Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Handkerchief code

The handkerchief code, also known as the hanky code or flagging, is a discreet signaling system developed within male and subcultures, wherein individuals wear colored bandanas or handkerchiefs tucked into the back pocket of their trousers to indicate specific sexual preferences, fetish interests, and preferred roles such as active (, left pocket) or passive (, right pocket). Emerging primarily in the amid urban communities in the United States—particularly San Francisco's Castro district and leather bars—it facilitated communication for casual sexual encounters and kink exploration during an era of widespread and against . Common colors include black for heavy , red for , for , and yellow for , with variations reflecting regional or community-specific adaptations over time. The code's cultural significance lies in its role as a pre-digital vernacular for negotiating and desire in high-risk environments, influencing visual semiotics and persisting in niche fetish scenes despite the rise of platforms.

History

Origins and Early Development

The origins of the handkerchief code remain disputed, with a persistent tracing bandana-wearing customs to mid-19th-century amid the era (1848–1855). In this narrative, an imbalance of male migrants due to the rush for gold created a scarcity of female dance partners at social gatherings, prompting men to pair with each other for square dances or similar events; a bandana or handkerchief in the left back pocket reportedly signaled the "lead" dancer, while the right indicated the "follow." This custom, carried over from earlier traditions, emphasized practical role assignment in mixed-sex-starved settings rather than explicit sexual intent, and contemporary historians note the absence of verifiable evidence connecting it directly to the later erotic signaling system. The modern handkerchief code crystallized in the early within urban gay male and subcultures, particularly in and , as a non-verbal tool for conveying sexual roles and interests under the shadow of anti-sodomy statutes and routine harassment. Participants in these scenes—often navigating bathhouses, bars, and street —adopted colored bandanas or handkerchiefs tucked into rear pockets to discreetly broadcast preferences, minimizing risks of where verbal propositions could invite arrest or violence. This adaptation repurposed mundane accessories for covert utility, starting with niche signals like red for practitioners, amid broader efforts by communities to evade in pre-decriminalization America. Documented references to the code's formalized use surface around 1971 in San Francisco's leather retail outlets, such as The , which began stocking bandanas and circulating rudimentary decoding lists to customers in the community. In , parallel developments in leather bars integrated the practice into the 1970s scene, as depicted in cultural artifacts like the 1980 film , though without a centralized authority; the system spread via word-of-mouth and ephemeral guides in gay publications, reflecting organic evolution rather than deliberate invention.

Expansion in the 1970s and 1980s

The handkerchief code expanded rapidly in the 1970s through word-of-mouth dissemination in 's district and leather bars, where gay men used colored bandanas in back pockets to signal specific sexual preferences and roles non-verbally. This growth was facilitated by the post-Stonewall (1969) gay liberation movement, which encouraged open expression in urban gay enclaves, alongside the sexual revolution's emphasis on casual encounters, though persisted in many U.S. states until the 1980s and beyond, heightening the need for discreet signaling to avoid harassment or arrest. In 1972, Alan Selby and partners at Leather 'n' Things in adapted surplus bandanas into a color-coded system, providing an early commercial impetus for its adoption among leather enthusiasts seeking fetish-compatible partners. Photographer Hal Fischer's Gay Semiotics (1977) offers empirical documentation of the code's prevalence in the , featuring staged portraits of men displaying handkerchiefs—such as red for —to denote interests and top/bottom positions, reflecting its integration into everyday attire like and shirts. The system's utility lay in enabling efficient mate selection amid pre-AIDS patterns, where gay men in bathhouses and bars averaged dozens to hundreds of partners annually, as later substantiated by epidemiological surveys, without relying on risky verbal initiations. By the early , guides like Bob Damron's (1980 edition) listed standard meanings, evidencing national spread beyond to other U.S. cities and via traveling leathermen and publications. Larry Townsend's The Leatherman's Handbook II (1983) further standardized the code by compiling a table of colors—black for S&M, for watersports—primarily for male BDSM practitioners, confirming its entrenchment in subcultural norms without significant uptake by lesbians or other groups during this era. Ethnographic observations from the period, including work and bar culture accounts, indicate near-universal recognition among in scenes for facilitating encounters, underscoring the code's causal in navigating high-density social-sexual environments where mutual was paramount.

