Wrer's Guil | The Gay & Lbian Review | Magaze

Contents:

• MALAYSIA CUTS SHORT MIC FT AFTER BRISH BAND SLAMS ANTI-GAY LAWS, SGER KISS MALE BANDMATE
• THE GAY MALE JOURNAL: THE SWAY OF IPV/A
• JASON GAY
• SEXUAL INTY, STIGMA, AND DEPRSN: THE ROLE OF THE "ANTI-GAY PROPAGANDA LAW" MENTAL HEALTH AMONG MEN WHO HAVE SEX WH MEN MOSW, RSIA
• MENTAL HEALTH LBIAN, GAY, BISEXUAL, AND TRANSGENR (LGBT) YOUTH
• “GAY IS GOOD”: HISTORY OF HOMOSEXUALY THE DSM AND MORN PSYCHIATRY
• GAY AND STRAIGHT MEN PREFER MASCULE-PRENTG GAY MEN FOR A HIGH-STAT ROLE: EVINCE FROM AN ELOGILLY VALID EXPERIMENT
• FRIENDSHIP TROUBLE: AN EXAMATN OF THE GAY BT FRIEND INTY AMERIN CONSUMER CULTURE
• NETFLIX LNCH 'THE GAY AGENDA,' A PODST CELEBRATG LGBTQ MUNY

MALAYSIA CUTS SHORT MIC FT AFTER BRISH BAND SLAMS ANTI-GAY LAWS, SGER KISS MALE BANDMATE

The Journal of Homosexualy is an ternatnally acclaimed, peer-reviewed publitn voted to publishg a wi variety of disciplary and terdisciplary scholarship to foster a thorough unrstandg of the plexi, nuanc, and the multifaceted aspects of sexualy and genr. First published 1991, the Tulane Journal of Law & Sexualy is the first and only stunt-eded law review the untry voted solely to verg legal issu of tert to the lbian, gay, bisexual, and transgenr muny on a wi variety of subjects, cludg nstutnal, employment, fay, health, surance, and ary law.

THE GAY MALE JOURNAL: THE SWAY OF IPV/A

Published fal eded form as:PMCID: PMC4887282NIHMSID: NIHMS789458AbstractToday’s lbian, gay, bisexual, and transgenr (LGBT) youth e out at younger ag, and public support for LGBT issu has dramatilly creased, so why do LGBT youth ntue to be at high risk for promised mental health?

Yet the first public and rearch attentn to young LGBTs foced explicly on mental health: A small number of studi the 1980s began to intify ncerng rat of reported suicidal behavr among “gay” youth, and a US feral report on “gay youth suici” (Gibson 1989) beme ntroversial both polics and rearch (Rsell 2003).

2014) sum, chang societal acceptance of LGBT people have ma g out possible for ntemporary youth, yet the age of g out now tersects wh the velopmental perd characterized by potentially tense terpersonal and social regulatn of genr and sexualy, cludg homophobia.

JASON GAY

We then highlight studi that foc on factors that protect and foster rilience among LGBT to the 1970s, the Amerin Psychiatric Associatn’s (APA’s) Diagnostic and Statistil Manual of Mental Disorrs (DSM) listed homosexualy as a “socpathic personaly disturbance” (Am.

1948, 1953) and psychologil parisons between heterosexual and gay men (Hooker 1957) fostered a change attus om the psychologil muny and motivated the APA’s removal of homosexualy as a mental disorr 1973 (although all ndns related to same-sex attractn were not removed until 1987). Generally, Meyer (2003) poss three strs procs om distal to proximal: (a) objective or external strsors, which clu stctural or stutnalized discrimatn and direct terpersonal teractns of victimizatn or prejudice; (b) one’s expectatns that victimizatn or rejectn will occur and the vigilance related to the expectatns; and (c) the ternalizatn of negative social attus (often referred to as ternalized homophobia).

