User:Axelman03/Heteroflexibility

Peer Review (Neil): This is great! The research and work put in definitely expands a lot on the original article and gives much needed context. I think that you could give headers in the separate paragraphs to better show what you are talking about and organize the section. For example in the last paragraph you could make the header: "Heteroflexibility in Media". Your formatting and citations are well done and the entire section looks polished!

Alex's comment - I have made my changes bold to make them more visible, and separate from the content in the section that was already there

Research and views

As of 2010, most studies of heteroflexibility have focused on young men and women, especially white women in the college environment. Research suggesting the influence of prenatal androgen exposure on female sexual identity places heteroflexibility on a continuum with bisexuality and lesbianism. Other studies have focused on social origins for the behavior, such as the shifting media presentation of bisexuality or the "socialization of the male interloper fantasy" in which a man is invited into a lesbian relationship as a third partner.

Unlike "bisexual until graduation" and similar pejoratives, heteroflexibility is typically considered to have a positive connotation, and is often a self-applied label, although use of the term as a pop-culture slur has been attested.

Social scientists Hoy and London point out that some men who have occasional sex with other men nevertheless identify as heterosexual. They may feel that occasional sex with men is a result of female unavailability, or that their same-sex attraction is infrequent enough to not affect their identity. They may claim that while they feel romantically, physically, and emotionally attracted to women, their attraction to men is purely sexual, lacking any emotional attraction. A heteroflexible management strategy for these men is to interpret their sexual practices with women to be more important than their sexual encounters with men. They may also see themselves as masculine, while associating a same-sex-attracted identity with femininity. Some of the men and women who experience same sex encounters while identifying as heterosexual do so to avoid the negative social consequences that come with identifying as a member of the LGBT community.

There may be a difference between genders as to why one may have same-sex sexual encounters while identifying as heterosexual. Some men who have sex with other men that identify as heterosexual may describe themselves as hypersexual, and are primarily focused on having sex, with less regard for who they are having sex with. Some men may find that having sex is more accessible and less complicated than having sex with women. Conversely, in studies of young heterosexual women at college parties, particularly where women kiss each other, it has been seen that their reasons for this are external, such as the male attention, shock value, and alcohol.

There is some research on why people may identify as heterosexual despite having same-sex encounters. Most people in this category may reject any other label than heterosexual. This may be the same reason they avoid being labeled as bisexual. Some people recognize that they don't represent exclusive heterosexuality and will instead use other descriptors of heterosexuality. These descriptors may help explain for some that heterosexuality is elastic and that having same-sex sexual encounters would not make one not heterosexual. Some of these people, particularly men, will use these descriptors to enforce heteronormativity. Such descriptors may enforce homophobia and misogyny. Other descriptors enforce a dichotomy of masculinity and femineity, where they are masculine. For many, the idea that someone could identify as heterosexual yet have same-sex encounters is confusing. It cannot be neatly categorized in the same way other sexualities can. Some people believe they can identify as heterosexual because there is no emotion or attraction in same-sex sexual encounters, although not everyone agrees.

Heteroflexibility in the media

Most media representation of heteroflexibility is focused on heterosexual women experimenting with their sexuality. Typically, these representations are for male viewers, almost exclusively involving women. The women may clarify they are not lesbians. More often, these relationships are viewed from a view of heterosexuality. In an analysis of 2 magazines over 40 years, Cleo and Cosmopolitan, there was a change in how these magazines represent lesbianism. From 1983 to 1993, the magazines had noticeably changed to a more celebratory representation of lesbianism. Between 1993 and 2003, this representation became focused on the eroticism of same-sex attraction. Between 2003 and 2013, the focus moved from eroticism to sexless and playful. These magazines have increased their representation of female same-sex attraction while increasingly viewing it from a heterosexual view, where female same-sex attraction is not about sex but little more than a sexless flirtation by heterosexuals or a performance by heterosexuals to get the attention of males.

Representation of heteroflexibility in media is often used to show that the piece is LGBT-inclusive while keeping the narrative's focus on heterosexuality. A popular plot twist is that a heterosexual female character is willing to engage in same-sex intimacy, just for a kiss or a night. This plot twist and similar plot lines featuring heteroflexibility mainly involve women. The media franchise, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, has a heteroflexible storyline in its comic book where the main character, Buffy, has a relationship with a female soldier. After the female soldier declares her love to Buffy, they eventually have a night together. Despite this, Buffy ends the relationship almost immediately. Buffy was written in the comics to be an open-minded heterosexual woman, that intimacy with other women happens, but can never be anything more.

Ana Shack PEER REVIEW

For the first three paragraphs, please add your sources. You refer to studies, we need to know where you got the info so we can look at more specifics about those studies if we want.

It is really well written and I just agree with the other peer review that you should maybe separate it into different topics or make your current header more descriptive (I feel like views is just too vague)