Interpersonal contact and heterosexuals’ attitudes toward gay men: Results from a national survey

1993 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 239-244 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gregory M. Herek ◽  
Eric K. Glunt
2005 ◽  
Vol 49 (1) ◽  
pp. 47-76 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin Castro-Convers ◽  
Laurie A. Gray ◽  
Nicholas Ladany ◽  
April E. Metzler

2002 ◽  
Vol 91 (1) ◽  
pp. 115-122 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lynne Carroll ◽  
Paula J. Gilroy

According to the zero-acquaintance paradigm gay men and lesbians possess the ability to identify other homosexuals accurately after only very brief interpersonal contact. Given the vulnerability gay men and lesbians face in terms of antigay violence and prejudice, perceptual accuracy provides self-protection. In an exploratory study, 123 respondents were classified as low, moderate, and high perceivers on the basis of their responses to a recognition index designed by the authors. Next, respondents rated on a series of 5-point Likert scales the helpfulness of several characteristics for identifying gay men and lesbians. Analysis supported the importance of eye contact for lesbians and gay men in identifying one another. For both lesbian and gay male participants, several other variables emerged as significantly helpful in identifying gay men: clothing style and fit, jewelry, facial expressions, posture, body type, walk or gait, and both the types and frequencies of gestures.


2020 ◽  
pp. 1-24
Author(s):  
Michelson and

Recent vocal and vociferous anti-transgender messages parallel historical attacks aimed at gay men and lesbians throughout the 20th century. Back then, many people described gay and lesbian people as pedophiles, sexual deviants, unnatural, or mentally ill. Both historically and today, opponents to transgender equality often call into question the legitimacy of transgender identity, dismissing transgender people as predatory, deviant, a threat to the natural order, or mentally ill. While there are parallels between public opinion toward gay men and lesbians then and transgender people today, this chapter discusses three significant differences: the nature and structure of public opinion, the role of media portrayals, and the impact of interpersonal contact with outgroups. The chapter addresses each in turn, describing how the past, present, and future of transgender rights differ from those of rights for gay men and lesbians.


2019 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
pp. 237802311985201 ◽  
Author(s):  
Long Doan ◽  
Natasha Quadlin ◽  
Brian Powell

Drawing on the first national survey experiment of its kind ( n = 3,922), the authors examine Americans’ perceptions of transgender people’s sex and the factors that underlie these perceptions. The authors randomly assigned respondents to a vignette condition describing a transgender person whose self-identified gender (i.e., identifies as a man or a woman), age (i.e., adult or teenager), and gender conformity in physical appearance (i.e., conforming, nonconforming, ambiguous, or unspecified) had been experimentally manipulated. Then, respondents were asked how they would personally classify that person’s sex. The findings suggest that Americans are more likely to perceive a transgender person’s sex as consistent with their sex assigned at birth than with their gender identity. Furthermore, of the experimental manipulations included in the experiment, only the transgender person’s level of gender conformity—not their self-identified gender or age—affects public perceptions of sex. The authors also find distinct cleavages along sociodemographic lines, including politics, sexual orientation, and interpersonal contact with transgender people. Implications for research on sex and gender are discussed.


Author(s):  
Brian F. Harrison ◽  
Melissa R. Michelson

Gordon Allport’s Intergroup Contact Theory predicts that coming into contact with a member of an outgroup will, under the right conditions, lead to reduced intergroup prejudice. Scholars have found significant evidence that contact with gay men and lesbians does typically lead to reductions in explicit prejudice, even when Allport’s specific conditions are not met. People who report that they personally know someone who is gay or lesbian are more supportive of gay and lesbian rights and relationships and people who report contact with same-sex couples in committed relationships are more supportive of legal recognition of those relationships. There is also evidence that mediated contact, also known as paracontact, can reduce prejudice—in other words, that exposure to positively portrayed gay men and lesbians via the media, including television shows, can shift attitudes. Less is known about how contact affects attitudes toward bisexuals, but initial evidence suggests similar effects. Contact with transgender people is more mixed, with some evidence that interpersonal contact is not as effective due to the negative reactions that many individuals have to transgender people, and some evidence that mediated contact may be more effective, although this is also limited due to the small (but growing) number of positively portrayed transgender characters in the media. A final complication is self-selection bias, in that members of the LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender) community are more likely to come out to individuals whom they believe will respond positively but both observational and experimental evidence suggests that this does not completely explain the power of contact to reduce prejudice against LGBT people.


Author(s):  
Ewa A. Golebiowska

Public opinion on LGBT Americans’ rights has become more supportive of equal treatment over time. The movement toward greater egalitarianism has been particularly pronounced on attitudes toward same-sex marriage and gay adoption. Today, the general public is overwhelmingly supportive of laws to protect gays and lesbians against job discrimination, the right of gay and lesbian couples to adopt children, and legal recognition of same-sex marriages. It is also overwhelmingly supportive of legal protections for gay and lesbian employees, although we do not know whether abstract support for equality in the workplace translates into support for the hiring of gays and lesbians in all occupations. Yet, many questions concerning LGBT Americans’ rights remain controversial. The general public is especially polarized on the questions of whether transgender individuals should be able to use the bathrooms of the gender with which they identify and whether business owners in the wedding services industry can discriminate against same-sex couples on religious grounds. Systematic research on political attitudes of LGBT individuals using probability samples is practically nonexistent, although there are many studies of lesbians, gays, and bisexuals’ attitudes, identities, and behavior that use convenience samples. The existing studies demonstrate that lesbians, gay men, and bisexuals tend to identify as ideologically liberal and favor the Democratic Party in their affinities and votes. LGBT Americans are far more supportive of equality in all issue domains although bisexuals—compared to lesbians and gay men—are more lukewarm in their embrace of equality on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. Scholarship on LGBT Americans in public opinion has primarily explored attitudes toward gays and lesbians and has tended to focus on attitudes toward same-sex marriage and adoption. It examines psychological, political, and demographic correlates of public opinion regarding LGBT individuals and explores links between interpersonal contact with LGBT individuals and attitudes toward them. Generally speaking, moral traditionalism, gender role conceptions, and attributions for the existence of homosexuality are especially important psychological predictors of attitudes toward sexual and gender identity minorities. Partisan and ideological identities play an important role too as do cues from ideologically compatible political elites. Of the several demographic attributes that researchers have included in their models, religion-related variables stand out for their predictive prowess. Finally, interpersonal contact with sexual and gender minorities, as well as community exposure to LGBT individuals, is associated with more favorable views toward them. Another yardstick by which commitment to equal treatment for LGBT Americans could be measured is whether and how sexual orientation and gender identity influence political fortunes of candidates for electoral office. Scholarship to date suggests that sexual orientation and gender identity function as important heuristics that influence voters’ thinking about LGBT candidacies. Some scholarship mines survey questions that inquire about respondents’ willingness to support hypothetical LGBT candidates for office. Others use experimental design to isolate the influences of sexual orientation and gender identity on political evaluation. Altogether, these studies demonstrate that LGBT individuals do not face a level playing field when they launch campaigns for office.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document