Abstract
Race-based sexual preferences in the online profiles of men who have sex with men (MSM) may be relevant for understanding the sexual health of this population, including racial/ethnic disparities in HIV infection. In October 2011, a content analysis was conducted of the profiles of Boston-area members of a racially diverse website for MSM. The present analysis formatively examined the use of demographic and partner selection criteria by race/ethnicity appearing in the profiles of men who indicated race-based partner preferences (n = 89). Latino men were the most frequently preferred race (54 %), followed by White (52 %), Black (48 %), and Asian (12 %) men. In separate multivariable models adjusted for age and HIV status disclosure, wanting low-risk foreplay was associated with a preference for White men (aOR) = 4.27; 95 % CI = 1.70–10.75; p = 0.002), while wanting group sex was associated with a preference for Black (OR = 2.28; 95 % CI = 1.08–4.81; p = 0.03) and Latino men (OR = 2.56; 95 % CI = 1.25–5.23; p = 0.01). Future studies are needed to replicate findings in larger online samples. Mixed-methods research should explore how racial and behavioral preferences impact the sexual mixing patterns and health of MSM online in urban areas.
Keywords: MSM, Internet, Race/ethnicity, HIV, Sexual risk
Introduction
Men who have sex with men (MSM) represent just 2 % of the US male population,1 yet comprised the majority (62 %) of all new HIV infections diagnosed among adults and adolescents in 2011.2 MSM of color are among the most severely affected by the epidemic as Black MSM constituted 72 % of new HIV infections among all Black men in 2010,3 and 38 % among all MSM in 2011,2 while Latino MSM accounted for 79 % of new HIV infections among all Latino men in 2010,4 and 24 % among MSM in 2011.2
MSM of color often experience racial discrimination when seeking sexual partners, which has been shown to contribute to HIV risk.5–10 Moreover, qualitative studies highlight a racialized sexual hierarchy in which White men are considered to be the most favored sexual partners and men of color are preferred least.5,11–15 For men of color, social stratification in the form of a racialized hierarchy has been shown to lead to restricted sexual networks,11,13,16 a diminished sense of self-worth,5,11–13,15 and increased vulnerability to HIV sexual risk behavior.5,11,13,15
The Internet is one of the most popular venues for sexual partner seeking among MSM.17,18 On the Internet, the “racialized sexual marketplace” is highly palpable as specific aspects of the online experience can amplify its existence.11,13,15 Specifically, sexual partner seeking on the Internet encourages the use of partner selection criteria in the profiles of men using the Internet to seek sex and these specifications often include the preferred race of a partner as well as desired sexual practices.11–13,15 Though asserting a preference for particular types of sexual partners may be liberating for men, the use of race-based partner selection criteria in online settings may reinforce the racial hierarchy and stigmatize certain groups based on racial stereotypes. Specifically, research shows that MSM may internalize the racial stereotypes and socialization messages observed in the online environment, which may, in turn, influence sexual risk behavior.5,11,15 Thus, understanding the relationship between racial and sexual preferences in the online environments where men seek sex with other men is important to understanding the social and cultural contexts that may shape sexual risk behaviors among MSM of color and their partners. This formative study sought to examine the factors associated with citing a racial preference in the online profiles of Black, White, Latino, and Asian men seeking sex with other men.
