Terms to Avoid and Defamatory Language
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Book Spring 2007:Book Winter 2007.Qxd.Qxd
Anne Fausto-Sterling Frameworks of desire Genes versus choice. A quick and dirty tain unalienable Rights . ” Moreover, search of newspaper stories covering sci- rather than framing research projects in enti½c research on homosexuality shows terms of the whole of human desire, we that the popular press has settled on this neglect to examine one form, heterosex- analytic framework to explain homosex- uality, in favor of uncovering the causes uality: either genes cause homosexuality, of the ‘deviant’ other, homosexuality. or homosexuals choose their lifestyle.1 Intellectually, this is just the tip of the The mischief that follows such a for- iceberg. When we invoke formulae such mulation is broad-based and more than as oppositional rather than developmen- a little pernicious. Religious fundamen- tal, innate versus learned, genetic versus talists and gay activists alike use the chosen, early-onset versus adolescent genes-choice opposition to argue their experience, a gay gene versus a straight case either for or against full citizenship gene, hardwired versus flexible, nature for homosexuals. Biological research versus nurture, normal versus deviant, now arbitrates civil legal proceedings, the subtleties of human behavior disap- and the idea that moral status depends pear. on the state of our genes overrides the Linear though it is, even Kinsey’s scale historical and well-argued view that we has six gradations of sexual expression; are “endowed by [our] Creator with cer- and Kinsey understood the importance of the life cycle as a proper framework for analyzing human desire. Academics Anne Fausto-Sterling is professor of biology and –be they biologists, social scientists,2 or gender studies in the Department of Molecular cultural theorists–have become locked and Cell Biology and Biochemistry at Brown Uni- into an oppositional framework. -
Students' Perceptions of Lesbian and Gay Professors1
Inventing a Gay Agenda: Students’ Perceptions of Lesbian and Gay Professors1 Kristin J. Anderson2 and Melinda Kanner University of Houston–Downtown Students’ perceptions of lesbian and gay professors were examined in 2 studies (Ns = 622 and 545). An ethnically diverse sample of undergraduates read and responded to a syllabus for a proposed Psychology of Human Sexuality course. Syllabuses varied according to the political ideology, carefulness, sexual orientation, and gender of the professor. Students rated professors on dimensions such as politi- cal bias, professional competence, and warmth. Lesbian and gay professors were rated as having a political agenda, compared to heterosexual professors with the same syllabus. Student responses differed according to their homonegativity and modern homonegativity scores. The findings from these studies suggest that students may use different criteria to evaluate lesbian, gay, and heterosexual professors’ ability to approach courses objectively.jasp_757 1538..1564 Psychology has a rich history of research on prejudice against people of color in the United States, with recent work concentrating on subtle forms of racism. The work on subtle prejudice against other marginalized groups, such as lesbians and gay men, has received less scholarly attention (Whitley & Kite, 2010). Likewise, the experiences, evaluations, and perceptions of women and people of color in the academy have been subjects of research, but again, fewer studies have examined experimentally students’ perceptions and judgments of lesbian and gay professors. The academic environment in general, and the classroom in particular, are important environments to study discrimination against lesbian and gay professors. For professors, academia is a workplace in which their livelihoods and careers can be threatened with discrimination by students through course evaluations and by supervisors’ performance evaluations. -
Download the Playbook
