Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Heterosexual Men’s Confrontation of Sexual Prejudice: The Role of Precarious Manhood

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Sex Roles Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Prejudice and discrimination are unfortunate common realities for sexual minorities yet people rarely confront such behavior (Dickter 2012). This is especially problematic because confronting prejudice is one of the most effective weapons against it (e.g., Czopp and Monteith 2003). The present study explores whether men who perceive manhood to be an impermanent state easily taken away by engaging in gender role violations (i.e., precarious manhood; Vandello et al. 2008) are less likely to react negatively to sexually prejudiced interaction partners and therefore less likely to confront sexual prejudice. In addition, we tested whether non-confrontation serves to affirm meta-perceptions of heterosexuality. To test this hypothesis, 88 heterosexual, young adult males, drawn from the undergraduate population of a university in the northeastern U.S., were randomly assigned to either pair with a confederate who expressed blatant sexual prejudice or no blatant prejudice toward a gay applicant in a hiring discussion. Consistent with predictions, precarious manhood predicted lower rates of confronting sexual prejudice, and less negative responses to their interaction partner, while confronting prejudice was associated with believing one would be viewed as gay regardless of individual differences in precarious manhood.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Badgett, M. V. L. Y., & Frank, J. (Eds.). (2007). Sexual orientation discrimination: An international perspective. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bahns, A. J., & Branscombe, N. R. (2011). Effects of legitimizing discrimination against homosexuals on gay bashing. European Journal of Social Psychology, 41, 388–396. doi:10.1002/ejsp.784.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baron, R.M., & Kenny, D.A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173–1182.

    Google Scholar 

  • Belsey, D. A., Kuh, E., & Welsch, R. E. (2004). Regression diagnostics: Identifying influential data and sources of collinearity. Hoboken: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bentler, P.M., & Chou, C. (1987). Practical issues in structural modeling. Sociological Methods Research, 16(1), 78–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blake, A. (2012). Adolescent suicide report: A data overview and prevention activities report on youth suicides in New Jersey. New Jersey Department of Children and Families, 1–37.

  • Bosson, J. K., Prewitt-Freilino, J. L., & Taylor, J. N. (2005). Role rigidity: A problem of identity misclassification? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 552–565. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.89.4.552.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bosson, J. K., Vandello, J. A., Burnaford, R. M., Weaver, J. R., & Wasti, S. A. (2009). Precarious manhood and displays of physical aggression. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 35, 623–634. doi:10.1177/0146167208331161.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bosson, J. K., Weaver, J. R., Caswell, T. A., & Burnaford, R. M. (2012). Gender threats and men’s antigay behaviors: The harmful effects of asserting heterosexuality. Group Processes Intergroup Relations, 15, 471–486. doi:10.1177/1368430211432893.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carnaghi, A., Maass, A., & Fasoli, F. (2011). Enhancing masculinity by slandering homosexuals: The role of homophobic epithets in heterosexual gender identity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37, 1655–1665. doi:10.1177/0146167211424167.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Czopp, A. M., & Monteith, M. J. (2003). Confronting prejudice (literally): Reactions to confrontations of racial and gender bias. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 532–544.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Czopp, A. M., Monteith, M. J., & Mark, A. Y. (2006). Standing up for a change: Reducing bias through interpersonal confrontation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 784–803. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.90.5.784.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dickter, C. L. (2012). Confronting hate: Heterosexuals’ responses to antigay comments. Journal of Homosexuality, 59, 1113–1130. doi:10.1080/00918369.2012.712817.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dickter, C. L., & Newton, V. A. (2013). To confront or not to confront: Non-targets’ evaluations of responses to racist comments. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 42, 112–119. doi:10.1111/jasp.12022.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diekman, A. B., & Eagly, A. H. (2000). Stereotypes as dynamic constructs: Women and men of the past, present and future. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 1171–1188. doi:10.1177/0146167200262001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Falomir-Pichastor, J. M., & Mugny, G. (2009). “I’m not gay…I’m a real man!” Heterosexual men’s gender self-esteem and sexual prejudice. Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 1233–1243. doi:10.1177/0146167209338072.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foderaro, L. W. (2010, September 29). Private moment made public, then a fatal jump. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/30/nyregion/30suicide.html.

  • Fritz, M. S., & MacKinnon, D. P. (2007). Required sample size to detect the mediated effect. Psychological Science, 18, 233–239. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01882.x.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Glick, P., Gangl, C., Gibb, S., Klumpner, S., & Weinberg, E. (2007). Defensive reactions to masculinity threat: More negative affect toward effeminate (but not masculine) gay men. Sex Roles, 57, 55–59. doi:10.1007/s11199-007-9195-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guardian US Interactive Team (2012). Gay rights in the US, state by state. The Guardian. Retrieved from http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/interactive/2012/may/08/gay-rights-united-states.

  • Herek, G. M. (1991). Stigma, prejudice and violence against lesbians and gay men. In J. Gonsiorek & J. D. Weinrich (Eds.), Homosexuality: Research implications for public policy (pp. 60–80). Newbury Park: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herek, G. M. (1994). Assessing attitudes toward lesbians and gay men: A review of empirical research with the ATLG scale. In B. Greene & G. M. Herek (Eds.), Lesbian and gay psychology: Theory, research, and clinical applications (pp. 206–228). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herek, G. M. (2008). Hate crimes and stigma-related experiences among sexual minority adults in the United States: Prevalence estimates from a national probability sample. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 24, 54–74. doi:10.1177/0886260508316477.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Herek, G. M., & Berrill, K. T. (1992). Hate crimes: Implications for policy. In G. M. Herek & K. T. Berrill (Eds.), Hate crimes: Confronting violence against lesbians and gay men (pp. 287–292). Newbury Park: Sage.

  • Horn, S. S., Szalacha, L. A., & Drill, K. (2008). Schooling, sexuality, and rights: An investigation of heterosexual students’ social cognition regarding sexual orientation and the rights of gay and lesbian peers in school. Journal of Social Issues, 64, 791–813. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.2008.00589.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu, L., & Bentler, P.M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria verses new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huberty, C. J., & Petoskey, M. D. (2000). Multivariate analysis of variance and covariance. In H. Tinsley & S. Brown (Eds.), Handbook of applied multivariate statistics and mathematical modeling (pp. 183–208). New York: Academic.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Itaborahy, L. P. (2012). State-sponsored homophobia: A world survey of laws criminalising same-sex sexual acts between consenting adults. Brussels: The International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaiser, C. R., & Miller, C. T. (2001). Stop complaining! the social costs of making attributions to discrimination. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 254–263. doi:10.1177/0146167201272010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kilianski, S. E. (2003). Explaining heterosexual men’s attitudes toward women and gay men: The theory of exclusively masculine identity. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 4, 37–56. doi:10.1037/1524-9220.4.1.37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kimmel, M. S., & Mahler, M. (2003). Adolescent masculinity, homophobia, and violence: Random school shootings, 1982–2001. American Behavioral Scientist, 46, 1439–1458. doi:10.1177/0002764203046010010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kosciw, J., Greytak, E., Diaz, E., & Bartkiewicz, M. (2010). The 2009 national school climate survey: The experiences of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender youth in our nation’s schools. New York: Gay, Lesbian Straight Education Network.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacKinnon, D. P., Fritz, M. S., Williams, J., & Lockwood, C. M. (2007). Distribution of the product confidence limits for the indirect effect: Program PRODCLIN. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 384–389. doi:10.3758/BF03193007.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Montoya, R. M., Horton, R. S., & Kirchner, J. (2008). Is actual similarity necessary for attraction?: A meta-analysis of actual and perceived similarity. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 25, 889–922. doi:10.1177/0265407508096700.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neuberg, S. L., Smith, D. M., Hoffman, J. C., & Russell, F. J. (1994). When we observe stigmatized and “normal” individuals interaction: Stigma by association. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 196–209. doi:10.1177/0146167294202007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pedhazur, E. J. (1997). Multiple regression in behavioral research. Forth Worth: Harcourt Brace College Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phoenix, A., Frosh, S., & Pattman, R. (2003). Producing contradictory masculine subject positions: Narratives of threat, homophobia and bullying in 11–14 year old boys. Journal of Social Issues, 59, 179–195. doi:10.1111/1540-4560.t01-1-00011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pilkington, N. W., & D’Augelli, A. R. (1995). Victimization of lesbian, gay, and bisexual youth in community settings. Journal of Community Psychology, 23, 34–56. doi:10.1002/1520-6629.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poteat, V. P., & Espelage, D. L. (2005). Exploring the relation between bullying and homophobic verbal content: The homophobic content agent target (HCAT) scale. Violence and Victims, 20, 513–528. doi:10.1891/0886-6708.2005.20.5.513.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Poteat, V. P., & Espelage, D. L. (2007). Predicting psychosocial consequences of homophobic victimization in middle school students. Journal of Early Adolescence, 27, 175–191. doi:10.1177/0272431606294839.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poteat, V. P., Espelage, D. L., & Koenig, B. W. (2009). Willingness to remain friends and attend school with lesbian and gay peers: Relational expressions of prejudice among heterosexual youth. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 38, 952–962. doi:10.1007/s10964-009-9416-x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Prentice, D. A., & Carranza, E. (2002). What women and men should be, shouldn’t be, are allowed to be, and don’t have to be: The contents of prescriptive gender stereotypes. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 26, 269–281. doi:10.1111/1471-6402.t01-1-00066.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prewitt-Freilino, J. L., & Bosson, J. K. (2008). Defending the self against identity misclassification. Self and Identity, 7, 163–183. doi:10.1080/17405620701330706.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rasinski, H. M., & Czopp, A. M. (2010). The effect of target status on witnesses reactions to confrontations of bias. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 32, 8–16. doi:10.1080/01973530903539754.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rattan, A., & Dweck, C. S. (2010). Who confronts prejudice? the role of implicit theories in the motivation to confront prejudice. Psychological Science, 21, 952–959. doi:10.1177/0956797610374740.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rodin, M. J., Price, J. M., Bryson, J. B., & Sanchez, F. J. (1990). Asymmetry in prejudice attribution. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 26, 481–504. doi:10.1016/0022-1031(90)90052-N.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rudman, L. A., Mescher, K., Moss-Racusin, C. A. (in press). Reactions to gender egalitarian men: Feminization due to stigma-by-association. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations. doi:10.1177/1368430212461160.

