Renn, K. (n.d.). LGBT And Queer Research In Higher Education: The State And Status Of The Field. Educational Researcher, 132-141.

In this article, the author provides an overview of existing literature addressing lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender (LGBT), and queer issues in higher education. She argues that although colleges and universities are the source of much critical and postmodern writing about LGBT and queer topics, scholarship on LGBT/queer people and organizations in higher education itself lacks theoretical depth.

Questions to Consider:

1)Why do you think number of narratives by members of the LGBT emerged during the 1990’s? What was taking place during this time period that led to these narratives?

 

2)What is the “Queer theory”?  Why has research been limited in regards to the application of this theory?

 

Billies, M., Johnson, J., Murungi, K., & Pugh, R. (2009). Naming Our Reality: Low-income LGBT People Documenting Violence, Discrimination and Assertions of Justice. Feminism & Psychology, 375-380.

The WWRC (Welfare Warriors Research Collaborative) came together in July 2007 to research violence from the perspective of racially and ethnically diverse low-income LGBTGNC people in New York City (NYC). Researchers set out to better understand the strategies people use to manage violence and discrimination as well as the systemic relations that shape these experiences. In this article, researchers introduce our theoretical assumptions, describe our participatory action research (PAR) and the epistemology that grounds our work and show how these fuel our thinking about social change.

Questions to Consider:

1)According to the article 60 % of transgender individuals have faced acts of violence (out of 252 individuals referenced in the article).  What reasons account for this violence?

 

2)According to the article what are the main goals of the Welfare Warriors Research Collaborative?

 

Levy, Y. (2007). The Right to Fight: A Conceptual Framework for the Analysis of Recruitment Policy toward Gays and Lesbians. Armed Forces & Society, 186-202.

The worldwide demand by gays and lesbians that they be allowed to openly participate in military service and the ways in which this demand have been handled reveal discrepancies between political culture and actual recruitment practices. This article offers a model drawn from a multiple-case study for explaining recruitment policies toward homosexuals.

Questions to Consider:

1)According to the article, following World War I, homosexuals were gradually excluded from military service in the United States.  Recently, “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” was repealed.  Why do you think there has been a shift in the military’s policy towards homosexuals?

 

2)Summarize the differences between the U.S. policy in regards to homosexuals serving in the military with other countries as referenced in the article.

 

Doan, L., Loehr, A., & Miller, L. (2014). Formal Rights and Informal Privileges for Same-Sex Couples Evidence from a National Survey Experiment. Formal Rights and Informal Privileges for Same-Sex Couples Evidence from a National Survey Experiment, 79, 1172-1195.

Attitudes toward gay rights have liberalized over the past few decades, but scholars know less about the extent to which individuals in the United States exhibit subtle forms of prejudice toward lesbians and gays. To help address this issue, we offer a conceptualization of formal rights and informal privileges. Using original data from a nationally representative survey experiment, we examine whether people distinguish between formal rights (e.g., partnership benefits) and informal privileges (e.g., public displays of affection) in their attitudes toward same-sex couples. Results show that heterosexuals are as willing to extend formal rights to same-sex couples as they are to unmarried heterosexual couples. However, they are less willing to grant informal privileges.

Questions to Consider:

1)According to the article, “attitudes toward homosexuality have changed more rapidly over the past few decades than for any other sexuality issue”.  Why do you believe this is so?  What factors have led to the change in attitudes?

 

2)According to the authors why do they feel it is important to distinguish between formal rights and informal privileges?

 

Martin, K. (2009). Normalizing Heterosexuality: Mothers' Assumptions, Talk, and Strategies with Young Children. American Sociological Review, 190-207.

In recent years, social scientists have identified not just heterosexism and homophobia as social problems, but also heteronormativity—the mundane, everyday ways that heterosexuality is privileged and taken for granted as normal and natural. There is little empirical research, however, on how heterosexuality is reproduced and then normalized for individuals. Using survey data from more than 600 mothers of young children, ages 3 to 6 years old, this article examines how mothers normalize heterosexuality for young children.

Questions to Consider:

1)The authors of this article focus on the impact of mothers in terms of how they interact with their children in terms of the sexual socialization process.  How influential do you think fathers are in terms of this process?

 

2)The demographics of the Mothers who participated in the survey varied.  How influential do you think demographics such as religion, race, or social class play in terms of the sexual socialization process?  Why?