“Femininity? It’s the Aesthetic of Subordination”: Examining Femmephobia, the Gender Binary, and Experiences of Oppression Among Sexual and Gender Minorities

Femininity Anchors: Heterosexual Relationships and Pregnancy as Sites of Harassment for U.S. Servicewomen

“…My research builds on this literature by showing how moments of elevated harassment reveal organizational, interactional, and individual gender dynamics. I highlight episodes of harassment and extend Hoskin's (2017Hoskin's ( , 2019Hoskin's ( , 2020 concept of "femmephobia" to the organizational level by showing how femininity anchors can trigger femmephobic responses.…”

“…Femininity anchors are part of a feminization process that occurs despite gender identity work, and the theoretical concept builds on other related concepts such as hegemonic masculinity, emphasized femininity, and pariah femininities (Connell 1987; Messerschmidt 2018; Schippers 2007). The military is a femmephobic organization, where military training actively denigrates women and femininity (Bayard de Volo and Hall 2015; Hoskin 2019, 2020). These values shape how servicemembers gain power within the institution (Barrett 1996; Hale 2008; Hinojosa 2010; Sasson-Levy 2003), and women specifically try to gain power in the military through masculine identity work, embodying masculinity, and distancing themselves from femininity (Crowley and Sandhoff 2017; King 2016; Sasson-Levy 2003).…”

“…When women embody emphasized femininity, they usually receive interactional benefits (e.g., status, popularity, or protection from harassment) for acquiescing to men's dominance and the existing gender order (Collins 2004;Hamilton et al 2019;Hoskin 2017;Schippers 2007). When women embody masculinity or forms of femininity that deviate from emphasized femininity, they are often punished through harassment, discrimination, ostracization, or violence (Collins 2004;Hoskin 2017Hoskin , 2019Hoskin , 2020Schippers 2007).…”

“…Even though women are subordinated to men in the gender order, they can receive some benefits, such as status and power over other women, by complying with hegemonic masculinity through heterosexuality (Collins 2000;Hamilton et al 2019). Previous scholarship shows harassment is often used to punish femininities that deviate from complementing hegemonic masculinity, suggesting women who comply are protected from this treatment (Hamilton 2007;Hoskin 2019Hoskin , 2020Payne 2010;Schippers 2007;Stone and Gorga 2014). However, I show that in an organizational space where femininity is significantly devalued, women are penalized for displaying heterosexuality, because this marker of emphasized femininity tethers them to the stigma associated with femininity in a hyper-masculine space.…”

The Long Arm of Oppression: How Structural Stigma Against Marginalized Communities Perpetuates Within-Group Health Disparities

“…This assumption however specifically villainizes gender nonconforming, sexual minorities (GNC-SMs), whose appearance and behaviors do not ascribe to prevailing norms of gender expression and characterizes them as deviants from the patriarchal norms and power structures that perpetuate toxic masculinity, while also invalidating their SM identity (Clarke et al, 2012). Qualitative research has provided insight into how community internalization and rejection of these structural stigmas result in the marginalization of GNC-SMs (i.e., Figure 1, Path C) and the SMs who are not GNC (i.e., Figure 1, Path E), respectively, based on visible gender-related mannerisms (Blair & Hoskin, 2014;Edmonds & Zieff, 2015;Edwards, 2018;Hoskin, 2020;Taywaditep, 2002). Consequently, diverse subcommunities have emerged to overcome exclusion experienced from broader SM populations (e.g., butch, bear, femme; Levitt, 2019).…”