Perceptions of Lgbtiq+ Population in a Nigerian Cosmopolitan City: Implications and Projected Pathways in Criminalization

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-4899953/v1

Download PDF

Research Article

Perceptions of Lgbtiq+ Population in a Nigerian Cosmopolitan City: Implications and Projected Pathways in Criminalization

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4899953/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

Version 1

posted

You are reading this latest preprint version

Background

Compared to those of other African countries, studies examining LGBTIQ + in Nigeria are scarce, while the perceptions of people with an LGBTIQ + orientation have not received adequate scholarly attention. In view of this, the present study aimed to explore the perceptions of the LGBTIQ + population in a cosmopolitan Nigerian city.

Method

This study utilized a cross-sectional analytical survey design and purposive technique to analyze the perceptions of 302 respondents to understand the disposition of people toward members of LGBTIQ + and, in so doing, to deduce workable pathways for handling the stigmatizing, discriminating and ostracizing treatment members of the LGBTIQ + experience. In assessing the key study variables, a qualitative 5-statement semi-interview questionnaire was developed and validated by the researchers to investigate the research objectives. Using IBM SPSS statistical tools, descriptive and inferential statistics were utilized.

Results

The results showed a prevalence rate of 40.7% for perceived severe criminalization by LGBTIQ + persons, while the main finding employing hierarchical regressions was that gender was the only independent significant predictor of perception of LGBTIQ+ (β = − .13, SE = .06, F = 5.37; p = .02), accounting for 1.8% of the variance in perceptions of the LGBTIQ + community and criminalization dimensions. Additionally, the majority of participants suggested severe measures for necrophilia, bestiality, and transsexuals; they were moderate toward gay and lesbian individuals in comparison.

Conclusions

In line with the findings, conclusions and recommendations were outlined, while policy implications and conclusions were drawn in a bid to address societal perceptions about the LGBTIQ + community and projected pathways in criminalizing the LGBTIQ + population in Nigeria.

LGBTIQ+ perceptions

sexual laws and orientation

human rights

criminals

Nigeria

The fact that LGBTIQ+ is now accepted in some parts of the world is no longer news, as it indicates relative acceptance accorded with the community, especially in the Western world, thereby protecting the rights of such populations in their place of work, family, and religion. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said of Nigeria, which is met with stiff opposition by legal injunctions, cultural ideologies, and religious fanatical beliefs (Ukah, 2018; Amnesty International, 2015/16; Same Sex Marriage Prohibition Act of Nigeria, [SSMPA] 2013). You dare not mention it in some homes or communities in Nigeria and expect things to be the same again. In more than 70 countries, practices of same-sex sexual relationships are categorized as crimes, whereas in 44 of these countries, legal constraints are applied (Mendos, 2019). Apart from several restrictions, punishments for LGBTIQ+ people in parts of Africa vary, ranging from physically flogging the defaulter to a death penalty in Sudan and from sending defaulters to life imprisonment in countries such as Uganda, Tanzania, and Zambia; however, southern Somalia and 12 Nigerian northern states also apply similar stringent measures—although the SSMPA 2014 law stipulates a 14-year jail term (Adebanjo, 2015; Adeoye, 2019; Mendos, 2019; Refworld, 2019; Sogunro, 2017; The Federation of Nigeria, 1916). The LGBTIQ+ (that is, Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Intersex, and Queer plus), compared to the other lots engaged in heterosexual relationships in Nigeria, represents a sexual minority. The daily challenges these minorities experience can be easily linked to the country's renouncement of LGBTIQ+ activities as an abnormal sexual relationship, which can increase police intimidation and detentions, homophobic violence, difficulties in healthcare services, and documented instances of blackmail and extortion (Human et al., 2016; Okanlawon, 2018).

