Comfort with LGB people and attitudes toward same-sex parenting in Continental American Hispanic Nations

Negative attitudes toward Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual (LGB) individuals leads to a perceived inability of LGB individuals to foster 'appropriate' family relationships, inciting negative attitudes specifically toward same-sex parenting. Intergroup and interpersonal relationships play a critical role in fostering attitudes toward others wherein type of contact, frequency, degree of closeness in the relationship, and the positivity/negativity of interactions are potential mediator of these relations, Moreover, the mechanism behind co-constructing positive relationships with sexual and gender minorities is comfort with contact with LGB individuals. The present study explored the effects of interpersonal contact and the mediator role of comfort with LGB people in explaining attitudes toward same-sex parenting in Spanish-speaking countries in North, Central, and South America. These countries are of particular interest given the dearth of research in the region on attitudes toward same-sex parenting as well as the varying degrees of acceptance of and protections for same-sex parented families. A non-probabilistic sample of 1955 heterosexual cisgender participants from 14 countries was asked to complete a series of sociodemographic questions, a questionnaire about their interpersonal contact/comfort experiences with LGB people, and the Attitudes Toward Gay and Lesbian Parenting Scale. Results showed that comfort was vital in fostering accepting attitudes toward Same-Sex Parenting across countries. Findings also suggested that comfort with LGB people has a particularly powerful influence in regions with less legal and cultural acceptance of LGB individuals. Policies are not enough to instill widespread change: we must encourage, facilitate, and supervise the formation of relationships with LGB people.

The Roles of Gender and Sexual Orientation in Predicting Reactions to Suitors: Revealing Intersectional Complexities

Relatively little is known about how gender and sexual orientation intersect to predict young adults' responses to unwanted romantic and sexual overtures from men and women suitors. To better understand these potential differences, and explore possible mechanisms that explain them, this pre-registered study used an online questionnaire to assess reactions to both hypothetical and recalled suitors among a sample of 855 cisgender heterosexual and gay young adults (18-35) from the United States. Results revealed that gay women and heterosexual men reported the most negative hypothetical reactions to men (versus women) suitors, while gay women, heterosexual men, and heterosexual women all recalled more negative reactions to men than women suitors. Gay men recalled relatively benign reactions to suitors of both genders. A desire to be seen as one's true orientation was a mediating factor for both gay women's and heterosexual men's negative reactions to men suitors. These findings and their potential explanations highlight the complexity of how gender and sexual orientation intersect to shape responses to romantic and sexual overtures from men and women suitors.

Don't Be My Neighbor: Exploring Social and Value Predictors of Sexual Prejudice Expressed by Those Who Fully Accept Sexual Minorities

It is without a doubt that acceptance of sexual minorities is growing across the globe. Two major narratives are commonly assumed to be true about this increased acceptance. First, this acceptance is increased by proximity to the stigmatized. Second, this acceptance is enduring. These might not be entirely true as multiple attitudinal datasets frequently show a diversity among the accepting population, especially for those who express full acceptance of the stigmatized while refusing neighboring proximity to them. This inconsistency in acceptance is the main focus of this study. Using rejection of neighboring proximity to sexual minorities as a case for stigma and data from the Integrated Values Surveys (n = 52,796; 48.15% male), this study explores the similarities and differences between those who fully accept sexual minorities and those who express heightened sexual prejudice when rejecting neighboring proximity to sexual minorities. Logistic regression models show those in the accepting population who reject neighboring proximity to sexual minorities are more likely to be men, lower educated, highly religious, hold a traditional gender-related belief, and are attracted to right-wing political ideologies. While those with extreme sexual prejudice share sex, age, and traditional gender-related beliefs in rejecting neighboring proximity to sexual minorities, no effects for educational attainment and political ideology were discovered. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

Contextual Influence of School-Level Gender Role Attitudes and Sexual Prejudice on Allyship, Bullying, and Internalized Homonegativity

Previous studies have primarily used an individual differences approach to identify dispositional factors associated with bullying behavior, which often neglect the broader school context in which bullying occurs. The present study used a multilevel research design to examine the contextual influence of school normative climate on allyship, bullying, and internalized homonegativity. The study included 3020 students (M = 15.83 years, SD = 1.50) from ten secondary schools in China. The results showed that school-level gender role attitudes were positively associated with bullying perpetration among heterosexual students as well as bullying victimization and internalized homonegativity among LGBQA+ students. In addition, there was a negative association between school-level sexual prejudice and allyship among heterosexual students. The findings demonstrate the contextual influence of school normative climate and highlight the need for regular school climate assessments, so that appropriate instructions, policies, and practices can be implemented to address gender biases and homophobia and the resulting bullying behavior.

