Content uploaded by Todd G Morrison
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Todd G Morrison on Oct 25, 2015
Content may be subject to copyright.
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=wjhm20
Download by: [University of Saskatchewan Library] Date: 24 October 2015, At: 17:07
Journal of Homosexuality
ISSN: 0091-8369 (Print) 1540-3602 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wjhm20
The Association Between Gay Men's Stereotypic
Beliefs About Drag Queens and Their Endorsement
of Hypermasculinity
CJ Bishop PhD Candidate , Mark Kiss BA Candidate , Todd G. Morrison PhD ,
Damien M. Rushe PhD Candidate & Jacqueline Specht BA
To cite this article: CJ Bishop PhD Candidate , Mark Kiss BA Candidate , Todd G. Morrison PhD ,
Damien M. Rushe PhD Candidate & Jacqueline Specht BA (2014) The Association Between Gay
Men's Stereotypic Beliefs About Drag Queens and Their Endorsement of Hypermasculinity,
Journal of Homosexuality, 61:4, 554-567, DOI: 10.1080/00918369.2014.865464
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00918369.2014.865464
Accepted author version posted online: 18
Nov 2013.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 776
View related articles
View Crossmark data
Citing articles: 4 View citing articles
Journal of Homosexuality, 61:554–567, 2014
Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
ISSN: 0091-8369 print/1540-3602 online
DOI: 10.1080/00918369.2014.865464
The Association Between Gay Men’s Stereotypic
Beliefs About Drag Queens and Their
Endorsement of Hypermasculinity
CJ BISHOP, PhD Candidate, MARK KISS, BA Candidate, and
TODD G. MORRISON, PhD
Department of Psychology, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada
DAMIEN M. RUSHE, PhD Candidate
Department of Psychology, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland
JACQUELINE SPECHT, BA
Department of Psychology, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada
To date, few researchers have investigated gay men’s stereotypic
beliefs about drag queens and the association between these beliefs
and individual difference variables such as hypermasculinity.
To address this omission, 118 men self-identifying as non-hetero-
sexual completed an online survey consisting of an adjective
checklist about drag queens and a psychometrically sound indi-
cant of hypermasculinity. As predicted, participants who were more
likely to endorse hypermasculine belief statements tended to per-
ceive negatively valenced attributes as more characteristic of drag
queens. Possible explanations for this relationship, limitations asso-
ciated with the current study, and directions for future research
are delineated.
KEYWORDS gay men, drag, femi-negativity, hypermasculinity,
masculinity
Researchers have devoted considerable attention to documenting the
stereotypes and prejudices that heterosexual individuals endorse about gay
men. However, few studies have empirically evaluated the beliefs various
Address correspondence to Todd G. Morrison, Department of Psychology, University
of Saskatchewan, 9 Campus Drive, Saskatoon, SK S7N 5A5, Canada. E-mail:
todd.morrison@usask.ca
554
Downloaded by [University of Saskatchewan Library] at 17:07 24 October 2015
Stereotypes of Drag Queens 555
subcultures within the gay community possess about each other. Drag
queens, a gay subculture consisting of males who impersonate females
for the purpose of entertainment, have received little quantitative attention.
However, prior qualitative research has noted a complicated relationship
between drag queens and other members of the gay community. In a study
evaluating the subjective experiences of drag queens, Berkowitz, Belgrave,
and Halberstein’s (2007) participants reported feeling marginalized by gay
men; yet they also believed they were respected performers in the gay
community. Echoing the last point, Hopkins (2004) observed that successful
drag queens experience a sense of power and normality from their perfor-
mances as they are held in high regard by their fans and admirers. Such
power and normality, however, are relegated to the setting where their drag
performances take place and are appreciated.
Fournet, Forsyth, and Schramm (1988) reported that the gay male par-
ticipants in this study were eager to distance themselves from drag queens
because they believed this group was not representative of the gay commu-
nity. However, although some individuals may consider drag queens to be
unrepresentative of the gay community, others appear to regard the prac-
tice of drag as transgressing the rules placed on us to “perform” our gender
within certain specifications (Schacht & Underwood, 2004). While there is
agreement that drag queens’ performances can be gender transgressive, they
also may be perceived as misogynistic and antifeminist (Nixon, 2009). Thus,
instead of drag queens serving as a figurehead for the gay community, they
may be seen as increasingly anachronistic: A performance without any real
connection or relevance to the concerns of gay and lesbian individuals in
the early 21st century.