Methods
In October 2011, data were collected from the online profiles of members of a popular, racially diverse sexual “hook-up” website for MSM. A non-intrusive content analysis methodology12,14,19–23 was used on a website that was free and easily accessible to anyone with an Internet connection. Open and closed methods24 were used to code specific demographic, sexual, and racialized content appearing in the profiles sampled. Profiles were eligible for inclusion in this analysis if they were: (1) male, (2) located in the Boston-area, (3) Black, White, Latino, or Asian/Pacific Islander; and (4) indicated a race-based partner preference; yielding a final analytic sample of 89 member profiles. The study was approved and conducted through the Institutional Review Board of Fenway Health in Boston.25
Measures
Member profiles were coded using both pre-existing response options (i.e., checkboxes provided by site when creating profile) and open-ended responses that were grouped according to themes derived from previous research.13,22 All demographic variables were categorical and included age, race/ethnicity (White, Black, Latino, Asian), self-reported HIV status, disclosure of sexual identity (e.g., “out,” “not out”), and sexual position (e.g., “top”—insertive partner, “bottom”—receptive partner, versatile).13,22 Drug and alcohol use variables were dichotomously assessed (e.g., openly reported any use of alcohol/drugs yes/no). Relationship preferences were coded as separate dichotomous variables (e.g., reported looking for sex yes/no; friendship yes/no). Both sexual and race-based partner preferences were dichotomously assessed as having reported the preference or its absence.
Data Analysis
SAS version 9.2 statistical software was used to perform analyses.26 Descriptive statistics were obtained for all variables. Bivariate logistic regression analyses were estimated for sexual partnering preferences, covariates, and citing an explicit preference for a partner of specific race, separately for each, compared to lack of preference (i.e., preference for White men, preference for Black men, and preference for Latino men). Preference for Asian men was excluded as an outcome due to low-cell count. Variables with a p value of <0.05 in the bivariate comparisons were retained in the multivariable models.27 Bivariate and adjusted odds ratios (OR/aOR) and 95 % confidence intervals (95 % CI) are presented.
Results
Participant demographics and relationship and sexual partnering preferences by race/ethnicity appear in Table 1 (n = 89). As shown in Table 2, and depicted graphically in Fig. 1, among those endorsing one or more race-based preference, Latino (54 %), White (52 %), and Black (48 %) men were the mostly highly preferred, while Asian men were preferred least (12 %). Black men tended to prefer other Black men (76 %), while Latino men equally preferred White (62 %) or other Latino men (62 %). The majority of White men reported a preference for Latino (63 %) or Black (53 %) partners, while Asian men most frequently reported a preference for White partners (57 %). Latino men most often reported a race-based preference compared to all other races (ORs: ranged from 2.2–4.2; all p < 0.01).
TABLE 1.
Profile characteristics by race/ethnicity of Boston-area men seeking men on a gay/bisexual social networking site (n = 89)
| White (n = 19) | Black (n = 21) | Asian (n = 7) | Latino (n = 42) | Total (n = 89) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Demographics | % (n/N) | ||||
| Age | |||||
| 18–25 | 16 (3/19) | 33 (7/21) | 43 (3/7) | 17 (7/42) | 23 (20/89) |
| 26–35 | 21 (4/19) | 33 (7/21) | 43 (3/7) | 55 (23/42) | 42 (37/89) |
