Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Sexual Fields

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Handbook of the Sociology of Sexualities

Part of the book series: Handbooks of Sociology and Social Research ((HSSR))

Abstract

In recent years, sociologists of sexuality have begun to conceive of sexual social life as a particular kind of social life in its own right. Drawing from Pierre Bourdieu’s field theory, these scholars define sexual social life as comprised of multiple sexual fields, each with their own particular sociodemographic composition and internally constituted status order. In this work, the central insight highlights how sexual fields shape desire and desirability in a manner irreducible to individual desires alone. In the present chapter, I outline the sexual fields approach, beginning with a discussion of its roots in field theory and an enumeration of its core conceptual elements. I then outline three ways in which the sexual field may shape desire and desirability, including: (1) the popularity tournament; (2) socialization processes; and finally (3) aggregation and intensification processes. Finally, I review some of the most important sexual fields scholarship and conclude with a discussion of the future of sexual fields research.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 69.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 89.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    For a contrasting formulation, see Hakim’s notion of “erotic capital” (2011). For a refutation of Hakim’s formulation, see Green (2013).

  2. 2.

    For more on this point, see Green’s (2014) discussion of sexual fields with multiple structures of desire.

References

  • Adams, M. L. (1999). The trouble with normal. Postwar youth and the making of heterosexuality. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Adam, B. D., & Green, A. I. (2014). Circuits and the social organization of sexual fields. In A. I. Green (Ed.), Sexual fields: Toward a sociology of collective sexual life (pp. 123–142). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Almagueur, T. (1993). Chicano men: A cartography of homosexual men and behavior. In H. Abelove, M. Aina Barale, & D. Halperin (Eds.), The lesbian and gay studies reader (pp. 255–273). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Archer, M. (1995). Realist social theory: The morphogenetic approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Armstrong, E. (2010). Sluts. Paper presented at “bringing Bourdieu to sexual life.” Toronto: University of Toronto.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arnett, J. J. (2000). Emerging adulthood: A theory of development from the late teens through the twenties. American Psychologist, 55, 469–480.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bailey, B. (1998). From front porch to back seat. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernstein, E. (2007). Temporarily yours. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a theory of practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, P. (1990). The logic of practice. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, P. (2001). Masculine domination (trans: Nice, R.). Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, P., & Wacquant, L. (1992). Invitation to a reflexive sociology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brock, D. (1998). Making work, making trouble: Prostitution as a social problem. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buss, D. M., Shackelford, T. K., Kirkpatrick, L. A., & Larsen, R. J. (1991). A half century of mate preferences: The cultural evolution of values. Journal of Marriage and Family, 63, 491–503.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • D’Emilio, J. (1983). Sexual politics, sexual communities: The making of a homosexual minority in the United States, 1940–1970. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, T. (1998). Against the queer turn. Sexualities, 1, 471–484.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Epstein, S. (1996). A queer encounter: Sociology and the study of sexuality. In S. Seirdman (Ed.), Queer theory, sociology (pp. 145–167). Cambridge: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farrer, J. (2011). Global nightscapes in Shanghai as ethnosexual contact zones. The Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 37, 747–764.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farrer, J., & Dale, S. (2014). Sexless in Shanghai: Gendered mobility strategies in a transnational sexual field. In A. I. Green (Ed.), Sexual fields: Toward a sociology of collective sexual life (pp. 143–170). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, C. (1975). Toward a subcultural theory of urbanism. American Journal of Sociology, 80, 1319–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fitzgerald, F. (1986). Cities on a hill. New York: Simon and Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foucault, M. (1980). The history of sexuality (Vol. I). New York: Vintage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fox, N. J., & Alldred, P. (2013). The sexuality-assemblage: Desire, affect, anti-humanism. The Sociological Review, 61, 769–789.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gagnon, J., & Simon, W. (1974). Sexual conduct. The social sources of human sexuality. New York: Aldine.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gamson, J. (2000). Sexualities, queer theory, and qualitative research. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 347–365). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghaziani, A. (2014). There goes the gayborhood? Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • George, M. (2014). The state, society and meta-sexual field. Paper in progress.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giddens, A. (1981). A contemporary critique of historical materialism: Power, property and the state. London: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giddens, A. (1992). The transformation of intimacy: sexuality, love and eroticism in modern societies. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, A. I. (2007). Queer theory & sociology: Locating the subject and the self in sexuality studies. Sociological Theory, 25, 26–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Green, A. I. (2008a). Erotic habitus: Toward a sociology of desire. Theory and Society, 37, 597–626.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Green, A. I. (2008b). The social organization of desire: The sexual fields approach. Sociological Theory, 26, 25–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Green, A. I. (2011). Playing the (sexual) field: The interactional basis of sexual stratification. Social Psychology Quarterly, 74, 244–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Green, A. I. (2013). Erotic capital and the power of desirability: Why “Honey Money” is a bad collective strategy for remedying gender inequality. Sexualities, 16, 137–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Green, A. I. (2014). Sexual fields: Toward a sociology of collective sexual life. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg, D. (1988). The construction of homosexuality. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hakim, C. (2011). Honey money: The power of erotic capital. London: Allen Lane.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hennen, P. (2008). Faeries, bears, and leathermen: Gay men in community queering the masculine. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hennen, P. (2014). Sexual field theory: Some theoretical questions and empirical considerations. In A. I. Green (Ed.), Sexual fields: Toward a sociology of collective sexual life (pp. 71–100). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herdt, G. (1996). Third sex: Third gender. New York: Zone Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Humphreys, L. (1975). Tearoom trade: Impersonal sex in public places. Chicago: Aldine.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, E. L., & Davis, M. D. (1993). Boots of leather, slippers of gold: The history of a lesbian community. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kimmel, M. (2008). Guyland: The perilous world where boys become men. New York: Harper Collins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levine, M. (1998). Gay macho. New York: New York University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lizardo, O. (2004). The cognitive origins of Bourdieu’s habitus. Journal for the Theory Of Social Behavior, 34, 2–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, J. L. (2003). What is field theory? American Journal of Sociology, 109, 1–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, J. L. (2005). Is power sexy? American Journal of Sociology, 111, 408–446.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, J. L. (2011). The explanation of social action. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, J. L., & George, M. (2006). Theories of sexual stratification: Toward an analytics of the sexual field and a theory of sexual capital. Sociological Theory, 24, 107–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mears, A. (2011). Pricing beauty: The making of a fashion model. Los Angeles: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newton, E. (1972). Mother camp: A history of female impersonation in America. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paul, J. P., Ayala, G., & Choi, K. (2009). Internet sex ads for partner selection criteria: the potency of race/ethnicity online. Journal of Sex Research, 46, 1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prieur, A. (1998). Mema’s house, mexico city: On transvestites, queens and machos. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rupp, L. (2009). Sapphistries: A global history of love between women. New York: New York University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rupp, L., & Taylor, V. (2008). Drag queens at the 801 cabaret. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schatzki, T. R., Knorr Cetina, K., & Von Savigny, E. (2001). The practice turn in contemporary theory. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schilt, K., & Windsor, E. (2014). Negotiating sexuality through gender: The sexual habitus of transgender men. The Journal of Homosexualities, 61(5), 732–748

    Google Scholar 

  • Seidman, S. (1996). Queer theory/sociology. London: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stein, A. (1997). Sex and sensibility: Stories of a lesbian generation. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stein, A., & Plummer, K. (1996). I can’t even think straight. In S. Seidman (Ed.), Queer theory/sociology (pp. 129–144). London: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tewksbury, R. (2002). Bathhouse intercourse: Structural and behavioral aspects of an erotic oasis. Deviant Behavior, 23, 75–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Valocchi, S. (2005). Not yet queer enough: The lessons of queer theory for the sociology of gender and sexuality. Gender and Society, 19, 750–770.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waller, W. (1937). The rating and dating complex. American Sociological Review, 2, 727–734.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weinberg, M. S., & Williams, C. J. (1975). Gay baths and the social organization of impersonal sex. Social Problem, 23, 124–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weinberg, M. S., & Williams, C. J. (2010). Men sexually interested in transwomen (MSTW): Gendered embodiment and the construction of sexual desire. Journal of Sex Research, 47, 374–383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weinberg, M. S., & Williams, C. J. (2013). Sexual field, erotic habitus, and embodiment at a transgender bar. In A. I. Green (Ed.), Sexual fields: Toward a sociology of collective sexual life (pp. 57–71). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weiss, M. (2012). Techniques of pleasure: BDSM and the circuits of sexuality. Durham: Duke University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Westhaver, R. (2005). “Coming Out of Your Skin:” Circuit parties, pleasure and the subject. Sexualities, 8, 347–374.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Sociology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

    Adam Isaiah Green

Authors
  1. Adam Isaiah Green
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Adam Isaiah Green .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Sociology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, USA

    John DeLamater

  2. Department of Sociology, Ithaca College, Ithaca, New York, USA

    Rebecca F. Plante

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Green, A. (2015). Sexual Fields. In: DeLamater, J., Plante, R. (eds) Handbook of the Sociology of Sexualities. Handbooks of Sociology and Social Research. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17341-2_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation