“HOW DO YOU DEFINE ART?”: RUPAUL’S DRAG RACE’S INFLUENCE ON

DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY AND GROUP CULTURE

______

A Thesis

Presented to

The Faculty of the Jack J. Valenti

School of Communication

University of Houston

______

In Partial Fulfillment

Of the Requirements for the Degree of

Master of Arts

______

By

Megan Brann

May 2017

“HOW DO YOU DEFINE ART?”: RUPAUL’S DRAG RACE’S INFLUENCE ON

DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY AND GROUP CULTURE

______

An Abstract of a Thesis

Presented to

The Faculty of the Jack J. Valenti

School of Communication

University of Houston

______

In Partial Fulfillment

Of the Requirements for the Degree of

Master of Arts

______

By

Megan Brann

May 2017

ABSTRACT

This thesis provides insight into how the popular program RuPaul’s Drag Race affects drag identity and drag culture. This program sparks a contentious, but also thoughtful, narrative of how those who participate in Houston drag culture identify and define group culture. At the same time, the show creates a semiotic sphere to explore group identity with diverse audiences and participants. Through a photovoice approach and semi- structured interviews with 12 drag participants, I illustrate how drag queens feel the show widened drag audiences but created generational divisions and diluted drag styles.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I am indebted to my wonderful committee members. First, I would like to thank my committee chair, Dr. Temple Northup, who always listened to my concerns with a patient smile and a nod. I would like to thank Dr. Jill Yamasaki, whose classes and teachings have forever shaped the way I read, write and learn. I would also like to thank

Dr. Xavia Karner for taking on my project after simply reading my abstract in an anxious email.

There are not enough words of gratitude for my family and friends. To my parents, thank you for instilling in me the drive to seek out answers and forge my own path. I am so grateful for the many dinners that landed in my fridge. They were the best meals I ate throughout my graduate career. To my sister, your patience with my ever- changing anxious state never went unappreciated. Thank you for making me laugh when

I needed it most. To Wes, thank you for your constant support and your many questions. I do not know what I would do without you. To my dogs, Archie, Oliver, Nala and Winnie, thank you for the emotional support and compelling me to take a step into the fresh air after a long writing session.

I would also like to thank the faculty and staff at the University of Houston’s Jack

J. Valenti School of Communication. My graduate work has been the most challenging, fulfilling and enlightening experience. I would also like to thank Dr. Shayne Lee for his sociological teachings and critiques that helped guide this paper.

And, finally, thank you to the drag community of Houston for welcoming an interested fan into your lives. You all inspire me with your creativity and boundlessness.

Thank you for coloring my world.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter I: Introduction ...... 2

Chapter II: Literature Review ...... 9

Chapter III: Methodology ...... 20

Chapter IV: Results ...... 30

Chapter V: Discussion ...... 51

Appendices ...... 63

References ...... 71

DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 1

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Participant’s demographic information ...... 26

Figure 2. Tatiana’s “glamedy queen” ...... 31

Figure 3. Athena’s “out of my comfort zone” ...... 32

Figure 4. Estella’s “challenging my audience” ...... 33

Figure 5. KiKi’s “sexy queen” ...... 35

Figure 6. Kyla’s “hipster queen” ...... 36

Figure 7. Chloe’s “petty spaghetti” ...... 37

Figure 8. Aracely’s “fishy” ...... 38

Figure 9. River’s “old world…drag” ...... 39

Figure 10. Adeciya’s “diva” ...... 44

Figure 11. Cyn’s “I love this paint” ...... 45

Figure 12. Lexus’ “I just like to wear it out” ...... 46

Figure 13. Violet’s “crowned” ...... 47 DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 2

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

The twelve drag queens on season six of RuPaul’s Drag Race (RPDR) had received their challenge: make an outfit out of leftover theme party materials, from luau to toga party themes. All contestants had worked relatively free of drama on their runway outfit, but they were shocked with one contestant’s decision. Milk, a more androgynous drag queen on the show, chose white fabric to create a flowing toga with a headdress stretching almost down to the floor. Milk also donned a beard and exposed the chest for the theme. This was not a typical decision for drag queens on the show, especially for the first challenge. But Milk’s choices worked well for the competition. The judges were impressed with the aesthetic, gumption and individual style, despite some discomfort with the facial hair. And this was only the beginning of the season.

Exploring juxtaposition on the show, drag queen Courtney Act was standing next to Milk during the judges’ deliberation. Courtney Act, whose party theme was a

Republican party, chose to wear a blue bikini. The two, one covered in white with a small beard and the other clad only in a small bikini, epitomizes the conversation encircling drag styles. Milk did not win that challenge – neither did Courtney – but the performance sparked a conversation concerning drag style and what is deemed as “drag” (RuPaul's Big

Opening Part Two, 2014).

The narrative surrounding drag style definitions is just one of many generated by the show. RPDR is a popular American reality television series on Viacom’s LogoTV where drag queens compete to become “America’s next drag superstar” (Chernoff, 2014). DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 3

The contestants have the potential to win a cash prize of $100,000 and cosmetics

(RuPaul's Big Opening Part Two, 2014).

RuPaul, the show’s host, is familiar with the spotlight. Quite possibly the most famous drag queen in American popular culture, RuPaul, or RuPaul Andre Charles, has featured his1 talents on MTV and VH1 (Schewe, 2009, p. 672). Models inspire RuPaul’s look, with a cinched waist and an iconic blonde wig (Schewe, 2009). However, critics have protested his “commercial” drag persona as a look “which presents a sanitized and desexualized queer subject for mass consumption” (Munoz, 1999, p. 99). There are, still,

RuPaul performances that did not make it to television, however, dubbed as “not-yet- ready-for-MTV” theatrics (Schewe, 2009, p. 672). RuPaul has challenged the norms of drag, gender and sexuality through performance and expression throughout his career

(Schewe, 2009). On his television show, RPDR, RuPaul has the power to choose who wins each round and the competition overall. He has the power to choose a winning style of drag queen and acts as a moderator of the standards of drag discussions.

The show is still a competition reality program. RuPaul starts each competition with the well-known phrase, “Gentlemen, start your engines, and may the best woman win” (RuPaul's Big Opening Part Two, 2014). Any given episode will provide drama, cattiness and manipulation in order to win that competition. Not all feedback has been positive. The show has been criticized for its view of transgender inclusion (Chernoff,

2014). There are elements of misogyny and discrimination. Even still, the program has been celebrated for puncturing holes in the constructions and stereotypes of gender

(Chernoff, 2014).

1 RuPaul accepts both male and female pronouns (Rogers, 2014). DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 4

A diverse set of influences has the potential to be impactful on drag identity. Drag studies opens a unique avenue into studying how social boundaries of gender identity are crossed. By studying the exploration of such boundaries, drag perspectives can enlighten gender and identity studies. To do so, I will examine the societal influences on drag queens as they transform within and outside shared mindsets to obtain a greater understanding of self. Considering the importance of mediated interactions in the

American way of life, it is vital to consider identity as part of media effects literature

(Altheide, 2000). This thesis will explore how a mediated interaction with entertainment content assists in the defining process of drag identity. This study expands on previous drag studies to include the process of constructing a drag identity within the context of

RPDR viewership. Understanding how drag identities are created can offer insight into how the show influences that construction. To do so, I interviewed 12 drag participants about their perceptions of similarities and differences between Houston drag style and culture and the style and culture portrayed on the show.

Drag Culture and Gender Studies

As feminism continues to explore and contest ideas of gender fluidity, drag culture has historically and pervasively played with concepts of gender when constructing identities. To clarify, drag queens have been defined as “gay men who dress and perform as but do not want to be women or have women’s bodies” (Taylor & Rupp,

2004, p. 115). The issue with this definition is that it contains both ambiguity and confinement. This concept not only allows gay men to explore beyond the ideas of feminine dress into performing gender-bending styles and expressions, but it also excludes the transgender community, women and straight men from participating. DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 5

There is a wide-ranging examination throughout social science literature contending the implications of drag on gender and queer theories (Schacht, 2003; Taylor

& Rupp, 2004; Wright, 2006). Garber (1992), Butler (1993a), and Halberstam (1998) analyzed drag as a vital component of the gay community. Judith Butler (1993b), one of the most cited academics in drag studies, asserted that drag is subversive in nature, while others view drag as incapable of destabilizing gender constructions (Tewksbury, 1994;

Schacht, 2000; Wright 2006).

Elaborated with drag style, the discussion illustrates how a transformation into a new identity embodies gender (Taylor & Rupp, 2004). Tewksbury (1994) and Schacht

(2000) stressed drag presents the dichotomous nature of gender representations.

Exemplifications of hyperbolized femininity only serve to further distinguish differences

(Tewksbury, 1994). In opposition, Garber (1992) and Butler’s (1993b) analysis portrayed drag as a method of constructing sexuality and gender. Therefore, “[i]t is conceivable that drag performers are those who are not always held hostage by societal perceptions of gender” (Egner & Maloney, 2016, p. 876).

While some have studied speech codes and language within the program and drag culture (Chesebro, 1981; Goldmark 2015; Simmons 2013), there is a surprising lack of literature regarding the direct influences on a drag queen’s performance persona and sense of self. Beyond the lexicon, culture comprises role models, performance art and nonverbal actions (Feilitzen & Linne, 1975; Hopkins, 2004; Taylor & Rupp, 2004;

Schewe, 2009; Berkowitz & Belgrave, 2010; Pagan, 2015). This thesis aims to understand the effect the show has on drag queen culture and the participating drag queens. DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 6

Implications of Drag Culture Studies and Media Research

Drag queens have been a cornerstone of the drag community, with venues dedicated for performances (Hillman, 2011). Drag queens actively participated in the

New York City 1969 Stonewall Rebellion, and they headlined emerging gay pride parades in the 1970s to highlight rebellion happening nationwide and around the world

(Hillman, 2011). The gay liberation movement in the 1960s occurred at a time when sexual and gender distinctions were becoming increasingly blurred: Young women were donning blue jeans, men grew their hair long, and androgynous fashion trends dominated the market (Hillman, 2011). While some celebrated the symbolic statements of drag, radical feminists ostracized drag participants, viewing their wardrobe and style as offensive to women (Hillman, 2011).

Public attention on trans sexuality, in the early 1950s, added confusion to the difference between homosexuality and transsexual identity (Hillman, 2011). Gay liberation activists went to great lengths to differentiate the transsexual movement with theirs in the eyes of the public (Hillman, 2011); drag entered at the center of this contentious debate. Representations in media characterized the novelty attribute of a male dressing in gowns (Hillman, 2011). However, in the late 1960s, the Society for Individual

Rights (SIR) would begin to distinguish types of drag to determine attendees for special occasions, almost like a dress code (Hillman, 2011). Certain groups went so far as to exclude drag queens from the gay liberation movement (Hillman, 2011).

Despite the potentially hostile environment, drag performance persisted and frequented politic advocacy events for individual rights. Hillman’s (2011) historical observation of drag queens and the gay liberation movement of the 60s and 70s DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 7 exemplifies the importance of drag presence. Their presence “also allowed gay liberationists to theorize on the relationship between gender and sexual oppression”

(Hillman, 2011, p. 171). Their presence allowed individuals to actively explore their gender and how they wanted to represent themselves. Their presence, through their quest of inclusion, allowed gender representation to become an ideological concern for individuals across the United States.

Drag queens are now represented on mainstream programming, permeating popular culture through RuPaul’s Drag Race. The show’s host RuPaul asserts that the show influences popular culture, not the other way around. In an interview with The

Guardian, RuPaul said, “It would take about 10 years for something in gay culture to actually migrate the mainstream. Because of our show, gay pop culture is pop culture in the mainstream. Everybody knows all of the terminology. It’s really interesting for us to bring a lot of the old ideas and gay culture forward to pop culture mainstream” (Rogers,

2014, para. 10). Following this notion, researchers have focused on the show’s lexicon and gendered drag performances to understand and explore drag culture.

The host channel, LogoTV, is primarily aimed at an LGBT audience (Collins,

2005). However, Viacom moved the show’s ninth season from LogoTV to sister-channel

VH1, which RuPaul attributed to an acceptance of drag into cultural mainstream (Main,

2017). As far as the show’s reach, RPDR viewership pales in comparison to larger networks like NBC or ABC, but garners the highest numbers for LogoTV. The difference is not in the total number of people watching, but rather how people are participating with the content. Viewers of this popular program have the opportunity to participate with the show while it airs, online and offline as well (Rogers, 2014). On social media sites, DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 8

LogoTV tallied a 136-percent increase in activity between the fourth and fifth season

(Rogers, 2014). The show actually surpassed ABC’s show The Bachelor’s activity on

Twitter (Rogers, 2014). This indicates that viewers are focusing on the content and interacting with a larger online community.

This analysis will highlight RPDR’s role in the broader conversation. Viewers have the opportunity to see their favorite contestants perform after a season is completed.

The contestants complete a nationwide tour after the show (RuPaul's Big Opening Part

Two, 2014). Those who became a fan of a particular drag queen or style have the opportunity observe them in real life, rather than just mediated interaction. These opportunities feed into a larger conversation encircling RuPaul’s program.

DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 9

CHAPTER II

LITERATURE REVIEW

Identity and culture are broad and complex starting points of study. My theoretical framework must have the capability to highlight complexities of self as well as enlighten potential cultural influences. To capture nuances within self and groups, symbolic interactionism (SI) and performance culture studies steer and inform this analysis. All perspectives are critical in enhancing this research. First, I will review SI origins as well as its applications to drag queen culture. Second, I will evaluate performance culture literature in its application to drag. Lastly, I will illustrate how media role models influence the LGBTQ+ community and personal identity development using media studies literature.

Symbolic interactionism

George Herbert Mead’s contribution to social sciences, as a philosopher, was his theory illustrating how individuals are a product of their social environment (Farganis,

2011). Symbolic interactionism (SI), termed by Mead’s pupil and social constructionist

Herbert Blumer, depicts a dynamic process in which a person is actively understanding and analyzing social processes to construct their identity (Farganis, 2011). Mead’s theory, and expanding critiques by Blumer, exists in contradiction to previous examinations in which a person’s actions were simplified to motivation by external forces (Farganis,

2011). Within this view, social processes supply individuals the toolkit to construct their actions. Thus, SI studies language, gestures and meanings to evaluate the human and societal experience (Blumer, 1962). DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 10

The ability to act upon one’s self, according to SI, is the key function of being human (Blumer, 1962). The capability to interpret an entity in an environment means a person is able to set it apart and attribute meaning or create an object (Blumer, 1962).

“Instead of the individual being surrounded by an environment of pre-existing objects which play upon him..., the proper picture is that he constructs his objects on the basis of his ongoing activity” (Blumer, 1962, p. 353). To expand, the meaning-making process is active as opposed to reactive (Blumer, 1962). People furnish their world collaboratively, utilizing self-defined objects, rather than constantly being bombarded with foreign objects.

To elaborate on the idea of self, the distinction within this perspective is that identity is vitally important (Blumer, 1962). Identity is simply defined as being who or what an individual is, depending on attached meanings to said person by themselves and others (Stryker, 1980). Society transforms cyclically, whereas interactions form self and self shapes society (Stryker, 2011). Thus, society continues to reshape itself endlessly in this cycle. New meanings can emerge from existing ones to answer new social issues or scenarios (Stryker, 2011).

Thus, groups require further examination. Collective identity, as Cerulo (1997) illustrated, derives from the classical sociological understandings. Karl Marx’s “class consciousness,” Emile Durkeim’s “collective conscience,” and Max Weber’s “verstehen” all indicate a group’s shared traits and behaviors (Cerulo, 1997; Farganis, 2011). Group members, in the classical perspective, spoke in a unified, singular voice. Thus, individuals assemble their character utilizing one shared mindset. This proposes an essentialist approach to a collective identity. Essentialism is just that, a single entity’s DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 11 attributes necessary to the formation and functionality of an identity (Cartwright, 1968).

SI rejects essentialism in this way. This is an important distinction for the theoretical perspective of this study. As Cerulo (1997) stated, “every collective becomes a social artifact-an entity molded, refabricated, and mobilized in accord with reigning cultural scripts and centers of power” (p. 387).

As a collective, drag performances typically contain expressions that break the norms of gender and sexuality expression (Egner & Maloney, 2016). But by viewing gender as a social construct, group culture can be better-examined utilizing drag studies

(West & Zimmerman, 1987; Egner & Maloney, 2016). Berkowitz and Belgrave (2010) utilized a similar theoretical lens for an ethnographic study on drag queens performing on

Miami Beach. A critical difference in this examination is the role of media in the development of a drag queen’s performance identity. Drag queen viewers are not reacting to the content; they are actively comprehending the behavior and defining their world around them.

There is a question of “place” or “situation” when applying an SI framework to this research. Altheide (2000) posed that a proposed situation of study is “more temporal than spatial,” and involves “a context of other experiences” (p. 5). Modern technology and communication processes have moved research from the idea of a setting, rather they are studying the formation of “me” devoid of place (Cerulo, 1997). Altheide (2000) detailed four significant implications of observing mass media in identity formation: (1) there is a mutual benefit by understanding mass media images or messages from a cultural studies perspective; (2) by understanding a message in this manner, media literacy and interpretations can improve; (3) media communities model themselves after DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 12 others that are subject to similar kinds of study; and (4) postmodern methodologies offer deeper texts for self perspectives, identities and presentations. Viewers spend a substantial amount of time interacting with content where it becomes a normalized relational form (Altheide, 2000). Altheide’s (2000) analysis demonstrated that individuals maintain interactions with content and that those interactions provide insight into meaning-making processes. With the object being RPDR content, we can deduce that the show influences how an individual interprets drag queen norms and behavior. RPDR allows drag queens a mediated interaction with behaviors and traits of some of the very best drag queens in the United States. In this case, each drag queen’s viewpoint is seen individually as opposed to grouping all drag queens together.

For example, Poe (2012) utilized a SI framework in order to analyze how direct- to-consumer advertising influenced their audience’s interpreted meaning of the product.

Poe’s (2012) examination relied on a mediated interaction with content and constructed meaning. The qualitative data shows that their participant’s questioned the meanings of health at their age in conjunction with the direct-to-consumer advertising. The women they interviewed challenged the definitions and standards derived from “culture” (Poe,

2012).

Swidler (1986) argued that individuals use culture as a “tool-kit”, pulling out language, behaviors and strategies to accomplish a goal. In one of the most widely referred to articles, Swidler’s (1986) Culture in Action: Symbols and Strategies detailed three steps of an analysis of culture. First, there must be an image of the cultural “tool- kit” with the inclusion of “symbols, stories, rituals, and worldviews” (Swidler, 1986, p.

273). Second, an analysis consists of observations of how individuals organize their DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 13 actions in time (Swidler, 1986). Third, culture is observed as tools for constructing strategic and reflexive strategies. Swidler (1986) asserted that “strategy” is used to convey that individuals organize many actions utilizing social networks, perhaps, to reach life’s goals.

SI’s Dramaturgy and Drag Identity

Performing for a crowd is a central focus of drag culture and is certainly the forefront of RPDR. Whether a contestant is lip-syncing “for her life” or completing a wardrobe challenge, performing for the judges or a crowd is a vital part. Hopkins (2004) examined the process of becoming a drag queen through performance. “While there are some costs to doing drag (e.g., possible rejection by friends/family, becoming more vulnerable to discrimination, violence, and harassment) the actual contextual experience of doing female impersonation is often quite positive, powerful, and normal” (Hopkins,

2004, p. 137).

In Goffman’s Presentation of Everyday Self, he described a theory called

“dramaturgy” (Goffman, 1959). The theory, an extension of the SI framework, illustrates that self is not a fixed being, however, it is a dramatic portrayal to fill a role and scenario

(Goffman, 1959). Therefore, according to Goffman (1959), self is based on the interaction between the actor and the audience. Depending on the context, the actor may tweak behavior, demeanor, style and language to fill a desired role. The adaptation process is called “impression management” (Goffman, 1959). An individual wanting to present their best self will adapt their being to fill a projected character.

Goffman (1959) utilized a metaphor of performance in his explanations of the presentation of self. Individuals work on their ‘character’ in what Goffman (1959) called DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 14 the “backstage”. Hidden from the audience, individuals prepare for their performance in a particular setting. The action of performing occurs on the “frontstage” (Goffman, 1959).

On the frontstage, the performer and the audience cooperate in determining the performance quality. Backstage work demonstrates the time and effort that the presentation of self requires in order to create the desired effect (Goffman, 1959).

Goffman’s (1959) metaphor also extends to the use of props, like clothing style. All of the components that make up an image to be showcased create Goffman’s ‘everyday self’, and all participate in the performance.

In an applied concept, Rubenstein (1995) observed the importance of clothing in

American culture as social costumes. She connected styles to socioeconomic status, perception of youth and political power (Rubenstein, 1995). They provide meaning to not only the wearer, but also the audience. Clothing can also be representative of an individual’s desires and achievements (Rubenstein, 1995). Therefore, the props are not flippantly placed in a performance; they are embroidered into the fabric of imagery.

Despite his intended metaphorical analysis, Goffman’s (1959) work provides insight into the art of performance and performance identity. A drag queen has a desired identity to portray to their audience; from Goffman’s (1959) perspective, they adapt to present themselves in that manner. The setting is critical in observing the interactions of self and audience (Goffman, 1959). While drag queens perform in theaters, clubs and other venues, they may not wear drag in other settings in order to project a different self.

Identity is not singular. Rather, the self comprises multiple identities (Goffman, 1959).

The self does not simply behave, but consciously fills a role. The character is as real as the performance is to an audience. In order to fill one’s own needs, the ability to perform DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 15 multiple identities “achieves individual or collective objectives” (Farganis, 2011, p. 351).

The self transforms into one’s own means to an end.

Goffman’s perspective also allows for individual creativity and resilience

(Farganis, 2011). People provide themselves with an array of choices for various social stages. Playing character roles and the interaction processes in social life clarify

Goffman’s difference. For example, if an individual is not receiving the expected reception from an audience, there might be frustration, shame and embarrassment concerning behavior and self (Pagan, 2015). In order to avoid potential embarrassment, a group may define behavioral needs or attributes to maintain a positive self-image (Pagan,

2015). The defining process is based on the interactive cooperation of that group

(Goffman, 1959).

The audience is also active in these scenarios. If the audience is pleased with the performance, they will give cues to the performer that the character is accurately portrayed (Goffman, 1959). These are nonverbal cues or image critiques that the performer reflects on. The performer has the independence and choice to adapt and deviate from norms expressed by the audience. In the context of this study, the individual drag queen will present their own style while still maintaining a status quo. Thus, their presentation of self reflects their own needs, their audience as well as what the setting requires.

Like Taylor and Rupp’s (2004) definition of a drag queen, RuPaul explained his own definition of drag:

“Well, drag is really making fun of identity. We are shape shifters. We’re like,

‘Today, I’m this. Now, I’m a cowboy. Now, I’m this.’ That’s what drag is about. DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 16

Transgender [people] take identity very, very seriously. You know, in that their

identity is who they are. …I’ll do whatever I want to do at anytime and change

and whatever” (Nichols, 2016a).

According to Blumer (1969), individuals develop their own common understandings through interactions and interpretations. Whether or not all drag queens agree with RuPaul’s own analysis, this is an example of a group reasoning with a definition and standard of drag.

In addition to Goffman’s (1959) dramaturgy, Blumer’s (1962) “joint action” concept assists in understanding a group of individuals constructing meaning; individuals are reflecting their actions off of one another or comprehending mediated symbols from a preceding social scenario to create a group understanding. With SI’s dramaturgy, drag queens are building off of former interpretations and ‘shape shifting’, to borrow RuPaul’s terminology, the drag culture itself.

Butler (1993a) understood gender as performative and transcended those concepts to drag as well. In fact, Butler (1993b) and RuPaul’s concept of drag align as she also believed the performance to be a satirical representation of gender. There is power in the ability to defy the rules and norms presented by a dominant socially constructed gender

(Taylor & Rupp, 2004). The process of constructing one’s own drag identity can be empowering and critical of gender norms and social constructs.

While other performance theories may offer insight into RPDR drag performances, SI, with Goffman’s performance perspective, provides a broader analysis of the self while including groups. The relations between performance setting, audience and performer all can be examined to understand the mutual benefits from each (Egner & DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 17

Maloney, 2016). Identity is not only tied to accepted definitions, but also observed rules that can be defied (Egner & Maloney, 2016). This is important for understanding minority or deviant individuals and groups (Berkowitz & Belgrave, 2010).

