Homophobiapsychology and society
Homophobia, culturally produced fear of or prejudice against homosexuals that sometimes manifests itself in legal restrictions or, in extreme cases, bullying or even violence against homosexuals (sometimes called “gay bashing”).
The term homophobia was coined in the late 1960s and was used prominently by George Weinberg, an American clinical psychologist, in his book Society and the Healthy Homosexual (1972).
Homophobia is a culturally conditioned response to homosexuality, and attitudes toward homosexuals vary widely across cultures and over time.
Although little is known about premodern women’s sexualities, it is largely believed that the sexual desire of one man for another was an acceptable, often venerated form of love in ancient cultures. Intolerance toward homosexual behaviour grew particularly in the Middle Ages, especially among the adherents of Christianity and Islam.
To understand the wider cultural impact of homophobia, awareness of the general societal consensus of the nature of homosexuality is necessary. In Western cultures in the later 19th century, some psychologists began to view homosexuality as more than a temporary behaviour, understanding that it was immutable.
As industrialization brought migration from rural to urban areas, the greater density of people in cities permitted same-sex attracted individuals to organize (initially under the cloak of anonymity), which ultimately led to greater visibility and the scientific study of homosexuality.
The term homosexuality was first used in 1868, and the research of Richard von Krafft-Ebing two decades later in Psychopathia Sexualis (1886; trans. into English in 1892) portrayed homosexuality as a fixed sexual desire. In 1905 Sigmund Freud popularized the erroneous notion that homosexuality was the product of a child’s upbringing, writing,
“The presence of both parents plays an important part. The absence of a strong father in childhood not infrequently favours the occurrence of inversion.” Freud even gave child-rearing tips to help parents lead their children to heterosexual adjustment.
With Freud’s warning in mind, and because of the long working hours that men spent under industrialization, homosocial organizations (e.g., sporting clubs and the Boy Scouts) were developed to introduce young boys to heterosexual masculine role models in the absence of their fathers.
The teaching of masculinity to boys and femininity to girls was (and often remains) falsely believed to be able to prevent children from becoming homosexual.
Gender has long been implicated with sexuality, and the trials of Irish writer Oscar Wilde, who in 1895 was convicted of gross indecency, furthered this belief.
The unusual aesthetic appearance that Wilde represented, alongside his penchant for aesthetic art and beauty, helped formulate homosexual suspicion for men who shared Wilde’s feminine flair. Wilde’s conviction thus helped promote the stereotype that homosexuality existed among feminine men, thereby erroneously disqualifying masculine-acting men from homosexual suspicion.
The power of homophobia is such that homosexual individuals often feel culturally compelled to misrepresent their sexuality (something known as being “in the closet”) in order to avoid social stigma. However, homophobia also impacts heterosexuals, as it is impossible to definitively prove one’s heterosexuality.
Accordingly, heterosexuals and homosexuals wishing to be thought heterosexual are compelled to avoid associating with anything coded as homosexual. This is accomplished through the repeated association with cultural codes of heterosexuality and disassociation from codes for homosexuality.
Conversely, the suspicion that someone is homosexual often is cast upon whoever displays behaviour gender-coded appropriate for the opposite sex.
For men, competitive team sports, violence, cars, beer, and an emotionless disposition have been associated with masculinity (and thus heterosexuality), while an appreciation of the arts, fine food, individual sports, and emotional expressionism has been associated with homosexuality. This equation is reversed for women.
A homohysteric culture (a term coined by American sociologist Eric Anderson) can be created by the combination of an awareness of homosexuality and a high degree of homophobia. In such a culture, it is believed that anyone might be gay, and, as a result, heterosexuals’ social, sexual, and personal behaviours are limited because men fear association with femininity and women fear association with masculinity.
In a homohysteric culture, individuals are concerned with proving their heterosexuality because homosexuality is stigmatized. Conversely, when cultural homophobia is so great that citizens do not generally believe that homosexuality is even possible (as in many contemporary Middle Eastern, African, and Asian cultures), there is no need to prove to one’s peers that one is not gay.
A manifestation of this notion can be seen in Iran, whose president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, said in a speech in the United States in 2007 that his country had no homosexuals. Others have sometimes labeled homosexuality a “white disease.”
Ironically, in some highly homophobic (yet not homohysteric) cultures, heterosexuals are given more freedom of gendered expression. Men can, for example, hold hands in many highly homophobic cultures (because others do not perceive they can be homosexual), while hand holding among men raises homosexual suspicion in the West.
Contemporary attitudes toward homosexuality
Western homophobia and homohysteria peaked in the 1980s with the spread of AIDS. The disease brought greater public awareness that homosexuals existed in every social institution, and the infectious nature of the disease further stigmatized homosexual men. It also ended, particularly in Western cultures, the presumption of heterosexuality.
As Christian-based fundamentalism grew stronger in the United States during this period, men there were particularly resolute to align their behaviours and identity with heterosexuality; feminine expressions among men were thus edged toward extinction.
Simultaneous with this homophobia and homohysteria, however, there was also a growth of political advocacy for the rights of homosexuals and an abatement of antigay laws. By the beginning of the 21st century, AIDS was recognized as a problem of heterosexuals as much as homosexuals, and antigay laws were stripped from most Western countries.