PROLIFERATION OF MASCULINITY IN GAY CULTURE
A shift in public attitudes toward gay men has been observed, with major-
ity disapproval having been replaced by tolerance and, in some cases,
even acceptance (Yang, 1997). However, negative stereotypes about, and
prejudice toward, overtly feminine gay men is still common, with some
of this negativity occurring within the gay community (Mitchell & Ellis,
2010). A masculine disposition (“straight acting”) and anti-feminine attitudes
have become desirable traits among some members of the gay commu-
nity (Clarkson, 2006). As a result, drag queens have yet to experience the
same level of acceptance as “straight-acting” gay men; indeed, some have
expressed feeling minimized and discounted by a gay community that now
seemingly prefers masculine ideals (Berkowitz & Belgrave, 2010).
The emergence of this “masculine ideal” may be traced to shifts in rep-
resentation within the gay community. During the 1970s, a new movement
surfaced wherein gay men started to embrace masculinity and “blue collar”
Downloaded by [University of Saskatchewan Library] at 17:07 24 October 2015
556 CJ Bishop et al.
ideals (i.e., the so-called “clone” aesthetic; Clarkson, 2006). Termed straight-
acting, this new subculture actively and publicly rejected stereotypically
feminine gay male roles, traits, occupations, and physiques (Kite & Deaux,
1987; Messner, 1997). A number of explanations have been forwarded to
account for the burgeoning popularity of “straight-acting” gay subculture.
First, the HIV/AIDS epidemic of the early 1980s is believed to have empha-
sized masculinity because gay men did not want to be associated with a
sick or frail image symptomatic of the disease (Signorile, 1997). Second, the
gay rights movement shifted in focus from cultural transformation through
sexual liberation to political and civil rights equality (Epstein, 1987; Escoffier,
1985; Gamson, 1995; Seidman, 1993). The emphasis of attaining parity with
heterosexual individuals may have contributed to gay men adopting a more
heterosexual demeanor. Last, it has been proposed that indirect childhood
bullying communicated via heteronormative undercurrents within the class-
room can result in gay males adopting a more masculine disposition in order
to avoid ridicule and “fit in” (DesRoches & Sweet, 2008).
FEMI-NEGATIVITY
Femi-negativity1refers to the strategy of seeing someone’s gender perfor-
mance as “normal” or “abnormal” and serves as a tactic to isolate those who
do not conform (Bailey, 1996; Clarkson, 2006; Lotto, 2006). Femi-negativity
may play a role in the development of negative stereotypes about drag
queens. Young boys are generally encouraged, by their parents and, later
on, their peers to embrace masculine male gender roles (Witt, 1997). These
boys are taught and encouraged to reject characteristics and activities con-
sidered to be feminine. Boys who violate the expectations of their parents
and peers to be masculine are typically subjected to various forms of punish-
ment (Birkett, Espelage, & Koenig, 2009). As such, femi-negativity could be
indicative of some gay men attempting to simulate the heterosexual major-
ity, which might lessen their likelihood of being the targets of stereotyping,
prejudice, and discrimination (Skidmore, Linsenmeier, & Bailey, 2006).
MISUNDERSTANDING OF DRAG
A common misperception is that drag performers are mocking women
and femininity. Some scholars have even compared drag to the blackface
performances of the early 1900s and the negative stereotypes of Black peo-
ple they portrayed (Kleiman, 1999). However, narratives of drag queens
suggest that the “true” intention is not to deride women and femininity
but, rather, to reveal and critique the performative nature of gender (Chinn,
1997). Unfortunately, these intentions do not appear to be evident to many
Downloaded by [University of Saskatchewan Library] at 17:07 24 October 2015
Stereotypes of Drag Queens 557
individuals (gay or straight). The belief that drag is misogynistic may further
contribute to negative stereotypes about drag queens.
DRAG QUEENS’ PERSPECTIVE TO GAY COMMUNITY
Butler (1990) argues that challenging masculinity through drag performance
is more allowable onstage than offstage. Interviews with drag queens in the
Miami Beach area support this argument (Berkowitz & Belgrave, 2010). While
onstage, drag queen interviewees believed they were respected performers
in the gay community. Participants stated that gay men recognize those drag
queens who put on a good show and that some gay men look up to them as
role models (Berkowitz & Belgrave, 2010). Likewise, gay men who hold drag
performance in high regard will often deem drag queens as local celebrities
(Schacht & Underwood, 2004).
However, offstage, drag queens often feel subjugated, segregated, and
alienated from the gay community, believing their only service is that of
entertainers (Berkowitz & Belgrave, 2010). For example, one of the partic-
ipants in Berkowitz and Belgrave’s study asserted that drag queens are not
viewed as equals in the gay community but rather as “freaks.”
Adding to the complexity of this situation are reports by some drag
queens of the difficulties they experience finding a romantic partner.
