Abstract
Most quantitative research about lesbian, gay, bisexual, and queer (LGBQ) people’s sexual subcultures and sexual practices has used non-probability samples due to data limitations. This paper used the Generations study, a national probability sample of LGBQ Americans in three age cohorts, 18–25 (n = 510), 34–41 (n = 294), and 52–59 (n = 425), who also identified as Black, white, or Latina/o. This paper analyzed men (n = 590) and women (n = 639) to answer the following sets of research questions: (1) What is the prevalence of subcultural identification as bear, leather/kink, twink, and jock among men, and how does it differ by cohort, race/ethnicity, and sexual identity? (2) What is the prevalence of men who describe themselves as a top, versatile top, versatile, versatile bottom, and bottom? What is the relationship between penetration practices and masculinity? (3) What is the prevalence of gender labels among women as femme, androgynous, and butch? How does the prevalence differ by cohort, race/ethnicity, and sexual identity? (4) What is the relationship between women’s gender labels and masculinity? Penetration practices were fairly evenly distributed among men, and there were few differences in masculinity based on penetration practices after controlling for demographics and subcultural identification. Most women did not use gender labels, but butch identities were more common among lesbians and femme labels were more common among Black women and Latinas.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data Availability
All Generations data are publicly available on ICPSR.
Code Availability
Stata code is available upon request.
Notes
When this paper makes claims about generalizability, it refers specifically to LGBQ people in the USA aged 18–25, 34–41, and 52–59 who also identified as Black, Latina/o, or white.
White lesbians frequented lesbian bars more often than Black women, however. Indeed, Black lesbian women’s nightlife in some areas, such as Detroit, revolved around private homes (Thorpe, 1996).
Some participants were just outside the bounds of these age categories at the time of the interview but were assigned to one of the three cohorts (e.g., 26-year-olds were assigned to the younger cohort and 42-year-olds were assigned to the middle cohort).
The requirement to speak English is a shortcoming of the Generations study, as it may have excluded some Latina/o participants who spoke only Spanish.
For comparison, average response rates for Pew Research Center’s telephone surveys were 6% in 2018 (Kennedy & Hartig, 2019) and 45.8% for one of the largest government-sponsored national probability surveys, called the National Survey on Drug Use and Health (Center for Behavioral Health Statistics and Quality, 2020). Low response rates are always a concern, but the Generations response rate was similar to those of government surveys that many researchers rely on for a wealth of data about the US population. Additionally, Gallup designed weights to account for non-response (Krueger et al., 2015). This strategy does not entirely eliminate issues with non-response, but it does substantially reduce them.
Respondents were eligible to participate if they reported another racial/ethnic identity in addition to one of these three. The Generations study coded respondents as white if they selected white in addition to any other racial/ethnic identity except for Black or Latina/o. Generations coded respondents as Black if they chose Black in addition to any other racial/ethnic identity except for Latina/o. The Generations team categorized all respondents as Latina/o if they chose Latina/o regardless of any other racial/ethnic identity. Some readers may view these coding decisions as shortcomings of the study that future research could address through a larger sample that would allow researchers to retain nuance in how racial/ethnic identities are coded.
“Masc” was not included in this option, but some women today identify as masc rather than butch, stud, or aggressive. Future research could include “masc” as a gender label option.
The weight W1WEIGHT_ORIG was used because this paper uses the original wave 1 sample for cross-sectional analyses (Krueger et al., 2015). Researchers at Gallup who sampled respondents designed this weight; it is available in the publicly available Generations dataset. Due to the exclusion of people of certain races (e.g., Native Americans, Asians, Pacific Islanders) and ages that fell outside of the age groups listed, the sample is representative not of the entire LGBQ population in the USA but rather LGBQ men and women who identify as Black, white, or Latina/o, and were aged 18–25, 34–41, and 52–59 at the time of sampling. The weight makes the results generalizable to these populations; see Krueger et al. (2015) for further detail about how researchers created the weight. Although an oversample of 187 respondents was later added to the study, these respondents did not answer the question about subcultural identities/gender labels/penetration practices and therefore they could not be analyzed.