Mediated Contexts and an Individual’s Self-Concept

Using Mead’s and Blumer’s definition, there are many different objects a drag queen can pull from within the show’s content to identify one’s self. Hammack (2005) asserted a framework in which gay, lesbian and bisexual (GLB) identity is constructed with cultural context. The GLB identity development process, described by Hammack

(2005), includes the realization of one’s same-sex partnership and sexual desires and coming out to community and friends. Factors mediating the highly nuanced identity development, like certain media, is seen in Parks’ (1999) interviews with lesbian participants. Parks (1999) found that the timing and meaning of coming out were attributable to social and cultural context. Gomillion & Guilliano (2011), using Parks’

(1999) study and Hammack’s (2005) framework, asserted that media is a critical component of study when analyzing the construction of one’s sense of self.

Hammack’s (2005) framework enlightens this study in the construction of identity for gay males. My focus is on the construction of an additional identity, a performance self, which an individual is comfortable presenting to an audience. Their connection to a cultural context is also critical. Their theoretical lens focuses my emphasis on the relationship between media and self.

As Altheide (2000) described, popular culture and entertainment media are often pervasive in many aspects of a consumer’s life. Media studies and communication literature focus on how role models in a mediated context, such as RuPaul, have been DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 18 studied effects on viewers. Wohlford, Lochman, and Barry (2004) studied how sharing traits with their role model affected a viewer. They found that their participants had a heightened self-esteem when they shared similar traits as opposed to fewer traits

(Wohlford et al., 2004). It is reasonable to deduce that media facilitates the awareness of such traits in viewers’ role models, certainly for the LGBTQ+ community.

And, how individuals connect and identify with those on the screen influences their personality traits, according to Feilitzen and Linne (1975). They defined two types of identification: similarity and wishful (Feilitzen & Linne, 1975). Comparably to

Wohlford et al.’s (2004) findings, similarity identification is when a viewer singles out parallel traits and idealizes a role model. A viewer who models their behavior off of a role model’s ideal qualities represents wishful identification (Feilitzen & Linne, 1975).

For example, an individual just starting to perform in drag may be observing role model’s, like RuPaul, qualities through finding similarities or modeling drag behavior.

In expansion on these definitions, Boon and Lomore (2001) asked young adult participants how they thought celebrities influenced their behavior and sense of self.

Their study allowed for the participant to define celebrity or idol. More than sixty percent of the identified idols were either actors or musical artists by occupation (Boon &

Lomore, 2001). The participants, widely, believed that their idols had impacted their attitudes, beliefs and personality characteristics. Boon and Lomore’s (2001) study not only provides groundwork for the importance of studying entertainment media’s influence, but that of the role models individually.

Specifically to the gay community, Kivel and Kleiber (2000) found that young gay and lesbian participants seek out information about heterosexual identity to find DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 19 individuals with whom they can relate. This is due to the wide heterosexual norms that dominate youth culture (Kivel & Kleiber, 2000). Many of their participants spent a time reading about gay and lesbian norms, watching programs that mirrored their own reality and developed social circles of like-minded individuals (Kivel & Kleiber, 2000). One participant in their study mentioned using a television program as “a learning device”

(Kivel & Kleiber, 2000, p. 223). While their study focused on the gay and lesbian youth, my study expands on their research to specific niche communities in gay culture.

Many studies focus on how media and role models influence the GLB community

(Basow & Howe, 1980; Boon & Lomore, 2001; Karunanayake & Nauta, 2004;

Lockwood, 2006; Matthews, 2005; Ochman, 1996; Wohlford et al., 2004), few have looked into the development of drag identity in relation to media influences. Specifically, this study observes how RPDR acts as a symbolic learning tool for drag queens.

Research Questions

The purpose of this study is to understand how entertainment media content influences identity, specifically how RPDR affects drag queen persona for viewers. Thus,

I propose the following research questions (RQs) in order to understand the influence

RPDR has had on drag identity and culture:

RQ1: How does the style of drag performance portrayed on RPDR influence the performance of viewers’ drag style?

RQ2: How does the participants’ perceptions of drag represented on RPDR relate with their own standards or performance of drag?

DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 20

CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY

To answer the research questions, I employed qualitative methods and a photovoice approach. Tracy (2013) described qualitative research as “immersing oneself in a scene and trying to make sense of it” (p. 3). Instead of quantifying values, the value is found in the nuances. Methodological approaches include interviews, online or in- person, participant observations, online or physical content analysis (Tracy, 2013). These strategies are also unique in their ability to assess local causality that surveys or other quantitative methods are not, all of which provide open-ended reactions to help comprehend and/or illustrate an experience (Tracy, 2013). These methods are appropriately applied to study participants or scenarios that have yet to be studied, which can be further expounded upon by quantitative approaches (Tracy, 2013). Lindlof and

Taylor (2002) maintained that qualitative research’s aim is to “preserve and analyze the situated form, content and experience social action” (p. 18). In essence, a qualitative approach will take a “photograph” of a particular scenario, colored with experience and perspectives.

Nordstrom and Perkins (2016) described approaching qualitative methods as a performance. Researchers observe different settings and spaces with a various, appropriate methodological approaches (Nordstrom & Perkins, 2016). A qualitative pupil may view practices, in this sense, as nouns; rather, Nordstrom and Perkins (2016) asserted to assess the tangling web of theory and practice as verbs. Through a verb transformation, a “qualitative pedagogy become[s]…open to re-deployment and re- signification” (Nordstrom & Perkins, 2016, p. 151). In this mindset, the researcher – or DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 21 performer in continuing Nordstrom and Perkins’ (2016) metaphor – can respond properly to their setting.

This also describes a core component of qualitative research: context (Tracy,

2013). The approaches utilized by qualitative researchers examine minute behaviors and traits that provide comprehensive data about people and culture. In other words, the study of context assists in providing thick description of scenarios (Tracy, 2013). Researchers understand behavioral meanings in a studied setting which allows them to construct theory or “grander statements” (Tracy, 2013, p. 3).

Qualitative approaches, certainly ethnographic work, have driven drag studies, primarily due to the vast nuances in setting and identity (Berkowitz & Belgrave, 2010;

Egner & Maloney, 2016; Hopkins, 2004; Schacht, 2002; Taylor & Rupp, 2004;

Tewksbury, 1994). RPDR studies focus on language and representation using content analysis (Chernoff, 2014; Simmons, 2014; Strings & Bui, 2014; Goldmark, 2015). This study aimed to bridge the gap with qualitative interviewing and photovoice analysis.

Through direct interaction with a visual narrative, I better understood how a media program influences the identity construction process for these participants.

Photovoice Approach

Photovoice is a visual, qualitative methodology designed for “understanding the social world through the eyes of those experiencing it” (Wagner, Ellingson & Kunkel,

2016, p. 336). Participants held the camera to document their reality, and their photographs were included in the research process (Wagner et al., 2016). Created by

Caroline Wang, the approach empowers the participants to tell the narrative (Wang,

1999). Photovoice has been used to (1) enable participants to record their personal DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 22 reflections, (2) promote discourse through photograph interaction, and (3) “inform research policymakers” (Simmonds, Roux & Avest., 2015, p. 35). The approach has been used across various disciplines and has proven to be a useful format for creating a safe platform for participants to share their story (Simmonds et al., 2015). Photovoice has largely been utilized for participatory action research; however, some have used photovoice outside of social change, such as in ethnographic settings (Meo, 2010).

Similarly, photo-elicitation is when photographs “can also be used as visual prompts during qualitative interviewing or as part of a set of qualitative methods”

(Warren & Karner, 2014). Employing both photovoice and photo-elicitation constructs a visual narrative to better document participant experiences (Minthorn & Marsh, 2016).

Due to the unambiguous photovoice procedure outlined by Simmonds (2013), I opted to incorporate aspects of photovoice methodology in conjunction with photo-elicitation concepts in order to provide clear steps for my participants.

This technique provided a fresh voice in documenting the reality and influences on drag queen identity transformation and construction. I provided my participants a photovoice directive to record self-reflections. The participants explained and elaborated on their photographs through one-on-one interviews. The photovoice acted as a narrative interview component of storytelling that just the semi-structured interviews do not offer

(Tracy, 2013).

I framed the photovoice approach around Simmonds’ (2013) five stages. First, the preparation stage ensured the participant is knowledgeable of the research and its aim.

The first stage was also when the researcher created a clear and “unambiguous” prompt

(Tracy, 2013, p. 38). The photovoice directive for this thesis was to document meaningful DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 23 aspects of their drag identity. I provided a consent form with this prompt, instructions and a clear explanation of my research project (Appendix A). I requested my participants to take five to 10 photographs visually describing their drag persona. This number was chosen to allow for freedom of the participant to choose how to express their persona, while still maintaining feasibility for the time frame of this study (Simmonds et al.,

2015). If the participant did not have a camera accessible to them, a disposable camera would have been provided. However, all of my participants had access to a camera. They provided consent at that time to utilize the photographs.

Second, the intermediary stage allowed participants 10 days to complete their directive and take their photographs (Meo, 2010). At the deadline, I followed up with the participant to set up an interview. The participants sent me their photovoice component digitally prior to the interview. I printed out the photographs for use during the interview.

I also provided the participant the option to review the photographs in a digital format via an iPad. I expressed to them that discretion and their privacy was of the upmost importance to me prior to reviewing the photographs through the interview.

Photo-elicitation narratives prompted the participant to recount their photographs during the one-on-one interview (Warren & Karner, 2014). The received photographs were rich in content, themes and genres. In the interview, all of the photographs were viewed collaboratively (Warren & Karner, 2014). As opposed to solely deciphering them thematically as the researcher, the interview guide (Appendix B) included questions referring to the participant’s work. This provided the participant the necessary platform to indicate verbally what their desired message was with the photo. DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 24

This method was insightful to the researcher, but also vulnerable to the participant. There are ethical concerns when utilizing this approach (Wagner et al., 2014;

Simmonds et al., 2015). Given that the photographs depict their persona and make it difficult to maintain confidentiality, written and verbal consent was necessary to diminish ethical concerns (Simmonds et al., 2015). Since participants took photographs utilizing their own equipment, I also obtained consent to use the photographs they own in my research (Simmonds et al., 2015). Even still, the participant had the power of point-and- shoot, as in they decided what they were willing to share.

Interviewing

Interviewing qualitatively is not simply asking a series of questions and expecting answers; rather, it requires engaging the participant in a meaningful way (Alby &

Fatigante, 2014). Constructivist interviews foster the development of a story, as the perspective views narratives as an “unfolding story” through conversation between the interviewer and participant (Charmaz, 2002; Holstein & Gubrium, 1995). Rather than the interview acting as a window into the participant’s reality, the data was “an interactive and mutually constructed product shaped just as much by the researcher’s identity and biography as the participants’” (Berkowitz & Belgrave, 2010, p. 166). Both individuals actively reflect and participate in an open-ended composition of data.

For this reason, I opted for constructivist interviewing, which allowed the participant to guide the understanding of multi-layered meanings and identity development (Charmaz, 2002; Berkowitz & Belgrave, 2010). This concept also coincides with the visual narratives constructed using photo-elicitation and photovoice methodological approaches. This research did not attempt to portray all drag queen’s DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 25 experiences with RPDR; rather, the interviews provided a greater comprehension of how media messages created meaning in this context. See below for more information on the interview guide and process.

Participants

Upon receiving approval from the institutional review board (IRB), I interviewed and provided photovoice directives to 12 drag queens who are 18 and older living in the

Houston area (Baker, Edwards & Doidge, 2012). Each of the participants had seen an entire season of RPDR prior to the eighth season. I used two strategies to recruit participants for this study. First, I used convenience sampling, which was recruiting an easily accessible population to the researcher (Tracy, 2013). I contacted these individuals by phone, email and social media platforms. The second strategy was snowball sampling, which was asking participants to recommend those they felt fit the study’s criteria (Tracy,

2013). This technique helped me to recruit 12 participants, my desired sample size necessary to complete the study (Baker, Edwards & Doidge, 2012).

My participants’ ages ranged from 20 to 40. All of my participants live in the

Greater Houston area, but some lived in the Spring area. This is an important distinction because many of my participants considered drag cultural differences inside the highway

610 loop (which circles the main part of Houston) to outside the highway 610 loop. The majority of the drag queens I spoke with were career queens, meaning they were drag queens that relied on their performances for their livelihood. Most of the drag queens began performing for a variety of reasons and a variety of ways. All of them attributed

RPDR to a heightened awareness of their profession or hobby. The table below provides the participants’ demographic information. DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 26

Frequency of Drag Name Age Gender Occupation Performances Estella2 26 Male Swim coach Once a week

Tatiana 32 Male Drag queen Once a week

Kyla 41 Male Drag queen Once a week

Aracely 31 Male DJ Once a week

Lexus 28 Male Drag queen Once a week

Adeciya 37 Male Drag queen Once a week

Physical therapist Once a month River 25 Queen technician Once a month KiKi 26 Male Freelance stylist Violet 29 Male Drag queen Once a week

Athena 32 Male Drag queen Once a week

Retail Assistant Once a month Chloe 25 Left blank Manager Figure 1. Participant’s demographic information

Interview Guide

The interview guide (Appendix B) I used for all participants required me to be an active participant and listener in the conversation. My interview guide included suggestions of when to designate photo elicitation (Warner & Karner, 2010). However, the conversation allowed for other opportunities; it was dependent on each participant.

The questions are designed to move beyond common boilerplate answers in sharing one’s experiences to provide rich data, which was done with open-ended queries (Charmaz,

2002). However, in order to capture demographic information, I included a face sheet

(Appendix C). In an effort to be inclusive, the “gender” question on the face sheet was to

2 Only performance names were used for this project. DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 27 be filled in rather than circling male or female, which allowed for the participants to designate their own gender broadly.

The semi-structured guide followed a similar framework to Gomillion and

Guiliano’s (2011) interview guide in that it included generative questions to understand motivations and identity development in conjunction with media content. However, I included an open-ended, semi-structured format to consider the SI perspective. This style of questioning provided an expansive format for the participant to feel free to share their personal experiences. The interview progressed from self to the outer social influences in one’s own reality (Gomillion & Guiliano, 2011).

I also considered Berkowitz and Belgrave’s (2010) qualitative analysis when creating my questions. They described how their participants shared experiences of transformation and the time and patience that it required (Berkowitz & Belgrave, 2010).

In addition to a photo-voice directive encircling transformation, I posed the open-ended questions, “[t]ell me about how [drag name] has changed over time,” and “How are

[chosen name] and [chosen drag name] different? How are they the same?”

Procedure

The participants had already sent me their photographs to view during the interview. Although it was not recommended, all of my participants chose to take photographs of themselves to portray what defined or inspired them. At first, I was worried there would be difficulty in consenting for use of these photographs. However, all of my participants were open and excited to share their visuals during the interview, despite the fact that their performance identity would be disclosed. DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 28

The participants chose the interview site for privacy and convenience (Tracy,

2013). In the event that they were unfamiliar with a place to conduct an interview, I supplied a list of quiet, safe and comfortable options (Appendix D; Tracy, 2013). The options included local coffee shops and public locations on University of Houston’s campus. I interviewed eight drag queens at local Starbucks close to their home or work in

North Houston. I interviewed three drag queens at a local coffee shop in the Heights area.

I interviewed one drag queen on University of Houston’s campus at The Nook.

Before beginning the interview, I reviewed the consent form and requested permission to record the interview (Appendix A). All of the participants agreed to audio recording the interview for transcription purposes. I reviewed the topics, the inclusion of photovoice and the potential length of the interview (Tracy, 2013). Each participant was given a face sheet to complete. I informed the participants that they could answer to their comfort level. All of the participants chose to review the photographs using an iPad.

Lastly, I asked each participant if they knew anyone else that may fit the criteria to participate. In addition, each participant also gave their consent for the use of their photographs in this study.

Analysis Procedure

After completion of each interview, I transcribed the contents in a Microsoft

Word document that included all of the transcriptions. Participants’ identities were not excluded from the transcription due to the inclusion of faces in the photographs.

However, their performance identities were the only ones included. Photographs were also added to the document when referenced, of which I received consent from my participants. The transcription included the verbal content as well as nonverbal content DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 29 from the participant. A separate comprehensive document included my reactions from the interview. Prior to typing the contents, I included the length of the interview, the participants’ name and drag name, date, time and location.

Glaser and Strauss (1967)’s Grounded Theory guided the data analysis of this research. This means I tried to approach the data without any preconceived notions concerning the answers to each of the interview questions or anticipated photographs.

Themes and meanings are constructed inductively (Charmaz, 2002; Tracy, 2013).

Interview questions were not composed to fit the data, but to help the creation of the narrative (Charmaz, 2002). As an active participant in the interview, I also maintained a key role by listening for interesting leads (Charmaz, 2002).

Coding, the secondary step, moved the data from description to conceptualization

(Charmaz, 2002). I had already reflected, as a participant in the interview, on the concept of identity (Charmaz, 2002). I created a codebook with each of the themes derived from my data. I continued coding until I reached saturation (Charmaz, 2002). I employed the use of in vivo coding, which utilized the participants’ language to ensure their voice remained present (Tracy, 2013). I identify as a heterosexual, cisgender female and a non- drag participant. While my perspective shaped the data construction through the interview process, in vivo coding highlighted the participants’ perspectives rather than my own. Originally, eight themes emerged, which referenced types of drag, illustrating shifts from season to season and drag families, which was then collapsed into style role models.

However, the discussion of pageant queens remained separate due to its prevalence. The final five themes remaining are discussed in the following chapter.

DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 30

CHAPTER IV

RESULTS

The 12 drag queens I interviewed mentioned different media – primarily, television shows and movies – that inspire their style and persona. Inspiration from performers and artists included: RuPaul’s early work on MTV, Beyonce, Madonna,

Rihanna, Adele and former RPDR contests. However, many of the drag queens expressed bittersweet relationships with RPDR. In consideration of the two research questions, five themes emerged from the transcribed data: style role models, “versus pageant queen”,

“how do you define art”, diluting drag, and a generational divide.

RQ1: How does the style of drag performance portrayed on RPDR influence the performance of viewers’ drag style?

Styles Role Models

The participants are a colorful representation of different drag styles. They are comedy queens, clown queens, pageant queens, “fishy” queens, club queens and so many more. They may represent a broad spectrum of drag styles but many of them defined their own drag style. All of the participants mentioned enjoying RPDR for the contestants’ looks. The show provides them with new trends and inspiration. Three of them expressed similarities in styles and referenced former contestants when elaborating on their drag style with me. Tatiana, 32, referred to her style as “glamedy. I am a glamedy queen. I love that I serve a little bit of comedy with a little bit of glam. You put it all together, and it's me.” DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 31

Figure 2. Tatiana’s “glamedy queen”

Tatiana told me this photograph was her “dramatic and classy” look. She usually has longer wigs, but she wanted to try something out of her own element. She performs often, and this look was less time consuming and still had the same effect. Tatiana’s contour and makeup struck me, so I complimented her blending.3 She said, laughing, “If you saw me when I had just started, I was so busted. I had fishhooks for eyebrows. I’ve come a long way. Glad those pictures aren’t side by side.”

Eight of the participants, Tatiana being one of them, mentioned Bianca Del Rio’s style or style consistency as a personal goal. Tatiana also described her aesthetic using former contestant Bianca Del Rio and Bob the Drag Queen:

Bianca Del Rio, of course, her style is so on point. But I also love her

hosting ability. She's just so quick. She's so quick to catch everything. And

I know that kind of thing comes with time. But I have too little patience.

3 Blending is a makeup technique when applying foundation. DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 32

And I'm just like I want to be that quick now and they deserve it. I love

how quick she is in her hosting style.

Athena, 32, also mentioned Bianca Del Rio as an inspiration. She referenced her level of success that has crossed into audiences formerly untouched by drag. But she does not believe it is just Bianca Del Rio’s style decisions that have taken her to the top.

Athena asserted that drag queens’ main goal is to show off their drag identity through their look. This includes thinking about how a drag queen’s personality is involved.

Bianca Del Rio’s personality represents a true drag queen to Athena:

There were people, because there are just nasty people everywhere, but along the

way people were very nice and very respectful and very deceptive and very

encouraging and very helpful, which is I think what I love about Bianca because

that was her. That was just her.

Her style does not necessarily mimic Bianca Del Rio’s, rather she says she – and other drag queens – should try to mimic her essence of drag.

DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 33

Figure 3. Athena’s “out of my comfort zone”

Athena told me she loves how fit she looks in this photograph, but credited the outfit. She said she loves making old world styles fresh in today’s society. She told me this outfit, hair and makeup really accomplish that goal. She also told me the photograph refreshed memories of that performance for her. “I love performing and meeting new people. I’m really just an introvert, so Athena allows me to get out of my comfort zone.”

Estella, 26, also mentioned Bianca Del Rio as an inspiration. However, she said that Adore has more of her aesthetic. Estella said she strives to challenge drag boundaries with her style. She continues to think of ways to make the audience ponder the message she is trying to send. She referenced this photograph many times throughout our interview because it channeled her inner Adore, a former contestant on RPDR. Estella said she is “obsessed” with Adore. Even still, she said she is “inspired” rather than

“influenced” by the styles seen on the show. “The drag queens on the show, their style, is tailored to the competition. I’m working on tailoring my style to me and to challenging my audience.”

Figure 4. Estella’s “challenging my audience” DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 34

Estella uses RPDR as a gauge for her style because she is interested in becoming a contestant on the show, so there are other motivations for watching. She told me that in order to be successful outside of the Houston market, a drag queen must challenge their own look. “Estella is just like that. She’s super competitive and edgy and looks damn good doing it.”

However, nine of the participants expressed frustration in the lack of variety in the drag styles on RPDR. KiKi, 26, said, “The show begins with a certain style and then many of the queens are told to transform into RuPaul or Michelle’s ideal style for the contestant. This is not true to all of the contestants, like Kim Chi or Bianca Del Rio, but I don’t think the show really captures what I try to do.” KiKi said the show helped her improve her make-up as opposed to overall aesthetic. She stressed that if the show was to change their format they should show how the drag queens transform.

KiKi, lighting up, discussed her style choices in great length. She said she thinks about her looks “constantly,” getting inspiration in a variety of places. KiKi, to her, is sexy, a bit grungy and a bit trashy. She said she hates when drag queens call their style

“slutty,” but she said KiKi is not that far off. RPDR and makeup tutorials are the only online and television media that she gathers inspiration from, but she said, “True inspiration comes from watching someone perform. It can be so beautiful.” DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 35

Figure 5. KiKi’s “sexy queen”

For this photograph, KiKi expressed that her style encapsulates all of the media and outside inspirations she comes into contact with, RPDR being one of them. When pointing to this photo, KiKi said that she likes the “sexy” feeling of performing. “There certainly have been sexy queens on RuPaul’s Drag Race, don’t get me wrong, but maybe we just don’t want to feel like we’re mimicking each other,” said KiKi.

Now that RPDR is more “mainstream,” Kyla, 41, said her audiences expect to see similar performance styles in live performances. She laughed at the thought that everyone would be just copying RPDR in the “club scene.” “It’s almost frustrating when someone new to drag immediately labels you as a queen from the show. I work really hard on my individual style, so you want to be known as Kyla and not as just a copycat.” In an effort to stay “fresh,” Kyla said:

I mean, she used to call me her hipster drag queen. I would always find these new

songs that were there like - I like British music, European music. Pop music is DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 36

very choppy whereas I still like American music, but it always has to have a

rapper or the songs are like soap bubble gummy.

Figure 6. Kyla’s “hipster queen”

Kyla said her usual style is a tight ponytail, and she’s experimenting with the pigtails. She is the only drag queen that I spoke with that performs with her own hair. “I love my long hair. I’m a lazy queen, fitting a wig is a lot of work. And my worst nightmare would be if the wig flew off during my performance. I like styling my own hair.”

Other drag queens also mentioned the desire to be individualistic, and hair style is a big part of that. Chloe, 25, told me, first and foremost, that in order to “work it” on stage, she needs to have big hair. Her style needs to represent her big, sassy personality. DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 37

She joked with me in our interview that her alternate ego drag name is ‘Petty Spaghetti’ because she loves food, and she cannot give up “throwing shade.”4

Figure 7. Chloe’s “petty spaghetti”

This photo, Chloe told me, highlights her style decisions very clearly. She likes to wear bodycon suits and avoids gowns. Her wigs, which are not inexpensive, are styled to be larger than life. Her wigs are her favorite part when styling Chloe. “And I usually have to put a color on my lips. I don’t always do black. I do bright pink a lot. But I think I’ve come a long way with my makeup. Contouring, mascara and lips, for sure.”

Chloe said, in relation to RPDR, her style is inspired by the show’s “sass” level.

The queens on the show are competitive and having to perform consistently. However, she asserts that RPDR is only one resource for inspiration. She reiterated that music and her fellow drag queens that perform with her are constantly challenging her to improve and evolve her look.

4 “Throwing shade” is a term used when criticizing someone. DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 38

Aracely, 31, is also inspired, primarily, with music. She strives to be different than the other drag queens by being the only drag queen DJ in the state of Texas. She said she loves transforming into Aracely before a show because of “how hot she makes me feel.”

Figure 8. Aracely’s “fishy”

When describing this photo, Aracely said, “I love how fishy I look in this. Not a lot of drag queens are able to look this fishy. I’ve got the right face structure. You know,

I can really go both ways and no one notices.”

Aracely mentioned a couple of drag queens contestants from RPDR when describing her look to me. She mentioned, first, Courtney Act. A drag queen who is also known for being “fishy,” meaning looking more like a female than a drag queen. Aracely boasted that Courtney Act is also “in the music scene.” After she discussed Courtney Act for a minute or so, Aracely paused to think. She then iterated that RPDR, while bringing the term “fishy” into the mainstream, moves drag queens away from that kind of look.

When I asked her how that made her feel, she said she did not mind because Aracely was DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 39 so successful. “I pushed myself out of the drag box a bit because I’m the only drag DJ in

Texas. How many people can say that?”

River, 25, also asserted her individuality when proclaiming she is one of the few

“hippie” drag queens. River felt as though there has not been a contestant on RPDR that truly embodies her performance style. River loves old-world music, style and performances. Even still, River said that even though she does not relate with contestants’ aesthetics, she enjoys watching RPDR because she relates with them simply on being a drag queen. She referenced the transformation process in particular.

Figure 9. River’s “old-world…drag”

This look utilized a particular song that River said would most likely never appear on RPDR. River described the performance:

Like I said, I love the style and music of the ‘40s and ‘50s, certainly not the social

issues. But I actually performed to – this is going to sound so nerdy – but I

performed to a song from a video game that’s placed in this era. I fell in love with DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 40

the song and decided to incorporate it into my performance. I don’t know how

many drag queens do that.

When I asked her if anyone recognized the song from her performance, she said only two people have. “But when they come up to me and tell me they know what the song is and where it’s from, it’s such – it’s so validating. I just say, like, ‘you get it!’”

“How do you define art?”

I asked my participants to define what drag is to them personally, as a starting point of comparison for the show. KiKi took several minutes, contemplating her answer, laughing nervously about the time it was taking her. Finally, she nudged a question back at me, “How do you define art?” She went on:

Drag is such a personal expression of creativity. I appreciate how you word that

question because I am defining it for me. Like, I’m challenging myself and

creating art and doing things individual to my style. That’s why it’s so hard to

judge other drag queens because it’s just so, so personal.

Nine of my drag queen participants had varying answers to this question. The three that had similar answers stated a broad definition. This definition was simply imitation. Aracely told me that drag is “impersonating a female.” Despite the fact that

Aracely shared a three-word definition, she said she extends the bounds of drag queen by being the only drag queen DJ in the state of Texas. “I like to do my own thing. I love drag. I love DJ-ing. I’m proud to be the only one who does that,” Aracely said. For

Aracely, RPDR is a small portion of all drag has to offer. The many opportunities of drag have yet to be explored. DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 41

Comparatively, Lexus, 28, utilized the same three-word definition as Aracely. She argued that drag queens all have varied styles, but the similarity lies within the overall goal. To her, drag queens must impersonate a female. She included, however, that it is her job. “It’s like a job. It's kind of a lifestyle for some people because some people start drag and become transgender women but for me - as for myself - it's more of just like a job, and what I wear is kind of like my uniform,” Lexus said.

Lexus said she loves her job. Being a drag queen is her dream. She said she has the opportunity to experience new things every night. To Lexus, RPDR embodies the job of being a drag queen and the work required to reach success. She referenced other similar shows like America’s Next Top Model and Project Runway, where people are competing in modeling and fashion designing, respectively. The individuals are utilizing skilled trade in order to win a competition. “I’m using my skills to be successful in my career,” Lexus said.

To contrast, the nine drag queens who did differ in their response believe drag takes on new meanings for each individual. The responses varied from using their individual style to utilizing standards of drag their drag mothers had set for them. River was one of my participants who said drag is different for each individual because a drag queen’s identity comes from a hidden personality they are unable to express. Societal obligations and norms of expression can be broken through drag, in River’s view. The difference of drag definition is dependent on who that individual is “inside.” River elaborated:

So of course it’s all different! We are all so different from one another.

RPDR can’t represent everyone because contestants come from a few DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 42

places with a few backgrounds. You see a lot of different types on the

show, but it’s so different in real life.

It is important to mention that none of my drag queen participants said that RPDR is the standard or definition of drag.

RQ2: How does the participants’ perceptions of drag represented on RPDR relate with their own standards or performance of drag?

Diluting Drag

Eleven of my participants expressed that RPDR is responsible for diluting drag culture, providing few performance opportunities. The expectations of a drag performance set by the only mainstream television show portraying the transformation process of a drag queen. In addition, they expressed concerns that the show reduces a drag queen to their “shade-throwing” capabilities. RPDR includes any drama between contestants, and my participants stated that this drama has had negative effects on drag culture. Only one of my participants stated that the drama was the best part of the show.

Athena shared her feelings on what RPDR is doing to the diversification of the popular drag scene:

It doesn't bother me as much, but for somebody who that's really their life. I feel

really bad for them because you have to be on the show or have to have won like

a big time pageant in the pageant circuit. You just, you aren't going to make it,

you know, and that doesn't measure your talent. It doesn't measure up. But

sometimes, it's kind of weird. I may be going out on a limb here saying this but I

think sometimes people are a little bit too quick to believe you know they're being

told this person is a big deal. DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 43

Kyla said the show overlooks the bar drag queens’ hard work. In addition, she said, RuPaul reduces fan interest in alternative forms of drag, forcing drag queens to modify their identity and look. These expectations, Kyla argued, are what hurt the drag community. She explained:

And I think that's what's frustrating for the bar girls. Because I think there have

been a hundred drag queens on drag race, but there are tens of thousands of drag

queens that work in the bar nightly so Drag Race is not everyone's goal. Not

everybody wants to be on TV. Not everyone feels like that it is going to validate

them. There are some girls or pageant girls who get their validation and love the

thrill of competition.

Estella also iterated the difficulty to gain success without pageants or local drag races; however, Estella informed me that she performs outside of the Houston highway

610 loop and said that there are astounding differences in the drag culture. Estella shared that she performs outside of the 610 loop and competes inside of the loop. Because she is a self-proclaimed competitive drag queen, Estella said she enjoys the competition of local drag races because it helps hone skills. “I absolutely think the performances are being limited to competitions because of Drag Race, but I also think that helps talent reach more people,” Estella said.

Similarly, Violet, 29, said she competes in the many pageants in and around the

Houston area. However, she also said that RPDR sets audience expectations to look and perform in a particular manner. Those expectations can hurt the drag queens who rely on their performances for their income. “Just like any art, I guess, drag is taken from being yourself to being what the audience wants you to be. I haven’t thought about that a lot, DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 44 actually. Queens who don’t do what needs to be done not only won’t get tip money, but they won’t get booked again either. ”

“Versus Pageant Queen”

Eleven of my participants mentioned a style divide in Houston between pageant queens and others. Four of my participants identified themselves as a pageant queen:

Adeciya, Cyn, Lexus and Violet. When asked about her style, Adeciya, 37, proclaimed herself to be a pageant queen, proudly. “I'm a pageant queen, I like to do pageants. So I want to win. I want to win Miss Gay USA but I need to hurry up because I'm getting older.”

Figure 10. Adeciya’s “diva”

Adeciya discussed pageant queens when talking about her photo. She said that this shiny, flowing gown is one of her favorites. She said it represents Adeciya perfectly.

She told me, with a laugh, the gold highlights Adeciya’s “diva” attitude well. While discussing the photo, she admitted that she thinks of my questions like she would at a DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 45 pageant. After mentioning how a lot of practice must have been involved to be able to think in that way, she said:

When I first started, I was just like, I was just a little boy playing in drag - in

women's clothing. But now, I've learned how to do my own makeup. I sew my

own clothes. You know, it's like I've learned the craft to become who I am today.

Adeciya mentioned that Houston is the place to be for pageant queens, since pageants are so steeped in the culture. However, she said there is a line drawn between pageant queens and other types of queens. This is represented in the lack of pageant queens on the show, according to Adeciya.

Cyn, 24, said she likes being a pageant queen because she likes the competition aspect. She said that watching RPDR is like watching a different kind of pageant, except

Houston pageants would look quite different. She claims her success, however, by thinking outside of the stereotypical pageant box. “I compete well and thrive in that creative space. But my style, when I perform is on the edge of pageant. My makeup tends toward fishy, but you don’t see this kind on RuPaul.” Cyn reiterated that RPDR is not the platform for pageant queens since they extend to many different looks.

DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 46

Figure 11. Cyn’s “I love this…paint”

Cyn said that this photo encapsulates her ideal look. Whenever she is having a bad makeup day, she said will think of this photograph because of how “fishy” her makeup looks. “I love the way my wig looks, my lashes, my brows - this paint.5 I have great support around me to help me reach this point where I am.” Cyn mentioned that it would be challenging to represent Houston on RPDR, but she says she is consistently trying to think outside of the box when it comes to her style and aesthetic.

Lexus is also a pageant queen, but she explained that she built her career one skill at a time. She said a new drag queen starts by singing, dancing, comedy or hosting a regular, weekly show. When asked about her style, Lexus emphatically stated that she dresses like “Beyonce. I just want to entertain the audience. Pretty costumes. You know nice big hair. Pretty makeup. I just like to wear it out.”

5 “Paint” refers to the overall makeup. DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 47

Figure 12. Lexus’ “I just like to wear it out”

After discussing her look in this photograph, Lexus told me that there have been looks similar to hers on RPDR, but there is an important difference. There is a certain stigma, she said, outside of the pageant queen community for identifying as a pageant queen. Lexus said:

Other drag queens think you’re not thinking outside of the box, but drag queens

can’t perform the same way we do. I compete, just like on RuPaul. I answer

questions, host, sing, dance, whatever – we do a lot! I’m happy to be in a city

where there are so many pageants. It’s my element.

Violet’s, 29, responses coincided to many of Lexus’ answers with regards to the stigma. Violet argued that she has found her success in her own way. Her drag identity works best in a pageant setting. After trying to find the words to explain to me the differences of a pageant queen, she ended with, “It’s just me.” She differed with some of my participants by saying that pageant queens are “somewhat” represented on RPDR, even though it is not explicitly referred to.

DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 48

Figure 13. Violet’s “crowned”

Violet chose this photo because of how happy she was to be crowned at this pageant. She expressed that the whole pageant was a blur and felt like her hard work in preparing with her mentors had paid off. Violet said:

Winning a pageant just tells you that your choices in style and performance were

right! We all work so hard to win because it can do so much for your career. You

start booking more when you win pageants. You improve your reputation. I guess

that’s like RuPaul on a bigger stage. That competition can totally change your

life.

Generational Divide

Many of my participants detailed two sides of a generational divide that appeared as a result of RPDR. Older queens expressed that the show perpetuates a particular attitude in younger queens who begin performing in drag after the show originally aired.

Younger queens shared with me that older queens refuse to embrace evolving drag culture that resulted in the mainstream success of the show. Only one of my participants did not mention this particular divide.

While many of my older queen participants laughed at the thought of referring to themselves as “old,” they still utilized the term when illustrating this divide to me.

Adeciya said that the divide is present when two generations are performing in the same space, resulting in awkwardness and boundaries. The divide is perpetuated by the portrayal of drag on the show. “Some of them don't want don't to wear breasts. We're called female impersonators. What lady do you know they don't have breasts? You know what I'm saying? To me, it sends a different signal to the younger generation about drag DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 49 and it's a lot of people that feels like their type of drag is supposed to be now,” Adeciya said. Adeciya hinted to me that the modern type of drag strays from her definition of drag, which is resulting in a new form in younger generations. She then detailed an outfit portrayed on the show and explained the differences between her definition of drag and that particular style. The outfit was missing, to her, necessary female components that are critical for performing in drag.

Despite the fact that the show is “sending the wrong message to a younger drag queen generation, Adeciya did mention that when she began her career there was a lot of fear in performing because of the stigma, which often resulted in violence, associated with drag. The show opened the doors for the younger generation to experience drag without as much fear, the same art form that allowed Adeciya to feel like she can openly be herself.

Tatiana also referred to herself as an older queen. She was more bothered by the attitude from younger drag queens than the style and aesthetic changes. Tatiana asserted that the drama portrayed on the show is validating a mean quality to new drag queens that, she feels, has not been present in past generations. She explained:

Drama is not what all drag is about. And it's turning into that and really with the

newer seasons that are coming out it's really turning a lot of the younger queens

that are wanting to come out and do drag into really really mean, bitter new girls,

and they have no business being that mean.

This new attitude, Tatiana said, is shaping a new generation of queens who fail to learn from older generations. Rather, the younger generation of drag queens “binge- watch all of the seasons of RuPaul, feel like they know everything and then get up on DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 50 stage,” Tatiana said. Drag mentorship is a cornerstone of the drag community, with similar family trees to collegiate Greek life. This is a new form of learning, according to

Tatiana.

Chloe referred to herself as a younger queen, who began performing in drag after

RPDR first aired. She said she did watch all of the seasons and felt like she could do well in drag. Chloe argued that the older generation of drag queens refuses to broaden their definition of drag from one style. With the idea that drag allows for freedom of expression, Chloe said that drag is individualistic. To her, RPDR allows younger generations of drag queens to learn and express themselves in a different way. Older generations of drag queens have a more difficult time understanding the artistic reasoning for expression, Chloe argued. “If I want to just contour on breasts or not wear pads, who says that doesn’t make me a drag queen? I just don’t understand. There are so many different types of really interesting drag that the older generation of drag queens start closing out because they’re holding on to this idea of what they’d been taught,” Chloe said.

Estella had similar sentiments. Estella said that she does not consider traditional notions of drag when she is constructing a style. Alternately, she said she is conceptualizing a look and constructing it that will best portray her message to the audience. She explained:

To me, that’s drag. Older queens need to have certain parts of their look to even

consider something as drag. But I’m like, I want to tell my audience something

through my look. I’ve done some things that have pushed boundaries. I’ve made

people angry with my performances. Like, I’ve posted some of my looks on DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 51

Instagram or Facebook and will get a lot of negative comments. But I don’t care!

The show is about pushing boundaries, right? That’s exactly what I do.

My participants’ perception of the generational divide highlight the differences of standards of drag, exemplified by RPDR. Just as Estella said, my participants do feel the show is impacting the culture of performing in drag by pushing boundaries. The boundaries seem to draw a line between pre- and post-RPDR. DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 52

CHAPTER V

DISCUSSION

I utilized qualitative methods to explore how RPDR influences drag identity and drag culture. Twelve drag queens were given photovoice prompts to elaborate on style aesthetics and to ignite narratives surrounding identity construction. My twelve participants were individually interviewed to understand their perceptions of the show’s influence on drag culture specifically to the Houston area. All of my participants continue to watch the program, despite the fact that many of them have a negative perception of how the show is influencing the culture. Just as Tatiana said, “the show puts us in your living room.” The visibility of drag queens was seen as the largest benefit of the show for

11 of my participants. Visibility and representation on a mainstream scale provides a kind of freedom and validation in their creativity and art form. It chips away at the shame and fear that historically surrounded drag. Even still, many of the drag queens I spoke with harbored negative reservations about the show’s impact stating that it creates a generational divide and focuses the pinnacle of drag success on one show. Reflecting on the results of this study, RPDR inspires drag queen aesthetics, creates a divide between pageant queens, sparks discussion on definitions of drag, establishes a generational division, and shifts perceptions of success.

As stated, this study included a photovoice and photo-elicitation approach to provide rich data of a creative and visual population. Because this study conceptualized the construction of one’s identity, it was critical to understand the many potential aspects of one’s performance and non-performance identity using photographs taken by my participants. The drag queens I interviewed were specifically asked to describe their drag DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 53 persona and any differences or similarities between the identities. Many of my participants relied on their performance identity as their livelihood, which resulted in animated discussions on how the show has influenced their career. Thus, success holds different meanings to different drag queens. This study is not generalizable, however, to the whole of the drag community, but serves as a localized perspective of RPDR’s influence.

Theoretical Implications

Symbolic Interactionism (SI). SI provided a clear and enlightening lens for comprehending the visual and verbal responses of my participants, many of whom create vastly different performance types and come from a variety of backgrounds. According to

Berkowitz and Belgrave (2010), SI provides meaning to drag queens and views individuals as reflexively capable of understanding the meanings drag queens provide for the world around them. It is a “social and interpretive process” (Berkowitz & Belgrave,

2010, p. 163). Berkowitz and Belgrave (2010) asserted that SI is ideal for analyzing drag queen identity and culture. Drag queens provide a unique look into concepts of gender and identity construction (Berkowitz & Belgrave, 2010). This study coincided with

Berkowitz and Belgrave’s (2010) findings that drag “enables some gay men to emphasize and manipulate aspects of femininity for the means of earning attention, income and situational power” (p. 182). The show, to my participants, eradicated feelings of marginalization and empowered them – or gave them monetary motivations – toward mainstream success in an otherwise niche subculture.

RPDR transforms into an object drag queens interpret and attribute meaning

(Blumer, 1962). I found that the performers I spoke with had continued to conceptualize DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 54 the meaning of drag and their performance identity upon our interviewing. To borrow a word used by Kyla, their identity is “evolving” using inspiration from other drag queens.

The show’s impact can be highlighted on the drag queens on the show who have inspired my participants. Different performers had various understandings of who the best RPDR drag queen is, thus my participants differed in RPDR role models.

Even still, most of my participants did mention Bianca Del Rio as someone who inspires them – even after some admitted they had a different aesthetic. Broadly, early SI explains how interpretation and engagement can lead to consensus (Blumer, 1962).

Bianca Del Rio won her season of RPDR, toured with the other RPDR drag queens and starred in her own movie on Netflix (Nichols, 2016b). Bianca Del Rio’s external success rooted in winning the show may attribute to the consensus of her as a drag inspiration.

Within SI, Altheide (2000) argued four significant implications of observing mediated-identity formation included mutual beneficiaries, improving interpretations, modeling media communities, deeper texts of self-perspectives. First, this study provided cultural context of identity formation in conjunction with media programming (Altheide,

2000). Second, the participants benefitted from questioning and/or interpreting media content (Altheide, 2000). My participants, while they admitted to discussing the show quite a bit in their social groups, made statements that surprised even themselves. As

Violet said, “I haven’t thought about that a lot, actually.” Third, media communities are created when a group viewed and discussed a show, perpetuating cultural discussion and shifts (Altheide, 2000). Fourth, SI is more receptive to identity and perspectives as it views the individual as actively evolving (Altheide, 2000). My participants discussed DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 55 how their performance persona has changed and will change in the future in accordance with goals. Some of my participants even have goals of being a contestant on the show.

Altheide (2000) asserted, through the use of SI, defining a situation in which an individual is actively engaged naturally creates boundaries and limitations. With this view, one individual in a mass-mediated context can influence those boundaries. A power-dynamic is created. “Hence others more or less accept the powerful person’s or group’s definition” (p. 5). This is elaborated in the divisiveness in which my participants discussed pageant queens. My participants admitted that there is an omission of pageant queens from becoming a contestant on the show; they even argue that it is the reason

Houston has not had a representing queen. My participants situated their personal identity and social identity to this context. My pageant queen participants relied on their social situations (pageantry), rather than mass-mediated situations to define their drag style.

In continuation of Altheide’s (2000) discourse, media is used as a resource for individuals to position their identity in a collective. Cerulo (1997) also stated that individuals use objects for identification. The study of these objects, such as television, can be observed in the language and conversation surrounding concept’s definitions

(Cerulo, 1997). The show, in a sense, is to be creating a collective consensus. However, my participants differed in their definitions of drag in relation to RPDR. The reflexive and individualistic interpretive capabilities, described by SI, can designate a collective drag queen culture in ritual and performance but can also describe how they differ on the most important notion: the definition of drag.

In relation to Swidler’s (1986) discourse on culture, I had the opportunity to analyze drag culture utilizing the three steps. First, the production of images and DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 56 narratives created drag cultural tools. Second, this analysis constructed discourse surrounding the interpretation and use of said tools. Third, my participants reflected on the cost and benefits of RPDR in order to continue evolving their drag persona. Swidler’s

(1986) definition of “strategy” also pertains to my participants’ multi-layered actions in order to reach their personal success.

As stated, there are a number of drag types on the show. Identities have the opportunity to be validated and inspired by what is seen on television (Altheide, 2000).

The multitude of drag types exemplifies the differences within such a collective, exaggerating a generational divide described by all of my participants. The older queens agree on the necessity of certain garments to be considered drag, among other creative, performance qualities. Younger queens assert a more gender-bending notion of drag, tossing aside the requirement of pads, for instance.

When analyzing my participant’s definitions of drag in relation to Taylor and

Rupp’s (2004) definition, the majority of my participants are moving beyond an exclusive definition and toward a more ambiguous one. It appears that the older generation follows more closely to Taylor and Rupp’s (2004) “gay men who dress and perform as but do not want to be women or have women’s bodies,” and the younger generation align with the idea that anyone has the capability to creatively express themselves by shape-shifting (p. 115).

Dramaturgy. As an extension of SI, my data is further illuminated by Goffman’s

(1959) dramaturgical perspective. Goffman (1959) claimed that identity is not singular; rather through the SI process, individual’s reflexive construct an identity to fill social situations. In it’s simplest form, drag allows for two identities and those identities were DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 57 openly discussed in my interviews. For example, many of my participants described their drag persona as an “armor” to their non-performance identity. Some of my participants expressed feelings of social anxiety when confronted with talking to strangers. With their drag persona, they have the ability to interact and perform in social situations where they may otherwise struggle with in their “male” identity, as Athena called it.

According to Taylor and Rupp (2003), positioning a perspective of performance theories and identity provide a refreshing alternative image. As Butler (1993b) asserted, drag queens toy with gender identity boundaries through artistic expression. Many of my participants expressed the desire to have a more “backstage” look, to use Goffman’s term, into how the contestants create their look on RPDR. The styles of drag portrayed on the show, while some of them may be different from my respective participants, are still of interest because of the transferable ability. For example, many of my participants expressed that Bianca Del Rio was one of their favorite drag queens from the show in that she was “consistently flawless” and maintained a quality persona. Some of my participants who perform an entirely different style to Bianca Del Rio’s watched and learned from her hosting ability’s and quick candor, while wishing they could learn from her sewing technique (as it is not shown in the episodes).

While my point of study was broader than clothing, my findings coincided with

Rubinstein’s (1995) observation of “social costumes.” Drag queens utilize their social environment to create clothing that embodies their performance identity and intended message for that specific performance. All of my participants chose to take photographs of themselves and describe their wardrobe and makeup choices. They described how each piece was representative of their desired aesthetic. Some of my participants included DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 58 references to former contestants on RPDR; however, they could have been doing this for my benefit to ensure I understood rather than to exhibit their adoration for a particular contestant’s performance style.

Taylor and Rupp (2004) asserted that defying gender norms and rules through drag is empowering. Very few academics discuss defying drag norms and rules as a point of study, and whether or not that is empowering. Many of my participants experience

“backstage” and “frontstage” forms of empowerment, from the rituals of painting

(applying makeup) to hosting or performing. However, the division between pageant queens and other queens provides an interesting point of study. The pageant queens I spoke with asserted their desire to continue with pageants despite its omission from

RPDR, considering it the highest standard of drag. They argued that audiences in other forms of performances are seeking alternate forms of drag, like the ones they have seen on the show. Thus, my participants’ active audiences are providing cues for them to shift their identity toward a more “mainstream” drag persona. Given the large pageant circuit in Texas and the United States, certainly Miss Gay USA, my participants interpreted their persona within a pageant context to avoid any embarrassment or marginalization that

Pagan (2015) discussed as a potential outcome for drag queens.

