Advertisement

Speed Dating: The Making of ‘Three-Minute Masculinities’

  • Chris Haywood
Chapter

Abstract

Drawing upon the semi-structured interviews with 15 men aged 30–54, this chapter explores men’s experiences of speed dating. Beginning with theories of partner choice, the chapter engages with the ways that men navigate speed dating events by focusing on their anxiety and vulnerability. This provides a pretext for the articulation and demonstration of particular speed dating masculinities. On the one hand, there are men who take up a predatory heterosexual script. On the other, there are men who use speed dating events as a means to find a long-term partner. Interestingly, men looking for partners make up the majority of those who attending speed dating. Such men had a number of strategies that they would draw upon to choose a potential partner, or in their words, ‘the right kind of woman’. These strategies involved reviewing and evaluating women’s appearance and manner and establishing whether the women that they were meeting were ‘telling the truth’. Thus, men would use such strategies to evaluate the quality of the date. The chapter concludes by suggesting that although men in this sample tended to hold onto traditional gendered attitudes, it was clear that the speed dating event exacerbated men’s insecurities and anxieties.

Bibliography

  1. Allen, L. (2007). ‘Sensitive and Real Macho All at the Same Time.’ Young Heterosexual Men and Romance. Men and Masculinities, 10(2), 137–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bird, S. R. (1996). Welcome to the Men’s Club: Homosociality and the Maintenance of Hegemonic Masculinity. Gender & Society, 10(2), 120–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bordo, S. (1994). Reading the Male Body. In L. Goldstein (Ed.), The Male Body: Features, Destinies, Exposures. Ann Arbour: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  4. Bridges, T. S. (2008). Gender Capital and Male Bodybuilders. Body & Society, 15, 83–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bright, Z., Haywood, C., & Mac an Ghaill, M. (2013). Making Connections: Speed Dating, Masculinity and Interviewing. In B. Pini (Ed.), Men, Masculinities and Methodologies (pp. 77–89). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  6. Buston, P. M., & Emlen, S. T. (2003). Cognitive Processes Underlying Human Mate Choice: The Relationship Between Self-perception and Mate Preference in Western Societv. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 100, 8805–8810.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cameron, S., & Collins, A. (2000). Playing the Love Market: Dating, Romance and the Real World. London: Free Association Books.Google Scholar
  8. Carter, G. L., Campbell, A., & Muncer, S. J. (2014). The Dark Triad Personality: Attractiveness to Women. Personality and Individual Differences, 56, 57–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Couch, D., & Liamputtong, P. (2008). Online Dating and Mating: The Use of the Internet to Meet Sexual Partners. Qualitative Health Research, 18(2), 268–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dark, B. (2004). The Little Book of Speed Dating. London: Michael O’Mara Books.Google Scholar
  11. Davis, K. (2002). A Dubious Equality’: Men, Women and Cosmetic Surgery. Body & Society, 8(1), 49–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Deyo, Y., & Deyo, S. (2002). Speed Dating: The Smarter, Faster Way to Lasting Love. New York: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
  13. Doull, M., Oliffe, J., Knight, R., & Shoveller, J. A. (2013). Sex and Straight Young Men: Challenging and Endorsing Hegemonic Masculinities and Gender Regimes. Men and Masculinities, 16(3), 329–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Eck, B. A. (2014). Compromising Positions: Unmarried Men, Heterosexuality, and Two-Phase Masculinity. Men and Masculinities, 17(2), 147–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Forrest, S. (2010). Young Men In Love: The (Re)Making Of Heterosexual Masculinities Through “Serious” Relationships. Sexual and Relationship Therapy, 25(2), 206–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Frank, E. (2014). Groomers and Consumers: The Meaning of Male Body Depilation to a Modern Masculinity Body Project. Men and Masculinities, 17(3), 278–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gagné, P., & Tewksbury, R. (1998). Conformity Pressures and Gender Resistance Among Transgendered Individuals. Social Problems, 45(1), 81–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Giddens, A. (1990). The Consequences of Modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  19. Giddens, A. (1992). The Transformation of Intimacy: Love, Sexuality and Eroticism in Modern Societies. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  20. Goffman, E. (1983). The Interaction Order: American Sociological Association, 1982 Presidential Address. American Sociological Review, 48(1), 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Grazian, D. (2007). The Girl Hunt: Urban Nightlife and the Performance of Masculinity as Collective Activity. Symbolic Interaction, 30(2), 221–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hakim, C. (2010). Erotic Capital. European Sociological Review, 26, 499–518.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hakim, C. (2011). Honey Money: The Power of Erotic Capital. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
