Navigating and Negotiating Sexual Identity and Attraction: A Queer Analysis of Heterosexual-Identified Men Who Have Sex with Men
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Heterosexual-identified men who have sex with men (H-MSM) defy dominant sexuality frameworks that assume coherence between sexual identity, attraction, and behaviour. While extant models of sexual minority and heterosexual identity and attraction presume that H-MSM experience identity confusion and crisis and that ‘primarily or mostly heterosexual men’ exhibit equal levels of opposite-sex arousal as exclusive heterosexuals but report lower levels of same-sex sexuality than bisexuals in their attractions, fantasies, and behaviours, little research has examined how H-MSM experience sexual identity and attraction. This article is framed by Queer Theory and utilizes interpretative phenomenology to explore how a qualitative sample of 10 H-MSM navigate and negotiate their sexual identity and attraction. Results demonstate that H-MSM situate their same-sex attraction as physical, situational, and exploratory while employing gendered and relational scripts. At the same time, H-MSM sustain their heterosexual identity by decoupling identity from attraction and negotiating identity through heteroromantic desire. These findings demonstrate how sexuality is lived as fluid, shifting, and contingent, rather than as a linear trajectory toward categorical resolution. Unlike stage-based models that interpret identity-attraction-behaviour discordance as confusion or denial, participants described their identities as coherent, meaningful, and grounded in their romantic and long-term commitments to women. Same-sex attraction was acknowledged but framed as separate from participants’ perceived emotional weight of heterosexual relationships. By illustrating how individuals actively weigh and assign meaning to different aspects of sexuality, the study broadens understandings of sexual identity and attraction.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".