Publications by Tristan Bridges
Sociological Perspectives, 2021
It is difficult to gauge people’s acceptance about same-sex sexualities, as responses to question... more It is difficult to gauge people’s acceptance about same-sex sexualities, as responses to questionnaires are prone to social desirability bias. We offer a new proxy for understanding popular concern surrounding same-sex sexualities: prevalence of Google searches demonstrating concern over gay/lesbian sexual identities. Using Google Trends data, we find that Google searches about whether a specific person is gay or lesbian show patterned bias towards masculine searches, in that such searches are much more frequently conducted about boys and men compared to girls and women. We put these findings into context by comparing search frequencies with other popular Google searches about sexuality and otherwise. We put forth that the patterned bias towards masculine searches illustrates support for the enduring relationship between masculinity and heterosexuality, and that it does so on a larger scale than previous research has been able to establish.
Men and Masculinities, 2021
In early 2020, the novel coronavirus, COVID-19, hit the global community, throwing social dispari... more In early 2020, the novel coronavirus, COVID-19, hit the global community, throwing social disparities into stark relief. With dramatic medical, social, cultural, economic, and environmental effects, the disease has revealed the liability inherent in structuring our social worlds around unequal access to resources, and unequal burdens of work and home. The ability to follow public health guidelines is unevenly distributed both between and within societies. And on the global level, nations have different access to testing and treatment. As we write this, some in primarily wealthier nations are receiving vaccinations, while others are far from this stage. All of this reveals how inequalities have been exacerbated by the disaster, while also making it more difficult for the global community to mitigate COVID-19. In this symposium, we focus on how gender inequalities in particular have structured social life during this global pandemic. At all levels, gender is a central part of the story of COVID-19-from how people experience the disease to how national decisions have been shaped by cultures of manhood. And from the rate of disease, and how men respond to public health calls, to what homelife looks like for people during shutdown, and nationalistic political responses, masculinity has been a unique liability to the human population during this time. At the beginning of the pandemic, men and women appeared to be contracting COVID-19 at similar rates. Men, however, were much more likely to die. Medical opinions piled up. As it turns out, the answer to why has more to do with risky behaviors-like smoking and drinking-in which men are more likely to participate, rather than with male biology (Hamer et al. 2020; Peckham et al. 2020). Compounding this, men's reported beliefs surrounding COVID-19 globally are surprising considering the scope and scale of the pandemic. A survey of 67 nations found that women more often than men said that they fear "very serious" outcomes if infected (Babalola et al. 2020). Yet men ought to be more fearful, as the disease is more fatal
Boyhood Studies, 2020
In this reflective piece, the new editors of the historic journal Men and Masculinities explicate... more In this reflective piece, the new editors of the historic journal Men and Masculinities explicate how key tenets of Raewyn Connell's scholarship informed their expanded vision of the journal. It begins with a meta-analysis of empirical research published in the journal for the last 20 years, and highlights its emphasis on contemporary scholarship from various disciplines and fields. Each facet of the journal's new vision is relayed thereafter, including its feminist perspective, international focus, and interdisciplinarity. It concludes with efforts by the editors to actualize their vision in the service of broadening the field of gender, boyhood, and masculinity studies.
Sexualities, 2020
It is not often that responses are published to peer-reviewed academic scholarship. We were surpr... more It is not often that responses are published to peer-reviewed academic scholarship. We were surprised to receive such a lengthy and impassioned response to our article, ''On the enduring relationship between masculinity and homophobia.'' The editors of the journal have offered us the space to reply to McCormack's response. In our reply, we would like to do two things: (1) provide context for how this response came to be, in an effort to highlight some of the politics of knowledge production that drive this exchange, and (2) respond to specific criticisms that need attention. Journals generally publish ''responses'' to accepted peer-reviewed articles at the discretion of their editors. That is the case at Sexualities and most other journals with which we are familiar. Responses are subject to different standards and expectations from manuscripts accepted as ''articles'' and generally take a different form. Responses are, for example, typically much shorter than the peer-reviewed articles to which they are responding and do not generally include abstracts. Importantly, they are customarily not peer-reviewed.
