Sexistential Crisis: An Intersectional Analysis of Gender Expression and Sexual Orientation in Masculine Overcompensation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Masculine overcompensation-a phenomenon where men react to masculinity threats by endorsing hypermasculine ideals-has been demonstrated among straight men but has yet to be examined among gay men. The current study therefore proposed to examine whether gay men overcompensate similarly to their straight counterparts by providing participants with randomized feedback that threatened their masculinity. Overcompensation was measured in 867 online respondents by administering a series of questionnaires regarding views of pornography, rape, sex roles, and political orientation. Although our hypothesis was not confirmed, results revealed the intersectionality of both sexual orientation and self-reported gender expression regarding the formation of different views and beliefs. Specifically, masculinity was differentially related to homophobic attitudes, more callous views toward victims of sexual assault, and various components of attitudes toward pornography in gay and straight men. Masculine gay males held stereotypically masculine views less strongly than their masculine straight counterparts, providing evidence that gay males adopt a different type of masculinity than straight males-something of a "masculinity lite." Such findings point to the converging influence of sexual orientation and gender expression as contributors relevant to the attitudes of gay and straight men. This information adds to a growing body of literature on differences between gay and straight men and can be used to inform theory, education, and clinical practice, particularly in settings where men grapple with the implications of their masculinity.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".