Performing Gender Identity: Young Men's Talk and the Construction of Heterosexual Masculinity

Introduction

• Deborah Cameron's (1997) chapter analyzes how gender identity is performed through talk, focusing on a conversation among young men.

• Cameron uses Judith Butler's concept of performativity to argue that gender is enacted through activity, not a pre-existing trait.

• The chapter explores how linguistic resources are used to accomplish specific aims and construct gender in certain situations.

Reading Questions

• What observations did Cameron make in Danny's recorded conversation that Danny overlooked?

• How does Cameron explain Danny's incomplete understanding of the conversation?

• What is the distinction between "rapport talk" and "report talk"? Which is typically associated with women, and how does Cameron interpret its presence in this conversation?

• Beyond wine, women, and sports, what else do the five men discuss, and how do they approach these topics?

• Why does Cameron assert that the conversation is "not only about masculinity, it is a sustained performance of masculinity"?

• Why does she argue against classifying the conversation as having a "feminine" conversational style, even when it resembles conversations among women?

• What purpose does the antigay content serve in this conversation?

Initial Observations and Danny's Analysis

• In 1990, Danny, a 21-year-old student, recorded a casual conversation among five male friends to examine "men's talk".

• Danny aimed to verify generalizations about male conversational styles, such as competitiveness, hierarchical organization, focus on impersonal topics, and joking/insulting.

• Danny's paper, titled "Wine, women, and sports," supported the stereotype of all-male interaction.

• Cameron agreed with Danny's identification of stereotypical features but found additional layers in the data.

• Cameron suggests that Danny's analysis was "partial" because his expectations shaped what he deemed significant, overlooking other aspects of the conversation.

The Role of Preconceptions in Analysis

• Cameron suggests Danny's selective reading was influenced by preconceived notions.

• Analysis is never fully objective; preconceptions inevitably shape observations.

• Gender-related subjects are particularly prone to being influenced by expectations during analysis.

• Popular books, like Deborah Tannen's You Just Don't Understand, present vignettes of typical masculine and feminine behavior that are easily recognized due to cultural scripts.

• Reversing the genders in Tannen's anecdotes still allows for plausible explanations of gender differences, indicating the influence of cultural scripts.

• Men's reluctance to ask for directions is often attributed to concerns about status, but an alternative explanation for women could be a desire to avoid imposing or fear of strangers.

• Behavior is interpreted through the lens of a broader discourse on gender difference.

• This discourse constructs and makes visible gender differentiation.

• Cameron proposes that conversationalists, like analysts, construct stories to perform gender identity.

Identity and Performativity

• Judith Butler's Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity (1990) uses the concept of performativity from speech-act theory.

• Butler argues that gender is performative, "constituting the identity it is purported to be."

• Drawing from J.L. Austin's theory that illocutions like "I promise" create a state of affairs, Butler suggests that "feminine" and "masculine" are effects produced through repeated acts.

• Gender is "the repeated stylization of the body," which solidifies over time to create the appearance of a natural kind of being.

• This extends the feminist view that gender is socially constructed, as Simone de Beauvoir stated, "one is not born, but rather becomes a woman."

• "Becoming a woman" or a man is an ongoing process of reaffirming and displaying gender through culturally normed acts.

• Speech is also a "repeated stylization of the body," with masculine and feminine styles resulting from repeated acts aimed at constituting oneself as a proper man or woman.

• Traditional sociolinguistics assumes that people talk a certain way because of who they are, while a postmodernist approach suggests that people are who they are because of how they talk.

• This shifts focus from cataloging differences to examining how linguistic resources produce gender differentiation.

• It also highlights the "rigid regulatory frame" that defines language appropriate for performing masculinity or femininity.

• This approach acknowledges the instability and variability of gender identities.

• While gender isPoliced by social norms, individuals can engage in acts of transgression and resistance.

• Men and women can use their awareness of gendered meanings in speech and action to produce various effects.