Poignantly, the adverse effects of this stereotypical and prejudice-linked behavior, as shown by a growing body of evidence, include depression (from moderate to chronic), mental disorders, unemployment, homelessness, and discrimination. Others include substance use disorders, suicidal behaviors, eating disorders, weight-related problems, drug abuse (that is, alcohol, marijuana, and other psychoactive drugs), risky sexual behavior and STDs(see Baams et al., 2015; Balsam et al., 2005; Choi & Meyer, 2016; Everett, 2013; Fredriksen-Goldsen et al., 2013; Friedman et al., 2011; Gonzales & Henning-Smith, 2017; Kamody et al., 2020; Marshal et al., 2011; Miller & Luk, 2019; Operario et al., 2015; Puckett et al., 2017; Raifman et al., 2020; Rice et al., 2019; Ross et al., 2018; Schuler et al., 2018; Strutz et al., 2015; and Schuler et al., 2015; and Schuler et al., 2015. Additionally, the experience of discrimination, primarily based on sexual orientation, may lead to low self-esteem, lower quality of life, negative affect, and dysfunctional coping strategies among such communities (Mays & Cochran, 2001; Oginni et al., 2019). Previous studies have indicated a high rate of mental health problems such as anxiety disorders, suicidal ideation, and attempted suicide among LGBTIQ+ individuals of African descent (Ahaneku et al., 2016; Rodriguez-Hart et al., 2018; Stahlman et al., 2016). Moreover, the LGBTIQ+ community in Nigeria has been found to experience social marginalization and violence, as described by Olaogun (2024), who, in his analytical literature review, posited that the exclusion of LGBTIQ+ may portend severe social consequences such as losing talented individuals to drug addiction, depression, and even suicide.

Conversely, current studies reveal that an ideal LGBTIQ+ identity is negatively associated with depressive symptoms and directly connected to psychological well-being and life satisfaction (Petrocchi et al., 2020; Riggle et al., 2014; Riggle et al., 2017; Rostosky et al., 2018). This minority community most often does not even protest or say anything in public while on Nigerian soil. Unfortunately, this may hurt their self-efficacy. Moreover, as Soyinka (1972) rightly opined, "The man dies in all who keep silent in the face of oppression." Notably, the majority of public opinion reported by students indicates that homosexuality does not go down well with most Nigerians at the moment and is not accepted with attendant adverse consequences when an individual is identified as a member of LGBTIQ+ (Human et al. [HRW], 2016; Nwaubani, 2017; Oduah, 2014; Alozie et al., 2017; Okanlawon, 2017; Okanlawon, 2020; Ukah, 2018; Olumide et al., 2018). Typically, Nigeria is a traditional African nation where issues related to morals and sexuality are treated with awe, neglect, and some sense of denial. Sexual orientations such as LGBTIQ+ were not topics of discussion in the 20th century in Nigeria's milieu. Hence, it existed in obscurity. It was from the 21st century that this topic became a topic of discussion. This situation worsened on the heels of the SSMPA, as endorsedby the Federal Government of Nigeria in January 2014 by Goodluck Jonathan, the former president of Nigeria. With severe penalties for same-sex relationships, the SSMPA has further marginalized and endangered the lives of LGBTIQ+ individuals in Nigeria (Amnesty International, 2015/16; see Criminal Code Act, Chapter 77 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 1990; see Section 214). Hence, such persons in Nigeria are socially ostracized by a mix of law, ideology, culture, and religion with respect to their fellow citizens (Arimoro, 2018; Gladstone, 2014; Ukah, 2018). After ten (10) years of follow-up since the promulgation of this law, the lives of LGBTIQ+ persons have been negatively affected in terms of identification and targeting; denial of access to healthcare, employment, and education; abandonment of religious affiliation; homelessness; harassment (both physical and sexual); and other forms of aggression (Nwazuoke & Igwe, 2016; The Initiative for Equal Rights, 2021). Similarly, an official report on gross rights violations, as reported by LGBTIQ+ persons between 2017 and 2018, revealed approximately 213 reported cases of battery use, assault, unlawful detention, mob attacks, torture, life threats, and forced evictions in Nigeria (TIERS, 2019).

