'The bars, the bogs, and the bushes': The impact of

This article was downloaded by: [Glasgow Caledonian University] On: 10 June 2012, At: 07:01 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Culture, Health & Sexuality: An International Journal for Research, Intervention and Care Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tchs20

'The bars, the bogs, and the bushes': The impact of locale on sexual cultures Paul Flowers, Claire Marriott & Graham Hart Available online: 08 Nov 2010

To cite this article: Paul Flowers, Claire Marriott & Graham Hart (2000): 'The bars, the bogs, and the bushes': The impact of locale on sexual cultures, Culture, Health & Sexuality: An International Journal for Research, Intervention and Care, 2:1, 69-86 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/136910500300877

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/ terms-and-conditions This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae, and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The

Downloaded by [Glasgow Caledonian University] at 07:01 10 June 2012

publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.

CULTURE, HEALTH & SE XUALITY,

2000, VOL. 2, NO. 1, 69±86

`The bars, the bogs, and the bushes’: the impact of locale on sexual cultures


PAUL FLOWERS, CLAIRE MARRIOTT and GRAHAM HART This paper explores the role of locale and location in understanding gay men’s sexual behaviour. Twenty gay men from Glasgow, Scotland took part in semi-structured, in-depth interviews. Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) was employed to analyse transcripts for recurrent themes. Shared understanding relating to the relationship between locale and sexual activity emerged as important. Findings suggest the existence of distinct sexual cultures associated with locales such as the commercial gay scene (the bars), public toilets (the bogs) and public parks (the bushes). Furthermore, sexual activity was directly affected by its speci®c location. Sexual behaviour is understood and patterned by the locale (i.e. sexual space) in which it occurs; it is also constrained by location (i.e. speci®c site). In the light of these ®ndings the appropriateness of traditional psychological approaches to understanding sexual activity and the relevance of other perspectives which map the links between social context and sexual behaviour are discussed.

Introduction

Throughout much of the history of research into sexual behaviour, there has been a distinct focus upon the physical aspects of sexual activity and a concomitant neglect of the historical and temporal factors affecting sexual conduct (Gagnon and Simon 1974). Similarly, understandings of sex within HIV and AIDS research have often stressed the physical aspects of sexual behaviour and ignored the social context in which sex occurs. As such, sexual activity itself rather than sexual situations has constituted the primary focus of inquiry (Huygens et al. 1996). However, recent work among gay men has explored the social context of sexual activity including the role of intimacy and romance (Joffe 1997, Flowers et al. 1997a) and the nature of the commercial gay scene (Flowers and Hart 1998). Yet, with the exception of studies addressing sex, international travel and tourism (Hawkes et al. 1994, Hawkes et al. 1995, Carter et al. 1997), studies which examine the spatial aspects of social contexts in relation to sexual health are rare (see Keogh and Holland 1998). There is now an established literature on the relationship between health and place, with social space having an independent effect on health quite separate from income, social class, gender and other social structural factors which are known to impact upon health status (Macintyre et al. 1993, MacinPaul Flowers is a research lecturer in the Department of Psychology, Glasgow Caledonian University, Cowcaddens Road, Glasgow, Scotland, G4 0BA; e-mail: [email protected]. This work was conducted whilst he was employed by the MRC Social and Public Health Sciences Unit, Glasgow. Clare Marriott works in the Department of Public Health at Glasgow University. Graham Hart is Associate Director of the MRC Social and Public Health Sciences Unit, Glasgow. Culture, Health & Sexuality ISSN 1369-1058 print/ISSN 1464-5351 online 2000 Taylor & Francis Ltd http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/tf/13691058.html

70

PAUL FLOW ERS, CLAIRE MARRIOTT AND GRAHAM HART

tyre and Ellaway, in press). In this paper, we explore the relationship between social space and sexual health through an examination of the impact of both locale and location in framing the social and temporal contexts in which sexual activity and sexual decision making occurs. By `locale’ we refer to type of location (or sexual space, and thus a social organized category) and by `location’ we mean a speci®c geographical site.


Health psychology and HIV risk related behaviour

Many early attempts to understand HIV risk related behaviour amongst gay men were informed by theoretical frameworks developed in health psychology. These `traditional’ health psychological frameworks sought to predict the physical aspects of sexual behaviour, namely sexual acts such as unprotected anal intercourse. This was in response to the urgent need to ®nd persuasive and effective means of encouraging behavioural change. The links between such models and health promotion are clear: ®rstly, knowledge is usually understood as necessary but not suf®cient to effect behaviour change and so information provision is always an essential part of sexual health promotion; secondly, a constellation of psycho-social health related variables, such as perceived risk, self-ef®cacy and attitudes to condoms are though to provide an effective focus for intervention and have been used to shape individual and group-based interventions and structure mass media campaigns. This particular psychological episteme is important because of the role it gives to individual agency as the central factor in determining behaviour. From this perspective an individual’s sexual decision-making processes are open to persuasion and change. However, within this paradigm a failure to maximise health is conceptualized, to some extent, as a failure of the individual (Pitts 1996, Sachs 1996). Maladaptive information processing can be located within identi®able individuals or `risk takers’ who are represented as having static risk pro®les. Once identi®ed, these `risk takers’ can be targeted within speci®c sexual health promotion initiatives. Sexual behaviour and social conduct

In contrast to the bulk of research concerned with HIV related risk, some recent approaches to understanding HIV risk-related behaviours conceptualize sexual activity from a perspective which focuses on sexual interactions (Van Campenhoudt et al. 1997). Approaching sex from this perspective departs from the traditional health psychology paradigm and highlights the importance of the social context of sexual behaviour. Rather than identifying individuals who can be characterized as risk takers and searching for the determinants of risky behaviour within their health related cognitions, an interaction-focused approach conceptualizes the social and cultural phenomena which in¯uence sexual activity and thus HIV risk-related behaviour. The combination of such phenomena can be designated `sexual cultures’ (see Parker 1994). These cultures in¯uence individual agency and supply a broad


THE BARS, THE BOGS, AND THE BUSHES

71

spectrum of sexual meanings which structure individuals’ cognitions regarding sexual behaviour. Furthermore, they are temporally and historically variable rather than universal and static and, because of this ¯uidity, are subject to modi®cation and change which is social rather than individual in origin. In this way, HIV risk taking, or sexual decision making more generally, can be re-conceptualized beyond individual culpability and the often narrow and limiting remit of `blaming the victim’ (Pitts 1996) as collective, cultural, and most importantly, situated activity. Our aim here is not to offer a deterministic model of the relationship between locale, sexual cultures and sexual decision making. The work reported within this paper is exploratory in nature and addresses varied and complex cultural phenomena which differ according to time frame and the speci®cities of particular locations. Our focus is upon shared understandings relating to the sexual cultures of speci®c locales. We offer a set of heuristics which signal the importance of locale in affecting sexual behaviour, but acknowledge fully that these heuristics are far from universal; indeed the rules of sexual conduct are particularly prone to transgression. However, it is appropriate and feasible to analyse shared understandings which describe the patterning of sexual meanings across differing locales in which sex can occur. Methods and analysis

