Varying Attitudes of Cordillerans

Towards Homosexuality

ABSTRACT
Homosexuality is simply defined as sexual relationships between people of the same sex
(Cardoso & Werner, 2003). Millenials nowadays are more likely to accept same-sex
relationships because of their fluid attitudes adopted through environment. We have evaluated
the perceptions of students from the University of the Cordilleras by conducting a survey to
define homosexuality, to know the level of acceptance and the main factors that affect their
views. 100 respondents with Cordilleran affiliation were chosen from different section and
strand, that filled out the survey that contains different statement dealing about homosexual.
According to the result of our study they are welcoming but not much affirming.
Keywords: Homosexuality, change, acceptance, culture, religion
I. Introduction
Available evidence indicates that the position of gays and lesbians in societies and the
legal status of homosexuality have undergone notable changes in recent decades. In some
countries, attitudes have become much more supportive of gay and lesbians rights and more
accepting of homosexual behavior (Tom, Son & Kim 2014). For example, in Great Britain the
percent saying that sexual relations between two adults of the same gender was “always wrong”
fell from 64% in 1987 to 22% in 2012 (Park & Rhead 2013) and in the United States approval of
gay marriage climbed from 11% in 1988 to 48% in 2012 (Smith & Son 2013).

Around the world, public opinion about homosexuality varies considerably. Research
done on the United States typically points to religion as one of the strongest predictors of
attitudes about homosexuality (Olson et al. 2006). Furthermore, work in cultural sociology
(Inglehart and Baker, 2000; Inglehart, 2006; Inglehart et al. 2002) suggests that economic
development and political stability may play a major role in shaping public opinion towards non-
normative groups and behaviors, like homosexuality. In addition, many studies have shown that
heterosexual men tend to be more negative in their attitudes than heterosexual women, especially
toward gay males (Herek 2000).

Compared to other countries, Philippines hold a more negative view towards

homosexuals or homosexuality in general. A number of sources suggest that Filipinos have
rather negative attitudes toward lesbians, gay men, and their sexualities. Observations made by
activists and members of the NGO sector, for example, point to prejudice and discrimination
against lesbians in many domains including healthcare, education, work and religion (Women’s
Feature Service Philippines 2001). Using 32 focus groups and 13 in- depth interviews with
Filipino adolescents in Metro Manila and Luzon, Gastardo- Conaco, Jimenez and Billedo (2003)
found that young Filipino lesbians and gay men report experiences of heterosexism, especially in
contexts like home, school and religion.

These experiences, according to a recent survey of gay male college students by Mostajo,
Saz- Page and Rasing (2005), may include by terms like bakla instead of one’s name, being
subjected to anti- gay jokes, being forced to enter intimate relationships with other opposite sex,
and being considered sick or abnormal. Even research that does not specifically focus on gay and
lesbian concerns points to the existence of heterosexist views among Filipinos. In their study of
Filipino pagkalalake/masculinity using interviews with 32 father- son pairs from various areas in
the Philippines, Aguiling- Dalisay and her colleagues (2000) found that being gay was
considered by participants as “sinful” and antithetical to being a “real” man.

Similarly, In their field research on sexual risks among Filipino young adults in Manila
and Iloilo, Tan Ujano- Batangan and Cabado- Espanola (2001) noted that many participants held
strongly negative views of being gay/ lesbian, with gay sex being described as “unnatural” or
“filthy” (“baboy”).

Despite the literature gathered from the Philippiness, less evidence is carried out when it
comes to Cordilleran views on homosexuality. Therefore, the researchers would like to examine
these Cordilleran attitudes.
This research study aims to study the factors that influence one’s perception in order to
have a better understanding of different level of acceptance that will serve as an eye- opener to
many. Moreover, this study aims to educate and broaden the understanding of society regarding
homosexuality in order to lessen prejudice and discrimination. This includes identifying positive
factors that can be enhanced and negative factors whose effects might be ameliorated in service
of reducing the challenges faced by homosexuals.

This study will cover different Cordillera affiliations such as, Ibaloi’s, Kalinga’s,
Kalanguya’s, Ifugao’s, Kankana- ey’s and the likes.

Objectives of the Study

The objectives of this study will include:
a. To define Homosexuality
b. To examine the level of acceptance toward homosexual behaviors
c. To understand the factors that influence their perceptions

Literature Review

Define Homosexuality
Gnuse (2015) argues that the word homosexuality in these passages has been incorrectly
interpreted from the meaning of greek word and instead the word refers to male prostitutes. In
the end we obtained that Cardoso and Werner (2003) simply defined homosexuality as sexual
relationships between people of the same sex. Yet behind this simple definition lie many
different phenomena. People vary tremendously in their same-sex behaviors, in their sexual
desires, and in the ways they define themselves. Cultures are also differing widely in the ways
they define and treat these relationships and the people who engage in them.
Level of Acceptance Towards Homosexual Behaviors

