Sexual orientation and gender: stereotypes and beyond (1).(study)

This essay is about sexual orientation and gender. (4) It is a topic that intrigues me for a variety of reasons. First of all, there is a personal fascination: Men who find a delicate balance between masculinity and femininity in their personality and the way they move around and behave intrigue me; quite often, such men are homosexual. There is also a scholarly interest.

The relation between sexual orientation and gender is currently being studied in a highly polarized way (Lorber, 1999). In the works of some scholars, the relation between gender and sexual orientation, primarily understood as a biologically determined phenomenon, almost comes across as a dogma (Bailey, 2003; Rahman & Wilson, 2003). In traditional "gay and lesbian" work, the relation is almost completely ignored, (5) stressing that sexual orientation and gender are completely independent phenomena. In these circles, it has been taboo for quite some time to even suggest that there might be a relation between effeminacy (6) and male homosexuality. Although the masculinities of gay men were being stressed (e.g., Nardi, 2000), relations to effeminacy remained largely unexplored. (7) On the other extreme is the queer perspective, in which gender and how it gets expressed in homosexual people are merely understood as performance, with the implicit suggestion of being under volitional control (Lorber, 1999). (8)

[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]

Without having the pretension of being able to reconcile the various approaches, I was interested in exploring what empirical evidence there is for the relation between gender and sexual orientation. I also wanted to examine in what way the relation between sexual orientation and gender could be a relevant issue.

THE GREATEST HOMOSEXUAL

My essay is inspired by two artistic expressions. The first one is a painting of Napoleon by the American pop artist Larry Rivers, who died in 2002 (Fig. 1). In part, the painting intrigued me because of its title. Rivers called this painting "The Greatest Homosexual." That is surprising. There have indeed been speculations about Napoleon's homoerotic interests, but there is no evidence of such. "The Encyclopedia of Homosexuality" writes about Napoleon: "Napoleon never lacked women to gratify his sexual needs and desires, and all the evidence points to the heterosexual character of his passions" (Johansson, 1990, p. 874). As an aside, Napoleon did, however, create a landmark in the emancipation of homosexuality. In 1810, he omitted sodomy from the list of sexual offenses (beating out the U.S. Supreme Court by 193 years).

[FIGURE 2 OMITTED]

Why did Rivers give his painting this title? Rivers himself seemed to have led a very active bisexual life, but, because of its unflattering title, it is rather unlikely that this painting was meant as a gay canonization of Napoleon. Fortunately, we do not have to speculate about his motives, because Rivers provided us with his own explanation. Rivers was inspired by another painting and it is easier to understand Rivers' reasoning when we look at that original picture, painted by Jacques-Louis David in 1812 and entitled "The Emperor Napoleon in His Study at the Tuilleries" (Fig. 2).

Rivers tells us that he came across David's painting in the National Gallery in Washington and was amazed by the work. He bought a large color reproduction and started working at an homage to David. Rivers wrote

 
    After many days of drawing, brushing, cutting, gluing, stenciling 
    etc. on canvas, which necessitated repeated and detailed 
    observations of the reproduction I couldn't avoid some obvious 
    nontechnical conclusions. Given a right hand resting in the split of 
    his cream vest, a gesture which by itself has come to represent 
    Napoleon, the plump torso settles comfortably on the left hip, the 
    careful curls and coif, the cliche of pursed lips and what self 
    satisfaction I read into the rest of his face, I decided Napoleon 
    was Gay. Now if he wasn't histories Greatest Homosexual, who was-- 
    Michelangelo? (Levy, Rose, & Serwer, 2002, p. 72) 

Rivers' reasoning elicits some compelling comments and questions. First of all, it shows that Rivers, probably like most people, (9) had an idea about what homosexuality is--inverted sexuality--and how it can be detected, in this case leading to a faulty conclusion. Rivers' reasoning also instructs us how men should not stand, at least if they do not want to come across as gay, regardless of what their actual sexual orientation is. Not only gay men are aware of this; heterosexual men also know perfectly well that certain gestures or postures are taboo because it might expose them as homosexuals (cf. Brownmiller, 1984; Henley, 1977). (10)

By interpreting Napoleon's posture this way and labeling him as homosexual, Rivers took Napoleon out of his historical context and applied a contemporary interpretative frame. The question arises whether this posture and these expressions were customary for men in the time in which Napoleon lived, or maybe for men of his standing. I did not do a comparative study of how men were depicted in Napoleon's days, but it is well known that the way in which people physically express themselves, and its relation to the biological sex they belong to, varies by time and place. Furthermore, "homosexuality" as a concept, not to speak of the word "gay," did not exist in the days of Napoleon. (11) Being gay or homosexual implies an identity that was not invented yet. So Napoleon could not have been a homosexual in the way we know homosexual people nowadays, let alone the greatest. It seems then that for Rivers there was an essential relationship between male homosexuality and effeminacy.

THE PERFECTLY MASCULINE IDYLL

The second artistic expression comes from "The City and the Pillar," one of the first novels written by Gore Vidal (1948/1965). The novel describes the homosexual coming of age of Jim Williard and his love for Bob Ford. Bob Ford, a mate from high school, is found irresistible by most girls, although boys did not much like him "possibly because girls did" (p. 10). Bob became a romantic obsession to Jim, after he as an adolescent, one summer day, beside a river, had an intense physical encounter with Bob. Vidal describes Jim's erotic life, mostly taking place in his dreams. Although initially frequented by both men and women, since that summer day it was only Bob that Jim dreamed of. Vidal adds, "Girls no longer intruded upon their perfectly masculine idyll" (p. 62).

