Intergroup Relations View on Gay Discrimination

Gay Discrimination -- Study Guide The field study by Hebl, Foster, Man nix and Davidic reveals a number of instances in which gay people are discriminated against. Those instances and situations are marked in this paper with bullet points for clarity and for succinctness. The authors also present details of a research project conducted in a Texas mall; this paper reviews that research and poses five questions after the critique and review of the Texas research project.

In 1996, attitudes vis-a-vis gays and lesbians were still quite biased; a 1996 Gallup Poll showed that half of Americans believe homosexuality is "…not an acceptable alternative lifestyle" (Hebl, et al., 2010, 815) Earlier, in 1994, a CBS poll showed that 45% of those surveyed believed that relations between gays and lesbians "…should be illegal" (Hebl, 815) At the time the Hebl article was published, only 11 states had passed laws that protect gay people in the workplace; the authors also point out that bias against gays can be interpersonal and only amount to whispers or someone glaring at a gay person -- and yet these behaviors are also unacceptable and hurtful (816) The research project that the authors describe involved 8 male students and 8 female students; they were to apply for jobs in a mall in Texas, and each person was given a hat to wear upon entering the stores; the hat either said "Gay and Proud" or "Texan and Proud" (participants didn't know which hat they were given to wear, which was a smart strategy on the part of the researchers) They were given four questions to memorize and ask while in each of the mall stores they entered: a) Do you have any job openings? b) Could I fill out an application? c) What sorts of things would I be doing if I worked here? And d) Would you mind if I used your bathroom? Each participant had a hidden tape recorder to record the verbal interactions for later analyais The results were not dramatically revealing in response to "stigmatized" participants (those wearing "Gay and Proud" hats): on question "a" employers answered "yes" 43% of the time and "no" 56%; on "b" 60% of gay hats received applications while 71% of non-gays got applications; on "c" 12% of gays were called back for interviews while 19% of non-gays were called back; and as to "d" 51% of gays were allowed to use the bathroom vs.

56% of non-gays Also, fewer words were exchanged with gay hats (169.45 on average) than with non-gay hats (257.18); gay hats received higher rates of "coded negativity" Was this research useful and worthy of being published as evidence of bias against gays? Questions: Remember, this took place in Texas, not a politically progressive state.

Asking participants to wear a "Gay and Proud" hat while inquiring about job openings solicited something close to what the researches expected, so why was it truly useful? No doubt there are employers who aren't biased but they would have reason to wonder if a person wearing a hat proclaiming their sexual preference got hired --.