As Goffman (1959) asserted, the self is social. Thus, an identity is dependent on a group defining norms. In this case, a group is including media in their process of defining drag. In this case, my participants largely had variations of definitions for drag. This exemplifies the independent, active reflexivity of the individual, as described with SI.

Viewing RPDR, in a mediated context, allows the individual the freedom of such forms of interpretation for backstage preparations. As KiKi stated, “How do you define art?” DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 59

The question weighs with impossibility. Even still, my participants self-identify as drag queens. A definition must be present. There may be differences in more narrow definitions, but the broad definition is present in many of my participant’s definitions.

Drag is art. The intricacies of artistic expression are highlighted in the standards and rules of drag. The intricacies of artistic expression are portrayed on the show. The intricacies of artistic expression are interpreted and debated in social settings among my participants and with me during our interviews.

Egner and Maloney (2016) argue that drag queens accept gender more fluidly and are not “held hostage by society’s local-and network-based preconceived notions” (p.

876). Drag queens, they assert, see gender as rules to defy. However, some of my participants struggle with defying rules curated for generations of drag, thus creating a divide between younger and older generations. All of my drag queens asserted that the show has had a direct effect on the division between generations. Thinking beyond the subversive essence of drag overall, I found that many of my participants struggled with challenging their own performance style and aesthetic. The division is not simply located within drag style, but the culture as a whole. My participants asserted a behavioral shift in those who have been performing pre-RPDR and post-RPDR.

Mediated Contexts and an Individual’s Self-Concept

I understood the identity process with Hammack’s (2005) GLB identity framework because of its utilization of cultural context. According to this framework, media play a critical part in constructing one’s identity. My participants did not discuss the construction process of their “male” identity, but found that media and popular culture played a unique role in constructing a performance identity. For instance, a drag DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 60 queen’s name is sometimes based on popular culture or media icons, as opposed to traditionally taking the name of one’s drag mother. This was only the case for a couple of my participants. Perhaps more importantly, the drag identity that relies on media is found within the art of performance. All of my drag queens relied on television, music, movies and other popular culture components to create their acts for the audience to relate with.

My participants were hesitant to state how much they rely on RPDR, since they knew the majority of drag queens watch the show. There was a heavy desire for uniqueness of performance.

Under Altheide’s (2000) theoretical direction, several studies found that media role models heightened participants’ self-esteem, altered behavior and prompted behavioral modeling (Wohlford, Lochman & Barry, 2004; Boon & Lomore, 2001;

Feilitzen & Linne, 1975). My participants had no problems listing more than my requested three models. Half of my participants included former contestants on RPDR.

Reasoning on why the individual is an inspiration varied from overcoming obstacles to quickness of banter. Interestingly, my participants mentioned style aesthetic when a former contestant was included on their list. All of my participants included their respective drag mother.

My participants did express that they model their behavior after some of their icons, mimicking Feilitzen and Linne’s (1975) study. However, only three of my participants expressed that they model some of their behavior after a former contestant.

Their desire to be individualistic and artistic outweighed their desire to mimic an icon.

Rather, they were adamant to me that they admired these individuals for their success and would want to mimic their results with their own methods. DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 61

This study coincides with Kivel and Kleiber’s (2000) findings that, due to sparse homosexual narratives found in media, gay and lesbian youth sought out gay media in which they could relate. All of my participants argued that the majority of their drag friends and acquaintances watch RPDR. However, no one listed RuPaul as a drag icon.

Eleven of my participants, even still, expressed a kind of gratitude toward presenting drag to the public as it brought them pride and wider audiences at performances.

Limitations of study

The largest limitation of this study is the breadth of analysis. I was only able to interview 12 drag queens in the Houston area from the same social circle. The drag queens I interviewed connected me with their friends and individuals they perform with.

There were similarities between the drag queens I interviewed. The drag queens I interviewed were in drag as a career or were interested in pursuing drag as a career. They were interested in the show as a launching pad for their career and success. Their perception of the show would be based around this notion. I had few participants who performed drag as a hobby. I also had few participants that explored various types of performance art while in drag, spoken word being an example. My participants largely host, dance, and compete in drag races and pageants. I am interested in this kind of artistic expression, but Houston drag performances rarely host these occasions.

A second limitation is the inclusion of photovoice, photo-elicitation and interviewing, which both deserved to be separate projects. By including both narratives and interview questions in one interview, there were layers of information and potential diverging follow-up questions that there simply was not time for. While my participant was informed of the one-two hour anticipated interview length, they grew weary and DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 62 answers become more limited as we surpassed the 90-minute mark. As an active participant in the interview, I found myself talking more toward the end of the interview to probe and follow-up.

Future Research

Because there is limited research on RPDR effects on viewers, future research should study broader types of drags and its influence. For instance, “bio queens” – women who perform as drag queens – and “trans queens” – transgender queens who perform as drag queens – were not allowed to be included on the show. This new season is the first to include a transgender queen. This research could be conducted qualitatively, with a similar research design. These types of drag are marginalized, even from drag communities. By studying their reception of RPDR, a show that has prohibited them from participating, it could further the understanding of this particular show’s impact on the

LGBTQ+ community.

I also recommend observing geographic location and RPDR viewers. Many contestants on RPDR come from similar areas across the United States. As I have observed in this study, my participants perceive that Houston drag culture does not correspond well with what producers want for RPDR. The New York/Rochester area, in comparison, boasts more than three contestants on the show. A comparative analysis of regional drag cultures surrounding RPDR viewers would be useful in comprehending consensus on drag definitions.

Lastly, I recommend a longitudinal content analysis of the show in its entirety.

With the show’s first “trans queen” contestant for the ninth season, there are potential shifts in drag culture allowing for the individual’s admission. By observing definitions of DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 63 drag through all nine seasons, there are opportunities of understanding how the meaning of drag has evolved.

This study offers the foundation to create the discussed studies. My participants highlighted a generational divide relatively unfounded in academic literature. In addition, all of my participants illustrated the immense impact the show has had on drag culture, and they foresee changes to come as drag becomes more mainstream.

DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 64

APPENDIX A: Project Consent Form

Photovoice Directive Letter

Dear Potential Participant:

I am a Master’s candidate at the University of Houston’s Jack J. Valenti School of Communication. I am exploring how the show RuPaul’s Drag Race has influenced drag styles and personas in Houston. I am contacting you with the hopes you may want to be involved in my thesis project.

I chose this project because of my love of drag performances, the wardrobe and the ‘lipsyncs for their life.’ I am conducting one-on-one interviews and including a photo project with those who are also fans of RuPaul Drag Race. There’s no such thing as a wrong answer or a bad picture, so any way you would participate is helpful! Your involvement would help understand how drag queens create and learn about their personas.

Look forward to hearing from you!

Megan Brann

Consent Form

You are invited to participate in research on drag queen style and persona in the context of RuPaul’s Drag Race. The purpose of the study is to understand how the show inspires drag performers. You’ve been selected because you are a drag queen viewer of the program in the Houston area. This project is being conducted under the supervision of Dr. Temple Northup, a professor at the Jack J. Valenti School of Communication.

If you agree to participate, you will be asked to take 5-10 different photographs of meaningful aspects of your drag identity. They could be of people, places, clothes and aspects of your drag performance. In an interview, we will talk about your photographs, your drag style, and what you think about RuPaul’s Drag Race, which will take about one hour.

The risk of this study is revealing your identity when there is potential stigma associated with drag performers. In order to overcome this risk, you can avoid taking photographs of your face or anything that may easily reveal your personal identity. Share what you feel comfortable with. You will be sharing your personal experiences and your opinions in an interview to give a better understanding of how drag queens view RuPaul’s Drag Race. The conversation will be audio recorded. The recording will be secured by Megan Brann and stored for five years, per University of Houston guidelines, before it will be erased.

Your identity will be kept private if requested and have included no photographs of your face. If so, every effort will be made to maintain the confidentiality of your participation in this project. You can provide a name for Megan Brann to refer to you as DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 65 throughout the study. Megan Brann will pair your name with a code number. This code number will appear on all written materials. The list pairing your name to the assigned code number will be kept separate from all research materials and will be available only to Megan Brann.

Taking part in the research project is voluntary and you may refuse to take part or withdraw at any time without penalty or loss of benefits to which you are otherwise entitled. You may also refuse to answer any research-related questions that make you uncomfortable. If you have any questions about the study, you can contact Megan Brann at (832-260-4915) at any time.

This study is approved by the Institional Review Board – Human Subjects, University of Houston. Any questions regarding this right as a participant may be addressed to the University of Houston Committee for the Protection of Human Subjects (713-743-9204). All research projects that are carried out by Investigators at the University of Houston are governed be requirements of the University and the federal government.

Photo FAQs

You are being asked to take five photographs of your choice with this question in mind: what is a meaningful part of my drag identity? You can take photographs of people, places or things. You will talk about why you took those photographs in an interview.

You will be asked to give Megan Brann permission to use these photographs as part of her research. There is also a chance those photographs will be used in published documents or in presentations.

Your name will not be used if requested. However, if you include a picture of yourself, someone may recognize you.

If you have any questions about the study, you can contact Megan Brann at (832- 260-4915 or [email protected]) at any time.

Project Information Guide

You are invited to participate in research on drag queen style and persona and RuPaul’s Drag Race. The purpose of the study is to understand how the show inspires drag queens. You’ve been selected because you are a drag queen viewer of the program in the Houston area.

If you participate, you will be asked to take five photographs that are meaningful to your life. You will be asked to send me your photographs, and then I will contact you to set up an interview convenient to your schedule and location. You will be asked questions like the following about your photographs: (1) Describe to me what is in this photo (2) What moved you to take this photo? (3) Why is this important for you to share? (4) Is there anything you wish you could add to this photo? DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 66

The project will take less than one month. If you choose to participate, you will be asked to take 5 different photographs in two weeks time. You will send me your photographs via email. If you do not have the equipment to take photographs, you will be given a disposable camera to take the five photographs. After you have taken your photographs, I will develop them prior to our meeting. After you send the photographs or the disposable camera, we will set up a one-hour interview to discuss your photographs and experiences. After the interview, you will be sent the final project to highlight your participation as well as printed copies of your photographs.

Our conversation will be audio recorded. If you choose to remain confidential, I will make every effort to secure your identity in the research materials. The potential risk is revealing identity when there is stigma associated with drag performers. In order to overcome this risk, you can avoid taking photographs of your face or anything that may easily reveal your personal identity. Share what you feel comfortable with, as you will be providing your personal experiences and opinions.

Participation is voluntary. You can choose to withdraw from the project at any time. Feel free to contact me with any questions by phone (832-260-4915) or by email ([email protected]).

Please ask any questions you may have and read the information materials until you feel comfortable with the project.

DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 67

APPENDIX B: Interview Guide for Drag Queen Participants

The interview is guided by the concept of identity, starting with self and expanding to social and cultural forces (Gomillion & Guiliano, 2011).

Thank you for taking the time to answer my questions. Before we start, could you read and review the consent form about your participation today. Please let me know if you have any questions, and I can give you more information.

Thank you.

I’m doing my thesis on the relationship between RuPaul’s Drag Race, drag identity and the culture surrounding drag queens. There are no right or wrong answers for any of the questions. You do not have to reveal anything that makes you feel uncomfortable. I will be recording our conversation, and your privacy is important to me.

I will be asking you questions about who you are when you perform in drag, your opinions about RuPaul’s Drag Race, and any drag queen role models you may have. Let me know if you’d rather not answer a question, and we can move on.

I’m starting the recorder now.

Do you have any questions before we get started?

1. Let’s begin by introducing ourselves. I’m Megan Brann. I’m a graduate student at U of H. I moved to Houston from New Orleans in 2014 where I worked for a non-profit. Tell me a little bit about yourself.

2. I’m going to ask you about your drag persona. I asked you to take photographs on things that define or inspire you. Why don’t you show me your photographs and tell me why you took them? Drag Identity

3. What’s your drag name? Tell me about her. Drag Identity Probe: Tell me about how [drag name] has changed over time. [probe about the development and construction of drag identity if not mentioned] Probe: How are [chosen name] and [chosen drag name] different? How are they the same?