Respondents believed that their participation in drag performances had neg-
ative connotations that they are promiscuous or overly feminine. Some drag
queens even go so far as not telling their partners they are drag performers
until the relationship gets serious. These negative connotations seem to stem
from other gay men being unable or unwilling to distinguish between a drag
queen’s onstage persona and who he is when not performing (Berkowitz,
Belgrave, & Halberstein, 2007).
PURPOSE OF THE CURRENT STUDY
The present study will examine gay men’s stereotypic and counter-
stereotypic beliefs about drag queens. Based on the scant literature available,
it is hypothesized that gay men to whom traditional masculinity is more
important should evidence stronger endorsement of negative stereotypes
about drag queens.
METHOD
Participants
One hundred and eighteen men participated in this study, with 104 self-
identifying as gay, 11 as bisexual to some extent, and three as queer. The age
Downloaded by [University of Saskatchewan Library] at 17:07 24 October 2015
558 CJ Bishop et al.
of participants ranged from 18 to 68 (M=28.2, SD =11.2). In total, 71 (60%)
considered themselves religious to some degree, and 47 (40%) did not. Over
half the sample reported having at least some postsecondary education (i.e.,
32% reported completing some university or college, 22% reported obtaining
an undergraduate university degree, and 16% reported having obtained a
Master’s or Doctorate degree). All participants were entered in a draw for a
$50 gift card in exchange for their time.
Measures
STEREOTYPE CHECKLIST
This measure included 52 stereotypic and 24 counter-stereotypic attributes
based on those originally identified by Madon (1997) and refined on the
basis of a pilot study (see below). Participants were asked to rate how
characteristic they found each attribute to be of drag queens on a 5-point
Likert scale. Response options included: 1 (very uncharacteristic of drag
queens), 2 (somewhat uncharacteristic of drag queens), 3 (no more char-
acteristic of drag queens than of any other group within the gay community),
4(somewhat characteristic of drag queens)and5(very characteristic of drag
queens). Space also was provided for respondents to add any attributes that
they felt were characteristic of drag queens but had not been included on
the checklist.
VALENCE MEASURE
A 5-point scale (−2=extremely negative;−1=negative;0=neutral;
1=positive;and2=extremely positive) was used to determine whether
participants perceived each stereotype as positive or negative.
AUBURN DIFFERENTIAL MASCULINITY INVENTORY (ADMI-60)
The ADMI-60 contains 60 statements that denote stereotypical hegemonic
masculinity (e.g., “When my partner struggles during sex it makes me feel
strong”; Burk, Burkhart, & Sikorski, 2004). Participants were asked to indicate
the extent to which they agreed/disagreed with each statement using a 5-
point Likert scale: 0 (strongly disagree), 1 (disagree), 2 (neutral), 3 (agree),
and4(strongly agree). Burk et al. provide evidence attesting to the scale’s
adequate construct validity and scale score reliability.
Procedure
PILOT STUDY
The checklist developed by Madon (1997) focused on gay male stereotypes;
therefore, to ensure this list was appropriate for the targeted group (i.e.,
Downloaded by [University of Saskatchewan Library] at 17:07 24 October 2015
Stereotypes of Drag Queens 559
drag queens), a pilot study was conducted. Four gay men from differing
backgrounds and ages, recruited through chain-referral (snowball) sampling,
served as participants. They were asked to review Madon’s checklist for
suitability and to also provide any additional attributes they believed were
descriptive of drag queens. For an item to be added or removed, agree-
ment was required by at least two participants. Based on this criterion, the
stereotypic attributes “hair dressers,” “wear tight pants,” “transvestites,” “walk
like girls,” and “effeminate” were removed,2with “irritating,” “offensive,”
“condescending,” “embarrassing,” “confused,” “hilarious,” and “dramatic”
being added. The counter-stereotypic attribute “traditional” was removed and
replaced with “entertaining.”
MAIN STUDY
Prospective respondents were recruited via poster-based advertising around
the campus of a Canadian University and at its Pride center. In addi-
tion, Web site links and poster advertising at other university Pride centers
across Canada were employed. In order to maximize the number of par-
ticipants recruited, chain-referral (i.e., snowball) sampling was used both
in person and through the social networking Web site Facebook. Finally,
Listserv recruitment was employed, with a link for the online survey
distributed to Listserv members of a local GLBT organization and the
Canadian Psychological Association’s Section on Sexual Orientation and
Gender Identity (SOGI).
