Homohysteria: Useful Construct? Or an Unnecessary Splitting of Hairs?

    Authors

    C. Negy

    Comments

    Authors: contact us about adding a copy of your work at STARS@ucf.edu

    Abbreviated Journal Title

    Sex Roles

    Keywords

    Homophobia; Homonegativity; Gendered Behaviors; Prejudice; Discrimination; Sexual Orientation; Attitudes; PERCEIVED DISCRIMINATION; GAY MEN; MASCULINITY; PSYCHOLOGY; HOMOPHOBIA; PREJUDICE; HEALTH; SPORT; Psychology, Developmental; Psychology, Social; Women's Studies

    Abstract

    In this commentary to McCormack and Anderson (2014, this issue), I offer my reaction to a relatively new construct-homohysteria-that characterizes heterosexual men's negative attitudes and affective reactions toward gay men in the context of gendered (traditional) behaviors. I propose that similar to other forms of "isms" used in both academia and the general community (e.g., racism, sexism), little is to be gained by continuing to splinter established terms such as heterosexism or homophobia. More specifically, I argue that by creating new terms for prejudice against gays and lesbians-terms that simply reflect either different degrees or motives of heterosexism-we risk muddling research findings and ultimately trivializing the pernicious phenomenon of prejudice and discrimination against the LGBT community. I also argue that in the absence of empirical support for the validity of homohysteria (as a distinct construct from heterosexism or homophobia), those embracing this new term are investigatively putting the cart before the horse.

    Journal Title

    Sex Roles

    Volume

    71

    Issue/Number

    3-4

    Publication Date

    1-1-2014

    Document Type

    Article

    Language

    English

    First Page

    137

    Last Page

    140

    WOS Identifier

    WOS:000342172600004

    ISSN

    0360-0025

    Share

    COinS