Heterosexual and Homosexual Marriag - Are Straight and Gay Marriag Intil?

Contents:

• UNRSTANDG GAY & LBIAN INTI
• LBIAN, GAY, BISEXUAL, TRANSGENR, QUEER, & INTERSEX LIFE
• ABOUT THE CENTERSCE 1983 THE CENTER HAS BEEN SUPPORTG, FOSTERG AND CELEBRATG THE LGBT MUNY OF NEW YORK CY. FD MORE RMATN ON AND OUR WORK ABOUT THE CENTER. VIS ABOUT THE CENTEROUR MISSNCYBER CENTERCENTER HISTORYRACE EQUYMEDIA CENTERLEARSHIP & STAFFEMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNICORPORATE PARTNERSHIPSANNUAL REPORTS & FANCIAL INFORMATNCONTACT USHOURS & LOTNSEMAPSUPPORT THE CENTER
• LBIAN, GAY, BISEXUAL, TRANSGENR – WHAT’S THE DIFFERENCE?
• QUEER VS. GAY: HOW THE WORDS ARE DIFFERENT, AND WHY IT’S IMPORTANT
• HETEROSEXUAL AND HOMOSEXUAL MARRIAG – ARE STRAIGHT AND GAY MARRIAG INTIL?
• DIFFERENC AMONG LBIAN, GAY, BISEXUAL, HETEROSEXUAL INDIVIDUALS, AND THOSE WHO REPORTED AN OTHER INTY ON AN OPEN-END RPONSE ON LEVELS OF SOCIAL ANXIETY
• COMPARG LBIAN AND GAY, AND HETEROSEXUAL RELATNSHIPS: FOR LOVE OR MONEY?
• LBIAN AND GAY PARENTG
• INTIMACY AND EMOTN WORK LBIAN, GAY, AND HETEROSEXUAL RELATNSHIPS

UNRSTANDG GAY & LBIAN INTI

Helpful rpons of a therapist treatg an dividual who is troubled about her or his same sex attractns clu helpg that person actively pe wh social prejudic agast homosexualy, succsfully rolve issu associated wh and rultg om ternal nflicts, and actively lead a happy and satisfyg life.

The phrase “g out” is ed to refer to several aspects of lbian, gay, and bisexual persons’ experienc: self-awarens of same-sex attractns; the tellg of one or a few people about the attractns; wispread disclosure of same-sex attractns; and intifitn wh the lbian, gay, and bisexual muny. The vast majory of scientific studi that have directly pared lbian and gay parents wh heterosexual parents have nsistently shown that the same-sex upl are as f and pable parents as heterosexual upl, and that their children are jt as psychologilly healthy and well adjted. Lbian (L), gay (G), and bisexual (B) dividuals experience social and stutnal prejudice and opprsn social teractns (Mays & Cochran, 2001), ls social support than heterosexual dividuals (Saen & Pantalone, 2006), ternalized shame, and are the targets of sexual mory vlence (Kg, et.

LBIAN, GAY, BISEXUAL, TRANSGENR, QUEER, & INTERSEX LIFE

Stemmg om biased beliefs that bisexuals are unstable their inty, greedy, immature, and/or immoral) is experienced om not only the heterosexual populatn, but also om lbian and gay populatns (Brewster, Moradi, DeBlaere, & Velez, 2013; Brewster & Moradi, 2010; Burlon, 2005; Weiss, 2003). Margalized sexual orientatns) are likely to experience a high equency of stigma-related thoughts durg social suatns, suggtg that non-heterosexual dividuals might have more negative thoughts surroundg social suatns than heterosexuals (Smart & Wegner, 1999), higher levels of social anxiety (along wh lower self-teem and greater fears of negative evaluatn) have been found LGB populatns when pared to heterosexual dividuals (gay men: Pachankis & Goldied, 2006; LGB: Gilman, Cochran, Mays, Hugh, Ostrow, & Ksler, 2001; Potoczniak, Ala, & DeBlaere, 2007; Saen & Pantalone, 2006). Comparable rearch has been replited sampl of gay man, monstratg that higher expectatns of rejectn, and more equent experienc of discrimatn are lked to higher levels of social anxiety (Hatzenbuehler, Nolen-Hoeksema, & Erickson, 2008; Pachankis, Goldied, & Ramrattan, 2008).

