Face processing-related ability might be helpful for individuals to determine their preferred facial features if one could not detect the tiny differences between masculinized and feminized faces, on the other hand, this process would be difficult. There were only minor differences between masculinized and feminized faces. The majority of previous studies manipulated the degree of facial masculinization and feminization based on the same original face ( Rowland and Perrett, 1995 Penton-Voak et al., 1999). Mental rotation ability has been found to be highly related to face processing (e.g., Lewis, 2001 Stevenage and Osborne, 2006). Therefore, mental rotation ability is a masculine cognitive capacity and may be related to facial masculinity preference in gay men. In general, men significantly outperform women on tests of mental rotation ability (e.g., Voyer et al., 1995 Peters et al., 2007). Mental rotation ability has been found to be related to masculine traits, such as systemizing ( Cook and Saucier, 2010 Zheng and Zheng, 2017). It is possible that gay men’s masculinity in the cognitive domain would be related to facial masculinity preference, based on the theory of homogamy. Overall, previous studies indicated that gay men’s self-perceived masculinity and masculinity norms were related to masculinity preference in partner choice. Moreover, homogamy in masculinity-femininity is positively linked to relationship quality in gay male couples ( Bártová et al., 2017).
Gay men with positive attitudes toward masculine gay men preferred masculine male faces, voices, bodies, and personality traits ( Zheng and Zheng, 2016). Gay men prefer masculine men, and preference for masculinity may be related to the participants’ own levels of masculinity ( Bailey et al., 1997). Gay men prefer potential partners who are similar to themselves in personality ( Štěrbová et al., 2017), height ( Valentova et al., 2014, 2016), and beardedness ( Valentova et al., 2017). Previous empirical evidence indicates homogamy in partner preference in gay men. There are also extensive individual differences in facial masculinity preference in gay and bisexual men for some variables, including sex role identity (i.e., tops, versatiles, and bottoms Zheng et al., 2013), relationship status ( Zheng, 2019), sexism ( Zheng and Zheng, 2015), and pathogen disgust ( Zheng et al., 2016). However, some studies found no overriding preference among homosexual males for either masculine or feminine facial features ( Valentová et al., 2013 Welling et al., 2013). In general, gay and bisexual men prefer masculinized faces over feminized faces ( Glassenberg et al., 2010 Zheng et al., 2013 Zheng and Zheng, 2015). Various factors contribute to individual differences in male facial masculinity preference in women, including relationship status ( Sacco et al., 2012), self-reported attractiveness ( Little and Mannion, 2006), sexual desire ( Jones et al., 2011), sociosexuality ( Glassenberg et al., 2010 Stower et al., 2019), and menstrual cycle ( Penton-Voak et al., 1999 Johnston et al., 2001). Although Levine explicitly rejects pathologizing the gay men afflicted with HIV, his work develops a scathing, feminist-inspired critique of masculinity, whether practiced by gay men or straight men.Masculine male facial characteristics (e.g., a pronounced brow and large jaw) are positively related to the circulating testosterone levels ( Roney et al., 2006) and they may be regarded as a cue to good health ( Gangestad and Simpson, 2000 Rhodes et al., 2003 Thornhill and Gangestad, 2006). Later chapters, based on Levine's pathbreaking empirical research, explore some of the epidemiological and social consequences of the AIDS epidemic on this particular substratum of the gay community.
Levine was a participant in as well as an observer of gay culture in the 1970s, and this perspective allowed him to capture the true flavor of what it was like to be a gay man before AIDS. Levine, a pioneer of the sociological study of homosexuality, was among the first social scientists to map the emergence of a gay community and this new style of gay masculinity. Gay Macho presents the ethnography of this homosexual clone. The gay "clone," a muscle-bound, sexually free, hard-living Marlboro man, appeared in the gay enclaves of major cities, changing forever the face of gay male culture. The 1970s saw a radical shift in gay male culture, as a male homosexuality emerged that embraced a more traditional masculine ethos. Before gay liberation, gay men were usually perceived as failed men - "inverts," men trapped in women's bodies.