Homohysteria: A Commentary and Critique

Abstract

McCormack and Anderson (2014) present a case for using homohysteria as a lens through which to examine the effects of declining homophobia. This commentary addresses limitations of the concept of homohysteria, and offers suggestions on ways to improve the concept as a theoretical lens. We identify two central concerns in this presentation of homohysteria; a definitional problem in operationalizing the construct of homohysteria, and a logical weakness in the construction of the definition of a homohysteric society. We offer suggestions based in psychological and historical data aimed to improve homohysteria as a lens through which to view shifts in attitudes toward sexual orientation minorities.

Inclusive Masculinity Theory: overview, reflection and refinement

“…When these conditions are met, homophobia is used as a tool to police gender, as people fear the stigma of being socially perceived as gay. A Feminist Forum debate in Sex Roles evaluated the concept, also providing a substantive review of the changing nature of masculinities Anderson 2014a, 2014b;Negy 2014;Parent, Batura and Crooks 2014;Plummer 2014;Worthen 2014).…”

Homohysteria: Definitions, Context and Intersectionality

“…In their paper, Parent et al (2014) offer three areas that they think need to be addressed in developing the concept. They call for 1) clarity of definition; 2) recognition of the diversity of sexuality; and 3) incorporation of an intersectional and international approach that extends the concept beyond heterosexual men in the U.S.…”

“…In the rest of this response, we engage with these issues. Parent et al (2014) argue that definitional clarity and falsifiability are necessary for theoretical utility. Adopting a sociological perspective, and contrasting it with Parent et al, we…”

“…Similarly, patriarchy has been a powerful way of understanding inequality between the genders (Walby 1990), despite no unified definition or instrument to measure it. Accordingly, answering the question "what is the level at which awareness of male homosexuality is widespread enough to active a homohysteric culture" (Parent et al 2014, this issue) is not required for the concept to be falsifiable. Even so, the question is an interesting one, although we suspect the precise level will vary across cultures and time-periods.…”

“…Using our stage model of homohysteria, we hypothesize that Iran and similar countries are currently in homoerasure but, given the current political climate, may be transitioning to homohysteria (Karimi in press). Parent et al (2014) are correct to assert that detailed study of other international contexts are lacking. It is our contention, however, that this is mostly attributable to the preponderance of masculinities and sexualities scholars existing in U.S. and U.K.…”