Decline and Adaptation Post-1990s

The handkerchief code experienced a marked decline starting in the mid-, as the epidemic prompted gay men to curtail and adopt safer sex practices, reducing the demand for rapid, non-verbal signaling in high-risk environments like bathhouses and public spaces. This epidemiological shift restricted casual encounters that had sustained the code's utility, with culture adapting to prioritize discussions over subtle cues. By the late , the practice had faded significantly alongside diminished , though it survived in lower-risk subcultural niches. Adaptations emerged to align the code with crisis-era realities, including the early 1990s introduction of black-and-white checkered handkerchiefs to denote safer sex commitments and raise awareness. In the late , BDSM communities repurposed the system through expanded fetish accessories—such as colored suspenders, shoelaces, and leather gear—extending flagging beyond traditional bandanas while maintaining its core logic in organized events. The 2009 launch of , the first major geolocation-based app for gay men, accelerated obsolescence by permitting explicit profile-based preference disclosure, eliminating the need for physical codes in most urban and digital-mediated interactions. By the 2020s, such platforms had rendered the code extraneous for the majority, with preferences conveyed via text, emojis, or filters rather than attire. Limited persistence endures in 2020s and scenes, where the code aids visual self-identification and consensual initiations at dedicated events, evoking communal among practitioners. However, its adoption remains confined to these specialized contexts, with no widespread empirical indicators of revival; verbal negotiations and digital tools predominate even there, underscoring the code's transition to symbolic relic.

Symbolism and Conventions

Color-Based Meanings

The handkerchief code employs specific colors to denote particular sexual fetishes or practices, with empirical associations derived from gay leather and community publications in the 1970s and 1980s. These meanings were not rigidly standardized, exhibiting regional and source-specific inconsistencies that highlight the code's organic, non-hierarchical development among participants rather than top-down imposition. For instance, core colors like black for (S&M) and red for appear consistently across guides, but nuances such as shade variations—dark blue for receptive versus light blue for —emerged to refine preferences without universal adoption. A representative list from Larry Townsend's The Leatherman's Handbook II (1983 second edition), a key reference in , illustrates these associations, where the color identifies the interest and the pocket side (left for /active role, right for /passive role) specifies the desired position.
ColorMeaning
BlackS&M
Gray
Dark Blue
Light Blue
Brown
Kelly GreenHustler/
OrangeAnything, anywhere, anytime
PurplePiercing
Red
Light Pink/anal toys
White
YellowWatersports
Community sources like the Motorcycle Club's documentation affirm overlap in these primary colors while noting expansions (e.g., adding patterns like black/white checks for practices by the mid-1980s), underscoring that lists served practical signaling in bars and events rather than exhaustive codification. Inconsistencies, such as occasionally denoting uniforms instead of in some urban U.S. scenes, arose from local adaptations, with no single authority enforcing uniformity.

Pocket Position Conventions

The handkerchief code employs a pocket placement system to convey the wearer's preferred sexual , with the left back pocket indicating a dominant or active ("top" or "giver") position and the right back pocket signaling a submissive or passive ("bottom" or "receiver") position. This left-right polarity emerged as a standardized within the male leather and BDSM subcultures of the mid-20th century, reflecting anatomical and behavioral asymmetries in sexual dynamics where one partner assumes the penetrative or controlling function and the other the receptive or yielding one. The design prioritizes rapid, low-ambiguity communication in environments such as dimly lit bars or dense crowds, where verbal negotiation could invite scrutiny or delay in high-stakes, anonymous encounters; a mere glance at the suffices for mutual role assessment, thereby minimizing rejection or mismatched advances. This efficiency stems from the code's alignment with observable patterns in male sexual behavior, favoring clear delineation over fluidity to facilitate prompt pairing based on complementary preferences. Placement in both pockets, denoting versatility or a willingness to switch roles, occurs infrequently, as the historically emphasized rigid role specialization among adherents to ensure reliable signaling. Deviations from this binary norm were marginal, underscoring the system's foundation in discrete, role-specific mate selection rather than egalitarian interchangeability.