From October 1996 to April 1997 twenty interviews were conducted with gay identi®ed men, aged between 17 and 55, living in Glasgow, Scotland. Interviews took place in a variety of settings and were conducted by the ®rst and second authors. The names of all the men who took part in this study, and the people to whom they have referred in interviews, have been changed to ensure anonymity. Men were recruited through a variety of methods: by approaching them in gay bars (n ˆ 6), approaching the membership of existing gay groups (n ˆ 4), `snowballing’ from previous contacts (n ˆ 9) and through a recruitment poster (n ˆ 1). In total, ®ve men from the sample were involved in either voluntary or paid work with other gay men. Our only criteria for participation in this study were a gay or bisexual identity and a reported familiarity with Glasgow’s commercial gay scene. It is worth noting that representative samples of men who have sex with men are almost impossible to attain and sampling gay-identi®ed men also presents many problems (see Harry 1986). Qualitative research, such as this, is issue driven and seeks to explore the social world of respondents and the meanings that inform their understanding of this world. We have previously employed this approach (e.g. Flowers et al. 1997a, Flowers et al. in press) and are con®dent that the results of this analysis re¯ect many shared beliefs of gay men in Glasgow. An interview schedule was developed drawing from both previous exploratory qualitative work (e.g. Flowers et al. 1997b) and empirical quantitative work (Hart et al. in press). It consisted of open ended questions, relating to the commercial gay scene, other locales in which sex occurs, the meaning of sex, safer sex and relationships. The interview style was non-directive, and a process of re¯ecting and probing was employed (e.g. Could you tell me more about . . . etc.?). In this way, the content of each interview was, in great part,


72


determined by the individual respondent; once rapport and trust were established the primary role of the interviewer was to facilitate the disclosure of the interviewee’s perspective on the topics to be discussed. The interviews were recorded on audio cassette and lasted between one and two hours. We believe a particularly productive approach to qualitative analysis is Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) (see Smith 1996a, 1996b). IPA draws upon the long standing traditions of phenomenology and symbolic interactionism, and is interested in the subjective meanings people ascribe to events rather than attempting to record or represent objective events. Rather than focusing upon the reasons why people talk about things in certain ways here we are more interested in the meanings people attach to things they talk about. The potential for participants to focus upon positive self-presentation and other related factors (see Baumeister and Newman 1994) must of course be acknowledged, as should the interpretative role of the researcher in constructing the analysis. The interviews were transcribed verbatim. Following this, the transcripts were analysed to identify recurrent themes. Themes were identi®ed at two levels; they emerged within individual interviews, and across different interviews (see Flowers Marriott and Hart, in press, for a full account of the analytic approach). The analysis attempts to capture the meaning of the phenomenon to the participants but this necessarily involves interpretative engagement with the respondent’s text (Smith 1995, 1996a). Extracts of text were selected as exemplars of an underlying recurrent theme, and represent the most articulate or powerful examples of that theme. It must be noted that not every man articulated the identi®ed themes; some men presented a plurality of views, some men incorporated in their accounts themes that were contradictory. Thus our analysis is not exhaustive, and does not outline every way in which men talked of the relationship between sexual culture and locale. The data that follow report men’s accounts of some of the different locations in which sex between men occurs in Glasgow. It outlines the importance of what we term `sexual cultures’ in affecting gay men’s reported understandings of their behaviour and their sexual decision making. We contrast gay men’s accounts of the commercial gay scene with those of some other locales in which men may meet sexual partners or engage in sexual activities, notably public toilets (the bogs) and parks and related areas (the bushes). We also report how locale in¯uences behaviour, in terms of affecting sexual partner selection and sexual repertoire (engagement in speci®c sexual acts). Results `The scene’: self-presentation and peer surveillance

One important distinction in understanding sexual behaviour in Glasgow is in the extent to which sexual interactions vary in the overtly social content of meetings between men. The very public and interactional dynamics of the gay bars and gay clubs can be contrasted with the impersonal (or apparently asocial) dynamics in other locales in which men meet for sex. For example,


73

the social dynamics of the gay bars facilitate peer surveillance in which men report feelings of being under observation from other gay men. Although each gay bar in Glasgow has its own unique ambience these dynamics appeared true for all the bars which constitute Glasgow’s commercial gay scene. This results in an emphasis upon self-presentation and image management. There are social norms prescribing àppropriate’ behaviour in terms of dress, who to talk to, who to choose as friends, and who to select as sexual partners (see Flowers and Hart 1998). The following extract provides some insight into these dynamics:


R:

In Glasgow it’s very clique-ish; if you don’t know certain people then . . . or you’re not . . . if you don’t have Versace shoes or a Gucci handbag . . . then you’re not a part of the clan and it’s like, people that are in that clan only sleep with people that are in that, people that are not don’t, you never really get the in between.

Gay men’s behaviour, in terms of clothing, friendship groups and choice of sexual partner are all constrained by the social dynamics of the gay bars. In normative terms, these dynamics establish negative sanctions against the overt and public pursuit of sex. Many men reported anxieties relating to their own reputation as potential `cows’, `tarts’, `slags’ or `slappers’; these terms, usually applied to or by women (Kitzinger 1995), suggest a pseudofeminized sub-culture amongst some gay men. There is a generally negative attitude towards `recreational’ sex upon the commercial gay scene. These social dynamics, and the constellation of attitudes and beliefs which they embody, represent a distinct sexual culture. It is a culture which shapes men’s behaviour, emphasizing `proper’ social conduct, or at least that which is socially visible; for example, the importance of `right’ partner selection in the public forum of the commercial gay scene. We are not suggesting these dynamics, and this particular sexual culture, are unique to gay men in Glasgow, they are likely to apply to the commercial gay scene in many other cities. Furthermore, these values are recognizable from a variety of other public spaces and other populations. However, in some other cities, where access to sexual activity on the premises is actively marketed, very different understandings of sexual cultures are reported (Keogh 1998). Yet, as the section below indicates, the commercial gay `scene’ in Glasgow does constitute a distinct social space in contrast to other locales within Glasgow.