After logging onto the survey website, participants were presented with
a consent form that indicated the study was completely anonymous, vol-
untary, and that they could withdraw at any time without their data being
included. Following the consent page, participants were asked to define the
term drag queen within a text box. After submitting their response, a defi-
nition of drag queen, taken from the Oxford English Dictionary (2009), was
provided to ensure that each participant responded to the subsequent items
using the same operational definition. Next, participants answered basic
demographic questions followed by the stereotype checklist/valence mea-
sure and the ADMI-60. Once complete, participants were asked to provide
debriefing information. Finally, any participants interested in being entered
in a draw for a gift card were asked to provide their personal informa-
tion, which was stored separately. Overall, the survey took approximately
30 minutes to complete.
RESULTS
Frequency distributions were used to identify attributes that respon-
dents perceived as stereotypic and counter-stereotypic of drag queens. As
Downloaded by [University of Saskatchewan Library] at 17:07 24 October 2015
560 CJ Bishop et al.
recommended by Madon (1997), for an attribute to be labeled stereotypic,
at least 60% of participants had to classify it as “very” or “somewhat” charac-
teristic and less than 10% had to classify it as “very” or “somewhat” unchar-
acteristic. The converse was used to identify attributes as counter-stereotypic
(i.e., <10% “very/somewhat” characteristic; 60%+“very/somewhat” unchar-
acteristic). The top 15 stereotypic and counter-stereotypic traits for drag
queens are listed in Tables 1 and 2, respectively. On average, the stereotypic
attributes were positively valenced (M=0.41, SD =0.51), and the counter-
stereotypic attributes were negatively valenced (M=−0.32, SD =0.35).
One-sample ttests revealed that both values differed significantly from 0:
stereotypic attributes, t(105) =6.66, p<.001, and counter-stereotypic
attributes, t(101) =−13.30, p<.001.
A multiplicative index (MI) was calculated by multiplying the mean
endorsement for each stereotypic/counter-stereotypic attribute by its
respective valence score; summing these products; and then dividing by 15
(the total number of attributes retained). MI values were generated ranging
from −10 to +10. Scores moving from 0 to −10 suggest stronger endorse-
ment of negatively valenced attributes, whereas scores from 0 to +10 reflect
stronger endorsement of positively valenced attributes.
Given that the ADMI-60 was designed for heterosexual men, items were
inspected to ensure their relevance to gay participants. Specifically, state-
ments on the ADMI-60 were retained for analysis if their rates of agreement
and disagreement were 30% or higher (i.e., the items had sufficient variability
and responses to the items were not skewed). Nineteen items were kept
(see Appendix A). A principal component analysis (PCA) then was used to
TABLE 1 Stereotypes Most Frequently Ascribed to Drag Queens (N=118)
Attribute SC PES Valence MI
Outspoken 93% 4.47 −0.03 −0.13
Dramatic 91% 4.31 −0.10 −0.43
Sociable 91% 4.17 1.13 4.71
Enthusiastic 90% 4.16 0.96 3.99
Melodramatic 89% 4.42 −0.63 −2.78
Proud 87% 4.19 0.89 3.73
Talkative 87% 4.19 0.53 2.22
Well groomed 84% 4.04 1.11 4.48
Flirtatious 84% 4.25 −0.11 −0.47
Different 81% 3.91 0.42 1.64
Emotional 80% 4.14 −0.14 −0.58
Liberal 78% 3.92 0.69 2.70
Frank 78% 4.14 0.08 0.33
Individualistic 71% 3.80 0.69 2.62
Open about feelings 67% 3.73 0.66 2.46
MEAN 4.12 0.41 1.63
(SD) (0.21) (0.53) (2.21)
Note. SC =Stereotype Checklist; PES =Personal Endorsement of Stereotypes (possible range 1–5);
Valence (possible range −2to+2); MI =Multiplicative Index (possible range −10 to +10).
Downloaded by [University of Saskatchewan Library] at 17:07 24 October 2015
Stereotypes of Drag Queens 561
TABLE 2 Counter-stereotypes Most Frequently Ascribed to Drag Queens (N=118)
Attribute SC PES Valence MI
Unemotional 88% 1.90 −0.67 −1.27
Hunt animals 86% 1.75 −0.64 −1.12
Sloppy looking 86% 1.97 −0.83 −1.64
Conservative dress 85% 1.95 −0.03 −0.06
Close-minded 85% 2.08 −1.14 −2.37
Conservative personality 83% 2.03 −0.37 −0.75
Act macho 81% 1.78 −0.37 −0.66
Masculine 80% 1.74 0.25 0.44
Dainty 78% 2.04 0.17 0.35
Cruel 78% 1.88 −1.50 −2.82
Thin 75% 1.97 0.24 0.47
Old-fashioned 74% 2.12 −0.45 −0.95
Studs 70% 2.12 0.21 0.45
Athletic 69% 1.99 0.77 1.53
Like the status quo 67% 2.15 −0.37 −0.80
MEAN 1.96 −0.32 −0.61
(SD) (0.13) (0.60) (1.17)
Note. SC =Stereotype Checklist; PES =Personal Endorsement of Stereotypes (possible range 1–5);
Valence (possible range −2to+2); MI =Multiplicative Index (possible range −10 to +10).
