Corto Gay 2017 DOS CHICOS ADOLESCENTES scribete a mi nal - vio Dailymotn

Contents:

• CóMO NSEGUIR UN HOMBRE (PARA HOMBR GAY)
• GAY AND STRAIGHT MEN PREFER MASCULE-PRENTG GAY MEN FOR A HIGH-STAT ROLE: EVINCE FROM AN ELOGILLY VALID EXPERIMENT
• ¡ELLOS SON LOS 8 GAYS LATOS MáS FAMOSOS Y SEADOS!
• SOY GAY Y SOY MUY VIRIL: ¿ALGUNA DUDA?
• IN CHANGG AMERI, GAY MASCULY HAS 'MANY DIFFERENT SHAS'
• THE WAYS GAY MEN ARE MORE MASCULE THAN THEY REALIZE
• CHI GAY IMáGEN DE STOCK
• HOMBR GAYS MASCULOS DICEN TAR NSADOS TO

CóMO NSEGUIR UN HOMBRE (PARA HOMBR GAY)

Entre los eventos LGBTQ más important tenemos al Orgullo Gay Madrid, NYC Pri (Marcha l Orgullo LGBT Nueva York), la Marcha l Orgullo LGBT São Plo, y la Sydney Gay and Lbian Mardi Gras (Marcha l Orgullo LGBT Sídney). Bisexual men are perceived to sound more mascule than men who are straight, acrdg to a study of Atralian subjects.Amics at the Universy of Sydney pared the voic of gay, straight and bisexual men a study volvg 160 people.In the rearch led by clil psychologist Jam Morandi, people were reced to analyse the voic of 60 men, 20 of whom were gay, 20 straight and 20 bisexual. They were then asked to rate the men on their sexual orientatn g a sle om zero (exclively heterosexual) to 10 (exclively homosexual).Listeners were also asked to rate each man’s perceived level of femy or masculy the voic on a siar sle.The men volved the study were asked to rerd themselv on a smartphone recg the first two l of the Atralian natnal anthem.Voice sampl were then modified to remove any background noise while volume levels were ma the same to ensure nsistency.Rults om the study showed listeners uld distguish between gay and straight men’s voic wh an accuracy of 62 per cent, apparently nsistent wh prev rearch.However, the study participants uld not terme any differenc between bisexual and straight men’s voic wh any gree of accuracy.

The thors said their rearch showed bisexual men’s voic were perceived as beg more exclively attracted to women pared wh both gay and straight men’s voic.Bisexual men’s voic were rated as more mascule than both gay and straight men’s voic.Rearchers claimed the abily to intify a man’s bisexual inty om his voice alone uld have cril social implitns such as helpg to rce feelgs of alienatn.‘Voice may unter visibily many bisexuals feel’An abstract of the study, tled Can listeners tect if a man is bisexual om his voice alone, reads: “The prent study examed whether bisexual men n be intified om their voic ak to how gay men n be intified on their voice alone.“If this is the se, voice may be an important target of discrimatn on the one hand but may also unter the visibily many bisexuals feel (if their bisexual inti n be apprehend by their voice alone, whout explic disclosure required).“The fdgs may also she light on whether bisexual male voic, like gay male voic, differ om straight voic terms of their genr non-nformy – a qutn that to date has not been examed.”But amics noted the rearch was limed on the grounds all men who participated the study are Atralian, which may not be reflected among wir cultur.And the thors nced the study did not ntrol for the rerdg environment or microphone-to-mouth distance, which uld have affected the qualy of the voice sampl.The thors said the fdgs suggted that while the voic of bisexual men the sample were perceived as more mascule and attracted to femal, listeners did not associate this imprsn wh bisexualy.As a rult, while bisexual men may appear to be at lower risk of facg voice-based intifitn and discrimatn than gay men, they may often be mistaken as beg straight.The study was published the Journal of Sex Rearch. Whereas most studi on perceptns of feme-prentg gay men have manipulated genr nonnformy via wrten scriptns, rearch suggts that behavural cu such as voice and body-language n migate or exacerbate prejudice toward a stereotyped dividual. For heterosexual men, the preference for mascule-prentg actors was predicted by greater anti-gay sentiment, whereas ternalised anti-gay prejudice did not predict a preference for mascule-prentatn among gay men.

GAY AND STRAIGHT MEN PREFER MASCULE-PRENTG GAY MEN FOR A HIGH-STAT ROLE: EVINCE FROM AN ELOGILLY VALID EXPERIMENT

This associatn between masculy and stat endowment has plex implitns for gay men, given the prevailg stereotype that they are more feme pared to heterosexual men (Ke & Dx, 1987; Lippa, 2000; Mchell & Ellis, 2011; Sanchez et al., 2009) Men and the Feme StereotypeSuch a stereotype reflects, to some extent, average differenc genr-typily between gay and heterosexual men. Policg of masculy among gay men is not only self-directed; there is also evince of prejudice toward more feme gay men om wh the gay muny (Bailey et al., 1997; Hunt et al., 2016) Penalti for Feme Gay MenContemporary theori of effective learship have challenged the perceived virtu of masculy. Theoretil explanatns for the fdgs nsistently foc on the possibily that gay men elic such discrimatn bee of the stereotype that they are feme and are therefore perceived as ls equipped to occupy higher-stat posns social hierarchi, such as the workplace (Ke & Dx, 1987; Lord et al., 1984).

¡ELLOS SON LOS 8 GAYS LATOS MáS FAMOSOS Y SEADOS!

Further support for this notn is found studi where gay men appear to avert stat-penalti when they adopt a more mascule prentatn (Glick et al., 2007; Morton, 2017; Pellegri et al., 2020). Siarly, Clsell and Fiske (2005) found that subgroup labels for feme gay men like ‘flamboyant’ eliced higher ratgs of warmth, but lower ratgs of petence pared to more mascule subgroup labels like ‘straight-actg’. Th, the rearch appears to suggt that feme gay men are at particular risk of stat penalti, pecially om dividuals who posss anti-gay Sentiment Amongst Gay MenA further qutn regardg potential stat penalti for feme vers more mascule-prentg gay men is how plic gay men themselv may be perpetuatg such prejudice.

Whereas most relevant rearch has ed heterosexual sampl, both lab and field studi on romantic partner preferenc amongst gay men highlight a monplace sire for mascule over feme tras potential partners (Bailey et al., 1997; Clarkson, 2006; Laner & Kamel, 1977; Sanchez & Vila, 2012; Tayawadep, 2002). Such a nnectn suggts that the extent to which gay men ternalise societal stigma about beg gay may fluence their treatment of dividuals who posss stigmatised is a nsirable lerature monstratg that gay men discrimate agast more feme gay mal beyond the romantic ntext (Brooks et al., 2017; Ravenhill & Visser, 2019; Sánchez & Vila, 2012; Taywadep, 2002).

SOY GAY Y SOY MUY VIRIL: ¿ALGUNA DUDA?

(2016), when gay men received bog feedback that they had rated below-average on a masculy measure, they were more likely to show a creased sire to associate wh a feme – but not a mascule – gay male target. The perceived femy/masculy of gay male targets was manipulated g wrten scriptns of their tras, terts, and qualifitns, which tapped to tradnal, stereotypil notns of masculy (henceforth masculy for simplicy). This effect among gay men mirrors siar fdgs observed among heterosexual participants (Aksoy et al., 2019; Frank, 2006; Pellegri et al., 2020) that also ed analogue tasks, which masculy/femy of gay male targets were manipulated via wrten scriptns.

Provid important advanc offerg elogilly valid monstratns of the rctn stat btowed upon feme men by heterosexual dividuals, important unaddrsed qutns rema about whether gay dividuals also show such a bias, g d-visual stimuli, and what psychologil mechanisms might expla such bias. Tradnally, studi vtigatg the impact of feme-prentatn on gay men’s stat have ed eher heterosexuals or gay men isolatn – to date, no study tegrated the two populatns to facilate meangful parisons.

IN CHANGG AMERI, GAY MASCULY HAS 'MANY DIFFERENT SHAS'

Demonstratg that gay men are as likely to discrimate agast feme gay men as heterosexuals would ntribute to the emergg awarens of tramory prejudice as an area of ncern for the gay Current StudyThe aim of this study is to explore whether a relatively feme-prentatn negatively impacts stat attament for gay men g a more elogilly valid methodology that allows meangful parisons of the reactns of gay and heterosexual men.

