Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, volume 153

International Conference on Diversity and Disability Inclusion in Muslim Societies (ICDDIMS 2017)

Attitudes toward Homosexuality among

Indonesian Social Work College Students
Binahayati Rusyidi
Social Welfare Department, Universitas Padjadjaran, Indonesia
E-mail: [email protected]

MD.Kamrujjaman
Graduate Social Welfare Program, Universitas Padjadjaran, Indonesia
E-mail: [email protected]

Social work is one of professions who are in contact

Abstract- This study investigated the associations of socio- with homosexuals and their significant others through various
demographic and socio-culture factors with attitudes toward practice settings. Social workers are agents to promote social
homosexuality. Using convenience sampling, students were justice so that homosexuals’ rights are acknowledged,
recruited from 5 social work programs at 5 (five) different
universities in provinces of West Java, Yogyakarta, East Java
respected and fulfilled. Ruling by its ethical principle, social
and Maluku. Attitudes toward homosexuality were measured workers are responsible to challenge social injustice
using revised version of Attitudes toward Lesbians and Gay Men experienced by marginalized or oppressed groups including
Scale. Simple regression analysis was performed to examine the gays and lesbians. Studies have reported attitudes held by
associations. Five hundred and eleven undergraduate students social workers can influence their delivery of services [6], [7].
aged between 17 to 28 years completed self-administered survey Therefore, it is important for social workers to be critical of
conducted in late 2016.The study found that social work student’ their own attitudes toward homosexuals, take actions to reduce
generally indicated negative attitudes toward homosexuality. public prejudice against homosexuals and master competent
Levels of interaction with homosexual individuals and length of practices with diverse groups so that they can deliver effective
study associated with attitudes toward homosexuality. Higher
levels of interactions with homosexuals associated with more
and professional services. Social work education can play
positive attitudes toward homosexuality. On the contrary, important roles to prepare social workers working effectively
students from older cohort reported more negative attitudes with this sexual minority groups [2], [3], [15], [17], [19].
toward homosexuality than their younger counterparts. Sex, This study explored the attitudes of Indonesian
ethnicity, religion and the level of religiosity were not found as undergraduate social work students’ toward homosexuality
significant factors. The findings bring some implications for and factors associated with such attitudes. So far only one
reviewing social work education and further studies. study conducted more than 20 years ago about attitudes of
undergraduate students of agricultural study in Indonesia [10]
so that this study can be considered the first to be conducted
Keywords: attitudes toward homosexuality, Muslim society, among Indonesian social work students. It is expected that the
social prejudice, social work students. study can reduce the gap of knowledge by presenting evidence
from a developing and predominantly Muslim country where
homosexuality is strongly rejected. The study is also expected
I. INTRODUCTION to provide recommendations for Indonesian social work
curriculum to deal with issues of diversity.
There has been great varieties with regards to societal
attitudes toward homosexuality that brings different impacts
on homosexuals’ welfare. In most developed Western II. METHODS
countries, public attitudes toward homosexuality have
improved over time. This is partly indicated by the declining The participants of the study were social work students from 5
of homophobic attitudes in one side and the increasing of (five) different universities located in the provinces of West
tolerance toward same-sex marriage or homosexual parenting Java (2 universities), East Java, Yogyakarta, and Maluku.
in the other side. Nevertheless, in many other developing Those universities were selected not only because they agreed
South region, the society remains express negative attitudes to be involved in the study but also in order to represent the
where homosexuality is strongly rejected and criminalized [1], varieties of social work education in Indonesia with regards to
[3] so that gay men, lesbian women, bisexuals and transgender the type, its affiliation, and management. Of those universities,
can face harsh discrimination, oppression, violence and two were private and the other three were public universities.
punishment. Such unequal and harsh treatments combined Three participating universities are considered as secular while
with lack of services are risk factors that negatively affect the other two have affiliation with Islam and Christian
safety, employment opportunities, coping skills, mental health, ideology of teaching. Four universities are administered by the
and general welfare this sexual minority group [4], [8].

Copyright © 2018, the Authors. Published by Atlantis Press.

