Advertisement

Going in Through the Back Door: Challenging Straight Male Homohysteria, Transhysteria, and Transphobia Through Receptive Penetrative Sex Toy Use

  • M. Smith
Original Paper

Abstract

To date, very little research literature exists concerning receptive penetrative anal eroticism in straight men. Of particular interest are its impacts upon other factors relevant to masculinities, sex roles, and the study of sexualities. Several co-constituted features of masculinity are likely to be relevant to straight-male anal sexuality, including masturbatory play with penetrative sex toys. Specifically, this study seeks to explore, “Do men who report greater comfort with receptive penetrative anal eroticism also report less transphobia, less obedience to masculine gender norms, greater partner sensitivity, and greater awareness about rape?” This study uses semi-structured interviews with thirteen men to explore this question, analyzed with a naturalist and constructivist grounded theory approach in the context of sexualities research and introduces transhysteria as a parallel concept to Anderson’s homohysteria. This analysis recognizes potential socially remedial value for encouraging male anal eroticism with sex toys.

Keywords

Sexuality Receptive anal eroticism Sex toys Homohysteria Transphobia Transhysteria 

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The author declares that he/she has no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in this study involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institution and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments, including standard IRB approval which was obtained for this study.

Human and Animal Rights

This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by the author

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

References

  1. Allan, J. A. (2016a). Phallic affect, or why men’s rights activists have feelings. Men and Masculinities, 19(1), 22–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Allan, J. A. (2016b). Reading from behind: A cultural analysis of the Anus. Regina, SK: University of Regina Press.Google Scholar
  3. Anderson, E. (2008). “Being masculine is not about who you sleep with…”: Heterosexual athletes contesting masculinity and the one-time rule of homosexuality. Sex Roles, 58(1–2), 104–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Anderson, E. (2009). Inclusive masculinity: The changing nature of masculinities. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  5. Attwood, F. (2005). Fashion and passion: Marketing sex to women. Sexualities, 8(4), 392–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Baker, M. L. (2015). Sexism, masculinity, and entitlement as predictors of rape culture support, and the role of empathy as a possible explanation. Senior Independent Study Thesis, Paper 6651, The College of Wooster, Wooster, OH.Google Scholar
  7. Beasley, C., Holmes, M., & Brook, H. (2015). Heterodoxy: Challenging orthodoxies about heterosexuality. Sexualities, 18(5–6), 681–697.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Blozendahl, C. I., & Myers, D. J. (2004). Feminist attitudes and support for gender equality: Opinion change in women and men, 1974–1998. Social Forces, 83, 759–789.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Blue, V. (2007). The adventurous couples’ guide to strap-on sex. San Francisco, CA: Cleis Press.Google Scholar
  10. Branfman, J., & Ekberg-Stiritz, S. (2012). Teaching men’s anal pleasure: Challenging gender norms with “prostage” education”. American Journal of Sexuality Education, 7(4), 404–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Branfman, J., Stiritz, S., & Anderson, E. (2017). Relaxing the straight male anus: Decreasing homohysteria around anal eroticism. Sexualities.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1363460716678560.Google Scholar
  12. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2012). Thematic analysis. In H. M. Cooper (Ed.), APA handbook of research methods in psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 57–71). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
  13. Burke, K. (2014). What makes a man: Gender and sexual boundaries on evangelical Christian sexuality websites. Sexualities, 17(1–2), 3–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Canan, S. N., Jozkowski, K. N., & Crawford, B. L. (2016). Sexual assault supportive attitudes: Rape myth acceptance and token resistance in Greek and non-Greek college students from two university samples in the United States. Journal of Interpersonal Violence.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260516636064.Google Scholar
  15. Carrera, M. V., DePalma, R., & Lameiras, M. (2012). Sex/gender identity: Moving beyond fixed and “natural” categories. Sexualities, 15(8), 995–1016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Carrillo, H., & Hoffman, A. (2017). “Straight with a pinch of bi”: The construction of heterosexuality as an elastic category among adult US men. Sexualities, 21(1–2), 90–108.Google Scholar
  17. Connell, R. W. (1995). Masculinities. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  18. Connell, R. W., & Messerschmidt, J. W. (2005). Hegemonic masculinity: Rethinking the concept. Gender & Society, 19(6), 829–859.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Foa, E. B., Dancu, C. V., Hembree, E. A., Jaycox, L. H., Meadows, E. A., & Street, G. P. (1999). A comparison of exposure therapy, stress inoculation training, and their combination for reducing posttraumatic stress disorder in female assault victims. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 67(2), 194–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Frank, K. (2008). Not gay, but not homophobic”: Male sexuality and homophobia in the “lifestyle. Sexualities, 11(4), 435–454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (2001). An ambivalent alliance: Hostile and benevolent sexism as complementary justifications for gender inequality. American Psychologist, 56, 109–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Glickman, C., & Emirzian, A. (2013). The ultimate guide to prostate pleasure: Erotic exploration for men and their partners. New York: Cleis Press.Google Scholar
