Romantic Relationships and Their Social Context Among Gay/Bisexual Male Youth in the Castro District of San Francisco

Abstract

ABSTRACT. This article examines the culture of romantic relationships among gay/bisexual male youth in the Castro District of San Francisco. The article seeks to specify the cultural ideology that informs these relationships, drawing upon ethnographic observation, autobiographical accounts, and informant cultural exegesis. The article also seeks to link thinking and experience inside romantic relationships (e.g., bonding, jealousy) to patterns of social behavior associated with romantic relationships (e.g., relationship sequestering, cheating), showing how both are informed by shared assumptions which make these emotions and gestures intelligible to the group. Beliefs about love, compatibility, and monogamy are explored. Reciprocity, including its degradation into negative forms, is examined with focus on the units of value that are exchanged in romantic relationships, in particular sentimental gifts. Gestures of commitment that mark commencement of a romantic relationship as well as extension of the dynamics of a relationship after "breakup" (as in "revenge sex" and "rebound relationships") are examined. Cultural systems that challenge adherence to a romantic ideology, such as a prestige economy associated with sex linked to an ethos of sexual exploration/recreation, are weighed against the pull of romance. "Drama," a hallmark of gay youth, is viewed in the context of romantic culture.

Boys Just Want to Have Fun? Masculinity, Sexual Behaviors, and Romantic Intentions of Gay and Straight Males in College

“…We restrict our sample size to undergraduate men who self-identify as either straight or gay for a sample size of 5,889 and 330 respondents respectively. Although the data were not drawn from a national probability sample, a major advantage of the OCSLS is its larger gay male college population than other studies (Eyre et al, 2007;Rhodes et al, 2007), allowing for more robust estimates. The data provide rarely available, detailed information about sexual interactions in relationships, dating, and nonrelationship sex.…”

“…This research focuses on issues such as suicide (Almeida, Johnson, Corliss, Molnar, & Azrael, 2009;Li Kitts, 2005;Saewyc, 2007;Silenzio, Pena, Duberstein, Cerel, & Knox, 2007), sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and HIV/AIDS (Garafalo, Herrick, Mustanski, & Donenberg, 2007;Harper, 2007;Rhodes, McCoy, Hergenrather, Omli, & Durant, 2007;Saewyc et al, 2006), substance abuse (Easton, Jackson, Mowery, Comeau, & Sell, 2008;Kipke et al, 2007;Marshal, Friedman, Stall, & Thompson, 2009;Rhodes et al, 2007), and victimization (Chesir-Teran & Hughes, 2009;Saewyc et al, 2006;Williams, Connolly, Pepler, & Craig, 2005). Within this literature, there is a lack of academic focus around the processes leading up to romantic relationships for sexual-minority youth (Diamond, 2003;Diamond, Savin-Williams, & Dubé, 1999;Eyre, Arnold, Peterson, & Strong, 2007;Savin-Williams, 2003; Smith, Guthrie, & Oakley, 2005). Due to stigma associated with alternative youth sexualities and a generalized notion that sexuality is a matter that only adults understand (Álvarez, 2006;Savin-Williams, 1996), information scholars have about the ways that young gay males construct their dating and sexual lives comes from a limited amount of research (Eyre et al, 2007); studies that focus on sexual and romantic scripts for younger gays largely utilize adults reflecting on their youth (Smith et al, 2005).…”

“…Within this literature, there is a lack of academic focus around the processes leading up to romantic relationships for sexual-minority youth (Diamond, 2003;Diamond, Savin-Williams, & Dubé, 1999;Eyre, Arnold, Peterson, & Strong, 2007;Savin-Williams, 2003; Smith, Guthrie, & Oakley, 2005). Due to stigma associated with alternative youth sexualities and a generalized notion that sexuality is a matter that only adults understand (Álvarez, 2006;Savin-Williams, 1996), information scholars have about the ways that young gay males construct their dating and sexual lives comes from a limited amount of research (Eyre et al, 2007); studies that focus on sexual and romantic scripts for younger gays largely utilize adults reflecting on their youth (Smith et al, 2005). From research that has been done on young gay males and sexual/romantic interactions, we know a few findings.…”

“…perpetuate the myth of gay male promiscuity" (2000, p. 35); these depictions emphasize the quest for anonymous sex with a complete lack of romantic intentions (Rhodes et al, 2007). Gay men, in this view, are in pursuit of hypermasculine prestige sex and seek to bolster their reputation by having frequent sex with attractive partners (Eyre et al, 2007). Rhodes and colleagues (2007), however, explain gay men's sexual behaviors through theories of masculinity.…”

Relationship cognitions and longitudinal trajectories of sexual risk behavior among young gay and bisexual men: The P18 cohort study

“…A key avenue of exploration has considered how features of romantic relationships may influence condomless (i.e. anal intercourse without a condom) sex behaviors (Bauermeister, 2012; Bauermeister, Ventuneac, Pingel, & Parsons, 2012; Eyre, Arnold, Pererson, & Strong, 2007; Newcomb, Ryan, Garofalo, & Mustanski, 2014). To date, much of the research in this area has been cross-sectional in nature, and thus unable to capture how romantic ideals may influence condomless anal sex behavior among young gay and bisexual men longitudinally, a issue of critical importance as these young men emerge into adulthood.…”