CAIJIFORNIA ST/t'l'E UNIVEW3ITY ~ NORTHRIDGE 1TOLONTEJ•~RING ..lW A FUNCTTON OF T/-t.SK ID.EJ:{'LLF'TCAT:J~C'N )\, WTJ.'H: F.K'HINIS!'1 .AND LESBIANISM A thes~s submitted {n partial satisfaction o£ the :t'~qu.:i.n:=:rt."->r.d;s f'o::r· the r_h;gT'=~e of Master o:f. Art::;, .in P,'Jy·ehology Hedy i'lhi te .Jl.m.• :; ~ 19'78 'l'b.IC.) Th.esis of Hedy White is approved: Cal:Lforn.ia State University, Northridge :l.:l.. ACKNOWLEDGHENTS I am especially grate:fvl to Dr. Jorry I,. Sha'v for his help at all stages of this project and to Dr. Dona.ld C., Butler for his help in desig:ning the experiments a.. nd anal·- yzing the results. I am also grate:ful to Dr,. !t1ichele A,. il:l.ttig- :fo:r· hr,lping me to clarify and operationalize my ideas~ to Charles Hofacker f:or helping me with Biomed, and ·to Lionel White f'or his encourecgement., :tii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page AC!CNOWJ.... EDm1.ENTS .. • • • • • • .. • • • " .. .. " • iii LIST OJ!' TABLES AND FIGURES • • • o e • e • • e 3 o 6 vi ABSTRACT 0 6 vii .. • • • • • • .. • • .. • • .. • • " • INTRODUCTION • ~ e e e • • • • • • e • • v ~ ~ • • & 1 EX.PERTNEW£ 1 • • e ~ e • e 0 • 0 • ~ 0 G • e a Q • • 23 ~1ethod. e ~ e ~ e • o ~ • • ~ • • • • • o e » & • • 23 Sub,jects • ., • • • • • • • • • • .. .. • 0 • • 23 Haterials • • • e • • ~ • • • • • • • e o • • • 2.3 Procedure e • o e • • ~ ~ e e • $ a • • o • • ~ Results • • • " • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • .. Discussi.on • • • e • • e • • • • ~ e • ~ o e ~ • • •••o••••.,_*o.a-•••••••1) Method ~ • • 0 • • • • • ~ 0 • • • 0 $ • 4 • • • • Subjects • • • • • • • .. .. • • • • • • • Iv1aterials and Procedure ~ • • o e • • e • o o ~ Results • " • " • " • • • • .. • • • D:lscu.ssion • • e • o e • • • • • e • • • • o • • e • • c • ~ 9 • • • • • • • • • • • • • # !·Iethod ~ • • • ·• • o • e ~ • s ~ e e o • • ~ ~ • • Sub,jects 0 .. " " • " • .. • • .. " .. .. MateriaJ_s and Procedure e • • • • • • • • • • e Hosults .. • • • .. • .. • • • .. " • .. • • .. 5'7 Diocussion • • • • • • 0 • • • ~ • 8 • • • • • • • 59 GENE11AL DTSCUSSION • ~ • • • • • • 0 • ~ • • • ~ • • 61 iv Page REFE:HENCES 0 tl> ., 6h .. .. • .. .. • .. " .. • .. " .. • " .. .. " " APPENDICES e .. • • • • " " • • • .. .. " " .. • • " " .. .. 67 A Ji'O:i:'lnS f} Biographical Information • c .. .. .. e .. ~ 67 B Volunteer Request li'orms: Experiment 1 .. .. " " e 69 Additional Vo J_un t e er·~f'orrn Page (Experiment c 1 ) .. " 73 ..., D Volunteer Pnciuest Forms; Experiment <'~ .. • .. .. .. 74 E Attitude Sv.cvey: Deception f'or Experiment:,. 1 and 2 e 0 • .. .. • • • " " " .. • .. " 79 F Data .t'or EJ::~)eriment 1 0 0 ., 85 " • • • .. " " • • .. • G Data f'or Experiment 1 Ch:i.. Square Tests • ~ • "' • 86 H Data :for Experiment 2 • .. .. • .. .. • • e • • .. • • 87 v LIST OF TABLES AND FIGUilliS Table Page 1 Volunteer R~tes in the Neutral, Feminist, J,esb:Lan, Feminist/Lesbian., and Combined Condj.tions • .. .. • • • .. .. • • " • • ., • • • • .. 29 2 Results of' Multivariate Tests for Ef':fects of' Lesbian and Feminist Nanipulations and of' Running Subjects in groups § .. • • • .. • • • 31 3 Unj.var:iate Analysis of' Variance for Group 9 Lesbian, Femj.nist, and Lesb:Lan x Feminist E:ff'oct;s Using Outcomes 1 and J, .Nuniber of Paid and FX-1:!6 Interviews e .. " • • 0 " " .. • 32 4 Chi Square Tests for Effects o:f Lesbian and Feminist r·1anipulations ., • ., • • • • • • • .. 5 Voluntf)er Rates as a Function of Sex of Pe_:;~son to be Interview·ed and Intervj_ew Topics • 48 6 R.enul ts of' Nul tivar:iate Tests :for I<.:ffects of' Sex and Topic Hanipulations, of' Running Subjects in Groups, and of Paid vs Free Tnte::cvj.Envs • • , ., ~ • .. • • • .. • ., • ., • • • 50 7 Univariate Analysis of Variance for Group, Sex, and Sex x Topic Ef':fects Using Outcome 4, Number of' Hou.rs Ava:i.labJ_e for Intervie1vs • • .. • 51 8 Subjectst Opinions of the Women 1 s Movement, Be.liefs about Men's Opinions, and Attitudes Toward Ending Disc:i:'imination against Lesbians • 58 1 !>lean nmnber of' ::Lnterv:Lm-.rs on Outcomes 1 and J ~ paid and 1'ree volunteering, as a £·unction of' sponsor e • '.0 • a • e • • • • e 8 G • G • • • • 35 v:i. ABSTRACT VOLUN'l'E'f:)RTNG AS A I•'UNCTION Oii' TASK IDEN'I'Il'"'ICATION WITH F'E:MINISN AND LESBIANISH by Hedy Wh::l.te Master of Arts ~n Psychology 'l'o explore th.e ef'±~ects of :i.dentif'ying the 1,romen t s movement ·1vith lesb~an rights 9 88 Ce.J.it~ornia State Univer- sity, Northridge, women between tho ages of 18 and 30 were asked to conduct :Ln.tervie"'vS for a social attitudli::B survey sponsored by an organi.zatj_on identified with ei the:r a · neutral, feminist, lesbian, or feminist/lesbian cause. lvnen subjects were to be paid, the difference betw·een vol~· unteer rates in the lesb:i.an and nonlesbian cond:i.tions was not s:i.gn:i.f:ica.nt; "'vi thont payment 9 Volunteer rates '\Y"ere l()W- ' er in the lesbian cond:i.t:i.ons, as hypothesized., \vhether rates were lower in the feminist/lesbian cond~tion than in the :f'(,~m:tn.1st cond::i.. ·t:ton., These f'indings were interpreted as prc)~.d.ding some evidence that associating 1vomen' s rj.ghts "t-.ri tlt lesbian rights might result in a loss o:f support :for tho women's movement~ v:t:i. 'J.'o test a possible reason f'or t;he above, a second ex~~ periment·was conducted in which 68 CSUN women were asked to volunteer to interview· either men or 1vomen and to discuss ei th.er w·omen t s and lesbian rights or only women t s rights o '!'"here -v;ere no dif'f'erences among responses to t.b.ese condi­ tions, a :fi:ndj_ng that possibly occurred beeaur,;e subjects dld not notice the manipulations or sa1v through the decep- t:i.on .. The deception, an e:1.ttitude survey {ba:3ed on Tavris, 1971), provided three outcome measures for a third experi­ ment: Lesbian-condi tio:n subjects f':com :Experiments l and 2 were cmnpared with non.lesbian~condition subjects on their own opinions of' the 1-1omen' s movement, their belief's about men 9 s opinions, and their attitudes tmvard ending discrim~ ination against lesbians. 1\'"hile the t1vo groups did not di:ff'er, subjects f'rom the entire sample had more :f'avorable opinions o:f the women's movement than they attributed to men!' n :finding suggesting further research on the influence of menfs opinions on women's support for the movement. v:i.ij. j:;ig£2,~ '~xpressed the discontent of:' the American. hou:se\.;:tf'e and. served as a rallying point :for early act:i.vi:::rts in. t.he '\\'Omenf s liberation movement., Three yea.rs lator~- the N;;,~. :F:c:tedruJ. aB its f'irst president. NCYWf s 1.966 Sta.t:enH:;nt of' Purpose calJ.ed for taking 11 action to bring women :i.nt;o :fuJJ_ participation in the mainstreaw of' American society 3l2:'*f~ exercising all the privileges and responsibiliti8B thereof • -'-1 1 ___'! OY7"' ,. ( j!) :tn truJ.y ~qual partnership WJ. !FJ.l men' (Declu.trd 9 p,. 330)., This purpose ref':Lected the generally modc)rate tone o:f. i;he feminists of· the sixties: ThE•Y were inter·- ested :i.:n equ.al rights, in a :fairer r.;JJ1ationship -~,r:i.th men., Du.r:tng the 1960s, NOW, which remain;;: the larg<:'J~lt of' the wom0n e s movement organizations, was conse:r.... v"ativo i:n the sense of appealing to women of tha middle classes and in having f.W :its goals the elimination of' specif'ic sexj_st Ft'aetices (e.g.,, relating to jobs, credit, house"\.;,rork) ra- th.er than a.:n. overthrow of traditional values in general., Until the late 1960s, movement w·omen tended to :ign.ore w·ha:t -v;as t;o become a con:fJ.ict that still ha.s not been re- solved: the role of' les'!:dcU1.s "ri thin th.e 1vomen 1 s movement. 2 During this period, 1-rhile feminists w·ere ignoring not only the issue of' whether or not a fight f'or lesbian rl.gh.ts should he waged within the frame-.;vork o:f the movement but also the qu<:,stion of' the extent of· the movement 1 s lesbian membership, o1.rtsiders 1vere more vocal: "Articles on the movement by the mass media alluded to them (lesbians) long be:fo:l"e feminists were even '\'r:i.lling to acknow·ledge their existenc\~H (Abbott & Love, 197J., p .. L~37) o Thc3 charge that Kate Hillett has ref·errf':d to as t:dyke~· bai ting·n ( 1974, p. 77) took a nurnber {)f' f'orms t :from the more blatant "They're noth:Lng but a. bunch 01'; lesbiaru;;11 (Brow-run:Li..ler 9 197.3, p., 404} to more su.btle accuse.tio:ns of' "In the militant, :r-adical segment or tJ:w l:i.br!rn-· tion movement are females 1-1ho 1v·i thout question have d.on.. 1.1.ed a social mask to cover their personal patho.1ogy 11 (I·.L-:::"ih:d.l, 1972, p, .318); "The Women! s Liberat:i.on Hovcment l::.'3.i~ a. strong appeal for women who are unable to succoed :Ln marriage" (Voth, 1973, P~ 21) .. Wlwth.er or not the word ulesbia:n11 is usedt moclt accu-· sationl'l ha.Ye had in common tho idea ·!;hat revealing trai.ts con~d.derHd un:feminin.o - aggressivenes.;;, independence 1 com·­ petit:ivr;ness,. abrasiveness, etc., - malces one unattractive to men or :i.s the rFc)Sult of· having been f'ound unattractive to men. .., In ~L969, tJhen a group o:f radieal feminists dem<>n­ st;:rat;c-,d in protest of' the values symboli.zed by the :t-1iss x\morica PagHil.nt !J columnist Harriet Van Horne corrunented: 3 Those sturdy lasses in their sensible shoes •• .,have been scarred a.'1.d wounded by consorting 'tvi th the 1vro:ng men ( 11 of· dubious masculi.ni ty 1vho wear f'r~illy Ed1va.rdian.