Practices and Usage

Application in Social and Sexual Contexts

The found practical application in gay male venues, including bars, bathhouses, and public grounds such as parks, where it functioned as a discreet non-verbal signaling system for initiating sexual encounters. By displaying a colored in a rear pocket, participants could convey preferences and roles to potential partners across a room or in dim lighting, bypassing the need for immediate verbal disclosure that might attract unwanted attention or reveal one's in hostile environments. This mechanism streamlined the process of identifying compatible individuals, particularly in the pre-digital era when anonymity was paramount for safety amid and societal stigma. Within rituals—informal protocols for seeking —the code integrated as an efficient precursor to physical approach, allowing for rapid assessment of mutual interest before committing to interaction. Historical documentation from the and describes its utility in high-density settings like leather bars and baths, where visual cues expedited pairings and conserved time in pursuit of casual encounters. This deployment reflected a pragmatic to the constraints of subcultures, enabling encounters with reduced exposure to rejection or . Despite its efficiencies, the code's application was hampered by interpretive inaccuracies, with frequent misreads of colors or placements leading to obligatory verbal clarifications. Accounts from participants note common confusions over dominant versus passive indicators, underscoring the system's reliance on shared knowledge that not all users possessed uniformly. Such miscommunications often transformed initial signals into negotiated dialogues, highlighting the code's role as a starting point rather than a definitive communicator in real-world sexual negotiations.

Variations Across Subcultures

In and subcultures, the handkerchief code prioritizes colors denoting pain, restraint, and dominance, such as black for S&M and red for , aligning with structured protocols observed in events like San Francisco's leather bars during the . These interpretations diverge from general male usage, which more commonly flags vanilla acts like dark blue for anal intercourse or for , as documented in urban guides from and pre-1980s. Adoption beyond gay and bisexual men remains marginal; lesbian communities have sporadically adapted flagging for or signaling since the 1970s, but without consistent color mappings or prevalence matching male usage, per archival accounts of bar culture. participation shows even sparser evidence in records spanning leather scenes to 2020s queer guides, often subsumed under broader LGBTQ+ references without distinct variants. Regional adaptations lack global uniformity, with fetish lists from the 1980s onward adding or emphasizing for watersports alongside core colors, reflecting localized norms distinct from U.S. baselines. variants, influenced by its dominant community, integrate more BDSM-specific shades like gray for , whereas iterations from the same era stress versatile urban preferences without such depth.

Cultural and Social Impact

Representation in Media and Art

The 1980 film , directed by , includes a pivotal scene in which Al Pacino's character, an undercover detective, is schooled on the handkerchief code by a leather shop salesman who details specific meanings, such as a light blue handkerchief in the left pocket signaling a preference for giving and the right pocket indicating receiving. This depiction served to illustrate the code's role in navigating anonymous encounters within New York's 1970s bars, though the film's broader portrayal of the as inherently violent and ritualistic amplified associations with danger over everyday signaling, contributing to contemporary critiques that it distorted the code's practical, varied applications for dramatic effect. Erotic illustrations by , active from the 1940s through the 1980s, captured the hyper-masculine leather and uniform aesthetics that underpinned many handkerchief code conventions, such as black for S&M or navy for police fetishism, without explicitly depicting pocketed handkerchiefs but evoking the subcultural dynamics the code discreetly encoded. These works, distributed via underground publications, visually reinforced the code's symbolic territory among enthusiasts, influencing later art that retroactively layered hanky code interpretations onto such imagery for thematic resonance. In 1990s queer zines and print media tied to circles, the appeared in lists and glossaries that documented its , often framing it as a fading analog ritual amid rising digital , with reinterpretations emphasizing gear like harnesses over literal bandanas to evoke its spirit. Literary nods in era-specific publications similarly referenced the to evoke pre-internet , though these accounts tended to universalize its across male spaces, overlooking regional and subcultural variations evidenced in archival guides. By the 2020s, short-form queer media on platforms like revived explanatory content, such as a April 2025 video by @yesterqueers outlining the code's historical color meanings, which amassed 21,300 likes and 191 comments, signaling niche educational appeal among digitally native audiences. Similarly, a October 2024 Grindr-affiliated clip detailing pocket signaling garnered 8,689 likes, yet aggregate viewership metrics—typically in the low thousands per video—underscore limited mainstream traction, with portrayals often simplifying the code's contextual fluidity into meme-ready infographics that risk overgeneralizing its obsolescence post-AIDS era adaptations. Such representations, while democratizing subcultural knowledge, occasionally inflate the code's prescriptive uniformity, diverging from empirical accounts of its informal, negotiated use in primary sources from the onward.

