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.

Comments are closed.
%d bloggers like this: