Exploring Social Representations of LGBTQ+ Law And

“We still have a long way to go”: Exploring Social Representations of LGBTQ+ Law and Equality through Mixed Qualitative Methods Annabel D. Roberts Keele University Katie Wright-Bevans Keele University Abstract In the wake of a changing global context for the LGBTQ+ community and equality, it has become increasingly important to bridge the gap between psychology and politics. The present study achieved this by exploring understandings of the current and future state of legal equality for the LGBTQ+ community, using social representations theory and a politically-charged thematic analysis. Talk from three different groups were analysed: (1) government actors, (2) hetero-cisgender people and (3) LGBTQ+ identifying individuals. Analysis of data from these three samples allowed for an exploration into differences in power in society may impact the representational field. Overall, three themes were identified, with their respective social representations; (1) progress vs “a long way to go”, with an emphasis on (2) responsibility and (3) LGB triumphalism vs T. All of which are underpinned by the thema of us vs them. Overall, the present study aimed to counteract individualistic conceptualisations of LGBTQ+ oppression by exploring how social representations of law, at a meso-level, can be used to understand the issue in context while recommending possible avenues for social change, to ultimately bridge the gap between psychology and politics. Keywords: social representations, social change, power, sexuality, equality. i Social Representations of LGBTQ+ Law and Equality Currently, in the UK, despite the growing rhetoric that LGBTQ+ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and others) individuals are equal to those of heterosexual, cisgender people (Ibhawoh, 2014) and positive law reforms such as the same-sex couples act (GOV.UK, 2013), LGBTQ+ inequality is rampant. Government statistics, from a recent (2018) nationwide survey of over 108,000 LGBTQ+ participants found that LGBTQ+ respondents were, overall, less satisfied with their life in comparison to their heterosexual and cisgender counterparts. Life satisfaction was even lower for those who are transgender. Furthermore, (Stonewall, 2017) found that lesbian, gay and bisexual (LGB) hate crimes surged by 78% from 2013 to 2016. Therefore, unsurprisingly perhaps, half of LGBTQ+ people experience depression and feel that they cannot be open about their sexual or gender identity (Stonewall, 2018). These statistics illustrate the day-to-day oppressive reality for LGBTQ+ people and demonstrates that despite the idea of LGBTQ+ triumphalism in the UK (Adler, 2018), i.e. the reproduced rhetoric that the quest for LGBTQ+ equality is complete, that the current state for LGBTQ+ people remains negative and dangerous for those who identify as such. Transgender people arguably face more challenges than LGB people. For example, a third of transgender people have been discriminated against because of their gender identity in the past year and 42% of transgender people who want to transition medically, have not done so as they fear the consequences it may have on their personal life (Stonewall, 2018). These statistics show that when identities intersect, it can magnify oppression, and demonstrates the importance of recognising how sexuality and gender identity can intersect with other aspects of identity. Although the UK is reasonably progressive in comparison to 70 other UN member states which criminalise “same-sex sexual acts” (International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association, 2019, p. 15), that is not to say that advancements do not need to be 2 Social Representations of LGBTQ+ Law and Equality made in those countries. However, pathways for social change can be recommended for UK policy as continual progression is needed in an ever-changing society. Socio-Political Context in the UK In 2013, an international survey found that acceptance of homosexuality is primarily linked to countries within the European Union; in Britain, 76% agreed that homosexuality should be accepted within society, with an increase of 5% from 2007. However, gender, age and other individual differences affect the degree to which someone is accepting of LGBTQ+ people (Pew Research Centre, 2013). Research also found that LGBTQ+ acceptance is more polarised than ever, with only 57% of countries experiencing an increase in LGBTQ+ acceptance (Flores & Park, 2018). In the UK, the Conservatives have been in power for around ten years (GOV.UK, 2019), Not only is conservatism seen as a dangerous barrier for LGBTQ+ rights (International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association, 2019), but current Prime Minister Boris Johnson has been suggested to hold the “most anti-human rights” cabinet in decades (Maurice, 2019). Whereby they have consistently voted against LGBTQ+ rights and human rights. A backlash is evident, whereby, recently, protests by religious groups halted LGBTQ+ inclusive education in schools (Duffy, 2019; Parveen, 2019; Hockaday, 2019), despite legislation making LGBTQ+ education mandatory in 2017 (Stonewall, 2017). This mirrors the broader global political backlash against the political left, liberalism and feminism, evident in universities whereby the number of conservative, right and alt-right societies are rising (Yorke, Mintz & Peters, 2019). Previous Research of LGBTQ+ Law and Equality Previous research around the LGBTQ+ community has largely focused on identity, using social identity theory and has 3 Social Representations of LGBTQ+ Law and Equality consequentially taken an individualistic view of LGBTQ+ issues. This paper aims to present an alternative view of LGBTQ+ identities and current issues in the UK, by exploring the social representations of LGBTQ+ law and equality to ultimately to suggest pathways for social change. This approach allowed for a critical understanding of the topic while addressing power dynamics and using a theory which relates directly to social change (Howarth, 2006). Ibhawoh (2014) found that present-day exclusions to human rights are consistently overpowered by a triumphalist and universalist rhetoric, where the dominant idea is that equality has been achieved. Therefore, certain identities become invisible and fundamental human rights are then still denied, i.e. those who identify as bisexual are often entirely left out of LGBTQ+ equal rights discourse (Marcus, 2015). However, LGBTQ+ policy research found that LGBTQ+ rights and equality have progressed, and people are, overall, more accepting of the community; pro-equality policies and legislation reduce reported hate crimes (Levy & Levy, 2017). The latter authors also found that equal rights within one country or area can ‘spill over’ and affect change in other areas; meaning that even local/small scale change can trigger larger-scale changes. Therefore, the progression of LGBTQ+ laws, their global reach and the overall achievements made in terms of equality have to be acknowledged and celebrated. In contrast, others have argued that there are many contradictions in human rights, and we must focus our attention on the exclusionary aspects which threaten the UDHR (universal declaration of human rights) with protection for all identities not just for some (Marcus, 2015). This is especially evident for those who are transgender. Academics, policymakers and those with power in society must acknowledge the triumphalist proclamations of inclusivity, and use an alternative lens to uncover the invisible spaces where 4 Social Representations of LGBTQ+ Law and Equality these human rights are denied; this is one of the aims of this study, which is to elevate the voices of the oppressed and uncover pathways towards social change. Policy and ultimately, laws, are difficult to shape and change as research suggests that LGBTQ+ equality and policy serves as a way to gain money and power by pandering to the wealthy LGBTQ+ community. This then forms stereotypical archetypal gay rights, which influences reform on behalf of the powerful and wealthy LGB (usually not T) (Adler, 2018). This ultimately may mean that legislation may be swayed to favour certain groups or identities. Heterosexism can also be regarded as a further barrier to equality. One recent study found that those with normative identities (cisgender and heterosexual) regard sex as fixed and binary, and gender or sexual orientation as a construction (fluid and continuous) (Lloyd & Galupo, 2019). This is important when applied to the context of human rights and LGBTQ+ law as these essentialist and constructionist beliefs could also explain attitudes towards groups (i.e. the LGBTQ+ community) and policies (Lloyd & Galupo, 2019). Theory of Social Representations. Social representations theory (SRT) was utilised within the present study as it is suitable for addressing issues of power and whose knowledge is granted legitimacy over others (Howarth, 2006). SRT, unlike discourse analysis, is more appropriate when exploring understandings in relation to social change (Wagner, Duveen, Themel and Verma, 1999). Since its development in Europe in the 1960s, SRT has become an established theory in social and political psychology (Sammut & Howarth, 2014). Moscovici (1976) defined social representations as system of values, ideas and practices. This system can be regarded as common-sense knowledge (Lorenzi-Cioldi & Clémence, 2001). Social representations (SRs) are dynamic (Duveen, 2000) in that they are of our current society; facilitated by culture, policies and

Load more