Influence on LGBTQ+ Signaling Systems

The handkerchief code established a foundational precedent for non-verbal, color-based signaling of sexual preferences and roles within male subcultures, influencing subsequent systems that prioritize identification in social settings. This tradition extended into contemporary communities, where similar color-coding appears in accessories such as wristbands and armbands at events like the , maintaining the practice of flagging for fetish interests without verbal disclosure. While digital platforms have largely supplanted physical flagging by enabling explicit profile declarations of , , or preferences—reducing reliance on ambiguous cues—the code's emphasis on predefined role binaries persists in app-based dynamics. Sociological analyses indicate that these roles, popularized through early signaling systems like the handkerchief code, reinforce associations between and or dominance, and bottoming with submissiveness, shaping partner selection and negotiations into the 2020s. Empirical studies on gay men's sexual positioning reveal persistent imbalances and cultural pressures tied to these binaries, with surveys documenting higher self-identification as bottoms among younger men, potentially echoing the code's role in normalizing rigid categorizations over fluid preferences. This legacy underscores a causal continuity from analog codes to modern disclosures, where initial non-verbal conventions evolved into overt digital labels but retained structural influences on interpersonal expectations.

Criticisms and Limitations

Health Risks and Miscommunication Issues

The handkerchief code facilitated anonymous sexual encounters in subcultures during the and early by allowing quick, non-verbal identification of compatible preferences, often bypassing explicit discussions of protection or health status in an era before routine testing or norms. This signaling system contributed to high volumes of unprotected within dense networks of partners, correlating with the explosive transmission observed in MSM communities, where AIDS cases increased rapidly throughout the , peaking with an estimated 150,000 new infections annually by mid-decade and MSM comprising 41% of cumulative cases through 2000. Misinterpretation of colors, positions, or wearer posed risks of encounters, as the code's visual could foster assumptions of mutual without verbal clarification, potentially escalating to coercive situations in high-stakes environments. Its semi-ambiguous, non-verbal nature amplified challenges, where reliance on cues alone might overlook hesitations or boundaries. Widespread adoption of safer sex practices following awareness led to a decline in the code's use by the mid-1980s, paralleling reduced and thereby mitigating associated transmission risks. However, its persistence in contemporary and events underscores the ongoing need for explicit verbal to prevent miscommunications, as visual signaling alone remains prone to error in diverse or less familiar groups.

Sociological and Ethical Critiques

The handkerchief code promotes a binary framework of sexual roles, such as top and bottom, which critics argue entrenches stereotypes that contradict observed fluidity in male same-sex practices. Empirical surveys reveal that versatility—alternating between insertive and receptive positions—is common, with 56% of gay men identifying as versatile rather than strictly one role or the other. This signaling system, by prioritizing fixed categories, can foster intra-community expectations that pressure individuals toward conformity, potentially marginalizing those whose preferences evolve or defy labels, as evidenced by studies documenting role inconsistencies even among self-identified tops or bottoms. Ethically, the code's fetish-based categorization raises concerns of , treating partners as interchangeable based on signaled kinks or positions rather than holistic . This reductionist approach may prioritize transactional encounters over mutual exploration, eroding opportunities for relational depth in an era predating widespread digital communication. From a causal standpoint, such preemptive labeling incentivizes superficial assessments, akin to commodifying into predefined scripts, which undermines informed by nuanced . While advocates highlight its utility for discreet signaling in high-risk social settings like leather bars, where verbal disclosure carried dangers, evidence links rigid role adherence to relational tensions. For instance, partnered with strong interests in casual, role-scripted report lower satisfaction, suggesting that code-like presumptions exacerbate mismatches absent direct communication. Broader data on gay community stressors, including sex-focused norms, correlate with dissatisfaction, implying that fetish-signaling systems amplify these pressures rather than mitigate them.