Although 1,331 respondents completed the study, 8 were excluded because they identified as heterosexual; 83 were excluded because they identified as genderqueer or nonbinary, and unfortunately, this sample size was too small for analysis; 10 were excluded because they did not answer the question about subcultural identities/gender labels/penetration practices; and 1 woman was excluded because she selected 11 of 12 responses, which suggests an invalid response pattern. Altogether this exclusion criteria resulted in a final analyzable sample of 1,229 respondents. The option “I don’t use any of these kinds of labels” was treated as valid data. Responses were categorized as missing only if the respondent did not check any box at all, including “I don’t use any of these kinds of labels.”.
In these weighted bivariate analyses, twink bottoms/versatile bottoms had a value of 8.676 on masculinity, compared to 10.510 for non-twink bottoms/versatile bottoms.
Online searches for title winners for each year since 1979 (the year of the first International Mr. Leather competition) will yield names, photographs, and (often) biographies for each winner.
Goldberg et al. (2020) examined queer identities through bivariate associations because sample sizes in the Generations study are too small to analyze them with multivariable models.
References
Adam, B. D. (2006). Relationship innovation in male couples. Sexualities, 9(1), 5–26. https://doi.org/10.1177/1363460706060685
Barrett, R. (2017). From drag queens to leathermen: Language, gender, and gay male subcultures. Oxford University Press.
Bauer, R. (2008). Transgressive and transformative gendered sexual practices and white privileges: The case of the dyke/trans BDSM communities. WSQ: Women’s Studies Quarterly, 36(34), 233–253. https://doi.org/10.1353/wsq.0.0100
Bauer, R. (2018). Bois and grrrls meet their daddies and mommies on gender playgrounds: gendered age play in the les-bi-trans-queer BDSM communities. Sexualities, 21(1–2), 139–155. https://doi.org/10.1177/1363460716676987
Bell, A. (2020). Age period cohort analysis: A review of what we should and shouldn’t do. Annals of Human Biology, 47(2), 208–217. https://doi.org/10.1080/03014460.2019.1707872
Berlinger, C. (2006). Black men in leather. Third Millennium Publications.
Bishop, M. D., Fish, J. N., Hammack, P. L., & Russell, S. T. (2020). Sexual identity development milestones in three generations of sexual minority people: A national probability sample. Developmental Psychology, 56, 2177–2193. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0001105
Blackman, I., & Perry, K. (1990). Skirting the issue: lesbian fashion for the 1990s. Feminist Review, 34(1), 67–78. https://doi.org/10.1057/fr.1990.10
Boag, P. (2003). Same-sex affairs: Constructing and controlling homosexuality in the Pacific Northwest. University of California Press.
Carballo-Diéguez, A., Dolezal, C., Nieves, L., Díaz, F., Decena, C., & Balan, I. (2004). Looking for a tall, dark, macho man … sexual-role behaviour variations in Latino gay and bisexual men. Culture, Health & Sexuality, 6(2), 159–171. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691050310001619662
Center for Behavioral Health Statistics and Quality. (2020). 2019 National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH): Methodological summary and definitions. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. https://www.samhsa.gov/data/sites/default/files/reports/rpt29395/2019NSDUHMethodsSummDefs/2019NSDUHMethodsSummDefs082120.htm
Chauncey, G. (1994). Gay New York: Gender, urban culture, and the making of the gay male world, 1890–1940. Basic Books.