This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/). 44
 Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, volume 153

Ministry of Research, Technology and Higher Education based on a 6-point Likert-type scale in which 1=never/not at
whereas one is run under the Ministry of Religion Affairs. all and 6=very much. Higher score equals to high level of
The process of the study was divided into several religiosity whereas low scores equal to low level of religiosity.
phases. Firstly, researchers contacted the head of social The scale has been used in several studies with population
department at every university to get approval for collecting from various religious affiliation in Middle East countries (sia
the data from their students. Secondly, lecturers who were including Indonesia [16]. In this study the reliability of the
scheduled to teach at odd semester of 2016 were identified, scale was 75.
asked for assistance and given descriptions about the study. Participants also were asked to provide some basic
Research member then mailed packet of questionnaires to data including age, sex, religion, ethnicity, and length of
each identified lecturers and asked them to distribute the study. Sex was measured as a binary variable where 1=female,
questionnaires within the first 3 weeks of semester. The 0=male. Religion was assessed through an open question but
questionnaires were filled by student in classes as soon as they then it was recoded as binary variable where 1=Muslim and
were distributed by the lecturers. 0=non-Muslim. Similarly, ethnicity was identified through an
Informed consent page that explained study’s open question but later on t was recoded as binary variable
purposes, research’s principals and her contact number, where 1=bilateral oriented ethnic group and 0=patrilineal and
participant’ anonymousness, and protection of confidentiality matrilineal oriented ethnic group. Meanwhile, age was treated
was attached at each questionnaire. The lecturers were not as a continuous variable. The length of study was recoded into
allowed to be in class when participants filled in the two groups: 3rd year and above/junior and senior (=1) and 2 nd
questionnaires to reduce pressure and bias. When the surveys year and below/freshmen and sophomore (=0). Extent of
were completed, the lecturers put all questionnaires into sealed interaction with homosexuals by asking students to select the
envelopes and mailed them back to research principle. There degree of their interaction with gays or lesbians that ranges
was no incentive provided for both students and lecturers from never (1) to most of the time (5) and this variable was
involving in the study but research report was provided for regarded as continuous variable. Data analysis applied both
each university upon request. Qualitative data through descriptive statistics and simple multiple regressions. Pre-
telephone interviews were also obtained from the head of regressions applied before conducting multiple regressions
departments regarding the curriculum and learning processes. indicated that all assumptions of linearity were met.
Five hundred twenty seven students participated in the study
but only 511 provided completed responses and were included
in data analysis. III. DISCUSSIONS AND RESULTS
The study utilized both validated and self-developed
instruments. All validated instruments are delivered in English Five hundred and eleven students who completed the survey
and for this study they all were translated into Bahasa aged between 17 to 28 years old with average 19.5 years. They
Indonesia. Attitudes toward Lesbians and Gay Men Scale originated from 5 (five) universities and their number was
Revised Short Version were used to measure students’ quite evenly distributed: Universitas Padjadjaran (19.56%),
attitudes toward homosexuality. This Scale is the revised Universitas Kristen Maluku (19.17%), Universitas Pasundan
version of Herek’s Attitudes toward Lesbians and Gay Scale, (19.96%), Univeristas Islam Negeri Yogyakarta (20.70%) and
has high reliability, and it has been validated in many studies. Universitas Jember (20.50%). Fifty-five percent respondents
The short version consists of 10 items and is divided into 2 were females and 45% were males. Ninety percent of
subscales which are Attitudes toward Lesbian subscale and participants were Muslim while the rest affiliated with
Attitudes toward Gay Men sub-scale. The response is Protestant, Catholic and Buddhism. Because religion
measured using-point scale where 1=strongly disagree, affiliation was very disproportionately distributed, this
3=neutral, and 5=agree strongly. The scoring of some items variable was excluded from analysis. The ethnic background
are reversed. Greater score means greater rejection toward of the respondents was vary in which 42% were Javanese,
homosexuals [9], [11]. In this study the scale was modified so 28% % Sundanese, 15% Ambonese, and others 13%.
that no statement was used to differentiate lesbians from gay Participants came from different cohorts: first year (33.6%),
men. For example, instead using statement Ï think male second year (30.1%), third year (29.2%), and fourth year and
homosexuals are disgusting”, the statement was changed as Ï above (7.1%). Sixty-one percent students never had contact
think gay men and lesbians women are disgusting”. Similarly, with gays/lesbians and the remaining students ever had
original statement Ï thinks lesbians can’t fit into our society different degrees of interaction with homosexuals.
was changed as Ï think lesbians and gay men cannot fit into Students’ attitudes toward homosexuality were
our society”. The differentiation was not used because in described on table 1 below. In general, attitudes reported by
Indonesia society tends to have strong prejudice against both students fell within the range of negative attitudes toward
lesbians and gay men. The internal consistency for this scale homosexuality (M=36.818, SD=4.07). For example, almost
was 0.60, which is at moderate level. 80% agreed that homosexuals are disgusting, 77% perceived
Other instrument was Haj-Yahia religiousity scale homosexuals as a sin, three-fourth viewed same-sex intimate
used to assess participants’ level of religiosity. The scale relations as wrong and that homosexuals cannot fit into
consists of 3 (three) items and responses to the items were Indonesian society, and more than 65% considered
homosexuals as sick individuals. Although limited,

