Disver all facts and statistics on Homosexualy (gays and lbians) the U.S. on !
Contents:
- YOEL ROTH'S ‘GAY DATA’ DISSERTATN ‘MISTAKENLY’ BLOCKED OM UPENN WEBSE AFTER ELON MK’S TWEET
- LBIAN, GAY AND BISEXUAL ONLE DATERS REPORT POSIVE EXPERIENC – BUT ALSO HARASSMENT
- LBIAN AND GAY PARENTG
- "GAYS LBIANS" THIS TOPICS, WRG DISSERTATNS ON "GAYS LBIANS," AND MASTERS THIS SERVICE
YOEL ROTH'S ‘GAY DATA’ DISSERTATN ‘MISTAKENLY’ BLOCKED OM UPENN WEBSE AFTER ELON MK’S TWEET
Sce s lnch 2009, the geosocial workg service Grdr has bee an creasgly mastream and proment part of gay culture, both the Uned Stat and globally. Mobile applitns like Grdr give ers the abily to quickly and easily share rmatn about themselv ( the form of text, numbers, and pictur), and nnect wh each other real time on the basis of geographic proximy. I argue that the servic nstute an important se for examg how bodi, inti, and muni are translated to data, as well as how data be a tool for formg, unrstandg, and managg personal relatnships. Throughout this work, I articulate a mol of worked teractivy that nceptualiz self-exprsn as an act termed by three sometim overlappg, sometim nflictg sets of affordanc and nstrats: (1) technomercial stctur of software and bs; (2) cultural and subcultural norms, mor, histori, and standards of acceptable and expected nduct; and (3) socpolil tennci that appear to be (but fact are not) fixed technomercial stctur. In the discsns, Grdr serv both as a mol of procs that apply to social workg more generally, as well as a particular study to how worked teractivy is plited by the histori and particulari of Wtern gay culture. Over the urse of this dissertatn, I suggt ways which ers, policymakers, and velopers n productively regnize the livens, valy, and durabily of personal rmatn the sign, implementatn, and e of gay-targeted social workg servic. Specifilly, I argue that through a foc on (1) open-end stctur of terface sign, (2) clear and transparent articulatns of service polici, and the ratnal behd them, and (3) approach to er rmatn that promote data sovereignty, signers, velopers, and advot n work to make social workg servic, cludg Grdr, safer and more reprentative of their ers throughout their data’s lifecycle. * gay data thesis *
Them clu unrstandg the role genr atypily plays the formatn of a gay inty, how procs of genr attributn shore up a bary genr orr, how sexual mory youths pursue sexualy tn that is reprentative of their experience via alternative forms of media, and how the queerg of the fay may rult posive g out experienc for youth. Neverthels, vtigatns foced on life experienc of lbian, gay and bisexual youth suggt that up to 84 per cent report verbal harassment (Poteat and Espelage, 2005), a quarter report physil harassment (Elze, 2003; Pilkgton and D'Augelli, 1995), and up to 70 per cent experience problems school due to prejudice and discrimatn based on sexual orientatn (Remafedi, 1987; Saewyc et al., 2007; Telljohann and Price, 1993). Non-disclosure of peer victimizatn is likely to be particularly problematic among lbian and gay youth, who often hate to seek support generally om school profsnals (Telljohann and Price, 1993), many of whom harbour tolerant attus toward lbian and gay persons (Fontae, 1998).
LBIAN, GAY AND BISEXUAL ONLE DATERS REPORT POSIVE EXPERIENC – BUT ALSO HARASSMENT
* gay data thesis *
Further, sexual mory youth may not seek support om their parents, who may be potentially available, out of fear that seekg support will lead to further victimizatn (Hunter, 1990; Williams et al., 2005) this study, we addrs gaps the lerature on peer victimizatn of youth who are lbian and gay.
Selectn creria clud expertise on lbian and gay youth and the cln of men and women occupyg diverse profsnal rol across var the purpose of the study, ‘youth’ was fed as dividuals aged between fifteen and twenty-four years (Statistics Canada, 2006), although bullyg of lbian and gay youth begs well before the age of fifteen and ntu after the age of twenty-four. Informants provid servic to lbian and gay youth, om age fifteen to twenty-four, var settgs, and occupied diverse rol, cludg: a sendary school teacher and universy-based social worker, youth peer unsellors and advot, and muny-based social service support workers and advot. Instutnal factors tnal settgs that ntributed to bullyg of lbian and gay youth prise aquate trag for tors, social service provirs and other adults workg wh youth, a lack of equy-based polici clive of sexual orientatn and failure to hold staff and stunts acuntable unr existg equy-based polici.
’ Instutnal-level factors emerged as creatg a climate that is eher hostile or supportive, and which strongly fluenc the attus and behavurs of staff, stunts and the experienc of lbian and the other hand, stutnal factors ernment and social policy were intified as migatg lbian and gay bullyg.