Given the higher prevalence of SAD LGB populatns, we mt nsir the bed impacts of livg wh both a margalized sexual orientatn and experiencg mental health stggl, as the tersectnaly uld potentially make both inti more summary, gay and lbian populatns face signifint mental health dispari pared to their heterosexual unterparts.

Unrreprented sexual mory groups uld potentially experience even greater distrs than lbian and gay populatns, as unrreprented sexual mori likely have even ls social support due to lower muny siz and awarens of and attentn to their sexual the prent study, we will vtigate levels of social anxiety participants who intify as lbian/gay, bisexual, heterosexual, as well as those who endorse the wre- rponse optn to see whether rat of social anxiety vary when we break down sexual inti to the subgroups. Further, we provi a scriptn of dividuals the wre- rpons group, acknowledgg the breadth of possible sexual orientatn inti prent wh our hypothize that, siar to prev rearch, heterosexual dividuals will report lower levels of social anxiety than all other groups (lbian/gay, bisexual, and those the wre- rponse group). Fally, we hypothize that dividuals the wre- rponse group will rate higher social anxiety than all other groups (lbian/gay, bisexual, and heterosexual) bee of the lower public awarens of their sexual inti, as well as potential lower social support experienced by those dividuals.

ABOUT THE CENTERSCE 1983 THE CENTER HAS BEEN SUPPORTG, FOSTERG AND CELEBRATG THE LGBT MUNY OF NEW YORK CY. FD MORE RMATN ON AND OUR WORK ABOUT THE CENTER. VIS ABOUT THE CENTEROUR MISSNCYBER CENTERCENTER HISTORYRACE EQUYMEDIA CENTERLEARSHIP & STAFFEMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNICORPORATE PARTNERSHIPSANNUAL REPORTS & FANCIAL INFORMATNCONTACT USHOURS & LOTNSEMAPSUPPORT THE CENTER

Further, livg a liberal cy is rrelated wh greater social support, and turn lower levels of social anxiety (Potoczniak, Ala, & DeBlaere 2007; Saen & Pantalone, 2006) fdgs also revealed that dividuals who intified as bisexual reported signifintly more social anxiety related fear and avoidance and greater anxiety on the social and performance subsl pared to those who intified as lbian/gay, or heterosexual. Wh the limatns md, our rults provi sight to varied experienc wh the LGB”O” fdgs suggt that a liberal, urban cy, dividuals who intify as bisexual and those who dite a wre- rponse experience higher rat of social anxiety than their gay/lbian, and heterosexual unterparts. Bee most LGBTQ people are raised the same society as heterosexuals, they learn the same beliefs and stereotyp prevalent the domant society, leadg to a phenomenon known as ternalized homophobia, whereas LGBTQ-intified dividuals feel shame, guilt or hatred towards the part of themselv intified as LGBTQ.

The failure to appreciate possible differenc between lbian and gay and heterosexual relatnships leads to the expectatn that marriage (or civil partnership) will brg the same benefs to lbian and gay upl as do for heterosexual upl (many lbian and gay fancial advisers argue otherwise: see Flemg, 2004). The assumptn here is that lbian and gay upl, bee they are no different om heterosexual upl, are seekg to merge their inti and their fanc a way that is enuraged by ‘morn marriage’ (Burgoyne & Routh, 2001), and that (monogamo) marriage reprents the ‘gold standard’ of relatnship achievement (Flay & Clarke, 2004). Even though a key argument support of same-sex marriage emphasis the enomic equaly marriage rights will offer lbian and gay partnerships, there is ltle discsn of how legislatn might bt reflect the specifici of the enomic dimensns of lbian and gay relatnships, and limed psychologil evince to feed to such discsns.

There is a need for more rearch on money management lbian and gay relatnships, not least bee velopments policy and legislatn – for stance, the Civil Partnership Act 2004 – rely on mols of heterosexual behavur that may not aquately reflect the lived realy of lbian and gay relatnships.

LBIAN, GAY, BISEXUAL, TRANSGENR – WHAT’S THE DIFFERENCE?

