Abstract
I conducted semi-structured interviews with ten American rural, white, straight-identified men who have sex with men to understand how they perceive their sexual identity and sexual behaviour. All ten tell other people that they identify as straight, and eight actually identify as straight. I detail three main themes: changes to sexual attractions, reasons for identifying as straight, and the meanings attached to sexual behaviour with other men. Half of the participants reported experiencing major changes to their sexual attractions, challenging the assumption that male sexuality is static. They described several reasons for identifying as straight, demonstrating that attractions and behaviour are not the only bases for sexual identity. The participants also explained that they experience sex with men in a variety of ways, many of which reinforce their straight identity. The results indicate that heterosexuality is a performance, rather than a natural expression of sexuality, and that interpretations – not just attractions and behaviour – are central to being straight.
Introduction
A question emerges from sexuality survey research: Why are there greater proportions of men who report same-sex sexual behaviours or attractions than a sexual minority identity? General Social Survey data indicate that the proportion of men in the US who have ever had a same-sex sexual partner is about 6.4% (Wienke and Whaley, 2015), and the 2011–13 National Survey of Family Growth shows that approximately 8% of American men 15–44 have some degree of same-sex attraction (NCHS, 2014). Sexual minority identification, however, is far lower than the prevalence of either same-sex behaviour or attraction: the 2013 National Health Interview Survey indicates 2.5% (Ward et al., 2014).
Research about sexual orientation helps explain this gap. Sexual orientation is a complex social and psychological phenomenon, which complicates sexual identity construction. Indeed, sexual orientation exists on a spectrum, rather than in categories (Savin-Williams, 2014). There are several components of it that are related but distinct (Savin-Williams, 2014), including sexual attraction, emotional attraction, and sexual behaviour, and rates of same-sex sexuality differ based on the aspect (Priebe and Svedin, 2013). Further, about 3.6–4.1% of men are ‘mostly straight’, in that they fall between bisexuals and heterosexuals on many measures of sexual orientation (Savin-Williams and Vrangalova, 2013). The complexity of sexual orientation indicates that sexual identities are not comprehensive enough to account for sexual diversity, explaining in part why some men with a degree of same-sex sexuality identify as straight.
This literature demonstrates that adopting a straight identity is not as simple as mainstream discourse suggests, but it does not explore the ways that straight-identified men who have sex with men (MSM) themselves understand their sexual identity and sexual behaviour. The purpose of this paper is to explore why straight-identified MSM identify as such, which in turn highlights how heterosexuality is performed. I study straight-identified rural white men because this population has been largely overlooked in sexuality research and because their experiences underscore the performative aspect of heterosexuality.
After overviewing research about sexual identity, which provides a theoretical framework for my study, I present three main themes: changes to sexual attractions, reasons for identifying as straight, and the meanings attached to sexual behaviour with other men. Half of the participants reported experiencing major changes to their sexual attractions, challenging the assumption that male sexuality is static. They described six reasons for identifying as straight, underscoring that attractions and behaviour are not the only bases for sexual identity. The participants also explained five ways they experience sex with men, four of which reinforced their straight identity. In the conclusion I discuss how heterosexuality is a performance, rather than a natural expression of sexuality, and that interpretations of the meaning of identity labels, attractions, and behaviours – not just attractions and behaviours themselves – are central to being straight.
Theoretical framework: The social construction of sexual identity
Scholarship about sexual identity helps put into context behaviours that do not ‘match’ sexual identity labels. Mainstream discourse posits that the sex(es) of individuals’ sexual partners reflects their ‘true’ sexual orientation, and that sexual identity should account for this. As Sedgwick (1990) explains, however, the current system of classification that privileges this sexual preference over all others is arbitrary. Sexual identities are socially constructed (Katz, 1995; Sedgwick, 1990; Seidman, 2010), and they differ across cultures and time periods. Thus, although cross-cultural patterns are evident among arrangements of same-sex sex – Murray (2000), for example, organizes same-sex relations into those structured by age, gender, or egalitarianism – there is extensive cross-cultural variation in how these arrangements are perceived, experienced, and labeled.
Current ways of defining individuals based on their sexual partners or attractions have their roots in mid- to late-19th-century medical discourse (Foucault, 1978) and new ways of defining appropriate gender practices in response to shifting gender dynamics in education and the workplace (Chauncey, 1994; Seidman, 2010). Sexuality was not always defined on the basis of sexual partners; for example, Chauncey (1994) demonstrates that among some populations of American men in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, sexual identity was determined more by masculinity and sexual position than sexual partners. Before the identity labels gay, bisexual, and straight were in widespread use, many considered masculine men who topped during anal sex ‘normal’ (Chauncey, 1994). In modern times, sexual acts that have gendered connotations may influence sexual identity; for example, among certain populations of MSM in Mexico, men who top during anal sex are considered straight, while those who bottom are considered gay (Cantú Jr, 2009). Understandings of sexuality are influenced by culture and time period, and they do not reflect individuals’ ‘inner essences’.