  23. Hayes, R. M., Abbott, R. L., & Cook, S. (2016). It’s her fault: Student acceptance of rape myths on two college campuses. Violence Against Women, 22(13), 1540–1555.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Heywood, W., & Smith, A. M. A. (2014). Anal sex practices in heterosexual and male homosexual populations: A review of population-based data. Sexual Health, 9(6), 517–526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Houvouras, S., & Carter, J. S. (2008). The F word: College students’ definitions of a feminist. Sociological Forum, 23(2), 234–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kimmel, M. (2001). Masculinity as homophobia: Fear, shame, and silence in the construction of gender identity. In S. Whitehead & F. Barrett (Eds.), The masculinities reader (pp. 266–287). Cambridge, MA: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  27. Lombardi, E. L., Wilchins, R. A., Priesing, D., & Malouf, D. (2002). Gender violence: Transgender experience with violence and discrimination. Journal of Homosexuality, 42(1), 89–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Matthews, C. R. (2014). Biology ideology and pastiche hegemony. Men and Masculinities, 17(2), 99–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. McBride, K. R. (2017). Heterosexual women’s anal sex attitudes and motivations: A focus group study. The Journal of Sex Research.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2017.1355437.Google Scholar
  30. McKee, A. (2014). Humanities and social scientific research methods in porn studies. Porn Studies, 1(1–2), 53–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. McNeil, T. (2013). Sex education and the promotion of heteronormativity. Sexualities, 16(7), 826–846.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Nagoshi, J. L., Adams, K. A., Terrell, H. K., Hill, E. D., Brzuzy, S., & Nagoshi, C. T. (2008). Gender differences in correlates of homophobia and transphobia. Sex Roles, 59, 521–531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Nordstrom, S. N. (2015). Not so innocent anymore: Making recording devices matter in qualitative interviews. Qualitative Inquiry, 21(4), 388–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Osman, S. L. (2016). Predicting rape victim empathy based on rape victimization and acknowledgement labeling. Violence Against Women, 22(7), 767–779.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Paasonen, S. (2017). Many splendored things: Sexuality, playfulness and play. Sexualities.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1363460717731928.Google Scholar
  36. Pacilli, M. G., Taurino, A., Jost, J. T., & van der Toorn, J. (2011). System justification, right-wing conservatism, and internalized homophobia: Gay and lesbian attitudes toward same-sex parenting in Italy. Sex Roles, 65(7–8), 580–595.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Pascoe, C. J. (2007). Dude, you’re a fag: Adolescent masculinity and the fag discourse. Sexualities, 8(3), 329–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Phillips, T. (2017). Campus rape culture: Effects on individual, social, and administrative levels. Honor’s thesis, Baylor University, Waco, TX. Retrieved from https://baylor-ir.tdl.org/baylor-ir/handle/2104/9973. Accessed 1 June 2018.
  39. Pronger, B. (1998). On your knees: Carnal knowledge, masculine dissolution, doing feminism. In T. Digby (Ed.), Men Doing Feminism (pp. 69–79). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  40. Pronger, B. (1999). “Outta my endzone”: Sport and the territorial anus. Journal of Sport & Social Issues, 23(4), 373–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Reling, T. T., Barton, M. S., Becker, S., & Valasik, M. A. (2017). Rape myths and hookup culture: An exploratory study of U.S. college students’ perceptions. Sex Roles.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-017-0813-4.Google Scholar
  42. Rentschler, C. A. (2014). Rape culture and the feminist politics of social media. Girlhood Studies, 7(1), 65–82.Google Scholar
  43. Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2012). Qualitative Interviewing: The Art of Hearing Data (3rd ed.). Los Angeles: SAGE.Google Scholar
  44. Savin-Williams, R. C., & Vrangalova, Z. (2013). Mostly heterosexual as a distinct sexual orientation group: A systematic review of the empirical evidence. Developmental Review, 33(1), 58–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Schrock, D. P., & Padavic, I. (2007). Negotiating hegemonic masculinity in a batterer intervention program. Gender & Society, 21(5), 625–649.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Silva, T. (2017). Bud-sex: Constructing normative masculinity among rural straight men that have sex with men. Gender & Society, 31(1), 51–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Speer, S. A., & Hutchby, I. (2003). From ethics to analytics: Aspects of participants’ orientations to the presence and relevance of recording devices. Sociology, 37(2), 315–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Suzuki, L. A., Ahluwalia, M. K., Arora, A. K., & Mattis, J. S. (2007). The pond you fish in determines the fish you catch: Exploring strategies for qualitative data collection. The Counseling Psychologist, 35(2), 295–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Terrizzi, J. A., Jr., Shook, N. J., & Ventis, W. L. (2010). Disgust: A predictor of social conservatism and prejudicial attitudes toward homosexuals. Personality and Individual Differences, 49(6), 587–592.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Ward, J. (2015). Not gay: Sex between straight white men. New York: NYU Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Watson, E. D., Séguin, L. J., Milhausen, R. R., & Murray, S. H. (2015). The impact of a couple’s vibrator on men’s perceptions of their own and their partner’s sexual pleasure and satisfaction. Men and Masculinities, 19(4), 370–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Weinberg, M. S., & Williams, C. J. (2010). Men sexually interested in transwomen (MSTW): Gendered embodiment and the construction of sexual desire. Journal of Sex Research, 47(4), 374–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Portland Ungendering Research Initiative (PURI)PortlandUSA

Personalised recommendations