Sexualities, 2020
Recent research in the social sciences suggests a methodological paradox as scholars work to make... more Recent research in the social sciences suggests a methodological paradox as scholars work to make sense of the contemporary relationship between masculinity and homophobia. Representative surveys consistently find dramatically decreasing levels of sexual prejudice among all groups, among men and young men in particular. Qualitative scholarship, however, continues to find that enactments of homophobia remain integral components of contemporary masculine identities. In this article, we make sense of this shift and apparent methodological inconsistency. We do not question which measure is best. Instead, we argue for a need to understand the ways that gendered sexual prejudice transforms in ways that allow the relationship between masculinity and homophobia to endure-sometimes even when it appears to be in decline.
The Routledge International Handbook of Heterosexualities Studies, 2020
This chapter explores a collection of identity practices mobilized by heterosexual-identifying me... more This chapter explores a collection of identity practices mobilized by heterosexual-identifying men with radically different gender politics-identifying elements of their performances of masculinity as "gay" in historically novel attempts to construct heterosexual masculine identities as men. Through their reliance upon gay culture and "gay aesthetics," these straight men gain symbolic distance from stereotypes of masculinity and, for some, simultaneously position themselves as politically progressive. Building on the work on hybrid masculinities, we theorize "hybrid hegemonic masculinity" to explore the dynamics of these men's gender projects and contribute to this growing body of scholarship critically considering the meanings, motives, and consequences of these emergent gender strategies. We argue that these discursive tactics are a profoundly visible element of a larger social and cultural process whereby durable systems of power are capable of incredible flexibility-particularly visible during moments of change and uncertainty. We argue here that the queer(ish) practices of straight men simultaneously secure and obscure systems of power and inequality.
Routledge International Handbook of Masculinity Studies, 2019
Men and Masculinities, 2019
In August of 2018, the American Psychological Association (APA) published a new report entitled, ... more In August of 2018, the American Psychological Association (APA) published a new report entitled, "APA Guidelines for Psychological Practice with Boys and Men." These Guidelines summarize the extensive scholarship documenting dilemmas associated with masculinity that harm boys' and men's lives. It discusses many elements of what is labeled "traditional" masculinity, which requires boys and men to suppress certain feelings and emotions (e.g., sadness, loneliness), limiting their psycho-social development and shaping their behaviors, relationships, and identities. In other words, subscribing to ideologies of conventional or "hegemonic" (i.e. currently and situationally valorized) masculinity (Connell 1995) comes with psychological and interpersonal costs. These constraints can lead to boys' and men's lack of empathy for girls and women, as well as for gay and "effeminate" boys, and for LGBTQ+ individuals. At the same time, they operate within a culture where "himpathy" leads people to identify with even poorly behaved white boys and men (Manne, 2018). The Guidelines explain, however, that even as men face "costs" of masculinity (see Messner 1997), the expectations of and privileges associated with masculinity mean boys and men are less likely to seek support or treatment for mental health struggles. Ignoring mental health needs indeed becomes an enactment of masculinity itself. As the authors of the report summarize, "compelling evidence exists supporting the need for guidelines for psychologists who provide services to boys and men" (2018; pg. 4). They outline ten separate guidelines for psychologists helping boys and men to seek happiness as well as to establish more intimate and egalitarian relationships. The Guidelines begin by urging clinical psychologists to understand masculinities as socially and culturally constructed (Guideline 1), and as constructions that look different over the life-course (Guideline 2). They encourage practitioners to recognize how power and privileges associated with masculinity are structured by broader systems of inequality, as well as how this inequality deeply harms boys and men and their relationships (Guidelines 3 and 4). They encourage "positive" (i.e. active) involvement from fathers (Guideline 5) and support the role of educational and healthcare institutions in expanding boys' understanding of their intellectual capacities and occupational potentials (Guideline 6). However, what constitutes "positive" and "healthy" are at times unclear, or in the case of fathering implicitly presumed to mean present rather than a reimagining of fatherhood beyond providing and playing. The Guidelines also acknowledge and suggest that psychologists work to reduce risk-taking behavior, address trauma that result in boys and men harming themselves and others (Guideline 7), and encourage
Men, Masculinities, and the Modern Career, 2020
Gender has been meaningfully tied to relations of production throughout history and across cultur... more Gender has been meaningfully tied to relations of production throughout history and across cultural contexts. What this exactly looks like and how it shapes the lived realities of people across time and place, however, has also been and will continue to be subject to great change. This chapter examines four contemporary dimensions of the relationship between masculinity, work, and career as well as how this relationship is connected with systems of gender inequality. We summarise scholarship on (1) the persistence of occupational sex segregation, (2) the effects of the "breadwinner" ideal, (3) the cultural devaluation of femininity , and (4) emergent scholarship on "masculinity contest cultures" at work. Here, we argue that it is through the interconnections between these dimensions that the relationship between masculinity, work, and career contributes to the durability of gender inequality.
Contexts, 2019
In Cheap Sex: The Transformation of Men, Marriage, and Monogamy, Mark Regnerus argues that men ha... more In Cheap Sex: The Transformation of Men, Marriage, and Monogamy, Mark Regnerus argues that men have historically entered marital relationships with women primarily to access sex. He claims that as women have demanded less from men in exchange for sex, the institution of marriage has been undermined. Regnerus suggests that shifts in women’s sexual behavior have “cheapened” sex because straight men are no longer obliged to offer concessions such as protection, resources, attention, or fidelity to gain access to sex with women. Thus, according to Regnerus, the decline in marriage—and the nuclear family—is caused by women’s newfound willingness to be “promiscuous.” These claims represent a nostalgic plea for a time when young women were expected to wait for marriage to have sex, accept reproduction as a likely outcome of sex, and rely on the material resources of a male partner. These claims are provocative. But are they true?...
Men and Masculinities, 2019
Feminist scholarship on masculinities ossified into a recognizable “subfield” of gender
studies,... more Feminist scholarship on masculinities ossified into a recognizable “subfield” of gender
studies, in part, through systematically centering the work of a very small group of
white men. This process of collective centering works as an effective “exclusionary
practice” that I argue hinders both the scholarly and political potential of this field.
This article examines the transformation of the status of the subfield alongside an
examination of women’s contributions to feminist scholarship on masculinities, and
an emergent politics of citation that works to reproduce inequality within this
subfield. In addition to identifying the processes by which a small group of white men
have accumulated a disproportionate amount of power and status within “masculinities studies” as problematic, I also question the lack of critical dialogue and
debate between various subfields examining systems of power and structured
advantage. Here, I put masculinities studies into conversation with whiteness studies,
critical heterosexualities studies, research on elites, and more to argue that there
should be more dialogue between scholars doing research in these areas. Disrupting
exclusionary practices in masculinities studies with both political and practical intent
will better situate feminist scholars of masculinities to adapt their scholarship to
transformations in the character and form of durable systems of inequality as well as
identifying emergent processes and mechanisms of social reproduction.
Men and Masculinities, 2018
This is a preprint of a review symposium of Mark Regnerus's book, "Cheap Sex: The Transformation ... more This is a preprint of a review symposium of Mark Regnerus's book, "Cheap Sex: The Transformation of Men, Marriage, and Monogamy" forthcoming in the journal, Men and Masculinities.
Gender, Work, and Occupation, 2017
Feminist sociologist Joan Acker is most commonly cited as one of
the first to theorize how gender... more Feminist sociologist Joan Acker is most commonly cited as one of
the first to theorize how gender gets institutionalized in organizations
and workplaces. But this project was actually an application
of a more general theoretical turn in the field Acker was promoting.
Acker was centrally involved in an important feminist sociological
conversation about whether we should continue to theorize and
study ‘patriarchy’ or whether our focus should shift to ‘gender’.
She argued for the latter and played an influential role in convincing
the field to follow this suggestion.
The " marriageability of men " is an argument used in sociological research to understand demogra... more The " marriageability of men " is an argument used in sociological research to understand demographic changes in marriage and to analyze social dynamics associated with gender, race, class, family, the workplace , incarceration, and more. While some are marrying later and others are foregoing marriage altogether , a lack of marriageable men is often part of the argument concerning new patterns of family formation in the United States. Research mobilizing the marriageability of men hypothesis spans a great deal of subfields of sociological research, not all in conversation with one another – and not all explicitly making use of the term. This article collects these diverse strands of thought and presents an argument for how and why men are less marriageable, what this means, and why it means different things for different groups of men and women. Racialized and classed conceptions of masculinity create different kinds of struggles for different groups of men and work against their marriageability for different reasons. We discuss the impact of incarceration, new struggles in a service economy, and shifts in women's perceptions and expectations of what qualifies men as " marriageable. "
In this essay we examine the contemporary relationship between masculinity and sexuality in three... more In this essay we examine the contemporary relationship between masculinity and sexuality in three identity practices. In doing so we suggest that a useful way to think about the relationship of masculinity and sexuality is not to think of sexuality as inhered in male bodies (heterosexual or homosexual), but as discursive practice. That is, when we think of sexuality as located in particular homosexual or heterosexual bodies, it means that heterosexuals are the homophobic ones and that homophobia is being directed at gay men. Instead we argue that homophobia is best understood—as Connell (1995) suggests of masculinity—as multiple (e.g., Stein 2005). Homophobia is often discussed as a psychological or political disposition. But homophobias can also operate as complex forms of gendered practice. The iterations of homophobia we address here do not necessitate the fear or hatred of gay men. Rather, they are contemporary forms of gender practice that recuperate existing relations of power and inequality among men and between men and women. What we are seeing is not necessarily a kinder, gentler form of masculinity, but a “soft-boiled” (Heath 2015) masculinity, discursively repackaged in light of feminist critique and challenge (e.g., Demetriou 2001; Bridges 2014; Bridges and Pascoe 2014). We argue that fag discourse, compulsive heterosexuality, and heterosexual men’s comfort with and adoption of “gay aesthetics” are practices associated with emergent forms of homophobia. They illustrate the tenacity of gender inequality behind a façade of gender and sexual equality.
This article addresses a paradoxical stance taken by young straight men in three groups who ident... more This article addresses a paradoxical stance taken by young straight men in three groups who identify aspects of themselves as “gay” to construct heterosexual masculine identities. By subjectively recognizing aspects of their identities as “gay,” these men discursively distance themselves from stereotypes of masculinity and privilege and/or frame themselves as politically progressive. Yet, both of these practices obscure the ways they benefit from and participate in gender and sexual inequality. I develop a theory of “sexual aesthetics” to account for their behavior and its consequences, contributing to a growing body of theory regarding the hybridization of contemporary masculinities and complicating
theories of sexual practice.
Uploads
Publications by Tristan Bridges
studies, in part, through systematically centering the work of a very small group of
white men. This process of collective centering works as an effective “exclusionary
practice” that I argue hinders both the scholarly and political potential of this field.
This article examines the transformation of the status of the subfield alongside an
examination of women’s contributions to feminist scholarship on masculinities, and
an emergent politics of citation that works to reproduce inequality within this
subfield. In addition to identifying the processes by which a small group of white men
have accumulated a disproportionate amount of power and status within “masculinities studies” as problematic, I also question the lack of critical dialogue and
debate between various subfields examining systems of power and structured
advantage. Here, I put masculinities studies into conversation with whiteness studies,
critical heterosexualities studies, research on elites, and more to argue that there
should be more dialogue between scholars doing research in these areas. Disrupting
exclusionary practices in masculinities studies with both political and practical intent
will better situate feminist scholars of masculinities to adapt their scholarship to
transformations in the character and form of durable systems of inequality as well as
identifying emergent processes and mechanisms of social reproduction.
the first to theorize how gender gets institutionalized in organizations
and workplaces. But this project was actually an application
of a more general theoretical turn in the field Acker was promoting.
Acker was centrally involved in an important feminist sociological
conversation about whether we should continue to theorize and
study ‘patriarchy’ or whether our focus should shift to ‘gender’.
She argued for the latter and played an influential role in convincing
the field to follow this suggestion.
theories of sexual practice.
studies, in part, through systematically centering the work of a very small group of
white men. This process of collective centering works as an effective “exclusionary
practice” that I argue hinders both the scholarly and political potential of this field.
This article examines the transformation of the status of the subfield alongside an
examination of women’s contributions to feminist scholarship on masculinities, and
an emergent politics of citation that works to reproduce inequality within this
subfield. In addition to identifying the processes by which a small group of white men
have accumulated a disproportionate amount of power and status within “masculinities studies” as problematic, I also question the lack of critical dialogue and
debate between various subfields examining systems of power and structured
advantage. Here, I put masculinities studies into conversation with whiteness studies,
critical heterosexualities studies, research on elites, and more to argue that there
should be more dialogue between scholars doing research in these areas. Disrupting
exclusionary practices in masculinities studies with both political and practical intent
will better situate feminist scholars of masculinities to adapt their scholarship to
transformations in the character and form of durable systems of inequality as well as
identifying emergent processes and mechanisms of social reproduction.
the first to theorize how gender gets institutionalized in organizations
and workplaces. But this project was actually an application
of a more general theoretical turn in the field Acker was promoting.
Acker was centrally involved in an important feminist sociological
conversation about whether we should continue to theorize and
study ‘patriarchy’ or whether our focus should shift to ‘gender’.
She argued for the latter and played an influential role in convincing
the field to follow this suggestion.
theories of sexual practice.