  24. Horowitz, G., & Kaufman, M. (1987). Male Sexuality: Towards a Theory of Liberation. In M. Kaufman (Ed.), Beyond Patriarchy (pp. 81–103). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Hunt, C. J., Gonsalkorale, K., & Murray, S. B. (2013). Threatened Masculinity and Muscularity: An Experimental Examination of Multiple Aspects of Muscularity in Men. Body Image, 10(3), 290–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hyde, A., Drennan, J., Howlett, E., & Brady, D. (2009). Young Men’s Vulnerability in Constituting Hegemonic Masculinity in Sexual Relations. American Journal of Men’s Health, 3(3), 238–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Johnson, P. (2007). Love, Heterosexuality and Society. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  28. Knights, D. (1990). Subjectivity, Power and the Labour Process. In D. Knights & H. Willmott (Eds.), Labour Process Theory (pp. 297–335). London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Korobov, N. (2011). Gendering Desire in Speed-Dating Interactions. Discourse Studies, 13(4), 461–485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kurzban, R., & Weeden, J. (2005). HurryDate: Mate Preferences in Action. Evolution and Human Behavior, 26(3), 227–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lodge, A. C., & Umberson, D. (2013). Age and Embodied Masculinities: Midlife Gay and Heterosexual Men Talk About Their Bodies. Journal of Aging Studies, 27(3), 225–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lupton, D. (1998). The Emotional Self: A Sociocultural Exploration. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  33. Maass, V. S. (2006). Images of Masculinity as Predictors of Men’s Romantic and Sexual Relationships. In V. H. Bedford & B. F. Turner (Eds.), Men in Relationships: A New Look from a Life Course Perspective (pp. 51–78). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  34. Mac an Ghaill, M. (1994). The Making of Men: Masculinities, Sexualities and Schooling. Buckingham: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Martin, P. Y., & Hummer, R. A. (1989). Fraternities and Rape on Campus. Gender & Society, 3(4), 457–473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. McWilliams, S., & Barrett, A. E. (2014). Online Dating in Middle and Later Life: Gendered Expectations and Experiences. Journal of Family Issues, 35(3), 411–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Mejia, X. E. (2005). Gender Matters: Working with Adult Male Survivors of Trauma. Journal of Counseling & Development, 83, 29–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Menadier, V. H. (2012). How Personality and Physical Attraction Lead to Possible Dating: A Reflection. Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 4(2), 111–119.Google Scholar
  39. Mishkind, M., Rodin, J., Silberstein, L. R., & Striegel-Moore, R. H. (1986). The Embodiment of Masculinity. American Behavioral Scientist, 29(5), 545–562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Mooney-Somers, J. (2005). Heterosexual Male Sexuality: Representations and Sexual Subjectivity. Ph.D. Thesis, School of Psychology, University of Western Sydney.Google Scholar
  41. Pease, B. (2000). Reconstructing Heterosexual Subjectivities and Practices with White Middle-Class Men. Race, Gender & Class, 7(1), 133–145.Google Scholar
  42. Quiroz, P. A. (2014). From Mail Order and Picture Brides, Lonely Hearts and Social Clubs. In R. B. Browne & B. Urish (Eds.), The Dynamics of Interconnections in Popular Culture(s) (pp. 114–129). Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
  43. Sassler, S., & Miller, A. J. (2014). “We’re Very Careful…”: The Fertility Desires and Contraceptive Behaviors of Cohabiting Couples. Family Relations, 63(4), 538–553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Seal, D. W., & Ehrhardt, A. A. (2003). Masculinity and Urban Men: Perceived Scripts for Courtship, Romantic, and Sexual Interactions with Women. Culture, Health & Sexuality, 5(4), 295–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Seidler, V. (2009). Recreating Sexual Politics: Men, Feminism and Politics. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  46. Sennet, R. (1974). The Fall of Public Man. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
  47. Shields, R. (1992). Spaces for the Subject of Consumption. In R. Shields (Ed.), Lifestyle Shopping: The Subject of Consumption (pp. 1–20). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  48. Speer, S. A. (2012). Feminist Conversation Analysis: Who Needs It? Qualitative Research in Psychology, 9(4), 292–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Stewart, C. (2016). The Dating Services Industry in 2016 and Beyond. Retrieved from http://blog.marketresearch.com/dating-services-industry-in-2016-and-beyond.
  50. Stiman, M., Leavy, P., & Garland, A. (2009). Heterosexual Female and Male Body Image and Body Concept in the Context of Attraction Ideals. Electronic Journal of Human Sexuality, 12. Retrieved from www.ejhs.org.
  51. Stokoe, E. (2010). “Have You Been Married, or…?”: Eliciting and Accounting for Relationship Histories in Speed-Dating Interaction. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 43(3), 260–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Sweeney, B. N. (2014). Masculine Status, Sexual Performance, and the Sexual Stigmatization of Women. Symbolic Interaction, 37(3), 369–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Taylor, B. (2001). HIV, Stigma and Health: Integration of Theoretical Concepts and the Lived Experiences of Individuals. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 35(5), 792–798.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Todd, P. M., Penke, L., Fasolo, B., & Lenton, A. P. (2007). Different Cognitive Processes Underlie Human Mate Choices and Mate Preferences. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 104(38), 15011–15016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Valentine, K. A., Li, N. P., Penke, L., & Perrett, D. I. (2014). Judging a Man by the Width of His Face: The Role of Facial Ratios and Dominance in Mate Choice at Speed-Dating Events. Psychological Science, 25(3), 806–811.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Vannini, P., & Williams, J. P. (Eds.). (2009). Authenticity in Culture, Self, and Society. Farnham: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  57. Waskul, D. (2009). The Importance of Insincerity and Inauthenticity for Self and Society: Why Honesty Is not the Best Policy. In P. Vannini & J. P. Williams (Eds.), Authenticity in Culture, Self, and Society (pp. 51–64). Farnham: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  58. Zukin, S. (1998). Urban Lifestyles: Diversity and Standardisation in Spaces of Consumption. Urban Studies, 35(5–6), 825–839.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Chris Haywood
    • 1
  1. 1.Media, Culture and HeritageNewcastle UniversityNewcastle-upon-TyneUK

Personalised recommendations