According to dominant cultural representations, masculinity in heterosexual relationships is signified by men's dominance, aggression, sexual promiscuity, and emotional unavailability. Yet, the preferred way of doing masculinity is context-specific, and middle-class men face increasing expectations that they engage in egalitarian relationships. In this study, I use in-depth interviews with thirty-one college-educated, heterosexual men to examine how they construct their masculinity under changing social conditions. My findings show that men use egalitarian narratives as a form of identity work in which they construct understandings of themselves as progressive, caring, and respectful of women, in contrast to the majority of men, whom they ascribe with stereotypical male traits. However, these egalitarian narratives serve as a shield, allowing men to dismiss inequalities that emerge in their romantic relationships as the result of individual preferences so that gendered outcomes are allowed to go unquestioned, thereby leaving gender inequalities intact.

Courtship conventions are premised on widespread and deeply held cultural beliefs that men and women need and want different things from their romantic relationships. Yet queer relationships challenge the notion of distinct gendered behaviors in romantic relationships, and queer people often explicitly seek to undermine conventional relationship practices. Using interview data from 40 LGBTQ-identified respondents, I examine how queer people negotiate culturally dominant gendered dating and courtship practices. My findings show that, rather than replicate heterosexual norms, respondents actively reject them, seeking new and more egalitarian ways of building romantic relationships. Significantly, the narratives drawn on to justify egalitarian dating practices are similar to those used in their committed relationships. Respondents emphasized egalitarian, flexible, and non-gendered care work in committed relationships, indicating that how people date may potentially set the stage for the dynamics in their relationships. The importance placed on these alternative norms in queer communities, however, contradicts respondents' assertions that they can create relationships free from cultural constraints, demonstrating how emerging norms can breed their own pressures for conformity.

Research on the college hookup scene consistently shows it to be heavily gendered and heteronormative. In spite of the extensive research on hookup culture, there are limited data on how lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) students navigate hookups on college campuses. Yet queer hookups potentially provide a space for students to challenge the dominant understandings of gender and sexuality that permeate the college hookup scene, creating alternative visions for how hookups and other sexual relationships may proceed. Drawing on interviews with 24 LGBTQ college students at a regional university in the southeastern United States, this research investigates how LGBTQ college students negotiate the hookup scene on college campuses. As we show, LGBTQ students are sharply critical of dominant hookup culture and aim to challenge heteronormative practices by deconstructing normative patterns of behavior, emphasizing communication and consent, and queering standards of pleasure. In spite of their stated aims, many respondents replicated gendered practices in their hookups, limiting the transformative potential of queer hookups. This study indicates that while LGBTQ students are actively working to remake hookup culture, and, in some ways, are succeeding, barriers to a more mindful hookup culture remain, even among those who explicitly seek new ways to pursue sexual relationships.

Traditional courtship norms delineate distinct gendered behaviors for men and women based on the model of a dominant, breadwinning male and a passive, dependent female. Previous research shows, however, that as women have increased their access to earned income, there has been a rising ideological and behavioral commitment to egalitarian relationships. Drawing on in-depth interviews with 38 college-educated women, this article explores how women negotiate these seemingly contradictory beliefs in order to understand how and why gendered courtship conventions persist even as heterosexual romantic relationships become more egalitarian. My findings show that while the women reference essentialist beliefs about men’s “nature” to explain their commitment to courtship conventions, they draw on narratives of choice, individualism, and personal autonomy to assert that the symbolic gendering of courtship will not interfere with their desire for an egalitarian marriage. However, women’s behaviors and narratives reinforce notions of gender difference, potentially providing support for other forms of gender inequality.

No abstract