Even within cultures there are various understandings of sexual identity. As Rust (1992) found, perceptions of the relative importance of sexual attractions and current sexual behaviour may influence sexual identity. In her study, lesbians reported that they could have sexual attractions to both men and women and still be lesbian as long as they did not act on attractions to men, whereas bisexual women felt that they needed to have sexual attractions to both sexes, but did not necessarily have to act on them. Emotional attractions, too, are influential: Among MSM, many who have emotional attractions to men identify as bisexual or gay, whereas many who do not reject bi and gay labels (Adam, 2000). Even opinions and information about sexual identity labels may influence which one individuals choose, as Kitzinger and Wilkinson (1995) found in their research about lesbian women. Indeed, many of the women in their sample did not initially identify as lesbian because they held stereotypical views of lesbians and did not think the label applied to them. As Ward (2008, 2015) demonstrates too, a feeling of belonging with heterosexual culture and disidentification with gay culture may influence how men interpret their sexual behaviour and their choice of sexual identity labels. There are many factors that influence perceptions of sexual identity – including the weight given to sexual attractions and sexual behaviours, emotional attractions, information and views about sexual identity labels, and cultural preferences – and individuals evaluate the importance of each differently.
The relationship between sexual behaviour and sexual identity is further complicated by contextual factors, such as sexual development trajectories and masculinity. Compared to older generations of gays and lesbians, younger same-sex attracted individuals are more likely to negotiate or even reject sexual identity labels; many embrace their sexuality, but do not view it as a defining feature of their lives (Savin-Williams, 2005). In terms of developmental sequences, sexual minority men who had sex with men before they identified as gay or bi – as compared to men who engaged in sex with men after they identified as non-heterosexual – are more likely to be involved in other-sex relationships, have higher levels of internalized homophobia, and have a greater number of male sexual partners (Dubé, 2000). Different types of masculinity also influence how straight men negotiate the bounds of heterosexuality. In his study of straight male cheerleaders, Anderson (2008) found that those who embraced orthodox masculinity considered certain forms of same-sex sex acceptable if they were used to secure sex with women, while men who embodied inclusive masculinity were much more flexible about some forms of same-sex sex and enjoyed them recreationally, even in the absence of women. Stretching the borders of heterosexuality – even in bounded ways – reflects in part the decreasing role of overt homophobia for many masculinities (Dean, 2013; McCormack and Anderson, 2014) and the increasing separation between sexuality and gender, though numerous subtle forms of homophobia remain central to many straight masculinities (Bridges, 2014; Bridges and Pascoe, 2016; Pascoe, 2011). In short, many factors influence how individuals perceive the relationship between their sexual behaviours and identity.
Even conventional understandings of heterosexuality are socially constructed. Although other-sex arrangements have existed throughout history, it is only recently that sexuality has been organized on a hetero/homo binary that emphasizes attractions and the sex(es) of sexual partners (Katz, 1995). Colonial New England, for instance, defined sexuality on a procreative/non-procreative basis, such that most non-procreative sexual behaviours were viewed as similar offenses (Katz, 1995). Heterosexuality is also more than a set of attractions and behaviours; it is an institution that structures everyday life. Indeed, it helps perpetuate inequality between men and women: ‘Heterosexuality itself is not merely a matter of specifically sexual desires and practices, but also entails divisions of labour, power and resources’ (Jackson, 1999: 4). Current understandings of sexualities are influenced by discourses (Foucault, 1978), scripts (Simon and Gagnon, 1986), stories (Plummer, 1995), and interactions (Plummer, 1996), and understandings of heterosexuality are similarly affected. Heterosexuality is not monolithic, either; it is a diverse set of practices and meanings (Beasley et al., 2012). Rather than an essential personal trait, heterosexuality is a complex matrix of meanings, behaviours, and structures, all of which affect individual lives but none of which are ‘natural’.
Perceptions of sexual identity may also change over the life course. Research examining non-heterosexual women indicates that individuals may change sexual identities as their personal interpretations and social context change, even in the absence of sexual orientation change (Diamond, 2009; Rust, 1996). As individuals experience changes to their social context throughout their lives, which may in turn influence how they perceive themselves, their understanding of their sexual identity has the potential to change as well (Gordon and Silva, 2015; Horowitz and Newcomb, 2001; Rust, 1996). Thus, straight-identified MSM, like others, may at some point reinterpret the ‘accuracy’ of their sexual identity and adopt a new one.
Regarding straight-identified MSM, it is important to differentiate between two populations: (1) those who identify as gay or bi but tell other people that they are straight, and who are thus ‘closeted’, and (2) those who identify as straight and perceive their sexual identity in ways that run counter to the dominant system of sexual classification. Individuals in the latter population complicate the relationship between sexual attraction, behaviour, and identity by using unconventional interpretations of their sexual behaviours and of heterosexuality as the basis for their straight identity, rather than exclusively using attractions and sexual behaviours themselves. In line with Gordon and Silva’s (2015) theory of sexual orientation and identity, I argue that interpretations of the meaning of attractions, behaviours, and identity labels are central to being straight. To explore alternative understandings of sexual identity and behaviour, I used the following question to guide my research: How do straight-identified rural MSM understand their sexual identity and behaviour?
Methods
After gaining approval from my institution’s human subjects committee, I began recruiting participants. In total I interviewed ten men. Although I advertised my study for approximately seven months, I was unable to secure additional participants. Many men likely did not respond to the ad because they perceived participation as a risk. Indeed, all of the participants explained that their same-sex sexual activity is highly secretive, and four said I, the interviewer, am the only person other than their sexual partners to know about these encounters. Because I was unable to recruit a larger sample, this study is exploratory.
I recruited all ten participants through an advertisement I placed in the men-for-men casual encounters section of Craigslist. Craigslist is organized regionally, so I placed ads in several surrounding areas of my institution. My intent in advertising close to my location was threefold: (1) I wanted to have the option of interviewing the men in person, (2) I assumed my university would be familiar to potential participants and may make them more comfortable with the study, and (3) I wanted to highlight the experiences of rural MSM, an understudied population. I interviewed only one participant in-person; the other nine interviews I completed over the phone. Eight lived more than 45 minutes away from my institution, so a phone interview was more practical for them than an in-person interview. Although I gave the option to meet in person, nine of the men chose to do a phone interview. Preferences for phone interviews reflected time constraints, considerable geographic distance between myself and eight of the participants, and the concern of several interviewees that they would be recognized at the library or would have to explain where they were during the interview to friends and family.
The interviews lasted approximately one to two hours. I audio-recorded and later transcribed each session. The interviews were semi-structured; I used an interview guide for each interview, but changed the ordering and phrasing of the questions to make the interviews more conversational. This added flexibility allowed me to follow up on information I considered important. I asked questions exploring the participants’ sexual identity, attractions, sexual history, and perceptions of their masculinity.
Of the ten participants, all identify as white and currently live in Missouri or Illinois. That the sample is exclusively white is not surprising given the high proportion of whites in rural Illinois and Missouri (US Census Bureau, 2013). One participant was in his 20s, one in his 30s, one in his 40s, three in their 50s, three in their 60s, and one in his 70s. Nine of the participants currently live in a rural area, and nine lived in rural areas as a child. All either currently live in or grew up in an area with fewer than 20,000 residents that is not a suburb or exurb of a large city.
After transcribing the interviews, I uploaded them to the qualitative data analysis software NVivo. I spent several hours per transcript coding for recurring themes, and created new codes as I identified emerging themes. After creating new codes I recoded earlier transcripts. It was during open coding that the themes of the current study emerged. Although I created dozens of codes while reading transcripts, in this paper I focus only on those related to changes to sexual attractions, sexual identification, and interpretations of sex. Other codes identified the participants’ perceptions of their masculinity and the masculinity of their sexual partners; their preferred sexual partners in terms of race and sexual identity; emotional boundaries around same-sex sex; and perceptions of extramarital sex. To ensure confidentiality, I assigned each participant a pseudonym, with the exception of Cain, who chose his own.
Results and discussion
Here I present the following themes: changes to sexual attractions, reasons for identifying as straight, and the meaning attached to sexual behaviours. In a separate paper I examine how the participants construct normative masculinity through particular sexual practices and specific sexual partners along the axes of masculinity, race, and sexual identity, which together illustrate the centrality of interpretations to sexuality and gender, the flexibility of male heterosexuality over the life course, and the centrality of heterosexuality to normative rural masculinity (Silva, 2016).
Participant characteristics.
The range of attractions indicates that the popular explanation of straight-identified MSM – that they are ‘really’ gay or bi (or mostly straight) – ignores the sexual diversity of this population. Based on attractions alone, one participant could be classified as mostly straight, one as mostly gay, three as bisexual, three as heterosexual, and two as gay. While internalized bi/homophobia play a role in their identification, the eight men that identified as straight did so because of unique interpretations they made about heterosexuality.
Changes to sexual attractions
Several scholars have theorized that sexual attractions can unintentionally shift over the life course due to either sexual orientation change (Gordon and Silva, 2015) or sexual fluidity (Diamond, 2009). Gordon and Silva suggest that individuals may reinterpret their sexual orientation after experiencing changes to their personal context, and that the possibility for sexual orientation change is always present for all individuals. Based on her sample of approximately 100 women, Diamond (2009) takes a different approach to explain female sexuality, arguing that women have a stable sexual orientation, a pattern of attractions and desires, but also experience sexual fluidity, depending on a complex interplay of biological and social factors.
Although little research explores changes to sexual attractions, existing data indicate that some individuals do experience changes to their attractions. Kinsey, Pomeroy, and Martin (1948) found that some male participants experienced changes to their attractions, and other research shows that both men and women can experience this (Blumstein and Schwartz, 1977; Weinberg et al., 1994). Nonetheless, there is a widespread assumption that because of biological and/or cultural factors the sexuality of men is fixed, whereas women’s is more fluid.
Relatedly, biological explanations for sexual orientation have become increasingly popular, and have been accompanied by a multitude of scientific studies identifying genetic or prenatal influences on sexual orientation (LeVay, 2011). Considering the role of biological potential for sexual attractions – structuring either their consistency or fluidity – is beyond the scope of this paper. To help explain changes to sexual attractions this study uses the framework of Gordon and Silva (2015), which suggests that cultural, social, and contextual factors influence how biological sexual potential is shaped, expressed, and experienced.
To add to the literature about changes to male sexuality, and to explore how this may complicate sexual identity construction, I asked the participants if their attractions had changed over time. Five of the ten experienced profound changes to their sexual attractions. The length of time these shifts lasted suggests a fundamental change to their sexuality. Of these five, two said they remembered a particular moment when their attractions changed, and three described the changes to their attractions as a process. All of these changes were unintentional and unanticipated.
Two participants said they remembered a specific instance when their sexual attractions began changing. For Brad, this was when he received a blowjob from another man. While drunk he had walked into an establishment that sold sex toys, and which also had ‘glory holes’ set up in the back. Brad walked to the back to masturbate and saw a tongue being flicked through a glory hole. He said the experience ‘just sorta happened’, since he had not walked in looking for sex. He did receive a blowjob, though, and this experience affected him greatly: I: Can you remember the first moment that you realized that you were aroused by other guys? B: It was down in [a Southern state], and I had been drinking, and wound up in an arcade, and I got some of the best head I ever had from another, [a] good lookin’ guy. And [that] pretty much sealed it right there for me.
Kevin also remembered when his attractions shifted. Although he recognized attractions to males in high school, they grew much more pronounced later in life. They began changing after his first sexual experience with another man, in his mid-30s: I: Can you explain how your attractions maybe changed after that point, if they did, or became more pronounced, or// K: Well, they did [change] some after that. After that, I was attracted more, I wouldn’t say more to men than women, but my attraction, my thoughts about men shall we say escalated and I [pause] … But yeah, it did change, it changed a lot. And, I seen it was an option, and it was good …
Three other participants also explained that their sexual attractions had changed, but for them change occurred as a process. Indeed, Mike noted that his attractions to men shifted slowly: I: So it almost sounds like when you were younger, you were attracted to women, but you weren’t as attracted to guys, but then that switched// M: Yes. Well, I think it’s something on the inside that’s finally matured to the outside. I was sexually attracted to girls, I had sex with ‘em and things like that, and there was nothing wrong with that, but I was dealin’ with what was on the inside too. And I probably could have went either way. But, because of society and the way I was raised and things like that, I couldn’t show the other part. I could only show the heterosexual part. And so that’s what I stayed with.
Will also experienced changes to sexual attractions as a process. Although he used to be attracted primarily to women, with some minor attractions to men, over the past decade his attractions shifted such that his attractions to men are slightly greater than those to women: I: And then too, have your sexual attractions changed over time at all? W: Yes. I: Can you explain that? W: I would say it has, gone more toward guys. Um, I, yeah, I would positively say it has changed to uh … I probably check out more guys than I do females. I: Can you remember when that first started changing? W: Not really, I mean it would have been within the last 10 years, but I mean specifically, no. I: What kind of sexual attractions did you have before that point? W: Oh, it would have been female, and then an occasional checkin’ out a dude, you know, he looks good, he’s fit, he’s clean. You know, just wondering because it wasn’t ‘til about 10 or 11 years ago that I ever did anything. Other, other than with a female.