| 36–50 | 47 (9/19) | 33 (7/21) | 14 (1/7) | 29 (12/42) | 33 (29/89) |
| >50 | 16 (3/19) | 0 (0/21) | 0 (1/7) | 0 (0/42) | 3 (3/89) |
| HIV status | |||||
| Negative | 68 (13/19) | 86 (18/21) | 57 (4/7) | 88 (37/42) | 81 (72/89) |
| Positive | 5 (1/19) | 0 (0/0) | 14 (1/7) | 2 (1/42) | 3 (3/89) |
| Not reported | 26 (5/19) | 14 (3/21) | 29 (2/7) | 10 (4/42) | 16 (14/89) |
| Sexual identity disclosure | |||||
| Out | 58 (11/19) | 29 (6/21) | 57 (4/7) | 64 (27/42) | 54 (48/89) |
| Not out, discreet, down-low | 5 (1/19) | 48 (10/21) | 29 (2/7) | 19 (8/42) | 25 (22/89) |
| Did not report | 37 (7/19) | 24 (5/21) | 14 (1/7) | 17 (7/42) | 21 (19/89) |
| Sexual position | |||||
| Top | 11 (2/19) | 19 (4/21) | 14 (1/7) | 12 (5/42) | 13 (12/89) |
| Versatile | 47 (9/19) | 63 (12/19) | 42 (3/7) | 48 (20/42) | 49 (44/89) |
| Bottom | 11 (2/19) | 11 (2/19) | 29 (2/7) | 29 (12/42) | 20 (18/89) |
| Did not report | 32 (6/19) | 14 (3/21) | 14 (1/7) | 12 (5/42) | 17 (15/89) |
| Substance use | |||||
| Uses alcohol | 68 (13/19) | 81 (17/21) | 43 (3/7) | 86 (36/42) | 78 (69/89) |
| Relationship preferences* | |||||
| Sex | 90 (17/19) | 81 (17/21) | 86 (6/7) | 91 (38/42) | 88 (78/89) |
| Relationship | 53 (10/19) | 91 (19/21) | 57 (4/7) | 60 (25/42) | 65 (58/89) |
| Friendship | 74 (14/19) | 48 (10/21) | 29 (2/7) | 79 (33/42) | 66 (59/89) |
| Sexual partnering preferences | |||||
| Low-risk foreplaya,b | 5 (1/19) | 10 (2/21) | 14 (1/7) | 19 (8/42) | 14 (12/89) |
| Rough sexa | 5 (1/19) | 33 (7/21) | 29 (2/7) | 14 (6/42) | 18 (16/89) |
| Group sex | 53 (10/19) | 52 (11/21) | 43 (3/7) | 69 (29/42) | 60 (53/89) |
*Proportions add to more than 100 % in several categories because they are not mutually exclusive and/or due to rounding
aNot a response option; variable generated based on profile content
bLow-risk foreplay includes foreplay activities that are low risk for the transmission/acquisition of HIV including water sports (urinating), scat play (feces play), and rimming (oral anal sex)
TABLE 2.
Race-based preferences (n = 89) by race/ethnicity as reported in the profiles of Boston-area men seeking men on a gay/bisexual social networking site
| White n = 19 | Black n = 21 | Asian n = 7 | Latino n = 42 | Total n = 89 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| % (n/N) | |||||
| White racial preference | |||||
| Yes, indicated | 47 (9/19) | 19 (4/21) | 57 (4/7) | 62 (26/42) | 52 (46/89) |
| Black racial preference | |||||
| Yes, indicated | 53 (10/19) | 76 (16/21) | 14 (1/7) | 38 (16/42) | 48 (43/89) |
| Asian racial preference | |||||
| Yes, indicated | 21 (4/19) | 5 (1/21) | 43 (3/7) | 7 (3/42) | 12 (11/89) |
| Latino racial preference | |||||
| Yes, indicated | 63 (12/19) | 43 (9/21) | 14 (1/7) | 62 (26/42) | 54 (48/89) |
% = n/total number of people who specified any race-based preference or rejection
FIGURE 1.
Race-based preferences (n = 89) by race/ethnicity as reported in the profiles of Boston-area men seeking men on a gay/bisexual social networking site.
In three separate multivariable models, each adjusted for age and HIV status disclosure (Table 3), (1) preference for a White partner was associated with a preference for low-risk foreplay (aOR = 4.27; 95 % CI = 1.70–10.75; p = 0.002); (2) factors significantly associated with a preference for a Black partner included self-identifying as a “bottom” (aOR = 2.30; 95 % CI = 1.07–4.96; p = 0.04) and a preference for group sex (aOR = 2.28; 95 % CI = 1.08–4.81; p = 0.03); and (3) factors significantly associated with a preference for a Latino partner included self-identifying as a “bottom” (aOR = 2.27; 95 % CI = 1.07–4.81; p = 0.03) and preference for group sex (aOR = 2.56; 95 % CI = 1.25–5.23; p = 0.01).
TABLE 3.