SEXUAL INTY, STIGMA, AND DEPRSN: THE ROLE OF THE "ANTI-GAY PROPAGANDA LAW" MENTAL HEALTH AMONG MEN WHO HAVE SEX WH MEN MOSW, RSIA

As a rult, lbian and gay youth livg unti wh fewer sexual orientatn and genr inty (SOGI)-specific antibullyg polici are twice as likely to report past-year suici attempts than youth livg areas where the polici were more monplace (Hatzenbuehler & Key 2013) wh school environments, is also important to nsir youths’ muny ntext. E., those wh more protectns for same-sex upl, greater number of registered Democrats, prence of gay-straight allianc (GSAs) schools, and SOGI-specific nondiscrimatn and antibullyg polici] are ls likely to attempt suici even after ntrollg for other risk ditors, such as a history of physil abe, prsive symptomatology, drkg behavrs, and peer victimizatn (Hatzenbuehler 2011). Importantly, although rat of bullyg crease over the urse of the adolcent years, this trend is ls pronounced for gay and bisexual pared to heterosexual mal, leavg the youth vulnerable to the experienc for longer perds of time (Robson et al.

Rults om a three-year longudal study showed that parison to LGB youth who dated other-sex partners, those who dated same-sex partners experienced an crease self-teem and a crease ternalized homophobia for men and women, rpectively (Bermeister et al. At one extreme, the Tennsee legislature failed to pass the “Don’t Say Gay” bill, which would have ma illegal for teachers to discs homosexualy wh stunts; at the other, the “Mental Health Servic for At-Risk Youth” bill California allows youth ag 12 to 17 to nsent to mental health treatment whout parental permissn and was signed to enable LGBT youth to seek mental health servic pennt of parental nsent. For example, a study of 77 gay male llege stunts showed that young gay men’s psychosocial functng (cludg openns wh their sexual orientatn) was improved through exprsive wrg that targeted gay-related strs, pecially for those who reported lower social support or who wrote about more severe topics (Pachankis & Goldied 2010).

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

E., substance e)Genr intyone’s sense and subjective experience of genr (malens/femalens), which may or may not be nsistent wh birth sexSexual orientatnendurg sense of emotnal, sexual attractn to others based on their sex/genrSOGIsexual orientatn and genr intyGSAGay-Straight Alliance school clubSexual intyself-label to scribe one’s sexual orientatn, such as lbian, gay, bisexual, or straightCBOmuny-based anizatnFootnotDISCLOSURE STATEMENTThe thors are not aware of any affiliatns, memberships, fundg, or fancial holdgs that might be perceived as affectg the objectivy of this review. This article exam the progrsn of classifitn of homosexualy var edns of the DSM, factors fluencg this progrsn, and implitns for sexual and other mory 1952, the Amerin Psychiatry Associatn (APA) Commtee on Nomenclature and Statistics veloped the first versn of the DSM, which served as the first manual of mental health foced on clil diagnos and re and provid a glossary and scriptn of psychiatric illns (3). Given the current societal acceptance of homosexualy many untri—and while may be difficult to image today that homosexualy tly fs to “pathologic behavr”— is important to unrstand that cln of homosexualy the DSM served to move same-sex sexual behavr om beg regard as a moral s and to the secular world of medice by regnizg not as a s but stead as a disorr (4).

Placed wh the ntext of mental health, this formed the foundatn for future study of homosexualy by clicians and for a morn-day unrstandg of health dispari faced by persons om sexual mory publitn of the DSM-II 1968 saw the cln of homosexualy aga, but this edn, the headg read simply “personaly disorrs” (5). Followg this meetg, and likely many more undocumented hours of bate among members of the APA Commtee on Nomenclature and Statistics, the sixth prtg of the DSM-II, 1973, saw a change language om “homosexualy” to “sexual orientatn disturbance” (4).

Sexual orientatn disturbance was fed not jt as same-sex attractn but as a nflict ed by this attractn or a sire to change shift foc om homosexualy self beg pathologized to the ternal nflict or sire to change one’s sexualy would set the theme for the followg three edns of the DSM. 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.

“GAY IS GOOD”: HISTORY OF HOMOSEXUALY THE DSM AND MORN PSYCHIATRY

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).

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

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). 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.

FRIENDSHIP TROUBLE: AN EXAMATN OF THE GAY BT FRIEND INTY AMERIN CONSUMER CULTURE

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. 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.

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). 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.

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.

NETFLIX LNCH 'THE GAY AGENDA,' A PODST CELEBRATG LGBTQ MUNY

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”.