Unlike heterosexual parents and their children, however, lbian and gay parents and their children are often subject to prejudice bee of their sexual orientatn that n turn judg, legislators, profsnals, and the public agast them, sometim rultg negative out, such as loss of physil ctody, rtrictns on visatn, and prohibns agast adoptn (ACLU Lbian and Gay Rights Project, 2002; Appell, 2003; Patterson, Fulcher, & Waright, 2002).

The relevance of this cricism has been greatly rced as rearch has expand to explore life a wir array of lbian mother and gay father fai (many of which have never lived through the divorce of a heterosexual uple), and as newer studi beg to clu a wir array of ntrol groups.

QUEER VS. GAY: HOW THE WORDS ARE DIFFERENT, AND WHY IT’S IMPORTANT

Three ncerns have historilly been associated wh judicial cisn makg ctody ligatn and public polici erng foster re and adoptn: the belief that lbians and gay men are mentally ill, that lbians are ls maternal than heterosexual women, and that lbians' and gay men's relatnships wh sexual partners leave ltle time for ongog parent-child teractns (ACLU Lbian and Gay Rights Project, 2002; Falk, 1989, 1994; Patterson et al., 2002; Patterson & Reddg, 1996).

HETEROSEXUAL AND HOMOSEXUAL MARRIAG – ARE STRAIGHT AND GAY MARRIAG INTIL?

There is no reliable evince that homosexual orientatn per se impairs psychologil functng, although the social and other circumstanc which lbians and gay men live, cludg exposure to wispread prejudice and discrimatn, often e acute distrs (Cochran, 2001; Freedman, 1971; Gonsrek, 1991; Hart et al., 1978; Hooker, 1957; Meyer, 2003; Reiss, 1980).

DIFFERENC AMONG LBIAN, GAY, BISEXUAL, HETEROSEXUAL INDIVIDUALS, AND THOSE WHO REPORTED AN OTHER INTY ON AN OPEN-END RPONSE ON LEVELS OF SOCIAL ANXIETY

Beliefs that lbian and gay adults are not f parents likewise have no empiril foundatn (Anrssen, Amlie, & Ytteroy, 2002; Brewaeys & van Hall, 1997; Parks, 1998; Patterson, 2000; Patterson & Chan, 1996; Perr, 2002; Stacey & Biblarz, 2001; Tasker, 1999; Victor & Fish, 1995).

COMPARG LBIAN AND GAY, AND HETEROSEXUAL RELATNSHIPS: FOR LOVE OR MONEY?

A recent study of 256 lbian and gay parent fai found that, ntrast to patterns characterizg the majory of Amerin parents, very few lbian and gay parents reported any e of physil punishment (such as spankg) as a disciplary technique; stead, they were likely to report e of posive techniqu such as reasong (Johnson & O'Connor, 2002).

LBIAN AND GAY PARENTG

Certaly, rearch has found no reasons to believe lbian mothers or gay fathers to be unf parents (Armto, 2002; Barret & Robson, 1990; Bigner & Bozett, 1990; Bigner & Jabsen, 1989a, 1989b; Bos et al., 2003, 2004; Bozett, 1980, 1989; Patterson, 1997; Patterson & Chan, 1996; Sbordone, 1993; Tasker & Golombok, 1997; Victor & Fish, 1995; Wton, 1991).

For stance, one such ncern is that children brought up by lbian mothers or gay fathers will show disturbanc genr inty and/or genr role behavr (Falk, 1989, 1994; Hchens & Kirkpatrick, 1985; Kleber, Howell, & Tibbs-Kleber, 1986; Patterson et al., 2002; Patterson & Reddg, 1996). Three aspects of sexual inty are nsired the rearch: genr inty, which ncerns a person's self-intifitn as male or female; genr-role behavr, which ncerns the extent to which a person's activi, occupatns, and the like are regard by the culture as mascule, feme, or both; and sexual orientatn, which refers to a person's choice of sexual partners, who may be homosexual, heterosexual, or bisexual (Money & Ehrhardt, 1972; Ste, 1993).

INTIMACY AND EMOTN WORK LBIAN, GAY, AND HETEROSEXUAL RELATNSHIPS

Although some children have scribed enunters wh anti-gay remarks om peers (Gartrell et al., 2005), young adult offsprg of divorced lbian mothers did not rell beg the targets of any more childhood teasg or victimizatn than did the offsprg of divorced heterosexual mothers (Tasker & Golombok, 1995, 1997).