This, combined with the increased visibility of gays and lesbians, decreasing homophobia from some branches of Christianity, the ability of heterosexuals to socialize with gay men and lesbians on the Internet, an increasing percentage of homosexuals coming out, and the greater awareness that homosexuality is produced biologically, greatly reduced cultural homophobia.
In Europe and much of North America, sexual minorities were awarded most of the rights of heterosexuals, including in some jurisdictions even marriage or state-recognized civil partnerships.
Research in the early 21st century found that in western Europe and North America young people had begun to rapidly disassociate themselves from homophobia, so weakening homohysteria that youths there were more capable of expressing a range of gendered behaviours regardless of their sexuality.
Rapidly decreasing cultural homophobia increasingly meant that it was homophobia that was stigmatized rather than homosexuality.
This decrease in cultural and legal homophobia has been uneven, however. While homosexuality was decriminalized throughout North America, South America, Europe, and Australia, the picture in Africa and parts of Asia is more divided.
For example, though South Africa prohibited discrimination against homosexuals in its postapartheid constitution adopted in the mid-1990s and legalized same-sex marriage in the first decade of the 21st century, homosexuality remained illegal in the countries that border it.
In most of the Middle East, the laws against gays and lesbians also remained severely restrictive; for example, in some countries where particularly conservative Islamic law was practiced, individuals who engaged in homosexual behaviour could be punished by death
Are Homophobic People Really Gay and Not Accepting It?
A series of studies recently published in the prestigious Journal of Personality and Social Psychology found higher levels of homophobia in individuals with unacknowledged attractions to the same sex, particularly when they grew up with authoritarian parents who also held homophobic attitudes.
In the University of Rochester's press release, Netta Weinstein, the study's lead author, said, "Individuals who identify as straight but in psychological tests show a strong attraction to the same sex may be threatened by gays and lesbians because homosexuals remind them of similar tendencies within themselves."
In the same release, study co-author Richard Ryan added, "In many cases, these are people who are at war with themselves and they are turning this internal conflict outward."
Attitudes towards gay and lesbian people are an important part of current political issues like the legality of same-sex marriage and employment nondiscrimination. Yet little scientific research has been done on what drives such anti-gay attitudes.
According to the team of researchers, this study is the first to document the role that both parenting and sexual orientation play in the formation of anti-gay attitudes, including self-reported homophobic attitudes, discriminatory bias, implicit hostility towards gays, and endorsement of anti-gay policies.
One prior study used genital measures of sexual attractions and found that homophobic men showed an increase in penile erections to male homosexual male erotica.
What was the study design?
As typical of papers in this journal, the article includes multiple separate experiments. The experiments were conducted in the United States and Germany, with each study involving an average of 160 college students.
The study focused on measuring participants' explicit and implicit sexual attractions. Explicit attractions are those we are consciously aware of and can provide in a questionnaire. Implicit attractions are those that are more subconscious and may not be detected in a questionnaire and instead are measured using psychological tasks.
To explore participants' explicit and implicit sexual attraction, the researchers measured the differences between what people say about their sexual orientation and how they react during a split-second timed task.
Students were shown words and pictures on a computer screen and asked to put these in "gay" or "straight" categories. Before each of the 50 trials, participants were subliminally primed with either the word "me" or "others" flashed on the screen for 35 milliseconds, which is too quick to even be consciously perceptible to the participants.
They were then shown the words "gay," "straight," "homosexual," and "heterosexual" as well as pictures of straight and gay couples, and the computer tracked precisely their response times. A faster association of "me" with "gay" and a slower association of "me" with "straight" was taken to indicate an implicit gay orientation.
Finally, the researcher measured participants' level of homophobia—both overt, as expressed in questionnaires on social policy and beliefs, and implicit, as revealed in word-completion tasks.
For the implicit measure, students wrote down the first three words that came to mind, for example for the prompt "k i _ _". The study tracked the increase in the amount of aggressive words elicited after showing participants the word "gay" for 35 milliseconds
In these experiments, participants who reported themselves to be more heterosexual than their performance on the reaction time task indicated were most likely to react with hostility towards gay people.
In other words, if a participant identified as heterosexual, but showed a reaction pattern consistent with homosexuality, they were more likely to express homophobic attitudes.
This incongruence between implicit and explicit measures of sexual orientation predicted a variety of homophobic behaviors, including self-reported anti-gay attitudes, implicit hostility towards gays, endorsement of anti-gay policies, and discriminatory bias such as the assignment of harsher punishments for homosexuals.
As with all studies, this one had several limitations. As the authors pointed out, all participants were college students, so it may be helpful in future research to test these effects in younger adolescents still living at home and in older adults who have had more time to establish lives independent of their parents and to look at attitudes as they change over time.
Additionally, given the correlational nature of many of the present findings, causal and developmental inferences cannot be reliably made. Finally, it is important to point out that implicit measures are not a perfect window into an individual’s psyche or “true” sexual orientation.
Despite these limitations, this series of studies helps us understand the roots of homophobia, specifically that in some cases it may represent repressed same-sex attractions.
Below is a video produced by the authors describing the findings:
M I Ro