New “Response” published in Sexualities

I have a new publication in the journal, Sexualities. This takes the form of a “Response” to an article by Sarah Diefendorf and Tristan Bridges. The argument in the original article was that a methodological paradox exists in research on men and masculinities — that decreased homophobia demonstrated in quantitative research is not evident in qualitative research. I profoundly disagree with the arguments in the article because: 1) such a result is not a paradox but an effect of different sampling strategies; 2) the supposed result only occurs by a systematic exclusion of publications the authors disagreed with, including from sexual minorities, women and people of colour; and 3) this speaks to a broader issue about “critical” theory trumping systematic methods in some masculinities research; including from one of the Editors of Men and Masculinities.

My response is available here, and I provide a discussion of inclusive masculinity theory because it was so mis-represented in the original article. Diefendorf and Bridges appropriately used their right to reply. I remain surprised the original article passed peer review and was not retracted after the issues were raised, but I am grateful to the Editors for enabling the academic debate–which has to be central to the role of academic journals.


Independent Voices article on Age Verification and BBFC report

The BBFC published a report about young adults’ porn consumption and parental perceptions of porn. The report is not available publicly, but has been reported in the media and copies are provided on request. The report as many issues – for example, referring to people aged 16-18 as children and equating kinky sex and/or BDSM as violence – but in this piece I focus on the problems of this approach to pornography and the failures of sex education.

My piece, with links to the information mentioned above, is available here.