Childs, A. (2016). Hyper or hypo-masculine? Re-conceptualizing ‘hyper-masculinity’ through Seattle’s gay, leather community. Gender, Place & Culture, 23(9), 1315–1328. https://doi.org/10.1080/0966369X.2016.1160033
Cox, D., Navarro-Rivera, J., & Jones, R. P. (2016). Race, religion, and political affiliation of Americans’ core social networks. Public Religion Research Institute. https://www.prri.org/research/poll-race-religion-politics-americans-social-networks/#.Vr0bUZMrJPM
Crawley, S. L. (2001). Are butch and fem working-class and antifeminist? Gender & Society, 15(2), 175–196. https://doi.org/10.1177/089124301015002002
Dangerfield, D. T., Smith, L. R., Williams, J., Unger, J., & Bluthenthal, R. (2017). Sexual positioning among men who have sex with men: A narrative review. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 46(4), 869–884. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-016-0738-y
Duckworth, K. D., & Trautner, M. N. (2019). Gender goals: Defining masculinity and navigating peer pressure to engage in sexual activity. Gender & Society, 33(5), 795–817. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243219863031
Dunlap, A. (2016). Changes in coming out milestones across five age cohorts. Journal of Gay & Lesbian Social Services, 28(1), 20–38. https://doi.org/10.1080/10538720.2016.1124351
Faderman, L. (1991). Odd girls and twilight lovers: A history of lesbian life in twentieth-century America. Columbia University Press.
Franklin, J. D., Bourne, A., & Lyons, A. (2020). Characteristics and functions of subcultural identities in the lives of gay, bisexual, and queer-identifying men in Australia. Psychology & Sexuality. https://doi.org/10.1080/19419899.2020.1856172
Genter, A. (2016). Appearances can be deceiving: Butch-femme fashion and queer legibility in New York City, 1945–1969. Feminist Studies, 42(3), 604–631. https://doi.org/10.15767/feministstudies.42.3.0604
Goldberg, S. K., Rothblum, E. D., Russell, S. T., & Meyer, I. H. (2020). Exploring the Q in LGBTQ: Demographic characteristic and sexuality of queer people in a U.S. representative sample of sexual minorities. Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity, 7(1), 101–112. https://doi.org/10.1037/sgd0000359
Grov, C., Parsons, J. T., & Bimbi, D. S. (2010). The association between penis size and sexual health among men who have sex with men. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 39(3), 788–797. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-008-9439-5
Gruys, K., & Munsch, C. L. (2020). “Not your average nerd”: Masculinities, privilege, and academic effort at an elite university. Sociological Forum, 35(2), 346–369. https://doi.org/10.1111/socf.12585
Hale, C. (1997). Leatherdyke boys and their daddies: How to have sex without women or men. Social Text, 52–53, 223–236.
Hammers, C. J. (2008). Making space for an agentic sexuality? The examination of a lesbian/queer bathhouse. Sexualities, 11(5), 547–572. https://doi.org/10.1177/1363460708094267
Haramis, N. (2018, May 14). Welcome to the age of the twink. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/14/t-magazine/age-of-the-twink.html
Hennen, P. (2005). Bear bodies, bear masculinity: Recuperation, resistance, or retreat? Gender & Society, 19(1), 25–43. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243204269408
Hennen, P. (2008). Faeries, bears, and leathermen: Men in community queering the masculine. University of Chicago Press.
Herbenick, D., Bowling, J., Fu, T.-C., Dodge, B., Guerra-Reyes, L., & Sanders, S. (2017). Sexual diversity in the United States: Results from a nationally representative probability sample of adult women and men. PLoS ONE, 12(7), e0181198. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0181198
Jeffries, W. L. (2009). A comparative analysis of homosexual behaviors, sex role preferences, and anal sex proclivities in Latino and non-Latino men. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 38(5), 765–778. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-007-9254-4
Johns, M. M., Pingel, E., Eisenberg, A., Santana, M. L., & Bauermeister, J. (2012). Butch tops and femme bottoms? Sexual positioning, sexual decision making, and gender roles among young gay men. American Journal of Men’s Health, 6(6), 505–518. https://doi.org/10.1177/1557988312455214
Jones, R. P., Jackson, N., Orcés, D., & Huff, I. (2021). Despite partisan rancor, Americans broadly support LGBTQ rights. Washington, DC: Public Religion Research Institute. Retrieved from Public Religion Research Institute website: https://www.prri.org/research/despite-partisan-rancor-despite-partisan-rancor-americans-broadly-support-lgbtq-rights-broadly-support-lgbtq-rights/
Kennedy, C., & Hartig, H. (2019). Response rates in telephone surveys have resumed their decline. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center. Retrieved from Pew Research Center website: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/02/27/response-rates-in-telephone-surveys-have-resumed-their-decline/
Kennedy, E. L. (1993). Boots of leather, slippers of gold: The history of a lesbian community. Routledge.