References

  1. [1]
    Hanky Code Introduction - ONYX NY NORTHEAST
    The hanky code is thought to have originated with gold rush settlers in San Francisco in the mid-19th century. A shortage of female dance partners meant men ...
  2. [2]
    Hanky Panky: An Abridged History of the Hanky Code
    Apr 23, 2019 · The hanky code was a covert sartorial code used predominately by queer men in the 1970s and into the 1980s.
  3. [3]
    hanky panky: the history and cultural impact of the hanky code
    The hanky code quickly inspired imagery which became a visual representation of queer masculinity, responded to cultural shifts in the queer zeitgeist, and ...
  4. [4]
    Hanky Code - Eagle LA
    SIGNAL TO OTHERS…WEAR AND SEEK OUT YOUR COLORS! ; Black, Heavy S&M Top ; Grey, Bondage Top ; Hunter Green, Daddy ; Dark Red, 2-handed Fister ...
  5. [5]
    How To Flag - The Hanky Code Explained - Agnes & Edie
    Nov 1, 2020 · Black - S&M · Grey - Bondage · Orange - Anything goes · Yellow - Watersports · Red - Fisting · Purple - Piercing · Green - Hustling/Sex work · Brown - ...
  6. [6]
    The Handkerchief Code, According to 'Bob Damron's Address Book ...
    Apr 25, 2019 · The handkerchief code uses colored bandanas to indicate sexual fetishes, sex type, and top/bottom status. Bob Damron's book listed the code, ...
  7. [7]
    Origins of the hanky code - San Francisco - SF Gay History
    particularly in the leather scene — began to wear colorful handkerchiefs to signal their sexual interests ...<|separator|>
  8. [8]
    The many histories of flagging - Feeld
    Oct 25, 2023 · Others say that the code started in San Francisco in 1972 when Alan Selby, co-owner of S&M shop Leather 'n' Things, accidentally received a ...Missing: references | Show results with:references
  9. [9]
    What Is The Hanky Code? The History Behind Gay Flagging - Them.us
    Feb 28, 2023 · The hanky code's exact origins are difficult to pin down. According to Nikita Shepard, a Columbia University Ph.D. candidate studying queer ...
  10. [10]
  11. [11]
    The hanky code's history and meaning in LGBTQ+ culture - GayCities
    The hanky code, also called the handkerchief code or flagging, is a subtle signaling system in the gay community with origins that are both practical and ...Missing: subculture | Show results with:subculture
  12. [12]
    decoding the secret language of gay 70s san francisco
    Nov 6, 2015 · Are you a fister, or fistee? In 1970s Castro district San Francisco, the answer was right on the ass – a red handkerchief in the back pocket.Missing: 1980s bars
  13. [13]
    "Gay Semiotics" Revisited
    Jun 4, 2021 · Hal Fischer speaks about his seminal 1970s-era examination of the “hanky code” used to signal sexual preferences of gay men.
  14. [14]
    The Context Behind The Hanky Code - The Everyday Magazine
    Apr 20, 2021 · Wearing a bandana, piece of fabric or a handkerchief in the back pocket of your jeans would signal specific sexual practices, kinks, someone's role.Missing: word mouth revolution<|control11|><|separator|>
  15. [15]
    Unveiling the Hidden Hanky Code in Queer Fashion | TikTok
    Aug 18, 2021 · this practice declined during the late 80s. as did anonymous sex due to the hiv/aids crisis. but still exists in some circles. and is an ...Missing: reduction | Show results with:reduction<|separator|>
  16. [16]
    10 years of Grindr: A rocky relationship - BBC
    Mar 25, 2019 · The concept was extraordinary. When Grindr launched in March 2009, the iPhone was still in its infancy. Back then, the BlackBerry was king.
  17. [17]
    Flagging Queer Desires: The Handkerchief Code - Abirpothi
    Jun 15, 2024 · With the advent of Grindr, Scruff, and other gay (social) apps ... hanky code became obsolete. At present, handkerchiefs and bandanas are ...Missing: obsolescence digital