A number of studies have explored public attitudes towards homosexuality. The

researchers were able to uncover that the level of acceptance in regards to homosexuality varies.
Men and women’s notions concerning lesbians and gay are distinct from one another. Where in
some people is very welcoming but not openly affirming; some has totally regarded homosexuals
negatively.
 The study by Smith et al. (2014) indicated that intercontinental studies show a consistent
shift towards greater acceptance of homosexuality and gay rights, but the magnitude of the shifts
and how widespread they are varying considerably across measures. It was also found out that
Latin America shows a general, but far from universal, rise in acceptance of homosexuality and
in Europe, the pattern is quite mixed. Many example of acceptance of homosexual marriages has
only been recently forthcoming as society is gradually becoming more permissive (Parasar,
2007). Souza and Cribari-Neto (2015) indicated that negative attitudes toward homosexuals are
common in many countries. It was also indicated that such negative attitudes tend to be less
prevalent in more developed nations, that is, they tend to weaken as a nation becomes richer and
more developed.
There are researches regarding level of acceptance towards homosexuality. (Herek, 2000)
stated that men also rated gays more negatively than they rated lesbians; in contrast, women
rated gay men and lesbians similarly on almost all dimensions except on contact where women’s
attitudes became particularly negative. It was also stated that these interactions underscore
another important feature of heterosexist views-attitudes toward gay men and attitudes toward
lesbians, while correlated, are distinct from one another. Because the male role can be
particularly precarious, men are more likely than women to feel compelled to affirm or bolster
their gendered (masculine) identity and thereby avoid losing the acceptance of their same sex
heterosexual peers (Franklin, 2000). Heterosexuals’ attitudes toward lesbians often differ from
their attitudes toward gay men, and their attitudes toward bisexuals differ from their attitudes
toward homosexuals (Norton & Herek, 2012).

A variety of structural factors perpetuate differential treatment based on sexual

orientation. For example, many religious institutions still condemn homosexuality and have
actively endeavored to prevent or overturn legal protection for sexual minorities (Herek, 2007).
In times past and in different climes, homosexuals were treated as heretics and were burned at
stake (Remoto, 2009). Religious person was found to hold more negative perception towards
homosexuals ( Jackle and Wenzelburg, 2015) and are less likely to accept homosexuals in the
society (Detenber, et al, 2010). Institutional policies create disparities in health care between
heterosexuals and lesbian, gay, and bisexual people (Inst. Med, 2011). Gay men have lower
annual incomes than comparable heterosexual men (Carpenter, 2007 and Herek, 2007).

But Andersen and Fetner (2008) found out that the increasing acceptance of lesbians and
gays in the United States is well established. Furthermore, Catholics, while more conservative on
some issues, tend to accept gays and lesbians because of their desire to include disparate groups
within the fold. A growing number of states provide some degree of legal recognition to same-
sex couples and their children, and a majority of the U.S. now resides in a jurisdiction where
sexual minorities are afforded statutory protection against employment discrimination (National
Gay Lesbian Task Force, 2012). At the level of individual attitudes, U.S adults are less
condemning of same-sex sexual relations and more supportive of basic civil liberties than at any
time since public opinion about these issues began to be measured (Andersen & Fetner, 2008;
Herek, 2009c).
Factors that Influence their Perceptions
A number of researchers have outlined a number of factors that affect people’s
perceptions toward homosexuality; mainly, religion, gender- role beliefs, right- wing
authoritarianism and social dominance orientation.
The level of religiosity is defined as strong predictor in one’s attitude towards
homosexuality (Detender, et al, 2010; Nget et al., 2015). Furthermore, throughout the course of
history, religion is considered a huge part in better understanding a particular society and that
society's citizens' way of life (Orsi, 2003). In fact, in a recent survey, the Philippines run against
the existing global trend, which states that the centrality of religion in people's lives is a negative
correlate of homosexual acceptance. In other words, the more important religion is for a
particular country, the less tolerance is exhibited (Bernal, 2013, para. 11). Souza and Cribari-
Neto (2015) stated that homosexuality non-acceptance tends to decrease when average
intelligence or religious disbelief increases.
Undergraduate students are young adults who are not at the stage of leaving adolescence
but have not considered as an adult yet. Their attitudes toward homosexuals may change as their
way of thinking are adjusted during the transition to young adult as better cognitive skills ability
to analyze through apparently contradict beliefs and formation of sense of self as well as
considerate things from multiple perspectives one developed (Brown, 2015).

Whitley and Aegisdottir (2000) on the other hand, used path analysis to demonstrate that
attitudes toward lesbians and gay men could be predicted by gender- role beliefs, right- wing
authoritarianism, and social dominance orientation.

Gender- role beliefs have long been considered an important correlate of heterosexism by
many social psychologists, who argue that attitudes towards lesbians ang gay men are embedded
within the greater context of a generalized gender belief system, defined as how people come to
view women and men, including the purported qualities of femininity and masculinity as well as
the ascribed values, roles and norms surrounding gender in a particular society. Right- wing
authoritarianism, on the other hand, refers to people’s degree of deference to in group authority
figures and the traditional values these authority figures endorse. Social dominance orientation, a
related construct, refers to the extent to which people wish to maintain a superior social status
relative to outgroups. The social dominance perspective argues that individuals who possess
social status and power (e.g., heterosexuals, particularly heterosexual men) will motivated to
preserve this status quo by endorsing, legitimizing beliefs, including prejudicial attitudes against
outgroups (e.g., lesbians and gay men). Combined with authoritarianism, social dominance and
gender- beliefs create a conceptually driven, social psychological view of heterosexism beyond
the usual, a theoretical demographic variables (Whitley and Aegisdottir 2000).

