Media & Cultural Studies

Pietermaritzburg Campus

Honours Research Project

2014
Straight Acting and the Everyday Gay: An
Analysis of the Represented Masculinities of
Only Lads Users.
Student Number: 211546749
Name: Warwick Jones
Date of Submission: 3/11/2014

I declare that this research is my own work and that all the sources I
have used to prepare it have been properly acknowledged.
Signed:

Contents
Introduction: _____________________________________________ 3
Literature Review: ________________________________________ 5
Methodology: ____________________________________________ 20
Data Analysis: ___________________________________________ 25
Findings and Conclusions: _________________________________ 42

Acknowledgements
At the end of long, but incredibly rewarding Honours experience, it seems appropriate
to give thanks to those who made this final research project possible. To Fiona, for
your guidance, patience and support, and for trimming the unnecessary frills thank
you. To my family, who have endured more than their fair share and remained
positive thank you. To the friends who have certainly seen the effects of sleep
deprivation in action thank you. To Red Bull for that late night motivation, thank
you. And to Eskom, for keeping the power on long enough for me to finish this final
write up thank you.

Introduction
The study of masculinity is one that has been widely criticised by scholars in
neighbouring fields, particularly those of gender and queerness (Beasley, 2005), for its
apparent focus on white, middle-class heterosexuals. Indeed, comparatively there are
few scholars in this field, and fewer still who have focussed on the specific subject of
gay masculinity. Questions regarding the specific norms and construction (adopting
the assumption that gender is socially constructed, for purposes of this study) of gay
masculinity and the translation of this onto particular social media platforms remain
somewhat unexplored.
The very nature of online dating is one that has fuelled much debate regarding online
identity construction, specifically with regards to the way individuals represent
themselves (and that fact that anonymity may allow this representation to be nonlinear to real world representations). Only Lads in particular is a somewhat generic
example of a site that fuses online dating with social networking. It is one of the most
popular queer dating sites in South Africa, having been originally developed in the
UK by Rocketware Limited, it has spread steadily through much of South Africas gay
community. Its popularity is particularly due to the fact that, unlike many sites of its
kind, the majority of the features it offers do not require a paid membership.
Only Lads, like may social networking site on the internet (to one degree or another),
utilises the idea of an identity menu; asking users to describe themselves in a series
of drop-down menus. On Only Lads, these menus ask for information ranging from
the ethnic origins of users, right through to their sexual orientation, role and penis
size. It is, however, not a necessity to fill in all of these fields. Users may also upload
a profile picture and cover photo, and are given a fair bit of space to describe
themselves and, in a separate field, what they seek in their potential partners.
While this project has ignored a fair amount of information provided, namely the
lifestyle information, the leisure activities and the selected characteristics users may
have included, it has looked to the descriptive fields provided, the selected types
users find attractive, their selected desired activities and the profile pictures they

upload. The combination of these identity menus, descriptive paragraphs and profile
pictures should provide material that suggests a number of things about, at the very
least, the way in which each user constructs his own masculinity and identity. This
analysis can be furthered, however, so as to include the analysis of the values and
societal norms that are present in the construction of masculinities and identities of
Only Lads users.
The latter part of this analysis will require a strong theoretical component, comparing
the findings of this research with similar studies, and applying these findings to
relevant theoretical ideas that would further an explanation of the data collected. The
theoretical backdrop will rely on masculinity studies (paying particular attention to
ideas of hegemonic masculinity, as well as alternative masculinities), queerness,
identity construction and social identity theories; all in the context of new media
theory. The nature of the study itself is qualitative and somewhat exploratory, with
little research into the specific niche that is the representation of masculinities on
queer dating sites.
Subsequently, the research questions that came of these initial investigative
hypothesises focussed on the represented masculinities of Only Lads users. They
highlight the aim of the project, and have been provided below:
1. How do users of Only Lads in the South Africa represent themselves, visually
and verbally, on Only Lads?

What does a discursive analysis of profile keywords (with

particular attention to those that are gender and role associative)
reveal?

What values and norms can be inferred from this analysis?

2. What are the implications of the above analyses in light of theories of

hegemonic and non-hegemonic constructions of masculinity and online
identity construction?

Literature Review
In the analysis of the represented masculinities of Only Lads users, a number of
theories must be considered to offer a balanced and insightful reading. This project
will make particular use of theories surrounding hegemonic and alternate
masculinities and their construction. It will also, however, utilise theory regarding the
construction of identity and masculinity on the internet, paying particular attention to
the use of social media and dating sites (and previous studies in this area), and
contextualise these theories within a gay and South African context. Finally, it will
look to the conceptual framework laid out by Castells surrounding identity building to
make inferences regarding how users of Only Lads choose to represent themselves.
The Evolution of Masculinity Studies
The study of masculinity is certainly one that has attracted its fair share of criticism
over the years. It has been argued to be rooted in the past, many theorists insisting that
it is vague and insufficiently concrete (Beasley, 2005: 178); too much so to have
any real resonance among the popular postmodern age of identity research. Where
newer research topics surrounding femininity and identity have addressed their
varying and complex natures; for the most part, before the late 1980s masculinity had
been left to the past a reminder of the burden of patriarchy and centuries of gender
inequality. To a degree, these criticisms are hard to ignore, particularly with reference
to hegemonic ideas of masculinity. However, if this study seeks to maintain its own
relevance, it must seek to move past these criticisms where possible. This section of
the literature review will look to the changing nature of hegemonic masculinity; it will
dispel criticism of the subject through a brief reading of the subjects history and a
detailed report of the theories that highlight its transition to the multiple and varying
form it is now understood as.
Hegemonic masculinity was first proposed as a concept in the early 80s, stemming
from research done in Australian high schools focussing on social inequality between
boys and girls (Kessler et al. 1982). Only this particular study found that there was
also a social hierarchy among boys, one that seemed to prize certain characteristics

above others. The idea of universalizing characteristics of men was not new to
society; psychological and sociological studies had recognized the social nature of
masculinity (Connell and Messershmidt, 2005: 831) as early as the late 50s. It
wasnt until the 70s when a flurry of writings on the male role emerged, criticising it
as the source of oppressive behaviour by men (Connell and Messershmidt, 2005:
831). Hegemonic masculinity began to be understood as a the maintenance of
practices that institutionalize[d] mens dominance over women and is constructed in
relation to women and to subordinate [other] masculinities (Connell, 1987: 185-86).
Masculinity as a field of research has flourished considerably in recent years, despite
facing criticism for essentializing the characteristics of men. Connell and
Messershmidt (2005) argue that the study of masculinity has done so well precisely
because the underlying concept is not reified or essentialist (836). They continue,
suggesting that masculinity as a contemporary study, must be recognised not as a
fixed entity embedded in the body or personality traits of individuals but as
configurations of practice that are accomplished in social action (836). As such,
masculinity is not limited to hegemony, nor (as recent scholars have argued) is it a
concept utterly bound to gender but rather a set of varying practices that uphold
social hierarchy.
Despite its social nature and impact on society, the formation of masculinity among
young boys - the transition from boy to man - has received little attention until very
recently. In her study, which focussed primarily on the formation of masculinity
among teenage boys (particularly those who partook in gang activity), Chopra
(2000) suggests that learning masculinity is not simply a linear process, but rather one
that constantly changes and adapts as its influenced by class, age, gender and social
relationships. She suggests that boys are shaped into men, by other men (2000).
To similar effect, Sharon Bird (1996) suggests that throughout mens lives hegemonic
masculinity norms are, and always have been, maintained by homosocial
relationships; where homosociality is defined as the non-sexual attractions held by
men (or women) for members of their own sex (Bird, 1996: 121). Bird uses ideas
originally theorised by Lipman-Blumen (1976) that suggest that homosociality

promotes clear distinctions between women and men through segregation in social
situations (Bird, 1996: 121).
Over time, the study of masculinity has developed significantly. Indeed, traditional
notions of hegemonic masculinity argue that masculinity itself is largely about
dominance. But the continued study of masculinity and gender has led contemporary
scholars to suggest that gender itself is a hierarchical relationship that involves mens
dominance (Beasley, 2005: 190). In recent years this has been refined and expanded
with profound congruence, suggesting instead that masculinity should be understood
as involving oppositional relations to and dominance of, women and men (Beasley,
2005; Chopra, Dasgupta and Janeja, 2000). Chopra, Dasgupta and Janeja, in their
study of Indian masculinities, caution against the myth of a single, unitary,
homogenised masculinity (1608), one that is seen only in opposition to femininity
through a lens of violence and oppression, and suggest that such ideas should be
rendered obsolete.
This is not at all to suggest that hegemonic masculinity itself is obsolete; but rather
that it must be understood as a complex collection of social influences that are culture,
race and time specific. This is to say, with congruence among various international
studies, that there is no one unitary framework for hegemonic masculinities; there are
many, and they vary by race, class, culture and generation. Cases of particular interest
in Chile (Valds and Olivarra, 1998), Japan (Ishii-Kuntz, 2003) and Mexico
(Gutmann, 1996), countries recognised for their stringent cultural homogeneity,
convey that homogenised ideas of masculinity, while not at all dispelled, still vary
across social and economic class.
Gutmanns ethnographic study of Mexican machismo (1996) is particularly unique
in that it studied the varying masculinities at work in a working class settlement; its
conclusion went as far as to suggest that amid a move towards nationalised Mexican
identities, the masculinities of participants were peppered with conflict between social
divisions, and were renegotiated on a daily basis. Gutmanns research in particular,
has moved furthest from traditional notions of essentialised hegemonic masculinity;
his results speak to the emerging idea that the construction of masculinity (with
particular reference to homogenised ideals) is far more complex than originally
7

anticipated. Within his research, this complexity in masculinity construction is

illustrated in the conflict between two well established hegemonies: traditional
cultural expectations (the conservative and often violent ideas associated with being
macho) and the developing social expectations of their nationalised identities (nation
building identities that focus far more of community building) (Gutmann, 1996).
If recent studies have achieved anything, it is to confirm the validity of masculinity as
a viable subject of study, and to illustrate that even hegemonic notions of masculinity,
like their feminine counterparts, are fluid social structures dependent on more than
simply the maintenance of dominance. Masculinity, while still plagued by concerns
(Chopra 2000) surrounding the glorification of male violence and aggression, needs to
be juxtaposed against the uncertainties of reproducing masculinity (Chopra,
Dasgupta and Janeja, 2000: 1609) through already paradoxical and ambiguous
gendered cultural tropes. This is to suggest that the basis of gender role and identity
(something traditionally central to both masculinity and femininity) is often
interwoven with cultural traditions and practices. Chopra, Dasgupta and Janeja,
however, suggest that these cultural traditions (particularly in Chopras study of
teenage masculinity in Indian gangs) are often vague in their representations of men
leaving much of the work in constructing a masculine identity to individual groups of
men.

