This article investigates two ubiquitous slogans that circulate among gay social media apps: ‘No Fats, No Fems’ and ‘Masc for Masc’. In their recurrence, both offer gendered readings of corporeality and ability, which equate muscled bodies with forms of desirable masculinity. In collecting data from SCRUFF, I document how gay male social media apps generate narrow definitions of masculinity that, like the slogans, uphold physical fitness and compulsory able-bodiedness as hallmarks of gay desirability. Alongside these trends, I highlight ‘working out’ as an exceptional form of gay male labour that prioritises ability and transforms the muscled body into a commodity that is successfully advertised on these apps.
BaileyM (2016) Black gay (raw) sex. In: JohnsonEP (ed). No Tea, No Shade: New Writings in Black Queer Studies. Durham: Duke University Press.
2.
BersaniL (1996) Homos. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
3.
D’EmilioJ (1983) Capitalism and gay identity. In: AbeloveHBaraleMAHalperinD (eds). The Lesbian and Gay Studies Reader. New York: Routledge.
4.
DugginL (2002) The new homonormativity: the sexual politics of neoliberalism. In: CastranovoRNelsonD (eds). Materializing Democracy: Toward a Revitalized Cultural Politics. Durham: Duke University Press.
5.
EwanS (2006) Hard bodies. In: LyonG (ed). Body and Culture. New York: Pearson.
6.
FieslerCProferesN (2018) ‘Participant’ perceptions of Twitter research ethics. Social Media + Society4(1): 1–14.
7.
FloydK (2009) Reification of Desire. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
8.
Garland ThompsonR (2001) Seeing the disabled: visual rhetorics of disability in popular photography. In (ed) LongmorePUmanskyL (eds). The New Disability History. New York: NYU Press.
GogginG (2018) Technology and social futures. In: EllisKGarland-ThomsonRKentM (eds). Manifestos for the Futures of Critical Disability Studies. New York: Routledge, Vol. 1.
11.
GreenAI (2013) ‘Erotic capital’ and the power of desirability. Sexualities16(1/2): 137–158.
12.
HakimC (2011) Erotic Capital: The Power of Attraction in the Bedroom and the Boardroom. New York: Basic Books.
13.
HakimJ (2016) ‘Fit is the new rich’: male embodiment in the age of austerity. Soundings61: 84–94.
14.
HalberstamJ (2011) The Queer Art of Failure. Durham: Duke University Press.
15.
HanCS (2008) No fats, femmes, or Asians: the utility of critical race theory in examining the role of gay stock stories in the marginalization of gay Asian men. Contemporary Justice Review11(1): 11–22.
16.
HanC-S (2009) Asian girls are prettier: Gendered presentations as stigma management among gay asian men. Symbolic Interaction32(2): 106–122.
17.
HennenP (2008) Faeries, Bears, and Leathermen: Men in Community Queering the Masculine. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
18.
HolthausC (2014) The future of bisexual activism. QED2(1): 22–36.
19.
JosephM (2002) Against the Romance of Community. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
20.
LightB (2007) Introducing masculinity studies to information systems research: The case of gaydar. European Journal of Information Systems16: 658–665.
21.
LimE-B (2014) Brown Boys and Rice Queens: Spellbinding Performance in the Asias. New York: NYU Press.
22.
LongR (1997) The fitness of the gym. Harvard Gay and Lesbian Review4(3): 20–22.
23.
LiuX (2015) No fats, femmes or Asians’. Moral Philosophy and Politics2(2): 255–276.
24.
McLeanK (2008) Inside, outside, nowhere: bisexual men and women in the gay and lesbian community. Journal of Bisexuality8(1): 63–80.
25.
MarxL (1887). In: MooreSAvelineEEngelsF (eds). Das kapital(trans). Moscow: Progress Publishers.
26.
MarxK (1978) Economic and philosophic manuscripts of 1844. In: TuckerR (ed). Marx-Engels Reader. New York: Norton.
27.
MilesS (2017) Sex in the digital city: location-based dating apps and queer urban life. Gender, Place & Culture24(11): 1595–1610.
28.
MillerDA (1992) Bringing Out Roland Barthes. Berkeley: University of California Press.
29.
MowlabocusS (2010) Gaydar Culture: Gay Men, Technology and Embodiment in the Digital Age. New York: Routledge.
30.
MurraySAnkersonMS (2016) Lez takes time: designing lesbian contact in geosocial networking apps. Critical Studies in Media Communication33(1): 53–69.
31.
Obrados-CamposM (2011) Deconstructing biphobia. Journal of Bisexuality11(2): 207–226.
32.
PérezH (2015) A Taste for Brown Bodies: Gay Modernity and Cosmopolitan Desire. New York: NYU Press.
33.
PuarJ (2007) Terrorist Assemblages: Homonationalism in Queer Times. Durham: Duke University Press.
34.
RaceK (2015) 'Party and play': online hook-up devices and the emergence of PNP practices among gay men. Sexualities18(3): 253–275.
35.
RothY (2015) Zero feet away: the digital geography of gay social media. Journal of Homosexuality63(3): 437–442.
SedgwickEK (2002) Touching Feeling: Affect, Pedagogy, Performativity. Durham: Duke University Press.
38.
ShieldA (2019) Immigrants on Grindr: Race, Sexuality and Belonging Online. New York: Palgrave.
39.
ShimizuCP (2016) Screening shirtless AZN men: the full frontal power of Intimate Internet Industries. Positions24(1): 231–252.
40.
SmithJGBrownS (2020) ‘No fats, femmes, or blacks’: the role of body types, gender roles, and race in condom usage online. In: FarrisNComptonDRHerreraA (eds). Gender, Sexuality, and Race in the Digital Age. Switzerland: Springer.
41.
WangS (2020) Chinese affective platform economies: dating, live streaming, and performative labor on Blued. Media, Culture & Society42(4): 502–520.
42.
Wang-JonesTTSHausonAOFerdmanBM, et al. (2018) Comparing implicit and explicit attitudes of gay, straight, and non-monosexual groups toward transmen and transwomen. International Journal of Transgenderism19: 95–106.
43.
WeissJ (2004) GL vs. BT: the archealogy of biphobia and transphobia within the US gay and lesbian community. Journal of Bisexuality3(3–4): 25–55.
44.
WeslingM (2012) Queer value. GLQ: A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies18(1): 107–125.
45.
WhiteselJ (2014) Fat Gay Men: Girth, Mirth, and the Politics of Stigma. New York: NYU Press.