Males who do not conform to gender role expectations risk variety of negative
consequences (Martin & Ruble, 2010), including being labeled homosexual (Bosson & Vandello,
2011) and being punished with antigay anger and aggression (Parrott, 2000 and Parrot et al,
2011). Endorsing antigay attitudes can reaffirm heterosexual men’s masculinity, preserve their
social status, and maintain clear gender boundaries, heterosexual women do not face parallel
social pressures associated with their feminine identity. To be sure, women encounter social
pressures to conform to cultural gender norms and thereby preserve male dominance (Glicke &
Fiske 2001), but women’s gender roles allow for greater flexibility than do male roles (Eagly et.
al. 2004). As a result, endorsing negative attitudes toward sexual minorities is not highly relevant
to most heterosexual women’s self-image as women (Herek 2000),

Empirical data generally support the argument that sexual prejudice is often a strategy for
men to demonstrate—both to others and themselves—their ability to meet cultural expectations
about masculinity. Endorsing traits and beliefs that are consistent with cultural norms for
masculinity—e.g., toughness, status, and antifeminist—is correlated with expressing prejudice
against gay men (Baunach et.al 2010, Keiller, 2010). Endorsing a strong masculine ideology has
also been demonstrated to motivate antigay anger and aggression (Franklin 2000; Parrott 2009;
Vincent et. al. 2011 a,b).

The connection between sexual prejudice and endorsement of gender role norms is also
grounded in more abstract ideologies about gender and sexuality. Empirical research has
consistently revealed significant correlations between sexual prejudice and traditional beliefs
about the proper roles for men and women (Goodman & Moradi 2008) as well as traditional
values concerning sexual behavior and family structure (Callahan & Vescio 2011, Vescio &
Biernat 2003). Valuing traditional male and female roles is tied to sexual prejudice even more
strongly for heterosexual women than men (Baunach et. al 2010, Keiller 2010), and religiosity
tends to be more strongly predictive of sexual prejudice among women than men (e.g., Ahrold &
Meston 2010, Brown & Henriquez 2008).

Theoretical Framework

In this research we concluded the Attribution theory will guide us researcher to further
understand the attitudes of Cordillerans toward homosexuality that could give us insights and
would help us evaluate our research questions and research problems. Attribution theory is
concerned with how individuals interpret events and how this relates to their thinking and
behavior. Heider (1958) was the first to propose a psychological theory of attribution, but Weiner
and colleagues (e.g., Jones et al, 1972; Weiner, 1974, 1986) developed a theoretical framework
that has become a major research paradigm of social psychology. Attribution theory assumes that
people try to determine why people do what they do, i.e., attribute causes to behavior. A person
seeking to understand why another person did something may attribute one or more causes to
that behavior. A three-stage process underlies an attribution: (1) the person must perceive or
observe the behavior, (2) then the person must believe that the behavior was intentionally
performed, and (3) then the person must determine if they believe the other person was forced to
perform the behavior (in which case the cause is attributed to the situation) or not (in which case
the cause is attributed to the other person). Weiner focused his attribution theory on achievement
(Weiner, 1974). He identified ability, effort, task difficulty, and luck as the most important
factors affecting attributions for achievement.
 Attributions are classified along three causal dimensions: locus of control, stability, and
controllability. The locus of control dimension has two poles: internal versus external locus of
control. The stability dimension captures whether causes change over time or not. For instance,
ability can be classified as a stable, internal cause, and effort classified as unstable and internal.
Controllability contrasts causes one can control, such as skill/efficacy, from causes one cannot
control, such as aptitude, mood, others’ actions, and luck. Attribution theory is closely associated
with the concept of motivation. It also relates the work done on script theory and inferencing
done by Schank. The Impacts of the Attribution Theory would be more likely negative according
to the study of Dolores Frias-Navarro, Hector Monterde-i-Bort, Marcos Pascual-Soler, and Laura
Badenes-Ribera Department of Psychology, University of Valencia Attribution theory suggests
the hypothesis that heterosexuals’ attitudes toward homosexual sexual orientation will be more
negative when homosexuality is attributed to controllable causes. Attribution theory suggests the
hypothesis that heterosexuals’ attitudes toward homosexual sexual orientation will be more
negative when homosexuality is attributed to controllable causes.
This would enable us to understand why some people have different perspective on
homosexuality. The theory states some ideas about the factors on how homosexuality exists or
how they appear. Speaking of publicity about homosexuality the theory says people are curious
what other people do and the outcome is the attribute to the behavior to the curios person so it
means that what people see on others has an influence on them their views and their thinking in
connection to homosexuality