Although Cain was initially unsure if his attractions had changed, in a follow-up interview he explained that his attractions, too, shifted: I: [What were] your proportion of attractions when you got married, if you’re able to remember that? C: It was probably 80–20, women-men. Because I had very little [sexual] experience, so I had a little bit of curiosity, I had a couple of experiences, but I really, I didn’t know what a glory hole even was until I went to grad school, until I was married. So, it was one of those things that I certainly didn’t explore [until later]. I would probably say it’s 50–50 now.
Combined, these results indicate that men can experience changes to their sexual attractions. Although sexual fluidity may be responsible, similar to what Diamond (2009) explains for women, the lengths of time these attractions have lasted suggest the participants’ sexual orientation has changed, supporting Gordon and Silva’s (2015) theory of sexual orientation. That said, these men did not ‘turn’ gay because of sex with other men. We can understand their experiences using the framework of Gordon and Silva (2015): they likely interpreted same-sex sex or their feelings from it as relevant to their sexuality, which contributed to their attractions shifting. Other men may interpret similar sexual experiences as irrelevant to their sexuality, thus not causing long-term changes; the interpretation of feelings and events are as important as the actual feelings or events. Indeed, as I explore later, there are three participants who had sex with men, but who reported exclusive attractions to women.
Although there are six main reasons the participants identified as straight, there were additional reasons related to their changed attractions. Kevin, Mike, Will, and Cain retained an attachment to their straight identity, despite changes to their attractions and sexual behaviour, perhaps because they perceived changes to their identity as threatening (Gordon and Silva, 2015; Horowitz and Newcomb, 2001). These four may be in a transition period between sexual identities, such that in the future they may reinterpret and change their straight sexual identity to reflect dominant constructions of sexual classification; only future interviews will determine if this is the case. This is what Brad experienced, as he identified as gay but was not open about it because of social stigma.
Reasons for identifying as straight
Until recently few studies investigated heterosexual identity construction. This is a gap in the literature, given that heterosexuality is socially constructed and is guided by social scripts rather than biological instincts (Ingraham, 1994; Katz, 1995; Wilkinson and Kitzinger, 1994). Researchers are, however, increasingly investigating heterosexual identity development (Eliason, 1995; Morgan and Thompson, 2011; Worthington et al., 2002). Morgan (2012) and Morgan, Steiner, and Thompson (2010), for example, demonstrate that while many straight-identified men passively adopt their heterosexual identity and question it little, some instead actively question, explore, construct, and maintain theirs.
Relatedly, new historical trends highlight what used to be taken-for-granted heterosexual identities: Dean (2014) argues that as LGBQ visibility has increased in American society, heterosexual men and women are perceiving and performing their identity in new ways, often using gender expression as a way to distinguish themselves from sexual minorities. Heterosexuality is still an important identity for most individuals, but the ways in which straights negotiate and perceive their own has changed with historical conditions.
With this in mind, it is fruitful to explore why straight-identified MSM identify the way they do. Because the participants were aware that their sexual behaviour contrasted with mainstream understandings of heterosexuality, they all considered why they identified as straight. The participants described six main reasons: (1) unwillingness to live a gay ‘lifestyle’; (2) participation in other-sex marriage and family formation; (3) internalization of messages during childhood; (4) religious beliefs; (5) attractions to women; and/or (6) the relative infrequency of male sexual encounters. Six participants noted more than one reason. This builds on Carrillo and Hoffman's (2016) online interview project with straight-identified “heteroflexible” men, who interpreted male heterosexuality as compatible with sex with men by framing same-sex sex as emotionless and by emphasizing primary or exclusive attractions to women.
Three participants noted that their unwillingness to identify with a gay ‘lifestyle’ was a major factor for them identifying as straight. 1 For the other participants that identified as straight, the rejection of a gay identity and ‘lifestyle’ was more implicit. Mike explained this rejection succinctly: ‘An alcoholic drinks, but everyone that drinks is not an alcoholic. So my philosophy is, every gay person does this, but not everybody that does this is gay.’ Expressing similar sentiments, Cain said, ‘I never have really identified with that gay lifestyle; I just really didn’t want to go that route.’
Five explained that their participation in conventional other-sex marriage and family formation was a reason they identified as straight. Of these five, four were married and one was divorced.
2
All five had children, and the four married men said they were happy with their marriage and had no intention of leaving their wives. As Kevin shared, he was happy with his married life and intended to maintain it: K: Well, I’m a husband and a father, and a grandfather, and I consider that a part of a man’s life as bein’ straight. I enjoy my kids, I enjoy my wife, and enjoy my life, and I certainly wouldn’t want to change it. I have no intention of leaving the wife for a guy or anything like that, it’s just, the guy part is just somethin’ I do. Kinda like some guys drink too much. It’s hard to explain.
