessica & Regehr Katilyn. 2022. Digital sexual violence and the gendered constraints of consent in youth image sharing. In Rape: A Challenge to Contemporary Thinking – 10 Years On, Miranda A. H. Horvath & Jennifer Brown (eds), 1–17. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shefer, Tamara, Stevens, Garth & Clowes, Lindsay. 2010. Men in Africa: Masculinities, materiality and meaning. Journal of Psychology in Africa 20(4): 511–517. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Simon, William & Gagnon, John H. 1999. Sexual scripts. In Culture, Society and Sexuality: A Reader. Richard Parker & Peter Aggleton (eds), 31–40. London: University College London Press.Google Scholar
Stern, Alexandra Minna. 2019. Proud Boys and the White Ethnostate: How the Alt-Right Is Warping the American Imagination. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
Tranchese, Alessia. 2023. From Fritzl to #metoo: Twelve Years of Rape Coverage in the British Press. Cham: Springer International Publishing. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tsui, Amy B. M. 1994. English Conversation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ullman, Sarah E. 2023. Talking About Sexual Assault: Society’s Response to Survivors. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Waling, Andrea. 2023. ‘Pay close attention to what my eyes are saying without having to spell it out’: Heterosexual relations and discourses of sexual communication in #MeToo commentaries. Sexualities 26(1–2): 140–161. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Whitehead, Sophie. forthcoming. ‘The culture is disgusting’: Analysing continuities and differences in experiences and perceptions of youth rape culture through cross-generational testimonies online. Journal of Gender Studies. DOI logo
Wright, Paul J. 2011. Mass media effects on youth sexual behavior: Assessing the claim for causality. Communication Yearbook 351: 343–386.Google Scholar
Zervoulis, Karyofyllis, Smith, David S., Reed, Rhiannon & Dinos, Sokratis. 2020. Use of ‘gay dating apps’ and its relationship with individual well-being and sense of community in men who have sex with men. Psychology & Sexuality 11(1–2): 88–102. DOI logoGoogle Scholar