Scholars have noted that men who have sex with men (MSM) place value upon hegemonic masculinity, both in reference to the self as well as potential partners. The current study examined masculinity language, body language, and sports/working out language in MSM-specific mobile dating app profiles. Using selective self-presentation and self-categorization theory as a background, the current work uncovered a clear privileging of masculinity and a focus on the male body in participants’ profile language directed at the self and others. Men who used body language in their profiles were more likely to be older, single, and North American, while men who used sports/working out language were more likely to be college graduates from North America. Finally, the results indicated a connection between language regarding masculinity, the body, and sports/working out.
AndersonE. (2005). In the game: Gay athletes and the cult of masculinity. Albany: State University of New York Press.
2.
BaileyJ. M.KimP. Y.HillsA.LinsenmeierJ. A. W. (1997). Butch, femme, or straight acting? Partner preferences of gay men and lesbians. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 960-973.
3.
BaymN. K. (2010). Personal connections in the digital age. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
4.
BellA. P.WeinbergM. S. (1978). Homosexualities: A study of diversity among men and women. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.
5.
BergerR. M. (1996). Gay and gray. New York, NY: Harrington Park Press.
6.
BerglingT. (2006). Sissyphobia and everything after. In KendallC.MartinoW. (Eds.), Gendered outcasts and sexual outlaws: Sexual oppression and gender hierarchies in queer men’s lives (pp. 27-34). Binghamton, NY: Harrington Park Press.
7.
BirnholtzJ.FitzpatrickC.HandelM.BrubakerJ. R. (2014, September). Identity, identification and identifiability: The language of self-presentation on a location-based mobile dating app. Paper presented at Mobile HCI. doi:10.1145/2628363.2628406
8.
BlackwellC.BirnholtzJ.AbbottC. (2015). Seeing and being seen: Co-situation and impression formation using Grindr, a location-aware gay dating app. New Media & Society, 17, 1117-1136. doi:10.1177/1461444814521595
9.
BoldingG.DavisM.HartG.SherrL.ElfordJ. (2005). Gay men who look for sex on the Internet: Is there more HIV/STI risk with online partners?AIDS, 19, 961-968.
10.
BusselleR. W.ShrumL. J. (2003). Media exposure and exemplar accessibility. Media Psychology, 5, 255-282.
11.
CadinuM.GaldiS.MaassA. (2013). Chameleonic social identities: Context induces shifts in homosexuals’ self-stereotyping and self-categorization. European Journal of Social Psychology, 43, 471-481. doi:10.1002/ejsp.1957
12.
CallanderD.HoltM.NewmanC. E. (2012). Just a preference: Racialised language in the sex-seeking profiles of gay and bisexual men. Culture, Health, & Sexuality, 14, 1049-1063.
13.
CampbellJ. E. (2004). Getting it on online: Cyberspace, gay male sexuality, and embodied identity. New York, NY: Harrington Park Press.
14.
CassidyE. M. (2013). Gay men, social media and self-presentation: Managing identities in gaydar, Facebook and beyond (Doctoral thesis). Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane.
15.
ChanL. S. (2016). How sociocultural context matters in self-presentation: A comparison of U.S. and Chinese profiles on Jack’d, a mobile dating app for men who have sex with men. International Journal of Communication, 10, 6040-6059.
16.
CheesemanK.Goodlin-FahnckeW.TewksburyR. (2012). “Looking for a married hookup”: An examination of personal ads posted by men seeking sex with married men. The Journal of Men’s Studies, 20, 144-157.
17.
ChesebroJ. W. (2001). Gender, masculinities, identities, and interpersonal relationship systems: Men in general and gay men in particular. In ArlissL. P.BorisoffD. J. (Eds.), Women and men communicating: Challenges and changes (pp. 33-64). Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press.
18.
ClarksonJ. (2006). “Everyday Joe” versus “Pissy, Bitchy, Queens”: Gay masculinity on StraightActing.com. The Journal of Men’s Studies, 14, 191-207.
19.
CochranS. D.ScottR. L.MaysV. M.VellosC. (2004, July). Don’t call me queer: Preferred self-identifiers for recruiting African American MSM’s in HIV research. Paper presented at the International Conference on AIDS, Bangkok, Thailand.
20.
ConnellR. W. (1992). A very straight gay: Masculinity, homosexual experience, and the dynamics of gender. American Sociological Review, 57, 735-751.
21.
ConnellR. W. (1995). Masculinities. Berkeley: University of California Press.
22.
ConnellR. W. (1996). Teaching the boys: New research on masculinity, and gender strategies for schools. Teachers College Record, 98, 206-235.
23.
ConnellR. W.MesserschmidtJ. W. (2005). Hegemonic masculinity: Rethinking the concept. Gender & Society, 19, 829-859.
24.
DeauxK.HannaR. (1984). Courtship in the personals column: The influence of gender and sexual orientation. Sex Roles, 11, 363-375.
25.
DemetriouD. Z. (2001). Connell’s concept of hegemonic masculinity: A critique. Theory and Society, 30, 337-361.