determine if the pool of items could be reduced further. Diagnostic tests such
as the Kaiser-Myer-Olkin measure of sampling adequacy (.90) and Bartlett’s
test of sphericity (χ2[171] =1195.59, p<0.001) suggested the data were
suitable for PCA. A one-component solution was identified (eigenvalue =
9.28; 48.81% variance accounted for), with component loadings ranging from
.55 to .84. Cronbach’s alpha for the 19 items was excellent (.94), with upper-
and lower-bound confidence intervals suggesting that unsatisfactory levels of
scale score reliability were unlikely to occur (95% CI =.92–.96). The mean
score on the 19-items was 34.25 (SD =16.76) indicating that participants
evidenced low endorsement of hypermasculine belief statements.
To investigate the study’s central hypothesis, correlations were com-
puted between total scores on the 19-item hypermasculinity measure and
stereotypic and counter-stereotypic MIs. The resultant rvalues were: −0.62,
p<0.001 and .30, p=0.005. Thus, as gay participants’ hypermasculinity
increases so, too, does their endorsement of negatively valenced stereotypes
about drag queens. Those evidencing greater hypermasculinity also are more
likely to perceive positively valenced attributes as less characteristic of drag
queens (i.e., more counter-stereotypic).
DISCUSSION
The present investigation revealed that, on average, attributes rated as
stereotypic of drag queens were positively valenced, while those rated as
Downloaded by [University of Saskatchewan Library] at 17:07 24 October 2015
562 CJ Bishop et al.
counter-stereotypic were negatively valenced. Further, as predicted, gay male
participants who subscribed to traditional views of masculinity evidenced
negative beliefs about drag queens in two ways: (1) ascription of nega-
tively valenced characteristics and (2) non-ascription of positively valenced
characteristics.
Given previous literature (e.g., Berkowitz et al., 2007), one might antici-
pate that most of the stereotypes gay men hold about drag queens would be
perceived as negative. A potential explanation for the finding that attributes
regarded as most stereotypic received positive valence ratings resides in the
“celebrity” status accorded to some drag queens—within the gay commu-
nity as well as within broader mainstream society (e.g., RuPaul). Many of
the characteristics attributed to drag queens relate to their onstage personas
(e.g., outspoken, enthusiastic, talkative, and frank) and are characteristics
that might be admired in any public figure.
Another possible explanation for positively valenced stereotypes may
relate to the increased visibility of drag queens in mainstream media, since
contact with gay men—be it real, imagined, or via mass media (i.e., paraso-
cial), leads to reductions in prejudice (Herek & Capitiano, 1996; Schiappa,
Gregg, & Hewes, 2005; Turner, Crisp, & Lambert, 2007). For example,
Schiappa et al. (2005) randomly assigned participants to a control condition
(lecture on public speaking) or experimental condition (80-minute pro-
gram featuring Eddie Izzard, a well-known transvestite comic). Participants
completed an “Attitudes toward Transvestites” (ATT) measure pre- and
post-intervention. As expected, scores on the ATT significantly increased,
denoting less prejudice, for those in the experimental group. No statistically
significant change occurred for those in the control condition. It is possible
that a similar phenomenon takes place regarding gay men’s beliefs and feel-
ings about drag queens. Even if the gay men in the current study had little
or no physical interaction with drag queens, they have probably encoun-
tered them, to some extent, through media (e.g., “RuPaul’s Drag Race”).
Such parasocial contact may facilitate a reduction in negative stereotypes
about drag queens.
The finding that gay men who endorse hegemonic masculinity hold
negative stereotypes about drag queens seems broadly analogous to pre-
vious research on heterosexual men. Past studies have demonstrated that
heterosexual men who subscribe to masculine views typically hold negative
attitudes toward gay men (Davies, 2004). These men often have overtly sexist
attitudes, disapprove of feminism, and adhere to traditional views regarding
male sexuality. They tend to view gay men as having cross-gender attributes
and mannerisms, and this forms the basis for their prejudice (Herek, 2004).
In a similar manner, gay men who subscribe to masculine views may hold
negative stereotypes about drag queens because they violate the gender
norms and traditional views of sexuality they endorse.
