Transforming Women's Body Image

No abstract available for this article.     

Who's Afraid of Gay Theology? Men's Studies,Gay Scholars,and Heterosexual Silence

Abstract

Despite the growing body of gay scholarship in religious studies, there is a dearth of responses by heterosexual scholars in the field of men's studies in religion. Gay theology can still count more predictably on the ire of a conservative public than on a nuanced, non-homophobic critique by their heterosexual colleagues. What contributes to disregarding gay scholarly voices? Paradoxically, their voices are marginalized to the point of invisibility and yet are also in the center of public discourse. This article sifts through some reasons of why heterosexual men shy away from a public debate of the merits of gay scholarship. Besides methodological reservations, heterosexual male anxieties cause such weariness. Autobiographical insertions by gay scholars combined with discipline-transgressions may lead to ‘homosexual panic’ even among non-homophobic scholars. The article argues that heterosexual men's studies in religion need to overcome their silence and engage the scholarship of gay theology.     

Ideology,Prejudice, and Attitudes Toward Sexual Minority Social Policies and Organizations

This study tested the effects of multiple ideologies on support for restrictive policies against gay and lesbian individuals and organizations and if these effects were mediated by sexual prejudice. Social dominance orientation (SDO), conservatism, and right‐wing authoritarianism (RWA) each had significant direct and indirect effects. SDO had the most consistent direct effects in addition to its effects through sexual prejudice. The direct effects of conservatism were smaller and similar in size to its indirect effects through prejudice. Although the direct effect of RWA was significant for policy attitudes, its effect was entirely mediated through sexual prejudice for organization opposition. Results suggest that high‐RWA individuals adopt their positions largely because of prejudice toward sexual minorities, while high‐SDO individuals adopt their positions partly out of prejudice and partly because these positions perpetuate hierarchies between heterosexuals and sexual minorities. Results also diminish the principled conservatism argument that conservative positions on these policies and organizations are absent of prejudice. As policies continue to be enacted that affect the sexual minority community, research is needed to identify the underlying motivations for individuals' positions toward these policies.     

‘Coming out’ in therapy? Perceived risks and benefits of self‐disclosure of sexual orientation by gay and lesbian therapists to straight clients

Primary objective: The study's primary objective was to investigate the experiences of gay and lesbian therapists, when considering self‐disclosure of their sexual orientation to straight (i.e. heterosexual) clients. This qualitative study set out to ascertain the key factors gay therapists take into account when considering this decision and to explore the effects this self‐disclosure may have on themselves, their clients and their therapeutic relationships. Research design: The research design was based on the use of semi‐structured interviews, undertaken with a non‐random, purposive sample of counsellors and psychotherapists (n=8) in current practice. The rationale for this method was to aid exploration of therapists' experiences of the process of self‐disclosure. Methods and procedures: Inclusion criteria were for therapists who self‐identified as being gay or lesbian, and who were experienced in clinical work with straight clients. Transcribed data was analysed using inductive thematic analysis. Main outcomes and results: Some therapists reported being confident with self‐disclosure relating to their own sexual orientation. However, a common theme related to the reportedly high levels of anxiety and vulnerability, which therapists identified. Key themes emerged around: respondents' fears of client judgement; a need for therapist self‐protection; self‐awareness of the potential impact of their own fears and prejudices on the therapeutic relationship; and the potential relevance of internalised homophobia, as an overall constraining factor. Conclusions: Self‐disclosure of their sexual orientation to straight clients is constructed, in this initial survey, as being potentially problematic and risky for some gay therapists.