Given the focus of this study on the nature of masculinities constructed by gay and
bisexual men on Only Lads, a key question to be asked is can queer men be
masculine? This line of questioning requires pushing beyond the boundaries of
normative hegemonic theories, which are argued to be constructed against gay
masculinities (Beasley, 2005: 212) It is necessary, within the context of this study
that masculinity be seen as multiple and non-homogenous, with the construction of
masculinity viewed as far more personalised and identity based (Connell, 2000).
Where alternate masculinities are so easily scrutinized and repressed under societys
magnifying glass, though, Connell concedes that the process of constructing ones
masculinity remains more in the realm of social identity suggesting that the pressure
of societal influence plays a large role in repressing marginalized constructions of
masculinity and identity.
8

Alternate constructions of masculinity, although being the newer and more complex
component within the sphere of masculinity studies, have received the bulk of
research in the field in recent times. Within these studies, the contextualisation of
masculinity is a far more nuanced affair, understanding masculinity as a social
construction, which may not even signal so-called male bodies (Connell, 2000: 16).
This line of research has strayed so far from essentialism that researchers have
explored masculinities enacted by people with female bodies (Connell and
Messershmidt, 2005, 836). Alternate masculinities are suggested to appear in various
forms, but are given little social power.
In Welcome to the Mens Club, Sharon Bird states that within the existing gender
order, meanings associated with behaviours that challenge hegemonic masculinity are
denied legitimization as masculine (1996: 121). Similarly, Demetriou (2001) asserts
that these alternate masculinities are subordinated and marginalized having no real
effect on the construction of hegemonic masculinities. To effect, non-hegemonic
masculinities are considered to exist in tension with, but never penetrate or impact
hegemonic masculinity (Connell and Messershmidt, 2005: 844). In addition to this,
men who reap the rewards associated with hegemonic masculinity (particularly power
and social status) but do not exact strong versions of masculine dominance are
generally regarded as showing a complicit masculinity (Connell and Messershmidt,
2005: 832).
Alternate masculinities have traditionally been thought subjugated and powerless to
their hegemonic counterparts, but the study of masculinity has broadened so
significantly that this is no longer necessarily the case. While most scholars now
accept that alternate masculinities influence hegemonic masculinities, emphasis is
placed on the fact that alternate masculinities, often marginalised in the wake of
hegemonic ideaology, are affected to a far greater degree. The trouble in pinning
down an exact measure of which masculinities are considered hegemonic and which
are alternative lies far less in the introduction of alternate masculinities, and more
within the way hegemonic masculinities are constructed, maintained and how they
operate.. Masculinity is indeed a set of social practices, hegemonic masculinity in

particular, that aim to reproduce a social order; but, this is not necessarily always to
the defence of patriarchy.
Hegemonic masculinity itself is far more nuanced than most scholars in the past have
acknowledged and, as scholars have begun to suggest, is not always based on real
men. In her study on the psychology of men, Nancy Chodorouw (1978), first hinted at
the idea that masculinity in developing teens was based far more on cultural
stereotypes of the masculine role than their individual but absent fathers (Gardiner,
2013: 114). Connell and Messershmidt, too, talk to the idea that the practice of
masculinity is affected by the circulation of models of admired masculine conduct,
which may be exalted by churches, narrated by mass media, or celebrated by the
state (Connell and Messershmidt, 2005: 838). While these models do express and
often echo existing ideals, dreams and desires among real men, they both refer to and
distort the everyday practice of masculinity. When men are understood in this way (as
hierarchically positioning themselves through discursive social practices), some
theorists suggests that individuality is often sacrificed moving the emphasis of
masculinity from the individual to the complex social structures that affect men
(Whitehead, 2002).
Masculinities in South Africa; the old, the new and the gay
South African society presents a fairly interesting case study of hegemonic
masculinity. Robert Morrell (2005) suggests that the cultural climate, one that has
seen significant change over the years, is strewn with interconnecting conflicts
between race, gender, and culture. The countrys social landscape has seen a swift turn
from the oppressive white patriarchy of Apartheid towards one that, in theory, upholds
gender and racial equality. Realistically, however, this transition is ongoing, and still
sees conflicts play out in the day to day lives of South African citizens especially in
the construction and hierarchy of identities and masculinities.
Despite the shift in gender power South Africa has experienced, this progress had not
overthrow[n] patriarchy, or removed men from their domination of public life,
politics and earning (Morrell, 2005: 271). There has been much debate, over the
years, surrounding mens role in society; where the focus of mobilised mens groups
10

like the South African Association of Men (SAAM) has included restoring male
authority (Morrell, 2005: 282) and restoring the tattered remains of the male image
(Morrell, 2005: 277). While support for such groups was minimal, their presence was
indicative of the resistance of hegemonic masculinities to change, and the reclamation
of male privilege. In addition to this, these organisations are representative of white,
middle-class ideas of hegemonic masculinity; of less report, and more concern
(according to Robert Morrell (2001) and Graeme Reid (2013)), is the overwhelming
resistance of patriarchal systems among black, low-income groups in the countrys
less developed corners.
South Africans, being the culturally diverse people that they are, have seen much
change over the last twenty years; but in almost equal amounts, a tendency to cling to
the past. The hard right Afrikaner( Swart, 2001: 86), a paragon of the apartheid era,
is argued by Sandra Swart in her study of the declining Afrikaner
Weerstandsbeweging (AWB), to be a people that have most epitomised the stubborn
defence of male privilege. Though the masculinity presented by hard right Afrikaners
has most certainly endorsed powerful paternal figures that seem to replicate
patriarchal society in a new constitutionally non-sexist environment (Swart, 2001:
86), it has become somewhat insular. While Swart (2001) seems to suggest that it has
lost its hegemony among white South Africans, Kobus du Pisani (2001) suggests that
while it no longer prescribes ideals of masculinity to South African society at large
(172), to one degree or another, its legacy will still be evident in white South African
masculinities for years to come. What cannot be contested however, is that amid the
crises of masculinity in South Africa and the gender anxiety of a nation propelled
forward; for these men lost in the New South Africa (Swart, 2001: 87) there is no
quick trek.
While due to the socio-economic struggles associated with the digital divide (a section
to be covered near the end of this chapter) the representation of black masculinities
may be somewhat underrepresented on Only Lads, an understanding of the changing
structure of hegemonic masculinity in African culture is essential. Quite surprisingly,
black South Africans are faced with a similar struggle in relation to issues of
hegemonic masculinity to that of their white counterparts. Now that the social and
political climate of the country has changed so dramatically, black South African men
11

are faced with gender anxiety in a non-sexist environment, as well as a clash of

developing cultural ideals in the construction of their masculinities. Using the partial
transformation of Zulu masculinity, or ubudoda, as an illustration, one gets an idea of
both the adaptive nature, and stubborn resilience of masculinity, particularly within a
South African context.
The first of these masculinities (and the oldest) represents the traditional African
gender order (Hemson, 2001: 58); placing value in physical prowess, courage and
endurance (Hemson, 2001: 58), associated with ideas like Ozinyathi [men like
buffaloes] and manliness. While this has remained somewhat prevalent in traditional
settings, it has largely made way for Amakholwa which is associated with
Christian converts, and prizes piety, education and familial respectability above all
else (Hemson, 2001: 58). In South Africa, the third notion, that of black masculinity
(Morrell, 1998) arose from the black urban working class living in townships under
apartheid rule. Black masculinity grew from black resistance, and many argue that
its oppositional character and violent assertion (Hemson, 2001: 58) are two of the
most common qualities still functioning in the construction of black South African
masculinity.
Despite these categories, Hemson, in his study of the masculinities of Durban
lifeguards in 2001, suggested a further change in these masculinities. His study
concluded that the lifeguards hed interviewed, as a young, emerging black lowermiddle class, had drifted from all three of these traditional constructions; instead
placing their values in self-confidence (Ukuzithemba) and Ukubekezela (patience,
forbearing and stoicism). However, Hemsons subjects still found their female
counterparts lacking, particularly in their ability to handle difficult situation (2001,
68). What this illustrates, more than anything, about the nature of masculinity in
South Africa; is the paradoxical relationship between how stubborn men are to
relinquish the past, and their desire to fulfil a new space in society.
An area of study within the theme of masculinity that has received particular
attention, particularly for its perplexing and problematic nature, is that of homosexual
masculinities. It has already been established that hegemonic notions of masculinity
are largely regarded to be maintained by men, and by cultural norms that dont
necessarily reflect everyday social practices. It has also been previously established
12

that alternative masculinities are often subdued and marginalised by their hegemonic
counterparts. Gay masculinities have, for a great deal of time, been considered an
alternative masculinity as a whole. However, in recent times, this view has been
altered in a great number of ways.
Hegemonic masculinity was originally theorized alongside the idea of emphasised
femininity (which foregrounds utter compliance by women with patriarchal society),
but has since begun to be understood as multiple and varying. What this suggests is
that there is no one overarching hierarchy of masculinity, but that different groups of
men (and women) may have their own masculine hierarchy, supporting different
norms, favoured character traits and ideals. Masculinity among gay men, then, can be
considered as having both its own hierarchy and perhaps conforming to those of wider
South African culture.
South African hegemonic masculinity has been argued to have been created
defensively during apartheid, embracing racism, misogyny and homophobia; traits
that are argued by many (Swart, 2001, Cocks, 2001, Morrell 2001, Reid, 2013) to
have survived, at least partially, the decline of apartheid and traditional Afrikaans
masculine ideals. At the same time, the notion that homosexuality is unAfrican is
one that still permeates much of black culture in South Africa. Opposition to
homosexuality has gone so far as to challenge South Africas extremely progressive
constitution which protects the rights of citizens on the grounds of sexual orientation
(The House of Traditional Leaders, 2012), and the vocalised homophobia of President
Jacob Zuma is no secret (BBC, 2006). Despite this, however, black and white gay
men (even in some small and underdeveloped communities) have begun to establish
themselves, and explore their identities from within safe spaces across South Africa
(Reid, 2013)
Unfortunately, within the public sphere, South Africa has seen little unified gay
presence (even less among bisexual men). Many theorists attribute this missing sense
of community largely to the legacy of apartheid; suggesting that socio-political and
economic rifts still remain too vast for a sense of unity to develop. (Isaacs and
McKendrick, 1992, Cage, 2003, Tucker 2009) In addition to this, where unified queer
communities have developed in the US and across Europe as gay rights movements,
13