Different locales, different sexual cultures

Many of the men who took part in this study showed clear distinctions in their understanding of different locales. The extract below represents a powerful illustration of the differences between locales: gay bars, gay clubs and parks. The nature of interactions between gay men clearly varies according to the sexual space in which it occurs: R:

Well, you see, pubs Ð people go there for a drink, they go for a pick up as well, but you are more controlled there because you are being watched, you know? Like, you don’t want to be seen being a whore, right? In the park, you go there for one reason Ð you are not there to drink, you are not there to stand and have a chat, which is occasionally quite good, as long as you can go to bed with him later on, or into a bush with him. But basically folk just go

74



there for dick. Ì’m here for cock’, do you know what I mean? Ì don’t want to know your fucking name’. `Get your dick out and your trousers down and let me get up your arse and lick it, or fuck it, or suck it’, or whatever, you know what I mean? That’s what you are there for. There is no messing about, just straight, lustful, animalistic sex Ð in a park that is. In a club you put on more fronts, you may be after a boyfriend so you might want to get to know him and give out the right image. It’s all image, an awful lot is image, you know. Like in a park, you don’t give a fuck, you can walk up there with a fucking pair of shorts on, you can be a dirty bastard, just labouring, and you can still get your hole easily. Probably get your hole even better.

There are clear and important differences in the pursuit of sex across locales. This respondent outlines a contrast between commercial venues and parks. In the former we see the importance of self-presentation, self-control, peer surveillance, conversation, social drinking and the possibility of developing romantic relationships; here, men’s motivations are varied and unclear. In contrast, within parks, sexual partners are represented purely in terms of sexual anatomy (i.e. cock, hole), and this somatic focus structures sexual activity. Men’s motivations are unitary and unambiguous; they are in search of sex. Locale captures shared understandings which relate to sexual activity, the social signi®cance of the sexual activity and even, as we see below, the probable consequences of the sexual activity: R: PF: R:

This is the thing, the way you pick up . . . shows how the relationship can go. Tell me about that, that sounds very interesting. Well as I say if you pick somebody up in the park you are not going to get a relationship out of it, you might get friendship out of it, but you won’t get a relationship. Because you are going there for instant sex; that is what your mind is on, Ì want fucking sex’. You go and you chat later on, and then you have a good chat and then you say `that was great ± thanks very much’ and then you go home and think `he was a very nice guy; I wish I could meet somebody like that’. You have just met him, but you are going for the wrong reason. Like that is one example, and then you can go to a pub, not a pub, a toilet and the same thing ± quick sex; sucking and a fuck and a shag. It is really dangerous and it is just sex, lust, sexual satisfaction. That’s it. Over. It’s away and then you can go away to a pub and you can meet somebody again. It depends what’s in your mind and if you are happy, if you really like somebody you want to get to know the person. The aim of the relationship is not just sex, it’s about companionship, it’s about getting on with one another, understanding one another.

The respondent describes how the context in which one meets a sexual partner is important in understanding the possible development of a relationship between people. In a pub it becomes possible to get to know a person and there is a possibility that a relationship could develop. In locales which facilitate ìnstant sex’ this possibility is negated as sex is implicitly understood as having little consequence beyond immediate physical grati®cation. As this respondent laments, he wishes he could get to know someone like the man he has in fact just `met’. The in¯uence of locale (in that it shapes understandings of sex) is so strong that when the same two individuals meet in different locales, very different behaviour can result: R:

PF: R:

Although I’ve found, I talked to a few people, like if you see them in the club and they’re like not interested, but you meet them in the park or wherever then they show interest. It’s what happens to me in the park, if I see the guy in the club they completely ignore you. Why do you think that is? I think they don’t want to be seen with people that they think they shouldn’t be seen with kind of thing, if they see people with the designer gear on and then they see people that are just ordinary dressed or not as popular, not as well paid or whatever, then they ignore you.



75

In addition to men’s decisions to use certain sexual spaces to pursue localespeci®c goals (e.g. to meet a potential boyfriend or to `get one’s hole’) there are temporal aspects to the relationship between locale and sex. For example, desire for sexual activity may change during the course of an evening, and men may become more `desperate’ (keen to ®nd a partner) as the night progresses, and their standards of partner selection fall. Men’s desire to achieve sexual success (`have a shag’) increases as time goes on and the evening comes to a close (Davies et al. 1993). Indeed, as several participants commented, they may well change locale and visit parks in pursuit of sex after using the gay scene. However, peer surveillance, which is so strong in the bars, is suspended within other locales such as parks. This is not to suggest that there is no monitoring of behaviour in these locales; observation and interpretation are, as the next two themes describe, central aspects of the sexual cultures of other locales. `The bogs’: the sexual culture of cottaging

Public toilets, `bogs’, `tea-rooms’ (Humphreys 1970) or `cottages’ (Church et al. 1993, Flowers et al. 1997b) represent a distinct sexual space outwith the overtly social dynamics of the gay scene. Although there are differences between speci®c toilets and the sexual behaviours with which they are associated, there was some consensus regarding understandings of sex within them and a distinct sexual culture of `cottaging’ can be identi®ed. It appears that toilets, like the parks, promise a kind of ìnstant sex’ or, as the respondent below notes, they offer èasy access’: R:

Well the toilets I can understand [. . .] It’s easy access, all an awful lot of people want is sex, they want it quick, they don’t want to wait and go to a big disco and spend £20 to get fuck all and end up in the park, right?

If a man wants sex, cottaging offers an inexpensive and straightforward alternative to a night out in the bars. Furthermore, it is also a day-time venue when the opportunity to pick other men up for sex is limited by club opening hours or constrained by visibility (i.e. daylight or undergrowth) within public parks. In cottaging, men described a set of rules which, if followed, enabled them to either engage in sexual activity with minimal fear of arrest or perhaps pick up a sexual partner to engage in sex elsewhere. This extract provides a brief description of these rules: PF: R:

How’s it work in the toilets? In toilets? My experience is basically you stand there pretending to do the toilet, you look over, glance over, if the other guy’s interested he’ll ¯ash. You kind of know by eye contact he’s kind of interested in you. You’ll either go off with him somewhere or go into a cubicle and do it.