Multivariable adjusted logistic regression models examining the association of substance use and sexual partnering preferences and racial preferences appearing in the profiles of Boston-area men seeking men on a gay/bisexual social networking site (n = 89)
| Prefer White men (n = 43) | Prefer Black men (n = 43) | Prefer Latino men (n = 48) | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR (95 % CI) | p Value | aOR (95 % CI) | p Value | OR (95 % CI) | p Value | aOR (95 % CI) | p Value | OR (95 % CI) | p Value | aOR (95 % CI) | p Value | |
| Sexual position | ||||||||||||
| Versatile | 1.00 | – | – | – | 1.00 | – | 1.00 | – | 1.00 | – | 1.00 | – |
| Top | 1.25 (0.55–2.88) | 0.60 | – | – | 0.30 (0.07–1.30) | 0.11 | 0.27 (0.06–1.18) | 0.08 | 0.93 (0.37–2.34) | 0.87 | 0.95 (0.37, 2.46) | 0.92 |
| Bottom | 1.27 (0.53–3.04) | 0.60 | – | – | 2.25 (1.08–4.69) | 0.03 | 2.30 (1.07–4.96) | 0.04 | 2.46 (1.20–5.04) | 0.01 | 2.27 (1.07, 4.81) | 0.03 |
| Substance use | ||||||||||||
| Alcohol use | 2.40 (1.10–5.21) | 0.03 | 1.35 (0.54–3.35) | 0.52 | 1.79 (0.88–3.68) | 0.11 | – | – | 2.38 (1.14–4.96) | 0.02 | 1.98 (0.75, 5.23) | 0.17 |
| Sexual preferences | ||||||||||||
| Low-risk foreplay | 5.86 (2.45–14.02) | <0.0001 | 4.27 (1.70–10.75) | 0.002 | 3.76 (1.41–10.17) | 0.01 | 1.27 (0.38–4.25) | 0.70 | 5.13 (2.16–12.17) | 0.0002 | 2.11 (0.74, 5.23) | 0.16 |
| Group sex | 2.20 (1.19–4.08) | 0.01 | 1.83 (0.91–3.69) | 0.09 | 3.33 (1.74–6.37) | 0.0003 | 2.28 (1.08–4.81) | 0.03 | 3.95 (2.10–7.44) | 0.0001 | 2.56 (1.25, 5.23) | 0.01 |
| Rough sex | 1.49 (0.57–3.88) | 0.41 | – | – | 3.64 (1.74–7.62) | 0.001 | 2.25 (0.92–5.47) | 0.08 | 3.60 (1.78–7.29) | 0.0004 | 1.91 (0.83, 4.37) | 0.13 |
Due to low-cell counts, associations between demographic and sexual risk preferences, and preference for an Asian partner could not be explored
aOR adjusted odds ratio. Adjusted for age and HIV status disclosure
Discussion
Researchers have argued that the use of race in partner selection criteria has implications in the creation and reinforcement of racialized sexual norms. Specifically, sexual behaviors may be activated in response to racial stereotypes leading men of color to engage in HIV sexual risk behavior in order to meet the racialized sexual expectations of partners who rank higher on the racial hierarchy (e.g., White men).5,6,13,15 Our formative data lend support to the existence of racialized sexual stereotyping as looking for higher risk sex activities (i.e., group sex) was associated with a preference for Black and Latino men, and endorsing lower risk sex activities (i.e., low-risk foreplay) was associated with a preference for White partners. If behavioral intentions predict behavior as the literature suggests,28–30 than these findings could pose elevated risk for HIV among Black and Latino MSM seeking sex online.
Consistent with prior research,16 Black men significantly preferred other Black men (76 % preferred sex partners of the same race). While same race preferences could indicate more restricted sexual networks,13,14,16our findings were unique16 in that Black men were not the least preferred partners of all other races. Rather, Black men were among the most highly preferred partners of Latino and White men. Asian men, however, were the least preferred race overall and among White, Black, and Latino men, specifically. This is particularly troublesome given that Asian men in our sample most frequently cited a preference for White men (57 %), yet only one-fifth of White men indicated a preference for Asian men, which is consistent with prior research.5,6 Qualitative research is needed to understand the differences in preferences by race/ethnicity among men using the Internet to seek sex with men.
There were limitations to the present study. First, this was a formative study that included a small sample of online MSM profiles with race-based preferences; replication of findings is needed with larger study samples. Second, this study analyzed Boston-area members of a specific partner-seeking website; thus, findings may not be generalizable to MSM outside of Boston or on another website. Another limitation is the exclusion of men who reported a race/ethnicity other than those reported here. Additionally, social desirability may have contributed to the under-reporting of preferences perceived as taboo or stigmatized (i.e., race/ethnicity and sexual risk), although social desirability is likely less of a factor in online settings where the potential for anonymity offers some protection against fear of judgment. Finally, as a content analysis of online profiles, this research is unable to assess the extent to which the preferences endorsed in men's profiles actually represent the behaviors practiced in person.
This is the first study we are aware of to document the associations between racial/ethnic and sexual preferences appearing in the online profiles of men seeking sex with other men online. Findings point to the need for interventions that aim to improve the online experience of racial minority men seeking sex with other men on the Internet. Such tactics might include the development of partner-seeking websites which provide safe and supportive environments for men seeking partners of a specific race, or more feasibly, the creation of educational campaigns featuring images of men of diverse races that aim to normalize inter-racial coupling, reduce racialized stereotypes, and promote safer sex practices. Before such interventions can be developed, however, future mixed methods research is needed to better understand how sexual and racialized content appearing in the online profiles of MSM impact those who view it; whether cited preferences contribute to the normalization of sexual risk behaviors among specific races/ethnicities; and lastly, the extent to which racial and sexual preferences predict behavior in offline settings.
References
- 1.CDC. HIV and AIDS among gay and bisexual men. 2010; http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/msm/index.htm.
- 2.CDC. HIV surveillance in men who have sex with men (MSM). 2013. http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/msm/pdf/msm.pdf.
- 3.CDC. HIV and AIDS among African Americans. 2013. http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/risk/racialethnic/aa/facts/index.html.
- 4.CDC. HIV incidence, 2010. Atlanta, GA: Division of HIV/AIDS Prevention, National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, Sexual Transmitted Diseases and Tuberculosis Prevention, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention;2013.
- 5.Han CS. A qualitative exploration of the relationship between racism and unsafe sex among Asian Pacific Islander gay men. Arch Sex Behav. 2008;37(5):827–837. doi: 10.1007/s10508-007-9308-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Wilson PA, Yoshikawa H. Experiences of and responses to social discrimination among Asian and Pacific Islander gay men: their relationship to HIV risk. AIDS Educ Prev. 2004;16(1):68–83. doi: 10.1521/aeap.16.1.68.27724. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Díaz RM, Ayala G, Bein E. Sexual risk as an outcome of social oppression: data from a probability sample of Latino gay men in three US cities. Cultur Divers Ethnic Minor Psychol. 2004;10(3):255–267. doi: 10.1037/1099-9809.10.3.255. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Stall R, Mills TC, Williamson J, et al. Association of co-occurring psychosocial health problems and increased vulnerability to HIV/AIDS among urban men who have sex with men. Am J Public Health. 2003;93(6):939–942. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.93.6.939. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Yoshikawa H, Wilson PA, Chae DH, et al. Do family and friendship networks protect against the influence of discrimination on mental health and HIV risk among Asian and Pacific Islander gay men? AIDS Educ Prev. 2004;16(1):84–100. doi: 10.1521/aeap.16.1.84.27719. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Nemoto T, Operario D, Soma T, et al. HIV risk and prevention among Asian/Pacific Islander men who have sex with men: listen to our stories. AIDS Educ Prev. 2003;15(1 Suppl A):7–20. doi: 10.1521/aeap.15.1.5.7.23616. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Paul JP, Ayala G, Choi K-H. Internet sex ads for MSM and partner selection criteria: the potency of race/ethnicity online. J Sex Res. 2010;47(6):528–538. doi: 10.1080/00224490903244575. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Phua VC, Kaufman G. The crossroads of race and sexuality: date selection among men in internet “personal” ads. J Fam Issues. 2003;24(8):981–994. doi: 10.1177/0192513X03256607. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Wilson PA, Valera P, Ventuneac A, et al. Race-based sexual stereotyping and sexual partnering among men who use the internet to identify other men for bareback sex. J Sex Res. 2009;46(5):399–413. doi: 10.1080/00224490902846479. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Feliciano C, Robnett B, Komaie G. Gendered racial exclusion among white internet daters. Soc Sci Res. 2009;38(1):39–54. doi: 10.1016/j.ssresearch.2008.09.004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Green AI. Health and sexual status in an urban gay enclave: an application of the stress process model. J Health Soc Behav. 2008;49(4):436–451. doi: 10.1177/002214650804900405. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Raymond H, McFarland W. Racial mixing and HIV risk among men who have sex with men. AIDS Behav. 2009;13(4):630–637. doi: 10.1007/s10461-009-9574-6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Liau A, Millett G, Marks G. Meta-analytic examination of online sex-seeking and sexual risk behavior among men who have sex with men. Sex Transm Dis. 2006;33(9):576–584. doi: 10.1097/01.olq.0000204710.35332.c5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Benotsch E, Kalichman S, Cage M. Men who have met sex partners via the internet: prevalence, predictors, and implications for HIV prevention. Arch Sex Behav. 2002;31(2):177–183. doi: 10.1023/A:1014739203657. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Riffe D, Lacy S, Fico FG. Analyzing media messages: using quantitative content analysis in research. 2. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; 2005. [Google Scholar]
- 20.Neuendorf KA. The content analysis guidebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2002. [Google Scholar]
- 21.Krippendorff K. Content analysis: an introduction to its methodology. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 2004. [Google Scholar]
- 22.Klein H. HIV risk practices sought by men who have sex with other men, and who use internet websites to identify potential sexual partners. Sex Health. 2008;5(3):243–250. doi: 10.1071/SH07051. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Hatala MN, Prehodka J. Content analysis of gay male and lesbian personal advertisements. Psychol Rep. 1996;78(2):371–374. doi: 10.2466/pr0.1996.78.2.371. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Strauss A, Corbin J. Grounded theory in practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publishing; 1997. [Google Scholar]
- 25.Mayer K, Mimiaga M, VanDerwarker R, et al. Fenway Community Health's model of integrated, community-based LGBT care, education, and research. In: Meyer I, Northridge M, et al., editors. The health of sexual minorities. New York: Springer; 2007. pp. 693–715. [Google Scholar]
- 26.Sas® Version 9.2 [computer program]. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc.; 2003.
- 27.Afifi A, Clark V, May S. Computer-aided multivariate analysis. 4. Chapman Hall/CRC: New York, NY; 2004. [Google Scholar]
- 28.Ajzen I. From intentions to actions: a theory of planned behavior. In: Kuhl J, Beckmann J, editors. Action Control: From Cognition to Behavior. Berlin: Springer; 1985. pp. 11–39. [Google Scholar]
- 29.Horvath KJ, Oakes JM, Rosser BR. Sexual negotiation and HIV serodisclosure among men who have sex with men with their online and offline partners. J Urban Health. 2008;85(5):744–758. doi: 10.1007/s11524-008-9299-2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Bull SS, Mcfarlane M, Lloyd L, et al. The process of seeking sex partners online and implications for STD/HIV prevention. AIDS Care. 2004;16:1012–1020. doi: 10.1080/09540120412331292426. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]