South Africas progressive constitution is theorized to have actually hampered the

emergence of a public queer community. Although there is evidence that this is slowly
changing (particularly as gay-pride festivals become more popular), it is also
suggested that this division is why so many gay, bisexual and curious men have
turned to the internet.
Constructions of Identity and Gay Masculinity on The Internet.
It is important to briefly acknowledge queer theory, the study of differing sexualities,
before progressing further. Although a rather minor and technical matter, it is
beneficial to understand that an individual identifying as gay or straight is not
necessarily useful, arguing instead that most people fall somewhere on a continuum
between gay and straight (not a view Only Lads drop-down identity menu
appears to coincide with). Sexually identifying ones self is not necessarily a question
of normalising monosexual identities (Alexander and Yescavage, 2009: 50). As the
authors suggest, many men who identify as straight but harbour same-sex fantasies
are not considered gay or even bisexual, and do not identify as such, but none-the-less
would fit somewhere on the spectrum between gay and straight. Here, then, it is
important to categorize the men that appear into the two categories that Only Lads
offers, gay and bisexual, but recognize that these may not necessarily represent the
actual sexuality of each user.
Masculinity studies and queer theory converge on the idea that particularly with
penetrative sex, but also in terms of intimate relationships, certain roles are often
adopted by individuals. Traditional notions of hegemonic masculinity suggest that
within a heterosexual context, penetrative sex is associated with the enactment of
male dominance (Stoltenberg, 1991, in Beasley, 2005: 205). Queer theory and
alternative masculinity theory, then, suggests that men (and women) should be able to
choose the role they prefer fulfilling, allowing men, too, to be both the penetrator and
the penetrated enacting both traditionally male and female roles.
Identity theory is difficult to isolate on its own, in that it is such a blanket term
regarding the way humans socially construct themselves. For purposes of this study,
identity is largely covered by ideas such as masculinity, gendered roles and self
14

presentation; painting identity as more of a varying network of self construction,

rather than a fixed term. It is argued to be a reflexive evaluation (Solomon, 1983:
321), that relies just as steadily on our understanding of who and what we are, as it
does on how we anticipate others will view us. This understanding of identity
incorporates (to a somewhat lesser degree) the idea of social identity theory; which
suggests that the core of an identity is the categorization of the self as an occupant of
a role, and the incorporation, into the self, of the meanings and expectations
associated with that role (Stets and Burke, 2000: 225). It suggests that assuming
certain roles in society is intrinsic to the way in which we construct our identities, and
like queer theory, suggests that gender and sexuality are perhaps more about the
performance of roles required to fit within an in-group. This is not only suggestive
of the performance of certain roles, but the alteration of ones self-presentation, so as
to be identified as part of a certain group.
However, with regards to the New Media aspect of this study, identity becomes
somewhat more difficult to pin down, despite the fact that no aspect of online social
life has received as much attention as identity (Baym, 2006: 41). While
psychological evaluation of social feedback on identity construction online has been
somewhat inconclusive, many researchers (Kozinets, 1997; Schau and Gilly, 2003;
Schau and Muniz, 2002) believe it to be an important part in how individuals portray
themselves online. In his study of how students and entry-level professionals in New
York construct their identities on Social Media Networks, Igor Matic (2011) found
that internet users knowingly represented themselves in accordance with audience
expectation (19), which was not necessarily in accordance with their own
expectation or understanding of themselves. Matics study also found that the
representation of identity online generally revolves around the interaction between
four typified characteristics of online usage: honesty, deception, maintained
anonymity and personal accuracy.
It is widely acknowledged within the field of online identity, that individuals are free
to construct online identities as they please, potentially subverting their real-life
gender, race and class. Some researchers in this field argue that anonymity allows for
individuals to be multiple people simultaneously, with no one of these selves
necessarily more valid than any other (Baym, 2006: 41). Identity itself is argued to
15

be composed of many differing ideas of who an individual thinks they are (Markus
and Nurius, 1986) these possible selves are suggested to be no less authentic than
one centralised self representation. This would reflect a more disembodied online
identity, focussing on multiplicity and fantasy. However, many theorists also argue
that anonymity, and its associated lessening of social risk, may allow people to be
more honest and take greater risks in their self-disclosures (Baym, 2006: 41).
Research by Turkle (1995) and Hardey (2002) go so far as to suggest that virtual
reality is itself an edited reflection of offline reality, and that offline and online
identities have the ability to influence each other. This line of research reflects a far
more embodied notion of online identity, focussing far more on maintaining
authenticity in self-representations.
With regards to queer identities and social repression, the option of anonymity should
theoretically allow for far more freedom online than in real world society. The internet
is argued to provide a space on the internet for various communities to exist, not
outside of society, but slightly aside from the rigid demands of societal norms. While
a site like Only Lads relies far more on the premise that participants are looking
eventually to meet each other in person, it still provides a virtual community
(Jankowski, 2006: 61) in which the norms of societal structure would follow, but to a
varying degree. The context of internet dating is argued to provide individuals with
the opportunity to both explore and validate their possible selves online (Yurchisin,
2005). It is for these reasons that the internet has seen various communities flourish
to such a great extent people are able to safely enact identities that would be
otherwise potentially cause real world social consequences.
Here, in theory, users should experience more freedom to perform whatever role they
desire; more so even than gay spaces in their respective society (gay bars, for
example), due to the option of maintaining anonymity on the internet. It also suggests,
however, that the internet itself is a community that adheres to its own sets of societal
norms, based loosely on what is acceptable within real world societies. This is both in
the sense that real world norms may permeate onto these virtual communities, and
that certain virtual communities may exist entirely to subvert real world norms.

16

This particular study finds great relevance in the conceptual framework of Manuel
Castells with regard to online identity construction, in which he makes a clear
distinction between role and identity (2009). Certain roles impact identity
construction, but their relative weight in influencing peoples behaviour depend upon
negotiations between individuals institutions and organisations (Castells, 2009: 7).
Here, Castells does not denounce the impact of roles on identity formation, but rather
suggests that their influence is far less direct and immediate. The highlight of his
argument however (and a central concept in this project) is Castells induction of three
differing forms of identity building: legitimizing identity, resistance identity and
project identity.
Legitimizing identity acts to confirm ones place in society, legitimising cultural and
societal norms, where resistance identity is essentially an identity constructed in
opposition to these norms (essentially, as Castells describes it, trench warfare).
Project identity, though, is when this resistance moves out of the trenches, so to speak;
it is the mobilization of an identity aimed at promoting social change. While of course
there are points of similarity between these three forms, it is important to note each
one in an analysis of online identities. With regard to this study, an aim is to note
whether the online identity constructions gay and bisexual men present on Only Lads
legitimize hegemonic masculine ideals, resist them, or suggest an active move for
social change (as notions of project identity would suggest).
This does reintroduce the focus of this study the represented masculinities of gay
and bisexual men on Only Lads. It also means that this literature review must return to
the issue of masculinity, contextualising it instead within existing research on gay
masculinities on dating sites, and the connection this has with identity building.
Online representations of masculinity on Only Lads, for the most part, seem to fall
into three categories: those deemed feminine, those self-labelled straight-acting
and those who fall between the two. In a scenario that both resonates with and utterly
baffles social identity theory - by scholarly account the relationship between straightacting men and their feminine counterparts is tenuous at best. This is sometimes
argued to be a reflection of the conflict, instability and otherness between

17

heterosexual and homosexual men, but instead raises a number of questions about gay
masculinity (Clarkson, 2006).
Studies of the personal advertisings of gay men have repeatedly shown them to stress
their own masculinity above the associated femininity that saddles notions of
homosexuality (Sanchez et al, 2010: 105). Particularly in online dating, there is a
recognized tendency for gay men to emphasise interests, characteristics and interests
that are traditionally deemed masculine. While, in his study of straight-acting
men on StraightActing.com, Jay Clarkson asserts that this notion of imitating
heterosexual notions of masculinity (and the plea for tolerance thereof) is simply a
thinly veiled discourse of normative, homophobic and misogynistic discourse; Robert
Payne (2007) suggests that while uncomfortably aligned with these notions, it is not
necessarily malicious in its intent.
Clarkson speaks undeniably to the idea of the conflict between masculine and
feminine gay men, suggesting that the construction of straight-acting identities are
oppositional in nature, and more often than not convey negative attitudes towards
other gay men and women (192). Payne is far more sensitive in his analysis of
straight-acting men on Gaydar. He suggests that calling oneself straight-acting is
very different from simply acting straight (533) in that it is rather an attempt to be
disassociated with the shamefully spectacular and excessively feminine gay man
(533). Payne argues that this does not distance straight-acting men from being gay, but
could instead suggest that their identities exist in opposition to the stereotypically
feminine gay men regularly represented in the media (534). He also suggests,
however, that straight-acting men generally utilise reductive self-designations to
remain the everyday man to remain normal. This too is exclusionary; suggesting
that to be normal is to distance oneself from being fat, feminine or Asian.
Payne and Clarkson do converge, however, on the idea that whatever the impact or
conscious aim of construction straight-acting masculinities, the identities of these men
are peppered with guilt and a need to reinforce their social standing. Essentially, the
straight-acting subject betrays and attempts to assuage his conscience of homosexual
guilt (Payne, 2007: 537) and (as Clarkson concludes) imitates heterosexual norms
to cling to the power that this position entails (2005: 251). Even gay men, it seems,
18

have a tendency to re-enact hegemonic masculine ideals that men and boys cling to as
protection against gender anxiety and feelings of powerlessness (Connell and
Messershmidt, 2005: 842).
To Conclude
In the analysis of relevant literature, this study has seen an argument form from the
use of theories surrounding hegemonic and alternate masculinities, and their
construction (particularly within a South African context). It has also looked to theory
surrounding online identity construction within the frame of social media and dating
sites, using previous studies within these fields to suggests how participants choose to
represent themselves (often making inference to why). The progression of this
argument centres on the research questions that this project aims to answer; those
regarding users visual and verbal representation, and the values and norms that may
be inferred from this analysis.