Krueger, E. A., Lin, A., Kittle, K. R., & Meyer, I. H. (2015). Generations: A study of the life and health of LGB people in a changing society: methodology and technical notes. The Williams Institute on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Law and Public Policy.
Lane-Steele, L. (2011). Studs and protest-hypermasculinity: The tomboyism within Black lesbian female masculinity. Journal of Lesbian Studies, 15(4), 480–492. https://doi.org/10.1080/10894160.2011.532033
Langdridge, D., & Lawson, J. (2019). The psychology of puppy play: A phenomenological investigation. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 48(7), 2201–2215. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-019-01476-1
Lawson, J., & Langdridge, D. (2020). History, culture and practice of puppy play. Sexualities, 23(4), 574–591. https://doi.org/10.1177/1363460719839914
Levine, M. P. (1998). Gay macho: The life and death of the homosexual clone. New York University Press.
Levitt, H. M., & Hiestand, K. R. (2005). Gender within lesbian sexuality: butch and femme perspectives. Journal of Constructivist Psychology, 18(1), 39–51. https://doi.org/10.1080/10720530590523062
Long, J. S., & Mustillo, S. A. (2021). Using predictions and marginal effects to compare groups in regression models for binary outcomes. Sociological Methods & Research, 50, 1284–1320. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124118799374
Lyons, A., & Hosking, W. (2014). Health disparities among common subcultural identities of young gay men: Physical, mental, and sexual health. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 43(8), 1621–1635. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-014-0315-1
Mackay, F. (2019). Always endangered, never extinct: Exploring contemporary butch lesbian identity in the UK. Women’s Studies International Forum, 75, 102241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wsif.2019.102241
Meyer, I. H. (2020). Generations: A study of the life and health of LGB people in a changing society, United States, 2016-2019 [Data file and codebook]. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor]. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR37166.v1
Meyer, I. H., Marken, S., Russell, S. T., Frost, D. M., & Wilson, B. D. M. (2020). An innovative approach to the design of a national probability sample of sexual minority adults. LGBT Health, 7(2), 101–108. https://doi.org/10.1089/lgbt.2019.0145
Mijas, M., Koziara, K., Galbarczyk, A., & Jasienska, G. (2020). Chubby, hairy and fearless. Subcultural identities and predictors of self-esteem in a sample of Polish members of bear community. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17124439
Moore, M. (2011). Invisible families: Gay identities, relationships, and motherhood among Black women. University of California Press.
Moore, M. R. (2006). Lipstick or Timberlands? Meanings of gender presentation in Black lesbian communities. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 32(1), 113–139. https://doi.org/10.1086/505269
Mosher, C. M., Levitt, H. M., & Manley, E. (2006). Layers of leather. Journal of Homosexuality, 51(3), 93–123. https://doi.org/10.1300/J082v51n03_06
Moskowitz, D. A., Avila, A. A., Kraus, A., Birnholtz, J., & Macapagal, K. (2022). Top, bottom, and versatile orientations among adolescent sexual minority men. Journal of Sex Research, 59, 643–651. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2021.1954583
Moskowitz, D. A., & Hart, T. A. (2011). The influence of physical body traits and masculinity on anal sex roles in gay and bisexual men. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 40(4), 835–841. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-011-9754-0
Moskowitz, D. A., Rieger, G., & Roloff, M. E. (2008). Tops, bottoms and versatiles. Sexual and Relationship Therapy, 23(3), 191–202. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681990802027259
Moskowitz, D. A., Turrubiates, J., Lozano, H., & Hajek, C. (2013). Physical, behavioral, and psychological traits of gay men identifying as bears. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 42(5), 775–784. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-013-0095-z
Moylan, B. (2016, November 9). Why are gay guys convinced the world is full of bottoms? Vice. Retrieved from https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/jmkjx4/why-are-gay-guys-convinced-the-world-is-full-of-bottoms
Munsch, C. L., & Gruys, K. (2018). What threatens, defines: Tracing the symbolic boundaries of contemporary masculinity. Sex Roles, 79(7), 375–392. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-017-0878-0
Munt, S. R. (Ed.). (1998). Butch/femme: Inside lesbian gender. Cassell.
