IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jscscx/v10y2021i2p56-d494515.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sexual Prejudice in the Portuguese Political Context

Author

Listed:
  • Maria Ferros

    (Department of Psychology and Education, Faculty of Social and Human Sciences, University of Beira Interior, Pólo IV, 6200-209 Covilhã, Portugal)

  • Henrique Pereira

    (Department of Psychology and Education, Faculty of Social and Human Sciences, University of Beira Interior, Pólo IV, 6200-209 Covilhã, Portugal
    Health Sciences Research Centre (CICS-UBI), 6200-506 Covilhã, Portugal
    Research Centre in Sports Sciences, Health Sciences and Human Development (CIDESD), 5001-801 Vila Real, Portugal)

Abstract

Sexual prejudice is a negative attitude toward an individual due to their belonging to a group defined by sexual minority behaviors, attractions, or orientations. As no studies assessing sexual prejudice levels among self-identified politicians have been conducted in Portugal, this study was carried out to address this gap in the literature. In addition, we sought to compare differences in levels of sexual prejudice by gender, religiosity, and political orientation. The sample consisted of 302 self-identified active politicians in Portugal, of whom 157 were men (52%) and 145 were women (48%), with an average age of 45.98 years. Study measurement instruments included a sociodemographic questionnaire and the Sexual Prejudice Scale in the Portuguese Political Context. Participants responded to this study’s outreach online, and they received emails that referred them directly to the online survey. The principal results show that, despite moderate overall levels of sexual prejudice among the sample, men and participants with right-wing general, social, and fiscal political views demonstrated significantly higher sexual prejudice scores. Negative levels of political engagement and negative attitudes toward lesbians and gay men were significant predictors of sexual prejudice. It is very important to raise awareness of this phenomenon among both politicians and the general public, so that it can be addressed accordingly.

Suggested Citation

  • Maria Ferros & Henrique Pereira, 2021. "Sexual Prejudice in the Portuguese Political Context," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-13, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jscscx:v:10:y:2021:i:2:p:56-:d:494515
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/10/2/56/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/10/2/56/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jay Barth & Janine Parry, 2009. "Political Culture, Public Opinion, and Policy (Non)Diffusion: The Case of Gay‐ and Lesbian‐Related Issues in Arkansas," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 90(2), pages 309-325, June.
    2. Peter B. Wood & John P. Bartkowski, 2004. "Attribution Style and Public Policy Attitudes Toward Gay Rights," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 85(1), pages 58-74, March.
    3. Lax, Jeffrey R. & Phillips, Justin H., 2009. "Gay Rights in the States: Public Opinion and Policy Responsiveness," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 103(3), pages 367-386, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Joslyn, Mark R. & Haider-Markel, Donald P., 2019. "Perceived causes of obesity, emotions, and attitudes about Discrimination Policy," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 223(C), pages 97-103.
    2. Mertzanis, Charilaos, 2018. "Institutions, development and energy constraints," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 962-982.
    3. Christopher Wratil, 2015. "Democratic Responsiveness in the European Union: the Case of the Council," LEQS – LSE 'Europe in Question' Discussion Paper Series 94, European Institute, LSE.
    4. Bac, Mehmet, 2014. "Opinion expressions under social sanctions," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 58-71.
    5. Maurizio Pisati & Valeria Glorioso, 2011. "Multilevel Regression and Poststratification in Stata," CHI11 Stata Conference 4, Stata Users Group.
    6. Facchini, Giovanni & Hatton, Timothy J. & Steinhardt, Max F., 2024. "Opening Heaven’s Door: Public Opinion and Congressional Votes on the 1965 Immigration Act," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 84(1), pages 232-270, March.
    7. Aklin, Michaël & Bayer, Patrick & Harish, S.P. & Urpelainen, Johannes, 2013. "Understanding environmental policy preferences: New evidence from Brazil," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 28-36.
    8. J. Sebastian Leguizamon & Susane Leguizamon, 2017. "Disentangling the effect of tolerance on housing values: how levels of human capital and race alter this link within the metropolitan area," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 59(2), pages 371-392, September.
    9. Elizabeth A. Sharrow, 2021. "Sports, Transgender Rights and the Bodily Politics of Cisgender Supremacy," Laws, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-29, July.
    10. Michaël Aklin & Vera Z. Eichenauer, 2022. "Power Shifts, Emigration, and Population Sorting," CESifo Working Paper Series 9765, CESifo.
    11. David A. Matsa & Amalia R. Miller, 2018. "Who Votes for Medicaid Expansion? Lessons from Maine’s 2017 Referendum," NBER Working Papers 25109, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Andrew L. Whitehead, 2014. "Politics, Religion, Attribution Theory, and Attitudes Toward Same-Sex Unions," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 95(3), pages 701-718, September.
    13. Liwei Shan & Shihe Fu & Lu Zheng, 2017. "Corporate sexual equality and firm performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(9), pages 1812-1826, September.
    14. Christafore, David & Leguizamon, J. Sebastian & Leguizamon, Susane, 2013. "Are black neighborhoods less welcoming to homosexuals than white neighborhoods?," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(4), pages 579-589.
    15. Stadelmann, David & Torrens, Gustavo, 2020. "Who is the ultimate boss of legislators: Voters, special interest groups or parties?," VfS Annual Conference 2020 (Virtual Conference): Gender Economics 224562, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    16. Jackman, Mahalia, 2019. "Religion, contact and ambivalent attitudes towards the rights of gays and lesbians in Barbados," SocArXiv 528bt, Center for Open Science.
    17. Jacob M. Grumbach & Jamila Michener, 2022. "American Federalism, Political Inequality, and Democratic Erosion," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 699(1), pages 143-155, January.
    18. Brian F. Harrison & Melissa R. Michelson, 2015. "God and Marriage: The Impact of Religious Identity Priming on Attitudes Toward Same-Sex Marriage," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 96(5), pages 1411-1423, November.
    19. Lupia, Arthur & Krupnikov, Yanna & Levine, Adam Seth & Piston, Spencer & Hagen-Jamae, Alexander von, 2009. "Why State Constitutions Differ in their Treatment of Same-Sex Marriage," MPRA Paper 15096, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Hatzenbuehler, Mark L. & Bellatorre, Anna & Lee, Yeonjin & Finch, Brian K. & Muennig, Peter & Fiscella, Kevin, 2014. "Structural stigma and all-cause mortality in sexual minority populations," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 33-41.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jscscx:v:10:y:2021:i:2:p:56-:d:494515. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.