Craigslist and the Gay Identity

One of the more intriguing stories of the last couple of weeks is the emergence of the Homodachi Research Group and the publication of their report entitled 'Exploratory National Gay Sex Survey using User-Generated Content'.

The group sadly don't identify themselves and unlike much of the literature around Craiglist, this study has not been peer-reviewed. It's therefore difficult to work out just how credible this research is. It does not seek to present the 'reality' of gay men's sex lives but rather how those lives are projected on Craigslist. I regard such research as valuable, telling us much about attitudes and performativity in seeking sexual encounters. However, this research looks at the presence of a word, and we do not therefore know whether the word 'bareback' indicates someone saying 'I do not do bareback' or 'I love bareback'. To say this is something of a draw-back is an understatement.

The site states that they analyzed over 48,000 craigslist M4M headlines in 23 (US) metropolitan areas, and claim that conducted the largest sample of gay sex survey ever made. They did no such thing, merely mining data rather than really seeking to analyse it. The full report can be downloaded here. They note at the start of the report the following:

Barebacking Capitals: Atlanta, Denver, Houston
Drug capitals: Dallas, New York, and San Francisco
Visitor capitals: Las Vegas & Washington DC
Group sex capitals: Chicago, Raleigh
69 capital: New York
Kink capitals: New York & Denver
Gym-body capitals: Los Angeles & New York

It looks an interesting project and having got this far (which is not nothing), they now move in to the more difficult analytical phase. They really ought to reveal who they are if that process it to be given any academic credibility, and as they seem to recognise, they need to become much more sophisticated in reaching any conclusions. I've previously looked at Gaydar (a sort of UK Craiglist) male for male escort websites and you can check that out here. I therefore know from experience just how much of a nightmare this sort of study can be, and I wish the group well. It could be one to watch.

Sex Work Research

I promised ages ago I'd start uploading conference slides/papers and publications and then, as is so often the case, I forgot all about it. So belatedly, here are a couple of pieces I wrote on sex work in 2009 and 2008. The first, entitled 'Male Sex Work and the Internet Effect: Time to Re-evaluate the Criminal Law' was published back in 2009 and explores sex work identities on the hook up/social networking site Gaydar, together with legal responses (or lack thereof) to the increasing role of the Internet in sex work. The second piece is a much smaller piece entitled 'Sex Work in Cyberspace: Who Pays the Price?'. It represents my first thoughts on the last UK government's approach to sex work, the role of the Internet (with an emphasis on female sex workers this time) and I also discuss the infamous Mark Oaten incident which had a life-changing impact on both Oaten and the male sex worker involved. It might also be the first law scholarly article to feature a recipe for Parkin cake.

Ashford, C (2009) ‘Male Sex Work and the Internet Effect: Time to Re-evaluate the Criminal Law?’, Journal of Criminal Law 73(3) 258

Jcla.73.3.258

View more documents from Chris Ashford.

Ashford, C (2008) ‘Sex Work in Cyberspace: Who Pays the Price?’ 17(1) Information and Communications Technology Law, 3.

Ictl sex work 791490741 content[1]

View more documents from Chris Ashford.

Gaydar on More4

More4 news carried a feature tonight on Gaydar - looking at how it has 'revolutionised' gay life. The report ended with an HIV slant (as seems the current fashion) with apparent shock (from the presenter who is a former Pink News editor) at the number of men willing to engage in bareback sex.

The message seems to be yes the Internet has had a massive impact and yes some men no longer go on the scene or use the scene differently. My own experience is that the scene today is very different to that ten years ago when I was discovering it for the first time. I can only comment on Newcastle and Manchester but in both instances the scene seems far more dominated by gay "stereotypes" - that is to say men (and it does seem to be much more male orientated) who appear camp or dress in a particular way or whose gestures are more effeminate. There seems less (and I hate this term) 'normal' or (hate this term even more) 'straight acting' guys on the scene than there was ten years ago. In contrast almost everyone I have talked to or met through Gaydar has fitted into this category. All this is just my personal experience and pretty sweeping but it does make me think. The scene today seems far more exclusive than ten years ago. I am surprised given the greater 'equality' enjoyed by 18 year old gay men and women today enjoy, that a young generation continues to be keen to carve out a clear gay identity - not apparently to challenge law or seek social changes as may have been the case in decades gone by but for some other reason.

