The Influence of Physical Body Traits and Masculinity on Anal Sex Roles in Gay and Bisexual Men
Department of Communication, University of Texas at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX 78249, USA.Archives of Sexual Behavior (Impact Factor: 3.53). 04/2011; 40(4):835-41. DOI: 10.1007/s10508-011-9754-0
Sociological, psychological, and public health studies document that many gay and bisexual men may self-label by their anal penetrative role (i.e., bottom or exclusively receptive; top or exclusively insertive; or versatile, both receptive and insertive during anal intercourse). Yet, what orients men to think of themselves as tops, bottoms or versatiles is poorly understood. We surveyed 429 men engaging in same-sex anal intercourse to investigate the degree to which anal penetrative self-identity was concordant with actual penetrative behavior. Additionally, the roles of masculinity and physical body traits (e.g., penis size, muscularity, height, hairiness, and weight) were tested as correlates of anal penetrative identity and identity-behavior concordance. Tops and bottoms showed a high degree of concordance between identity and enacted behavior; however, only half of versatiles reported concordant identity and behavior (i.e., wanting to be versatile and actually reporting versatile behavior). Generally, tops reported larger penises than bottoms. They also reported being comparatively more masculine than bottoms. Versatiles fell somewhat between the tops and bottoms on these traits. Of the six independent variables, penis size and masculinity were the only two factors to influence concordance or discordance between identity and penetrative behavior. Our study suggests that the correlates of gay men's sexual self-labels may depend on objective traits in addition to the subjective pleasure associated with receptive or insertive anal intercourse.
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
- "ole in sexual activity Hooker, 1965 preference for roles Hart et al., 2003 preference for sexual activity Ross, 1975 sexual-role behavior Carballo-Diéguez, 2004 sex-role preference Carrier, 1977 sexual role preferences Moskowitz et. al., 2008 genitoerotic roles Weinrich et al., 1992 sex roles Moskowitz, Hart, 2011 behavioral sex roles Coxton et al., 1993 preference for intercourse Zheng & Zheng, 2011 Downloaded by [Mr Jerzy Adam Kowalski] at 11:41 07 August 2015 A c c e p t e d M a n u s c r i p t 30 role behaviour van Druten et al., 1996 intercourse preference position Zheng et al., 2012 erotic roles Singh et al., 1999 homosexual gender labels Walker et al., 2012 sexual practices Wegison et al., 2000 sexual preferences Johns et al., 2012 Downloaded by [ "
ABSTRACT: The attempt is made to initially arrange in the terms of methodology the area of the research on partner roles in homoerotic relations. These issues have been noticed fairy early in human history, e.g., different roles performed or bimodal polarization, but only recently the science become interested in this. It is suggested to cover all such roles by the term sexual partner roles (SPR) instead of various terms used and to classify them according to the ethological evolutionary approach into the appetitive and consummatory SPR. Further details of the division are discussed, and the utility of such classification is marked.Journal of Homosexuality 05/2015; (in press). DOI:10.1080/00918369.2015.1078639
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
- "A recent study conducted in China found that tops scored higher than bottoms on instrumentality, interests toward things versus people, and self-ascribed masculinity, bottoms scored higher than tops on expressiveness, with versatiles' scores being intermediate between tops and bottoms (Zheng et al., 2012). For example, tops were higher than bottoms on instrumentality and self-reported masculinity (Moskowitz & Hart, 2011; Zheng et al., 2012). Sexual self-labels seem to be related to gender typical behavior both in childhood and adulthood. "
ABSTRACT: Gay men across a variety of countries label themselves by their preferences for insertive anal intercourse or receptive anal intercourse. A "top" is defined as someone who prefers the insertive role, a "bottom" as someone who prefers the receptive role, and "versatile" as someone who has no preferences regarding anal sex role. Previous studies documented that tops showed a masculine profile and bottoms showed a feminine profile in gendered personality traits. In this study, we examined the association among sexual self-label groups and empathizing-systemizing (E-S) cognitive styles among 509 gay men across multiple cities in China. There were significant differences in systemizing among sexual self-label groups, with tops scoring higher on systemizing than bottoms and versatiles. Tops were more likely to have S > E and high E and S cognitive styles than bottoms. Bottoms were more likely to have E > S and low E and S cognitive styles than tops. There was a significant indirect effect of systemizing on sexual self-label through Self-MF. There was also a significant indirect effect of sexual self-label on systemizing through Self-MF. The findings suggest that sexual self-labels among adult gay and bisexual men may reflect more than preferences for anal sex.Archives of Sexual Behavior 02/2015; 44(5). DOI:10.1007/s10508-014-0475-z · 3.53 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
- "I'm looking more for the person than the position preference.'' Previous studies have found that sexual minority men's selfreported penis size is associated with their sexual position identity (Grov et al., 2010; Moskowitz & Hart, 2011). Our results suggest that partner's absolute and relative penis size may both influence position identity. "
ABSTRACT: Recent evidence suggests that young sexual minority men's sexual position identities (e.g., "top," "bottom," "versatile") may be governed by dynamic influences. Yet, no study has prospectively examined whether, how, and why this aspect of sexual minority men's sexuality changes over time. Consequently, the present study investigated the extent to which young sexual minority men use sexual position identities consistently over time, typical patterns of position identity change, explanations given for this change, and the correspondence of changing sexual position identities with changing sexual behavior and fantasies. A total of 93 young sexual minority men indicated their sexual position identity, behavior, and fantasies at two assessment points separated by 2 years. Following the second assessment, a subset (n = 28) of participants who represented the various sexual position identity change patterns provided explanations for their change. More than half (n = 48) of participants changed their sexual position identity. Participants showed a significant move away from not using sexual position identities toward using them and a significant move toward using "mostly top." Changes in position identity were reflected, although imperfectly, in changes in sexual behavior and largely not reflected in fantasy changes. Participants offered 11 classes of explanations for their identity changes referencing personal development, practical reasons, changing relationships, and sociocultural influences. Previous investigations of sexual minority men's sexual position identities have not adequately attended to the possibility of the changing use of the sexual position categories "top," "bottom," and "versatile" across young adulthood. Results of the present study suggest the possibility of a more fluid, context-dependent use of these terms than previously documented.Archives of Sexual Behavior 04/2013; 42(7). DOI:10.1007/s10508-013-0090-4 · 3.53 Impact Factor
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.