The current study examines the effect of religious orientation, social dominance orientation, right wing authoritarianism, and group socialization on the degree to which covert prejudice beliefs are endorsed. This study is novel in that individual and intergroup factors are simultaneously considered. Unlike much of the existing research, the study measures all six types of religious orientation for a nuanced examination of the different approaches to religion and the effect this has on attitude formation and maintenance. The study also demonstrates higher levels of generalizability in that questionnaires were distributed to a diverse sample and also considered many forms of discrimination (racism, sexism, classism, and heterosexism). Additionally, relevant prejudice measures that better represent covert, modern day prejudice are used in the current study. Social dominance orientation (SDO) was strongly and positively correlated with all four types of subtle prejudice. In hierarchical regression modeling, right wing authoritarianism was the strongest predictor variable for all prejudice outcome variables. SDO was the second strongest predictor for all variables except for benevolent sexism. Demographic and religious orientation predictors varied by prejudice outcome variable. Only immanence and intrinsic emerged as significant religious orientations predictors. Multiple regression models with only religious orientation predictors were also conducted to examine the relationship of each religious orientation to each prejudice when the other religious orientations were held constant. Different trends for different prejudice attitudes were found for intrinsic and immanence orientations. Quest orientation was negatively correlated with prejudice and extrinsic religious orientation was positively correlated with prejudice for all prejudice outcome variables. Increasing intolerance with more indiscriminately pro- or anti-religious responding was not elicited. Instead a pattern of increasing pro-religiosity was related to higher prejudice scores. Progressive congregational factors correlated with lower colorblind racial attitudes, benevolent sexism, classism, and homonegativity among congregants.

The purpose of this research was to explore social hardships of non-gay identifying, [behaviorally] bisexual, and “other” marginal LGBTQ+ men who are sexually intimate with men in a heteronormative and [toxic] masculine world. Relatedly, hegemonic masculinity dominates the patriarch through regulating behavioral norms that often stigmatize and discriminate opposing traits, ideologies, or groups, such as LGBTQ+. This has been known to affect and mediate health outcomes and “outness.” Therefore, this study explored how minority stressors impact self-concept, mental health, well-being, and motivations to disclose and/or conceal. Data collection involved survey and interview formats (mixed-methods cross-sectional design) that assessed internalized homophobia, conformity to masculine norms, subjective masculinity stress, disclosure, and concealment in relation to lifestyle and social context. While all variables had expected linear associations, not all were causal. Those who conformed to masculine norms significantly experienced internalized stigma/homophobia. Hence, it can be hypothesized that participants who conformed sought to conceal stigma under pressure of heteronormative culture and the patriarch. However, subjective masculinity stress was nonsignificant, exemplifying hegemonic influence as more defining to their self-concept than their own. Further, minority stress constructs (masculine norms, internalized stigma/homophobia, and subjective masculinity stress), when age, regional location, and faith were controlled, significantly predicted less disclosure and more concealment in social contexts. This reinforces the power of modern patriarchy/masculine norms/minority stress and its adverse effects on mental health, well-being, and outness in marginalized populations of LGBTQ+. Relatedly, qualitative data validated these quantitative findings but generally over the lifecycle of “coming out” as opposed to respondents’ current growth and development in outness, mental health, and well-being. However, to further affirm such quantitative findings, both survey and interview data did report distress regarding modern day masculinity and its ill standards that place unrealistic expectations on men, which continue to create disparities among and between many communities and humanity.