This study extends previous research by comparatively examining variations in situational circumstances of bias homicide targeting lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) victims. Rather than conceptualize categories of homicide by offender motive, this study disaggregates anti-LGBT homicide based on observable characteristics of victim selection by offenders. Anti-LGBT homicides are conceptualized as predatory and responsive offenses, which capture planned, unprovoked homicides and unplanned crimes in which victims play a role in the escalation of violence. Further situational distinctions are conceptualized within these categories of anti-LGBT homicide, and comparative analyses reveal important differences across these situational circumstances. Considering the large amount of variation found within anti-LGBT homicide, which often goes unrecognized by studies relying on official bias crimes data, these findings suggest that open-source crime data and nuanced examinations of anti-LGBT homicide may be useful tools for fashioning informed policy discussions of victim-based legal protections and law enforcement responses to bias crime.

In the current study, we seek to understand the dynamic processes of fatal attacks against lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) individuals across different situational circumstances. A review of prior research and story line analyses of 121 anti-LGBT homicides led to the creation of a homicide typology based on offender mode of victim selection. Guided by symbolic interactionism and theories of masculinity and violence, five representative case studies are conducted based on various open-source materials. The purpose of the case studies is to examine the applicability of theories of masculinity and violence for explaining anti-LGBT homicides across different modes of victim selection. We conclude that interactionist and masculinity theories of violence can in part illuminate how and why offenders use violence to demonstrate masculinity in some anti-LGBT homicide scenarios.

Are women and men judged for breaking gender norms in the context of heterosexual marriage? Using the case of marital name choice, the author compared the effect of gender-conventional choices (woman takes man’s surname) to gender-egalitarian choices (both partners keep or hyphenate their surnames) on the perceived quality of heterosexual women and men as romantic partners. Relying on a survey experiment ( n = 501), the author found that U.S. respondents perceived women who kept their surnames and women who shared hyphenated surnames with their husbands to be less committed and loving and to conform less to respondents’ image of the ideal wife than women who changed their names. These results show that gender-norm violations, not preferences for a shared spousal surname, explain the marital name penalty. Men in norm-breaking couples were also judged, albeit not as harshly as women, suggesting that there are contexts in which women are granted less gender flexibility than men.

The aim of this study is to compare public opinion regarding single and same-sex parents. Background: Comparing attitudes about the effectiveness of single-parents to same-sex parents shows how much importance the public places on the number of parents compared to the sex of the parents; however, surprisingly little research examines attitudes about single and samesex parenting ability. Method: We use data from the 2012 General Social Survey "Family-and-Changing-Gender-Roles" module (N $ 1200) to compare perceptions of the effectiveness of single parents (vs. two parents) and same-sex parents (vs. a mother and a father). We construct a measure that captures whether individuals hold more positive attitudes about single parents or same-sex parents. We then rely on multivariate models to examine the impact of sociodemographic characteristics on these perceptions, and explore the influence of attitudes regarding gender, sexuality, and childcare policy.Results: Approximately half of the respondents provided similarly positive or negative responses regarding the effectiveness of single and same-sex parents; of the remaining half, slightly more provided higher ratings to single parents. Several sociodemographic factors-gender, age, marital status, region, and sexual minority statussignificantly shape attitudes about same-sex and single parents in similar directions-although, in some cases, these factors also predict differences in these attitudes. For example, compared to men, women are more positive about both single parents and same-sex parents, but they still rate single parents higher. In contrast, other sociodemographic factors-notably, race/ethnicity and education-predict attitudes about same-sex and single parents, as well as the difference between these two parental types. Some of these patterns occur via respondents' religiosity. Of the attitudinal factors, attitudes regarding

No abstract