Sexual Prejudice and Comfort to Provide Services to Men Who Have Sex with Men Among HIV Healthcare Workers in Western Kenya: Role of Interpersonal Contact

Sexual minority men living in Africa, where many countries criminalize same-sex behavior, are vulnerable to HIV and experience significant barriers to HIV care. Sexual prejudice in healthcare settings is a key contributor to these barriers. Building on social psychological models of prejudice and interpersonal contact at the clinic, we examined the associations between healthcare workers' sexual prejudice and their comfort to provide care to MSM, and assessed the moderating role of workers' prior interpersonal contact with MSM. A cross-sectional survey of 147 healthcare workers varying in level of training and expertise working in HIV care organizations was conducted in western Kenya. Sexual prejudice was negatively associated with comfort to provide care to MSM. Prior interpersonal contact with MSM moderated the association between sexual prejudice and comfort to provide care to MSM among nurses/counselors, such that those with low prior contact and high sexual prejudice were the most uncomfortable providing care to MSM. Interventions are needed to address sexual prejudice and encourage positive forms of interpersonal contact with MSM, especially with nurses and counselors who might have more and varied patient interactions, to improve access to the continuum of HIV prevention and care for MSM in Kenya.

Assessing the Effects of a Real-Life Contact Intervention on Prejudice Toward LGBT People

Prejudice against sexual and gender minorities (e.g., LGBT people) is quite prevalent and is harmful. We examined an existing-and often-used-contact intervention in pre-existing groups in an educational setting and assessed its effectiveness in reducing different forms of LGBT negativity. We focused particularly on modern LGBT negativity: a relatively subtle form of prejudice, involving ambivalence, denial, and/or the belief that there is too much attention for LGBT prejudice. We used a mixed design in which condition (experimental vs. control group) was the between-participants factor, which was randomized at the group level, and time (pretest vs. posttest vs. follow-up) was the within-participants factor (N = 117). Interventions were video recorded and the behavior of LGBT educators and participants was coded. Participants responded positively to the intervention, especially to the LGBT educator's "coming-out story." Exploratory analysis of the video data indicated that the perceived effectiveness of the intervention was higher in groups where participants were more engaged, although caution is necessary in interpreting this finding. The most important measure indicated that modern LGBT negativity decreased in the intervention groups directly after the intervention, but returned to baseline levels one week later. However, in the control condition, modern LGBT negativity had increased over time. Taken together, this suggests that an actual reduction in modern LGBT negativity was short-lived (i.e., the intervention effect disappeared within 7 days).

[Damage repair in breast cancer has to evolve]

Breast damage is likely to result in compensation according to the principle of full compensation. However, breast damage, little covered in the scales usually used, requires a specific methodology. The quantification of functional prejudice must be done with regard to the age of the victim and must take into account the possible repercussions on mobility (shoulder and/or spine) as well as the psychological repercussions. Whether or not the nipple and areola are preserved should be described. Temporary aesthetic damage (before breast reconstruction) must be assessed on the basis of objective elements, its duration and quantification on a scale of 0 to 7. Permanent aesthetic damage takes into account scars, deformities, amputations and quality of the prosthesis. A new scale for evaluating permanent aesthetic damage is proposed. Sexual prejudice must take into account an impairment of the pleasure related to sexuality and its erotic function, in line with the concept of sexual health. However, even after reconstruction, the areas of quality of sexual life and sexual satisfaction often remain affected. An exploration using standardized questions from validated questionnaires such as BREAST-Q can be useful. The sequelae linked to the damage on a breast can also lead the woman to limit certain pleasure activities, in particular because of psychological discomfort or even be the cause of a loss of opportunity to carry out a family's life plan.

Differential Reactions to Male and Female Gender-Role Violations: Testing the Sexual Orientation Hypothesis