A Guide for Reporting SOUTHERN on LGBT People in STORIES South Carolina WE ARE A PROUD SPONSOR OF THE GLAAD SOUTHERN STORIES PROGRAM 800.789.5401 MGBWHOME.COM GLAAD Southern Stories A Guide for Reporting on LGBT People in South Carolina Getting Started 4 Terms and Definitions 5 South Carolina’s LGBT History 6 When GLAAD’s Accelerating Acceptance report revealed that levels of discomfort towards the LGBT community are as high as 43% in Terms to Avoid 10 America—and spike to 61% in the South—we knew we had to act. To accelerate LGBT acceptance in the U.S. South, GLAAD is telling the stories of LGBT people from across the region through our Southern Stories program. We are amplifying stories of LGBT people who are resilient in the face of inequality and Defamatory Language 11 adversity, and building a culture in which they are able not only to survive, but also to thrive. These are impactful stories with the power to change hearts and minds, but they are too often missed or ignored altogether. In South Carolina, the LGBT community is Best Practices in Media Coverage 12 making sure and steady progress, but the work to achieve full equality and acceptance is far from done. More and more, South Carolina sees communities of faith opening their arms to LGBT people; public officials listening to families, workers, and tax payers Pitfalls to Avoid as they voice their need for equal protections; 13 students creating supportive, inclusive spaces; and allies standing up for their LGBT friends, family members, and neighbors. -
Public Opinion and Discourse on the Intersection of LGBT Issues and Race the Opportunity Agenda
Opinion Research & Media Content Analysis Public Opinion and Discourse on the Intersection of LGBT Issues and Race The Opportunity Agenda Acknowledgments This research was conducted by Loren Siegel (Executive Summary, What Americans Think about LGBT People, Rights and Issues: A Meta-Analysis of Recent Public Opinion, and Coverage of LGBT Issues in African American Print and Online News Media: An Analysis of Media Content); Elena Shore, Editor/Latino Media Monitor of New America Media (Coverage of LGBT Issues in Latino Print and Online News Media: An Analysis of Media Content); and Cheryl Contee, Austen Levihn- Coon, Kelly Rand, Adriana Dakin, and Catherine Saddlemire of Fission Strategy (Online Discourse about LGBT Issues in African American and Latino Communities: An Analysis of Web 2.0 Content). Loren Siegel acted as Editor-at-Large of the report, with assistance from staff of The Opportunity Agenda. Christopher Moore designed the report. The Opportunity Agenda’s research on the intersection of LGBT rights and racial justice is funded by the Arcus Foundation. The statements made and views expressed are those of The Opportunity Agenda. Special thanks to those who contributed to this project, including Sharda Sekaran, Shareeza Bhola, Rashad Robinson, Kenyon Farrow, Juan Battle, Sharon Lettman, Donna Payne, and Urvashi Vaid. About The Opportunity Agenda The Opportunity Agenda was founded in 2004 with the mission of building the national will to expand opportunity in America. Focused on moving hearts, minds, and policy over time, the organization works with social justice groups, leaders, and movements to advance solutions that expand opportunity for everyone. Through active partnerships, The Opportunity Agenda synthesizes and translates research on barriers to opportunity and corresponding solutions; uses communications and media to understand and influence public opinion; and identifies and advocates for policies that improve people’s lives. -
Media Reference Guide
media reference guide NINTH EDITION | AUGUST 2014 GLAAD MEDIA REFERENCE GUIDE / 1 GLAAD MEDIA CONTACTS National & Local News Media Sports Media [email protected] [email protected] Entertainment Media Religious Media [email protected] [email protected] Spanish-Language Media GLAAD Spokesperson Inquiries [email protected] [email protected] Transgender Media [email protected] glaad.org/mrg 2 / GLAAD MEDIA REFERENCE GUIDE TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION FAIR, ACCURATE & INCLUSIVE 4 GLOSSARY OF TERMS / LANGUAGE LESBIAN / GAY / BISEXUAL 5 TERMS TO AVOID 9 TRANSGENDER 12 AP & NEW YORK TIMES STYLE 21 IN FOCUS COVERING THE BISEXUAL COMMUNITY 25 COVERING THE TRANSGENDER COMMUNITY 27 MARRIAGE 32 LGBT PARENTING 36 RELIGION & FAITH 40 HATE CRIMES 42 COVERING CRIMES WHEN THE ACCUSED IS LGBT 45 HIV, AIDS & THE LGBT COMMUNITY 47 “EX-GAYS” & “CONVERSION THERAPY” 46 LGBT PEOPLE IN SPORTS 51 DIRECTORY OF COMMUNITY RESOURCES 54 GLAAD MEDIA REFERENCE GUIDE / 3 INTRODUCTION Fair, Accurate & Inclusive Fair, accurate and inclusive news media coverage has played an important role in expanding public awareness and understanding of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) lives. However, many reporters, editors and producers continue to face challenges covering these issues in a complex, often rhetorically charged, climate. Media coverage of LGBT people has become increasingly multi-dimensional, reflecting both the diversity of our community and the growing visibility of our families and our relationships. As a result, reporting that remains mired in simplistic, predictable “pro-gay”/”anti-gay” dualisms does a disservice to readers seeking information on the diversity of opinion and experience within our community. Misinformation and misconceptions about our lives can be corrected when journalists diligently research the facts and expose the myths (such as pernicious claims that gay people are more likely to sexually abuse children) that often are used against us. -
A Correlational Study on the Neurodevelopemental
A CORRELATIONAL STUDY ON THE NEURODEVELOPEMENTAL THEORIES OF HUMAN SEXUALITY HONORS THESIS Presented to the Honors College of Texas State University In Partial Fulfillment Of the Requirements for Graduation in the Honors College By Keimche P. Wickham San Marcos, Texas May 2016 A CORRELATIONAL STUDY ON THE NEURODEVELOPMEMENTAL THEORIES OF HUMAN SEXUALITY by Keimche P. Wickham Thesis Supervisor: ________________________________ Natalie Ceballos, Ph.D. Department of Psychology Second Reader: __________________________________ Judith Easton, Ph.D. Department of Psychology Approved: ____________________________________ Heather C. Galloway, Ph.D. Dean, Honors College TABLE OF CONTENTS . LIST OF TABLES………………………………………………………………………vii LIST OF FIGURES…………………………………………………………………..…viii ABSTRACT………………………………………………………..….……….…...…viiii CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION………………………………………..…..…..…...1 History of Homosexuality ……......…………… ………..….….…2 Social and Psychological issues of Homosexuality...…..................4 Scientific Studies of Homosexuality.………………..………….... 5 Fraternal Birth Order Effect……………………………………….6 The Kin Selection Theory……………………………......………..7 II. METHOD…………………..………………………..…………..……8 Questionnaires………………....………….………………………9 Data Analysis ………………………………….…….…………..10 Birth Order……………………………….....….………………...11 Parent-Child Relationships………………………………..……..11 III. RESULTS……………………………………………………………12 Birth Order Effects……………......………………………….…..13 Parent-Child Relationships………......………………………......14 IV. DISCUSSION…………………………………………………….….16 Strengths and Limitations……………………………………..…19 -
Key Terms LGBTQ
KEY TERMS Sex (Sex Assigned at Birth): A biological construct that refers to our physical attributes and our genetic makeup. This includes determines birth-assigned male or female sex. Gender Identity: A person’s internal, deeply-felt sense of being male, female, something other, or in between. Gender identity is not determined by genitals or Sex Assigned at Birth Gender Expression: An individual’s characteristics and behaviors such as appearance, dress, mannerisms, speech patterns, and social interactions that are perceived as masculine or feminine. Gender Nonconformity (gender creative, gender expansive): Gender expressions that fall outside of societal expectations for one’s sex assigned at birth • May (or may not) impact gender identity: Natal male: “I am a girl and I like to express femininity.” Natal male: “I am a boy and I like to express femininity.” Non-Binary Gender: An umbrella term that reflects gender identities that don’t fit within the accepted binary of male and female. Individuals can feel they are both genders, neither or some mixture thereof. Terms under this umbrella: genderqueer, gender fluid, agender, bigender, etc. Non-binary folks may use they/them/theirs or other neutral pronouns. Gender diverse/fluid/expansive/creative: Conveys a wider, more flexible range of gender identity and/or expression. It reinforces the notion that gender is not binary, but a continuum; and that many children and adults express their gender in multiple ways. Sexual Orientation: The gender to which one is romantically and/or sexually attracted Transgender or Trans : Individuals with an affirmed gender identity different than their sex-assigned-at-birth. -
They Want All of Your Kids to Be Gay
Eastern Illinois University The Keep Masters Theses Student Theses & Publications 2014 "They Want All of Your Kids to be Gay and Oppose God": Incivility and Othering in Yahoo! News Comments Emily Vajjala Eastern Illinois University This research is a product of the graduate program in Communication Studies at Eastern Illinois University. Find out more about the program. Recommended Citation Vajjala, Emily, ""They aW nt All of Your Kids to be Gay and Oppose God": Incivility and Othering in Yahoo! News Comments" (2014). Masters Theses. 1272. https://thekeep.eiu.edu/theses/1272 This is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Theses & Publications at The Keep. It has been accepted for inclusion in Masters Theses by an authorized administrator of The Keep. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Thesis Reproduction Certificate Page 1of1 THESIS MAINTENANCE AND REPRODUCTION CERTIFICATE TO: Graduate Degree Candidates (who have written formal theses) SUBJECT: Permission to Reproduce Theses An important part of Booth Library at Eastern Illinois University's ongoing mission is to preserve and provide access to works of scholarship. In order to further this goal, Booth Library makes all theses produced at Eastern Illinois University available for personal study, research, and other not-for-profit educational purposes. Under 17 U.S.C. § 108, the library may reproduce and distribute a copy without infringing on copyright; however, professional courtesy dictates that permission be requested from the author before doing so. By signing this form: • You confirm your authorship of the thesis. • You retain the copyright and intellectual property rights associated with the original research, creative activity, and intellectual or artistic content of the thesis. -
1 Introducing LGBTQ Psychology
1 Introducing LGBTQ psychology Overview * What is LGBTQ psychology and why study it? * The scientific study of sexuality and ‘gender ambiguity’ * The historical emergence of ‘gay affirmative’ psychology * Struggling for professional recognition and challenging heteronormativity in psychology What is LGBTQ psychology and why study it? For many people it is not immediately obvious what lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans and queer (LGBTQ) psychology is (see the glossary for defini- tions of words in bold type). Is it a grouping for LGBTQ people working in psychology? Is it a branch of psychology about LGBTQ people? Although LGBTQ psychology is often assumed to be a support group for LGBTQ people working in psychology, it is in fact the latter: a branch of psychology concerned with the lives and experiences of LGBTQ people. Sometimes it is suggested that this area of psychology would be more accurately named the ‘psychology of sexuality’. Although LGBTQ psychology is concerned with sexuality, it has a much broader focus, examining many different aspects of the lives of LGBTQ people including prejudice and discrimination, parenting and families, and com- ing out and identity development. One question we’re often asked is ‘why do we need a separate branch of psychology for LGBTQ people?’ There are two main reasons for this: first, as we discuss in more detail below, until relatively recently most psychologists (and professionals in related disciplines such as psychiatry) supported the view that homosexuality was a mental illness. ‘Gay affirmative’ psychology, as this area was first known in the 1970s, developed to challenge this perspective and show that homosexuals are psychologically healthy, ‘normal’ individuals. -
Expressive Ends: Understanding Conversion Therapy Bans*
Expressive Ends: Understanding Conversion Therapy Bans* MARIE-AMÉLIE GEORGE** Abstract LGBT rights groups have recently made bans on conversion ther- apy, a practice intended to reduce or eliminate a person’s same-sex sexual attractions, a primary piece of their legislative agenda. However, the stat- utes only apply to licensed mental health professionals, even though most conversion therapy is practiced by religious counselors and lay ministers. Conversion therapy bans thus present a striking legal question: Why have LGBT rights advocates expended so much effort and political capital on laws that do not reach conversion therapy’s primary providers? Based on archival research and original interviews, this Article argues that the bans are significant because of their expressive function, rather than their prescriptive effects. The laws’ proponents are using the statutes to create a social norm against conversion therapy writ large, thus broadening the bans’ reach to the religious practitioners the law cannot directly regulate. LGBT rights groups are also extending the bans’ expressive message to support the argument that sexual orientation is immutable and to reverse a historical narrative that cast gays and lesbians as dangerous to children. These related claims have been central to gay rights efforts for much of the twentieth century and continue to shape LGBT rights battles. While * Originally published in the Alabama Law Review ** Associate in Law, Columbia Law School; Ph.D. Candidate, Department of His- tory, Yale University. I would like to thank Richard Briffault, Elizabeth Emens, Kath- erine Franke, Suzanne Goldberg, Claudia Haupt, Lisa Kelly, Ryan Liss, Anna Lvovsky, Serena Mayeri, Marah McLeod, Henry Monaghan, Doug NeJaime, Luke Norris, Cliff Rosky, Carol Sanger, Elizabeth Scott, Sarah Swan, Allison Tait, Ryan Williams, John Witt, and Maggie Wittlin for their thoughtful feedback on drafts. -
A Human Sexuality and Socialization Curriculum. PUB DATE 75 NOTE 45P
-• DOCUMENT RBSUE ED 131 644 EC 091 911 , AUTHOR Blum, Gloria J.; Blum, Barry TITLE Feeling Good About Yourself: A Human Sexuality and Socialization Curriculum. PUB DATE 75 NOTE 45p. AVAILABLE FROM Gloria Blum, 507 Palia Way, Mill Valley, California 94941 EDRS PRICE • MF=$0.83 HC-$2.06 Plus Pstage'. ' ' DESCRIPTORS Adolescents; Cntraception; *Curriculum Guides; Exceptional Child Eduéation; *Handicapped Children; Hmosexua lity; *Parent Teacher Cooperation; Self Concept; Sex (Characteristi ès) ; *Sex Education; Sex Role; Sé ivality; *Socialization; Stereotypes; *Student Centered Curricului;'Teaching Methods; venereal Diseases; Young Adults ABSTRACT Presénted is a curriculuh plan designed for .use, in' a socialization and.híman'sexuality•program for handicapped young adults. Notes to: the teacher cover topics such as establishment' Of trust and clarification of the'sexual attitudes of self and others-. The need for relating' to parents of students is explained and suggestions of appropriate topics and techniques for discussion are .included. Provided are objectives, definitions, activities, and subjects for discussion in curriculum areas concerning "getting to , know yourself" and "relating to others"', such as the following: feeling, recognizing-, and knowing emotions; getting to know .our body,; erotic.fantasies, physical disabilities relating to masturbation and intercourse,' sex roles, aád sexual independence.. Appended are' a list of additional techniques and activities for parents and students; and a list of resources such as charts, books, models, kits, and other teaching aids.- (IM) A itUMAN SEXUALITY and SOCIALIZATION CURRICULUM Designed For Everyone Physically Disabled Emotionally Disabled Mentally Disabled Socially Disabled Non-disabled by GLORIA J. BLUM BARRY BLUM, M.D. Parts of this paper which are derived from publications of..other authors (indicated by asterisks in the.bibliography) may not -be reproduced without specific permission from`those authors. -
A Bill for Same-Sex Binational Couples, 4 Nw
Northwestern Journal of Law & Social Policy Volume 4 | Issue 1 Article 9 2009 Some Suggestions for the UAFA: A Bill for Same- Sex Binational Couples Timothy R. Carraher Recommended Citation Timothy R. Carraher, Some Suggestions for the UAFA: A Bill for Same-Sex Binational Couples, 4 Nw. J. L. & Soc. Pol'y. 150 (2009). http://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/njlsp/vol4/iss1/9 This Note or Comment is brought to you for free and open access by Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Northwestern Journal of Law & Social Policy by an authorized administrator of Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons. Copyright 2009 by Northwestern University School of Law Volume 4 (Winter 2009) Northwestern Journal of Law and Social Policy Some Suggestions for the UAFA: A Bill for Same-Sex Binational Couples Timothy R. Carraher∗ I. INTRODUCTION ¶1 There are over 36,000 same-sex binational couples living in the United States today.1 Because the courts have ruled that, within the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA),2 the term “spouse” does not include individuals in same-sex unions—even those who have been legally married in jurisdictions that recognize same-sex marriage—gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender (GLBT) U.S. citizens are prohibited from sponsoring their same-sex partners for permanent residence in the United States.3 ¶2 In 2000, Congressman Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) introduced the Permanent Partners Immigration Act (PPIA) to address the issue of binational sponsorship.4 The PPIA would have amended the INA to give same-sex couples an avenue to sponsor their partners in the United States, adding “permanent partner” after references to “spouse,” and “permanent partnership” after references to “marriage.”5 The bill provided a comprehensive definition of “permanent partnership” that included same-sex couples.6 The PPIA never left committee.