Downloaded by [University of Saskatchewan Library] at 17:07 24 October 2015
Stereotypes of Drag Queens 563
Previous research has demonstrated that hypermasculinity, or the desire
to be a “real man,” can be both psychologically and physically damaging for
gay men. In past studies, hypermasculinity among gay men has been associ-
ated with serious health risk behaviors, including HIV infection (Hamilton &
Mahalik, 2009; McInnes, Bradley, & Prestage, 2009), lower-quality relation-
ships (Wade & Donis, 2007), negative feelings about being gay (Sánchez,
Westefeld, Liu, & Vilain, 2010), and male same-sex intimate violence (Kay
& Jeffries, 2010). The current study offers evidence that hypermasculine atti-
tudes may be damaging to the gay community collectively. If one subgroup
within this community negatively stereotypes another, it will be more diffi-
cult to combat the negative stereotyping of gay persons by the heterosexual
majority.
There are a number of possible theoretical explanations for the find-
ing that overtly masculine gay men hold negative stereotypes about drag
queens. Herek’s (1987) functional approach to attitudes provides one useful
framework for examining the results. Herek hypothesized that individuals
rely on three primary functions in their appraisal of others: experiential-
schematic, defensive, and self-expressive. With regard to the current study,
the experiential-schematic function would help gay men understand previ-
ous or imagined interactions with drag queens. The self-expressive function
would serve participants with an opportunity to communicate views con-
sistent with their own values and those of their peer group. Finally, the
defensive function would help to distance unwanted stimuli that could elicit
discomfort with participants’ own sexuality, such as drag queens’ violation of
gender norms. For example, an overtly masculine gay man may: (1) have lit-
tle or no interaction with drag queens (experimental-schematic function);
(2) have a peer group consisting largely of other overtly masculine gay
men (self-expressive function); and (3) distance himself from the behavior
of drag queens (defensive function). Through these three functions, overtly
masculine gay men may come to negatively stereotype drag queens.
Future research in this area should include continued qualitative stud-
ies of drag queens’ perceptions of the gay community and their sense of
inclusion or exclusion. Despite being subject to negative stereotypes from
masculine gay men, it is possible that drag queens still maintain a sense
of belonging within the gay community. A more detailed examination of
the reasons for endorsement of positive or negative stereotypes about drag
queens would also be useful. For example, is there a relationship between
internalized homonegativity and endorsement of negative stereotypes about
drag queens? Also, the behavioral implications of subscribing to negative
stereotypes could be examined. Although masculine gay men hold nega-
tive stereotypes about drag queens, are these stereotypes associated with
prejudice or discrimination against members of this group?
A limitation to this study is that a convenience sample was used in
which most participants were young adults and affiliated with gay and
Downloaded by [University of Saskatchewan Library] at 17:07 24 October 2015
564 CJ Bishop et al.
lesbian centers. Given that these men have grown up in a society char-
acterized by increased tolerance and understanding of homosexuality, their
stereotypes about drag queens may differ appreciably from older partici-
pants or those less integrated with the gay community. Second, the majority
of participants were residents of a fairly rural Canadian province and, con-
sequently, may have had limited exposure to drag queens. The potential
implications of contact with this social category in terms of the stereo-
types endorsed or rejected are unknown. Third, the measure of hegemonic
masculinity that was used was not designed specifically for gay men. The
19-item version that we created had sufficient variance in terms of item
agreement/disagreement and excellent scale score reliability. The confirma-
tion of predicted associations between scores on the hypermasculinity scale
and endorsement of negatively valenced stereotypes (and rejection of pos-
itively valenced counter-stereotypes) also attests to the measure’s construct
validity. However, it is recommended that researchers wishing to examine
hypermasculinity and attitudes toward drag queens employ a measure that
is content valid for gay men (e.g., Fishgrund, Halkitis, & Carroll, 2012).
Despite these limitations, the current study demonstrates that drag
queens are subject to a range of negatively valenced stereotypes, partic-
ularly by gay men who subscribe to traditional hegemonic masculinity.
Future research should focus on the socialization of young gay men, and
the processes by which they acquire these stereotypes and perceive them
as negatively valenced. Abundant research demonstrates that gay men are
subject to a range of negative stereotypes from the wider world (e.g., Herek,
2000). It seems somewhat ironic, therefore, that a substantial proportion of
our gay sample attributed negative stereotypes to other members of their
community. Efforts to ameliorate this situation would not only be of benefit
to those men who engage in drag but to the gay community at large.
NOTES
1. The term femi-negativity has been used instead of femi-phobia since any negative attitudes and
prejudice directed toward overtly feminine gay men cannot always be identified as a phobic response.
As a broader term, femi-negativity better captures all forms of negativity directed toward overtly feminine
gay men.