4. “What role do you think media – and by media I mean TV, movies, books, magazines, etc. – play[ed]” when you’re working on your drag persona (Gomillion & Guiliano, 2011, p. 354)? Drag Identity Probe: Does media help you with your drag style and/or persona? Probe: Were you watching RuPaul when you were starting to dress in drag? DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 68

5. I’m going to ask you a little bit about the show. How would you describe RuPaul’s Drag Race to someone who has never seen it before? Media and Drag Identity Probe: How often have you watched the show? Probe: Tell me about how you feel when you watch the show. If they are unsure, ask about a time they watched the show.

6. Tell me about some of the drag styles that you see on the show. Media and Drag Identity Probe: Tell me about your own personal style of drag. Probe: How do you think the show’s preferences and your style overlap and differ?

7. Who are some drag queen role models to you? Media and Drag Identity Probe: Why are they so influential to you? Probe: Has there been a contestant that has influenced or stood out to you?

8. What do you think it would be like if you were a contestant on the show? Probe: Does the show inform you about new styles or give you ideas? Probe: Describe how you feel when you watch an episode.

9. How do you feel about the way RuPaul’s Drag Race represents you as a drag queen? Opinions of Portrayals in Media Probe: How do you think it represents the culture you described earlier? Probe: How has that changed?

10. What do you love most about the show? Media and Drag Culture Probe: Describe how you think the show makes other drag queens feel. Probe: Describe how you think the show makes viewers who do not participate in drag feel.

11. What do you dislike about the show? Media and Drag Culture Probe: How have those changed over the course of the show? Probe: How do you think the show will change as it continues?

12. What role do you think the show is playing for those who are just starting out? Media and Drag Culture Probe: What advice would you give them? Probe: Tell me what it was like just starting out for you.

DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 69

13. Do you think the show is important to drag queens? Media and Drag Culture Probe: Why? Probe: Tell me about how that has changed over the seasons.

Is there anything else you’d like to add?

Thank you again for so generously sharing your time and experiences with me. You can contact me at [email protected] with any further questions.

DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 70

APPENDIX C: Face Sheet

Name: ______

Age: ______

Email: ______

Gender: ______

Marital status (circle one):

Single Engaged Married Divorced Widowed

Occupation: ______

Education level (circle one):

High School (GED) Bachelor’s Some Graduate Master’s/PhD

Where did you receive your last degree: ______

Do you perform in drag (circle one)? Yes No

How often do you perform in drag?

Never Once per month 1-2 times a month Once per week

Who would you consider your drag role model to be? Name up to three people.

______

______

______

Thank you again for so generously sharing your time and experiences with me. You can contact me at [email protected] with any further questions.

DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 71

Appendix D: Interview Site Locations

Coffee Shops Heights Boomtown Coffee, 242 W 19th St, Houston, TX 77008 EQ Heights, 1030 Heights Blvd, Houston, TX 77008 Antidote, 729 Studewood St, Houston, TX 77007

Montrose/Midtown Siphon Coffee, 701 W Alabama St, Houston, TX 77006 Empire Café, 1732 Westheimer Rd, Houston, TX 77098 Brasil Café, 2604 Dunlavy St, Houston, TX 77006

Rice Military PJ’s Coffee, 2155 Durham Dr #101, Houston, TX

Outer Loop Starbucks, Oak Forest, 1206 W 43rd St, Houston, TX 77018 Starbucks, Oak Forest, 5340 W 34th St, Houston, TX 77092 Starbucks, City Center, 500, 8420 Katy Fwy, Houston, TX 77055

Rice Village Starbucks, 2520 University Blvd, Houston, TX 77005

University of Houston Sue Conference Room, 450 PGH, University of Houston Wilson Conference Room, Jack J. Valenti School, University of Houston The Nook, 4701 Calhoun Rd, Houston, TX 77004 M.D. Anderson Library, 4333 University Dr, Houston, TX 77204 Student Center South, 4455, University Dr, Houston, TX 77204 Student Center Satellite

DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 72

REFERENCES

Alby, F., & Fatigante, M. (2014). Preserving the respondent's standpoint in a research

interview: Different strategies of 'doing' the interviewer. Human Studies, 37, 239-

256. doi:10.1007/s10746-013-9292-y

Altheide, D. L. (2000). Identity and the definition of the situation in a mass-mediated

context. Symbolic Interaction, 23, 1-27.

Baker, S. E. (2012). How many qualitative interviews is enough?: Expert voices and

early career reflections on sampling and cases in qualitative research (Rep.).

Retrieved from http://eprints.ncrm.ac.uk/2273/4/how_many_interviews.pdf

Bandura A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory.

Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Bandura, A. (2001). SOCIAL COGNITIVE THEORY: An Agentic perspective. Annual

Review of Psychology, 52(1), 1.

Berkowitz, D., & Belgrave, L. L. (2010). "She works hard for the money": Drag queens

and the management of their contradictory status of celebrity and marginality.

Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 39, 159-186.

doi:10.1177/0891241609342193

Blumer, H. (1962). Society as symbolic interaction. In A. M. Rose (Ed.), Human

behavior and social processes (pp. 179-192). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.

Blumer, H. (1969). Symbolic interactionism: Perspectives and method. Englewood Cliffs,

NJ: Prentice Hall.

Boon, S. D., & Lomore, C. D. (2001). Admirer-celebrity relationships among young

adults: Explaining perceptions of celebrity influence on identity. Human

Communication Research, 27, 432–465. DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 73

Butler, J. (1993a). Imitation and gender insubordination. In H. Abelove, M. A. Barale,

& D. M. Halperin (Eds.), The lesbian and gay studies reader (pp. 301–320). New

York, NY: Routledge

Butler, J. (1993b). Bodies that matter: On the discursive limits of sex. New York, NY:

Routledge

Boyce, C., & Neale, P. (2006). Conducting in-depth interviews: A guide for designing

and conducting in-depth interviews for evaluation input (pp. 3-7). Watertown,

MA: Pathfinder International.

Cartwright, R. L. (1968). Some remarks on essentialism. The Journal of Philosophy, 65,

615–626. doi:10.2307/2024315.

Cerulo, K. A. (1997). Identity construction: New issues, new directions. Annual Review

of Sociology, 23, 385–409.

Charmaz, K. (2002). Qualitative interviewing and grounded theory analysis. In J. F.

Gubrium & J. Holstein (Eds.), Handbook of interview research (pp. 675-693).

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Chernoff, C. (2014). Of women and queens: Gender realities and re-education in

RuPaul’s drag empire. In Jim Deams (Ed.), RuPaul’s Drag Race: Drag and

reality TV (pp. 148-167). Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Company.

Egner, J., & Maloney, P. (2016). “It has no color, it has no gender, it’s gender bending”:

Gender and sexuality fluidity and subversiveness in drag performance. Journal of

Homosexuality, 63, 875-903. doi:10.1080/00918369.2015.1116345

Farganis, J. (2011). Readings in social theory: The classic tradition to post-modernism.

Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill. DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 74

Feilitzen, C., & Linne, O. (1975). Identifying with television characters. Journal of

Communication, 25, 51–55.

Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. Garden City, NY:

Doubleday.

Goldmark, M. (2015). NATIONAL DRAG. GLQ: A Journal Of Lesbian & Gay Studies,

21, 501-520. doi:10.1215/10642684-3123665

Gomillion, S. C., & Giuliano, T. A. (2011). The influence of media role models on gay,

lesbian, and bisexual identity. Journal of Homosexuality, 58, 330-354.

doi:10.1080/00918369.2011.546729

Halberstam, J. (1997). Mackdaddy, superfly, rapper: Gender, race, and masculinity in the

drag king scene. Social Text, 52/53, 104–131.

Hammack, P. L. (2005). The life course development of human sexual orientation: An

integrative paradigm. Human Development, 48, 267–290.

Holstein, J. A., & Gubrium, J. F. (1995). The active interview. Qualitative Research

Methods Series 37. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Hopkins, S. J. (2004). "Let the drag race begin": The rewards of becoming a queen.

Journal of Homosexuality, 46(3/4), 135-149.

Kivel, B. D., & Kleiber, D. A. (2000). Leisure in the identity formation of lesbian/gay

youth: Personal, but not social. Leisure Sciences, 22, 215-232.

doi:10.1080/01490409950202276

Mead, G. H. (1962). Mind, self, and society from the standpoint of a social behaviorist.

Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 75

Minthorn, R. S., & Marsh, T. E. (2016). Centering indigenous college student voices and

perspectives through photovoice and photo-elicitation. Contemporary

Educational Psychology, 474-10. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2016.04.010

Nichols, J. M. (2016a, March 2). RuPaul explains the difference between drag and being

transgender. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/rupaul-

explains-the-difference-between-drag-and-being-

transgender_us_56d73496e4b03260bf78f317

Nichols, J. M. (2016b, September 21). Bianca Del Rio opens up about her first full-length

feature film. Retrieved March 1, 2017, from

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/bianca-del-rio-hurriance-

bianca_us_57e151e6e4b04a1497b6b60b

Pagan, N. O. (2015). Dada and performance: A symbolic interactionist

perspective. Studies in Theatre & Performance, 35, 22-35.

doi:10.1080/14682761.2014.1001608

Poe, P. Z. (2012). Direct-to-consumer drug advertising and “health media filters”: A

qualitative study of older adult women's responses to DTC ads. Atlantic Journal

of Communication, 20, 185-199. doi:10.1080/15456870.2012.692236

Rogers, K. (2014). RuPaul: Drag Race 'has exactly the effect we thought it might have.'

Retrieved September 14, 2016, from https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-

radio/2014/feb/24/rupaul-drag-race-lgbt-impact-pop-culture-tv

Rubinstein, R. P. (1995). Dress codes: Meanings and messages in American culture.

Boulder, CO: Westview Press. DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 76

RuPaul's Big Opening Part Two [Television series episode]. (2014, March 3). InRuPaul's

Drag Race. LogoTV.

Schacht, S. (2002). Four renditions of doing female drag. Feminine appearing conceptual

variations of masculine theme. Gendered Sexualities, 6, 157–180.

Schewe, E. (2009). Serious play: Drag, transgender, and the relationship between

performance and identity in the life writing of RuPaul and Kate Bornstein.

Biography: An Interdisciplinary Quarterly, 32, 670-295.

Simmel, G. (1955). Conflict and the web of group-affiliations. New York, NY: Free

Press.

Simmonds, S., Roux, C., & Avest, I. T. (2015). Blurring the boundaries between

photovoice and narrative inquiry: A narrative-photovoice methodology for

gender-based research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 14(3), 33-

49.

Simmons, N. (2014). Speaking like a queen in RuPaul's Drag Race: Towards a speech

code of American drag queens. Sexuality & Culture, 18, 630-648.

doi:10.1007/s12119-013-9213-2

Strings, S., & Bui, L. T. (2014). “She is not acting, she is.” Feminist Media Studies, 14,

822-836. doi:10.1080/14680777.2013.829861

Stryker, S. (1980). Symbolic interactionism: A social structural version. Menlo Park, CA:

Benjamin Cummings.

Stryker, S. (2008). From Mead to a structural symbolic interactionism and beyond.

Annual Review of Sociology, 3415-3431. DRAG QUEEN IDENTITY 77

Swidler, A. (1986). Culture in action: Symbols and strategies. American Sociological

Review,51, 273. doi:10.2307/2095521

Taylor, V., & Rupp, L. J. (2004). Chicks with dicks, men in dresses: What it means to be

a drag queen. Journal of Homosexuality, 46(3/4), 113-133.

Tewksbury, R. (1994). Gender construction and the female impersonator: The process of

transforming “he” to “she.” Deviant Behavior, 15, 27–43. doi:10.1080/

01639625.1994.9967956

Tracy, S. (2013). Qualitative research methods: Collecting evidence, crafting analysis,

communicating impact. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.

Wang, C. C. (1999). Photovoice: A Participatory Action Research Strategy Applied to

Women's Health. Journal Of Women's Health, 8(2), 185.

Warren, C. A., & Karner, T. X. (2014). Discovering qualitative methods: Field research,

interviews, and analysis. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Wagner, P. E., Ellingson, L. L., & Kunkel, A. (2016). Pictures, patience, and

practicalities: Lessons learned from using photovoice in applied communication

contexts. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 44, 336-342.

doi:10.1080/00909882.2016.1192292

Wohlford, K. E., Lochman, J. E., & Barry, T. D. (2004). The relation between chosen

role models and the self-esteem of men and women. Sex Roles, 50, 575–582.