Sexuality and Culture

, Volume 8, Issue 1, pp 60–86 | Cite as

Gaydar: Eye-gaze as identity recognition among gay men and lesbians

  • Cheryl L. Nicholas
Articles

Abstract

This paper examines eye-gaze associated with identity recognition among gay men and lesbians. Eye-gaze is argued to be crucial to forces that either trigger or reinforce one gay person’s perception of another person’s gay identity during social encounters. “Gaydar” is the folk concept used within the gay and lesbian culture to name this identity recognition device. An ethnography on Gaydar conducted over a period of three years reveals that eye-gaze in relation to Gaydar includes two different variations of visual contact, the direct and the broken stare. These types of gaze can be accentuated by the presence of other forms of nonverbal communication such as posture, gestures, and smiles. Consciousness in relation to eye-gaze is also discussed to be a distinct trigger and reinforcer of gay and lesbian identity recognition.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Argyle, M. & Cook, M. (1976). The gaze and mutual gazing. London: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Argyle, M. & Dean, J. (1965). Eye-contact, distance and affiliation. Sociometry, 28, 289–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bailey, J. & Pillard, R. (1991). A genetic study of male sexual orientation. Archives of General Psychiatry, 48, 1089–1096.Google Scholar
  4. Baker, P. (2002). Polari—The lost language of gay men. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  5. Bernstein, M. (1997). Celebration and suppression: The strategic uses of identity by the lesbian and gay movement. American Journal of Sociology, 103, 531–565.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Blumer, H. (1969). Symbolic interactionism: Perspectives and method. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  7. Bohan, J. (1996). Psychology and sexual orientation: Coming to terms. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  8. Brown, M. (2000). Closet space: Geographies of metaphor from the body to the globe. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  9. Butler, J. (1991). Imitation and gender insubordination. In D. Fuss (Ed.), Inside/Out: Lesbian theories, gay theories. (pp. 13–31). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  10. Cass, V. (1979). Homosexual identity formation: A theoretical model. Journal of Homosexuality, 4, 105–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chesebro, J. (1980). Paradoxical views of “homosexuality” in the rhetoric of social scientists: A fantasy theme analysis. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 66, 127–139.Google Scholar
  12. Chesebro, J. (Ed.). (1981). Gayspeak: Gay male and lesbian communication. New York: Pilgrim Press.Google Scholar
  13. Chesebro, J. (1994). Reflections of gay and lesbian rhetoric. In R. Ringer (Ed.), Queer words, queer images: Communication and the construction of homosexuality. (pp. 77–90). New York: NYU Press.Google Scholar
  14. Corey, F. (1996). Performing sexual identities in an Irish pub. Text and Performance Quarterly, 16, 146–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Corey, F. (2002). Alexander. Communication Quarterly, 50, 344–358.Google Scholar
  16. Cox, S. & Gallois, C. (1996). Gay and lesbian development: A social identity perspective. Journal of Homosexuality, 30, 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cruikshank, M. (1992). The gay and lesbian liberation movement. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  18. Dank, B. (1971). Coming Out in the gay world. Psychiatry, 34, 180–197.Google Scholar
  19. D’Augelli, A. & Patterson, C. (2001). Lesbian, gay, and bisexual identities and youth: Psychological perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Darsey, J. (1981). Gayspeak: A response. In J. Cheseboro (Ed.), Gayspeak: Gay male and lesbian communication. New York: The Pilgrim Press.Google Scholar
  21. DeCecco, J., & Parker, D. (Eds.). (1995). Sex, cells, and same-sex desire: The biology of sexual preference. Birmingham, NY: Haworth Press.Google Scholar
  22. Dillallo, K. & Krumholtz, J. (1994). The unofficial gay manual. New York: Main Street Books.Google Scholar
  23. Dovidio, J., Keating, C., Heltman, K., Ellyson, S. & Brown, C. (1988). The relationship of social power to visual displays of dominance and affiliation between men and women. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 233–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Drukman, S. (1995). The gay gaze, or why I want my MTV. In P. Burston & C. Richardson (Eds.). A queer romance: Lesbians, gay men and popular culture. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  25. Ekman, P. & Friesen, W. (1969). The repertoire of nonverbal behavior: Categories, origins, usage, and coding. Semiotica, 1, 49–98.Google Scholar
  26. Ellsworth, P. & Langer, E. (1984). Staring and approach: An interpretation of the stare as a nonspecific activator. In A. Katz & V. Katz (Eds.), Foundations of nonverbal communication. (pp. 111–118) Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Exline, R. (1963). Explorations in the process of person perception: Visual interaction in relation to competition, sex and the need for affiliation. Journal of Personality, 31, 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Fernbach, D. (1998). Biology and gay identity. New Left Review Journal, 228, 47–66.Google Scholar
  29. Garcia, N. (1998). Remaking passports: Visual thought in the debate on multiculturalism. In N. Mirzoeff (Ed.). The visual cultural reader. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  30. Garfinkel, H. (1967). Studies in ethnomethodology. Englewood cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  31. Goffman, E. (1963). Stigma: Notes on the management of spoiled identity. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  32. Goodwin, C. (2000a). Visual analysis: An ethnomethodological approach. In T. Van Leeuwen & C. Jewitt (Eds.). Handbook of visual analysis. (pp. 157–182). London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  33. Goodwin, C. (2000b). Vision and inscription in practice. Mind, culture & activity, 7, 1–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Greenberg, D. (1988). The construction of homosexuality. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  35. Grindstaff, D. (1999). A rhetoric of the gay male body. Paper presented at the Natinoal Communication Association Conference, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
  36. Gross, L. (2002). Up from invisibility: Lesbians, gay men, and the media in America. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Guerrero, L. (1997). Nonverbal involvement across interactions with friends, opposite-sex friends and romantic partners: Consistency or change? Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 14, 31–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Hamer, D., et al. (1993). A Linkage Between DNA Markers on the X Chromosome and Male Sexual Orientation. Science, 261, p. 326.Google Scholar
  39. Harper, R., Wiens, A., & Matarazzo, J. (1978). Nonverbal communication: The state of the art. New York: Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
  40. Horowitz, J., & Newcomb, M. (2002). A Multidimensional Approach to Homosexual Identity. Journal of Homosexuality, 42, 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Jagose, A. (1997). Queer theory: An introduction. Washington Square, NY: New York University Press.Google Scholar
  42. Jandt, F. & Darsey, J. (1981). Coming out as a communicative process. In J. Cheseboro’s (Ed.). Gayspeak: Gay male and lesbian communication. (pp. 12–42). New York: Pilgrim Press.Google Scholar
  43. Kendon, A. (1967). Some functions of gaze direction in social interaction. Acta Psychologica, 26, 1–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Kimmel, D. & Sang, B. (1995). Lesbians and gay men in midlife. In A. D’Augelli & C. Patterson (Eds.), Lesbian, gay and bisexual identities over the lifespan. (pp. 190–214). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  45. Kleinke, C. & Taylor, C. (1991). Evaluation of opposite-sex person as a function of gazing, smiling, and forward lean. Journal of Social Psychology, 131, 451–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Leap, W. (1994). Can there be gay discourse without gay language? In M. Bucholtz, A. C. Liang,Google Scholar
  47. L. Sutton, & C. Hines (Eds.), Cultural performances: Proceedings of the third Berkeley women and language conference. (pp. 399–408). Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Women and Language Group.Google Scholar
  48. Leap, W. (1996). Word’s out: Gay men’s English. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnessota Press.Google Scholar
  49. Leap, W. (1999). Language, socialization, and silence in gay adolescence. In M. Bucholtz, A. C. Liang, & L. Sutton. (Eds). Reinventing identities: The gendered self in discourse. (pp. 259–272). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  50. Lewis, R. (1997). Looking good: The lesbian gaze and fashion imagery. Feminist Review, 55, 92–109. Liang, A. C. (1999). Conversationally implicating lesbian and gay identity. In M. Bucholtz, A. C. Liang, & L. Sutton. (Eds). Reinventing identities: The gendered self in discourse. (pp. 293–310). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  51. Livia, A. & Hall, K. (Eds.). (1997). Queerly phrased: Language, gender, and sexuality. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  52. Majors, R. (1992). Discovering gay culture in America. In L. Samovar & R. Porter (Eds.). Intercultural communication: A reader (7th ed.), (pp. 160–167). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
  53. Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, Self, and Society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  54. Mehrabian, A. (1969). Significance of posture and communication in the communication of attitude and status relationships. Psychological Bulletin, 71, 359–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Mischel, W. (1968). Personality and assessment. New York: Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
  56. Mulvey, L. (1988). Visual and other pleasures. Bloomington, IA: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  57. Munt, S. (Ed.). (1998). Butch-Femme: Inside lesbian gender. London: Cassell Books.Google Scholar
  58. Nardi, P. & Schneider, B. (Eds). (1998). Social perspectives in lesbian and gay studies. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  59. Nicholas, C. (2003). Contextualized cues as identity recognition: An ethnography on Gaydar. Paper presented at the Central States Communication Association’s Annual Conference.Google Scholar
  60. Painter, D. (1981). Recognition among lesbians in straight settings. In J. Chesebro (Ed.), Gayspeak: Gay male and lesbian communication. (pp. 68–79). New York: The Pilgrim Press.Google Scholar
  61. Patterson, M. (1973). Compensation in nonverbal immediacy behaviors: A review. Sociometry, 36, 237–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Patterson, M., Jordan, A., Hogan, M., & Frerker, D. (1981). Effects of nonverbal intimacy on arousal and behavioral adjustment. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 5, 184–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Phillips, D. (2002). Negotiating the Digital Closet: Online Pseuudonymity and the Politics of Sexual Identity. Information, Communication, and Society, 5, 406–424CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Plummer, K.. (1981). Going gay: Identities, life cycles, and lifestyles in the male gay world. In John Hart & Daine Richardson (Eds.). The theory and practice of homosexuality. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  65. Plummer, K. (1996). Symbolic interactionism and the forms of homosexuality. In S. Seidman (Ed.) Queer theory/Sociology. (pp. 64–82). Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Publishers.Google Scholar
  66. Ponse, B.. (1998). The social construction of identity and its meanings within the lesbian subculture. In P. Nardi & B. Schneider (Eds.). Social perspectives in lesbian and gay studies. (pp 246–260). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  67. Ringer, J.. (Ed.) (1994). Queer words, queer images: Communication and the construction of homosexuality. New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
  68. Risman B., & Schwartz, P.. (1988). Sociological research on male and female homosexuality. Annual Review of Sociology, 14, 125–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Rudd, N. (1992). Clothing as a signifier in the perceptions of college male homosexuals. Semiotica, 91, 67–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Rutter, D. (1976). Visual interaction in schizophrenic patients: The timing of looks. British, Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 16, 357–361.Google Scholar
  71. Rutter, D. (1984). Looking and seeing: The role of visual communication in social interaction. New York: Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
  72. Rutter, D., Stephenson, G., & Dewey, M. (1981). Visual communication and the content and style of conversation. British Journal of Social Psychology, 20, 41–52.Google Scholar
  73. Sedgwick, E. (1990). Epistemology of the closet. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  74. Seidman, S. (2002). Beyond the closet. New York: RoutledgeGoogle Scholar
  75. Shaw, D. (1998). Gay men and computer communication: A discourse of sex and identity in cyberspace. In S. G. Jones (Ed.), Virtual culture: Identity and communication in cybersociety. (pp. 133–145) Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  76. Slagle, R. (1995). In defense of Queer Nation: From identity politics to a politics of difference. Western Journal of Communication, 59, 85–102.Google Scholar
  77. Tieu, T. (1999). Rhetorical investigations into identity in gay Chicago. Paper presented at the 1999 National Communication Conference, Chicago.Google Scholar
  78. Troiden, R. (1988). Gay and lesbian identity. New York: General Hall Inc.Google Scholar
  79. Turner, W. (2000). A genealogy of queer theory. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
  80. Vicinus, M. (1988). They wonder to which sex I belong: The historical roots of modern lesbian identity. In D. Altman, C. Vance, M. Vicinus, & J. Weeks (Eds.), Homosexuality, which homosexuality? (pp. 65–75). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  81. Wieder, D. & Pratt, S. (1990). On being a recognizable Indian among Indians. In D. Carbaugh’s (Ed.), Cultural communication and intercultural contact. (pp. 45–64). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum & Associates.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Cheryl L. Nicholas
    • 1
  1. 1.University of OklahomaNorman

Personalised recommendations