Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Discourse & Society
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by SPEER, S. A.
Right arrow Articles by POTTER, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

The Management of Heterosexist Talk: Conversational Resources and Prejudiced Claims

SUSAN A. SPEER

BRUNEL UNIVERSITY

JONATHAN POTTER

LOUGHBOROUGH UNIVERSITY

This article criticizes current psychological work on `heterosexism', highlighting the way its operationalization tends to obscure flexible discursive practices and settle them into stable, causal attitudes within individuals. It studies extracts from a variety of sources where sexuality is made relevant (in describing someone as a `poof' or a `dyke', for example), and considers (a) how interactants attend to `heterosexism' in their talk and (b) what such `attending to' is doing interactionally. The analysis highlights four of the resources speakers use to manage such talk: (i) discounting heterosexism; (ii) displaying a lack of understanding; (iii) softening the blow; and (iv) conceding positive features. It is argued that heterosexist utterances do not have their negativity built into them, but become prejudicial, troublesome or otherwise for participants in situ, as their sense is produced and negotiated. The article concludes with a discussion of the wider implications of this type of research for psychological approaches to (what are typically conceived as) `ideological' or `cognitive' phenomena.

Key Words: attitude • conversation analysis • discourse analysis • discursive psychology • heterosexism • homophobia • prejudice • sexuality

Discourse & Society, Vol. 11, No. 4, 543-572 (2000)
DOI: 10.1177/0957926500011004005
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Human RelationsHome page
E. Kelan
Gender, risk and employment insecurity: The masculine breadwinner subtext
Human Relations, September 1, 2008; 61(9): 1171 - 1202.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Theory PsychologyHome page
W. Sims-Schouten, S. C.E. Riley, and C. Willig
Critical Realism in Discourse Analysis: A Presentation of a Systematic Method of Analysis Using Women's Talk of Motherhood, Childcare and Female Employment as an Example
Theory Psychology, February 1, 2007; 17(1): 101 - 124.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Men and MasculinitiesHome page
N. Korobov
The Management of "Nonrelational Sexuality": Positioning Strategies in Adolescent Male Talk about (Hetero)Sexual Attraction
Men and Masculinities, April 1, 2006; 8(4): 493 - 517.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Applied LinguisticsHome page
D. Cameron
Language, Gender, and Sexuality: Current Issues and New Directions
Applied Linguistics, December 1, 2005; 26(4): 482 - 502.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Discourse SocietyHome page
A. Hepburn and S. Wiggins
Developments in discursive psychology
Discourse Society, September 1, 2005; 16(5): 595 - 601.
[PDF]

Home page
 Discourse SocietyHome page
C. Tileaga
Accounting for extreme prejudice and legitimating blame in talk about the Romanies
Discourse Society, September 1, 2005; 16(5): 603 - 624.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Discourse SocietyHome page
M. Augoustinos, K. Tuffin, and D. Every
New racism, meritocracy and individualism: constraining affirmative action in education
Discourse Society, May 1, 2005; 16(3): 315 - 340.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Theory PsychologyHome page
J. Dixon and M. Wetherell
On Discourse and Dirty Nappies: Gender, the Division of Household Labour and the Social Psychology of Distributive Justice
Theory Psychology, April 1, 2004; 14(2): 167 - 189.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Discourse SocietyHome page
A. Weatheral
Towards understanding gender and talk-in-interaction
Discourse Society, November 1, 2002; 13(6): 767 - 781.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Discourse SocietyHome page
S. A. Speer
What can conversation analysis contribute to feminist methodology? Putting reflexivity into practice
Discourse Society, November 1, 2002; 13(6): 783 - 803.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Discourse SocietyHome page
C. MACMARTIN
(Un)reasonable Doubt? the Invocation of Children's Consent in Sexual Abuse Trial Judgments
Discourse Society, January 1, 2002; 13(1): 9 - 40.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Discourse SocietyHome page
E. H. STOKOE and J. SMITHSON
Making Gender Relevant: Conversation Analysis and Gender Categories in Interaction
Discourse Society, March 1, 2001; 12(2): 217 - 244.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Feminism PsychologyHome page
S. A. Speer
Reconsidering the Concept of Hegemonic Masculinity: Discursive Psychology, Conversation Analysis and Participants' Orientations
Feminism Psychology, February 1, 2001; 11(1): 107 - 135.
[Abstract] [PDF]