LG but Not T: Opposition to Transgender Rights Amidst Gay and Lesbian Acceptance

IF 1.2 4区 社会学 Q3 SOCIOLOGY
Kelsy Burke, Emily Kazyak, Marissa Oliver, Payton Valkr
{"title":"LG but Not T: Opposition to Transgender Rights Amidst Gay and Lesbian Acceptance","authors":"Kelsy Burke, Emily Kazyak, Marissa Oliver, Payton Valkr","doi":"10.1080/00380253.2023.2167673","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article draws on sociological theories of affect and ambivalence to empirically examine individuals who express support for the rights of gays and lesbians but not transgender people. Using a representative survey of Nebraska residents and quantitative and qualitative analysis of close-ended and open-ended responses, we find that the group we call “inconsistents” are more similar demographically to consistent opponents, they outnumber consistent opponents, and that they rely on two types of logics to justify their views. For nearly all who oppose employment nondiscrimination and bathroom protections for transgender people, they use an identity logic to express skepticism, and often overt hostility, toward transgender identity. For most who oppose only bathroom protections but support employment nondiscrimination, they use a setting logic that emphasizes how social context determines when definitions of gender matter (like when using public restrooms). Our analysis shows that attitudes about LGBT rights are not dichotomous or always uniform and serves as a model to understand other contentious social issues.","PeriodicalId":48007,"journal":{"name":"Sociological Quarterly","volume":"64 1","pages":"471 - 492"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sociological Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00380253.2023.2167673","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

ABSTRACT This article draws on sociological theories of affect and ambivalence to empirically examine individuals who express support for the rights of gays and lesbians but not transgender people. Using a representative survey of Nebraska residents and quantitative and qualitative analysis of close-ended and open-ended responses, we find that the group we call “inconsistents” are more similar demographically to consistent opponents, they outnumber consistent opponents, and that they rely on two types of logics to justify their views. For nearly all who oppose employment nondiscrimination and bathroom protections for transgender people, they use an identity logic to express skepticism, and often overt hostility, toward transgender identity. For most who oppose only bathroom protections but support employment nondiscrimination, they use a setting logic that emphasizes how social context determines when definitions of gender matter (like when using public restrooms). Our analysis shows that attitudes about LGBT rights are not dichotomous or always uniform and serves as a model to understand other contentious social issues.
LG而非T:在同性恋被接受的背景下反对变性人的权利
本文运用情感和矛盾心理的社会学理论,对支持同性恋者权利而不支持变性人权利的个体进行实证研究。通过对内布拉斯加州居民的代表性调查以及对封闭式和开放式回答的定量和定性分析,我们发现,我们称之为“不一致”的群体在人口统计学上与一致的反对者更相似,他们在数量上超过一致的反对者,并且他们依靠两种逻辑来证明他们的观点是正确的。对于几乎所有反对就业不歧视和跨性别者卫生间保护的人来说,他们都用一种身份逻辑来表达对跨性别身份的怀疑,甚至经常是公开的敌意。对于大多数只反对厕所保护,但支持就业不歧视的人来说,他们使用的是一种设定逻辑,强调社会背景如何决定性别定义的重要性(比如在使用公共厕所时)。我们的分析表明,对LGBT权利的态度并不是二分的,也不是一成不变的,这可以作为理解其他有争议的社会问题的一个模型。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
期刊介绍: The Sociological Quarterly is devoted to publishing cutting-edge research and theory in all areas of sociological inquiry. Our focus is on publishing the best in empirical research and sociological theory. We look for articles that advance the discipline and reach the widest possible audience. Since 1960, the contributors and readers of The Sociological Quarterly have made it one of the leading generalist journals in the field. Each issue is designed for efficient browsing and reading and the articles are helpful for teaching and classroom use.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信