A third and similar reason seven participants identified as straight was their upbringing, which resulted in the internalization of heteronormative messages – especially those regarding family formation. Mike identified as straight in part because he was taught that is how men should live: M: Well, the straight home that I was raised in, we were taught that no matter what, that you’re a straight male, and you’re supposed to get married, you’re supposed to do all these things, so I’ve always identified with that because that’s how I was raised. I wasn’t raised to do any of the other things.
A fourth reason participants identified as straight involved religious influences. Two described their religious beliefs as an ongoing struggle, while two others said religion influenced them as children but did not describe current religious struggles. Cain went into the most detail describing his religious struggles; he said he felt ‘disappointment’ at his behaviour and constantly sought to suppress it.
Another reason four participants identified as straight was because they reported sexual attractions to women and no emotional attractions to men. Indeed, Marcus, Pat, and Richard reported exclusive sexual attractions to women, while Kevin’s were about three-quarters for women and one-quarter for men. As these four explained, their attractions – not their sexual behaviour – influenced their sexual identity. In the next section I explore more fully why the three men who reported exclusive attractions to women had sex with other men.
Two participants – Will and Kevin – described a sixth and last reason for identifying as straight: infrequency of sexual activity with other men. As Kevin described: K: I have been attracted to guys, so, I can’t be 100% straight, but I am pretty close, I think. I’ve never done a lot of heavy stuff with guys, I don’t meet guys every few days or anything like that, uh, but every six weeks or so I do, on average, sometimes it’s longer, and sometimes it’s sooner, but uh, I just consider myself straight, and that’s all I can say, I guess.
Six participants mentioned that fear of stigma influenced the identity they projected to others, though the fact that all were secretive about their same-sex sexual behaviour indicates that this fear was present for all ten. This finding is consistent with mainstream understandings of the closet: Some individuals attracted to the same sex attempt to ‘pass’ as straight to avoid prejudice. As Will stated, ‘I think living a straight life is a much easier one than it would be to live a gay life. Maybe that’s part of the reason I am who I am.’
In line with other research, internalized bi/homophobia influenced how the participants perceived their sexual identity (Miller et al., 2005; Wolitski et al., 2006). Four of the reasons the participants gave for identifying as straight reflected their heteronormative social context as both children and adults, the messages of which they internalized. In this way, even ‘authentic’ desires to identify as straight and live a straight ‘lifestyle’ stem from systemic heterosexism. Additionally, the motivation for all ten to remain secretive about their same-sex sexual behaviour reinforces the power that the ‘closet’ still holds for the lives of many individuals who are attracted to and/or engage in sexual activity with the same sex. Thus, although the symbolic closet is changing and weakening in many contexts (Dean, 2014; Seidman, 2002), it is still very powerful for some individuals.
While it is necessary to understand the role of internalized bi/homophobia, it is not appropriate to make judgements about the ‘correct’ sexual identity of these men. Consider the numerous criteria individuals use to choose a sexual identity: sexual attractions, emotional attractions, sexual behaviour, desires, fantasies, participation in conventional other-sex marriage and childrearing, and gender expression, among others. Individuals perceive the importance of each differently; thus, unconventional sexual identity construction may reflect alternative interpretations of sexual identity, not necessarily just internalized bi/homophobia. The narratives of the eight participants that identified as straight indicated that although they were affected by internalized bi/homophobia, they also used alternative interpretations of heterosexuality not dependent upon behaviour (and for some men, neither behaviour nor attractions) to explain why they identified as straight.
The meaning attached to sexual behaviour
Little research has explored the meaning of sexual activity for straight-identified MSM. Humphreys’ (1970) study of anonymous sex in public restrooms showed that many men engaged in anonymous male-male sex to satisfy sexual desires while still maintaining their identity as heterosexual, family-oriented men. Anything with greater involvement may have threatened their public identity and current family life.
Ward’s (2008) content analysis of personal ads in the casual encounters section of Craigslist-LA by men who identify as ‘str8’ provides cultural insight into this population. Ward argues that central to the identities of many straight-identified white MSM (str8 men) are their participation in normative heterosexual culture and the ways in which they interpret and bound their sexual behaviour. Her data show that many str8 men have a distinct masculine, white, heterosexual identity, and use homophobia as a strategy to express it. Ward’s later research (2015) also reveals that sexual behaviour between straight white men is common, but that it is not labelled or interpreted as sexual by these men; certain sexual behaviours are perceived as bonding experiences, initiation rites, or humiliation rituals, rather than sex or intimacy. Other content analyses of Craigslist postings by men in this population also suggest the centrality of interpretations to straightness (Reynolds, 2015; Robinson and Vidal-Ortiz, 2013). Zeeland (1995) observed similar themes about the meaning of same-sex sexual behaviour in his interviews of Navy sailors; his interview data also revealed that boundaries placed on same-sex sexual behaviour, such as only topping during anal sex or never kissing, are of paramount importance to some straight men. For many straight white men, perceptions of the ‘sexual’ activity they perform are influenced by broader constructs of the heterosexual masculinity they embody.