II. Materials and Methods

This chapter explained the research design used to frame this study. Target population
and location of the study were also outlined and followed by the method of sample size
calculation. The sampling method used to recruit respondent of the study was discussed as well.
Next, the detail of the research procedure and measures used in this study were presented. The
data processing and analysis plan were stated at the end of this chapter.
Quantitative approach, specially survey research design was used to study the research on
Cordillerans’ attitude towards homosexuality and the factors that affect their attitude.
Quantitative study is the use of post positivist claims to develop understanding, apply inquiry
plans as experiments and surveys, and gather data on prearranged measurement to obtain a
statistical data (Creswell, 2003). Survey research design is describe as the method to evaluate,
describe or characterize an individual or a group by using a written or oral form of survey
(Privitera, 2014).
This study used survey questionnaire as the data collection instrument for the research. A
number of 100 Cordilleran participants was selected to complete the survey questionnaire. The
questionnaire is composed of three parts. There are a total of 26 questions in the questionnaire
design. Where in our questionnaire is formatted according to the research objectives which is to
define homosexuality, to examine the level of acceptance of Cordillerans towards homosexuality
and lastly is to understand the factors that influence their perceptions.
 This study focuses primarily on the students of University of the Cordilleras. It is a private
university located at Baguio City, Philippines. Population of this study involved Igorots from
CAR (specifically from Benguet, Mt. Province, Kalinga and Ifugao). Cordillera Administrative
Region (CAR) is situated in the Northern part of Philippines. It is divided into six regions:(1)
Benguet, (2) Ifugao, (3) Mt. Province, (4) Abra, (5) Apayao and (6) Kalinga.
There is no exact number of respondents per affiliation. The reason why we chose to select
respondents from different provinces is for us to be able to analyze if their culture or the
ethnicity they belong in and their religion has an impact on their level of acceptance towards
homosexuality, which is our objective in our research.
Stratified sampling method was adopted for the study. The sample were selected by their
specific ethnicity in Cordillera. People who were identified as non-Cordilleran were excluded in
the sample as the study is only interested on Cordilleran’s attitudes toward homosexuality.
Respondents of the study were asked using stratified sampling whereby questionnaires was
distributed in the form of survey questionnaires.
Those who agreed to complete the survey was given the survey paper and pen. Those who
did not agree to complete the survey had the opportunity to decline participation. The complete
survey was approximately 10 minutes to complete.
Details in the informed consent such as purpose of the study, voluntary participation and
confidentiality of information was briefly explained to the participants. The participants were
given few questions in regards to their backgrounds to assess their basic demographic
information including: gender, age and ethnicity.
We measured the participants’ visibility of homosexual by rating each statements given in
the survey questionnaire wherein each statements were scaled: 4- Strongly Agree, 3- Agree, 2-
Disagree & 1- Strongly Disagree.
The data was obtained using a statistical analysis, 26 items of statements solve with the use
of statistical analysis getting the weighted average scaled as: 1.1-2.0 lowest, 2.1-3.0 moderate,
and 3.1-4.0 extreme. This is used to test if the Cordilleran affiliation’s views on homosexuality
differ from each other significantly in one or more characteristics. In terms of definition and
factors that affects their acceptance level.

III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The primary purpose of the study was 1. To define homosexuality, 2. To examine the
level of acceptance toward homosexual behaviors and 3. To understand the factors that influence
their perceptions. The result and findings was based on data obtained from a distributed survey
questionnaire given to 100 Igorot’s from University of the Cordilleras Senior High School, 26
items of statements solve with the use of statistical analysis getting the weighted average scale
as: 1.1-2.0 low level, 2.1-3.0 moderate level, and 3.1-4.0 extreme level.

TABLE 1: To Define Homosexuality

 STATEMENTS WEIGHTED RESULTS RANKING
AVERAGE
1. Homosexuality is natural expression of sexuality 2.42 Moderate 4th
in humans level
2. Homosexuality is merely a different kind of 3.07 Extreme 1st
lifestyle that should not be criticized. level
3. Homosexuality is people who engage sexual 2.96 Moderate 2nd
attraction to same sex level
4. The experience of love similar to all people 2.93 Moderate 3rd
regardless of sexual orientation level
The table 1 shows that respondents were able to rate four statement dealing with the
definition of homosexuality. The highest weighted average was 3.07 for the statement
“Homosexuality is merely different kind of lifestyle that should not be criticized”. The second
highest weighted average was 2.96 for the Statement “homosexuality is people who engage
sexual attraction to same sex. The third highest was 2.93 for the statement “the experience of
love similar to all people regardless of sexual orientation. The lowest weighted average was 2.42
for the statement “Homosexuality is natural expression of sexuality in humans.”

Similar to other studies (Cardoso &Werner, 2003), our data indicated that homosexuality
is people who engage sexual attraction to same sex and merely a different kind of lifestyle that
should be criticized. Our knowledge has grown over time. Probably since the beginning of
human culture, people have been thinking about homosexuality (Cardoso & Werner, 2003).
Also, records of these reflections have come to us in the form of myth, political histories, legal
documents, literature and religious injunctions. According to Collier et al. (2012), acceptance of
gender non-conformity would enhance our understanding of attitudes towards homosexuality in
adolescences as a positive effect that knowing openly gay or lesbian people. In addition, we our
bounded by social control which states that our behavior, thoughts and appearance are regulated
by the norms, rules, laws, and social structures of society.

TABLE 2: To Examine the Level of Acceptance of Cordillerans Towards Homosexuality

STATEMENTS WEIGHTED RESULTS RANKING

AVERAGE

1.I considered myself friendly towards 3.05 Extreme 1st

homosexuality level

2.I find it difficult to be around homosexuals 2.90 Moderate 3rd

level

3.I think that homosexuals couple should be allowed 2.65 Moderate 8th
legalizing their relationship level

4. I see homosexual movement a positive thing. 2.67 Moderate 7th

 level
5.The increasing acceptance of homosexuality in our 2.36 Moderate 11th
society is aiding in the weakening of morals level

6. Homosexuals do not have the all the rights they 2.14 Moderate 12th
need. level

7. It would be beneficial to the society to recognize 2.81 Moderate 5th

the homosexuality as normal. level

8.If homosexuals want to be treated like everyone 2.83 Moderate 4th

else then they need to stop making such fuss about level
their sexuality/culture

9 Homosexuals become far too confrontational in 2.52 Moderate 10th

their demand for equal rights. level

10. I find homosexual contagious. 3.00 Moderate 2nd

level

11. if man has a feelings, he should do everything he 2.56 Moderate 4th

can to overcome them. level

12. Celebration such as “Gay Pride Day” are 2.78 Moderate 6th
ridiculous because they assume that an individual’s level
sexual orientation should constitute a source of
pride.

