Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet

The concept of homophobia has become an integral part of the vocabulary of social science. Homophobia is defined as any negative attitude (from simple discomfort to extreme violence) of an individual or group toward homosexual individuals or relationships. “Homophobic” behavior depends on historical and cultural context, and homophobic attitudes manifest themselves in many forms, depending on the context and the social groups concerned. The term homophobia has been in use since the 1970s. Specifically, it was the American psychotherapist G. Weinberg who first defined it as “the dread of being in close quarters with homosexuals.” However, the concept has at times been criticized, depending on the discipline in which it is being used. Sociologists and social psychologists studying violence toward homosexual individuals emphasize not only the individual component of the concept (the phobia) but also the ensemble of cognitive behavior toward homosexuality at social, moral, and legal levels. The suffix -phobia suggests that individuals characterized by negative attitudes toward homosexual individuals are “afraid,” but most scholars agree that such behavior is rooted in social prejudice. Therefore, some scholars use the terms antihomosexual sentiment, antigay sentiments, homohatred, antihomosexualism, and homosexual bias.

Scholars of deviant behavior tending toward a sociocultural analysis identify cognitive and social as well as psychological, individual, and emotional aspects. Thus, some use the concept of heterosexism, meaning a system that is the basis for a given society to develop a form of segregation based on sexual orientation. This concept refers to all the structures, institutions, and social relationships that generate, maintain, and perpetuate feelings of disdain for homosexual individuals. A distinction between homophobia and heterosexism needs to be made because, whereas the first indicates a personal and individual disposition, the second implies institutional subordination of homosexual individuals. In the sociological debate, Ken Plummer was one of the first to put forward timely criticisms of the concept of homophobia. According to Plummer, the expression has a number of limits: (a) it strengthens the belief that sexual identities must be understood in terms of illness and mental health, (b) it appears to be of little use in constructing theories on anti-lesbian violence, (c) its focus remains on the individual, and (d) it makes the problem of oppression of gay men a priority over the oppression of other sexual minorities. Therefore, an analysis considering antihomosexual violence as a product of heterosexism is more compelling. Plummer (1975) defines heterosexism as

a diverse set of social practices—from the linguistic to the physical, in the public sphere and the private sphere, covert and overt—in an array of social arenas (e.g. work, home, school, media, church, courts, streets, etc.), in which the homo/hetero binary distinction is at work whereby heterosexuality is privileged. (p. 19)

Studying Homophobic Behavior

Homophobic violence can be considered as an expressive act, and violent behavior can be considered as antihomosexual when victims are chosen because they are considered or perceived to be homosexual. Certain factors are necessary for antihomosexual violence to manifest itself, in particular (a) the establishment of a gender system with specific, defined, and definitive boundaries; (b) motives for which any departure from gender roles (and from the sexual practices culturally linked to the latter) is culturally perceived as abominable; (c) the presence of groups of men who feel the need to constantly validate their male status; (d) the estrangement of these male groups from the conventional moral order in force; and (e) a series of opportunities and conditions that allow antihomosexual behavior to take place (spatial characteristics of the location of the violence, specific days and times, and unsafe areas of the city). Homophobic behavior has expressive and communicative value, in that an openly and visibly antihomosexual act unequivocally proves the heterosexuality of the individual carrying it out. Thus, violent acts and behavior are proof of the refusal and rejection of homosexuality; they represent a “masculinization” practice within the processes of gender socialization. Every homophobic act aims to intimidate not just the victim but the whole group associated with the victim, whether concretely or merely in the perception of the perpetrator. Therefore, not only gay and lesbian individuals are targeted but also heterosexual individuals who are perceived as homosexual or who don't conform to dominant normative sex and gender models. Whenever homophobia is confronted in studies of deviance, the sociocultural context must be taken into consideration, because there are as many forms of antihomosexual violence as there are hegemonic models and forms of gender both outside and within the homosexual community.

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Loading