  18. [18]
    Handkerchief Codes in BDSM - The Aftercare Lounge
    Jun 5, 2025 · The code also remains in use within leather and BDSM events, where it fosters community and provides a visible means of self-expression. In ...Missing: modern 2020s
  19. [19]
    [PDF] Hanky Code: - CMEN
    Wearing one or more color handkerchiefs on the left or right can be used to indicate preferred fetish or sexual preferences. In gay culture a man will often ...Missing: 1972 | Show results with:1972
  20. [20]
  21. [21]
    Hanky Codes - Cowboy Frank
    Worn in the right rear pocket, it indicates an interest in the passive, often "bottoming" position. Worn in the left pocket, it indicates a predilection for ...
  22. [22]
    flags - Columbia University
    The code, understood colloquially among queers as the 'hanky code', lists the different colors and patterns of bandanas in terms of the sex acts these colors ...Missing: significance | Show results with:significance
  23. [23]
    Do You Know the Hanky Code? - KGay Desert Guide Palm Springs
    May 22, 2018 · The hanky code uses colored bandanas to signal sexual preferences. Left side indicates top/dominant role, right side bottom/submissive. Colors ...Missing: earliest | Show results with:earliest
  24. [24]
    A History of Leather at Pride: 1965-1995 - Aphyr
    Sep 18, 2021 · Like mainstream gay bars, leather bars and baths were targets ... hanky code for lesbians (Califia, 1987). Society of Janus marched as ...
  25. [25]
    The History Of The Handkerchief Code - LGBTQ Language
    Jun 12, 2019 · In the '70s, the handkerchief code gained popularity among gay men who were in search of casual sex. The handkerchiefs were placed in your ...Missing: ethnographies adoption
  26. [26]
  27. [27]
    The Hanky Code of the 1970s and 80s Gay Scene - Facebook
    Jul 13, 2024 · Here is a link to a rundown of the hanky code which was so rampant back in the 70s and 80s. I always got it confused and finally just wore ...What was the hanky code used by gay men in the 1970s and 80s?The History and Usage of the Hankie Code in the LGBTQ CommunityMore results from www.facebook.com
  28. [28]
    LEATHER WISDOM: “The Original Hanky Code” - NLA-Dallas
    The code is known in the leather subcultures of the United States, Canada, and Europe, to indicate preferred sexual fetishes, what kind of sex they are seeking, ...
  29. [29]
    Queer Flagging 101: How to Use the Hanky Code to Signal the Sex ...
    Aug 28, 2018 · Some folks will tie a handkerchief around their neck to signify switching/into either receiving or giving the sexual act. It's that simple! If ...
  30. [30]
    Know Your History: Flagging, Femme Flagging, and Queer Modes of ...
    Flagging, or the use of the hanky code, originated in 1970s bar culture as a way to indicate particular sexual interests. ... Flagging is also part of an historic ...
  31. [31]
    Colour Codes: Flagging in the Queer Community | QueerEvents.ca
    Meanings traditionally parallel the traditional hanky code colors –- i.e. grey for bondage, black for S&M, light blue for oral, and so on.Missing: 1980s | Show results with:1980s<|separator|>
  32. [32]
    Fifty Shades of Gay – The Hanky Code - Ambush Magazine
    Apr 23, 2019 · The Hanky Code is an important part of gay history and worth mentioning, if for no other reason then to remind us of our tenacity in overcoming the struggles ...Missing: ethnographies 1980s
  33. [33]
    A guide to the gay hanky code and its unusual origins - Emen8
    The handkerchief or hanky code is a secret gay sex language! Find out what pink, red, and other coloured hankies meant when worn or hung from a gay man's ...
  34. [34]
    Cruising (1980) - Ruthless Reviews
