Responses from the Lesbian & Gay Psychology Section to Crossley's 'Making sense of 'barebacking''.
The aim of the present study is to summarize key responses to Crossley's (2004) article 'Making sense of barebacking' from members of the British Psychological Society's Lesbian & Gay Psychology Section. These responses are assembled into four main themes: (1) terminology, including descriptions of sexual behaviour that are inaccurate and pejorative; (2) representations that endorse culturally dominant and stigmatizing stereotypes of gay men as hedonistic, promiscuous, morally irresponsible and interested in sex rather than relationships; (3) methodology, particularly the use of autobiographical and fictional accounts as reliable sources of data about HIV risk; (4) ethics, especially the infringement of the dignity and the worth of those researched or represented. We welcome attempts to address the continuing problems of HIV/AIDS but recommend that authors and editors enter into dialogue with colleagues who are members of sexual minority communities as part of the research process.
Barker
Meg
M
Department of Psychology, Faculty of Arts and Human Sciences, London South Bank University, 103 Borough Road, London, UK. barkermj@lsbu.ac.uk
Hagger-Johnson
Gareth
G
Hegarty
Peter
P
Hutchison
Craig
C
Riggs
Damien
D
D032984:Ethics, Research; D005260:Female; D015658:HIV Infections / Q000517:prevention & control; D018452:Homosexuality, Female; D018451:Homosexuality, Male; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D033262:Narration; D011287:Prejudice; D011593:Psychology, Social; D012106:Research; D012725:Sexual Behavior; D013240:Stereotyping; D009626:Terminology as Topic; D006113:United Kingdom; D047568:Unsafe Sex