19

Methodology Chapter
In an attempt to analyse the presented constructions of queer masculinities on Only
Lads, this project focuses primarily on issues surrounding hegemonic ideals of
masculinity, alternative ideas of masculinity and online identity construction. It is
important for a psychosocial study, to clearly address the context in which this
research project is situated.
Considering the interpretive nature of this project, the methods used can be
considered qualitative research. Within such parameters, it is necessary to reject the
positivist assumption that everything of interest can be measured (Priest, 2010; 6).
This study follows a similar line of thinking, seeking to understand the way in queer
men construct and represent their masculinity and identity on the social networking
site, Only Lads. The focus needs to be to engage in the kinds of open-ended,
inductive exploration made possible by qualitative research. (Terre Blanche, Kelly
and Durheim, 2006; 272)
While still within the frame of qualitative research, this study moves towards the
realm of critical realism. Critical realism is an adaptation of positivism; taking the
certainty and the absoluteness of the approach (Denscombe, 1998, 125). It embraces
a post-positivist epistemology; lauding theoretical concepts as important frameworks
that offer empirical explanations of often deep, concealed social realities. A realist
ontology accepts that social reality is complex, suggesting that social phenomena are
often the result of multiple concealed causes; thereby understanding that where social
norms exist, they sometimes influenced by factors that are not necessarily observable
or measurable.
This may seem a problem, given the nature of this study, but it does not go so far as to
say that societal norms can not be analysed and deconstructed, but rather places a
sense of limitation on studies surrounding social reality. Its important to understand
that studies of this nature can reveal only suggestions at understandings of real world
constructions, and not absolute understanding at all. This project offers a glimpse of
truth (which is no less accurate) but cannot offer a complete understanding. Textual

20

analysis cannot make self assertions about the intentions of a texts producer, nor
can it validly infer the impact of the text on readers, viewers or listeners. (Deacon,
2007, 189) What it can do, though and what this study aims to achieve, is to offer
provocative and productive hypotheses about these processes. (Deacon, 2007, 189)
This project will consist primarily of a discourse analysis of all the profiles that
appear on an Only Lads account set up specifically for this study. The account itself
must first be cleared with Only Lads administrators, so as to avoid breaching their
terms of use, and ensuring ethical responsibility. The account will not need to specify
its intentions to users of Only Lads, however, and will not advertise the study it is
used to perform. This is primarily because it is unnecessary, as the Only Lads terms of
use clearly state that no copyrights are extended to users, with all information
considered the intellectual property of Only Lads. In addition to this, knowledge of an
observer may cause men to delete or change their profiles or change some of the
information provided; this should be avoided, so as to best represent occurring online
constructions of masculinity and identity.
While upon original inspection of Only Lads, it seems that profiles appear only based
on online users within a certain geographical distance, this study utilised the search
function on the site, allowing access to all the profiles that have listed South Africa as
their current place of residence: well over 1000 profiles. This method of sampling is
known as maximum variation sampling (Kelly, 2006; 290), and involves the
collection of the broadest range of viable information (here limited only by
geographical location and the use of the social networking site, Only Lads). This is,
however, far too large a number, and thus profiles were sorted in order of the users
last visit to the site. From this, the first eighty profiles were collected, lowering the
sample number significantly.
Before an understanding of users can be established, a brief screening method must
be employed; but certain aspects of this process can be recorded for brief analysis.
Only Lads requires each member to create a profile, which is essentially their own
page, much like Facebook, that contains a profile picture, a cover photo and
information about that individual. These profiles contain only the information users
are willing post to the public, and include set answers from drop-down identity
21

menus regarding orientation, role, relationship status, age, height, race, body type,
and even penis size. Users may also decide to fill out the adult section (detailing
what they seek in a sexual partner), as well as sections that allow users to select what
they seek in potential partners and describe themselves in their own words. Only Lads
is entirely unique as a case study, in that it is the only popular gay dating site that
makes use of a drop-down menu for users to select distinct characteristics to describe
themselves offering an insight, perhaps, into the valued character traits among gay
and bisexual men in South Africa. Users can, however, choose to leave all the
information menus blanks, as well as the descriptive fields; even uploading a profile
picture is optional. Only Lads, though, differs distinctly from Facebook in that it is
aimed specifically at gay and bisexual men, and functions as a dating site.
Unfortunately, upon closer inspection, 15 of the original 80 profiles contained too
little information to be useful having filled in neither descriptive field and uploaded
no profile picture (a trend among some users seems to be to leave almost every
information field blank). It is important that such profiles be discarded from the final
analysis; significantly lowering the number of profiles to be examined to a far more
manageable number. The basic information of these profiles, however, was still
recorded, and inferences may still be drawn from this data. Analysis of the remaining
profiles will begin at a contextual level, regarding the information they provide in the
drop-down menus available. Here, profiles were separated and categorized based on
commonalities in their selected role and orientation, before a content analysis of
all the information provided in the drop-down menus, and a brief textual analysis of
the accompanying photos was performed. Then, this project specifically analysed the
words Only Lads members used to describe themselves in the descriptive fields on
their profiles (in relation to the information they provided via drop-down menus,
regarding orientation and role), and the pictures that accompany them, utilising the
differing forms of discourse analysis detailed below. In this case, the combination of
content, textual and discourse analyses should highlight the norms and values
implicated in the construction of the masculinities of each user.
Of the methods of textual analysis, this project has relied on discourse analysis, for its
ability to deconstruct and highlight sometimes complex structures and connotations
within a text. Discourse analysis, though, is incredibly complex in itself, relying on
22

more than one aspect in dissecting a text; this particular project focussed more on the
idea of performing an ideological analysis; which, as Brennen (2012) suggests, should
have identified the dominant ideologies of individuals, groups or communities. In this
case, an indication of the norms and values implicated in the construction of the
masculinities of each user should be afforded, as well as a suggestive spectrum of the
different norms and values at work in the construction of masculinities on Only Lads.
While an ideological analysis alone is sufficient as the core analysis of this project,
another point of interest are the binary notions of gender and masculinity argued by
most scholars in these fields. Binary oppositions are widely argued to be a
fundamental way in which the human mind produces meaning. (Berger, 2000; 71)
Thus, this particular discourse analysis will contain paradigmatic elements; studying
how oppositions hidden in the text generate meaning. (Berger, 2000; 70) This mode
of analysis adds a more structured approach to the way in which gender and role
associative keywords are analysed and, theoretically, allows for a more succinct set of
results, like an ideological analysis - revealing the values and norms at work within
each users online self representation.
There are a number of issues that could hinder a project such as this, most within the
range of human error on the researchers part, which can only be avoided through
careful planning and the ability to deal rigorously with data. While a certain degree of
researcher bias is unavoidable, scrupulous analysis and careful consideration of
discrepant data can significantly lessen its effect. But perhaps the two most pressing
issues in terms of this studys weakness are that, like so many other studies in this
field, it has a strong chance of misrepresenting the differing positions on the spectrum
of male sexuality, as well as representing only a white, upper/middle class
demographic. The first of these issues stems largely from the fact that having to select
ones orientation suggests far less of the fluid state that sexuality is argued to possess
as well as the fact that one can only choose between gay and bisexual. This in
itself creates data to analyse specifically with regard to people who establish
project identities in opposition of the limited options of Only Lads (and even
consideration of those who refuse to use it as a result).

23

The second of these concerns the digital divide - the impact of socio-economic
factors in limiting access to technology, which is of prevalent concern, especially in
African countries and suggests that the majority of working-class South Africans do
not have internet access (due to a lack of resources, government infrastructure and
educational discrepancy) and are perhaps not as exposed to notion of a queer
community, online or offline.
Graeme Reid suggests that despite South Africas progressive constitution, ideas of
homosexuality are seen to threaten traditional values, ideals and practices. The idea of
being out and proud is not a luxury afforded to many queer African men in smalltown communities (Reid, 2013). While Robert Morrell suggests that South African
men can be seen to be moving towards ideas of emancipatory masculinity (2001,
33), he states that this transition is slow moving, with much cultural resistance
especially in less developed communities. Unfortunately, this combines with the
digital divide to severely under-represent notions of queer African constructions of
masculinity on Only Lads, weakening the reach of this study.

24

Data Analysis
Previous chapters have looked to establish a theoretical framework from which to
base analysis, one that has outlined the complex and multifaceted nature of
masculinity and identity construction. This chapter will focus primarily on previous
studies that have analysed the re-representation of gay identities on online dating
sites, Raewyn Connells re-evaluation of masculinity and Castells theoretical
framework for identity building, and applying these to the data collected. To do this,
the data has been split into differing categories: a rough statistical overview, the
looking for descriptive field, the about me descriptive field, the preferred type of
each participant and the profiles pictures that accompany profiles.
Table 1.1 Sexual Preference and Race
Gay

Bisexual

Total

Asian

4 +1

6 +1

Black

10 + 5

4+3

14 + 8

Mixed

White

26 + 1

11 + 2

37 + 3

Total

41 + 9

24 + 6

65 + 15

Demographics
Table 1.1 addresses the racial demographic of all 80 of the Only Lads profiles
collected, the blank profiles are represented by the red additions. While the near-blank
profiles will not be used for the majority of this analysis, for purposes of a more
accurate demographical census, they have been used where possible. Of all the users
profiles collected, 4 in total had no selected race; one such profile contained enough
information to be used regardless, and possessed a profile picture of the users face.
It has already been established that largely due to the digital divide, the slow progress
of black empowerment and the cultural taboo surrounding homosexuality, the
presence of black gay and bisexual men on sites like Only Lads should be minimal.
Having, arguably, with more cultural freedom and a more established presence in
middle and higher class income brackets, its no surprise that white South African
men represent the majority of profiles collected. What is surprising, however, is that

25

this majority is only 53%. In addition to this, 29 % of the profiles collected are
attributed to black South African men, despite unfavourable preconditions. Asian men
make up a further 9 %, and those of mixed race the final 9 %.
While this is in no way an accurate reflection of South Africas racial demographic,
where black South Africans make up roughly 80 percent of the countrys population;
white South Africans constituting 8.8 percent, third overall; the collected data is
reflective of an emerging sense of black homosexuality among South African men.
While a large portion of the overall number of black profiles are blank, perhaps
suggesting a strong desire for anonymity among those questioning of their sexuality,
whats important is that these individuals are at the very least curious of an identity
that is against the cultural norm in one way or another. This is in line with the work
of Graeme Reid (2013), who suggests that black men in South Africa are beginning to
explore their sexuality within safe spaces places where the societal risk of
exposing oneself is significantly lessened of which the internet, in South Africa, is
irrefutably one.
Compared to the official census of 2011, white men are severely overrepresented in
the collected profiles, as are Asians; experiencing 44.2 and 6.6 percent increases,
when compared to the national average. While this is not at all to suggest that South
African culture is accepting of homosexuality, but rather that perhaps the subcultures
of white and Asian men are more accepting than that of their black counterparts.
Certainly in metropolitan areas, where the white population percentage increases, the
safe spaces previously discussed are more prevalent, as is the propensity for counter
cultures and alternate notions of masculinity to emerge. In addition, black South
Africans may be underrepresented further by the lingering economic effects of
apartheid, as a far greater proportion of black South Africans suffer the effects of
poverty, and have little access to running water, let alone the internet and Only Lads.
In terms of sexuality, 62.5 percent of the profiles collected listed themselves as gay,
37.5 percent as bisexual. Given that there is no given option for sexually curious men,
one can assume that there is a greater chance that some of those who list themselves
as bisexual (and perhaps gay, to a lesser degree) are merely curious - not yet
considering themselves bisexual, nor crossing out that possibility. In all but the
26

participants of mixed race, the proportion of men who consider themselves to be gay
is far greater than those who selected bisexuality. Interestingly enough, of the profiles
of mixed race men, six listed themselves as bisexual and only one described himself
to be gay. This may well be a misrepresentation in the sampling group, as there is no
discernable cultural phenomenon that speaks to the cause of such a statistic.
Regardless, further research would be needed to reassess this data, and if the anomaly
persists perhaps to investigate it further.