45
 Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, volume 153

interestingly, 63% thought that homosexuality is not a Table 1. Frequency of Distribution Attitudes of Indonesian
problem except if society constructed it otherwise. Slightly Social Work Students toward Homosexuality (N=511)
more than 50% students also viewed that laws against
homosexuality should be lifted up.
The researchers indicated patterns from the above Statement M SD Disa Disagr Neu Agree Agree
findings. First, to a large extent, the students commonly gree ee tral Some Strongl
Stro Some what y
viewed gays and lesbians as those who expressed deviant ngly what
behaviour that are against religious and social norms. Male/female 4.57 .931 1.8 4.1 7.4 9.2 77.1
homosexuals are
Homosexuality is also considered as pathological phenomena disgusting
that needs to be fixed. Such negative attitude tendency Male/female 4.27 1.03 4.7 4.1 13.5 14.9 62.6
reported by large number of Indonesian social workers homosexuality is a
perversion
appears to be in line with findings reported from existing Male/female 2.78 1.51 7.7 20.4 14.5 17.2 30.2
studies in Asia and African like South Korea [12], [14]. In homosexual is natural
expression of sexuality
South Korea’ study for example, more than 3/4 th of social in men/women*
work students’ attitudes was considered as reflecting Sex between two men 4.41 1.4 5.3 4.1 9.2 7.3 74.1
homophobia. However at the same time different views started or women is just plain
wrong
to emerge when some Indonesian students perceived that Male/female 2.77 1.50 16.2 20.4 18.8 13.9 30.7
institutional discrimination against homosexuals was homosexuality is
merely a different kind
unacceptable and that societal construction over the issue is of lifestyle that should
power related. not be condemned*
In researchers’ view, these two patterns may reflect Gays/lesbians just
cannot fit into our
4.46 1.00 4.1 2.8 10.4 8.7 74

the influences of two type of different environment society

experienced by the students. In one hand, students are State laws against 2.60 1.63 21 17.1 10.6 10.4 40.7
private sexual
impacted by social-political structures of Indonesian contexts behaviour consenting
that is highly affected by strong religions and collective views adult between
women/men should be
against homosexuality [1]. On the other hand, to a lesser abolished*
degree, some students are probably start getting the influences Male/female 4.57 .961 3.1 2.3 8.0 7.0 79.5
from other kind of environment that exposed them to the ideas homosexuality is a sin
Male/female 2.10 1.60 16.9 8.6 4.9 6.5 63.1
about social justice and protection of rights for the homosexual is no
discriminated groups. Although being more strongly opposed problem unless society
makes it a problem
by conservative religious groups, LGBT activists in Indonesia Gays/lesbians are sick 4.33 1.11 4.1 5.3 10.2 13.9 66.4
have been being more politically active to express their DS=Disagree Strongly, DSo=Disagree Somewhat,
demands for equal treatment in society. In addition, Indonesia ASo=Agree Somewhat, AS=Agree Strongly
does not have any law that protects LGBTs from
discrimination. As indicated in table 2 below, multiple regressions
applied to examine factors associated with attitudes toward
homosexuality found two significant predictors: level of
interaction with homosexuals and length of study. When other
predictors were controlled, students with higher degree of
interaction with gays and lesbians reported more positive
attitudes toward homosexuality than their counterparts who
had none or very limited association with gays/lesbians. Level
of interaction with homosexuals was the strongest predictor
(p<.001). Furthermore, when other independent variables were
held the same, students from older cohort (junior &senior
years) expressed more negative attitudes toward
homosexuality than those in younger cohort (p<.010).
Independent variables included in the model explained 63
percent of variance.

