Running Head: How Accepting Is Society?

How Accepting Is Society? A Study on Attitudes Toward Homosexuality Aiyana Holton-Scott Shenandoah University

Author Note: Aiyana Holton-Scott, Conservatory, Shenandoah University Correspondence concerning this paper should be sent to Aiyana Holton-Scott Conservatory, Shenandoah University, 1460 University Drive, Winchester, VA 22601. Email: aholtons12@su.edu

Running Head: How Accepting Is Society?

Abstract

The following essay evaluates the level of tolerance the Shenandoah University campus has for the homosexual community. M.A. Morrison & T.G. Morrison (2011), Hall & LaFrance (2012), and Altman (2012) provide a foundation for the hypothesis that the Shenandoah University campus is not as accepting as it seems. Through using a survey and conducting an interview, the essay finds that some prejudicial people mask their views by claiming being openly accepting of the LGBT community. It is also realized that groups are more commonly the offenders in anti-gay activities.

Keywords: Gender bias, homosexuality, tolerance, prejudice

Running Head: How Accepting Is Society? The battle for equality has become a well-known topic in, most recent news, all over the world. The discussion has evolved from race to gender, and has now reached homosexuality. While many have come to accept others for whom they are, homosexual marriage is still illegal across the globe. However, is marriage truly the only issue the world has with the homosexual community? Are people still continuing to discriminate against homosexuals? There are a number of variables that relate to homosexual

prejudice, including religion, location, and the idea of gender roles. Paying mind to these particular variables enables us to visualize different levels of homophobia. Part I According to Melanie A. Morrison & Todd G. Morrison (2011), issues dealing with homosexuality are nearly always at the top of every public, legal, and political debate agenda. Authors suggest that a topic of particular interest is homonegativity, which refers to negative affect, cognitions, and behaviors directed toward individuals who are perceivedcorrectly or incorrectlyto be gay or lesbian (M. Morrison & T. Morrison, 2011, p.2573). There are two forms of homonegativity: old-fashioned and modern. Old-fashioned homonegativity is on a more moral or religious level when rejecting ideas of homosexuality. Modern homonegativity, which is more commonly found amongst college campuses, is based on contemporary concerns, e.g. the advertisement of ones own homosexuality, the excessive protests concerning rights, etc. While the two of these are interrelated, they also differ greatly. (M. Morrison & T. Morrison, 2011). Jeffrey Hall & Betty LaFrance (2012) have observed that men will often use terms like gay, faggot, fag, queer, and others when surrounded by their peers (p.35). Hall

Running Head: How Accepting Is Society? & LaFrance (2012) have come to understand that the act of homophobia by heterosexual men is almost certainly motivated by a desire to present oneself as not gay (as cited in

Hall & LaFrance, 2012, p.36). Social norms, such as gender identitiy and communication norms play a large role in the heterosexual attitude toward homosexuals. Hall & LaFrance (2012) utilize social identity theory (SIT; Tajfel & Turner, 1979) in order to understand how homophobia is communicated in the social environments of young men (p.36). Hall & LaFrance revealed that, When individuals identify themselves in terms of a self-inclusive social category, such as sex and gender, they seek to enhance the self by seeking approval from an inclusion within the group (as cited in Hall & LaFrance, 2012, p.37). When such intense efforts are made to connect and identify with a certain group, people develop oppression over those with whom the group does not identify. Dennis Altman (2012) touches this topic as he evaluates homosexual oppression in our society. Altman (2012) believes there is little genuine acceptance of homosexuality as a valid sexual and social lifestyle (p.20). As a homosexual, Altman (2012) is consistently reminded of this, but has come to realize his homosexuality is a large part of his self-identity. Our society sets a stigma for many groups, which include non-whites, primarily, and women. Yet, the homosexual stigma is a very significant one, according to Altman (2012). The homosexual stigma, not like most others, has always been defined behaviorally. However, the behavioral approach is flawed, as pointed out by Altman (2012). Altman (2012) stated, Human beings are distinguished by a capacity for experience as well as by their behavior, and homosexuality is as much a matter of emotion as of genital manipulation (Altman, 2012, p.21.) In branding homosexuals without true consideration of all that is involved outside of their genitalia, society forms

Running Head: How Accepting Is Society? an oppressive hold over this community. Oppression has become a highly overworked word (Altman, p.50), but it still exists in todays society. Each researcher addressed has brought up the idea that prejudice towards the homosexual community has everything to do with ones environment. Moral beliefs in combination with the feelings of a certain social group are cause for an upsurge of homonegativity. By analyzing various situations in which homosexuals are present, we can further evaluate which variables most affect levels of prejudice and homonegativity. Part II: Survey Many people accept the fact that the homosexual community exists, and that it isn't going anywhere. What most people don't realize is how their attitudes change when around homosexuals. Hall & LaFrance (2012) point out that many people will behave differently simply due to the group by which they are accompanied. How adjusted is one's view when alone, versus with friends? To further investigate how group dynamics affect homonegativity, I will be conducting a survey that explores peoples opinions on homosexuality. This survey will be administered via social media as well as in a paper format and delivered randomly. The survey will consist of six multiple-choice questions and one yes/no question.

The initial question on the survey will ask for each persons sexual orientation; of the listed responses will be straight, gay, lesbian, bisexual, pansexual, transgender, and other. I will then ask if one feels as though they are viewed differently due to their orientation. The next four questions are tied closely together. I first ask if any of the following words have been used towards the survey taker: fag/faggot, dyke, queer, limpwrist, queen, tranny, or other. The following question asks if a single person or a group

Running Head: How Accepting Is Society? of people used these slurs. The next two questions are almost identical; the difference being it asks if the survey taker has used these words towards anyone else. The final question asks how the use of anti-gay slurs makes the survey taker feel. I felt these questions properly covered issues regarding levels of homonegativity when groups are involved.

To gain a deeper understanding of the results, the surveys will first be categorized by sexual orientation. This way, levels of homonegativity can be compared between different sexual orientations. I will then compare how many people have had slurs used towards them, and create a bar graph to show the most commonly used slurs. A similar bar graph can be created for those who admit to using these slurs themselves. My purpose for conducting this survey is to show that there is a correlation between homonegativity from a single person versus in social groups. I expect there to be greater use of homonegative slurs when groups of people are involved as well as when slurs come from heterosexual people. I will not ask leading questions in the survey, nor will I watch anyone take the survey. I will be within the vicinity, but no body language or verbal statements will be made to sway a survey takers responses to my survey. Survey Results Over the course of a week, I administered a survey, consisting of five multiplechoice questions, to sixty people. Each survey taker was either a student or a faculty member of Shenandoah University. My results found that, while the majority of students consider themselves accepting of the LGBT community, homonegativity is very evident campus-wide.

Running Head: How Accepting Is Society? Using SurveyMonkey, I administered a survey to sixty individuals on the

Shenandoah University Campus via Facebook and email. The survey remained open for a period of seven days. For the first question, How would you describe your view towards the LGBT community? 39 out of 60 (65%) said they were very accepting. 18 out of 60 (30%) stated that they dont mind/care, and only 3 out of 60 (5%) admitted the LGBT community makes [them] very uncomfortable. This data could suggest one of two things: that people are generally very accepting of the LGBT community, or that they are afraid to admit how it really makes them feel. The second question, How often do you hear gay slurs used out of context on campus? varied a bit more in responses. 3 out of 60 (5%) chose never, and 12 out of 60 (20%) chose rarely. The most chosen response, chosen by 27 out of 60 (45%) survey takers, was sometimes. 12 out of 60 (20%) chose often, and 6 out of 60 (10%) chose always. These specific results were fairly balanced on both ends, which leaves more to be asked. The third question, Where do you notice the most homophobia on campus? requires survey takers to check all applicable answers. 24 out of 60 (40%) said they dont notice homophobia. 9 out of 60 (15%) noticed homophobia in dorms/residence halls and at parties. 6 out of 60 (10%) said they noticed it most in the dining halls. 21 out of 60 (35%) said sporting events were where most homophobia existed. 15 out of 60 (25%) claimed they noticed homophobia everywhere. For the fourth question, Do homophobic conflicts typically occur one-on-one or from a group of people? 18 out of 60 (30%) said they dont notice homophobic