Table 2 shows that respondents were able to rate twelve statement examining the level of
acceptance among cordilleras toward homosexuality. The highest weighted average was 3.05 for
the statement “I considered myself friendly towards homosexuality”. The second highest
weighted average was 3.00 for the Statement “I find homosexuality contagious”. The third
highest was 2.90 for the statement “I find it difficult to be around homosexual”. Other perception
statement which had weighted average above 2.0 were: If homosexuals want to be treated like
everyone else then they need to stop making such fuss about their sexuality/culture (2.83). It
would be beneficial to the society to recognize the homosexuality as normal (2.81). Celebration
such as “Gay Pride Day” are ridiculous because they assume that an individual’s sexual
orientation should constitute a source of pride (2.78). I see homosexual movement a positive
thing (2.67). I think that homosexual couple should be allowed legalizing their relationship
(2.65). If man has feelings, he should do everything he can to overcome them (2.56).
Homosexuals become far too confrontational in their demand for equal rights (2.52). The
increasing acceptance of homosexuality in our society is aiding in the weakening of morals
(2.36). The lowest weighted average was 2.14 for the statement “Homosexuals do not have the
all the rights they need”.
 The analysis of the data given based on the result of weighted average, the seven statement rank
as the highest which is “I consider myself friendly towards homosexuals”. With a weighted average of
3.05 suggesting an extremely support on the given level of acceptance. The result shows that millennial
have a much more fluid sense of sexual identity and gender. They are becoming more aware of different
sexualities because of their open –mindedness and social interactions through the use of social media. The
Pew Research Center conducted a survey in 39 countries with 37,653 respondents. This survey showed
that 73% of Filipino respondents said that homosexuality should be accepted by society with an even
higher percentage (78%) of younger respondents in the 18-29 age groups (Pew Research Center). The
study of Ipos Mori (2018) shows that social media was playing a part, with young people more likely to
be aware of different sexualities because of the availability of such information on the internet. The
unified theory of molecular aspects of evolution: neo- lamarckian (Larmarck) concept that facilitates neo-
Darwinian evolution (Charles Darwin) state that environmental epigenetics and epigenetics trans
generational provide molecular mechanism where in the concept that environment can directly alter
phenotype in heritable manner. The combination of concepts explains the ability of environmental
epigenetics to alter phenotypic and genotypic variation directly can significantly impact natural
selections.

Homosexual people all over the world continue to face challenges. Example include a
lack of employment opportunities (Scars & Mallory, 2011), and prejudice when assessing health
care (Winter, 2012), housing (Grant, Mottet & Kahil, 2011) and education (Burn, 2011).
However, the statement “Homosexuals do not have all the rights they need” ranked as the lowest
with 2.14 weighted average in the level of acceptance. Goes to show that the respondents believe
that homosexuals enjoy human rights. This also proves that the respondents who answered the
survey questionnaire holds a tolerant behavior when viewing homosexuality. Tolerance is seen
as openness, inclusiveness, and diversity to all ethnicities, races and all walks of life (Florida,
2003 p.10). Definition of tolerance provided by Berggren and Elinder (2012), according to which
“a tolerant person is assumed to accept the presence and participation of all kinds of people in
society, regardless of what he thinks or feel about them” (Berggren and Elinder, 2012, p. 284).
But it is at least equally likely that favorable attitudes lead to the legal recognition of gay rights.

TABLE 3: To Understand the Factors that Influence their Perceptions

STATEMENTS WEIGHTED RESULTS RANKINGS

AVERAGE
1. I accept homosexuality but I’m not very 2.62 Moderate 6th
 welcoming about it, we still find it as a taboo level
(forbidden) in our culture.
2. My personal religious beliefs and affiliation has a 2.41 Moderate 10th
big impact on my views regarding homosexuality. level
3. I have friends that are gays and lesbians so isn’t 2.90 Moderate 2nd
hard for me to accept and welcoming homosexuals. level
4. I negatively view homosexuality because they are 2.40 Moderate 8th
known as carrier of HIV/AIDS. level
5. I Positively find homosexual couples since they 2.28 Moderate 9th
are not cable of bearing a child. It can serve as a level
solution to overpopulation.
6. I’m not convinced with the idea of having a 2.65 Moderate 5th
homosexual leads our society/country. level
7.My religion is not a reason for me to view 3.07 Extreme 1st
homosexuality negatively level
8, Little by little, I get to understand homosexuals 2.82 Moderate 4th
because of T.V shows, advertisement and showbiz level
personalities are not against.
9. I accept homosexual according to their power and 2.44 Moderate 7th
authority. level
10. Since I’m on the stage of adolescence. My view 2.84 Moderate 3rd
toward homosexuals may change on process of level
transition to young adult.

Table 3 shows that respondents were able to rate ten statement in understanding the
factors that influences their perception towards homosexuality. The highest weighted average
was 3.07 for the statement “My religion is not a reason for me to view homosexuality
negatively”. The second highest weighted average was 2.90 for the Statement “. I have friends
that are gays and lesbians so isn’t hard for me to accept and welcoming homosexuals.”. The
third highest was 2.84 for the statement “Since I’m on the stage of adolescence. My view toward
homosexuals may change on process of transition to young adult.” Other perception statement
which had weighted average above 2.0 were: Little by little, I get to understand homosexuals
because of T.V shows, advertisement and showbiz personalities are not against. (2.82). I’m not
convinced with the idea of having a homosexual leads our society/country (2.65). I accept
homosexuality but I’m not very welcoming about it, we still find it as a taboo (forbidden) in our
culture. (2.62). I accept homosexual according to their power and authority. (2.44). My personal
religious beliefs and affiliation has a big impact on my views regarding homosexuality (2.41). I
negatively view homosexuality because they are known as carrier of HIV/AIDS. (2.40). The
lowest weighted average was 2.28 for the statement.” I positively find homosexual couples since
they are not cable of bearing a child. It can serve as a solution to overpopulation.”