As a tennis instructor, Jim then becomes part of a homosexual subculture. Vidal proceeds

 
    He was aware that what he dreamed of was not what normal men dreamed 
    of. But at the same time he made no connection between what he and 
    Bob had done and what his new acquaintances did. Too many of them 
    behaved like women. Often after he had been among them, he would 
    study himself in a mirror to see if there was any trace of the woman 
    in his face or manner; and he was always pleased that there was not. 
    (p. 62) 

Jim is intrigued, though, by this feminine world and Vidal continues

 
    He could not imagine himself doing the things they said they did. 
    Yet he wanted to know about them, if only out of a morbid desire to 
    discover how what had been so natural and complete for him could be 
    so perfectly corrupted by these strange womanish creatures. (p. 62) 

If we explore this fictional character in the light of contemporary theory and research, we would have to conclude that Jim does not resemble the prototype of a gay boy. Several studies suggest that because of his homosexual interest he should have been feminine, with an interest in girls' stuff (Bailey, Nothnagel, & Wolfe, 1995; Bailey & Zucker, 1995; Bell, Weinberg, & Hammerstein, 1981; Green, Roberts, Williams, Goodman, & Mixson, 1987; Zuger, 1988). (12) Coming in contact with the gay subculture--in his case obviously inhabited by effeminate, if not womanish, men--should then have resulted in recognition and feeling at home. This is, however, not the case. His anxious scrutiny for feminine features further suggests his awareness of the rules of gender display, but also of the negative appraisal of feminine features, at least in men. We do not know what happened to Jim, but it is quite likely that he adopted at least some of the effeminate mannerisms that he observed around him, even if it was just to become part of this subculture.

PRELIMINARY REMARKS

The question is whether there is an actual relationship between sexual orientation and gender. This question might be (dis)qualified as "essentialist," because it suggests a universal, omnipresent relationship that is either present or not. But even if the relationship between sexual orientation and gender would be socially constructed, it does not mean that such a relationship is not real. As the philosopher Ruse (1995) comments, "Because something is real, it does not mean that it cannot be a construct. Nor does its being a construct mean that it can not be real" (p. 65). Some preliminary remarks are necessary, however, before reviewing empirical work done in this area.

First of all the concept of homosexuality: it is not a univocal concept. Since Kinsey's work, we have come to see sexual orientation as a continuous trait ranging from heterosexual to homosexual, with bisexuality in between, on which people are scaled on the basis of the sex of the people they have sex with, fantasize about, and feel sexually attracted to (for an extensive discussion, see Gagnon, 2004). As will become clear, this has not always been the case. Homosexuality can be defined in terms of attraction, orientation, behavior, and self-identification. Beyond these distinctions there is a wide variety of ways in which homosexuality gets expressed--to some extent related to gender, ethnicity, social class, and culture--which I will only address if necessary. My focus here is on Western (homo)sexuality with a stress on male homosexuality; first of all, because I am more familiar with the male side of this story; and secondly, because more of the available material focuses on men. (13)

The concept of gender, and consequently of femininity and masculinity, is problematic as well. Gender has been defined in various ways in terms of patterns of behaviors, attitudes, personality features, and dispositions that are typical for biological males and females. There are more sexes than male and female (Meyer-Bahlburg, 1999) and, accordingly, there are also more than two genders. Although masculinity and femininity used to be seen as the ends of a bipolar scale, it has become good practice to discuss them as multidimensional phenomena. This becomes especially clear when we take ethnicity and social class into account and look at gender from an intercultural perspective (e.g., Johnson, Jackson, & Herdt, 2000). (14) Even though lay people probably still think of gender as a binary concept, it has become good practice to talk about femininities and masculinities.

A few other comments have to be made when talking about gender. Although gender, masculinity, and femininity used to be seen as a characteristic of a person, we are now aware that gender is continuously being produced; hence, the concept of "doing gender" (West & Zimmerman, 1987). Gender is also not just a descriptive term; it also has a prescriptive character. Even though what is gender-typical will differ depending upon time and place--cultures have different definitions of what it means to be a man or a woman--it tells us what is expected from us as men or as women. Connected to this is the awareness that masculinity and femininity are not neutral terms. In our society, feminine characteristics are less valued than masculine ones, in general, but especially in men. (15) Consequently, transgressions into femininity by men are more negatively valued than transgressions into masculinity by women. Finally, when we talk about gender, we are not just talking about people, but also about systems within which they operate (Connell, 2002). These systems are usually based on gender, consequently limit or enhance opportunities of men and women, and are in place to maintain existing social structures. All these qualifications should be taken into account when exploring the relationship between homosexuality and gender.

WOMEN'S SOULS IN MALE BODIES

What do we know about the link between gender and sexual orientation? Most experts would directly point out the historical link. When at the end of the nineteenth century homosexual men started to reflect upon themselves, they conceptualized themselves as a third sex, as having a woman's soul in a male body. This process has been …