Legal recognition of same-sex couple relationships provides at least some material benefits to couple members; however, few studies have examined the associations between legal recognition and psychological distress or well-being. Using an online survey sample of 2,677 lesbian, gay, bisexual (LGB) individuals, participants were placed in 4 groups: single, dating, in a committed relationship, and in a legally recognized relationship. Analyses revealed that participants in committed or legally recognized relationships reported less psychological distress (i.e., internalized homophobia, depressive symptoms, and stress) and more well-being (i.e., the presence of meaning in life) than single participants. Significant group differences and multivariate analyses indicated that participants in a legally recognized relationship reported less internalized homophobia, fewer depressive symptoms, lower levels of stress, and more meaning in their lives than those in committed relationships, even after controlling for other factors. The need for further research on the psychological benefits of legal relationship recognition for same-sex couples is discussed.
This study explored the experiences of Uzbek women therapists and counselors working to end violence against women through their involvement in nongovernmental organizations. A content analysis was used, which elicited four themes: (a) participants' early interactions provided them with an awareness of gender injustices that led them into adult leadership roles with the support of family members; (b) motivation to work with nongovernmental organizations developed due to perceived barriers that impeded women's access to resources and personal freedoms; (c) participants struggled with how to create crisis centers without a grassroots foundation and with the limitations placed on them by the Uzbek government; and (d) the paradox of feminism: participants held views of Western feminism that both inspired and disturbed them, resulting in distance from feminist identities but general respect for its philosophies.
This study explored the experiences of family members of lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) individuals (N= 198) following the 2006 November election in the United States. Family members in states that passed a constitutional amendment to restrict marriage recognition (PASS) reported greater exposure to negative media messages about LGB individuals and greater negative affect related to the amendments than family members living in non‐PASS states. Family members in PASS states reported similar exposure to negative media and affect but less stress than LGB PASS individuals (N= 361). Analysis of responses to an open‐ended question about feelings about marriage amendments revealed 6 themes, including concern for the safety and well‐being of LGB family members and negative impact on family. Overall, findings suggest that family members may experience increased concern for LGB family members during policy initiatives aimed at LGB individuals. Social justice implications for family members are discussed.
Abstract The current study explored whether differences in the practice of monogamy or non-monogamy related to the relational health of men in long-term same-sex relationships. A total of 179 monogamous and non-monogamous gay partnered men from the U.S. and Canada were surveyed via the internet in order to examine demographic, sexual, and relational variables. The majority of the sample reported maintaining a monogamous relationship (73%). The results suggested that non-monogamous men were more out, reported a greater number of sexual partners, higher frequencies of past sexual contact with men, and lower levels of dyadic attachment than their monogamous counterparts. Conversely, the monogamous and non-monogamous coupled men appeared similar in age and total number of past relationships, and did not appear to differ in their frequency of sex with their primary partners, nor in their stated relationship satisfaction, sexual satisfaction, or attachment styles.
ABSTRACT The aim of this study was to determine the role of family of origin violence in predicting intimate partner violence (IPV). Male participants were divided into generally offending and family-only groups according to whether their violence occurred exclusively within intimate partner and family contexts or toward others outside the family as well. Results showed that exposure to family of origin violence affected IPV differently between the two groups of offenders. For generally offending offenders, exposure to family of origin violence significantly predicted IPV above and beyond demographic factors, alcohol and drug use, and bidirectional aggression. For family-only offenders, witnessing father-initiated violence toward the mother had a significant influence on their violent behavior toward their intimate partners. Clinical implications of these findings are addressed.
