Sam Houston State University, Huntsville, TX, USA.
Old Dominion University, Norfolk, VA, USA.
J Interpers Violence. 2020 Nov;35(21-22):4239-4261. doi: 10.1177/0886260517713713. Epub 2017 Jun 14.
Gay panic refers to a heterosexual man violently responding to unwanted sexual advances from a gay man. In court, the defendant may argue he was provoked or temporarily insane. This study utilized 352 jury-eligible citizens to assess differences across mediums of gay panic. Participants were asked to read vignettes depicting a control, gay panic as provocation, or gay panic as insanity condition and provide verdicts and ratings of blame and responsibility. Participants also completed measures assessing political orientation and homonegativity. Data were analyzed via a MANCOVA, a chi-square goodness-of-fit test, and general linear modeling. Verdicts, victim blame, and ratings of responsibility differed across vignette conditions, with an observed leniency effect when gay panic was claimed in either context. Homonegativity also exacerbated patterns of prodefendant views, as participants higher in homonegativity assigned higher victim blame, lower defendant responsibility, and more lenient verdicts in the gay panic conditions. The effect of political orientation was nuanced, as only republicans in the provocation condition followed the anticipated pattern in rendering more lenient verdicts. Results provide additional support for the notion gay panic defenses may be, in part, fueled by political beliefs and prejudicial beliefs against persons of sexual minority status. Drawing from a justification-suppression model, it may be that in cases of gay panic, a context is created in which prejudiced ideologies can be openly expressed via leniency on the defendant. Implications may be relevant to future criminal law policies and practices, particularly advocacy and policy efforts, judicial training, and trial consultation to attorneys for juror selection and development of trial strategy.
同性恋恐慌指的是异性恋男性对同性恋者的非自愿性侵犯行为做出激烈反应。在法庭上，被告可能会以受到挑衅或暂时精神错乱为由进行辩护。本研究利用 352 名符合陪审团条件的公民，评估了同性恋恐慌在不同媒介中的差异。参与者被要求阅读描述控制组、作为挑衅的同性恋恐慌或作为精神错乱的同性恋恐慌的情境小插图，并提供判决和责任归咎与评定。参与者还完成了评估政治取向和同性恋厌恶的量表。数据通过 MANCOVA、卡方拟合优度检验和一般线性模型进行分析。判决、受害者指责和责任评定在情境小插图条件之间存在差异，在两种情境中声称同性恋恐慌时观察到宽大处理效应。同性恋厌恶也加剧了支持被告观点的模式，因为对同性恋者持更强烈厌恶情绪的参与者在同性恋恐慌情境中对受害者的指责更高、对被告的责任认定更低，并且判决更宽大。政治取向的影响是细微的，只有挑衅情境中的共和党人遵循了预期的模式，即做出更宽大的判决。研究结果进一步支持了这样一种观点，即同性恋恐慌辩护可能部分是由政治信仰和对性少数群体成员的偏见信念所驱动。从合理化抑制模型来看，在同性恋恐慌的情况下，可能会创造出一种环境，使偏见观念可以通过对被告的宽大处理而公开表达。这些结果可能与未来的刑法政策和实践有关，特别是倡导和政策努力、司法培训以及为陪审员选择和审判策略制定而与律师进行的审判咨询。
