Matching Items (2)
- All Subjects: gender roles
- All Subjects: Sex Offenders
- Genre: Masters Thesis
- Creators: Arenas, Lauren
- Creators: Risko, Evan
- Member of: ASU Electronic Theses and Dissertations
- Member of: Theses and Dissertations
The long-term impacts of bullying, stress, sexual prejudice and stigma against members of the LGBTQ population are both worrisome and expansive. Bullying among adolescents is one of the clearest and most well documented risks to adolescent health(Nansel et al., 2004; Wilkins-Shurmer et al., 2003; Wolke, Woods, Bloomfield, & Karstadt, 2001) The present study examined the influence of sexual orientation to severity of bullying experience, coping strategies, emotion regulation and the interaction of gender role endorsements in relation to coping and emotion regulation strategy prediction. Extensive research exists to support high victimization experiences in LGBT individuals (Birkett et al., 2009; Robert H DuRant et al., n.d.; Kimmel & Mahler, 2003; Mishna et al., 2009) and separately, research also indicates support of gender role non conformity, social stress and long term coping skills (Galambos et al., 1990; Sánchez et al., 2010; Tolman, Striepe, & Harmon, 2003b). The goal of this study was to extend previous finding to find a relationship between the three variables: sexual orientation, victimization history, and non-traditional gender role endorse and utilizing those traits as predictors of future emotion regulation and coping strategies. The data suggests that as a whole LGBT identified individuals experience bullying at a significantly higher rate than their heterosexual counterparts. By utilizing gender role endorsement the relationship can be expanded to predict maladaptive emotion regulation skills, higher rates of perceived stress and increased fear of negative evaluation in lesbian women and gay men. The data was consistent for all hypotheses in the model: sexual identity significantly predicts higher bully score and atypical gender role endorsement is a moderator of victimization in LGBT individuals. The findings indicate high masculine endorsement in lesbians and high feminine endorsement in gay males can significantly predict victimization and maladaptive coping skills, emotion dysregulation, increased stress, and lack of emotional awareness.
While there is a good amount of research focused on sex offenders as a whole, only a limited number of studies examine variations within these offenders, how people view the variations, and why their opinions may differ. This study focuses on the interconnections among gender norms, rape myth acceptance, and the perception of sex offenders by administering an online student survey. The survey measured rape myth acceptance and adherence to traditional gender roles to see how they affected perceptions of sex offenders. Perceptions were measured using vignettes that were varied by gender and the situation described. Results showed that higher rape myth acceptance would decrease the blameworthiness of the offender, that the offender was seen as more blameworthy when the offender was a male, and that women tended to see the offender as more blameworthy than men did. The type of sexual situation did not have an impact on blameworthiness, nor did adherence to gender roles. The findings support past research that suggests that rape myth acceptance can impact people’s opinions about offenders in sexual situations and specifically that these opinions differ depending on the gender of the offender. With some offenders being viewed as more blameworthy than others, it is necessary to examine sex offense laws to see how they may disproportionately affect some offenders and implement harsher punishments than the public may deem necessary.