When Do Opponents of Gay Rights Mobilize? Explaining Political Participation in Times of Backlash against Liberalism

Abstract

Existing research suggests that supporters of gay rights have outmobilized their opponents, leading to policy changes in advanced industrialized democracies. At the same time, we observe the diffusion of state-sponsored homophobia in many parts of the world. The emergence of gay rights as a salient political issue in global politics leads us to ask, “Who is empowered to be politically active in various societies?” What current research misses is a comparison of levels of participation (voting and protesting) between states that make stronger and weaker appeals to homophobia. Voters face contrasting appeals from politicians in favor of and against gay rights globally. In an analysis of survey data from Europe and Latin America, we argue that the alignment between the norms of sexuality a state promotes and an individual’s personal attitudes on sexuality increases felt political efficacy. We find that individuals who are tolerant of homosexuality are more likely to participate in states with gay-friendly policies in comparison with intolerant individuals. The reverse also holds: individuals with low education levels that are intolerant of homosexuality are more likely to participate in states espousing political homophobia.

Political engagement and turnout among same-sex couples in Western Europe

“…According to rational choice framework (Downs, 1957; Riker and Ordeshook, 1968), welfare maximising voters will turn out to vote for political candidates that they perceive will increase either their own personal welfare or that of their group. This is particularly relevant for LGB individuals, as the potential benefits of participation for minority groups may be larger than that for the majority – including obtaining greater legal protections from discrimination or the expansion of civil rights legislation for the LGB(T+) collective (Ayoub and Page, 2019; Blumer, 1958; Sherrill, 1996).…”

“…We report, therefore, a ‘sexuality gap’ (Hertzog, 1996) in political interest and electoral participation. We theorise that the European ‘lavender’ voter (Turnbull-Dugarte, 2020a) is likely driven to ‘over participate’ (vis-à-vis their heterosexual peers) in elections because they view participation in the political process as vital to ensure the advancement of their own individual welfare – as well as that of their in-group – and to protect themselves against the potential threat of discriminatory policies of the majority (Ayoub and Page, 2019). In short, a desire among LGBs to advance LGB(T+) rights and calls for them to ‘vote like their rights depended on it’ (Brydum, 2013) makes them i) more interested in politics, ii) more likely to head to the polls on election day, and iii) more likely to participate in other non-electoral forms of engagement in the democratic process.…”

Pride amid Prejudice: The Influence of LGBT+ Rights Activism in a Socially Conservative Society

“…Second, social-psychological factors like personal and/or collective identity and efficacy are critical for participation. Ayoub and Page (2019) found evidence that efficacy, or feeling there is a chance of success, is associated with participation in their study of voting and movement activism. Along the same dimension, a collective identity, or sense of one-ness, held by many marginalized queer people is critical for determining political behavior.…”

The Limiting of the Impact of Proxy Culture Wars by Religious Sensitivity: The Fight of Neo-Pentecostal Churches against LGBTQ Rights Organizations over Uganda’s Future

“…The reason that brings progressivists to Uganda is the fact that LGBTQ rights are part of human rights (Ayoub 2017;Ayoub and Page 2020;Castle 2019;Hartman 2015;Murray 2019;Rectenwald 2019), and, therefore, an inevitable part of humanitarian aid.…”