Homophobia

Homophobic aggression .
Homophobia - male homosexual arousal .
Homophobia statistics .
Psychology of Homophobia .

.. PubMed search ..

Homophobia statistics

From a university website:

Understanding Homophobia and Heterosexism.

Sexual Prejudice: Motivations.

Demographic Correlates

In contrast to heterosexuals with favorable attitudes toward gay people, those with negative attitudes are more likely to be:
• men
• older
• less well-educated
• residing in geographic areas where negative attitudes represent the norm (for example, rural areas or the Midwestern or Southern United States).

Political and Religious Values

In contrast to heterosexuals with favorable attitudes toward gay people, those with negative attitudes are:
• more likely to attend religious services frequently
• more likely to endorse orthodox religious beliefs, such as the literal truth of the Bible
• more likely to be a Republican than a Democrat or Independent
• more likely to describe themselves as politically conservative, rather than liberal or moderate.

Personality and Attitudinal Characteristics

In contrast to heterosexuals with favorable attitudes toward gay people, those with negative attitudes:
• display higher levels of psychological authoritarianism
• are less sexually permissive
• are more supportive of traditional gender roles.

Perceptions and Experiences of Gay Men and Lesbians

In contrast to heterosexuals with favorable attitudes toward gay people, those with negative attitudes:
• are more likely to believe that a homosexual orientation is freely chosen
• are less likely to have had close personal friends or family members who are openly lesbian or gay.

Homophobia male homosexual arousal

Is homophobia associated with homosexual arousal?

J Abnorm Psychol. 1996 Aug;105(3):440-5.

Adams HE, Wright LW Jr, Lohr BA.

The authors investigated the role of homosexual arousal in exclusively heterosexual men who admitted negative affect toward homosexual individuals. Participants consisted of a group of homophobic men (n = 35) and a group of nonhomophobic men (n = 29); they were assigned to groups on the basis of their scores on the Index of Homophobia (W. W. Hudson & W. A. Ricketts, 1980). The men were exposed to sexually explicit erotic stimuli consisting of heterosexual, male homosexual, and lesbian videotapes, and changes in penile circumference were monitored. They also completed an Aggression Questionnaire (A. H. Buss & M. Perry, 1992). Both groups exhibited increases in penile circumference to the heterosexual and female homosexual videos. Only the homophobic men showed an increase in penile erection to male homosexual stimuli. The groups did not differ in aggression. Homophobia is apparently associated with homosexual arousal that the homophobic individual is either unaware of or denies.

Department of Psychology, University of Georgia, Athens 30602-3013, USA.

Homophobic aggression

Homophobia and physical aggression toward homosexual and heterosexual individuals.

J Abnorm Psychol. 2001 Feb;110(1):179-87.

Bernat JA, Calhoun KS, Adams HE, Zeichner A.

This study examined the relationship between homophobia (defined as self-reported negative affect, avoidance, and aggression toward homosexuals) and homosexual aggression. Self-identified heterosexual college men were assigned to homophobic (n = 26) and nonhomophobic (n = 26) groups on the basis of their scores on the Homophobia Scale (HS; L. W. Wright, H. E. Adams, & J. A. Bernat, 1999). Physical aggression was examined by having participants administer shocks to a fictitious opponent during a competitive reaction time (RT) task under the impression that the study was examining the relationship between sexually explicit material and RT. Participants were exposed to a male homosexual erotic videotape, their affective reactions were assessed, and they then competed in the RT task against either a heterosexual or a homosexual opponent. The homophobic group reported significantly more negative affect, anxiety, and anger-hostility after watching the homosexual erotic videotape than did the nonhomophobic group. Additionally, the homophobic group was significantly more aggressive toward the homosexual opponent, but the groups did not differ in aggression toward the heterosexual opponent.

Department of Psychology, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia 30602-3013, USA. jbernat@egon.psy.uga.edu

Psychology of Homophobia

The psychological basis of homophobia: cultural construction of a barrier.

Integr Psychol Behav Sci. 2007 Dec;41(3-4):225-47; discussion 326-34.

Madureira AF

The main goals of this article are: (a) to analyze the intricate relations between sexuality, gender, culture and power, and more precisely, the connections between homophobia and sexism; and (b) to analyze the psychological and cultural basis of homophobia and its affective roots. The model of the semiotic regulatory system and the general notion of tension between the two processes (specified by Ernest Boesch)--Heimweh ("homeward road"--striving towards the known and the secure) and the Fernweh ("road to the far away"--adventure, encountering novelty) is used as the theoretical ways to analyze homophobia as a cultural barrier. It is suggested: homophobia is a boundary phenomenon of affective meaning making, a collective historical-cultural construction. Presented in the conclusion are some implications of the promotion of strategies against homophobia in our societies.

Institute of Psychology, University of Brasilia, Brasilia, DF, Brazil. afam2001@terra.com.br
.

"Homophobia": a dialogical-semiotic approach.

Integr Psychol Behav Sci. 2007 Dec;41(3-4):262-71; discussion 326-34.

Gonçalves MM, Machado C

The target article from Madureira--The psychological basis of homophobia: Construction of a cultural barrier--is a very rich theoretical proposal, drawing on from different fields, from cultural psychology to the dialogical theories of the self. Despite its richness, in this commentary we will question some of its implicit and explicit assumptions. It seems to us that the author treats "homophobia" as a hegemonic cultural discourse, ignoring that a mixture of opposing discourses are nowadays available at a cultural level towards lesbians and gays, with important consequences at interpersonal and intrapersonal level. In addition, the very concept of "homophobia" (with its implicit assumptions from the field of psychopathology: "phobia") suggests a very static and intrapersonal way of understanding the diversity of the social mechanisms that underlie sexual prejudice. The way the author describes and tries to clarify the semiotic processes implied in the construction of the interpersonal and psychological barrier involved in "homophobia", in our opinion, also needs to be further developed. The use of the opposition between HEIMWEH and FERNWEH in the explanation of the barrier it is not, from our view, a description of a (semiotic) process but more a description of an outcome. In order to overcome these problems, we suggest some possible ways to approach this phenomenon from a semiotic and dialogical perspective.

Department of Psychology, University do Minho, 4710 Braga, Portugal. mgoncalves@iep.uminho.pt
.