Table 1.2 Age Distribution

18 - 22

23 - 29

30 - 39

40 +

Gay

13

21

Bisexual

10

While age is not a category by which this study will analyse the represented
masculinities of Only Lads users, it offers to enhance this study in that when
combined with the sexuality of participants and the looking for drop down menu on
Only Lads, certain patterns begin to emerge. This combination offers a quick
summation of what Only Lads users seek from the site - which could affect the way in
which they construct their profiles, how much they chose to disclose, and perhaps
offer insight into the represented social identity behind each group of profiles, before
an analysis of how users describe themselves.

Looking For, and Desired Activities

27

Graph 1.3 illustrates a summative view of the general desires of each age group;
while this does not isolate specific instances, it gives a general feel for the differing
aims of each age group. Among bisexual men, these trends are rather distinct.

Basic Information, and the Multiplicity of Chat.

The majority of Only Lads bisexual users seem to seek friendship and chat with
other men who feel same-sex attraction. Chat, can be broken down into three
subcategories: when paired with friends, one assumes it centralises on the idea of
friendly communication, the exchange of banter with the possibility for friendship
(and perhaps more, as many users stipulate); when alone, it suggests the maintenance
of distance, taking on discreet or covert connotations perhaps to sate a vague
curiosity, or a sexual one; and when used in conjunction with 1-1 Action, however,
the implications of chat become far more sexual, as the possibility of physical
interaction emerges. The combination of all three (chat, friendship and 1-1 action)
opens up a myriad of possibilities for the user, suggesting an openness to whatever
may pique their interest; whether they choose to follow through on this interest is
another matter.
When relationship is added to the mix, the end goal is established; this is perhaps
the condition of entirely legitimate bisexuality (as opposed to curiosity,
experimentation and simply physical sexual relationships) where the possibility of a
relationship is indeed plausible. To the majority of this studys bisexual candidates, a
relationship is not specifically sought out; less than 42 percent of all men list it as
what theyre looking for. When it does appear it is always linked to friendship, or
chat the possibility of a relationship as a comforting long-term goal. The majority of
users who selected relationship as a desired goal fall between 18 and 22 (where 60
percent of participants selected it), which is perhaps indicative of an increased sense
of social or cultural freedom that young people tend to experience particularly away
from home and at university. After 22, however, this number drops significantly;
potentially due to already established relationships in real life, fear of social risk, or
perhaps simply a greater attraction to women.

28

While friendship and chat seem to be the most consistently desired activities, 1-1
action is a close second overtaking the two for those between 18 and 22. There can
be no mistaking the explicit implication of such a desire that of physical interaction,
or sex. Among young and old, this could be in sync with curiosity, experimentation,
potential relationship partners - or perhaps even a little fun along the way.
The Relationship.
The narrative that runs alongside these drop-down menus, in the form of users
actively describing what they are looking for, is somewhat in sync with
participants previous selections. Those who list having a relationship as their desired
activity generally utilise more emotive approaches. While some do certainly mention
a desire for friends first (LU2, 20) or maybe more (Muscle123, 33), even straying
to include NSA (no strings attached) fun (Austin, 19), the bulk of these descriptions
that accompany the selection of relationship in the drop down menu, seem to centre
around the qualities users seek in potential long term partners. Some seek interesting
people, close in age, who can hold a conversation (Matt, 19), others look for
straight acting, sorted, intelligent jocks (Leeno Vieira, 33). The majority of those
seeking a relationship (60 percent) clearly establish the end goal in their descriptions
that of stable long term commitment, a soul mate, for something real (Dr Who,
37), as one profile states.
1-1 Action, Group Action and Reading Between the NSA.
The tendency of those who selected other desired activities via drop down menu is
decidedly different; here, the name of the game is discretion. What these profiles seek
is immediate and easily attainable, their descriptive fields reading: straight acting
guys for 1-1 (Zachary, 19), Str8 discreet dudes, who is not fem (StrDiscreetBi, 25),
or perhaps just a discreet 1-1 sex partner, not old and not fat (Ntoka, 26). The
general theme of the profiles that stray from this immediacy (an underwhelming 5 out
of 24) can be summed up in the simply put: having fun, and making friends for now
(Freddy, 22).

29

The majority of these profiles, however, those that select 1-1 Action or Group
Action, exist within the realm of the hyper-masculine, where social and sexual
dominance ooze from the Looking For descriptive fields. Demands are curt, and a
seemingly palpable need for physicality is somewhat evident certain fields
consisting of only monosyllabic desires: NSA (Discreet1, 32), or twinks (Codi,
25). Some needs are so urgent that they perhaps bypass those negative traits, like
racism, associated with traditional notions of South African hegemonic masculinity
(Swart, 2001, Cocks, 2001, Morrell 2001, Reid, 2013): any race, but good looking
please (Ntoka, 26). In total, of the participants who listed 1-1 and Group Action as
their desired activities (whether alone or in other combinations), eighty percent
exhibited one or more characteristics associated with hegemonic South African
masculinity in the Looking For descriptive field; specifically: racism, antieffeminacy, overt sexual desire, sexual prowess, homophobia, reinforcing social
superiority through status, diminutive language and opposition, and finally the
repression of feeling (and homosexual desire).
There is, however, the odd propensity for affection, for tenderness amid such raw
physicality. Where it appears explicitly, it is often confused, as if such a yearning does
not fit naturally within the speaker, and quickly hidden beneath a sexual or derogatory
adage: a loving guy who dont act like a lady, for chat and discreet sex (Junior, 19).
Where it is not so explicit, it is a simple difference in word selection: friend for
NSA (Robby, 44) becomes friend/partner in the Jozi area (Mongs, 25), NSA fun
(Austin, 19) becomes friends and more (Muscle123, 33), not fem (Str Discreet Bi,
25) becomes interesting people who can hold a conversation" (Matt, 19). What
these profile snippets all have in common is the selection of 1-1 action as their
desired activity, omitting relationship, and as complete profiles they all conform to
one or more of the stereotyped hyper-masculine characteristics: Mongs
friend/partner must be not so obvious, Matts profile picture features himself in
just his underwear, Muscle 123s self-description reads str-acting professional HIV
negative, you should be 2. The overt aim of these users is sexual, but within these
descriptions is a hint of uncertainty the prospect of something more. While some
may be loathed to admit it, for whatever reason, the potential for affection, for feeling,
is present even if it exists solely within the maybe.

30

It is possible to detect, here, between the presented hyper-masculinity and the brief
flirtation with feeling, a fear among Only Lads users. It is almost certainly the fear of
identification, of social exposure, and perhaps something more the fear of lost
privilege. Eight of the total 24 bisexual profiles use pictures that include their own
faces only four of these are un-obscured. The concept of discretion, of being
straight acting is incredibly common here, 18 profiles referencing it in one form or
another. This is in line with Connell and Messershmidts (2005) suggestion of the
continuation of homosexual guilt, the self-reproach of sexual abnormality that drives
men to adopt traits synonymous with hegemonic masculinity. Straight-acting is the
term most often used by gay, bisexual and curious men for this normality, and it is
certainly one that will be further discussed. The over-compensation of men with
same-sex desires is consistent with suggestions that the establishment of the self as
hyper-masculine is a defence mechanism to ward off gender anxiety and feelings of
powerlessness (Connell and Messershmidt, 2005).

Graph
1.4, the desired activities of gay men, paints a very different picture. Among all the
options offered, the most desired activity is the establishing of a relationship, across
all ages; friendship is a close second, and chat is third. What these drop-down
selections suggest is that purely physical relationships are not actively sought out by
the majority of gay Only Lads users. 1-1 Action consistently hovers around the 40
percent mark, while group action (probably the most experimental and purely physical
of the options) sits below 20 percent before disappearing altogether, despite relative
popularity among bisexual men aged 18 to 22.

31

What these results suggest is that among gay men, dating sites like Only Lads are used
largely for that very purpose for dating. Attaining relationships is, at least
statistically, the overarching aim of participants although friendship and chat may
be sought in the meanwhile. Friends first and maybe more are still
commonalities, but the end results - affection and intimacy - are far less murky
possibilities and more active aims of this process. Here, chat is perhaps less sexually
fuelled. While in certain cases it may still refer to a reaching out, a fearful
experimentation from behind the veil of anonymity, it seems far more cemented in its
connection to friendship. It is the banter between newly acquainted individuals, or
getting to know someone youve just met. Nevertheless, the idea of chat still
harbours the possibility for a non-physical sexual exchange, as many users pair it with
pic swapping in their descriptive fields.
Unfortunately, despite the apparent openness to the relationship, certain gay men offer
up narratives that seem to display equally contradictory desires and self descriptions
to their bisexual counterparts. Perhaps it is due to the sampling of this study (having a
greater number of gay profiles), but the trends extracted from the descriptive fields of
gay men are far more varying.
For many, the desired outcome of their online search is vague and uncertain. While
they list a number of possibilities in their drop down menus, there is no definite
answer to what is perhaps a reflection of their own uncertainty: Im not sure [what
Im looking for] really; I guess I am just looking at the moment, perhaps make new
friends (Kyle, 20). This extract displays a similar search, having selected friendship,
chat, and relationship as desired outcomes, as that of Hotline89s: f@ck knows, Ill
know when I find it (24), who selects friendship, relationship, chat and 1-1 action.
Hotline89 perhaps exemplifies this constant search for something more, and the
frustration of not knowing exactly what it is, even if it is subverted by humour. The
two profiles perhaps also illustrate the different approaches to fulfilling the meantime,
and the differing approaches to sexual relationships.
In other gay men, this search for more is not vague, and sometimes altogether absent
they have desired activities, and they are unwilling to compromise to too great a
32

