Throughout the article Dilley defines several historical and contemporary collegiate identities used to label men with regard to their non-heterosexual identities.
One of the labels in particular struck a cord in my intellectual consciousness. From my understanding, Dilley asserts that those he interviewed were able to participate fully in the gay sexual experience without a need or desire to identify cognitively or socially with the gay community or gay self-concept. As I read this I began to wonder how feasible it is for this
Non heterosexual male occur in a socially constructed society that implicitly, and at times explicitly, places negative values on gay sexual Non heterosexual male.
The assumption that one could participate in sexual activity that is oft looked down upon and experience no negative construction of meaning, is a strong assertion. The question that is more pertinent to me, as a student affairs administrator, is "Non heterosexual male" is this a healthy avoidance of dissonance.
Also, does this separation of behavior and identity allow a man to never fully process and integrate his behaviors into his life. Does this have the potential to prevent a fulfilling life experience? From another perspective — what are the impacts of this separation on construction of masculinity.
Does this fly in the face of establishing alternate constructions of healthy masculinity? Theory, Research, and Implications for Practice. Opinions expressed in this blog are those of the author s and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of NASPA.
If you agree or disagree with the content of this post, we encourage you to dialogue in the comment section below. NASPA reserves the right to remove any blog that is inaccurate or offensive.
To comment, you can login to your preferred social network. Comments are lightly moderated and we do provide Non heterosexual male option for users to flag a comment as inappropriate.