Reducing Sexual-Orientation Discrimination: Experimental Evidence from Basic Information Treatments

We study basic information treatments regarding sexual orientation using randomized experiments in three countries with strong and widespread anti-gay attitudes: Serbia, Turkey, and Ukraine. Participants who received information about the economic costs to society of sexual-orientation discrimination were significantly more likely than those in a control group to support equal employment opportunities based on sexual orientation. Information that the World Health Organization (WHO) does not regard homosexuality as a mental illness increased social acceptance of sexual minorities, but only for those who reported trust in the WHO. Our results have important implications for policy makers aiming to expand the rights of lesbian, gay, and bisexual people worldwide.

The strong global trend of prohibiting employment discrimination based on sexual orientation

Over the last 30 years, more than 85 countries have prohibited sexual orientation discrimination in employment. Enacting such legal prohibitions has thereby become the most common form of legal recognition of homosexual orientation (more so than the decriminalisation of homosexual sex or the opening up of family law to same-sex partners). The trend is global (ten countries in Africa, more in Asia/Oceania, many in Europe and the Americas). The trend is reflected in supranational rules of the European Union and the Organisation of American States and also in decisions of international human rights bodies. On the basis of these numbers and developments, and in light of the various factors that help explain the strength of this global trend, the author argues that it is to be expected that the trend will continue to reach more and more countries. Explicit legal prohibitions of sexual orientation discrimination in employment can play a useful – perhaps central – role amongst other legal, educational, and social strategies aimed at increasing LGB inclusion.

Psychiatric Disorders Mediates the Association between Sexual Orientation Discrimination and Substance Use Disorders among Sexual Minority Adults

Although sexual orientation discrimination (SO-discrimination) is associated with an increased risk of psychiatric and substance use disorders (SUD) among sexual minority (SM) adults, these relationships are not well understood, particularly in the context of SUD severity. To address this gap, we assessed the direct and indirect effect of SO-discrimination and sexual identity on psychiatric disorders and SUD severity in the context of stress and resilience among SM adults. We used data from 3,494 adults reporting nonheterosexual identity, attraction, or behavior collected as part of a nationally representative cross-sectional sample of adults in the United States. Structural equation modeling assessed potential pathways between SO-discrimination, psychiatric disorders, and SUD severity. Past-year psychiatric disorders and SUD severity were significantly correlated in the multivariate model. Concordant homosexual orientation was associated with reduced risk of psychiatric disorders, but not with past-year SUD severity. SO-discrimination was significantly associated with increased risk of psychiatric disorders, but was not a significant predictor of SUD severity. Notably, SO-discrimination was not directly associated with SUD severity, but was found to have a significant indirect effect on SUD severity through psychiatric disorders. SO-discrimination was directly associated with increased risk of psychiatric disorders, and psychiatric disorders mediated the pathway between SO-discrimination and SUD severity. Since psychiatric disorders and SUD are often cooccurring, these data indicate integrated assessment strategies and dual interventions for SM populations.

Pride and Prejudice

The concept of graduate employability has gained great prominence in international education. However, there still exists a gap in sexual orientation discrimination in graduate employability among transgender and queer (TQ) international students. In our qualitative study investigating graduate employability of transgender and queer students graduating from Australian and Canadian institutions, we have interviewed 14 international graduates with transgender and queer identity regarding their perceptions of sexual orientation and recruitment discrimination at the workplaces. Utilizing intersectionality as a conceptual framework, we have studied employability-related problems that these marginalized students with their foreigner identities have experienced in the labor market. The findings will be around the social, cultural, and political impacts of Canadian and Australian working and recruitment environments on the varying extent of discrimination, namely local attitudes toward queer and transgender international graduates, the manifestation of antidiscrimination laws, and the extent to which employers value stereotypically male heterosexual personality traits.

Discrimination, Sexual Orientation Discrimination, and Severity of Tobacco Use Disorder in the United States: Results From the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions-III

Introduction Tobacco use is more prevalent among sexual minority populations relative to heterosexual populations. Discrimination is a known risk factor for tobacco use. However, the relationship between exposure to different forms of discrimination, such as racial or ethnic discrimination and sexual orientation discrimination, and tobacco use disorder (TUD) severity has not been examined. Aims and Methods Using data from the 2012–2013 National Epidemiologic Survey of Alcohol and Related Conditions-III (n = 36 309 US adults), we conducted multivariable logistic regression analyses to examine the associations among racial or ethnic discrimination, sexual orientation discrimination, and TUD severity for lesbian or gay-, bisexual-, and heterosexual-identified adults. Consistent with the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders Fifth Edition (DSM-5), past-year moderate-to-severe TUD was defined as the presence of ≥4 DSM-5 TUD symptoms. Results Higher levels of lifetime racial or ethnic discrimination were associated with significantly greater odds of past-year moderate-to-severe TUD among sexual minorities (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.03, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.01–1.05) and heterosexuals (AOR = 1.04, 95% CI = 1.03–1.05). Stressful life events, mood disorder, and anxiety disorder had significant associations with moderate-to-severe TUD among sexual minorities (AOR range: 1.86–5.22, p < .005) and heterosexuals (AOR range: 1.71–3.53, p < .005). Among sexual minorities, higher levels of racial or ethnic and/or sexual orientation discrimination were associated with greater odds of any TUD (AOR = 1.02, 95% CI = 1.01–1.03). Conclusions Sexual minorities and heterosexuals who experience higher levels of racial or ethnic discrimination are at heightened risk of having moderate-to-severe TUD. Exposure to higher levels of discrimination also increases the risk of having any TUD among sexual minority adults. Health providers and tobacco cessation professionals should be cognizant of the minority stressors experienced by their clients and their potential impact on TUD severity. Implications This study is the first to show how experiences of racial or ethnic and sexual orientation discrimination are associated with DSM-5 TUD severity among sexual minority and heterosexual populations. Individuals exposed to multiple minority stressors may have increased vulnerability for developing TUD and related adverse health consequences. Our study underscores the importance of considering racial or ethnic discrimination and the multiple minority statuses that individuals may hold. Eliminating all forms of discrimination and developing interventions that are sensitive to the role that discrimination plays in TUD severity may attenuate the tobacco use disparities between sexual minority and heterosexual adults.

Is Sexual-Orientation Discrimination a Form of Sex Discrimination?

In Bostock v Clayton County (2020) Gorsuch J holds that direct discrimination because of sexual orientation is a form of direct discrimination because of sex. I argue that the same is true under the Equality Act 2010. I consider the arguments of (Finnis, in: Finnis (ed) Intention and identity: collected essays, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2011) and (Gardner in Oxf J Leg Stud 18(1):167–187, 1998) that “because of”, “on grounds of”, and similar phrases in UK discrimination legislation invoke the state of mind of the discriminator. I apply this point to Bull and Bull v Hall and Preddy [2013] arguing that (i) the UK Supreme Court was wrong to find direct discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation, while, (ii), nevertheless, under the Equality Act 2010, that case and similar cases actually involve direct discrimination because of sex, not because of sexual orientation. I conclude by considering some objections, precedents, and implications.