LBIAN AND GAY PARENTG
Inclus a summary of rearch fdgs on lbian mothers, gay fathers and their children, an annotated biblgraphy of the published psychologil lerature and addnal rourc relevant to lbian and gay parentg. * gay data thesis *
Tolerance for vlence as perpetuated by the media, as well as ‘pervasive’ heteronormative imag of ‘the perfect fay’, were seen to endorse bullyg, whereas the creasg cln of lbian and gay characters televisn programmg was unrstood as a migatg factor, which has ‘done a lot terms of makg more acceptable for people to vary a ltle b wh sexual orientatn’. A rponnt explaed suicidaly among some lbian and gay youth as a functn of feelg isolated multiple spher of life, cludg fay, school and peer group: ‘I gus people turn to suici bee they feel, “when I go home I'm isolated om my whole fay, when I go to school and wh my peers 's the same way. All rponnts exprsed ncern that lbian and gay bullyg is not aquately addrsed and intified three ma barriers to addrsg bullyg: nial, dilutn and fear of, rponnts referred to nial of the existence of queer youth; nsequently, bullyg of lbian and gay youth remas unacknowledged.
Pervasive and severe forms of bullyg motivated by tolerance towards others based on actual or perceived membership a particular group, known as bias-based bullyg, both reflects and ntribut to a toxic environment, which fosters lbian and gay victimizatn (Ryan and Rivers, 2003).
However, several characteristics of bullyg that victimiz lbian and gay youth appear to be, whereas tradnal bullyg and bullyg of lbian and gay youth are both strongly evint schools, ndns that foster the bullyg of lbian and gay youth appear across their entire social elogy, cludg peers, siblgs, parents, teachers, relig thori, and ach, as well as social polici, laws, stutns and the media.
"GAYS LBIANS" THIS TOPICS, WRG DISSERTATNS ON "GAYS LBIANS," AND MASTERS THIS SERVICE
The double-edged nature of the g-out procs may be one key ponent to unrstandg the experienc of lbian and gay youth and to providg support and, while bullyg is generally unrreported, rearchers, policy makers, and tors are creasgly acknowledgg the pervasivens of bullyg and takg actn to tervene. Merely cludg ‘bias-based’ bullyg wh the overall tegory of bullyg nceals the unrlyg motivatns and th rc the signifince of the particular bias and s enactment (Greene, 2006; Ste, 2003), while a culture that glorifi vlence ntribut to all bullyg, lbian and gay youth are specifilly victimized by homophobia the media and social stutns.
This powerful stutnal ntext, based on entrenched sexual prejudice—for example, schools, sports, relig stutns, and shelters—and enshred laws and social polici that exclu, negate or discrimate on the basis of sexual orientatn, is a ccial factor that may renr victimizatn of lbian and gay youth, the pervasive sexual prejudice embedd many relig stutns may hold a distct place the bullyg experienc of lbian and gay youth. The pervasivens of homophobic imag and disurse the media, and discrimatn agast lbian and gay persons polici and laws, place lbian and gay youth at higher risk for problems due to ternalizatn of stigma and tolerance (Hetrick and Mart, 1987; Hunter and Schaecher, 1987). Addrsg ‘ternalized homophobia’ merely as a psychologil phenomenon risks further victimizg lbian and gay youth (Newman, 1998, 2002)—as if they rema the foc of ‘treatment’ or terventn—whereas the ln's share of change should be implemented fai, schools, relig stutns, social polici and laws to bat sexual prejudice and to provi lbian- and gay-affirmative and supportive environments for all fact, the ma barriers to addrsg bullyg of lbian and gay youth, intified this study as nial, dilutn and fear of reprisal, fd parallels to regnized barriers the lerature on ‘tradnal’ bullyg.
However, the se of lbian and gay youth, this barrier appears to extend to adults as barriers to addrsg bullyg of lbian and gay youth, therefore, are analogo to intified barriers to addrsg ‘tradnal’ bullyg, whereas others rrpond to barriers that apply to motivatnal bullyg that targets particular populatns, and some appear unique to lbian and gay youth—such as lackg any safe space or person to whom to self-disclose or to turn for help, and the entrenchment and even acceptance of sexual prejudice social polici, laws and stutns. Approach that tend to operate on one level, particularly those targetg dividual-level dynamics of lbian and gay bullyg, not only may be effective, but actually risk ntributg to the problem; lbian and gay youth might bee intified as the loc of the problem rather than fai, schools, sportg events, plac of worship and other key social and muny stutns, as well as laws and social polici that ignore or exclu lbian and gay youth om their exploratory rearch supports fdgs that terventns mt be tailored to particular populatns and social and stutnal ntexts.