degree. Either, these profiles exhibit a strong desire only for the immediate, to fulfil
the meantime, or they turn their gaze to the horizon; in short, the divide here is
between the search for immediate sexual fulfilment and the desire for long term
affection. While there are obviously a few profiles that lie between this divide, a
staggering majority either suggest a contentedness with the mean time (with friends
and fun (Stegman, 20)) and do their best to denounce the possibility of feeling (or, at
least suggest a passive ambivalence to the future the idea of the maybe more), or
they stipulate their primary search for a relationship. While these descriptive fields
often include terms like friends first, or looking for dates, they have the
overarching aim (most often explicitly) of finding the one (Thursty, 21), someone
to share [their lives] with (Reinhart, 24), or perhaps just a guy designed for [them]
(Ora, 22).
What is perhaps most noticeable in these three tendencies (uncertainty, fun and the
long haul) is that there seems to be an uncomfortable coexistence between the
reassertion of masculinity and adopting what could be considered feminine traits.
While many profiles focus primarily on reassuring others of their own manliness and
a total of one profile that exhibits only feminine characteristics, the majority of
profiles are those that fall between these, and to a degree incorporate an interesting
marriage of the masculine and the feminine. While there is a certain parallelism
between the profiles of bisexual men and those of gay men, in that each group
establishes a spectrum of sorts the idea is far more developed within gay candidates,
very few inklings of the effeminate existing within the construction of bisexual
profiles.
This is, then, the spectrum of masculinity that part of this study has sought to
investigate. What remains is the further analysis of these profiles, of those that echo
hegemonic notions of masculinity and those that move to an alternative, in some cases
as far as the effeminate. Thus, this study will now turn to an analysis of the self
description of Only Lads users, their selected characteristics, and the types they find
themselves most attracted to.
Desired Types, Descriptive Fields and Profile Pictures.

33

Due to the sheer volume of material, it is impossible to offer an in depth analysis of

each individual profile. While each profile has been briefly survey and sorted, it is the
trends that appear in these self descriptions that will be analysed; how users of Only
Lads represent themselves, the profile pictures they select, the terminology utilised,
societal assumptions and the cultural norms that may be evident within these
descriptions and chiefly, what these things suggest about the understanding these
men show of their own masculinity, and how they reconstruct this in their online
identities.

Graph 1.5, sets out what types are considered desirable and undesirable among gay
and bisexual men. Of the total 64 profiles analysed, 20 did not fill in this section; thus,
each score has a maximum of 44. As one can see, Straight Acting comes very close to
this maximum three profiles, in total, did not list it as a desirable character type.
There has been a great deal of debate surrounding the term straight acting, and
almost every side of it is reflected in the collected data. As Clarkson (2006) posits,
this term is perhaps the product of the tension, unease and otherness homosexual men
experience at the hands of their heterosexual counterparts. What the phrase means is
quite unclear, and has received a great deal of scrutiny as a result. Its fault is that it

34

relies on cultural and societal hegemony to determine exactly what straight men act
like; and as weve already seen, masculinity, what it is to be a manly, is incredibly
difficult to isolate and define. What is evident within the profiles of those who
actively describe themselves as straight acting, is that there is a tendency to adopt
character traits that are associated with traditional hegemonic masculinity; in that they
revolve predominantly around the idea of male dominance, and often revert to the
subjugation of other identities to legitimize their own.
Im not feminine and I expect you not to be either (Zachary, 19), says one self
-description. The problem with this kind of dialogue is that it uses a binary for the
validation of its identity; Im not feminine, so I must be masculine, and then imposes
this binary on others; as a man, you too should not be feminine. Another states:
Afrikaans boer boy, in the closet and very straight acting. Regret no fems and ONLY
whites(Stegman, 20); there are a number of things that this particular description
suggests. It ties the individual to Afrikaans farming culture, which carries with it its
own set of connotations; chiefly that of patriarchy, hyper-masculinity, racism and
perhaps misogyny. Stegman states explicitly that he is very straight acting, implying
that there are certain degrees to which one can be straight acting. This, in itself, is
perplexing is it possible to act more straight than the next man? The answer is
uncertain. The majority of theory accessed suggests that this kind of thinking is
destructive, but for the users of Only Lads the term straight acting seems to a certain
currency. It is a difficult term to define, but within these descriptive fields its
opposition seems to be the fem gay man; perhaps suggestive of what it means, to
these users, to be straight acting.
As Payne (2007) suggests, there is a very great difference between calling oneself
straight acting, and simply acting straight. Straight acting, here, is strongly linked to
discretion, to be straight acting seems to be the ability to exist among men without
appearing gay the ability to conceal ones homosexuality, as opposed to actually
acting in any specific way. Payne (2007) furthers this to suggest that the underlying
problems with this social camouflage are attributed to its tendency to overcompensate, its reductionary nature and its exclusionary practice.

35

As Castells (2009) suggests, legitimizing identities are constructed around existing

cultural and societal norms, often actually lending support to whatever systemic
practices or beliefs may exist there. In line with this, the straight acting identities
presented have a tendency to portray racism as utterly acceptable, so long as people
are reasonably polite about it: regret ONLY WHITE, White only, respect my
preference, [looking for] Indians and Whites. These straight acting identities also
have a tendency to propagate homophobia, though this need not even be assuaged by
courtesy, as is so elegantly conveyed by Marius1975 (39) when describing what hes
looking for:
Someone who dont flap around and who can be himself
Must be Str8 acting, dont do queens lol
Look after himself and nobody over 38, unless I contact you first
What this response does suggest, is an opposition to the stereotyped gay, who is
indiscreet and parades around. Marius1975 makes the link between this kind of
behaviour and mimicry, a lack of authenticity while asking for someone who
pretends to be straight in social circumstances. This is not to suggest that there is a
particular way to be gay or straight, but rather to highlight the contradiction of such a
term, used to such an effect. To be straight acting is, in this context, to act normally
and, ironically, to be original.
As a man, where hegemonic masculinity speaks to how each individual should behave
certain traits become enforced by societal expectation. One such trait is mans
strength, his physical prowess and dominance over others. Its no surprise then, that
athletes, muscled men and sporty men are next three highest values on graph 1.5. This
is suggestive of a desire for men who are physically attractive and keep fit, than an
actual desire for professional athletes or bodybuilders. This is quite suggestive of the
physical nature of online interaction; physical, in the sense that - as shown by
Graphs 1.3 and 1.4 a large portion of meeting online is under the premise that
sexual relations will follow, circumstances permitting.
Physical and sexual prowess are traits far more synonymous with masculinity, than
its feminine counterpart especially within a culture as patriarchal as that of South
36

Africa. It is no surprise, then, that a great deal of the profile pictures on Only Lads are
of muscled, bare torsos. Peacocking, is a term that seems ideally suited to this
phenomenon: look at how strong I am, look at how much work I put into my body,
look at my raw sexuality. It seems just as much about advertising; about instilling
desire in the onlooker the purpose of appearing on Only Lads is, after all, to attract
and meet other men, for whatever desired outcome. There is, however, a certain
degree of vulnerability to these users. Of the shirtless photographs, two members
show their faces, the rest make sure to maintain their anonymity - and all of these
photos, without exception, are selfies. Theres a degree of isolation to the selfie,
especially when it is within the enclosed walls of the toilet stall. This could possibly
speak more to the tension and otherness gay and bisexual men (and certainly their
displays of affection or desire) experience at the hands of their heterosexual
counterparts, more than a pure expression of physicality and sexuality. Most likely,
these photos represent a complex interaction between all of these factors; an area that
would require further in depth study to better understand.
(Flippy, 22)

(Plesierspier, 23)

Slightly aside from this tendency, but no less popular, is that of the discreet profile
picture. A few of these are merely 3rd party photographs; pictures of cars, landscapes,
football teams or something humorous. The aim of these photographs is quite
obviously the maintenance of discretion, something their descriptions mention, and
perhaps stem from a lack of confidence in their appearance, or a combination of the
two. Where headless torsos do not sacrifice their ability to advertise themselves, these

37

profiles must rely on their descriptive fields and sometimes offer up more
information to compensate, as we have already seen from these two:

(Austin, 19)

(Stegman, 20)

The third and final category of profile pictures, is that of the facial picture. These are
not always, however, as exposing as this category may suggest. Many users add
partial facial pictures; the top of their heads, an ultra close-up of their mouth, a slight
facial profile from behind or perhaps simply obscuring their features with props and
filters. Partially obscured facial photographs are most common among participants
requesting discretion. Unobscured facial photographs, are not uncommon among gay
profiles (less so among bisexual men), and are most common among those who
display resistance and project identities.
(Ora, 22)

(Cupraboy25, 26)

Project
Identities and
the Everyday
Gay.

38

The difficulty with socially constructing an identity is that there are always binaries to
consider, subconscious relationships between how people act and who they are. To be
normal is to situate oneself within the in group, established by detecting how they
operate. To be original is to be new, unexperienced by the world, undoubtedly aside
from both we and they. The problem here is that originality is practically
impossible its not how humans function to choose to be distinct within the in
group is to risk existing without the in group. This is the line that the largest
proportion of Only Lads users tread with extreme caution.
They do not describe themselves as straight acting, but aim instead to be nothing
exceptional to embrace normality and fly under the veritable radar. The most
common self-attribution is the idea of normalcy, of commonality. Down to earth,
simple oke, normal guy and countless variations on theme exist across both gay
and bisexual men. As Clarkson (2005) and Payne (2007) suggest, and as previously
discussed, there is a tendency among gay and bisexual men to shield themselves from
the anxiety, tension and otherness they experience at the hands of heterosexual men
by adopting straight acting personas. Clarkson and Payne also recognise that being
straight acting seems to go hand in hand with the complete normalization of ones
persona. This is a normalization in the sense that the image of normality, of the
everyday man, is evoked as a shield of sorts protection from the critical gaze of
society.
This study did not so much find that the two went hand in hand, but rather that the
overwhelming majority of profiles exhibited this evocation of the everyday man.
Where the aim of the straight acting individual is to actively fit in, it seems those who
choose instead to exemplify the ordinary, build their identities to remain hidden, and
uninteresting to the hostile glace. This tendency is perhaps indicative of the
homosexual desire to be recognised as normal within society, to not face social
exclusion for their differing sexual preference in accordance with many gay rights
movements, whos fundamental understanding is that heterosexual and homosexual
people alike are human being. This self normalization may also be the simple
convenience of not being recognised as a gay man as opposed to actively portraying
oneself as straight acting or undergoing the societal disdain associated with effeminate
men.
39