Most religions take a proscriptive stance against homosexuality, viewing it as

“unnatural”, “perverted”, and “sinful” (Barnes & Mayer 2012; Rodriguez & Oulette, 2000).
Based on the Pew Research Center’s (2013) ‘religiosity scale”, the Philippines is a highly
religious country where anti- homosexual teachings of the Roman Catholic Church pervade.
However, the analysis of the data given based on the result of weighted average, the seven
statement rank as the highest which is “My religion is not a reason for me to view homosexual
negatively”. With a weighted average of 3.07 suggesting an extremely support on the given
factor. The result shows that millennials are now less religiously affiliated. They remain interested
in spiritual dimension even when they have rejected organized religion. This is supported by Pew
Research Center in 2012 millennial have the (1/3 of American population) largest percentage of
religiously unaffiliated of any age group “Nones” are actively seeking and creating communities of
purpose belonging and service outside of religious institution. The result also shows that millennial are
into the peers of technology or in their social media life interest which cause them to become less
affiliated to their religion. As a relation to a recent study, Thomsen & Rekve (2003) found that religious
adolescents watched significantly less television per day (3.18 hrs.), as compared to less religious peers
(3.72 hrs.). Casanova (2011: 60) states that the discourse on the Church as a community is
especially interesting in relation to the theory of secularization. Secularization embodies a
presumption that modern values lead to the decline of religious beliefs and practices. The world,
with some notable exceptions (of which more in a moment), is as religious as it has ever been,
and in some places is more religious than ever. This, however, does not mean that there is no
such thing as secularization; it only means that this phenomenon is by no means the direct and
inevitable result of modernity (Berger, 2001).

Homosexual people all over the world continue to face challenges. Example include a
lack of employment opportunities (Scars & Mallory, 2011), and prejudice when assessing health
care (Winter, 2012), housing (Grant, Mottet & Kahil, 2011) and education (Burn, 2011).
However, the statement “Homosexuals do not have all the rights they need” ranked as the lowest
with 2.14 weighted average in the level of acceptance. Goes to show that the respondents believe
that homosexuals enjoy human rights. This also proves that the respondents who answered the
survey questionnaire holds a tolerant behavior when viewing homosexuality. Tolerance is seen
as openness, inclusiveness, and diversity to all ethnicities, races and all walks of life (Florida,
2003 p.10). Definition of tolerance provided by Berggren and Elinder (2012), according to which
“a tolerant person is assumed to accept the presence and participation of all kinds of people in
society, regardless of what he thinks or feel about them” (Berggren and Elinder, 2012, p. 284).

The statement “I positively find homosexual couples since they are not capable of
bearing a child” has the lowest weighted rate average which is 2.28%. This gathered data shows
that being homosexual who can control the population growth can affect the SHS students’
perception towards homosexuals. Because nowadays people who are homosexual are not very
accepted inside the society. There are a lot of ways to control the growth of population. Being
homosexual may be one of it, but in this case it just helps to lower the rate of population growth
but does not help the society to develop. And to create a society it consists a family (man and
Woman). Boellstorff (2005), men and women lived segregated and traditional family formation
is the dominant cultural norm.
IV. CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATIONS

The researchers therefore conclude that millennials nowadays are moderately accepting
of homosexuals or homosexuality in general. They are open in accepting gays and lesbians but
not very welcoming about it.

Since the study are focused on Senior High School students in University of the
Cordilleras. The researchers encourage future researchers to conduct further studies on students
from different Universities. The gathering of data, for the future researchers must not focus more
on millennials as participants. Future researchers should consider having an adult or elders as
respondents in their research study. For better results, the researchers suggest that they should
consider involving other affiliation for a wider perspective when viewing homosexuality.

References:

Aguiling-Dalisay, G., Mendoza, R. M., Mirafelix, E. J. L., Yacat, J. A., Sto Domingo , M. R.,
Bambico, F. R. (2000). Pagkalalake: Men in control? Filipino male views on love, sex & women.
Quezon City: Pambansang Samahan sa Sikolohiyang Pilipino.

Ahrold TK, Meston CM. 2010. Ethnic differences in sexual attitudes of US college students:
gender, acculturation, and religiosity factors. Arch. Sex. Behav. 39:190–202

Andersen R, Fetner T. 2008. Cohort differences in tolerance of homosexuality: attitudinal change

in Canada and the United States, 1981–2000. Public Opin. Q. 72:311–30

Baunach DM, Burgess EO,Muse CS. 2010. Southern (dis)comfort: sexual prejudice and contact
with gaymen and lesbians in the South. Sociol. Spect. 30(1):30–64

Berger, P. L. (2001). Reflections on the Sociology of Religion Today. Sociology of

Religion,62(4), 443. doi:10.2307/3712435
Bernal, B. (2013, June 6). Is the Philippines really gayfriendly?In Move.ph. Retrieved
fromhttp://www.rappler.com/ move-ph/3127 6-philippinesgay-friendly

Bosson JK, Vandello JA. 2011. Precarious manhood and its links to action and aggression. Curr.
Dir. Psychol.Sci. 20:82–86

Brown, K. (2015). Influence of post-formal thought on Intellectual testing. Gallaudet Chronicles

of Psychology, 1(3), 43-45. Retrieved from https:www.gallaudet.edu/Documents/Gallaudet-
Chronicles-Psychology.pdf