Nash, C. J., & Bain, A. (2007). ‘Reclaiming raunch’? Spatializing queer identities at Toronto women’s bathhouse events. Social & Cultural Geography, 8(1), 47–62. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649360701251809
Noël, R. A. (2018). Race, economics, and social status. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. https://www.bls.gov/spotlight/2018/race-economics-and-social-status/pdf/race-economics-and-social-status.pdf
Noor, S. W., Adam, B. D., Brennan, D. J., Moskowitz, D. A., Gardner, S., & Hart, T. A. (2018). Scenes as micro-cultures: Examining heterogeneity of HIV risk behavior among gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men in Toronto Canada. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 47(1), 309–321. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-017-0948-y
Orenstein, P. (2020). Boys & sex: Young men on hookups, love, porn, consent, and navigating the new masculinity. HarperCollins.
Prestage, G., Brown, G., De Wit, J., Bavinton, B., Fairley, C., Maycock, B., Batrouney, C., Keen, P., Down, I., Hammoud, M., & Zablotska, I. (2015). Understanding gay community subcultures: implications for HIV prevention. AIDS and Behavior, 19(12), 2224–2233. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10461-015-1027-9
Quidley-Rodriguez, N., & Santis, J. P. D. (2016). Physical, psychosocial, and social health of men who identify as bears: A systematic review. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 25(23–24), 3484–3496. https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.13368
Quidley-Rodriguez, N., & Santis, J. P. D. (2017). A literature review of health risks in the bear community, a gay subculture. American Journal of Men’s Health, 11(6), 1673–1679. https://doi.org/10.1177/1557988315624507
Quidley-Rodriguez, N., & Santis, J. P. D. (2019). A concept analysis of bear identity. Journal of Homosexuality, 66(1), 60–76. https://doi.org/10.1080/00918369.2017.1392131
Ravenhill, J. P., & de Visser, R. O. (2017). “There are too many gay categories now”: Discursive constructions of gay masculinity. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 18(4), 321–330. https://doi.org/10.1037/men0000057
Ravenhill, J. P., & de Visser, R. O. (2018). “It takes a man to put me on the bottom”: Gay men’s experiences of masculinity and anal intercourse. Journal of Sex Research, 55(8), 1033–1047. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2017.1403547
Rosario, M., Schrimshaw, E. W., Hunter, J., & Levy-Warren, A. (2009). The coming-out process of young lesbian and bisexual women: Are there butch/femme differences in sexual identity development? Archives of Sexual Behavior, 38(1), 34–49. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-007-9221-0
Rubin, G. (2000). Sites, settlements, and urban sex: Archaeology and the study of gay leathermen in San Francisco 1955–1995. In R. Schmidt & B. Voss (Eds.), Archaeologies of sexuality (pp. 62–88). Routledge.