  • Sechrist, G. B., Swim, J. K., & Stangor, C. (2004). When do the stigmatized make attributions to discrimination occurring to the self and others? the roles of self-presentation and need for control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 111–122. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.87.1.111.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Shelton, J. N., & Stewart, R. E. (2004). Confronting perpetrators of prejudice: The inhibitory effects of social costs. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 28, 215–223. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.2004.00138.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shrout, P. E., & Fleiss, J. L. (1979). Intraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychological Bulletin, 2, 420–428. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.86.2.420.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sobel, M. E. (1982). Asymptotic intervals for indirect effects in structural equations models. In S. Leinhart (Ed.), Sociological methodology (pp. 290–312). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stangor, C., Swim, J. K., Van Allen, K. L., & Sechrist, G. B. (2002). Reporting discrimination in public and private contexts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 69–74. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.82.1.69.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Swim, J. K., Ferguson, M. J., & Hyers, L. L. (1999). Avoiding stigma by association: Subtle prejudice against lesbians in the form of social distancing. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 21, 61–68. doi:10.1207/s15324834basp2101_6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vandello, J. A., Bosson, J. K., Cohen, D., Burnaford, R. M., & Weaver, J. R. (2008). Precarious manhood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 1325–1339. doi:10.1037/a0012453.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wellman, J. A., Czopp, A. M., & Geers, A. L. (2009). The egalitarian optimist and the confrontation of prejudice. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 4, 389–395. doi:10.1080/17439760902992449.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Kathryn M. Kroeper, Psychology Department, Rutgers University; Diana T. Sanchez, Psychology Department, Rutgers University; Mary S. Himmelstein, Psychology Department, Rutgers University. This work was supported in part by an Aresty Research grant from Rutgers University awarded to the first author.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Rutgers University, Tillett Hall Livingston Campus, 53 Avenue E, Piscataway, NJ, 08854-8040, USA

    Kathryn M. Kroeper, Diana T. Sanchez & Mary S. Himmelstein

Authors
  1. Kathryn M. Kroeper
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Diana T. Sanchez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mary S. Himmelstein
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Diana T. Sanchez.

Appendix A

Appendix A

Coding levels of confrontation:

To what extent did the participant disagree with or otherwise confront the confederate’s remarks.

  1. 1

    Not at All: The participant did not state anything that would lead one to believe he disagreed with the target remark

  2. 2

    The participant mentioned once that he mildly disagreed with the remark, but did not pursue the confrontation (e.g. “I don’t know about that.” “Eh, I’m not sure.”).

  3. 3

    The participant made 2–4 comments disagreeing with the remark, or 2–4 mild comments. Less explicit regarding sexuality (e.g. “It’s irrelevant.” “I disagree.” “He’s qualified.”)

  4. 4

    The participant made many (>4) comments disagreeing with the remark, made many mild comments, and/or one strong comment disagreeing with the remark (e.g. “That sounds like prejudice.” “Who cares if he’s gay?” or “We shouldn’t discount him just because he’s gay.” “Who cares if he hasn’t been a manager before.” “We shouldn’t discount him just because he lacks a little experience.”). These comments are less committal than what is needed for a “5.”

  5. 5

    A Great Deal: The participant made multiple strong comments disagreeing with the remark (e.g. “It is wrong not to hire him because of his sexuality.” “To say he is not qualified for a job that he is prepared for just because he’s gay is discrimination.” or “I won’t stand for someone being discounted based solely on his sexuality.” “To say he is not qualified for a job that he is prepared for is not true.” “I won’t stand for someone being discounted on a small technicality.”) More committal comments.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kroeper, K.M., Sanchez, D.T. & Himmelstein, M.S. Heterosexual Men’s Confrontation of Sexual Prejudice: The Role of Precarious Manhood. Sex Roles 70, 1–13 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-013-0306-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-013-0306-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation