Culture and contact in the promotion and reduction of anti-gay prejudice: evidence from Jamaica and Britain

Jamaica has been called "the most homophobic place on Earth" ( Padgett, 2006 , p. 1), and has been involved in numerous international incidents with Britain, and other countries, concerning anti-gay prejudice. However, neither the severity of Jamaican anti-gay prejudice, nor any means of reducing this prejudice has ever been empirically investigated. Intergroup contact-social interaction with a person from another group-is one of the most successful and widely used social-psychological interventions to reduce prejudice and improve intergroup relations. In this article, we compared sexual prejudice in Jamaica to that in Britain and investigated the relationship between contact and sexual prejudice in both countries. Jamaican participants reported more negative attitudes toward gay men than did British participants, but contact was more strongly associated with reduced sexual prejudice for Jamaican participants than for British participants. Implications for reducing Jamaican sexual prejudice are discussed.     

Gay men and lesbians' experiences in and expectations for interactions with heterosexuals

We analyzed 97 gay men's and lesbians' experiences with and expectations for interactions with majority group members. Respondents described reactions to previous or imagined future interactions with an unfamiliar heterosexual person who had just become aware that the respondent was lesbian or gay. Results indicated that respondents are more proactive than reactive (in contrast to expectation states theories), that the contact hypothesis can be appropriately applied to this group, even though the formulation of the theory was based upon negative attitudes in the absence of extensive contact, and that they have different reactions for people of different prejudice levels, rather than being globally suspicious, as is predicted by many intergroup theories. Future research should direct more attention to the stigmatized group members' attitudes about and reactions toward the majority group.     

Affective Responses to Gay Men Using Facial Electromyography: Is There a Psychophysiological “Look” of Anti-Gay Bias

ABSTRACT

Despite a wealth of attitudinal studies that elucidate the psychological correlates of anti-gay bias, studies that provide evidence of the physiological correlates of anti-gay bias remain relatively scarce. The present study addresses the under-representation of physiological research in the area of homonegativity by examining psychophysiological markers, namely the affective manifestations of anti-gay prejudice, and their correspondence with anti-gay behavior. Facial electromyography (EMG) was the technique used to acquire the psychophysiological markers via recordings from two facial muscle sites. Whether heterosexual men’s implicit affective reactions to gay male couples best predicted their overt and covert discriminatory behavior toward a presumed gay male confederate was determined. The strength of the implicit affective reactions to predict anti-gay discrimination was then tested against the strength of participants’ implicit cognitive reactions acquired via the Implicit Association Test (IAT). Results indicated that the affective reactions recorded via facial EMG emerged as the strongest predictor of discrimination toward gay men compared to the cognitive reactions recorded using the IAT. Findings support the contention that emotional reactions to gay men using implicit techniques such as facial EMG are potentially valuable pathways toward understanding the nature and sequelae of anti-gay behavior.     

The Effects of Death Reminders on Sex Differences in Prejudice Toward Gay Men and Lesbians

Terror management research shows that death reminders (mortality salience) increase prejudice toward worldview violators. Two studies investigated whether death reminders exacerbated differences in heterosexual men's and women's reports of sexual prejudice (negative attitudes based on sexual orientation). Results showed that following death reminders, sex differences in anti-gay discrimination and affective prejudice toward gay men (but not toward lesbians) were larger, and that these increased sex differences were mediated by gender role beliefs. The current studies suggest that researchers may attenuate the effects of death reminders by lessening the perceived worldview violation in addition to alleviating the existential terror of death.     

The effects of death reminders on sex differences in prejudice toward gay men and lesbians

Terror management research shows that death reminders (mortality salience) increase prejudice toward worldview violators. Two studies investigated whether death reminders exacerbated differences in heterosexual men's and women's reports of sexual prejudice (negative attitudes based on sexual orientation). Results showed that following death reminders, sex differences in anti-gay discrimination and affective prejudice toward gay men (but not toward lesbians) were larger, and that these increased sex differences were mediated by gender role beliefs. The current studies suggest that researchers may attenuate the effects of death reminders by lessening the perceived worldview violation in addition to alleviating the existential terror of death.     