Moreover, the study aims to tt psychologil mechanisms that may unrly the hypothised reluctance to endow stat to feme-prentg gay relevant lab studi to date have measured stat attament g direct measur, such as subjective ratgs of learship effectivens or behavural tentns. Though not rmg primary hypoth, we also examed whether sexism may mediate preference for more mascule gay ndidat, given that Sanchez and Vila (2012) found that antifeme attus predicted a preference for mascule-prentg romantic partners.

THE WAYS GAY MEN ARE MORE MASCULE THAN THEY REALIZE

MaterialsScript for Fictnal Ad CampaignTo monstrate the direct fluence of mascule/feme-prentatn on stat attament for gay men, a novel pennt variable was nstcted for the current study. Six cis-male, Whe-Atralian profsnal actors, 25 to 35 years old (who all intify as gay real life) were filmed performg an intil vox pop script two ways; 1) once where they were directed to manipulate their voice and body language (VBL) to be more feme, and 2) once where their VBL was to be more mascule.

” (Actor lghs)The script ma no reference to the ndidate’s qualifitns, occupatn, skills, tn, or hobbi (that is, rmatn that may be nsted as genred by participants; Lippa, 2000), while makg the ndidate’s homosexualy explic (by mentng a same-sex partner). Pre-ratgs om an pennt participant pool of 40 gay men were ed to validate the VBL each clip as beg mascule or feme as tend (See the onle supplement for method and rults of vio validatn study).

CHI GAY IMáGEN DE STOCK

3Frequency of Vot for Each Actor by Heterosexual and Gay Participants (N = 256)Full size imageMeasurStat EndowmentA sgle forced-choice em askg participants to select their preferred ndidate read as follows:“Please now vote for the actor you thk should be st the Ad Campaign promotg tourism to Sydney.

Internalised Anti-Gay Attus (Gay Participants Only)The 3-em ternalised homophobia subsle of the Lbian, Gay and Bisexual Inty Sle (LGBIS; Mohr & Kendra, 2011) was ed to asss negative attus toward onelf as a gay person. Usg 5-pot Likert sle where a sre of “0” dited “Totally agree” and a sre of “5” dited “Totally disagree”, gay participants were asked to rate how much they endorsed the ems, “I wish I were heterosexual”; “If were possible I’d choose to be straight”; and “I believe is unfair that I am attracted to people of the same sex”. The average of each participant’s three rpons were lculated to create their Internalised Homonegativy Attus (Heterosexual Participants Only)To measure anti-gay attus we ployed an adapted 6-em versn of the Morn Homonegativy Sle (MHS; Morrison & Morrison, 2002), as ed by Morton (2017), to exclively asss ntemporary negative attus toward gay men.

Usg 5-pot Likert sle, where a sre of “0” dited “Totally agree” and a sre of “5” dited “Totally disagree”, heterosexual participants were asked to rate statements such as, “Gay men have all the rights they need”; and “Gay men seem to foc on the ways which they differ om heterosexuals, and ignore the ways which they are siar”. The average of each participant’s six rpons were lculated to create their Homonegativy Sexism (All Participants)A 5-em subsle om the Morn Sexism Sle (Swim et al., 1995), asssg ntemporary negative attus toward women was ed.

HOMBR GAYS MASCULOS DICEN TAR NSADOS TO

Fally, logistic regrsns examed whether a preference for mascule vios was predicted by pre-existg levels of ternalised homonegativy (for gay participants) and homonegativy (for heterosexual participants), followed by exploratory analys also g logistic regrsns.

Contrary to expectatns, among gay participants, the logistic regrsn mol examg the effect of ternalised homonegativy on likelihood of selectg feme vers mascule gay actors was non-signifint, χ2(1) = 1. 195], that we predicted higher ternalised homonegativy levels would be associated wh a lower likelihood of votg for a feme gay exploratory logistic regrsn analysis was unrtaken to exame if morn sexism predicted ls likelihood of choosg a feme gay male (over a mascule gay male) actor, and if this effect was morated by each participant’s sexual orientatn.