Running Head: How Accepting Is Society? conflicts. 3 out of 60 (5%) chose typically one-on-one, and 15 out of 60 (25%) chose typically from a group of people. 24 out of 60 (40%) said it happens both ways. For the last question, I asked, On a scale of 1-10, how safe do you believe the LGBT community to feel on campus? None of the survey takers chose a number below 5. 3 out of 60 (5%) chose 5, and 6 out of 60 (10%) chose 6. 9 out of 60 (15%) chose 7 and 10. 12 out of 60 (20%) chose 9. Most people, 21 out of 60 (35%),

chose 8. While anti-gay conflicts exist on campus, people at SU still believe the LGBT community to feel very comfortable and safe, overall. My expectation upon conducting this survey was that most would identify as being accepting of the LGBT community, but their recognition of homophobic behaviors would outweigh their claims. The reality is that a lot of people on this campus dont notice homonegativity or homophobia too often. If they do, it happens rarely. I also presumed most recognized homophobic conflicts would occur coming from groups of people, but the survey results suggest that it happens equally, between group conflicts and one-on-one conflicts.

Part IV: Interview Is it believable to say that our society is finally accepting the homosexual community? We have homosexual leaders, educators, parents, and friends, yet society hasnt fully grasped the fact that the LGBT community is here. Are homosexuals comfortable in society yet? Do they feel accepted? An in-depth interview should shed some light on this topic.

Running Head: How Accepting Is Society? In an attempt to understand homosexual acceptance in our society, I will conduct an interview with a Shenandoah University professor, DeLyn Celec. The interview will be conducted via email at a time most convenient for the professor. I will ask Professor

Celec seven questions about her orientation and experiences being out in todays society. I will ask Professor Celec how she defines sexual orientation, in order to establish a basis for the interview. To follow up, I will ask her to identify her own sexual orientation. My next question will ask what sort of reactions does Professor Celec receive on campus. Ill then ask her to describe what she understands to be the campus attitude toward the LGBT community, as well as what actions, if any, could or should be taken to improve the social environment. I will also ask Professor Celec if there have been issues of homonegativity or gay-bashing on the campus. My final question to her will be if she notices anti-gay behavior happening more on an individual level or more on a group level. I chose to conduct this interview with Professor Celec because she is a known lesbian on campus, and she is proud of it. She also teaches a first year seminar on homosexual behaviors and attitudes. I felt she would be a beneficial source for my research. During the interview, I will be sure to avoid leading Professor Celec into any particular answers. Should she show signs of discomfort, I will back away from whichever question was asked. My hope is to gain insight on the feelings of some part of the homosexual community, without causing disruption to anyone. Interview Results

Running Head: How Accepting Is Society?

