Why Do Social Work Students Engage in Lesbian and Gay Rights Activism?

Abstract

This paper considers the contexts and motivations as to why some social work students engage in lesbian and gay rights activism. To explain electoral and protesting modes of activism, this study utilized variables from resource, mobilizing, and framing theories of political participation to explain activism related to gay and lesbian rights. After gathering data on 159 undergraduate social work majors, regressions suggest that economic resources failed to explain participation in gay and lesbian politics. Instead, the predictors of gay and lesbian activism more closely aligned with four key variables: educational attainment, communicating with full-fledged activists, having an ability to recognize heterosexism, and maintaining a commitment to social justice.

Keywords:

• Activism
• collective behavior
• homosexuality
• gay rights
• political participation
• social movements
• social identity

Notes

*p > .05

**p > .01.

1. The terms sexual prejudice, heterosexism, and homophobia are sometimes used interchangeably. For the rest of this paper, we will be using the term homophobia to mean a hostile reaction to lesbians and gay men, heterosexism to deal with the cultural ideology that justifies discrimination against homosexuals who challenge conventional gender expectations, and sexual prejudice as the individuals' acceptance of ideological frameworks that degrade any sexual orientation other than complete heterosexuality (see Herek, 2004). The term heteronormativity centers on the assumption that all people are heterosexuals and that sexual identities that break from this assumption are deemed deviant and undesirable.

2. While it is difficult to know the effects of LGB movements, some studies have noted some major changes in same-sex laws and social movements (Kane, 2003; Soule, 2004).

3. Research schools: University of Delaware, University of Oregon, University of Texas; Doctoral: University of North Carolina-Greensboro, University of Mass-Lowell, Rutgers; Masters: Longwood College, University of Southern Maine, University of Wisconsin-Green Bay; Baccalaureate: Evergreen State College, Mesa State College, Southeast Arkansas College.

4. Clearly this response rate was neither high nor random. Professors who never read e-mail automatically removed themselves from the sample, and the willingness to distribute the surveys was not constant throughout the different sorts of schools and disciplines. For the sample of all professors, around 2% of the research professors distributed surveys, while 13% professors at master's-granting universities did so. Likewise, fewer than 1% of chemistry, biology, and physics professors assisted in this project while professors in political science, sociology, and social work were most receptive to our requests (11%). Of the social work professors who actually distributed surveys, all either taught research or policy classes.