26.
DowsettG. W. (1980). Reaching men who have sex with men in Australia: An overview of AIDS education, community intervention and community attachment strategies. Australian Journal of Social Issues, 25, 186-198.
27.
EguchiS. (2009). Negotiating hegemonic masculinity: The rhetorical strategy of “straight-acting” among gay men. Journal of Intercultural Communication Research, 38, 193-209. doi:10.1080/17475759.2009.508892
28.
GlickM.MuzykaB. C.SalkinL. M.LurieD. (1994). Necrotizing ulcerative periodontitis: A marker for immune deterioration and a predictor for the diagnosis of AIDS. Journal of Periodontology, 65, 393-397. doi:10.1902/jop.1994.65.5.393
29.
GoedelW. C.HalkitisP. N.GreeneR. E.HicksonD. A.DuncanD. T. (2016). HIV risk behaviors, perceptions, and testing and preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) awareness/use in Grindr-using men who have sex with men in Atlanta, Georgia. Journal of the Association of Nurses in AIDS Care, 27, 133-142. doi:10.1016/j.jana.2015.11.005
30.
GonzalezM.MeyersS. (1993). Your mother would like me: Self-presentation in the personal ads of heterosexual and homosexual men and women. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 19, 131-142.
31.
GoodeE. (1996). Placing/answering personal ads as a form of courtship. Sex Roles, 34, 141-169.
32.
GrosskopfN. A.LeVasseurM. T.GlaserD. B. (2014). Use of the Internet and mobile-based “apps” for sex-seeking among men who have sex with men in New York City. American Journal of Men’s Health, 8, 510-520. doi:10.1177/1557988314527311
33.
GudelunasD. (2005). Online personal ads: Community and sex, virtually. Journal of Homosexuality, 49(1), 1-33. doi:10.1300/J082v49n01_01
34.
HalkitisP. N. (2001). An exploration of perceptions of masculinity among gay men living with HIV. The Journal of Men’s Studies, 9, 413-429.
35.
HalkitisP. N.GreenK. A.WiltonL. (2004). Masculinity, body image, and sexual behavior in HIV-seropositive gay men: A two-phase formative behavioral investigation using the Internet. International Journal of Men’s Health, 3, 27-42.
36.
HalkitisP.N.MoellerR.W.DeRaleauL.B. (2008). Steroid use in gay, bisexual, and nonidentified men-who-have-sex-with-men: Relations to masculinity, physical, and mental health. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 9(2), 106-115.
37.
HancockJ. T.TomaC. L. (2009). Putting your best face forward: The accuracy of online dating photographs. Journal of Communication, 59, 367-386.
38.
HennenP. (2008). Fearies, bears and leathermen: Men in community queering the masculine. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
39.
HirschfieldS.RemienR. H.HumberstoneM.WalavalkarI.ChiassonM. A. (2004). Substance use and high-risk sex among men who have sex with men: A national online study in the US. AIDS Care, 16, 1036-1047.
40.
HoggM. A.AbramsD. (1988). Social identifications: A social psychology of intergroup relations and group processes. London, England: Routledge.
41.
HoggM. A.ReidS. A. (2006). Social identity, self-categorization, and the communication of group norms. Communication Theory, 16, 7-30.
42.
KimmelM. (1996). Manhood in America: A cultural history. New York, NY: The Free Press.
43.
LanerM. R.KamelG. W. L. (1978). Media mating I: Newspaper “personal” ads of homosexual men. Journal of Homosexuality, 3, 149-161.
44.
LearyM. R.KowalskiR. M. (1990). Impression management: A literature review and two-component model. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 34-47.
45.
LehmillerJ. J.IoergerM. (2014). Social networking smartphone applications and sexual health outcomes among men who have sex with men. PLoS ONE, 9(1), e86603. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0086603
46.
LemkeR.WeberM. (2017). The man behind the curtain: Investigating the sexual online dating behavior of men who have sex with men but hide their same-sex sexual attraction in offline surroundings. Journal of Homosexuality, 64, 1561-1582. doi:10.1080/00918369.2016.1249735
47.
LevineM. (1998). Gay macho: The life and death of the homosexual clone. New York: New York University Press.
48.
LiauA.MillettG.MarksG. (2006). Meta-analytic examination of online sex-seeking and sexual behavior among men who have sex with men. Sexually Transmitted Diseases, 33, 576-584.
49.
LightB. (2013). Networked masculinities and social networking sites: A call for the analysis of men and contemporary digital. Masculinities and Social Change, 2, 245-265. doi:10.4471/MCS.2013.34
50.
LodgeA. C.UmbersonD. (2013). Age and embodied masculinities: Midlife gay and heterosexual men talk about their bodies. Journal of Aging Studies, 27, 225-232. doi:10.1016/j.jaging.2013.03.004
51.
LumbyM. E. (1978). Men who advertise for sex. Journal of Homosexuality, 4, 63-72.
52.
MacapagalK.CoventryR.PuckettJ. A.PhillipsG.MustanskiB. (2016). Geosocial networking app use among men who have sex with men in serious romantic relationships. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 45, 1513-1524.
53.
MartinoW. (2006). Straight-acting masculinities: Normalization and gender hierarchies in gay men’s lives. In KendallC.MartinoW. (Eds.), Gendered outcasts and sexual outlaws: Sexual oppression and gender hierarchies in queer men’s lives (pp. 35-60). Binghamton, NY: Harrington Park Press.
54.
MessnerM. A. (1997). Politics of masculinities: Men in movements. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
55.
MillerB. (2015a). “Dude, where’s your face?” Self-presentation, self-description, and partner preferences on a social networking application for men who have sex with men: A content analysis. Sexuality & Culture, 19, 637-658. doi:10.1007/s12119-015-9283-4
56.
MillerB. (2015b). “They’re the modern-day gay bar”: Exploring the uses and gratifications of social networks for men who have sex with men. Computers in Human Behavior, 51, 476-482. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.05.023
57.
MillerB.Behm-MorawitzE. (2016). “Masculine guys only”: The effects of femmephobic social networking application profiles on partner selection for men who have sex with men. Computers in Human Behavior, 62, 176-185. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.03.088
58.
NardiP. (2000). “Anything for a Sis, Mary”: An introduction to gay masculinities. In NardiP. (Ed.), Gay masculinities (pp. 1-11). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
59.
OcampoA. C. (2012). Making masculinity: Negotiations of gender presentation among Latino gay men. Latino Studies, 10, 448-472.
60.
PascoeC. J. (2007). Dude you’re a fag: Masculinity and sexuality in high school. Berkeley: University of California Press.
61.
PoonM. K.HoP. T. (2008). Negotiating social stigma among gay Asian men. Sexualities, 11, 245-268.
62.
ReynoldsC. (2015). “I am super straight and I prefer you be too”: Constructions of heterosexual masculinity in online personal ads for “straight” men seeking sex with men. Journal of Communication Inquiry, 39, 213-231. doi:10.1177/0196859915575736
63.
RiggsD. W. (2013). Anti-Asian sentiments amongst a sample of White Australian men on gaydar. Sex Roles, 68, 768-778. doi:10.1007/s11199-012-0119-5
64.
RodriguezN. S.HuemmerJ.BlumellL. (2016). Mobile masculinities: An investigation of networked masculinities in gay dating apps. Masculinities and Social Change, 5, 241-267. doi:10.17583/MCS.2016.2047
65.
RosenL. D.CheeverN. A.CummingsC.FeltJ. (2008). The impact of emotionality and self-disclosure on online dating versus traditional dating. Computers in Human Behavior, 24, 2124-2157. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2007.10.003
66.
RosserB. R.WilkersonJ. M.SmolenskiD. J.OakesJ. M.KonstanJ.HorvathK. J.…MorganM. A. (2011). The future of internet-based HIV prevention: A report on key findings from the men’s Internet (MINTS-I,II) sex studies. AIDS and Behavior, 15(Suppl. 1), S91-S100.
67.
SánchezF. J.GreenbergS. T.LiuW. M.VilainE. (2009). Reported effects of masculine ideals on gay men. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 10, 73-87. doi:10.1037/a0013513
68.
SánchezF. J.VilainE. (2012). “Straight-acting gays”: The relationship between masculine consciousness, anti-effeminacy, and negative gay identity. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 41, 111-119. doi:10.1007/s10508-012-9912-z
69.
SánchezF. J.WestefeldJ. S.LiuW. M.VilainE. (2010). Masculine gender role conflict and negative feelings about being gay. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 41, 104-111. doi:10.1037/a0015805
70.
SchlenkerB. R. (2002). Self-presentation. In LearyM. R.TangneyJ. P. (Eds.), Handbook of self and identity (pp. 492-518). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
71.
SignorileM. (1997). Life outside: The Signorile report on gay men: Sex, drugs, muscles, and the passages of life. New York, NY: HarperCollins.
72.
SlevinK. F.LinnemanT. J. (2010). Old gay men’s bodies and masculinities. Men and Masculinities, 12, 483-507. doi:10.1177/1097184X08325225
73.
TajfelH.TurnerJ. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In AustinW. G.WorchelS. (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33-47). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
74.
TaywaditepK. J. (2002). Marginalization among the marginalized. Journal of Homosexuality, 42(1), 1-28. doi:10.1300/J082v42n01_01
75.
TomaC. L.HancockJ. T. (2010). Looks and lies: The role of physical attractiveness in online dating self-presentation and deception. Communication Research, 37, 335-351.
76.
TurnerJ. C.HoggM. A.OakesP. J.ReicherS. D.WetherellM. (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory. Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.
77.
WaltherJ. B. (1992). Interpersonal effects in computer-mediated interactions: A relational perspective. Communication Research, 19, 52-91.
78.
WaltherJ. B. (1996). Computer-mediated communication: Impersonal, interpersonal, and hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research, 23, 3-44.