Polymorphous Prejudice: Liberating the Measurement of Heterosexuals' Attitudes Toward Lesbians and Gay Men

A multidimensional measure of sexual prejudice was developed to assess the increasing complexity of heterosexuals' attitudes toward gay men and lesbians. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses revealed a valid and reliable 7-factor measure that assessed: 1) traditional heterosexism; 2) tendency to deny anti-gay discrimination continues; 3) aversion toward gay men; 4) aversion to lesbians; 5) judgments regarding the value of the gay and lesbian movement; 6) resistance to heteronormative expectations; and 7) endorsement of positive beliefs about gay people. A modern heterosexism theory was supported and queer/liberationist notions of anti-heteronormativity and positive beliefs were found to be related to pro-homosexual attitudes.     

Perceived Similarity With Gay Men Mediates the Effect of Antifemininity on Heterosexual Men’s Antigay Prejudice

This research examined the hypothesis that heterosexual men’s motivation to differentiate themselves from gay men mediates the relationship between the antifemininity norm of masculinity and antigay prejudice. We assessed masculinity through three concepts: status, thoughness, and antifemininity. Participants then reported their perceived similarity with gay men and their antigay prejudice. The results showed that antifemininity was the best predictor of both perceived similarity and antigay prejudice: The more people endorsed the antifemininity norm, the more they perceived themselves as dissimilar from gay men and showed antigay prejudice. More important, perceived similarity mediated the effect of antifemininity on antigay prejudice. These findings provide direct evidence for the link between masculinity and the motivation to differentiate oneself from gay men, and they suggest that antigay prejudice accomplishes the identity function of maintaining unambiguous gender boundaries.     

Mistakes that heterosexual people make when trying to appear non-prejudiced: the view from LGB people

In two studies, lesbians, gay men and bisexuals were queried concerning mistakes that well-meaning heterosexual people have made when interacting with them. In qualitative, open-ended research, we determined that the most common mistakes concerned heterosexuals' pointing out that they know someone who is gay, emphasizing their lack of prejudice, and relying on stereotypes about gays. Following up with a quantitative, close-ended questionnaire, we determined that the mistakes respondents experienced most often involved heterosexuals (a) relying on stereotypes and (b) ignoring gay issues; the most annoying mistakes were heterosexuals (a) using subtle prejudicial language and (b) not owning up to their discomfort with gay issues. We used two theoretical perspectives, shared reality theory and the contact hypothesis, to analyze the quantitative responses. Implications for intergroup relationships between heterosexual people and gay people are discussed.     

Positive associations among interpersonal contact, motivation, and implicit and explicit attitudes toward gay men

A correlational study explored the role of intergroup contact and motivation to respond without prejudice on heterosexuals' expression of explicit and implicit (unconscious) bias against gay men. Participants who reported having more relationships and closer relationships with gay, lesbian, or bisexual people tended to exhibit more favorable attitudes toward gay men on implicit as well as explicit attitude measures. Attitudes were also related to self-reported motivation to be non-prejudiced, including motivation stemming from sources internal as well as external to the individual. Multiple regression analyses showed that contact and motivation explain unique variance in attitude but that motivation is a relatively stronger predictor. The results are interpreted to suggest that implicit and explicit prejudice may be reduced through motivation coupled with positive contact experiences.     

Attitudinal and Individual Differences Influence Perceptions of Mock Child Sexual Assault Cases Involving Gay Defendants

Many people hold negative attitudes and stereotypes about gay men, including the stereotype that gay men are likely to be child molesters. This article explored the implications of this stereotype for judgments made in a hypothetical legal case involving child sexual abuse accusations against a male teacher by either a male or female victim. Mock jurors who held the most anti-gay attitudes and those who endorsed the stereotype of gay men as child molesters made the most pro-prosecution judgments in scenarios involving gay defendants. A new scale (the Stereotypes about Gays and Child Abuse scale) was developed to assess the extent to which participants endorsed the stereotype of gay men as being likely to sexually abuse children. This scale was a stronger predictor of case judgments than existing, more general scales measuring biases against homosexuality.     

