Suchergebnisse

AbstractIn this study, we analyze 50 interviews with racially diverse, predominantly low‐income, LGBTQ participants living in the San Francisco Bay Area. Rooted in intersectional theory that conceptualizes identities as shaped by interlocking forms of oppression and privilege, we compared interviews with "Baby Boomers" to those with "Millennial" participants, who came into adulthood in a time of greater legal and social inclusion for LGBTQ people. Our analysis focused on three questions: How do participants understand their sexual identities? How are the identities of sexual minority participants coconstructed with intersecting forms of oppression? What motivates LGBTQ people in our sample to engage in social justice work? We found that white LGBTQ people tended to see their sexualities as primary to their identity, compared to LGBTQ Black and/or Indigenous People of Color (BIPOC) who tended to see their identities in intersectional terms. Younger LGBTQ people were more likely to delink sex and gender identity; consequently, they were more likely to frame their sexual identities with terms not rooted in a gender binary (e.g., pansexual or queer). Experiences with homophobia were prevalent across generations, and intersected with racism and economic oppressions, but younger people more often described support from institutional agents. Participants' sense of community and commitment to giving back after experiences of trauma motivated them to engage in social justice work. Our findings highlight the intersectional nature of oppressions faced by LGBTQ people and the need for organizations to move away from focusing exclusively on homophobic oppression as a monolith.

Jewish Americans' opinions on the Israeli–Palestinian conflict influence both the Israeli and the U.S. governments. Consequently, the Jewish American diaspora can act to promote or inhibit the peace process between Israelis and Palestinians. Several different sociopsychological beliefs have been postulated to lead individuals to support the perpetuation of conflict. Among these beliefs are a sense of collective victimhood, dehumanization and delegitimization of the other side, a zero‐sum view on the conflict, and a monolithic narrative about the conflict. In this exploratory study we examined the role of these beliefs in predicting Jewish Americans' rejection or support of compromise solutions to the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. A survey study of 176 Jewish Americans shows that a monolithic view on the conflict, dehumanizing and delegitimizing of the other side, and a zero‐sum view on the conflict played an important role in predicting opposition to compromise solutions for the Palestinian–Israeli conflict. Beliefs about collective victimhood did not predict support for compromise solutions. Findings are discussed in terms of the centrality of narrative misrecognition in preventing agreement to concessions toward the other side.