Brown MJ, Henriquez E. 2008. Socio-demographic predictors of attitudes towards gays and
lesbians. Indiv. Differ. Res. 6:193–202

Burni, C. (2011). Fact sheet: LGBT Discrimination is higher education financial aid. Center for
American progress. Retrieved 20 August 2013 from https://www.americanprogress.org/wp-
content/uploads/issues/2011/08/pdf/ lgbt_fastsheet.pdf

Cardinal, R. N., & Aitken, M. R. F. (2006). ANOVA for the behavioural sciences researcher.
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Callahan MP, Vescio TK. 2011. Core American values and the structure of antigay prejudice. J.
Homosex.58:248–62

Casanova, J. (2011). The secular, secularizations, secularisms. In Graig Calhoun, Mark

Juergensmeyer and Jonathan VanAntwerpen (eds), Rethinking Secularism; pp. 54–75. New
York: Oxford University Press.

Cardoso, Ferando & Wernenr, Dennis. (2003). Homosexuality. 204-215. 10. 1007/0-387-29907-
61_21

Carpenter CS. 2007. Revisiting the income penalty for behaviorally gay men: evidence from
NHANES III. Labour Econ. 14:25–34

Collier, K. et al. (2019). Intergroup contact, attitudes toward homosexuality, and the role of
acceptance of gender non-conformity in young adolescents. Retrieved from
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2011.12.010.

Creswell, J. W. (2003). A framework for design. Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and
mixed methods approaches. Retrieved from
http://isites.harvard.edu/fs/docs/icb.topic1334586.files/2003_Creswell_A%20Framew ork
%20for%20Design.pdf

Crossman, A. (2019). Definition of social control. Retrieved from

https://www.thoughtco.com/social-control-3026587
Daly, Dennis. (1996). Attribution Theory and the Glass Ceiling: Career Development Among
Federal Employees. Public Administration & Management: An interactive Journal
[http://www.hbg.psu.edu/faculty/jxr11/glass1sp.html]

Detenber, B.H., HO, S., Neo, R.L., Malik S., and Cenite, M. (2013). Influence of value
predipositions, interpersonal contact, and mediated exposure on public attitudes towards
homosexuality in Singapore. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 16(3), 181-
196.doi:10.1111/ajsp. 12006

Eagly AH, Diekman AB, Johannesen-SchmidtMC, Koenig AM. 2004. Gender gaps in
sociopolitical attitudes:a social psychological analysis. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 87:796–816

Franklin K. 2000. Antigay behaviors among young adults: prevalence, patterns and motivators in
a noncriminal population. J. Interpers. Viol. 15:339–62

Gastardo- Conaco, M.C., Jimenez, M.C.C., & Billedo, C.J.F. (2003). Filipino adolescents in
changing times. Quezon City: UP Center for Women’s Studies.

Glick P, Fiske ST. 2001. An ambivalent alliance: hostile and benevolent sexism as
complementary justifications for gender inequality. Am. Psychol. 56(2):109–18

Gnuse. R. K. 2015. Seven gay texts: Biblical passages used to condemn homosexuality. Biblical
Theology Bulletin 45 (2):68-87.

Goodman MB, Moradi B. 2008. Attitudes and behaviors toward lesbian and gay persons: critical
correlates and mediated relations. J. Counsel. Psychol. 55:371–84

Grant, J.M. et al. (2011). Injustice at everyturn; a report of the national transgender
discrimination surve. National Center for Transgender Equality & National Gay and Lesbian
Task Force. Retrieved 20 August 2013 from
https://endtransdiscrimination.org/PDF’sNTDS_Report pdf.

Harvey, J.H.  & Weary, G. (1985). Attribution: Basic Issues and Applications, Academic Press,
San Diego.

Heider, F. (1958). The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations. New York: Wiley.

Herek, G. M. (2000). Sexual prejudice and gender: do heterosexuals’ attitudes toward lesbians
and gay men differ? Journal of Social Issues, 56, 251- 266.

Herek GM. 2007. Confronting sexual stigma and prejudice: theory and practice. J. Soc. Issues
63:905–25
Herek GM. 2009c. Sexual stigma and sexual prejudice in the United States: a conceptual
framework. In Contemporary Perspectives on Lesbian,Gay and Bisexual Identities: The
54thNebraska Symposium on Motivation, ed. DA Hope, pp. 65–111. New York: Springer

Inglehart, R., Baker, W.E., 2000. Modernization, cultural change, and the persistence of
traditional values. American Sociological Review 65, 19–51.

Inglehart, R., 2006. Mapping global values. Comparative Sociology 5, 114–136.

Inglehart, R., Norris, P., Welzel, C., 2002. Gender equality and democracy. Comparative
Sociology 1, 321–345.

Inst. Med. 2011. The Health of Lesbian,Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender People: Building a
Foundation for Better Understanding.Washington, DC: Natl. Acad. Press.
http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=13128

Jackle, S., Wenzelburg. G. (2015). Religion, religiosity and attitudes toward homosexuality- A
multilevel analysis of 79 countries. Journal of Homossexuality 62(0), 207-241.doi:10-
1080100918369-2014.969074.

JOURNAL OF SEX RESEARCH, 52(2), 151–161, 2015 Copyright # The Society for the
Scientific Study of Sexuality ISSN: 0022-4499 print=1559-8519 online DOI:
10.1080/00224499.2013.802757

Jones, E. E., D. E. Kannouse, H. H. Kelley, R. E. Nisbett, S. Valins, and B. Weiner, Eds.

(1972). Attribution: Perceiving the Causes of Behavior. Morristown, NJ: General Learning
Press.

Keiller SW. 2010. Masculine norms as correlates of heterosexual men’s attitudes toward gay
men and lesbian women. Psychol. Men Masc. 11:38–52

Kreitzer, Rebecca J., Allison J. Hamilton and Caroline J. Tolbert n.d. “Does policy adoption
change opinions on minority rights? The effects of legalizing same-sex marriage.” Political
research quarterly.

Lewis, F. M. and Daltroy, L. H. (1990). “How Causal Explanations Influence Health Behavior:
Attribution Theory.” In Glanz, K., Lewis, F.M. and Rimer, B.K. (eds.) Health Education and
Health Behavior: Theory , Research. and Practice. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers,
Inc.

Mostajo, S. T., Saz-Page, E. C., & Rasing, E. V. (2005, April). Homophobic experiences of male
homosexuals: Basis for counseling interventions. Paper presented at the 14th Regional
Conference of the Psychological Association of the Philippines, Baguio City.
Natl.Gay Lesbian Task Force. 2012. Reports and Research: IssueMaps.
http://ngltf.org/reports_and_research/issue_maps

Norton AT, Herek GM. 2012. Heterosexuals’ attitudes toward transgender people: findings from
a national probability sample of U.S. adults. Sex Roles. DOI: 10.1007/s11199-011-0110-6. In
press

Olson, R.R., Cadge, W., Harrison, J.T., 2006. Religion and public opinion about same-sex
marriage. Social Science Quarterly 87, 340–360

Orsi, R. (2003). Is the study of lived religion irrelevant to the world we live in? Journal for the
scientific study of religion, 42(2), 169-174.

Parasar, A. (2007). Homosexuality in India: The invisible conflict.

Park, Alison & Rebecca Rhead. 2013. Personal Relationships: Changing Attitudes towards Sex,
Marriage, and Parenthood. In British Social Attitudes, ed. Alison Park et al. London NatCen
Social Research.

Parrott DJ. 2009. Aggression toward gay men as gender role enforcement: effects of male role
norms, sexual prejudice, and masculine gender role stress. J. Pers. 77:1137–66

Parrott DJ, Peterson JL, Bakeman R. 2011. Determinants of aggression toward sexual minorities
in a community sample. Psychol. Viol. 1:41–52

Pew Research Center. (2013). The global divide on homosexuality. Greater acceptance in more
secular and affluent. Countries. Washington, DC: Pew Reseach Center.

Pew Research Center, (2012). Religion & public life. Nones on the rise. Washington, DC: Pew
research Center.

Privitera, G. J. (2014). Survey and correlational research designs. Research methods for the
behavioral sciences. Retrieved from https://us.sagepub.com/sites/default/files/upm-
binaries/57732_Chapter_8.pdf

Remoto, Danton (2009) “ Disenfranchising homosexuals.” Danton Remoto 2010. Blogspot.com.

November 16, 2009. Accessed on December 14, 2012
http://dantonremoto2010blogspot.com/2009/11/disenfranchisinghomosexual-html

Smith, C. (2001). Religion and the life attitudes and self-image of American adolescents. Chapel
Hill, NC. National Study of Youth and Religion
Smith, Tom W., Jaseok Son & Jibum Kim. 2014. A Compilation of Cross- National Studies of
Attitudes towards Homosexuality and Gay rights. Chicago, IL & Los Angeles, CA: NORC at the
University of Chicago and the Charles R. Williams Institute on Sexual Orientation and Gender
Identity Law and Public Policy.

Smith, Tom W. & Jaesok Son. 2013. Trends in Attitudes towards Sexual Morality. Chicago IL:
NORC.

Souza, T. C., & Cribari-Neto, F. (2015). Intelligence, religiosity and homosexuality non-
acceptance: Empirical Evidence. Intelligence, 52, 63-70

Tan, M. L., Ujano-Batangan, M. T., & Cabado-Espanola, H. (2001). Love and desire: Young
Filipinos and sexual risks. Quezon City: UP Center for Women’s Studies.

Vescio TK, Biernat M. 2003. Family values and antipathy toward gay men. J. Appl. Soc.
Psychol. 33:833–47

Vincent W, Parrott DJ, Peterson JL. 2011a. Combined effects of masculine gender-role stress
and sexual prejudice on anger and aggression toward gay men. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 41:1237–
57

Vincent W, Parrott DJ, Peterson JL. 2011b. Effects of traditional gender role norms and religious
fundamentalism on self-identified heterosexualmen’s attitudes, anger, and aggression toward
gaymen and lesbians.Psychol. Men Masc. 12:383–400

Weiner, B. (1974). Achievement motivation and attribution theory. Morristown, N.J.: General

Learning Press.

Weiner, B. (1980). Human Motivation. NY: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

Weiner, B. (1986). An attributional theory of motivation and emotion. New York: Springer-
Verlag.

Whitley, B. E., Jr., & Aegisdottir, S. (2000). The gender belief system, authoritarianism, social
dominance orientation, and heterosexual’s attitudes toward lesbians and gay men. Sex Roles, 42,
947-967.
Winter. (n.d.). LGBT rights in the Philippines. Retrieved 22 august 2013 from
http://lgbt.wikia.com/wiki/LGBT_rights_inthe_Philippines.

Women Feature Service Philippines (2001). Body & soul: A forum on lesbianism & religion.
Quezon city: Author