• Differences in men's and women's speech are not as clear-cut as dichotomies like "competitive/cooperative" and "report talk/rapport talk" suggest.

• People perform gender differently in various contexts and sometimes behave in ways associated with the "other" gender.

The Conversation: Wine, Women, Sports,…And Other Men

• The conversation involved five white, middle-class American suburbanites, Al, Bryan, Carl, Danny, and Ed, all 21 years old.

• The conversation took place while watching a basketball game at home.

• References to the game were frequent and considered legitimate conversational moves.

• Sports talk is a masculine conversational genre in the U.S.

• The men discussed their day, classes, domestic arrangements, and the merits of wine.

• There was also a narrative about two roommates unknowingly inviting girlfriends over simultaneously.

• The title "Wine, women, and sports" is accurate but incomplete.

• The most prominent theme, besides basketball, was gossip about other men, focusing on their appearance, dress, social behavior, and sexual mores.

• The individuals discussed were identified as "gay." The topic of "gays" was introduced by Ed early in the conversation

• He mentions seeing the new Remnant, a right-wing campus newspaper, which attacked the college's Gay Ball.

• Al, Bryan, and Ed actively established a shared view of the Gay Ball and homosexuality, portraying gays as alien and comical.

• Danny commented that it was "hilarious."

• Ed joked about who would wear the boutonniere and corsage, implying that both would wear flowers because they are "fruits."

• Danny then initiated gossip about individual men identified as gay, starting with his classmate Ronnie.

• Bryan mentioned "the most effeminate guy I've ever met" and "that really gay guy in our Age of Revolution class."

• Ed claimed there were many "homos" and "dykes" in their class, focusing on a "fat, queer, goofy guy" and a "blond hair, snide little queer weird shit."

• These references sometimes led to extended discussions about the individuals.

"The Antithesis of Man"

• The criteria for categorizing people as gay did not always align with their known or suspected sexual preferences.

• The terms "butt pirate" and "butt cutter" were infrequently used.

• It was often unclear if the referred individuals were actually homosexual.

• Bryan and Ed complained about "four homos" hitting on "the ugliest-ass bitch in the history of the world," highlighting the focus on gender deviance rather than sexual deviance.

• Being "gay" meant failing to meet the group's standards of masculinity or femininity.

• Conformity to gender norms was seen as a matter of degree.

• Hitting on an "ugly-ass bitch" was considered "homosexual" behavior, as proper masculinity requires that the object of sexual interest be at least minimally attractive.

• The term "gay" referred to insufficiently masculine appearance, clothing, and speech.

• The conversation about the "really gay guy in our Age of Revolution class" ended with Ed declaring, "he's the antithesis of man."

• Bryan described the guy wearing shorts in 42-degree weather, resembling women volleyball players' shorts, combined with a parka.

• Ed added that he has incredibly skinny legs and might be at home combing his leg hairs.

• Bryan noted he doesn't have leg hair but wears ridiculous Reeboks with goofy striped tube socks.

Cooperation

• To demonstrate that certain individuals are "the antithesis of man," the group engaged in conversation resembling "women's talk."

• The conversation focused on people and served rapport rather than report purposes.

• It affirmed the in-group's solidarity by criticizing the out-group's behavior.

• The specific subjects were clothing and bodily appearance.

• The men criticized the "gays" for their interest in displaying their bodies and wearing inappropriate clothing.

• Clothing choices included bathing costumes to class and shorts in cold weather with parkas.

• The conversationalists showed awareness of "unmanly" concerns such as styles and materials ("French cut spandex," "tube socks").

• They talked about men's bodies to demonstrate their own lack of sexual interest in those bodies.

• The formal features of the conversation departed from stereotypical notions of "men's talk."

• Analyses of speech styles often contrast men's talk as "competitive" with women's talk as "cooperative."

• Men talk to gain "status," while women talk to forge "intimacy" and "connection."