Castells theory surrounding resistance identity building is probably what resonated

most with this kind of masculine construction. Where their straight acting
counterparts base so much of their identities on the idea of enhancing their own
manliness, the owners of these ordinary profiles seem to do just enough to pass. Their
identity is built to exist easily within proximity of hegemonic masculinity, but not in
such a way that they are not free to resist where possible, and in no way to legitimize
the norm. Existing in equal measure among those cradling their anonymity and those
happy to show their faces, this kind of identity construction seems far less about
maintaining a farce among their heterosexual contemporaries there seems to be no
honest intention for deceit, but far more to do with making life easier for oneself. In a
sense, this is the essence of social camouflage - the intention is not to hide, but to
blend into the background.
The ordinary man, ironically, is free to act as he pleases so long as he remains
unremarkable. These profiles show a far greater move towards attaining romance,
welcoming affection and feeling where, as illustrated earlier, the straight acting man
only alludes to, and then conceals affection. The ordinary man is has a certain degree
of freedom to explore his options, to openly search for more than just sex and
friendship : Simple, uncomplicated guy looking for the so called Mr Right
(Cupraboy, 26).
Keeping in sync with Castells theory on identity building, the third and final
construction of masculinity observable is that related to the project identity. Where
resistance identity is often referred to as trench warfare, project identity is then taking
that fight out of the trenches and into the public sphere. Project identity, in this
context, would refer to the profiles that are constructed in stark opposition to the
norm, perhaps even engaging in debate where possible.
While there are a number of profiles that straddle the line between resistance and
project identities, clinging to tenuous phrases like easy going (Collin, 20) or
approachable (Varaclus, 35) as camouflage, two profiles out of the entire 65 stop to
ask the reader; why should I act this way? One, describes himself simply as a free

40

bitch (Ora, 22), also stipulating his non-conformity, the other approaches the entire
process of creating a profile on Only Lads with a sense of humorous criticism:
Diggs rimming tight, firm buttock holes... There seems to be a ton load of
''real, honest, straight acting, etc'' guys around here, these are boxes we
confine ourselves in, all in the name of finding someone to fuck....busy
impressing one another with lies.... (when in Rome...................)
The extract provided, while certainly containing a sense of humour, conveys a quiet
sense of resignation the opinion of the veritable they, looking in on the we. He,
although rather crudely, accurately points to the flaws he spots in the use of Only
Lads, and of contemporary constructions of gay and bisexual masculinity in general.
The only choice he can spy, is to join the flock, to engage in the pretence.

41

Findings and Conclusions

Where previous chapters have discussed the relevant theory and methodological
approaches of this study, as well as analysing the data collected, this chapters will
discuss the findings and implications of this data. It will address the nature of key
terms gathered from the Data Analysis, such as straight acting and normal, looking
specifically to what these terms indicate about the identities constructed by Only Lads
users. This chapter will also address the limitations of this study as a whole, before
looking to ways in which it could be furthered in the future.
The first aim of this project has been to analyse how a relatively small group of South
African gay, bisexual (and perhaps bi-curious) men represented themselves, visually
and verbally, on the dating site Only Lads. Subsequently, the focus of analysis looks
to the use of particular keywords that are gender and role associative; as well as a
discursive analysis that seeks to determine the values and norms inferred by these
participants within their self-representation.
What the data collected has revealed is a strong correlation to the literature collected,
particularly Castells outline of identity building, previous studies of similar websites
by Clarkson(2007) and Payne (2005), and has benefited greatly from the outline set
up regarding hegemonic and alternative masculinities within a South African context.
Indeed, the men of Only Lads seem to have an instinctive awareness (whether
conscious or not is debatable) of the masculine constructions at work within society;
most using these keystones of what it is to be a man to remain under the radar of
their heterosexual peers, in varying forms. This is usually enacted in two ways,
although these tendencies do overlap on occasion not quite to the degree that
Clarkson (2007) and Payne (2005) suggest in their respective studies namely, the
straight-acting man and the every-day man.
The problem with identifying as straight-acting is that it introduces a paradox within
the user - the disconnect between acting straight and still maintaining ones presence
within the gay and bisexual community. There is no definitive definition of this term,
but what this research suggests is the idea of fitting in of acting the part, if one

42

cannot be the part. This is not to suggest that participants who identify as straight
acting necessarily want to be straight, but rather that if they cannot repress their
homosexuality, they can smother themselves in masculinity.
Straight-acting, when identified in this particular project, seems to be an ode to
hegemony, to the dominance of heterosexual notions of masculinity. For the men who
use it to describe themselves, it seems to be to reaffirm their own masculinity, and
their power within society. Often, it is paired with words that reinforce the dominance
of the author, over both men and women, cementing his place within the realm of
hegemonic masculinity. Perhaps, as Payne and Connell and Messershmidt suggest, it
is an attempt to reclaim the privilege that comes with being a heterosexual man
(particularly in the context of white South Africans), perhaps it is simply the desire to
fit in. Regardless, the term seems to function as a defence mechanism, distancing the
author from the effeminate gay stereotype, and aligning him with a masculinity that is
far more comfortable within the frame of hegemonic notions of male identity.
Surprisingly, it is not the most popular term among the self-descriptions of
participants; though it is the most popular trait that is sought after by users. This can
perhaps be posited to a slightly different understanding of the term in the description
of others, where straight-acting is selected from a drop-down menu. One could
instead suggest that it is understood here as a blanket term for being normal and
fitting in (especially where among the alternative suggestions there is nothing that
implies the ordinary), instead of within the self descriptions where it is active, and
often enforced with traces of the forcefulness and overt physicality of hypermasculinity.
At the opposite end of the spectrum are those who openly disregard the conventions
of orthodox masculinity, or at least show an understanding of how they arent letting it
influence them. These arent necessarily users who display traditionally feminine
qualities, as a few examples show, although the majority of these profiles exhibit such
behaviour. Often, these profiles are questioning of the behaviour of their peers,
questioning of society at large confused as to what is expected of them. Some ask
rhetorical questions, or openly oppose themselves to the cultural conventions of being
a man; the uniting trait of these profiles, however, is their acknowledgement that they
43

do not fit the mould. They have no desire to act as heterosexual men do, and they
have no desire to be normal.
Surprisingly, and somewhat opposed to the studies that have gone before it, the
overwhelming tendency among South African users of Only Lads is to represent
themselves as entirely unexceptional. The conjuration of the ordinary, of the
everyday man, is evident in close to seventy percent of the profiles collected. For the
sake of convenience, within the established spectrum of masculinities, these profiles
are placed between straight-acting participants and those who show disregard for the
conventions of hegemonic masculinity.
The adoption of the ordinary functions much like the use of straight-acting: as a
shield against the critical gaze of heterosexual peers, as a barrier between the author
and the effeminate stereotype. This social camouflage does not go so far as to
legitimize hegemonic notions of masculinity in that it is not active in its support;
rather, it is a silent resistance trench warfare, as Manuel Castells puts it when
describing this form of resistant identity building.
The implications of the everyday profiles, of the keywords in their self descriptions
(down to earth, normal, average guy), is that there is still great difficulty in
expressing gay identity in South Africa. Where straight-acting can be considered an
active step away from establishing any gay notion of masculinity, evoking the
everyday man is mere resignation under the gaze of society. It could perhaps be
considered the acceptance of mild homophobia, of societal inequality and perhaps the
loss of an entirely authentic public persona, in lieu of remaining indistinguishable (at
least at surface level) to their heterosexual peers. Or, this normalization could be a
resistance of sorts to the common societal belief that to be homosexual is to be
abnormal. Perhaps what this trend may is most indicative of is a quiet resistance, one
that may act just as much as a reaffirmation within the speaker as it does to speak out
against homophobia.
The weaknesses of a study like this, and indeed one within the realm of interpretative
analysis, are almost always those that revolve around the bias of the researcher. While
such a statement cannot be openly disregarded, careful preparations have been made
44

within the process of this study to refrain wherever possible from instances of weak
analysis, sweeping generalisation and researcher bias. Aside from this, the relatively
small sample group is a limitation and future research could certainly benefit from a
larger data pool.
In terms of ascertaining an understanding of how users represent themselves and their
masculinity, the actual platform on which this study was conducted, Only Lads, could
be considered a limitation. The site itself is limited in its drop down menu selection,
not allowing for the selection of orientations other than gay or bisexual. While it does
certainly offer a degree of freedom within the descriptive fields, the given list of
selectable characteristics, types and desired activities could perhaps be considered
somewhat leading. In the future, this line of research would benefit from a more in
depth approach, incorporating interviews with participants to better understand the
process behind these self descriptions, free from the restrictions of Only Lads and the
internet.
Other limitations already addressed through out this project include the under
representation of black participants and the over representation of white participants,
at least, in relation to the South Africas racial demographic. To further the accuracy
of this project, and to increase the range of its findings, it could perhaps become
comparative being juxtaposed to the profiles created by heterosexual men on dating
sites, or perhaps homosexual men from more culturally lax societies.
The conclusion to these findings, however, may not be as bleak as it seems. A great
deal of these profiles could indeed be said to converge with the findings of previous
research, which mourns the loss of authentic gay masculinities to their hegemonic
counterparts. If this study was to operate solely under the assumption that Only Lads
(and by extension, the internet) is indeed a safe space for gay identity building these
findings would be concrete. However, considering the alternative that Only Lads
and other social networking sites are not spaces free of societal pressure (particularly,
as it could be argued, due to the toxicity and active legitimization of hegemonic
masculinities by straight-acting peers) it could be said that more social capital is at
stake among fellow homosexuals in the globally accessible social arena..

