Use policyThe full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that:• a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.Please consult the full DRO policy for further details.
Novelty Attachment and Content Substitution among Gay Friendly Students
Matthew Ripley
University of Bath
Eric Anderson University of Winchester
Mark McCormackBrunel University
Ben Rockett
University of BathThis article explores the complex relationship between an openly gay instructor, homophobia, and heteronormativity in a university classroom. We first tabulated the frequency in which the instructor used the lives of heterosexuals and homosexuals as examples of content or content itself, and then interviewed 32 students about their perceptions of these frequencies. We found students significantly overestimated LGBT frequencies and underestimated heterosexual ones. We develop two analytical concepts to highlight this form of heteronormativity: novelty attachment and content substitution.We explain these phenomena by suggesting that the novelty of using LGBT examples and discussing homosexuality as content results in the activation of stereotypes among otherwise gay friendly students. We examine the cognitive underpinnings of this using social identity theory and call for further research to examine the applicability of our theory to other minority groups.Keywords: heteronormativity, novelty attachment, content substitution, pedagogy 2
Homophobia and Heteronormativity in the ClassroomAn extensive body of research focuses on homophobia in educational settings, highlighting the cultural and institutional discrimination that LGBT individuals experience at both the student and faculty level (Ferfolja 2007;Mills 2004;Rivers 1995 were told that the guest speaker was applying for a post. In order to examine for attitudes toward homosexuality the guest lecturer identified as homosexual by mentioning his partner, Jason, in four classes and he revealed heterosexuality by mentioning his partner, Jennifer, in four other classes. After each class, students were asked to fill out an evaluation of the speaker. The students scored the speaker lower on a measure of credibility when he identified as homosexual, also rating him as less knowledgeable. Highlighting the vast difference in responses to the guestlecturer, 93% of students suggested that they would 'unquestionably' hire him when they thought 3 he was straight, while only 8% of students suggested that they would 'unquestionably' hire him when he identified as gay. These findings were echoed by Anderson and Kanner (2011) who found undergraduate students perceived gay and lesbian professors as having a political agenda, compared to hete...