• Analysts identify formal features of talk as markers of competition and cooperation.

• The stereotype itself underpins analytic judgments; behavior can support either interpretation, and gender influences how it is interpreted.

• Scholars like Jennifer Coates have noted the "cooperative" nature of informal talk among female friends.

• Linguistic features such as hedging, epistemic modals, latching of turns, simultaneous speech, and repetition indicate joint production.

• The conversation includes many turns beginning with "you know" and/or containing the marker "like."

• These items function cooperatively, mitigating conflict and building group involvement and consensus.

• "You know" and "like" mark information as "given" within the group's discourse and express high involvement.

• Moments of excitement are marked by intonation, pitch, loudness, speech rate, and the use of taboo language.

• Latching and simultaneous speech indicate close attention to others' contributions.

• The discussion of the "really gay" guy's legs exemplifies jointly produced discourse, with speakers cooperating to build a detailed picture.

• The sequence includes latching, repetition, and hearer support like "yes" and "that's right."

• The conversation resembles women's talk, but the organization of the floor is not egalitarian or non-hierarchical.

Competition

• The conversation is not egalitarian in quantitative terms.

• Ed and Bryan are the dominant speakers, while Al and Carl contribute less.

• Danny's contributions vary in length and frequency.

• There is a hierarchy in this conversation, with competition between Bryan and Ed.

• Ed introduces the topic of homosexuality and tries to maintain "ownership" of it.

• He is interrupted by Danny, who contradicts Ed's reference to The Remnant.

• Ed uses a joke to cap other contributions but receives no response.

• Danny's gossip elicits a matching contribution from Bryan.

• Ed unsuccessfully attempts to regain the floor, being ignored or contradicted.

• Ed's attempts to interrupt Bryan also fail initially.

• Eventually, Ed uses the "you know, like" strategy to gain the floor.

• From that point, Ed orients more to joint production norms.

• The speakers collaborate and reinforce bonds by denigrating people outside the group.

• More extreme forms of hierarchical and competitive behavior are not rewarded.

• Ed and Bryan engage in the joint production of discourse.

• Alternatively, Ed and Bryan may be using the collaborative enterprise to engage in verbal dueling, scoring points by dominating the floor and coming up with extravagant put-downs.

• In this analysis, Ed does not modify his behavior but "loses" his duel with Bryan.

Deconstructing Oppositions

• The opposition between "competitive" and "cooperative" behavior is problematic.

• Conversation typically contains both cooperative and competitive elements.

• Talk involves a minimum of cooperation and some degree of competition.

• "Cooperation" can refer to agreement on aims, respect for rights, or support for contributions, but co-occurrence is not always perfect.

• Participants may compete while pursuing a shared project.

• They may disagree but respect speaking rights.

• They may be overtly supportive while covertly seeking status.

• Discussions of women's talk often overlook that attending to others' face and one's own are not mutually exclusive.

• Egalitarian norms of female friendship groups are coercive.

• Status within the group depends on displaying the correct degree of concern for others.

• Gender stereotyping causes us to miss status-seeking in women's talk and connection-making in men's.

How To Do Gender With Language

• The analysis of male gossip does not suggest that the young men adopted a "feminine" conversational style.

• Characterizing the conversation as "feminine" would miss the point that it is a sustained performance of masculinity.

• What matters in gendering talk is the "performative gender work" it does.

• There may be an association between a certain style of speech and speakers of a particular gender, but the reasons behind this association need to be explored.

• It is not enough to claim that men do not know how to do "women's talk" if they occasionally engage in it.

• Men and women learn a broad set of gendered meanings attached to different ways of speaking.

• They produce their behavior in light of those meanings.

• Even those committed to traditional notions of gender have a range of possible gender identities.

• Performing masculinity or femininity involves different strategies in different contexts.

• Gender is relational, and "being a man" minimally requires "not being a woman."

• Men may avoid forms of talk associated with women to constitute themselves as masculine.

