The Relations Of Power And Intimacy Motives To Genitoerotic Role Preferences In Gay Men: A Pilot Study

Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality, The, Spring, 2000 by Will Damon

ABSTRACT: The objective of this study was to explore the relationships between power and intimacy motives and genitoerotic role preferences in gay men. Twenty European-American gay men, ten with a preference for insertive anal sex (MIPs) and ten with a preference for receptive anal sex (MRPs), participated in the study. There were no significant differences between MIPs' and MRPs in general power or intimacy motivation; however, there were significant differences in terms of directional power motivation in the sexual context. MIPs were more likely to desire exerting power over their partners during sex whereas MRPs were more likely to desire being overpowered during sex. Role preferences in anal sex generalized to oral sex with nonprimary partners. MIPs were significantly more likely to engage in insertive oral sex, and MRPs were significantly more likely to engage in receptive oral sex. In addition, MIPs and MRPs preferred sexual behaviours and sexual partners that amplified the power differential. For example, MIPs were significantly more likely to enjoy having their partners worship their bodies during sex and to prefer sexual partners who were younger, shorter, and smaller than they were. Implications for HIV prevention efforts are discussed.

Keywords: Gay men Sexual motives Sexual behavior HIV prevention

INTRODUCTION

Even fifteen years into the HIV epidemic, there is a dearth of research on what motivates gay men to have anal sex. Given that unprotected anal sex is the primary, risk behaviour for gay men in contracting HIV, this omission is a curious one. Researchers have focused on gay men's "triggers" for unprotected sex, such as substance use (Dilley, McFarland, Sullivan, & Discepola, 1998; Hays et al., 1997; Sacco & Rickman, 1996). However, they have largely ignored the arguably more central issue of what anal sex means to gay men. This omission may be an oversight, but it is more likely due to discomfort with gay men's sexuality, in general, and with anal sex between men, in particular. If researchers do not gain a better understanding of what anal sex means to gay men, the ramifications are twofold. First, researchers are unlikely to be aware of gay men's motivations for anal sex that may facilitate unprotected anal sex. Second, their lack of understanding of their target population will not be lost on gay men. Gay men will feel misunderstood and, thus, will be a less receptive audience to researchers' findings and recommendations. The end result is that HIV prevention efforts will continue to fall short of effecting significant, long-term change in gay men's anal sexual behaviour.

Although some gay men do not engage in anal sex, many find it central to their sexual lives. Davies, Hickson, Weatherburn, and Hunt (1993) found that 46.6% of their sample of 237 gay men described anal sex as "very important," "quite important," or "important." Of gay men who engage in anal sex, some prefer to be the insertive partner, others prefer to be the receptive partner, and still others report enjoying both roles equally. Within the gay male community a nomenclature has emerged around sexuality, and thus, there are names for men who prefer insertive and receptive anal sex. Men who prefer insertive anal sex are referred to as "tops," men who prefer receptive anal sex are referred to as "bottoms," and men who enjoy both are referred to as "versatile." These labels can take on great importance to gay men. They help navigate the search for a partner by quickly conveying what one likes sexually and, thus, often become part of gay men's identities.

Sex researchers also have a vernacular to describe people's sexual roles in the bedroom. Weinrich, Grant, Jacobson, Robinson, and McCutchan (1992) used the term genitoerotic role to encompass the set of scenarios and acts that one enjoys or performs in one's sexual, erotic, and/or genital interactions with other people or, in masturbation, with oneself. Consequently, a gay man who most enjoys insertive anal sex in which he is physically on top of his partner, and in which he controls the rate, depth, and direction of his pelvic thrusting would probably consider himself a "top." Sex researchers would consider him to be expressing a particular genitoerotic role preference. This exploratory study of a small sample of gay men explores two motives that may be related to genitoerotic role preferences in gay men: power and intimacy.

POWER AND INTIMACY MOTIVATION

Motives refer to the underlying reasons for behaviour, the internal "springs of action" in William James' (1890) words. Personality theorists have disagreed on the number of motives that exist. Some have suggested that people's behaviour is determined by numerous underlying motives (e.g., McDougall's [1908] 12 instincts and 5 nonspecific innate tendencies, Murray's [1938] 20 psychogenic needs). Other theorists have posited that one primary motive serves to direct behaviour (e.g., Adler's [1927] striving for superiority, Roger's [1951] self-actualization). Occupying a middle ground are those theorists who have conceptualized motives in terms of a dualism. Dualistic theories suggest that personality comprises two primary, opposing forces that exist in perpetual tension (e.g., Freud's [1900/1953] life instinct and death instinct, Rank's [1936] fear of life and fear of death, Angyal's [1941] need for autonomy and need for surrender, and Bakan's [1966] agency and communion).