Does Contact Matter?: The Relative Importance of Contact in Predicting Anti-Gay Prejudice in Jamaica

ABSTRACT

Jamaica has been called one of the world’s most anti-gay countries. However, little empirical research has investigated methods of reducing this prejudice. Intergroup contact—(positive) interaction with someone from a different social group—is one of the most widely tested and strongly favored methods of reducing prejudice. However, the role of contact in this specific context is not clear, particularly the relative importance of contact compared to other variables that predict (less) prejudice. This current cross-sectional research investigated that question using a large, representative sample of Jamaican participants (N = 942). As in prior research, contact predicted less anti-gay prejudice, and the (negative) relationship between contact and anti-gay behaviors was mediated by intergroup anxiety and attitudes, even when other important predictors were taken into account. However, contact was a less important predictor than gender, education, or religiosity. Implications for intergroup contact and prejudice-reduction strategies in Jamaica are discussed.     

Ambivalent Homoprejudice towards Gay Men: Theory Development and Validation

ABSTRACT

Myriad social groups are targets of hostile and benevolent (i.e., ambivalent) prejudice. However, prejudice toward gay men is typically conceptualized as hostile, despite the prevalence of benevolence toward gay men in popular media. This article aims to compare gay men with other targets of ambivalent prejudice (i.e., women and elderly people) and draw on the stereotype content and microaggressions literatures in order to develop a theory of ambivalent homoprejudice. The resultant framework, comprising repellent, adversarial, romanticized, and paternalistic homoprejudice was investigated using seven focus groups of heterosexuals and gay men (N = 22), and the findings were consistent with stereotype content theory. Directions for future research into the deleterious effects of ambivalent homoprejudice and possible empowering interventions are discussed.     

Life-stories and storied lives: genre and reports of lived experience in gay personal literature

Personal literature may be written either as a life story such as an autobiography or memoir or as an autobiographical novel. Using the three volumes comprising the memoir of author Paul Monette and the three volumes comprising the autobiographical fiction trilogy of journalist and novelist Edmund White, this article explores the goal of each author for selecting a particular genre in which to write about lived experience. Each author enjoyed an elite education and came to adulthood in postwar America in the decade prior to the gay rights era beginning in the 1970s, and each writer participated in the sociosexual culture emerging over the succeeding decade. Each writer became HIV+ in the 1980s (Monette died of complications attending AIDS in 1995), and each writer experienced the loss of his lover to AIDS. While Monette and White each experienced the anti-gay prejudice of postwar American society, Monette's youth was less troubled than that of White who grew up in a complex family with a distant yet harsh father toward whom he was also sexually attracted. While Monette's goal in writing a memoir was that the suffering of his generation of gay men should be remembered, White's goal was more personal, choosing autobiographical fiction in his effort to overcome his feelings of shame about being gay founded on his desire for his father.     

Life-Stories and Storied Lives: Genre and Reports of Lived Experience in Gay Personal Literature

ABSTRACT

Personal literature may be written either as a life story such as an autobiography or memoir or as an autobiographical novel. Using the three volumes comprising the memoir of author Paul Monette and the three volumes comprising the autobiographical fiction trilogy of journalist and novelist Edmund White, this article explores the goal of each author for selecting a particular genre in which to write about lived experience. Each author enjoyed an elite education and came to adulthood in postwar America in the decade prior to the gay rights era beginning in the 1970s, and each writer participated in the sociosexual culture emerging over the succeeding decade. Each writer became HIV+ in the 1980s (Monette died of complications attending AIDS in 1995), and each writer experienced the loss of his lover to AIDS. While Monette and White each experienced the anti-gay prejudice of postwar American society, Monette's youth was less troubled than that of White who grew up in a complex family with a distant yet harsh father toward whom he was also sexually attracted. While Monette's goal in writing a memoir was that the suffering of his generation of gay men should be remembered, White's goal was more personal, choosing autobiographical fiction in his effort to overcome his feelings of shame about being gay founded on his desire for his father.     