• The circumstances under which the contrast with women loses its salience need to be explored.

• Men may do so-called feminine talk without threatening their constitution as men or even to their advantage.

When and Why Do Men Gossip?

• Both sexes gossip, but its cultural meaning is "feminine."

• Men may avoid or disguise gossip, especially in mixed settings, to differentiate themselves from women.

• In all-male groups, the perceived danger is homosexuality.

• Under these circumstances, transgressing the norm "men don't gossip" may be acceptable to affirm heterosexual orientation.

• Gay men provide a contrast group against whom masculinity can be defined.

• This principle of contrast limits the permissibility of gossip for these young men.

• They talk about basketball players' skills and records, not their appearance or personal lives.

• Talking about players' personal lives or sexual activities would border on taboo: desire for other men.

• Ironically, gay men are the only men about whom these male friends can legitimately talk intimately without compromising their heterosexual masculinity.

• In a different context, with girlfriends, they might discuss basketball players differently.

• The presence of a woman displaces the dread spectre of homosexuality.

• What counts as acceptable talk for men depends on contextual variables.

• In a private conversation among male friends, gossiping about sexual exploits with women or the repulsiveness of gay men is the most appropriate way to display heterosexual masculinity.

• In public, agonistic strategies like yelling abuse at women or gays or exchanging sexist/homophobic jokes may be used.

• Both strategies do performative gender work, but they belong to different settings.

Conclusion

• Models of gendered speech implying monolithic constructs are unhelpful.

• The meaning of an interaction among men or women should not be sought primarily in the style, rather than the substance, of what is said.

• Men and women can subvert or resist prevailing codes of gender, but Danny and his friends are not doing this.

• Their conversation is driven by traditional anxieties about being seen as heterosexual males.

• Their skill as performers does not change the fact that they perform the same old gendered script.

Transcription Conventions

• latching: ==

• turn onset overlaps previous turn: [

• turn is completely contained within another speaker's turn: ]

• rising intonation on utterance: ?

• short pause: (.)

• indecipherable speech: (indeciph)

• emphatic stress on italicized item: italics

Vocabulary

• face: Public image

• hedging: Using cautious language to avoid directness.

• joint production: Collaborative construction of conversation

• latching: Immediate continuation of speech between speakers

• mitigating: Reducing the force or impact of something.

• performativity: Gender as constructed through repeated actions

• quotative: Reporting someone else's words.

• tag question: Adding a question at the end of a statement.

• turn: A speaker's opportunity to talk.

Cameron's analysis of the male conversation highlights several key arguments and points that resonate with broader linguistic and sociological concepts:

1. Performativity of Gender: Cameron's central argument, drawing from Judith Butler, is that gender is not a fixed attribute but is performatively constructed through repeated acts and stylizations. This aligns with the broader sociolinguistic understanding that language is not merely a tool for reflecting identity but also for enacting and constituting it. This perspective connects to Erving Goffman's work on impression management, where individuals strategically present themselves to create desired impressions.

2. Critique of Dichotomies: Cameron challenges simplistic oppositions like "competitive/cooperative" and "report talk/rapport talk," arguing that real-world interactions are more complex and nuanced. This critique aligns with feminist critiques of essentialist views of gender differences, which often reinforce stereotypes. Instead, Cameron emphasizes the contextual and contingent nature of gender performance, echoing Penelope Eckert's work on communities of practice, where identity is negotiated and constructed through participation in specific social groups.

3. The Role of Preconceptions: Cameron points out how preconceived notions and cultural scripts influence the analysis of language and gender. This observation is consistent with critical discourse analysis, which examines how power relations and ideologies are embedded in language use. The influence of popular books like Deborah Tannen's You Just Don't Understand illustrates how dominant discourses shape our understanding of gender differences.

4. Gossip as Gendered Practice: Cameron's analysis of male gossip reveals how it functions as a means of reinforcing heterosexual masculinity by denigrating those perceived as