2. Due to an oversight, the attribute “warm-hearted” was not included in the questionnaire package.
REFERENCES
Bailey, M. (1996). Gender identity. In R. C. Savin-Williams & K. M. Cohen (Eds.), The
lives of lesbians, gays, and bisexuals: Children to adults (pp. 71–93). New York,
NY: Harcourt Brace.
Berkowitz, D., & Belgrave, L. (2010). “She works hard for the money”: Drag
queens and the management of their contradictory status of celebrity
Downloaded by [University of Saskatchewan Library] at 17:07 24 October 2015
Stereotypes of Drag Queens 565
and marginality. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography,39, 159–186.
doi:10.1177/0891241609342193
Berkowitz, D., Belgrave, L., & Halberstein, R. A. (2007). The interaction of drag
queens and gay men in public and private spaces. Journal of Homosexuality,
52, 11–32. doi:10.1300/J082v52n03_02
Birkett, M., Espelage, D. L., & Koenig, B. (2009). LGB and questioning students in
schools: The moderating effects of homophobic bullying and school climate on
negative outcomes. Journal of Youth & Adolescence,38, 989–1000.
Burk, L. R., Burkhart, B. R., & Sikorski, J. F. (2004). Construction and preliminary
validation of the Auburn Differential Masculinity Inventory. Psychology of Men
& Masculinity,5, 4–17. doi:10.1037/1524-9220.5.1.4
Butler, J. (1990). Gender trouble (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
Clarkson, J. (2006). “Everyday Joe” versus “pissy, bitchy, queens”: Gay mas-
culinity on straightacting.com. Journal of Men’s Studies,14, 191–207.
doi:10.3149/jms.1402.191
Chinn, S. (1997). Gender performativity. In A. Medhurst & S. Munt (Eds.), Lesbian
and gay studies (pp. 294–308). Washington: Cassell Press.
Davies, M. (2004). Correlates of negative attitudes toward gay men: Sexism,
male role norms, and male sexuality. The Journal of Sex Research,41,
259–266.
DesRoches, S., & Sweet, M. E. (2008). Citizenship for some: Heteronormativity as
cloaked bullying. Journal of Gay & Lesbian Social Services,19(3–4), 173–187.
Drag Queen. (2009). The Oxford dictionary of current English online. Retrieved from
http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1O999-dragqueen.html
Epstein, S. (1987). Gay politics, ethnic identity: The limits of social constructionism.
Socialist Review,93/94, 9–56.
Escoffier, J. (2003). Gay-for-pay: Straight men and the making of gay pornography.
Qualitative Sociology,26 (4), 531–555.
Fishgrund, B. N., Halkitis, P. N., & Carroll, R. N. (2012). Conceptions of
hypermasculinity and mental health states in gay and bisexual men. Psychology
of Men & Masculinity,13, 123–135.
Fournet, L., Forsyth, C., & Schramm, C. (1988). The process of deviance designation:
The case of the homosexual transvestite. Free Inquiry in Creative Sociology,
16(2), 177–182.
Gamson, J. (1995). Must identity movements self destruct? A queer dilemma. Social
Problems,42, 390–407.
Hamilton, C., & Mahalik, J. (2009). Minority stress, masculinity, and social norms
predicting gay men’s health risk behaviors. Journal of Counseling Psychology,
56, 132–141. doi:10.1037/a0014440
Herek, G. M. (1987). Can functions be measured? A new perspective on the
functional approach to attitudes. Social Psychology Quarterly,50, 285–303.
doi:10.2307/2786814
Herek, G. M. (2000). The psychology of sexual prejudice. Current Directions in
Psychological Science,9, 19–22. doi:10.1111/1467-8721.00051
Herek, G. M. (2004). Beyond homophobia: Thinking about sexual prejudice and
stigma in the twenty-first century. Sexuality Research & Social Policy,1, 6–24.
Downloaded by [University of Saskatchewan Library] at 17:07 24 October 2015
566 CJ Bishop et al.
Herek, G. M., & Capitiano, J. P. (1996). “Some of my best friends”: Intergroup
contact, concealable stigma, and heterosexuals’ attitudes toward gay men
and lesbians. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,22, 412–424.
doi:10.1177/0146167296224007
Hopkins, S. J. (2004). Let the drag race begin: The rewards of becoming a queen.
Journal of Homosexuality,46 (3/4), 135–149.
Kay, M., & Jeffries, S. (2010). Homophobia, heteronormativism and hege-
monic masculinity: Male same-sex intimate violence from the perspective of
Brisbane service providers. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law,17, 412–423.
doi:10.1080/13218710903566953
Kite, M. E., & Deaux, K. (1987). Gender belief systems: Homosexuality and the
implicit inversion theory. Psychology of Women Quarterly,11, 83–96.
Kleiman, K. (1999). Drag =blackface. Chicago Kent Law Review,75, 669–674.
Lotto, D. (2006). Review of the wimp factor: Gender gaps, holy wars, and the politics
of anxious masculinity. The Journal of Psychohistory,34, 171–173.
Madon, S. (1997). What do people believe about gay males? A study of stereotype
content and strength. Sex Roles,37, 663–684. doi:10.1007/BF02936334
McInnes, D., Bradley, J., & Prestage, G. (2009). The discourse of gay men’s group
sex: The importance of masculinity. Culture, Health & Sexuality,11, 641–654.
doi:10.1080/13691050902850009
Messner, M. A. (1997). Politics of masculinities: Men in movements. Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
Mitchell, R. W., & Ellis, A. L. (2010). In the eye of the beholder: Knowledge that
a man is gay promotes American college students’ attributions of cross-gender
characteristics Sexuality and Culture,15, 80–99.
Nixon, K. D. (2009). Are drag queens sexist? Female impersonation and the socio-
cultural construction of normative femininity. Retrieved from http://uwspace.
uwaterloo.ca/bitstream/10012/4307/1/MA%20Thesis%20-%20K.%20Nixon%20-
%20Final%2097-03%20Revised.pdf
Sánchez, F., Westefeld, J., Liu, W., & Vilain, E. (2010). Masculine gender role conflict
and negative feelings about being gay. Professional Psychology: Research and
Practice,41, 104–111. doi:10.1037/a0015805
Schacht, S. P., & Underwood, L. (2004). The absolutely fabulous but flawlessly
customary world of female impersonators. Journal of Homosexuality,46 (3/4),
1–17.
Schiappa, E., Gregg, P. B., & Hewes, D. E. (2005). The parasocial contact hypothesis.
Communication Monographs,72, 92–115. doi:10.1080/0363775052000342544
Seidman, S. (1993). Identity and politics in a ‘postmodern’ gay culture: Some histori-
cal and conceptual notes. In Michael Warner (Ed.), Fear of a queer planet: Queer
politics and social theory (pp. 105–142). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota
Press.
Signorile, M. (1997). Life outside: The Signorile Report on gay men—The passages of
life. New York, NY: Harper Collins Publishers.
Skidmore, W. C., Linsenmeier, J. A., & Bailey, J. M. (2006). Gender nonconformity
and psychological distress in lesbians and gay men. Archives of Sex Behaviour,
35, 685–697. doi:10.1007/s10508-006-9108-5
Downloaded by [University of Saskatchewan Library] at 17:07 24 October 2015
Stereotypes of Drag Queens 567
Turner, R. N., Crisp, R. J., & Lambert, E. (2007). Imagining intergroup contact can
improve intergroup attitudes. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations,10,
427–441. doi:10.1177/1368430207081533
Wade, J., & Donis, E. (2007). Masculinity ideology, male identity, and romantic
relationship quality among heterosexual and gay men. Sex Roles,56, 775–786.
doi:10.1007/s11199-007-9303-4
Witt, S. D. (1997). Parental influence on children’s socialization to gender roles.
Adolescence,32, 253–259.
Yang, A. S. (1997). The polls-trends: Attitudes toward homosexuality. Public Opinion
Quarterly,61, 477–507. doi:10.1086/297810
APPENDIX A
Items Selected from ADMI-60
1. I think gay men who cry are weak.
2. I don’t feel guilty for long when I cheat on my boyfriend/husband.
3. There are two kinds of men: the kind I date, and the kind I would marry.
4. I like to tell stories of my sexual experiences to my male friends.
5. If a man struggles while we are having sex, it makes me feel strong.
6. If someone challenges me, I let them see my anger.
7. Many men are not as tough as me.
8. I value power over other people.
9. If a man puts up a fight while we are having sex, it makes the sex more
exciting.
10. I prefer to watch contact sports like football or boxing.
11. I like to brag about my sexual conquests to my friends.
12. I can date many men at the same time without commitment.
13. I don’t mind using physical violence to defend what I have.
14. I would initiate a fight if someone threatened me.
15. If some guy tries to make me look like a fool, I’ll get him back.
16. I consider myself quite superior to most other men.
17. If another man made a pass at my boyfriend/husband, I would want to
beat him up.
18. Sometimes, I have to threaten people to make them do what I want.
19. If I exercise, I play a real sport like football or weight-lifting.
Downloaded by [University of Saskatchewan Library] at 17:07 24 October 2015
