Global Regnn of Human Rights for Lbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgenr People - PMC

Contents:

• GLOBAL REGNN OF HUMAN RIGHTS FOR LBIAN, GAY, BISEXUAL, AND TRANSGENR PEOPLE
• MENTAL HEALTH LBIAN, GAY, BISEXUAL, AND TRANSGENR (LGBT) YOUTH
• LEGIMACY OF ‘CTOMER’ SUPREME COURT GAY RIGHTS SE RAIS ETHIL AND LEGAL FLAGS

GLOBAL REGNN OF HUMAN RIGHTS FOR LBIAN, GAY, BISEXUAL, AND TRANSGENR PEOPLE

Put simply, a number of natns have wnsed “sea chang” public opn about gay other strikg feature is the wi variatn across natns public opn about gay rights and gay marriage, as well as related attus about gay men, lbians, and homosexualy (see Table 1). Lookg at the natnal level, a 2013 survey of 16 “veloped” natns found that support for full regnn of gay marriage was >75% Swen, Norway, and Spa but <30% South Korea, Japan, and Poland (Ipsos, 2013). A 2013 survey of 39 natns found “broad acceptance of homosexualy North Ameri, the European Unn, and much of Lat Ameri, but equally wispread rejectn predomantly Mlim natns and Ai, as well as parts of Asia and Rsia” (Pew Rearch Global Attus Project, 2013).

Table 1Public opn about gay marriage and homosexualy selected natns NatnSame-sex upl should be allowed to legally marry (%) (Ipsos, 2013)Society should accept homosexualy (%) (Pew Rearch, 2013)Swena 81 – Norwaya 78 – Spaa 76 88 Belgiuma 67 – Germany 67 87 Canadaa 63 80 Atralia 54 79 Francea 51 77 Braa 55 76 Italy 48 74 Argentaa 48 74 Philipp – 73 Mexib – 61 Brazila – 60 Uned Statb 42 60 Hungary 30 – Japan 24 54 Venezuela – 51 Poland 21 42 South Korea 26 39 South Aia – 32 Cha – 21 Rsia – 16 Turkey – 9 Malaysia – 9 Kenya – 8 Indonia – 3 Egypt – 3 Pakistan – 2 Nigeria – 1 NatnSame-sex upl should be allowed to legally marry (%) (Ipsos, 2013)Society should accept homosexualy (%) (Pew Rearch, 2013)Swena 81 – Norwaya 78 – Spaa 76 88 Belgiuma 67 – Germany 67 87 Canadaa 63 80 Atralia 54 79 Francea 51 77 Braa 55 76 Italy 48 74 Argentaa 48 74 Philipp – 73 Mexib – 61 Brazila – 60 Uned Statb 42 60 Hungary 30 – Japan 24 54 Venezuela – 51 Poland 21 42 South Korea 26 39 South Aia – 32 Cha – 21 Rsia – 16 Turkey – 9 Malaysia – 9 Kenya – 8 Indonia – 3 Egypt – 3 Pakistan – 2 Nigeria – 1 Not. ”aAs of June 1, 2014, provid legal regnn for gay marriage all of June 1, 2014, provid legal regnn for gay marriage some 1Public opn about gay marriage and homosexualy selected natns NatnSame-sex upl should be allowed to legally marry (%) (Ipsos, 2013)Society should accept homosexualy (%) (Pew Rearch, 2013)Swena 81 – Norwaya 78 – Spaa 76 88 Belgiuma 67 – Germany 67 87 Canadaa 63 80 Atralia 54 79 Francea 51 77 Braa 55 76 Italy 48 74 Argentaa 48 74 Philipp – 73 Mexib – 61 Brazila – 60 Uned Statb 42 60 Hungary 30 – Japan 24 54 Venezuela – 51 Poland 21 42 South Korea 26 39 South Aia – 32 Cha – 21 Rsia – 16 Turkey – 9 Malaysia – 9 Kenya – 8 Indonia – 3 Egypt – 3 Pakistan – 2 Nigeria – 1 NatnSame-sex upl should be allowed to legally marry (%) (Ipsos, 2013)Society should accept homosexualy (%) (Pew Rearch, 2013)Swena 81 – Norwaya 78 – Spaa 76 88 Belgiuma 67 – Germany 67 87 Canadaa 63 80 Atralia 54 79 Francea 51 77 Braa 55 76 Italy 48 74 Argentaa 48 74 Philipp – 73 Mexib – 61 Brazila – 60 Uned Statb 42 60 Hungary 30 – Japan 24 54 Venezuela – 51 Poland 21 42 South Korea 26 39 South Aia – 32 Cha – 21 Rsia – 16 Turkey – 9 Malaysia – 9 Kenya – 8 Indonia – 3 Egypt – 3 Pakistan – 2 Nigeria – 1 Not. ”aAs of June 1, 2014, provid legal regnn for gay marriage all of June 1, 2014, provid legal regnn for gay marriage some jurisdictns.