Alternatively it could be that with the increase in acceptability of gay relationships those men who would consider themselves 'straight acting' can now socialise and met other men in reasonable comfort on the straight scene thus reducing the gay scene to the core it has always been with each generation.

I don't know but I do find it interesting to wonder - has the legal reform of the last ten years transformed the gay scene in ways never imagined?

The More4 news site contains a story on this with additional quotes viewable at: http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/science_technology/the+internet+hiv+risk/1872047

The broadcast report is viewable here.

Newsnight: Bareback Porn

Newsnight included a controversial and revealing item last night on the bareback porn industry. The report has had a follow up on Pink News and the mainstream British media.

It includes a description of one company that sent eight boys out to France in July last year to make a barebacking porn video. One guy had been HIV- before he went out but found out he was positive after the shoot. It turned out he was positive after the shoot (he had therefore actually been positive during the shoot). 3 further models were infected and another company, Load XXX subsequently released the scenes showing the models being infected in their barebacking scenes.

The whole item names numerous well known groups in the gay community including the massive group behind the Gay Times and Pink Paper plus Gaydar. I have a feeling that this has the potential to be really explosive in the UK gay community. You can view the item via the BBC iplayer at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediaselector/check/player/nol/newsid_7280000/newsid_7280500?redirect=7280560.stm&news=1&bbram=1&bbwm=1&nbwm=1&nbram=1

Read the Pink News item at: http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-7042.html

You can read the original item about the DVD in Boyz published last year: http://www.boyz.co.uk/pdfs/848/pdfs/04_BOYZ_In_The_Know.pdf

You can keep up to date in this general area in this amazing blog by Edwin J Bernard: http://criminalhivtransmission.blogspot.com/

Gaydar Stereotypes?

Interesting story reported in Pink News which from what I can work out from the net is based on a research paper delivered in the Spring. Prof Ben Light at Salford Uni has accused the well known dating site, Gaydar, of using "vilage people stereotypes". The company behind Gaydar pointed out that people don't need to define themselves as a group to sue the site. I, like them don't really understand what Prof Light is on about and I'd certainly like to see his full paper. If people define themselves as a role that is self definition and though you could get into the issues around identity construction it seems clear that the site is not responsible (though arguably the online "community" is). I'm not sure I'd even accept that. Where Prof Light may have a point is in relation to the "Sexfactor" element of the site. This is where people can nominate and vote for people on the basis if their appearance and the number of votes given is shown. Now, there are fairly extensive categories and some of them perhaps conform to some "stereotypes" but I'd consider them subcultures. The full list is: Leather, Rubber, Skins & Punk, Muscle (18-30), Muscle (31+), Cubs, Bears, Young Guys (18-21), Young Guys (22+), Guy Next Door (18-30), Guy Next Door (31+), Older Guys, Alternative, Hip, Uniforms and Sports Gear. I'd be interested to know how widely these categories are understood beyond the "active" gay community.

http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-5221.html

How Gay Sex Changed the World

The final programme to comment on in Ch4's Gay Season is 'How Gay Sex Changed the World'. I actually found this a very easy and interesting viewing. It mixed a discussion of the evolving legislation with pop culture references and consequently involved the interviewing of a number of celebrities and politicians who were all gay. I thought it was nice to see such a varied portrait of the modern homosexual. It was also nice to see people expressing "rebellious" views. Both journalist Mark Simpson and the actor Simon Callow expressed ant-homosexual views. This queer analysis is one well established in the States but not something we see all that often here - at least on the media. It was the type of theme that this season should have explored - pushing the boundaries and exploring contemporary debates rather than reflecting on debates of the past. The programme flirted with another modern debate on the subject of Gaydar (the "dating" website). They explored the multi-functionality of the site - the chat space for the young kid coming out, the dating site for the modern day guy, the escort site for the guy wanting a rapid commercial sexual encounter or as seemed to be the consensus, the main function - a way of meeting lots of guys for sexual encounters. Some of the "talking heads" asked - is this a male thing? Is it a consequence of what happens when women aren't in the relationship mix? etc etc. Again, something that could/should have been explored much further. For what it's worth I think there's a lot of value in the "it's just men argument". Whilst I know of some guys who don't use Gaydar in that way of know of hundreds of others who do. Many in relationships but who just can't give up on at least "checking messages" on Gaydar. The continued search for another bloke, a better bloke or indeed several blokes all at once.