Measuring feminine gender identity in homosexual males

Freund, Kurt; Nagler, Ernest; Langevin, Ronald; Zajac, Andrew; Steiner, Betty W.

doi:10.1007/bf01541488

Cited by 50 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…We, therefore, expected the five scales of Section E and the four scales of Section F to differentiate between HET, non-HET, and GDYS participants. These expectations were based on demonstrated differences between these groups in other gender domains, as illustrated by the data from our RCGQ-R Gender scale (Table 2): HET men < HET women, HET men < non-HET men < GDYS men, and HET women > non-HET women > GDYS women, which are in line with published data by others that demonstrate for either natal sex a (crude) continuum of gender typicality-atypicality from HETs, to homosexuals, to transsexuals (Blanchard & Freund, 1983; Freund, Nagler, Langevin, Zajac, & Steiner, 1974; Wallien & Cohen-Kettenis, 2008). (Note that the RCGQ-R robustly correlates with scales of current gender-related behavior for adults, as shown by Meyer-Bahlburg et al, 2006).…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 90%

Development and Validation of the Pregnancy and Infant Orientation Questionnaire

Meyer‐Bahlburg¹,

Dolezal

Johnson

et al. 2010

Journal of Sex Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this current study was the construction, scaling, and scale validation of a self-report questionnaire assessing biographical information and motivation for pregnancy and infant care in men and women with disorders of sex development or other gender variations of potential clinical relevance. The overall design of the questionnaire and the initial item pool were derived from related clinical and research experience. Collection of pilot data and, where appropriate, scale construction (via principal components analyses) were based on Canadian convenience samples of heterosexual (HET) and non-HET men and women (N=414). A sample of gender-dysphoric (GDYS) men and women (n=45) was added for validity analysis. Validation of the resulting scales was based on the demonstration of expected scale differences between HET men and women, as well as between HET, non-HET, and GDYS men and between HET, non-HET, and GDYS women, and was successful with one exception. This study concludes that this new questionnaire, in addition to its descriptive sections, provides several distinct scales related to desires for child bearing and child rearing and has good psychometric properties.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 90%

Development and Validation of the Pregnancy and Infant Orientation Questionnaire

Meyer‐Bahlburg¹,

Dolezal

Johnson

et al. 2010

Journal of Sex Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…If Blum and Pfetzing (1997) are correct in asserting that the childhood of protogay children is traumatic, partly because of negative reactions to their marked CGNC, then the association of CGNC with later suicidality might be even stronger for LGB compared to heterosexual individuals. In a sample of homosexual and bisexual adult men, childhood femininity, as measured with Part A of the Feminine Gender Identity scale (Freund, Nagler, Langevin, Zajac, & Steiner, 1974), correlated with current depression/dejection: r = .23 (Weinrich, Hampton, McCutchan, Grant, & the HNRC Group, 1995). Skidmore, Linsenmeier, and Bailey (2006) found that the association of CGNC with psychological distress was substantial among gay men (r = .38), but not as strong among lesbians (r = .18).…”

Section: Childhood Gender Nonconformity As Precursor Of Later Suicidamentioning

confidence: 96%

Childhood Gender Nonconformity and Harassment as Predictors of Suicidality among Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Heterosexual Austrians

2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The role of childhood gender role nonconformity (CGNC) and childhood harassment (CH) in explaining suicidality (suicide ideation, aborted suicide attempts, and suicide attempts) was examined in a sample of 142 lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) adults and 148 heterosexual adults in Austria. Current and previous suicidality, CGNC, and CH were significantly greater in LGB participants compared to heterosexual participants. After controlling for CGNC, the effect of sexual orientation on CH diminished. CGNC correlated significantly with current suicidality in the LGB but not in the heterosexual group, and only non-significant correlations were found for CGNC with previous suicidality. Controlling for CH and CGNC diminished the effect of sexual orientation on current suicidality. Bayesian multivariate analysis indicated that current suicidality, but not previous suicidality, depended directly on CGNC. CH and CGNC are likely implicated in the elevated levels of current suicidality among adult LGB participants. As for previous suicidality, the negative impact of CGNC on suicidality might be overshadowed by stress issues affecting sexual minorities around coming out. The association of CGNC with current suicidality suggests an enduring effect of CGNC on the mental health and suicide risk of LGB individuals.

show abstract

“…English Dictionary defines "masculine" as "having qualities or appearance traditionally associated with men." Past definitions have suggested narrow and categorical meanings of masculinity and gender identity, and, as such, these definitions were often limited to behavioral patterns (i.e., sexual preference) or one's physical appearance (Freund, Nagler, Lagevin, Zajac, & Steiner, 1974;McConaghy & Armstrong, 1983;Money & Hampson, 1955). According to these tenets, a man was considered masculine if he behaved like a man, engaged in sexual relations with females, and dressed in a masculine way.…”

Section: Masculine Identitymentioning

confidence: 99%