Rhetoric and Etiological Beliefs About Sexuality: Reader Responses to Cynthia Nixon’s New York Times Interview

In 2012, the U.S. actress Cynthia Nixon was quoted in the New York Times Magazine as having stated that “for me, it [being gay] is a choice. I understand that for many people it’s not, but for me it’s a choice, and you don’t get to define my gayness for me.” The interview attracted international media attention and public criticism by lesbian and gay activists. This article suggests a rhetorical approach to understanding etiological beliefs and provides a discursive analysis of 198 online comments by readers of Pink News, a gay news Web site that reported on Nixon’s controversial interview. This article explores common arguments used in readers’ comments about Nixon and examines the rhetorical construction of sexuality. The analysis examines three themes within the data. First, biological essentialism was treated by many readers as common knowledge; second, readers suggested that only bisexuals have “choice”; and, third, it was suggested by both Nixon’s critics and her supporters that counterarguments colluded with homophobia. The article suggests that there is an ideological dilemma whereby both “born-this-way” and “choice” arguments can be understood as colluding with anti-gay prejudice.     

Attitudes, subjective experiences, and behaviors in imagined and actual encounters between gay and heterosexual people

Across four studies, we assessed the relationship between participants' attitudes toward gay men and their experiences during either imagined or actual interpersonal encounters with gay men. In the first three studies, participants imagined interactions with gay men and either responded in an open-ended or a closed-ended fashion. In these imagined interactions, participants reported that they expected to have considerable agreement between their attitudes and their subjective experiences during the intergroup encounter. However, during actual interactions, there were no differences between members of different prejudice levels in their responses to the gay confederate. A comparison of the actual and imagined interactions demonstrated that high prejudice people are particularly unlikely to have subjective experiences that match their negative attitudes concerning actual interpersonal encounters.     

Effects of subtle heterosexism on gays, lesbians, bisexuals

This study examined heterosexism that is not specifically targeted at LGB individuals, but may be experienced as antigay harassment, and may contribute to the stigma and stress they experience. LGB participants (N = 175, primarily Euro-American college students), read scenarios of heterosexuals saying or assuming things potentially offensive to gay men or lesbian women. For each scenario, they indicated extent to which they would be offended and less open about their sexuality, and their perceptions of the behaviors as evidence of antigay prejudice. Not only did respondents find the scenarios to be offensive and indicative of prejudice, but perceived offensiveness was associated with a decreased likelihood of coming out. In comparison to gay men, lesbian women and bisexuals found the scenarios more offensive and more indicative of prejudice. Limitations of the current study and directions for future research are outlined.     

Public attitudes toward gays and lesbians: trends and predictors

Public opinion about gay men and lesbians is a popular topic in both the popular press and academic journals. However, analyses of attitudinal trends are rare. Tracing changes in opinion polls on homosexuals in the United States between 1977 and 2003, the first part of the present study showed that public opinion of this minority group has become more positive over time. Part two of this research utilized a recent national survey to identify factors predicting anti-gay attitudes. The best predictors included respondents' sex, stance of anti-abortion and anti-women's equality, and religiosity. Implications for gay rights advocates were discussed.     

Prejudice,internalization, and the accessibility of personal standards for responding to gay men

Heterosexual participants who were very low, moderately low, moderately high and very high in prejudice toward gay men reported their personal standards for responding to gay men (i.e., how they believed they should feel or think in an imagined scenario involving a gay man) via computer. As expected, the standards of very low-prejudice individuals were the least prejudiced, the most internalized (i.e., most important and central to the self), and the most accessible (i.e., reported most quickly). Regression analyses revealed the predicted relation between accessibility and internalization, such that the more internalized the standard the greater its accessibility. A significant quadratic trend for prejudice revealed that accessibility decreases with increasing prejudice, except that at very high levels of prejudice accessibility begins to increase. Implications for prejudice reduction for both low- and high-prejudice individuals are discussed.