These relatively simple rules allow men to unobtrusively assess other men as potential sexual partners or indeed engage in sexual activity. The interaction also involves identity management (see Flowers et al. 1997b) as men must ful®l the dual role of signalling sexual availability on the one hand (to other cottagers) but also mimic legitimate toilet use on the other (to any noncottaging observer). Keogh and Holland (1998) in their ethnographic study of observed behaviour across differing locales in London note that the extent

76


to which a site has other `legitimate’ functions (e.g. as a public toilet) directly affects the degree to which sexual interactions are rigidly scripted. As some earlier quotes suggested, the scope for social interactions between partners is limited. This can be seen in the following extract: R:

CM:


R:

If you meet someone in the cottage you wouldn’t want to be their best friend, you just wouldn’t. If you go to a cottage you are just interested in a quickie so you’re not, you wouldn’t want to have them over for dinner sort of thing, but if you met someone at a swimming pool well you would invite them back for dinner maybe or have them over another day for dinner, or go out to dinner. Right so there’s something about it being a more desirable activity to be going swimming than to be going to the cottage? Well it’s, you could meet someone at the swimming pool who spends you know eight hours a day in a cottage but you didn’t meet them in the cottage, I guess it’s the actual location of where you meet someone. I guess that’s the connotation is just where you meet them, you know?

The social possibilities associated with interactions between men in toilets is limited. This respondent realises that in other circumstances, with exactly the same partner, very different understandings of sexual activity and its social consequences could result. Cottages present a locale which offers free, easy access to other men. The social implications and consequences of sexual activity within cottages are limited by both the non-verbal nature of sexual interactions, and a shared understanding of the casual nature of the sex therein. `The bushes’: the sexual culture of the parks

Men who took part in this study reported that within parks at certain times (particularly night-time) there was a shared understanding of the likelihood of sex. Men’s presence in the park at these times was understood to be indicative of their desire for sexual activity. As the following quote suggests: R:

They’re walking about, you can see the people and you know, whether you like them or not, and you know that they’re there for sex. If they weren’t there for sex they wouldn’t be there.

As previous extracts have already indicated, the parks, and the `bushes’ within them, offer opportunities for sexual activity that avoid the complexities of pursuing sex upon the commercial gay scene: R:

Yeah, I think just because it’s almost like a total like one to one. Honest. There’s no other (implications) involved, it’s very direct, it’s very, like, Ì know why you’re here and you know why I’m here’, because you wouldn’t be there. . . Whereas if you’re in a pub or a club, maybe someone is waiting (for) someone, or they’re just out for a drink. . .

Shared understandings of implicit sexual motivation facilitate a similar kind of ìnstant sex’ to that reported within the previous section with ± as one participant said ± `no bullshit chit-chat’. Practicalities are also important; for example, visibility is a consideration in the parks at night, as darkness can help prevent other people seeing (or more speci®cally, policing) their choice of sexual partner, as the next extract shows: R:

Because I think in the clubs you’re seen to be getting off with this person, in the park nobody knows that you’ve slept with this person because in the park it’s kind of anonymous, a lot of the time you don’t even get to know their name, it’s as quick as you can get it over with, and then you leave for the next person kind of thing.


77

This respondent contrasts the club and the park. Within the latter anonymity is important, as is the possibility of multiple partners and brief sexual exchanges. Like sexual activity within toilets, there are well rehearsed and familiar (usually non-verbal) methods of engaging other men in sexual activity. As the respondent below describes it, this is `the art of cruising’:


PF: R: PF: R: PF: R: PF: R:

What is it about it that’s fun? It’s electrifying. I think it’s the, cruising, what you want, the art of cruising. Do you think there’s an art to it? I think there’s a knack of doing it. I think you can’t just go up to a guy and grab him by the balls or by the arse, you know, else he’d belt you. So how would you do it then? How would I do it? What’s the knack Yet again I’d go back to normally walking past a person, you know, looking up and down . . . if they saw you, you walk back and forth and look a few times, or just stand there, if he was interested he’d probably come up and give you a feel, or whatever he wanted to do. If he wasn’t, if he took one look at you and walked away, well then you just move on to the next person that may be available.

Minimal social involvement characterizes these non-verbal interactions, as men assess each other, in a controlled and scripted manner, as potential sexual partners. However, as Keogh and Holland (1998) report, in locales with no alternative or `legitimate’ function (e.g. a public park at night) `there is no established set of socially pre-determined rituals which is common or acceptable to this environment, no ìnnocent’ behaviours which cover subversive ones. Instead, social organization is determined entirely by the primary function of the site (i.e. the sexual function)’ (Keogh and Holland 1998). The respondent below describes the positive value he ascribes to such àsocial’ sexual behaviour in his pursuit of sexual acts (rather than sexual partners): R:

I was just wanting to have sex there and then and not have the bother of actually taking someone back. Then this thing of leading to conversation again. I can’t be bothered with this conversation nonsense, and you know you might end up in a bed cuddling or whatever. I’m much more interested in the sexual act preferably with more than one person. And you don’t know who is going to be joining you next and I’m not really particularly interested in who the people are.

There is a wide-range of sexual possibilities which differentiate sex within parks from sex in other locales. Limited social interaction coupled with the potential for large numbers of sexual partners creates a situation in which romantic dyadic sexual scripts are inappropriate as guides to sexual behaviour. In fact, for the last respondent, many treasured aspects of such traditional romantic scripts, such as the intimacy associated with conversation, cuddling and a bed, are precisely those features of sexual contact that he would like to avoid. The following extract outlines how diverse sexual behaviour within a park can be: R:

This is probably my objection to sex in the bedroom or whatever because that tends to be planned sex, the getting there is planned. Like `Do you want a cup of tea’ kind of thing. Whereas in the park it is totally spontaneous, totally unplanned and, that is the thrill of it, the fact that you don’t know what is going to happen. You don’t know whether you are going to be having sex with one person or with six people. You don’t know whether it’s going to continue, or whether half way through everybody is going to bugger off. You don’t know

78



PF: R:

whether you are going to have to stop because somebody is coming, you know, you just don’t know what will happen. Spontaneity. Therein lies the danger. Why? Because if it is spontaneous then you can’t plan to have your condoms ready or whatever. I suppose that the answer maybe if you are going out to the park to insert a femidom up your bum. I don’t plan to go the park very often [authors’ emphasis].

For this respondent, it is the unpredictable nature of sexual interactions within the parks that he enjoys. The parks host an instant, socially inconsequential sex that can be characterized by spontaneity and unpredictability. Though relatively few participants reported unprotected sex within parks, when they did, as the previous quote suggests, it was described as an unwelcome consequence of the unplanned and èrratic’ nature of sex within the parks. The following respondent was `carried away’ in the `¯ow’ of activity: R:

When you’re in the park and you go into a bush, it’s a wee bit awkward; well, have you got a condom because you just kind of, that’s what I found because before when I’ve had unsafe sex, you just go with the ¯ow and you’re getting into it then you don’t really stop to think about saying maybe I should have a condom. It’s quite funny, sometimes but then you don’t bother with the condom. If you can stop to open a packet of lube why couldn’t you stop and open a condom, a couple of more seconds?