Other research shows that some forms of physical intimacy – once considered incompatible with heteromasculinities – are now being incorporated into some heteromasculine performances. Some young straight British men, for example, consider kissing (Anderson et al., 2010) and cuddling (Anderson and McCormack, 2014) a form of heterosexual intimacy. This research indicates that the physical bounds of heteromasculinity are shifting for some young straight men.
To investigate the meanings straight MSM place on their sexual behaviour with other men, I asked the participants several questions about why they meet up with other men. They framed their drive to have sex with men in the following ways: (1) urges that need to be resolved; (2) male bonding that ‘helps’ them and others get off; (3) a specific craving for men; (4) attractions/desires for men; and (5) needs/desires for sex, regardless of the sex of the partner. Three of the participants noted more than one reason.
Both Cain and Ryan explained their sexual behaviour with other men as a way to release urges. Although both reported sexual attractions to other men, they framed their desires to have sex with other men not simply as a way to act on attractions, but as a way to resolve uncontrollable, unwanted feelings. Ryan distanced himself from his urges, saying, ‘I definitely am compartmentalized, and that part of me that acts out on those urges is different than the other part of me … we’re two different people.’ Interpreting same-sex sexual behaviour as a way to release urges indicates that both rejected the possibility that they are gay or bi; they were acting on urges only to relieve them so they could continue to live their straight lives otherwise uninterrupted.
Mike and Cain described a second framing of same-sex sexual behaviour: ‘helpin’ a buddy out’. The majority of both men’s sexual partners were men in relationships with women, indicating that non-romantic sex between two guys in relationships with women – two ‘buds’ – was a way for each to help the other satisfy sexual desires in a way that did not harm either one’s other-sex relationship. Because both perceived their other-sex marriages as central to their straight identity, interpreting and acting on sex in this way allowed them to experience pleasure without threatening their other-sex marriage – and by extension, their straight identity. As Mike said, ‘It’s just helpin’ a buddy out’. He further explained the ‘help’ he gave his friends: M: In your mind you’re thinking you’re not gay, you’re just helping somebody out. This poor guy, he’s married, his wife won’t do it [give him a blowjob] … But basically it was, if your wife won’t do it, come, I’ll do it, or my wife won’t do it, then we’ll get together and just do it together. And so, I guess in my mind, I wasn’t thinking this is a gay thing, this is just, I’m just helping my friend out. He just needs some helpin’, he’s helpin’ me out, and once it’s over with it wasn’t like call the next day, ‘oh, how are you,’ no, this stuff, it was over. Til the next time. It was over, there was no … it was a no strings attached thing.
Cain expanded on this point, saying he saw sex with men as a way to keep his desires for other men in check and, in so doing, maintain his marriage: C: So, I kinda look at it in my own mind as, I realize that this is an impulse that I have, and that I try to keep it in check, and I’m thinking an occasional bud or whatever to help me out is what I need. And so, it’s kind of the way I look at it. [Pause] I would never cheat on my wife with another woman. That it’s like, being, with a guy every so often, helps me kinda maintain, in fact sometimes it even seems like it helps me become a better lover to her, but, that’s, maybe part of my rationalization, I don’t know.
Just one participant, Marcus, explained a third framing for sex with men: a way to satisfy a particular craving for men. Marcus was clear that he was not sexually attracted to men, and that he did not meet up with guys because he could not have sex with women. Instead, he did so because ‘it just seems like, um, once in a while I’ll just kind of get a craving, so to speak. It’s like, hmm, I haven’t done that in a long time, maybe I’ll see if I can’t do that.’ For Marcus, giving and receiving oral sex with men was a way to satisfy cravings that were arousing because he perceives male-male sex as ‘somethin’ kinky, somethin’ taboo, somethin’ just a little bit different from the norm’, even in the absence of attractions. Because he reported exclusive attractions to women, he did not perceive his same-sex sexual behaviour as meaningful to his straight identity.
Seven participants explained a fourth framing for sex with men: a way to act on sexual attractions to men. Of these seven, Mike, Cain, and Ryan also framed sex with men in other ways – ways that reinforced their straight identity. Of the other four, who framed sex with men exclusively as a way to act on attractions to men, Brad identified as gay and Reuben as bi; their interpretations of their sexual behaviour reinforced their identities. The other two, Kevin and Will, did not use alternative interpretations of their sexual behaviour to bolster their straight identity, and instead relied on other interpretations of why they identified as straight, as I explored in the last section.