At the natnal level Europe, public favorabily toward homosexualy is associated wh legal regnn of same-sex relatnships (Hooghe & Mesen, 2013). Siarly, public opn about gay marriage is associated wh public policy about the issue at the state level the Uned Stat (Lewis & Oh, 2008). At the dividual level, public opn about gay rights not only reflects broad human, polil, and relig valu (Brewer, 2008; Fzgerald, Wstone, & Prtage, this issue) but may also shape other polil attus and behavrs, cludg voter turnout and vote choice, unr some circumstanc (Campbell & Monson, 2008; Lewis, 2005).

MENTAL HEALTH LBIAN, GAY, BISEXUAL, AND TRANSGENR (LGBT) YOUTH

Th, is cril to unrstand what shap public views on gay rights, cludg gay marriage, as well as attus about gay men, lbians, and homosexualy. One of the aforementned featur of public opn about gay rights—namely, the rapid transformatns support that have unfold some natns—provis opportuni for examg the dynamics of policy opns. The sharp divis opn across publics also provi potential leverage explorg the foundatns of dividuals’ views about gay rights.

Fzgerald, Wstone, and Prtage extend rearch on such differenc by ttg whether the attus that migrants om Eastern Europe to Wtern Europe hold toward gay men and lbians reflect an acculturatn studi the special issue ntribute to our knowledge about how mography, social ntact, and media n shape public opn about gay rights along wh related attus. Two articl foc on Asian populatns, which paratively few studi have examed and among which public support for gay rights remas paratively low.

L, L, and Loper tt the effects of both terpersonal and imaged ntact on public opn about gay men, lbians, and an antidiscrimatn law Hong Kong (where the visibily of gay men and lbians public life has creased dramatilly), while Panchapakan, Li, and Ho analyze how levels of attentn to tradnal news and Inter news are related to public opn Sgapore (where gay and lbian ntent is censored tradnal media).

LEGIMACY OF ‘CTOMER’ SUPREME COURT GAY RIGHTS SE RAIS ETHIL AND LEGAL FLAGS

Although the studi llected here pture the state of the art rearch on public opn about gay rights and gay marriage, much work remas to be done on the topic. As polil velopments on gay marriage ntue numero untri, om Albania to Vietnam, that currently do not provi legal regnn for , the field should follow. As sea change follows sea change public opn about gay rights, new rearch ontiers will undoubtedly emerge the years to e.

1The followg acunt the terms “gay rights” and “gay marriage, ” but is worth observg that the e of language scribg the issu at hand may, and of self, rry implitns for opn. For example, McCabe and Heerwig (2012) fd that e of alternative am (“gay marriage, ” “same-sex marriage, ” or “homosexual marriage”) n alter the tensy of opns exprsed.

1 Some people, specifilly lbian, gay, bisexual, and transgenr (LGBT) dividuals, are many plac and circumstanc nied their claim to the full set of human rights. 21–24 In many Mlim untri, both civil law and shari’a (the l erng the practice of Islam) crimalize homosexual activy. For example, the Internatnal Gay and Lbian Human Rights Commissn (IGLHRC) has existed for the past 16 years to secure the full enjoyment of the human rights of LGBT people and muni subject to discrimatn or abe on the basis of sexual orientatn or exprsn, genr inty or exprsn, and/or HIV stat.