46
 Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, volume 153

so. The issue is limitedly discussed in class depending on the

Table 2. Regression Attitudes of Indonesian Social Work interests of individual lecturers ad there is no standard on the
Students toward Homosexuality on Socio-Demographic and discussed topic. Some discussions might be delivered in a
Socio-Cultural Related Variables (N=511) pathological, stereotyped and blaming lenses while some
Model Unstandard- Coeffi- Standa t Sig.
others might be taught in a more liberal and non-punitive
ized B \cients rdized ways. There is a common fear among many lecturers to
Std. Coeffi discuss the issue because they do not wanted to be seen as
Error cients
Beta ‘promoting homosexuality’ or “accepting LGBT” which is
Constant 22.899 1.834 12.487 .000 against their personal values.
Year of study (3rd 1.252 .470 .120 2.663 .008 Despite those facts, the study suggests that when
year & above=1)
Sex (female=1) -.472 .459 -.047 -1.028 .304 there is need to discuss about LGBT in academic setting, it
Religion (Islam=1; .138 .939 .007 .147 .883 should be conducted in a more objective and non-punitive
non-Islam=0)
Ethnic group -1.258 .658 -.096 -1.910 .057 ways. The issues should be framed within human rights and
(patriarchal social justice values that underlie the professional practice
oriented=1)
Degree of interaction -1.122 .296 -.171 -3.788 .000
rather than morality based. LGBT as individuals and groups
with homosexuals have the same as other groups to be treated without
Religiosity .052 .104 -.023 .502 .616 discrimination and violence. Excluding or discriminating
R square=.063
LGBT them from receiving social work professional services
as needed means the violation of their rights. The study found
The influence of interaction level with homosexuals that almost 40% of social work students ever interacted with
on attitudes toward homosexuality found in this study is homosexuals and more interaction significantly associated
consistent with findings in previous cross-cultural studies. with less intolerance toward homosexual. It will be impossible
Individuals who reported more contact and positive to encourage students to interact more with homosexuals but a
experiences with lesbians and gay men have consistently positive attitude toward them could be promoted through
expressed greater acceptance of homosexuals [12], [15], [18]. education. Students and lecturers need to understand that
One other important finding from this study is the association taking a side to reduce discrimination against homosexuals is
between the lengths of study with attitudes toward not equal with encouraging others to be homosexuals. The
homosexuality. Existing studies have reported inconsistent students and lecturers may need to get more education about
association between the two variables. For example, [19] this group of people.
found that greater acceptance toward homosexuality were There are some limitations of this study. First is the
more likely to be reported by students in older cohorts convenience sampling applied in the study that reduces its
meanwhile [13] found no association at all. One reason that generalization. The inclusion of independent variables in the
could explain such inconsistency may related with the study has explained a great degree of variance but it can be
research context. Tolar’s study was conducted in the USA developed stronger by taking into account other variables such
where LGBT issues have been integrated into curriculum and as attitudes toward gender role which is validated by many
the public attitudes have been more supportive toward studies to have significant impacts on the attitudes toward
homosexuality. There is a possibility that students in older homosexuality. Further studies can consider using a more
cohort in the USA are getting more liberalized through such rigorous sampling techniques and comprehensive theoretical
educational processes. On the contrary, the issue of LGBT is framework. The universities included in this study was
very new at educational and public settings in Indonesia so predominantly in Java, therefore next study should consider
that students from older cohort might receive more limited involving more universities outside Java. It is also important
exposure to discourse and discussion of it compared to their to study the perceptions of social work lecturers and social
younger counterparts. workers about the issue so that more knowledge can be
The findings from this study can bring some developed about homosexuality in education and practice
implications toward social work education in Indonesia. settings.
Negative attitudes toward homosexuality showed by students
can have undesired impacts over their practices in the future. IV. CONCLUSIONS
They may ignore and stigmatize the existence of the
homosexuals and consequently allocate insufficient efforts and In general, Indonesian undergraduate social work
attention to help homosexuals to get needed services. The students reported negative attitudes toward homosexuality.
worst case could be that very few social workers really wanted Unfriendly social environment and unsupportive educational
to work with this minority group. In other words, instead of setting against homosexuality are likely to put great impact in
reducing prejudice, social workers become agents that shaping student attitudes. This study validates the predictor of
perpetuate discrimination against homosexuals. attitudes as reported in other cross-cultural studies and found
According to heads or lecturers of social welfare another predictor that is explainable in Indonesian context.
departments participating in this study, there is neither course Social work education institutions in Indonesia need to be
on homosexuality or LGBT is offered to the students nor is the more open-minded about the issue and deal with it properly
encouragement from Indonesian Social Work Education to do through educational interventions so that the students are

47
 Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, volume 153

better equipped in dealing with sexual minority groups later on [16] Rusyidi, B., Wulandari, K., Jahidin, A., & Darwis, R.S.
in their future career. (2017). Definitions of violence against wives among
Indonesian social work college students. Journal Sampurasun,
REFERENCES 3(1).
[17] Ryan, S.D. (2000). Examining social workers’ placement
[1] Adamczyk, A. & Pitt, C. (2009). Shaping attitudes about recommendations of children with gay and lesbian adoptive
homosexuality: The Role of religion and cultural context. parents. Families in Societies, 81(5), 517-528.
Social Science Research, 38(2), 338-351. [18] Snively, C.A., Kreuger, L., Stretch, J.J., Watt, J.W., &
[2] Ben-Ari, A.T. (1998). An experiential attitude change: Chada, J. (2004). Understanding homophobia: Preparing for
Social work students and homosexuality. Journal of practice realities in urban and rural settings. Journal of Gay
Homosexuality, 36(2), 59-71. and Lesbian Social Services, 17(1), 59-81.
[3] Camilleri, P. & Ryan, M. (2007). Social work students’ [19] Tolar, T.C., Lambert, E.G., Ventura, L.A., & Pasupuleti,
attitudes toward homosexuality and their knowledge and S. (2008). The views of social work students toward gay and
attitudes toward homosexual parenting as an alternative family lesbian persons. Journal of Gay and Lesbian Social Services,
unit: An Australia study. Social Work Education, 25 (3), 288- 17 (3), 59-85.
304. [20] Ryan. S.D. (2000). Examining social workers’ placement
[4] Center for Disease Control and Prevention. Lesbian, Gay, recommendations of children with gay and lesbian adoptive
Bisexual and Transgender. (June 21 2017). parents. Families in Society, 81 (5), 517-528.
https://www.cdc.gov/lgbthealth [21] Swank, E. & Raiz, L. (2010). Attitudes toward gays and
[5] Cochran, B.N., Stewart, A.J., Ginzler, J.A., & Cauce, lesbians among undergraduate social work students. Affilia,
A.M. (2002). Challenges faced by homeless sexual minorities: 25(1), 19-29.
Comparison of gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender
homeless adolescent with their heterosexual counterparts.
American Journal of Public Health, 92(5): 773-777.
[6] Crisp, C. (2006). Correlates of homophobia and use of
gay affirmative practice among social workers. Social Work,
42(4), 319-332.
[7] Faria, G. (1997). The Challenge of health care social
worker with gay men and lesbians. Social Work in Health
Care, 25 (1/2), 65-72.
[8] Hequembourg, A.L. & Brallier, S.A. (2009). An
exploration of sexual minority stress across the lines of gender
and sexual identity. Journal of Homosexuality, 56(3), 273-298.
[9] Herek, G.M. (1994). The Attitudes Toward Lesbians and
Gay Men Scale. Retrieved from
http://lgbpsychology.com/html/atlgfile/pdf on May 12, 2016.
[10] Kyes, K.B. & Tumbelaka, L. (1994). Comparison of
Indonesia and America college students’ attitudes toward
homosexuality. Psychological Reports, 74, 227-237.
[11] La Rubia, J.M. & de la O, A.V. (2014). Measurement of
attitudes toward lesbians and gay men in students of health
sciences from Northeast Mexico. Journal of Behaviour,
Health and Social Issues, 6(1), 51-65.
[12] Lim, H.S. & Johnson, M.M. (2001). Korean social work
students’ attitudes toward homosexuality. Journal of Social
Work Education, 17 (3), 545-554.
[13] Logie, C., Bridge, T.J., & Bridge, P.D. (2007).
Evaluating the phobias, attitudes and cultural competence of
master social work students toward the LGBT population.
Journal of Homosexuality, 53(4), 201-221.
[14] Matthews, J.D., Clemons, K., & Avery, L.C. (2017).
Social Work students’ attitudes toward gay men and lesbian in
Namibia. South African Journal of Higher Education, 31 (4),
286-301.
[15] O’Hare, T. & Williams, C.I. (1996). Fear of AIDS and
homophobia: Implications for direct practice and advocacy.
Social Work, 41(1): 51-58.

48