Five participants framed sex with men as a way to relieve general sexual needs, regardless of the sex of the partner. Of these five, Pat and Richard reported exclusive attractions to women. Years after Pat’s wife stopped having sex with him, he explained, ‘I finally decided well, I can’t live this way anymore, I’ve got to have some blowjobs. Or the little woman has to start spreadin’ her legs.’ He elaborated: P: I decided, well, I’m not livin’ this way. So uh, that’s when I started lookin’ for guys that wanted to give blowjobs. Now your next question is why didn’t I choose women. I could have, and would have, but, you’ve got to think the whole thing through. You’ve got to be logical. Were I to have an affair with a woman on the side, women are gonna talk. They’re emotional. They’re gonna talk. They’re gonna let the secret out. As opposed to meeting up with a straight man, they’re not gonna talk. They’re not gonna let the secret out. So I guess that’s when I decided.
These data demonstrate the complex and multifaceted meanings of male-male sexual activity for straight-identified MSM. Rather than just being a way to act on attractions, sex for straight-identified MSM is imbued with various meanings. These results complement the findings of Carrillo and Hoffman (2016), Humphreys (1970), Reynolds (2015), Robinson and Vidal-Ortiz (2013), Ward (2008, 2015). The participants’ identification with heterosexuality and normative masculinity – and disidentification with gay culture – influenced their interpretations of their same-sex sexual behaviour, such that they perceived their same-sex sex as compatible with their straight identity. The numerous framings of male-male sex demonstrate that it is not just sexual behaviour that is meaningful to a straight identity, but the interpretation of it. Indeed, the interpretations of same-sex sexual behaviour for six participants reinforced their straight identity.
Conclusion
The results from this study indicate that although attractions cannot be intentionally changed, heterosexuality as an identity – like gender (Butler, 1990; West and Zimmerman, 1987) – is performed, rather than naturally enacted. Straight-identified MSM provide an ideal way to examine this performance, as many are hyperaware of their own. Although eight of the ten men identified as some variation of straight and felt as though what they were doing was compatible with their understanding of heterosexuality, the fact that all were secretive about their sexual behaviour indicates that they understood the need to perform a conventional ‘show’ of heterosexuality.
The men described various ways of ‘being’ straight, including participating in conventional other-sex marriage and family formation and keeping their same-sex sexual activity a secret. Interpretations of same-sex sexual behaviour as a way to release urges, act on cravings or needs for sex, or bond with other men reinforced the participants’ straight identity as well. Their narratives shed light on the process by which all heterosexuals, even those exclusively attracted to the other sex, perform their sexual identity. Heterosexuality is not simply a matrix of attractions and/or sexual behaviours; it is also a set of interpretations and ways of participating in conventional institutions, such as other-sex marriage and family formation. Being heterosexual also involves passing as heterosexual, which these men did by keeping their same-sex sexual activity a secret.
Future researchers should seek to broaden the scope of the current study. Straight-identified MSM are highly secretive and difficult to access for research, so other studies should extend the time period of data collection to recruit more participants. It would also be beneficial for researchers to examine the intersections of race, class, masculinity, location, and age to the sexual identities and lives of this population. Previous research (e.g. McCormack et al., 2015; Savin-Williams, 2005) shows that generational factors – such as declining overt bi/homophobia – influence the ways in which sexual minorities understand and perceive their sexual identity. The fact that eight participants are over the age of 40 suggests there may be generational factors at play. With this in mind, future studies could more thoroughly explore how age affects the experiences of straight MSM.
Data from this study indicate that there are both queer and straight ways of having same-sex sex: the same act can be interpreted in many ways, and can be used to reinforce both straight and non-straight identities. Thus, it is interpretative frames, rather than behaviour, that distinguish straights from sexual minorities. Eight of the participants hold a heterosexual cultural frame and share little in common with queer people.
At the same time, the existence of straight-identified MSM is potentially queer. These men’s narratives indicate that sexuality is fluid for some individuals; heterosexuality is performed, rather than naturally enacted; and heterosexuality is a matrix of not only attractions and sexual behaviours, but also interpretations of attractions and behaviours, as well as of identity labels. Normativity can be challenged not just from the fringes of sexuality and gender (e.g. LGBTQ+ individuals) but also unintentionally from within the institution of heterosexuality itself. These men’s narratives reveal that heterosexuals are not sexually homogeneous, but rather heterogeneous. They also show that heterosexuality is a verb, not a noun.
Footnotes
Acknowledgement
I would like to thank Kristen Barber for her feedback at all stages of the research process, and Chris Wienke for his helpful suggestions for the paper.