10

I conducted my interview with Professor DeLyn Celec on October 10th, 2013 via email. The interview had been completed at 2:07pm. For my first question, I asked Professor Celec to define sexual orientation. Professor Celec relied on the Human Rights Campaigns definition, Sexual orientation is the preferred term used when referring to an individuals physical and/or emotional attraction to the same and/or opposite gender. Heterosexual, bisexual and homosexual are all sexual orientations. A persons sexual orientation is distinct from a persons gender identity and expression. Professor Celec went on to add, I would add pansexual and asexual to their list because I know persons who identify in those ways, too. I went on to ask, with my second question, how Professor Celec identified her own orientation, to which she answered lesbian, but added, but [I] also use the terms gay, queer and dyke if I am making a particular point in which they are more appropriate. For my third question, I asked Professor Celec what types of reactions she receives on campus. She responded, Overwhelmingly, I feel welcome and supported. She also mentioned that, Occasionally I hear second- and third-hand about students, faculty or staff who have indicated their disapproval of me working in campus ministry as a lesbian who is open about her sexual orientation. Professor Celec mentioned the pushback SU received when Queer-Positive programming was introduced. This particular response raised a flag for me, as it suggested that people on campus shield their true feelings toward the LGBT community on occasion.

Running Head: How Accepting Is Society? For my fourth question, I asked Professor Celec how she would describe the campus attitude toward the LGBT community. She said, It depends on the area of the

11

campus. For example, the conservatory seems to be very open and affirming. I have seen same-sex couples around campus holding hands, or showing other appropriate forms of PDA and do the same with my wife. She went on, Overall, the climate is largely comfortable with and for LGBTQ (lesbian, gay, transgender, transsexual, intersex, gender variant, bisexual, pansexual, asexual, genderqueer, queer and questioning) persons and those who seek equality in regards to sexual orientation and gender identity. I then asked if Professor Celec if she thought there was room for improvement, as far as the campus attitude goes. Professor Celec stated, I believe there is always room for improvement. I followed up with that by asking what actions could or should be taken to improve the social environment. She said, I would love to see more ungendered restrooms that are safe for genderqueer, trans* or intersex people to use. Also, RAs and other peer-counseling-type students could be specifically trained in LGBTQ issues and common challenges while a student is coming out. For my sixth question, I asked if there have ever been issues of homonegativity or gay-bashing on campus. Professor Celec said, Students have shared with me isolated incidents in which verbal slurs have been used. To my knowledge, nothing has escalated beyond words. She also mentioned that, in at least one case, other students really stepped up to let those who were name-calling know it was not okay. For my final question, I asked if Professor Celec noticed anti-gay behavior happening on more of an individual level or more on a group level. She responded, There have been a couple of groups of students who identify as Christian that have been

Running Head: How Accepting Is Society?

12

known to do harm by excluding and/or alienating LGBTQ students. (This is particularly difficult for me on a personal level because of my background as a Christian pastor.) In the isolated incidents mentioned above, the interpersonal interactions (face-to-face) were at least two students namecalling one or more students. Throughout my interview with Professor Celec, I began to see that some of my hypotheses were accurate. Professor Celec confirmed my beliefs that some people on this campus are discreetly uncomfortable with the LGBT community. This interview also shed light on the fact that many anti-gay conflicts exists between groups, where there are multiple students harassing one or more members of the LGBT community. Part VI: Conclusion In comparison to the findings of Hall & LaFrance (2012), my research was split. Through the survey, I understood that homonegativity occurred equally on an individual level as well as a group level. Yet, through my interview with Professor Celec, I found that groups were more commonly offenders of anti-gay behavior. My research also coincided with Altman (2012) and his belief that a lot of homosexual acceptance was not genuine. I discovered that, while many people on the Shenandoah campus identify themselves as being accepting of the LGBT community, there is enough homonegativity noticed to suggest that not everyone is as truthful as wed like to believe.

Running Head: How Accepting Is Society? References Morrison, Melanie A., Morrison, Todd G. Sexual orientation bias toward gay men and lesbian women: Modern homonegative attitudes and their association with discriminatory behavioral intentions. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, Vol 41(11), Nov 2011, 2573-2599. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2011.00838.x

13

Hall, J., & LaFrance, B. (2012). That's Gay: Sexual Prejudice, Gender Identity, Norms, and Homophobic Communication. Communication Quarterly, 60(1), 35-58. doi:10.1080/01463373.2012.641833 Altman, Dennis. Homosexual: Oppresion and Liberation. March 2012.