21 elmer eddynov1


Published on

Published in: Spiritual, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • homophobia: actual phobic fear of gay people; very narrow; few people are like thishomonegativity is a preferable term: cultural attitudes that devalue homosexuality and homosexuals-internalized homonegativity: negative societal attitudes against homosexuality that a person with same-sex attractions turns toward himselfI think one can be negative about homosexuality, though, even in the absence of negative cultural attitudes;awareness that you are differentawareness you may not be able to have kids- IH a part of minority stress: experiences of discrimination and hassles in daily life- anticipated stigma- episodes of discrimination anti-gay attacks
  • focus has been on risky sexual behaviour and how the other outcomes correlate with IHbut they other outcomes are important in and of themselves!
  • 1st group: came of age late-1990s - present2nd group: came of age 1980s - mid-1990s3rd group: came of age 1960s, 1970
  • picking good measure is hardmany developed long time agoharshly wordednot measuring IH directly, but things related to it, like acceptance of gay culture; comfort in gay settings; comfort with men who do not prescribe to traditional gender roles; public ID as gay/outnessmost not validated with older gay men – or with gay men at all!too longIHI:23 itemsLikert scale 1-6items cluster into 3 factors directly related to IHPersonal Homonegativity example: When I think about my sexual attraction towards men, I feel unhappy; I sometimes feel that my homosexuality is embarrassingAffirmation example: I am thankful for my sexual orientation; I believe more gay men should be shown in TV shows, movies, and commercialsMorality example: I believe it is morally wrong for men to be attracted to one another; in my opinion, homosexuality is harmful to the order of societytotal scores on revised scale range from 17-102
  • both Levene’s test and Brown-Forsythe testchose not to use age as a continuous variable because wanted to examine cohort effects vs effect of aging in general
  • - it gets better; or AT LEAST IT DOESN’T GET WORSEINTERACTION WITH GAY MENas you interact with more gay men over the life course, you feel less differentfeel less alonemore social supportSOCIOEMOTIONAL SELECTIVITY-life-span theory of motivationas time horizons shrink, people become increasingly selective, investing greater resources in emotionally satisfying goals and activitiesmotivational shift in cognitive processing, with a relative preference for paying attention to and remembering positive over negative information;won’t dwell on negative feelings about one’s sexuality; will try to see it more positivelyREACTIVITYharsh wording invokes blatant stigma and they will consciously fight against thisor may even react against researcher- unlikely a problem, though - only a few people commented about item wording - I removed most harshly worded items - you see orderly decline in IH over time
  • resilient in the face of stigmastill affects health: even low levels of IH can affect health because they add to burden of minority stress by considering stigma as something that a personal internalizes, it becomes THEIR problem to solverather, we should be dealing with the societal stigmabut that may not be enough for the person in the here and now
  • those men for whom IH is a big problembut even among out gay men, IH is a problemlook at Manhunt, Grindr, etc.re: Facebook:whole world seems to be on Facebook, incl older peoplegetting people from suburban and rural settingspeople who don’t go out much—who want to participate in gay life from a distancemany participants: said they’d never have been able to participate in an online survey if it weren’t for Facebook
  • although not ethnically diverse, diversity evident along other dimensionsoccupations include: accountant, a barber, a physician, car salesman, lawyer, bus driver, carpenter, banker, farmer, TV presenter, sailor, reiki master, opera singer, priest, and a mortician
  • 21 elmer eddynov1

    1. 1. “It Gets Better”:InternalizedHomonegativityand AgeEddy ElmerDepartment of GerontologySimon Fraser Universityeddyelmer@gmail.com
    2. 2. Agenda definition of terms correlates IH over the life course current study results discussion implications limitations and future research
    3. 3. Definitions homophobia actual phobic fear of gay people very clinical, narrow term few people are like this homonegativity preferable term encompasses both homophobia and culturalattitudes that devalue homosexuality andhomosexuals
    4. 4. Definitions internalized homonegativity (IH) negative societal attitudes againsthomosexuality that a person with same-sexattractions turns toward himself minority stress everyday stress on account of being a sexualminority IH is one component
    5. 5. Correlates of IH depression anxiety poor self-esteem loneliness suicidal ideation substance abuse intimate partner violence risky sexual behaviour
    6. 6. IH and age IH rarely examined in men 40+ ageism? most studies anecdotal and qualitative need quantitative studies to compare IHbetween different cohorts of men to examine effects of differing degrees ofsocietal stigma on levels of IH
    7. 7.  compared IH in different age groups examined whether any cohort effects differby countryCurrent study
    8. 8.  3,600 gay and bisexual men participatedin attractiveness study in 2010 all recruited online over 10 days usingFacebook, Craigslist, Reddit, 4Chan, email all completed surveys online using websitedesigned specifically for this study anonymousSample
    9. 9.  1,200 completed 4-6 month follow-up follow-up included IH measures current study: 900 self-identified gay menfrom follow-upSample640 165 100
    10. 10. 18-29(n = 278)30-49(n = 311)50-85(n = 311)Mean Age 24.5 40 57Caucasian 82% 87.4% 94.2%GeographicType50.2% Urban40.8% Suburb9% Remote58.3% Urban33.6% Suburb8.1% Remote60.1% Urban31.6% Suburb8.2% RemotePartnered 36% 45.3% 45.2%Years ofEducation15.4 16.3 16.1GayCommunity Involvement331 376 408Sample
    11. 11.  Internalized Homonegativity Inventory(Mayfield, 2001) Personal Homonegativity Gay Affirmation Morality of Homosexuality I recently revised (shortened) the scalebased on CFAs with young and older men revised scale appropriate for all agesMeasure of IH
    12. 12.  reliable α>.84 for all age groups valid scale scores associated with communityinvolvement, relationship status no social desirability bias scale scores not associated with ImpressionManagement scaleMeasures
    13. 13.  data transformed to reduce positive skew homogeneity of variance checked two-way ANOVA: age x country followed by post-hoc tests potential mediators of link between age andIH examined using hierarchical linearregression mediators were variables associated with age,including education, geographic type, relationshipstatus, and community involvementAnalysis
    14. 14. Results
    15. 15.  statistically significant effect of age in opposite direction than expected, even in themore conservative US non-significant effect of country non-significant interaction of age x country community involvement explained about 50%of relationship between age and IH no other demographic variables explainedthis relationshipResults
    16. 16. Discussion IH seems to decline with age stigma tempered bydevelopmental, maturationaleffects: gay identity development less contingent self-esteem more interaction with gay men socioemotional selectivity reactivity to scale items? reaction formation?
    17. 17. Implications resilience in face of stigma successful aging but IH still problem for many even low levels affect health adds to minority stress for some, doesn’t get better young men at highest risk personal or societal issue?
    18. 18.  biased, non-random sample self-identified gay men (already out, so lowerlevels of IH than men still questioning) but even among these men, IH still a problem drawn from attractiveness study Facebook sample might have lower IH, but ismore demographically diverse and includes menwith differing levels of gay community involvement reactivity to item wording all of above can lead to positively skewed dataLimitations
    19. 19.  large sample size diverse sample (SES, education, geographictype, relationship status/duration) examined older gay men anonymity less social desirability bias valid and reliable instrument assessment of IH between countries shows consistency of age effectsStrengths
    20. 20.  “older old” men men from other countries men of other ethnicities other sexual minority men (e.g., bisexual) sexual minority women qualitative studies of mediators longitudinal studies improvements to IHI scale; other scalesFuture research
    21. 21. Thanks for listening!For more info:eddyelmer@gmail.com