Abstract
Contributing valuable insights into the fields of criminology, sociology, and LGBTQ studies, Vanessa Panfil’s The Gang’s All Queer is a groundbreaking qualitative study of gay gang members. A successful disruption of the “heterosexual imaginary” (p. 3) that underlies research on masculinity among gang- and crime-involved men, Panfil’s work analyzes negotiations of queer identity within a population that has been rendered theoretically invisible. Stretching the limits of sexualities research—which largely emphasizes the victimization of queer individuals—this book is salient in capturing participant responses to discrimination and respective modes of resistance (p. 8).
By strategically conducting in-depth interviews and ethnographic methods, Panfil paints a detailed picture of the lives of fifty-three gay gang members in the greater Columbus, Ohio area. Central to her thematic analysis is symbolic interactionism, which is relied upon as a framework for interpreting the meaning-making and identity work constituting participant narratives. Organizing her findings in terms of gangs’ traits, interactions, and composition of gay, lesbian, and bisexual (GLB) members, Panfil coins three types—that is, gay, straight, and hybrid gangs. “Gay gangs” are characterized as “cliques” that consist of family and friend ties; here, the reason for joining mostly aligns with “straight gangs”—that is, membership enhances reputation. Gay gangs are unique in their demonstration of queerness (p. 107), but straight gangs differ; coming out to members can result in ridicule and violence (p. 125). Hybrid gangs, however, are more accepting, given a larger minority of GLB members and the ability to join via same-sex relationships (p. 141).
The book begins by introducing a series of cultural messages, drawn from interview data, to contextualize how participants negotiate multiple identities. These include (1) a prominent, internalized sense of heteronormativity; (2) “early perceptions” (p. 23) of deviant sexual identity, learned via attempts to obscure it and formative interactions with relatives and friends; and (3) the negative consequences of coming out, where charged reactions from family members embody their fears of effeminate or gender nonconforming behaviors among gay sons. This final cultural message, marked by the co-construction of homophobia and misogyny, links homosexuality with weakness and perhaps, whiteness (p. 43).
After historicizing the term “fag,” its permissions and limitations are described, as well as its implications of associated behaviors. When used as a slur to express general distaste for flamboyance, fag represents a space beyond the boundaries of masculinity—that is, a line that should not be crossed—and powerfully monitors gender and sexual identities simultaneously. Among gay men exclusively, the term is similarly used to chastise effeminate behavior that creates undesirable attention, but fag can also be understood as endearing. And although tenets of masculinity and heteronormativity can be defied in safe, private spheres (e.g., the Vogue Ball, where participants are judged on the authenticity of drag performances [p. 68]), masculinity is generally seen as rigid and highly policed.
To combat homophobia and violence, gang members utilize specific means of resistance to defend their reputations. Besides fighting back, participants explain that reclaiming derogatory terms (p. 183) like fag or “fagging out” (p. 190) can be means of retaliation that simultaneously construct a queer masculinity and prevent future harassment. There are additional challenges, however, in managing gay identities and the stereotypes of a gang-related lifestyle. For example, gay gang members are constantly recalibrating stigmatized means of work to produce legitimate cultural images, for example, the “real man” narrative for employment (p. 199), the “good drug dealer,” and the escort. While participants admit that legal means of income are preferred to illicit work, Panfil importantly notes that such opportunities are often not feasible due to inadequate wages and the consequences of incarceration.
A robust and unprecedented exploration of queer masculinities, Panfil’s project is quite difficult to criticize. Even minor reservations on terminology—that is, the use of “gay” rather than “queer” as a catchall term for GLB gang members—seem to be justified by Panfil who notes that participants’ interpretations of identity should be prioritized. Such a perspective, paired with a candid and realistic methodology, highlights Panfil’s well-polished skill set and pragmatic approach to social science. Profoundly debunking assumptions of masculinity in the academy, while revealing rich “self-narratives” (p. 10) of a largely understudied population, this book is an accomplishment.