45

Many participants are not hesitant to show their faces in their profile pictures, and the
pictures used by the everyday men, while never too flamboyant or consistently
unobscured, are indicative of a desire for both openness and anonymity. It is perhaps a
confused narrative, but one that speaks to the personalization of authentic identity and
the projection of exactly what is required by societal convention. Profiles on Only
Lads are no doubt about advertising the self (for whatever aim), and so these profile
pictures offer enough to be of interest, but not enough to stand outside of the norm of
masculine behaviour.
What this does suggest, especially in light of the theoretical arguments on masculinity
by Connell and Messershmidt, and the work of Graeme Reid, is that (if Only Lads is
to exist within South African society) hegemonic masculinity is still very much
entrenched in traditional notions of what it is to be a man but this only extends so
far. Alternate masculinities are possible in hostile circumstances, but not openly
where the risk of societal criticism is imminent. It can be posited then, that whatever
authentic notion of the self, of homosexual masculinity, must be observed behind the
cursory evocation of the ordinary. Gay identities, as Reid suggests in his research, are
explored by men in small-town (and often ruthlessly homophobic) communities in
South Africa within the safe spaces they create outside of societal view; whether they
remain there is another question, but the idea itself is pertinent.
Unfortunately, this view does suggest that the majority of the data collected does not
speak to authentic gay masculinities, as was this studys intention (not to suggest that
it is any less useful in identifying represented masculinities) but creates a conclusion
that is far more hopeful than the idea of the legitimization, or resignation to heteronormative masculinity by the overwhelming majority of the gay and bisexual men on
Only Lads. The observable connotations of these profiles, the subtlety with which
emotions are engaged, the desire for connection and the potential of more, all speak
to at least some form self expression, of personal and intimate freedom, behind the
ordinary.

46

Bibliography
Alexander, J. and Yescavage, K. (2009) `The Scholars Formerly Known as`:
Bisexuality, Queerness and Identity Politics. In Giffney, N. and ORourke, M.
(Eds) (2009) The Ashgate Research Companion to Queer Theory. Surrey,
Ashgate Publishing Limited.
Baudrillard, J. (1988) The Consumer Society. In M. Poster (Ed.), Jean Baudrillard:
Selected Writings. Cambridge, Polity Press.
Baym, N. K. (2006) Interpersonal Life Online. In Lievrouw, L. A. and Livingstone, S.
(Eds) (2006) The Handbook of New Media; Updated Student Edition. London,
Sage Publications.
BBC (2006) Zuma Apologises For Gay Comments, BBC News. Available online at
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/5389378.stm (accessed May 5, 2014)
Beasley, C. (2005) Gender and Sexuality; Critical Theories, Critical Thinkers.
London, Sage Publications.
Berger, A. A. (2000) Media and Communication Research Methods: An Introduction
to Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches (3rd Ed.). Thousand Oaks,
California, Sage Publications.
Bird, S. (1996) Welcome to the Mens Club: Homosociality and the Maintenance of
Hegemonic Masculinity. In Gender and Society, Vol. 10, No. 2, 120 132.
Acessed on 13/05/2014 from http://www.jstor.org/stable/189829
Brennen, B. S. (2012) Qualitative Research Methods for Media Studies. London,
Routledge.
Cage, K. (2003) Gayle: The Language of Kinks and Queens. Johannesburg, Jacana.
Castells, M. (2009) The Power of Identity (2nd Ed) Sussex, Wiley-Blackwell Press.
Chodorouw, N. (1978) The Reproduction of Mothering: Psychoanalysis and the
Sociology of Gender. Los Angeles, University of Calafornia Press.
Chopra, R. (2000) Knowing Men: An Ethnographers Dilemma. In Chopra, R.,
Dasgupta, C., and Janeja, M. K. (2000) Understanding Masculinity. Accessed
on 13/05/14, at http://www.jstor.org/stable/4409257
Chopra, R., Dasgupta, C., and Janeja, M. K. (2000) Understanding Masculinity. In
Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 35, No. 19, 1607 1609.

47

Clarkson, J. (2006) Everyday Joe versus Pissy, Bitchy, Queens: Gay Masculinity
on StraightActing.com. In The Journal of Mens Studies, Vol. 14, No. 2, 191
207.
Cock, J. (2001) Gun Violence and Masculinity in Contemporary South Africa. In R.
Morrel (Ed.) Changing Men in Southern Africa. Scottsville, University of
Natal Press.
Connell, R. W. (1995) Masculinities. Cambridge, Polity Press.
Connell, R. W. (2005) Masculinities. (2nd Ed.) Cambridge, Polity Press.
Connell, R. W. and Messershmidt, J. W. (2005) Hegemonic Masculinity: Rethinking
the Concept. In Gender & Society, Vol. 19, No. 6, 829-859.
Deacon, D. Pickering, M. Golding, P. and Murdoch, G. (2007) Researching
Communications: A Practical Guide to Methods in Media and Cultural
Analysis (2nd Ed.). London, Hodder Arnold.
Demetriou, D. Z. (2001) Connells Concept of Masculinity: A Critique. In Theory and
Society, Vol. 30, No. 3, 337 361.
Denscombe, M (1998) The Good Research Guide For Small-Scale Social Research
Projects. Buckingham, Open University Press.
Gardiner, J. K. (2013) Masculinitys Interior: Men, Transmen, And Theories of
Masculinity. In The Journal of Mens Studies, Vol. 21, No. 2, 112 126.
Gurman, M. C. (1996) The Meaning of Macho: Being a Man in Mexico City.
Berkeley, University of California Press.
Hardey, M. (2002) Life Beyond the Screen: Embodiment and Identity Through the
Internet. In The Sociological Review, Vol. 50, No. 4, 570 584.
Hemson, C. (2001) Ukubekezela or Ukuzithemba: African Lifesavers in Durban. In
R. Morrell (Ed.) Changing Men in Southern Africa. Scottsville, University of
Natal Press.
Isaacs, G and McKendrick, B. (1992) Male Homosexuality in South Africa: Identity
Formation, Culture, and Crisis. Cape Town, Oxford University Press.
Ishii-Kuntz, M. (2003) Balancing Fatherhood and Work: Emergence of Diverse
Masculinities in Contemporary Japan. In J. E. Robertson and N. Suzuki (Eds.)
Men and Masculinities in Contemporary Japan. London, Routledge Curzon.

48

Jankowski, N. W. (2006) Creating Community with Media: History, Theories and

Scientific Investigation. In Lievrouw, L. A. and Livingstone, S. (Eds) (2006)
The Handbook of New Media; Updated Student Edition. London, Sage
Publications.
Kelly, K. (2006) From Encounter to Text: Collecting Data in Qualitative Research. In
Terre Blanche, M. Durheim, K. and Painter, D. (eds) Research in Practice:
applied Methods for The Social Sciences (2nd Ed.). Cape Town, UCT Press.
Kessler, S. J., Ashenden, D. J., Connell, R. W., and Dowsett, G. W. (1982) Ockers
and Disco-Maniacs. Sydney, Inner City Education Center.
Kimmel, M. S. (Ed.)(1987) Changing Men: New Directions in Research on Men and
Masculinity. Newsbury Park, Sage.
Kozinets, R. V. (2002) Can Consumers Escape the Market? Emancipatory
Illuminations From the Burning Man. In the Journal of Consumer Research,
Vol 28 (June), 67 88.
Lipman-Bluman, J. (1976) Toward a Homosocial Theory of Sex Roles: An
Explanation of the Sex Segregation of Social Institutions. In Signs: Journal of
Women and Culture and Society, Vol. 1, 15 31.
Payne, R. (2007) Str8acting. In Social Semiotics, volume 17, 525 538. Oxford,
Routledge.
Priest, S. H. (2010) Doing Media Research: An Introduction (2nd Ed.). Thousand
Oaks, California, Sage Publications.
Reid, G. (2013) How to be a Real Gay: Gay Identities in Small-Town South Africa.
Pietermaritzburg, University of KwaZulu-Natal Press.
Markus, H., and Nurius, P. (1986) Possible Selves. In American Psychologist, Vol.
41, No. 9, 954 969.
Matic, I. (2011) The Social Construction of Mediated Experience and Self Identity in
Social Networking. In The International Journal of Interdisciplinary Social
Science, Vol. 5, No. 11, 1833 1882.
Morrell, R. (2001) The Times of Change: Men and Masculinity in South Africa. In
Morrell, R. (Ed) (2001) Changing Men in Southern Africa. Pietermaritzburg,
University of Natal Press.
Morrell, R. (Ed) (2001) Changing Men in Southern Africa. Pietermaritzburg,
University of Natal Press.
49

Morrell, R. (2005) Men Movements and Gender Transformation in South Africa. In

Ouzgane, L. and Morrell, R. (Eds.) African Masculinities. New York,
Palgrave-Macmillan.
du Pisani, K. (2001) Puritanism Transformed: Afrikaner Masculinities in the
Apartheid and Post-Apartheid Period. In R. Morrell (Ed.) Changing Men is
Southern Africa. Scottsville, University of Natal Press.
Snchez, F. J., Vilain, E., Westefeld, J. S. and Ming Liu, W. (2010) Masculine Gender
Role Conflict and Negative Feelings About Being Gay. In Professional
Psychology: Research and Practice, Volume 41, No 2, 104-111.
Schau, H. J., and Gilly, M. C. (2003) We Are What We Post? Self-Presentation in
Personal Web-Space. In the Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 30, No. 3,
385 404.
Schau, H. J. and Muniz, A. M., Jr. (2002) Brand Communities and Personal Identities:
Negotiations in Cyberspance. In S. M. Broniarczyk and K. Nakamoto (Eds.),
Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 29, 344 349.
Solomon, M. R. (1983) The Role of Products as Social Stimuli; A Symbolic
Interactionism Perspective. In the Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 10, No.
3, 319 329.
Stets, J. E. and Burke, P. J. (2000) Identity Theory and Social Identity Theory. In
Social Psychology Quarterly, 2000, Vol. 63, No. 3, 224 237.
Stoltenberg, J. (1991) How Men have (a) Sex. In Canadian Dimension, 25: 1,
January - February.
Swart, S. (2001) Man, Gun and Horse: Hard Right Afrikaner Masculine Identity in
Post-Apartheid South Africa. In R. Morrell (Ed.) Changing Men in Southern
Africa. Scottsville, University of Natal Press.
Terre Blanche, M. Kelly, K. and Durheim, K. (2006) Why Qualitative Research? In
Terre Blanche, M. Durheim, K. and Painter, D. (eds) Research in Practice:
applied Methods for The Social Sciences (2nd Ed.). Cape Town, UCT Press.
Turkle, S. (1995) Life on Screen: Identity in the Age of the Internet. New York: Simon
& Schuster.
Valds, T., and Olivarra, J. (1998) Ser Hombre en Santiago de Chile: A Pesar de
Todo, un Mismo Modelo. In T. Valds and J. Olivarra (Eds.) Masculinidades
y Equidad de Gnero en Amrica Latina. Santiago, FLACSO/UNFPA.
50

Whitehead, S. M. (2002) Men and Masculinities: Key Themes and New Directions.
Cambridge, Polity Press.
Yurchisin, j., Watchravesringkan, K. and McCabe, D. B. (2005) An Exploration of
Identity Re-creation in the Context of Internet Dating. In Social Behaviour
and Personality, 2005, Vol. 33, No. 8, 735 750.

51