Previous research has found that gender-atypical males are evaluated more negatively than gender-atypical females. According to the sexual orientation hypothesis, this asymmetry in evaluations occurs because the feminine characteristics taken on by males when they violate gender roles are more closely tied to perceived sexual orientation than are the masculine characteristics of gender-atypical females. The current series of studies were designed to confirm the existence and generality of the asymmetry phenomenon (Study 1), the preconditions for testing the sexual orientation hypothesis (Study 2), and then to test the hypothesis itself (Study 3). Study 1 found that, as predicted, adults (N = 195, females = 97) displayed more intolerance of males than of females committing gender-role violations across a wide variety of characteristics within multiple domains, although the existence of asymmetry varied somewhat depending on the domain. Study 2 revealed that, as predicted, adults (N = 196, females = 117) believed that gender-role violations indicate homosexuality more so for males than for females overall and across all four domains studied (occupation, activity, trait, and appearance). Study 3 directly tested the sexual orientation hypotheses by examining the relationship between intolerance of specific gender-role violations (scores from Study 1) and the perceived homosexuality associated with those violations (scores from Study 2). Overall, there was a positive relationship between intolerance and perceived homosexuality, indicating that the more a given gender-role violation is thought to implicate homosexuality, the more negatively/less positively people tend to react to the violation, consistent with the sexual orientation hypothesis.

Validation of the Beliefs about Children's Adjustment in Same-Sex Families Scale in Italian University Students

Assessing attitudes toward same-sex parenting has important implications for both intervention and prevention programs designed to foster the tolerance and normality of sexual and family diversity. Few empirically validated measures of rejection of same-sex parenting have been developed. The current study examined the psychometric properties of an Italian translation of the Beliefs about Children's Adjustment in Same-Sex Families Scale, a 14-item scale distributed in two subscales that measure direct and subtle rejection toward same-sex parenting, for its use in assessing heterosexual people's attitudes toward same-sex parents in Italy. The sample consisted of 344 Italian heterosexual university students (113 men) with a mean age of 20.48 years (SD = 1.60). The results showed that the scale has a good factor structure (via confirmatory factor analysis) and satisfactory reliability and acceptable criterion-related validity. Therefore, the BCASSFS can be used to measure opposition toward gay and lesbian parenting in the Italian context.

Essentialist Beliefs and Sexual Prejudice Toward Feminine Gay Men

We propose that feminine gay men are targets of essentialist beliefs that cast them as less natural and more entitative than masculine gay men, and that this pattern of low-naturalness/high-entitativity beliefs fuels increased sexual prejudice toward, and discomfort with, feminine gay men. Data from two studies support these hypotheses. In Study 1, feminine versus masculine gay men were rated lower in naturalness and higher in entitativity, while masculine versus feminine lesbians did not elicit this pattern of beliefs. Study 2 replicated the effects of gay men's gender expression on essentialist beliefs, and demonstrated that feminine gay men arouse more prejudice and discomfort than masculine gay men because they are perceived as socially constructed (low in naturalness) and deeply homogeneous (high in entitativity). Discussion considers the implications of these findings for reducing the stigma of femininity in gay men and outlines directions for future research.

Heteronormativity, Disgust Sensitivity, and Hostile Attitudes toward Gay Men: Potential Mechanisms to Maintain Social Hierarchies

Within a social hierarchy based on sexual orientation, heteronormative ideology serves as a social force that maintains dominant group members' status (e.g., heterosexual men). Disgust may be an emotional reaction to gay men's violation of heteronormativity (i.e., same-sex sexual behavior) and motivate hostile attitudes toward gay men to promote interpersonal and intergroup boundaries. Based on this theoretical framework, we hypothesized that sexual disgust-compared to pathogen or moral disgust-would be most strongly associated with antigay hostility and would statistically mediate its relationship with heteronormativity. Heterosexual men in the United States (n = 409) completed an online questionnaire assessing heteronormative ideology, disgust sensitivity, and hostile attitudes toward gay men. Results support the hypotheses and suggest that gay men's sexual behavior is the most likely elicitor of disgust and antigay hostility, as opposed to a perceived pathogen threat or moral transgression. The findings indicate that heteronormative attitudes and sexual disgust are likely contributors to antigay hostility. Thus, intervention efforts should seek to improve tolerance of same-sex sexual behavior among heterosexual men, which may mitigate emotional reactions and hostile attitudes toward gay men.

Genetic Counselors' and Genetic Counseling Students' Implicit and Explicit Attitudes toward Homosexuality

Members of the lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) community experience significant health disparities. Widespread preferences for heterosexual over homosexual people among healthcare providers are believed to contribute to this inequity, making recognition (and ultimately reduction) of healthcare providers' sexual prejudices of import. The present study sought to characterize North American genetic counselors' and genetic counseling students' implicit and explicit attitudes toward homosexuality. During January 2017, 575 participants completed a Web-based survey and Sexuality Implicit Association Test (SIAT). A majority of participants (60.2%) harbored implicit preferences for heterosexual over homosexual people. Mean implicit attitude score (0.24) indicated a slight automatic preference for heterosexual over homosexual people, while mean explicit attitude score (0.033) indicated no preference for either group. Although participants' implicit and explicit attitudes were positively correlated (p < 0.001), there was greater implicit bias for heterosexual over homosexual people than suggested by explicit attitude scores (p < 0.001). Implicit attitudes differed across self-reported sexual orientation (p < 0.001), but not across gender, race, or genetic counseling specialty. Education has been demonstrated to be moderately effective at reducing sexual prejudices, and almost all participants (95.8%) indicated that they would support the implementation of genetic counseling curricula addressing lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) issues. The study's combined findings suggest that North American genetic counselors and genetic counseling students support, and may benefit from, the implementation of genetic counseling curricula addressing LGBT issues.

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

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.

Sexual Prejudice in Sport Scale: A New Measure

This study describes the process of developing and validating the Sexual Prejudice in Sport Scale (SPSS), which is a multidimensional instrument developed to assess attitudes toward lesbians and gay men (LG) in sports. The authors conducted two studies: first, to establish the factor structure of the SPSS on 297 heterosexual athletes; and, second, to test the reliability and validity of the resulting 19-item scale on a sample of 311 heterosexual and 160 LG athletes. Exploratory factor analysis of an initial item pool yielded three factors: open rejection, which assesses the blatant prejudice expressed toward LG people; denial of visibility, which evaluates attitude toward the coming out of LG people; and gendering performance, which corresponds to gender stereotypes about performance/skills of LG people. A confirmatory factor analysis was conducted to assess the stability of the SPSS. The authors documented internal consistency, test-retest stability, and convergent/divergent validity. Implications and directions for future research are discussed.

Systematic Development of a Dutch School-Based Sexual Prejudice Reduction Program: an Intervention Mapping Approach

Experiences of sexual prejudice threaten the quality of life and psychological well-being of sexual minority youth. The aim of this paper is to provide a comprehensive overview of how we developed a theory- and evidence-based sexual prejudice reduction program suitable for the Dutch high school context, guided by the intervention mapping approach (IM). In line with IM, six steps were followed: an initial needs assessment in which empirical, theoretical, and new data were gathered to acquire a thorough understanding of the problem (step 1); the formulation of program objectives for both students and teachers (step 2); the selection of theory-based methods and applications (step 3); program development (step 4); the provision of an adoption and implementation plan (step 5); and the development of an evaluation plan (step 6). In conclusion, developing a sexual prejudice reduction program for schools is a challenging but feasible process. IM is an effective tool for the systematic (theory- and evidence-driven) development of such a program.

Who intervenes against homophobic behavior? Attributes that distinguish active bystanders

Research on homophobic behavior has focused on students engaging in this behavior or students toward whom this behavior is directed. There has been little attention to the large segment of students who observe this behavior, including active bystanders who defend or support students when homophobic behavior occurs. Among 722 high school students (55% female, 87% white, 86% heterosexual), 66.8% had observed at least one instance of homophobic behavior in the past 30 days. Gender (in this case, girls more so than boys), leadership, courage, altruism, justice sensitivity, and number of LGBT friends were associated with engagement in more active bystander behavior in response to observing homophobic behavior. Further, gender, courage, altruism, and number of LGBT friends each made unique contributions in accounting for variability in students' defending behavior in a comprehensive regression model. Findings highlight qualities that interventionists should cultivate in students that could lead to more active bystander engagement against homophobic behavior.

National Survey on Sexual Prejudice

Empirical research has documented that contact with lesbians and gays is associated with more positive feelings toward and greater support for legal rights for them, but we know less about whether these effects extend to informal aspects of same-sex relationships, such as reactions to public displays of affection. Furthermore, many studies have assumed that contact influences levels of sexual prejudice; however, the possibility of selection effects, in which less sexually prejudiced people have contact, and more sexually prejudiced people do not, raises some doubts about this assumption. We used original data from a nationally representative sample of heterosexuals to determine whether those reporting contact with a lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender friend or relative exhibited less sexual prejudice toward lesbian and gay couples than those without contact. This study examined the effect of contact on attitudes toward formal rights and a relatively unexplored dimension, informal privileges. We estimated the effect of having contact using traditional (ordinary least squares regression) methods before accounting for selection effects using propensity score matching. After accounting for selection effects, we found no significant differences between the attitudes of those who had contact and those who did not, for either formal or informal measures. Thus, selection effects appeared to play a pivotal role in confounding the link between contact and sexual prejudice, and future studies should exercise caution in interpreting results that do not account for such selection effects.