Cited by 74LGBTQ Health, Identity, and PolicyGender and Feminist StudiesGender, Sexuality, and Education

LGBT discrimination, harassment and violence in Germany, Portugal and the UK: A quantitative comparative approach

Open access
Bayrakdar, Sait, King, Andrew·2023·Current Sociology

Abstract

This article examines the incidents of discrimination, harassment and violence experienced by lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans (LGBT) individuals in Germany, Portugal and the UK. Using a large cross-national survey and adopting an intra-categorical intersectional approach, it documents how the likelihood of experiencing discrimination, harassment and violence changes within LGBT communities across three national contexts. Moreover, it explores how individual characteristics are associated with the likelihood of experiencing such incidents. The results show that trans people are more at risk compared to cisgender gay, lesbian and bisexual individuals to experience discrimination, harassment and violence. However, other factors, such as socioeconomic resources, also affect the likelihood of individuals experiencing such incidents. The three countries in our study show some nuanced differences in likelihood levels of experiencing discrimination, harassment and violence with regard to differential categories of sexual orientation and gender identity.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/00113921211039271

Cites

38 of 38 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • People who are part of the LGBTQ+ community are vulnerable to various status inequalities related to income disparities, treatment in the workplace, and social and legal discrimination.

    “Several studies have documented that people who are part of the LGBTQ+ community are vulnerable to various status inequalities related to income disparities, treatment in the workplace, and social and legal discrimination [44,45,46], as same-sex unions are not recognized.”

    From An Internet-Based Intervention to Increase the Ability of Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual People to Cope With Adverse Events: Single-Group Feasibility Study (2024) · cites this paper as [45]

    The Introduction (p. 2) and Discussion (p. 15) document discrimination against LGBT people, including workplace bullying. The Results (p. 12) examine how earnings relate to discrimination, but do not establish income disparities between LGBT people and others. The paper also does not support the explanation that same-sex unions are unrecognized: its discussion of national context (p. 6) says marriage equality came into effect in Germany. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Arabsheibani GR, Marin A and Wadsworth J (2007) Variations in gay pay in the USA and in the UK. In: Badgett L and Frank J (eds) Sexual Orientation Discrimination: An International Perspective . Abingdon: Routledge, pp. 306-319.
  2. Creese B and Lader D (2014) Hate crimes, England and Wales, 2013/14. Home Office Statistical Bulletin . Available at: www.report-it.org.uk/files/home\_office\_hate\_crime\_data\_201314.pdf (accessed 1 May 2021).
  3. Mulé NJ (2007) Sexual orientation discrimination in health care and social service policy. In: Badgett L and Frank J (eds) Sexual Orientation Discrimination: An International Perspective . Abingdon: Routledge, pp. 306-319.
  4. Valfort M (2017) LGBTI in OECD countries: A review . OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers No. 198. Paris: OECD Publishing.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bayrakdar, S., & King, A.
Affiliations
  • King's College London (GB)
  • University of Surrey (GB)
Corresponding author
Bayrakdar, Sait
Venue
Current Sociology
Published
2021-09-17
Volume
71
Issue
1
Pages
152-172
ISSN
  • 0011-3921 (ISSN-L)
  • 1461-7064
OpenAlex
W3200132909
Cited by
74
References
38
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 27 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 5
FWCI
12.96
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Current Sociology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • Warwick Research Archive Portal (University of Warwick) (submittedVersion)
  • Open Research (University of Surrey) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
NORFACE (462-16-080/3724)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › LGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender and Feminist Studies
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender, Sexuality, and Education
Keywords
LGBT discrimination, harassment, violence, transgender people, intersectionality, sexual orientation, gender identity, socioeconomic resources, cross-national comparison, Germany, Portugal, United Kingdom

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review