    Apr 30, 2024 · According to this gentleman, a light blue hanky in the left back pocket means that a person wants a blowjob. If that same hanky is in the right ...
  35. [35]
    In Defense of Cruising - Air Mail
    Nov 9, 2024 · It also shows what must be Hollywood's first (and last?) simulated fisting and offers a partial explanation of the “hanky code,” both of which, ...Missing: handkerchief | Show results with:handkerchief
  36. [36]
  37. [37]
    27 Dos and Don'ts for Folsom Street Fair - Advocate.com
    Sep 21, 2017 · Bone up on the hanky code and talk to people who seem sexy and interesting. Folsom is a great time to try something for the first time. 22 ...
  38. [38]
    Folsom Street Fair Party Guide 2024 - Andymatic
    Jun 10, 2024 · “What's with the colors and armbands?” [photo]. When hooking was more difficult and dangerous, gay men developed the 'hanky code' where you'd ...<|separator|>
  39. [39]
    Flagging - by James Beaman - The Cornfield
    Mar 21, 2024 · There was a time, before hookup apps and video chat rooms, when gay men, who were forbidden to be open about themselves and to pursue ...Missing: evolution subculture
  40. [40]
    Gay Cruising: From Clandestine Origins to the Digital Era - Bearwww
    Oct 7, 2025 · From Grindr and Sniffies: the history of gay cruising—molly houses, hanky code, Stonewall, AIDS—and its evolution into the digital age.Missing: subculture | Show results with:subculture
  41. [41]
    “Butch Tops and Femme Bottoms”?: Sexual Roles, Sexual Decision ...
    We examine how gendered ideologies regarding sexual positioning influence sexual decision-making among YMSM, and reflect on the usefulness of a gender ...
  42. [42]
    More bottoms than tops? Mediated sexual roles and masculinity ...
    Mar 2, 2023 · This paper examines the discursive production of “there are more 0s (bottoms) than 1s (tops)” in a mediated environment, and its implications on gay ...
  43. [43]
    Gay Men's Experiences of Masculinity and Anal Intercourse
    The aim of this study was to explore how gay men's beliefs about masculinity were associated with their beliefs about the gendered nature of sexual self-labels.<|control11|><|separator|>
  44. [44]
  45. [45]
    HIV and AIDS --- United States, 1981--2000 - CDC
    The greatest impact of the epidemic is among men who have sex with men (MSM) and among racial/ethnic minorities, with increases in the number of cases among ...Missing: spikes | Show results with:spikes
  46. [46]
  47. [47]
    'Consent is a right often withheld from LGBTIQ+ people ...
    The non-verbal, semi-ambiguous communication of the hanky code. Cruising. At times, these sites pose difficulties when it comes to communicating consent. It ...Missing: misinterpretation risks
  48. [48]
    [PDF] Individual Differences in Perceptions of Gay Men's Sexual Role ...
    Jun 7, 2014 · Indeed, research has sug- gested that most men identify with the category versatile (56 %) whereas tops and bottoms generally divide the other ...
  49. [49]
    [PDF] Top, bottom, or vers? Sexual satisfaction and masculine conformity ...
    This thesis explores the relationship between sexual positional identities (top, bottom, or vers) in queer men and their sexual satisfaction and masculine ...Missing: reinforcement | Show results with:reinforcement
  50. [50]
    Gender Role Conflict, Interest in Casual Sex, and Relationship ... - NIH
    Still, for partnered gay men, a high degree of interest in casual sex may be a source of dissatisfaction with one's relationship.
  51. [51]
    Pressure From Within: Gay-Community Stress and Body ...
    Gay community stress, particularly focus on sex, social status, and competition, is significantly associated with greater body dissatisfaction among sexual ...