Schnarrs, P. W., Jones, S. S., Parsons, J. T., Baldwin, A., Rosenberger, J. G., Lunn, M. R., & Rendina, H. J. (2021). Sexual subcultures and HIV prevention methods: An assessment of condom use, PrEP, and TasP among gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men using a social and sexual networking smartphone application. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 50, 1781–1792. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-020-01784-x
Schnarrs, P. W., Rosenberger, J. G., Schick, V., Delgado, A., Briggs, L., Dodge, B., & Reece, M. (2017). Difference in condom use between bear concordant and discordant dyads during the last anal sex event. Journal of Homosexuality, 64(2), 195–208. https://doi.org/10.1080/00918369.2016.1174024
Simula, B. L. (2019). Pleasure, power, and pain: A review of the literature on the experiences of BDSM participants. Sociology Compass, 13(3), e12668. https://doi.org/10.1111/soc4.12668
Smith, C. A., Konik, J. A., & Tuve, M. V. (2011). In search of looks, status, or something else? Partner preferences among butch and femme lesbians and heterosexual men and women. Sex Roles, 64(9–10), 658–668. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-010-9861-8
Smith, C. A., & Stillman, S. (2002). Butch/femme in the personal advertisements of lesbians. Journal of Lesbian Studies, 6(1), 45–51. https://doi.org/10.1300/J155v06n01_05
Stone, A. L., & Shapiro, E. (2017). “You’re really just a gay man in a woman’s body!”: The possibilities and perils of queer sexuality. Men and Masculinities, 20(2), 254–272. https://doi.org/10.1177/1097184X15625316
Swift-Gallant, A., Coome, L. A., Monks, D. A., & VanderLaan, D. P. (2018). Gender nonconformity and birth order in relation to anal sex role among gay men. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 47(4), 1041–1052. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-017-0980-y
Thorpe, R. (1996). A house where queers go”: African American lesbian nightlife in Detroit. In E. Lewin (Ed.), Inventing lesbian cultures in America (pp. 1940–1975). Beacon Press.
Tskhay, K. O., Re, D. E., & Rule, N. O. (2014). Individual differences in perceptions of gay men’s sexual role preferences from facial cues. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 43(8), 1615–1620. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-014-0319-x
Twenge, J. M., & Blake, A. B. (2021). Increased support for same-sex marriage in the US: Disentangling age, period, and cohort effects. Journal of Homosexuality, 68, 1174–1186. https://doi.org/10.1080/00918369.2019.1705672
Van Doorn, N. (2016). The fabric of our memories: leather, kinship, and queer material history. Memory Studies, 9(1), 85–98. https://doi.org/10.1177/1750698015613975
Wignall, L., & McCormack, M. (2017). An exploratory study of a new kink activity: “Pup play.” Archives of Sexual Behavior, 46(3), 801–811. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-015-0636-8
Willoughby, B. L. B., Lai, B. S., Doty, N. D., Mackey, E. R., & Malik, N. M. (2008). Peer crowd affiliations of adult gay men: Linkages with health risk behaviors. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 9(4), 235–247. https://doi.org/10.1037/1524-9220.9.4.235
Wilson, B. D. M. (2009). Black lesbian gender and sexual culture: celebration and resistance. Culture, Health & Sexuality, 11(3), 297–313. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691050802676876
Wright, L. (1997). The bear book: Readings in the history and evolution of a gay male subculture. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315783734
Wright, L. (2001). The bear book II: Further readings in the history and evolution of a gay male subculture (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203047644
Zheng, L., & Zheng, Y. (2016). Gender nonconformity and butch-femme identity among lesbians in China. Journal of Sex Research, 53(2), 186–193. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2015.1058890
Funding
The author did not receive support from any organization for the submitted work.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Tony Silva was responsible for all data analysis and manuscript preparation.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The author declares that he has no conflict of interest.
Ethical Approval
Ethics approval was not necessary for this paper because it used de-identified data made publicly available through the Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research (ICPSR).
Informed Consent
The Generations study obtained informed consent from all participants.
Financial Interests
The author has no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Silva, T. Subcultural Identification, Penetration Practices, Masculinity, and Gender Labels within a Nationally Representative Sample of Three Cohorts of American Black, White, and Latina/o LGBQ People. Arch Sex Behav 51, 3467–3483 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-022-02285-9
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-022-02285-9