Furthermore, as the next quote describes, `danger’ and èxcitement’ were important elements of the sexual culture of this locale (for more details see Flowers Marriott and Hart, in press: CM: R: CM: R:

In safety terms what is the sex like? Exciting because it’s dangerous. So this dangerous sex idea Ð in what way is it dangerous? Well just that you might get caught, you have got your trousers round your ankles and you can’t run. Also the fact that it is so easily accessible. It’s on tap, someone will have sex with you.

Thus, danger was present in terms of risk of a raid by the police or homophobic violence and, for the last respondent, his immobility whilst engaging in sex. Excitement was related to the array of sexual possibilities, the wide variety of sexual partners and the suspension of rules of conduct which characterized sexual liaisons in other situations; as the participant below notes, there is no need to be `polite’: PF: R:

So what is important in that kind of situation to you? It’s important that there are endless possibilities. No obligation perhaps I don’t know I’m only guessing. Perhaps for me is the fact that in this group sex there is no obligation to anybody. No obligation ± I don’t have to be polite to them. It is a very different kind of sex I would have, even in a threesome with my partner. (Then) it would be much more trying to look after that third person, make sure they felt included in some way.

In summary, the pursuit of sex within parks was very different to within gay bars. The social constraints which characterized men’s interactions within the bars were not present within parks and, unlike sex within toilets, sex within the parks was reported to be spontaneous, unplanned and unstructured. The etiquette of `domestic’ sex is also absent, as men `shop’ for sexual anatomies from potential sexual partners. They are literally ®ngering the goods and moving on if unsatis®ed, or simply choosing to leave the sexual activity rather than feeling obliged to reciprocate or wait until a partner reaches orgasm. In this way, in parks, the sexual partner is often thought of as incidental to the sexual act.


79


Locale and sexual repertoire

Understandings which directly linked given locations to the repertoire of sexual activity were also reported, as sexual repertoire was shaped by the situational constraints of speci®c locations (e.g. particular parks) as well as locale. In many of the locations outwith the commercial gay scene, the risk of disturbance or arrest, together with the circumscribed nature of interactions, curtails verbal negotiation of sexual activity. Furthermore, shared understandings of the likelihood and meaning of sex make such negotiations apparently inappropriate. Sexual repertoire is shaped by the speci®cs of certain locations which embody shared expectations of the likelihood and feasibility of certain sexual acts. In cottaging, for example, sexual repertoire is limited by the layout of the toilet. In general, if they occur, anal and oral sex will be conducted within cubicles; in contrast, masturbation alone will occur at urinals: CM: R:

CM: R:

Right, what kind of sex would you have in a cottage? It could range from you know just mutual masturbation, well no it could range from each person just masturbating you know to mutual masturbation all the way up through full intercourse In the cottage? Yeah. Well at the urinals . . . the most that would go on at the urinal would be like mutual masturbation, but if I mean if it was going to go any further people usually go into stalls. No, well it could be, there are cottages ± between the stalls there’s holes in the wall and you have no idea what’s on the other side. I would never do something through the hole. I mean if I was in a cottage doing something I would have to be in the same stall with them, but I mean there are people . . . something comes through the hole and they go at it . . . I wouldn’t do that.

The above respondent describes how sexual activity is constrained within a cottage by its spatial organization. Also, as the earlier section suggested, there is minimal social interaction between men, and the respondent’s comments add to the anatomic objecti®cation associated with these sexual spaces (`something comes through the hole and they go at it’ rather than a reference to `someone’s penis’). Within parks sexual repertoire is also limited by situational constraints; for example, dif®culties in the positioning of bodies for penetrative sex would seem to be universal: R:

Fucking is quite awkward especially when people are two different heights, it’s much better if you’re lying down, but usually gay sex is standing up in the park.

Thus, because of the cold, damp, possibly muddy ground, penetrative sex, when it does occur, will usually be in the vertical position. Furthermore, the men who took part in this study reported different behaviour in different parks. The density of vegetation and undergrowth varies considerably between these parks and this affects the likelihood of penetrative sex, as we see below: R:

Its a lot easier. I mean I have been fucked in park X because its a lot more open and you can, if you bend over you can hold on to a tree trunk. Whereas in park Y there’s so much brushwood you’re more likely to get your eye poked out than anything. It’s the logistics of the whole thing.

The park ®lled with brushwood is also accessed most frequently by men in cars. Unlike Glasgow’s other main cruising parks, few men arrive on foot.

80


Given the problems associated with the vegetation men may also engage in sex within their cars; this also has its dif®culties:


R:

Anyone who manages to have penetrative sex in the back of a car is either double jointed or incredibly lucky. You just can’t do that.

This section described how sexual behaviour, or sexual repertoire, is shaped not so much by the individual’s sexual decision making and choice of sexual acts but by the logistics and situational constraints of particular locations. These in¯uences shape the likelihood and expectation of certain sexual acts. Though, as we have shown in earlier sections, there are shared understandings at the level of locale. Within this section we have indicated just how important differences between particular locations can be in determining sexual conduct. Discussion

By focusing upon the variability in men’s understandings of partner selection and sexual activity, according to the site in which it occurs, we have highlighted the importance of locale. `Locale’ encapsulates the speci®c social context of sexual activity: it is a socially and spatially demarcated sexual space. Different locales and sexual cultures have distinct social consequences in terms of interactions between men, the degree and nature of scripted or formulaic sexual conduct (see Keogh and Holland 1998) and importantly, the likelihood of certain sexual acts. It should perhaps come as no surprise that, in a recent study from Holland, de Wit et al. (1997) found differences in number of sexual partners, number of anal sexual partners, and number of unprotected anal sexual partners, according to the venue in which sex was reported (they included cruising areas, cinemas, hotel rooms, dark rooms, saunas, home of participant, or partner’s home). The commercial gay scene represents a sexual culture in which there is an overriding concern with public behaviour. In Glasgow, no bars or clubs allow sex on the premises and the culture of the commercial bars primarily revolves around overtly social behaviour and meeting potential sexual partners. If partners wish to engage in sexual activity the location of such activity is likely to be negotiated (`your place or mine?’), it will follow familiar sexual scripts primarily addressing the negotiation of intimacy (`would you like a cup of coffee/what kind of sex are you into?’), and there is often an understanding of the potential longer term social consequences of such activity (`do you want my phone number?’). On the `scene’, there are clear injunctive norms prescribing appropriate behaviour (e.g. choice of sexual partner). There is a distinct contrast between the sexual culture of the bars and that of other locales. The existence of commercial venues in which men meet each other in the pursuit of sex is of course a relatively modern phenomenon. Social stigma and legislation criminalizing the soliciting of homosexual encounters and homosexual activity itself has led to a history of men seeking sex with other men in a variety of different, usually `public’ locations (Escof®er 1997). Given the potential consequences of discovery (e.g. blackmail, a



81

criminal record, suicide) the pursuit of partners and of sex almost certainly evolved in the covert ways described here directly as a response to these threats. However, within many cultures in the contemporary West, the use of commercial venues for socializing and meeting sexual partners now represents a well established and socially acceptable space for the pursuit of sexual activity. In other cities, saunas (bathhouses) and sex clubs represent locales in which it is possible to engage in sexual behaviour comparable to that reported in the parks and toilets in this account; undoubtedly these have their own sexual cultures. We feel con®dent that our ®ndings represent a set of heuristics appropriate to Glasgow and indeed raise many general issues relating to the spatial patterning of sexual cultures everywhere. However, we are cautious about the direct transferability of locale-speci®c sexual cultures to all similar locales in other cities. Policing, site-speci®c condom availability and the social and historical organization of sexual space distinguish some locations such as Hampstead Heath in London (French et al. 1998). Sexual activity within toilets emerged as being primarily non-verbal, and with few social consequences. A non-verbal routine of assessing potential sexual partners differentiated men engaging in sex from men using the toilet to urinate (see also Flowers et al. 1997b, Keogh and Holland, 1998). In terms of sexual behaviour, sexual contact was primarily non-penetrative; oral and anal sex occurred only within the relative safety of a toilet cubicle. The parks present a locale within which men can obtain instant sex with a variety of partners. Again, sexual activity can be characterized by its relative lack of social consequence. Unlike sex within toilets, men had a shared understanding of implicit sexual motivation to account for the presence of other men in the park at night ± they were all considered to be potential sexual partners. Again, a non-verbal script was followed to assess the possibility of sex with speci®c partners. Sexual behaviour itself was understood to be unstructured and men reported feeling very little obligation to their partners (for example, in terms of reciprocity). We have described the different understandings of sexual activity associated with different locales in which sex occurs. The process of analysis draws upon a distinct inter-subjectivity which we believe represents the in¯uence of local sexual cultures. The meaning of sexual activity, the variability of men’s sexual behaviour and the expected social consequences of sexual activity are all patterned by locale and provide evidence of the importance of sexual cultures. We believe that it is not the individual per se but shared understanding generated between gay men that can provide the best explanation of context-speci®c sexual conduct. Whilst the role of location has only brie¯y been touched upon within this paper, it can be considered as providing an additional layer of in¯uence upon sexual conduct. The sitespeci®c differences of location can either facilitate or inhibit the speci®cs of sexual activity. For example, two toilet cubicles linked by a glory hole will facilitate oral sex; in contrast, weather conditions and brushwood in parks may inhibit anal penetration. We would argue that this approach represents a more useful and powerful account of sexual behaviour than attempting to identify ®xed propensities to engage in particular sexual acts by given individuals (a traditional


82


psychological episteme). Such sexual cultures may be more signi®cant for our understanding of sexual behaviour than the health-related cognitions which have structured so much of our current understanding of gay men’s sexual health (for a review, see Flowers et al. 1997c) and proved so in¯uential in initiatives promoting gay men’s sexual health (e.g. the UK Health Education Authority’s `Choose safer sex’ campaign). In stressing the primacy of sexual cultures, we are not proposing a causal model of sexual behaviour predicted by locale alone, but are suggesting that sexual behaviour should be understood as shaped, constrained and patterned by locale and indeed the speci®c location in which it occurs. It is far better to conceptualize gay men in relation to their engagement with shared (spatially patterned) sexual cultures than the somewhat reductionist categorization of gay men as, for example, `risk takers’ or `risk avoiders’. Furthermore, rather than focusing on associations between risky sexual behaviour and psychological or indeed socio-demographic variables, a more inclusive, wide ranging and potentially productive research agenda could examine the production and consumption of various sexual cultures. This shift in focus to the links between sexual cultures and sexual behaviour has important implications for risk, sexual health and sexual health promotion. Traditional health psychology posits risk as embodied solely within the individual. Sexual behaviour becomes predominantly a matter of individual decision-making and, for those men who engage in risky sexual activity, a stable attribute which may mitigate against future sexual health. This conceptual framework, one of health-rationalistic individual `choice’, is associated with the attachment of stigma and blame to risk-taking. We believe this provides a strong disincentive to the frank acknowledgement of such `risky’ sexual behaviour. Furthermore, where risk is thought of as `static’ (solely within an individual) those who have engaged in risky activity, for example, unprotected anal sex, may feel this is an unavoidable expression of their very nature and unprotected anal sex will ìnevitably’ re-occur; such an episteme resulted in the morbid psychopathology suggested by the concept `relapse’ (Hart et al. 1992). Con¯ating risk with static individual attributes has obvious implications for conceptualizing risk management, as within this framework there is a danger that risk becomes something of a self-ful®lling prophecy, precluding the possibility of individual behaviour change. In contrast, an approach which could address the link between risk and sexual cultures would allow us to go beyond the somewhat narrow perspective of individual risk, responsibility and blame. It conceptualizes risk as situated and contingent, a probability that everyone should address and potentially avoid. A focus on sexual cultures also shows how systems of meanings are pivotal in understanding sexual behaviour in a variety of settings. Whereas the application of traditional health psychology theories highlights the importance of a limited range of health related-cognitions in predicting sexual behaviour (e.g. perceived risk, response ef®cacy), a culture-focused approach, in contrast, is capable of illustrating the importance of alternative in¯uences: the social environments that create sexual cultures. The primacy of a psychological episteme which posits individual agency as a major in¯uence in understanding sexual behaviour should, we believe, be challenged.



83

Early work, such as Weinberg and Williams (1975), highlighted the importance of the social organization of sexual activity, describing the supraindividual conditions which frame the importance of sexual scripts, as did that of Gagnon and Simon (1974). Similarly, Duyves (1995) begins to explore cultural geography and addresses the construction of Amsterdam as a `gay capital’. Since the advent of HIV and the construction of `sexual health’ in the 1990s as a ®eld of inquiry, sexual behaviour has been primarily conceptualized from an individual and behavioural perspective with scant attention being paid to the social contexts of such activity (see Rhodes, 1995, Bloor 1995, Hart and Flowers 1996). It is precisely those links between individual agency and the wider social context that need exploring; we believe that the relationship between locale and sexual culture is worthy of further examination. Much of the recent literature regarding public sex environments (PSEs) has also been in¯uenced by the traditional psychological episteme. Implicitly, it casts `risk’ as located `within’ individuals who use public sex environments. Studies have examined men who use PSEs and have highlighted the association between PSE use and HIV risk-related behaviour (Mayne et al. in press). Whilst some research has associated PSE use with unprotected anal intercourse, it has paid little attention to the situations in which this HIV risk related behaviour actually occurs (Coates 1996, Hays et al. in press). Such studies compare PSE users with PSE non-users. The validity of these ®ndings depends upon two central assumptions. Firstly, a construction of gay men which categorizes them according to an exclusive and static taxonomy (PSE users and non-users). Secondly, an allocation of the enormous range and diversity of sexual spaces into the dichotomous PSE and non-PSE sub-classes. This clustering of very varied locales into a single, homogenous `PSE’ (e.g. Woods et al. 1996, Mayne et al. in press) reduces the complexity and diversity which inform a locale’s spatial organization, social rules and expectations (the multiple elements which constitute sexual culture), to the one epistemological constant of health psychology: the individual. In conclusion, this paper has described the importance of locale in understanding gay men’s sexual activity in Glasgow. Differing locales encapsulate the shared understandings which structure expectations of both the likely social consequences of sexual activity, and the probable range of sexual acts in which men will engage. Through the notion of a sexual culture we have sought to connect individual agency with immediate social environment to generate an analysis that seeks to represent the lived experience of the men who took part in this study. Sexual culture thereby offers the ontological basis for our appreciation of their social world. Acknowledgements

This research is supported by the Medical Research Council. Thanks to the men who were willing to be interviewed for the study and to Stephen Nicholson, Stephanie Church, Jamie Frankis and Barbara Duncan for their helpful comments on an earlier draft.

84



References Aveline, D. T. (1995) A typology of perceived HIV/AIDS risk-reduction strategies used by men who `cruise’ other men for anonymous sex. The Journal of Sex Research, 32, 201±212. Baumeister, R. F. and Newman, L. S. (1994) How stories make sense of personal experience: motives that shape autobiographical narratives. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 676±690. Bloor, M. J. (1995) The Sociology of HIV Transmission (London: Sage). Carter, S., Horn, K., Hart, G., Dunbar, M., Scoular, A. and Macintyre, S. (1997) The sexual behaviour of international travellers at two Glasgow GUM clinics. International Journal of STD and AIDS, 8, 336±338. Carter, S. and Clift, S. (in press) (eds) Tourism, Travel and Sex. The Cutting Edge of Tourism Series, Series ed. (Berry. S), (London and Washington: Pinter). Church, J., Green, J., Vearnals, S. and Keogh, P. (1993) Investigation of motivational and behavioural factors in¯uencing men who have sex with other men in public toilets (cottaging). AIDS Care, 5, 337±346. Coates, T., Acree, M., Stall, R., Hoff, C., Kegeles, S., Ekstrand, M., Paul, J. and Jinich, S. (1996) Men who have sex with men in public places are more likely to have unprotected anal intercourse. XIth International Conference on AIDS, Vancouver, Canada, 7±12th July 1996 [Mo492]. Davies, P. M., Hickson, F. C. I., Weatherburn, P. and Hunt, A. J. (1993) AIDS: Sex, Gay Men and AIDS (London: Falmer Press). Duyves, M. (1995) Framing preferences, framing differences: inventing Amsterdam as a gay capital. In R. G. Parker and J. H. Gagnon (eds) Conceiving Sexuality: Approaches to Sex Research in a Post Modern World (London and New York: Routledge). deWit, J. B. F., deVroome, E. M. M., Sandfort, T. G. M. and vanGriensven, G. J. P. Homosexual encounters in different venues. International Journal of STD & AIDS, 8, 130±134. Escoffer, J. (1997) The political economy of the closet: notes toward an economic history of gay and lesbian life before Stonewall. In A. Gluckman and B. Reed (eds) Homo-economics: Capitalism, Community and Lesbian and Gay Life (London and New York: Routledge). Flowers, P. and Hart, G. (1998) Everyone on the scene is so cliquey: are gay bars an appropriate context for community peer led intervention? In P. Aggleton, G. J. Hart and P. Davies (eds) AIDS: Family, Culture and Community (London: Taylor and Francis). Flowers, P., Smith, J. A., Sheeran, P. and Beail, N. (1997a) Health and romance: understanding unprotected sex in relationships between gay men. British Journal of Health Psychology, 2, 73±86. Flowers, P., Smith, J. A., Sheeran, P. and Beail, N. (1997b) Identities and gay men’s sexual decision making. In P. Aggleton, P. Davies and G. Hart (eds) AIDS: Activism and Alliances (London: Taylor and Francis). Flowers, P., Sheeran, P., Beail, N. and Smith, J. A. (1997c) The role of psychosocial factors in HIV riskreduction among gay and bisexual men: a quantitative review. Psychology and Health, 12, 197±230. Flowers, P., Smith, J. A., Sheeran, P. and Beail, N. (1998). `Coming out’ and sexual debut: understanding the social context of HIV risk-related behaviour. Journal of Community and Applied and Social Psychology. 8, 409±421. Flowers, P., Marriott, C. and Hart, G. (in press) Constructing sexual health: gay men and `risk’ in the context of a public sex environment. Journal of Health Psychology. French, R., Power, R., Mitchell, S. and Dockrell, M. (1998). An evaluation of community-based STD/HIV prevention work in a public sex environment. [43293] 12th World AIDS Conference, Geneva, 28th June±3rd July. Gagnon, J. H. and Simon, W. (1974) Sexual Conduct: The Social Sources of Human Sexuality (London: Hutchinson). Harry, J. (1986) Sampling gay men. Journal of Sex Research, 22, 1±34. Hart, G., Boulton, M., Fitzpatrick, R., McLean, J. and Dawson, J. (1992) Relapse to unsafe sexual behaviour amongst gay men: a critique of recent behavioural HIV/AIDS research. Sociology of Health and Illness, 14, 216±232. Hart, G. and Flowers, P. (1996) Recent developments in the sociology of HIV risk-related behaviour. Risk Decision and Policy, 1, 153±167. Hart, G., Flowers, P., Der, G. and Frankis, J. (in press) Gay men’s HIV-related sexual risk behaviour in Scotland. Sexuality Transmitted Infections. Hawkes, S., Hart, G. J., Bletsoe, E., Shergold, C. and Johnson, A. M. (1995) Risk behaviour and STD acquisition in Genitourinary Medicine Clinic attenders who have travelled. Genitourinary Medicine, 71, 351±354.



85

Hawkes, S., Hart, G. J., Johnson, A. M., Shergold, C., Ross, E., Herbert, K. M., Mortimer, P., Parry, J. V. and Mabey, D. (1994) Risk behaviour and HIV prevalence in international travellers. AIDS, 8, 247±252. Hays, R., Kegeles, S. and Coates, T. (in press) Predicting changes in HIV risk-taking among young gay men: the Young Men’s Survey. Humphreys, L. (1970) Tearoom Trade (Chicago: Aldine). Huygens, P., Kajura, E., Seeley, J. and Barton, T. (1996) Rethinking methods for the study of sexual behaviour. Social Science and Medicine, 42, 221±231. Joffe, H. (1997) Intimacy and love in late modern conditions: implications for unsafe sexual practices. In J. Ussher (ed.) Body Talk: The Material and Discursive Regulation of Sexuality, Madness and Reproduction (London: Routledge). Keogh, P. (1998) Public Sex Venues. Back to the future; the ®rst National CHAPS Gay Men’s HIV Prevention Conference, Birmingham, 17±18th March. Keogh, P. and Holland, P. (1998) Observing the rules: an ethnographic study of London’s cottages and cruising areas. In P. Aggleton, P. Davies and G. Hart (eds) AIDS: Activism and Alliances (London: Taylor and Francis). Kitzinger, J. (1995) I’m sexually attractive but I’m powerful: young women negotiating sexual reputation. Women’s Studies International Forum, 18, 1±8. Macintyre, S. and Ellaway, A. (in press) Ecological approaches: rediscovering the role of the physical and social environment. In L. Berkman and I. Kawachi (eds) (Oxford: Oxford University Press). Macintyre, S., MacIver, S. and Sooman, A. (1993) Area, class and health: should we be focusing on places or people? Journal of Social Policy, 22, 213±234. Mayne, T. J., Woods, W., Kegeles, S. M. and Coates, T. J. (in press) HIV sexual risk behaviour among men who patronize public sex environments in San Francisco. AIDS Parker, R. G. (1994) Sexual cultures, HIV transmission, and AIDS prevention. AIDS, 8, S309±S314. Pitts, M. (1996) The Psychology of Preventive Health (New York and London: Routledge). Rhodes, T. (1995) Theorizing and researching `risk’: notes on the social relations of risk in heroin users `lifestyles’. In P. Aggleton, P. Davies and G. Hart (eds) AIDS: Safety, Sexuality and Risk (London: Taylor and Francis). Sachs, L. (1996) Causality, responsibility and blame±core issues in the cultural construction and subtext of prevention. Sociology of Health and Illness, 18, 632±652. Smith, J. A. (1995) Semi structured interviewing and qualitative analysis. In J. A. Smith, R. Harre and L. Van Langenhove (eds) Rethinking Methods in Psychology (London: Sage). Smith, J. A. (1996a) Beyond the divide between cognition and discourse: using interpretative phenomenological analysis in health psychology. Psychology and Health, 11, 261±271. Smith, J. A. (1996b) Evolving issues for qualitative psychology. In J. Richardson (ed.) Handbook of Qualitative Research Methods for Psychology and the Social Sciences (Leicester: The British Psychological Society). Van Campenhoudt, L., Cohen, M., Guizzardi, G. and Hausser, D. (1997) Sexual Interactions and HIV Risk: New Conceptual Approaches in European Research (London: Taylor and Francis). Weinberg, M. S. and Williams, C. J. (1975) Gay baths and the social organization of impersonal sex. Social Problems, 2, 124±136. Woods, W., Mayne, T., Kegeles, S. (1996) Few men at sex clubs and cruising areas have unprotected anal intercourse. XIth International Conference on AIDS, Vancouver, Canada, 7±12th July 1996 [TuD2713].

ReÂ sume Â

Cet article eÂtudie le roÃle du type de lieu (espace sexuel) et de la localisation (site geÂographique) pour expliquer le comportement sexuel des hommes homosexuels. Des entretiens semi-directifs approfondis ont eÂteÂ meneÂs aupreÁs de 20 hommes homosexuels Áa Glasgow. L’Analyse PheÂnomeÂnologique InterpreÂtative a eÂteÂ utiliseÂe pour analyser les entretiens sur des theÁmes privileÂgieÂs. Le lien entre le type de lieu et l’activiteÂ sexuelle est clairement mis en eÂvidence et consideÂreÂ comme important. Les reÂsultats

86



reÂveÁlent l’existence de cultures sexuelles distinctes, associeÂes Áa diffeÂrents lieux, tels que la sceÁne gay commerciale (`the bars’), les toilettes publiques (`the bogs’) et les jardins publics (`the bushes’). D’autre part, l’activiteÂ sexuelle deÂpend eÂgalement de sa localisation speÂci®que. Le comportement sexuel est interpreÂteÂ et construit par le type de lieu ou Á il se manifeste; il est eÂgalement contraint par sa localisation. A la lumieÁre de ces reÂsultats, la discussion porte sur l’adeÂquation des approches psychologiques traditionnelles pour comprendre l’activiteÂ sexuelle, et sur la pertinence d’autres perspectives qui interrogent les liens entre comportement sexuel et contexte social. Resumen

En este articulo se explora la importancia de los lugares y sitios que eligen los hombres homosexuales para entender su comportamiento sexual a partir de entrevistas en profundidad, semiestructuradas realizadas en Escocia a veinte homosexuales de Glasgow. Se utilizoÂ el anaÂlisis fenomenoloÂgico interpretativo para analizar los temas recurrentes y se vio que los conceptos compartidos que tenõÂan sobre la relacioÂn entre lugares y actividades sexuales Ä aban un papel importante. Los resultados indican la existencia de desempen culturas sexuales concretas que se asocian a lugares o escenarios como bares de ambiente gay, lavabos y parques pu Â blicos. AdemaÂs, la actividad sexual se ve directamente afectada por el lugar determinado donde eÂsta ocurre. El comportamiento sexual se entiende y rige por el local o escena (es decir, el espacio sexual) donde eÂste ocurre y tambieÂn esta Â limitado por el sitio en cuestioÂn. A la luz de estos resultados, se estaÂ estudiando, por una parte, si el enfoque de la psicologõÂa tradicional es el maÂs apropiado para entender la actividad sexual y, por otra, la importancia de otras perspectivas posibles para trazar los võÂnculos entre el contexto social y el comportamiento sexual.