Sexual Orientation and Discrimination
When respondents were asked if they were "aware of situations in which students have been discriminated against on the basis of their sexual orientation," the contrast between the heterosexual and non-heterosexual reaction was dramatic. Only 6% of the heterosexual respondents answered "yes," whereas 35% of the GLB group were aware of specific incidents of discrimination. When the question turned from discrimination to outright harassment, the numbers were similar: 7% of the heterosexual respondents, as compared to 39% of the GLB group, reported witnessing such incidents on campus. In addition, twelve percent of the GLB group reported having been victims of harassment on campus. Both heterosexual and GLB respondents reported fewer incidents on the UA campus than off campus, where the percentages were genuinely alarming: 54% of the GLB group had been witnesses, and 50% targets. While we can be grateful that there may be fewer incidents on a college campus where the free exchange of ideas is encouraged, the University figures are still alarmingly high. Differences between the GLB and heterosexual respondents also emerged in opinions about the perceived impact of sexual orientation in the tenure process. While a minority of the heterosexual respondents believed sexual orientation had been important in past tenure decisions (18%), only half that many (9%) believed it could be important today. The GLB respondents were more pessimistic about this and less inclined to think the situation had improved: 35% thought that sexual orientation might have played a role in past tenure decisions, and 30 % though it was still influential today. Critically, the two groups agreed overwhelmingly (93%) that sexual orientation should not be a factor in tenure decisions.
If you have comments or suggestions, email matkin@ccit.arizona.edu