A plethora of studies have been conducted on the legal, health, ethical, cultural, and religious implications of the LGBTIQ+ community in Nigeria cum Africa, focusing on adolescent-related matters andissues bothering LGBTIQ+ people; social media discourse on LGBTIQ+; subjective perceptions of male homosexuals; literature reviews; prevalence of police violence; and institutionalization of LGBTIQ+ (Asue, 2018; Dutta & Srinivasan, 2024; Endong & Calvain, 2015; Giwa et al., 2020; Hall et al., 2021; Igundunasse et al., 2019; Mapayiet al., 2016; Mckay & Angotti, 2016; Morgan, 2012; Mosaku et al., 2017; Mustanski et al., 2014; Obasola, 2013; Obidimma & Obidimma, 2013; Oginni et al., 2017; Ogunbajo et al., 2021; Olaogun, 2024; Reynolds & Hanjorgiris, 2000; Savin-Williams, 2019; Savin-Williams & Cohen, 2015; TIERS, 2022; Ukah, 2018; and Ukonu et al., Only TIERS (2022), a nationwide study, was close to the present study, in which investigations on the perceptions of Nigerians toward the LGBTIQ+ community were conducted. Even so, the study did not consider the sentencing perceptions of Nigerians concerning LGBTIQ+ people in addition to the contributory roles of demographics in an analytic projective dimension or other more extreme forms of sexual activity, such as bestiality and necrophilia (Servick, 2014). With these improvements in the limitations of previous studies, those gaps have formed the basis of the current study. Therefore, the study's objectives, which guided the research hypotheses, are (i) to ascertain whether participants will report a negative perception and low acceptance of LGBTIQ+ people, (ii) to gauge the extent to which demographic factors will predict harsh criminalization of LGBTIQ+ persons, and (iii) to assess public opinion's level of tolerance and acceptance of highly queer sexual behaviors such as necrophilia and bestiality in criminal sentencing. Given the preceding, the following research hypotheses were formulated to provide concise direction for the study:

i. There will be a high prevalence of perceived severe criminalization of LGBTIQ+ persons in Nigeria.

ii. The gender identity of participants significantly predicts severe criminalization of LGBTIQ+ persons such that males will be more vicious than females.

iii. Age significantly predicts severe criminalization in LGBTIQ+ persons such that younger participants are more liberal than older participants are.

iv. The educational qualification of participants significantly predicts severe criminalization of LGBTIQ+ persons such that more educated participants will be more liberal than their less educated counterparts.

v. There will be a high rate of intolerance and acceptability of necrophilia and bestiality in criminal sentencing compared to gays and lesbians.

Historical overview of LGBTIQ+, related concepts and progression

Sexual orientations such as homosexuality, lesbianism, and heterosexuality have always been common in human civilizations since the era of enlightenment; progress in arts, science, and technology (i.e., the Golden Era); and eras known for ignorance and savagery (i.e., Middle Ages). Understanding the historical and psychological perspectives of sexual orientations is crucial in comprehending the societal and legal implications of LGBTIQ+ issues. Historically, the development of the LGBTIQ+ community has dramatically evolved. In the 20th century, sexualities outside heterosexual relationships were deemed abnormal. According to Freud, in his theory of psychosexual changes, bisexuality is an innate trait in humans, but people with this trait manage to become heterosexual or, in some cases, homosexual as a result of childhood experiences with significant others, such as parents and guardians (Freud, 1905). Freud postulated that fixation in any of the psychosexual stages, especially the phallic stage, could precipitate the onset of homosexuality, such as experiencing castration anxiety that motivates boys to jettison women and exhibiting narcissistic self-obsession, prompting boys to select or prefer an object of attraction thatmirrors them (Lewes, 1988). After several decades, Freud (1935) slightly changed his opinion by asserting that homosexuality was not an illness or vice; instead, he saw homosexuality trait in terms of an atypical variant in human sexuality as a result of unresolved intrapsychic conflicts during the psychosexual stages of childhood.

Other neo-Freudians, such as Irving Bieber, Sandor Rado,and Charles Socarides, were advised that homosexuality be rectified by using psychoanalysis. Others rejected these assumptions of inherent bisexuality and adopted pro-parent–child dynamics (that is, parents overly rejecting and critical of their children, especially the girl child, neglecting them and "defeminizing" such as dressing the girl child in boys’ clothes and inculcating feminine skills) as predictors of homosexuality (Bieber, 1962, 1967, 1969; Drescher, 2015; Rado, 1940, 1949; Socarides, 1968; United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, 2011). Given this, sexual orientation serves as an evolutionary function to support its existence. Apart from evolution, 3 other explanations are possible: first, dimensions of biology may account for the various sexual orientations; second, explanations of homosexuality may be ontological, dealing with the nature of being, especially in environmental conditions experienced by the individual. Third, a temporary connection may exist between biological and nurture factors (Laumann et al., 1994; Schwartz et al., 2010).

Beginning in the colonial period of Nigeria's existence, same-sex and other acts practiced among LGBTIQ+ persons were illegal. The Criminal Code, adapted from Tasmania's Code, criminalized these acts. In the Nigerian traditional setting, people caught engaging in acts linked to LGBTIQ+ were at risk of banishment, paying for fines, carrying out rituals of expiation to appease the 'gods of the land,' or being publicly shamed and disgraced by going around the village market square/community stark naked while renouncing the perceived sexual offense allegedly committed. Undoubtedly, some aspects of sexuality can be unpleasant and upsetting for an untrained mind, and in the past, such types of sexuality were not even discussed; bestiality and zoophilia are two such topics. However, not talking about these things or not empirically investigating them compound the problems, making it difficult for behavioral scientists to change the narrative objectively. Bestiality and zoophilia are related but quite different. The former connotes the act of a human having sex with a nonhuman animal for gratification, which may or may not involve penetration (Silverberg, 2017). On the other hand, as first used in the clinical literature by the sexologist Richard von Krafft-Ebing, zoophilia was described as a human who is sexually inspired or aroused by an animal (Krafft-Ebing, 1965; Miletski, 2002). Bestiality is a practice or an act (i.e., something people do), and zoophilia is an attraction, experience, or preference. Another related variant known as somnophilia, an uncommon paraphilium, is a form of sexual fetishism characterized by an excessive desire to have sex with an unconscious human object who cannot respond. Hence, not everyone who engages in the act of bestiality is a zoophile, and not everyone classified as having zoophilia engages in sexual activity with animals.

Nonetheless, much controversy exists regarding whether bestiality is part of the 'queer' in the LGBTIQ+ community, and there has not been a consensus on the subject matter. In the present study, however, bestials and necrophiliacs were categorized under those with the '+' category in the LGBTIQ+ acronym. It has been said that sexual orientation is within the purview of private morality, whereas marriage is within the purview of public morality. In matters of private morality, the State should not peep beyond the curtains at home to probe the activities of two consenting adults in their closet (Okuefuna, 2016). However, it is the present reality now that States are involved in sexual matters concerning two consenting adults. This involvement raises questions about the boundaries of state intervention in private matters and the potential impact on individual rights and freedoms. Culture and religion, the two most potent variables in Nigeria, have been involved in the effort to undermine the LGBTIQ+ community. For Moslems, their holy book, otherwise known as the Quran, condemned homosexuality and proscribed death through stoning (Quran 7:80-84). In addition to these cultural and religious stipulations, Nigeria is a secular State (Sec. 10 CFRN 1999 as amended) in which the constitution states that 'the Government of the Federation or a State shall not adopt any religion as State Religion.' Hence, the constitution of Nigeria should naturally prevail should there be a clash between moral codes and cultural/religious commandments (Sec. 1 (3) CFRN 1999 as amended). However, the role of culture and religion in shaping societal perceptions of sexual orientation is necessary and should be considered in any discussion of LGBTIQ+ issues.

Conceptual Framework of LGBTIQ+ Constructs

LGBTIQ+ is an inclusive acronym that encompasses all sexual orientations, a concept distinct from sexual preference. It is important to note that sexual orientation has to do with the gender or gender to which a person is attracted, while sexual preference implies the specific sexual activities a person enjoys. This diversity within the LGBTIQ+ community covers various identities, varying across cultures depending on their acceptance, perception, or tolerance (Drushel, 2017). Independently, lesbianism can be defined as a sexual and romantic attraction between women or females, while gay indicates sexual attraction between people of the same sex, especially men. For an individual to be regarded as bisexual, a combined trait of both lesbianism and gayness must be observed or present. Transgenderism involves individuals whose gender identity does not align with the sex they were given at birth by nature. At the same time, the term Intersex is a compound word that connotes a range of biological traits that predispose people to be born with chromosomes, gonads, or genitals that differ from ideal male and female bodies. Finally, the term 'Queer' is a broad phrase utilized in describing any variant or synonym of people who deviate from societal and conventional lifestyles and norms. The '+' represents other new or upcoming types of sexual orientations or other sexual minority identities that are not currently covered by the LGBTIQ population and were proposed by the current study, including asexuality. Homophobia, as another concept related to the current study, connotes fear, hatred, and discrimination against homosexuality based on negative stereotypes; these conditions have intensified in recent years and have had a significant negative impact on individuals and society. In some climes, outing someone (that is, exposing a homosexual) is seen as a heroic deed, to the detriment of such one so exposed who may not come out alive (Rouget, 2021; The Initiative for Equal Rights, 2021). Understanding and addressing the negative impact of homophobia are crucial for creating a more inclusive and accepting society.

Theoretical Framework

The present study utilized four (4) different theories as underpinning theories for understanding the dynamics and perceptions of LGBTIQ+ persons. The theories used are social stigmatism theory, social constructionism theory, broken windows theory, and the Cass model of homosexuality.

Social Stigmatism Theory (SST)

The present study is built on the theoretical framework of social stigmatism theory (SST) developed by an American sociologist, Erving Goffman. The SST holds that stigma arises when society labels individuals or groups as deviant due to their socially constructed values and norms. This societal labeling has profound implications, particularly for the LGBTIQ+ community, which is stigmatized due to its 'unpopular sexual orientation' and gender identity.Stigma, as defined by Herek (2009), implies “the negative regard, inferior status, and relative powerlessness that society collectively accords to people who possess a particular characteristic or belong to a particular group or category” (p. 32). Goffman further argues that stigma is a social phenomenon borne out of the association between individuals and their communities in which individuals are labeled deviant due to 'perceived' differences. He further argued that the stigmatization process comprises three stages: labeling, stereotyping, and discrimination (Allport, 1954; Devine, 1989; Major & Eccleston, 2004; Makanjuola et al., 2018). Understanding the dynamics of stigma in this instance of sexual preference indicates that it is not only an overt process imposed by society but also a covert process in which people stigmatize imbibe and internalize negative societal beliefs about their stigmatized traits, with a significant psychological impact on an individual's self-esteem, resilience, and identity formation (Olaogun, 2024).

The Social Constructionism Theory (SCT)

The social constructionism theory was first put together by Berger and Luckmann (1991), who utilized the theory as a paradigm to better understand crimes committed against discriminated persons. Scholars have provided different and similar definitions of this construct (Andrews, 2013; Lumen, 2017; Meynert, 2015; Terre-Blanche et al., 2006). These definitions revolve around the social specificity of people's comprehension of reality, how they perceive it, and how it is transferred to the group's or societal level. Hence, social constructionism refers to a conflict between the world's and the public's perceptions, values, norms, and laws and is often regarded as an anomaly. Specifically, social constructionism theory is based on gender and sex concepts. First, gender is operationally defined as learned expectations and behaviors related to each sex in a social milieu.

In contrast, sex is related to the biological state of being male or female (Andersen & Taylor, 2007, p. 302). Society today, especially in the African context, tends to assign specific roles to each sex. Everyone is expected to align with them or be seen as abnormal, unnatural, or deviant, as in the case of LGBTIQ+ communities in some heteronormative societies of Africa, resulting in constant crimes and victimization in some cases even in the hands of security agencies (KatzWise & Hyde, 2012; Nadeem, 2013). Several theologians and religionists, as stated by Nkosi and Masson (2017), utilized the Bible to argue that homosexuality is an abominable sin and unnatural, deserving a capital offense, citing the book of Leviticus 20:13 and, at other times, citing Romans 1:26-28 as Bible verses commonly used to justify their hate, crime, and condemnation of LGBTIQ+, which they believe is against the will of God. This etiology of the belief system stems from the notion that God created "Adam and Eve," not "Madam and Eve" or "Adam and Steve."

The Broken Windows Theory and LGBTIQ+ Perception

As developed in 1982 by criminologists James Wilson and George Kelling, the broken windows theory (BWT) offers a metaphorical framework for understanding the dynamics of crime, criminal behavior, and psychological disorders within communities. The theory holds that visible signs of neglect and disorder, similar to broken windows in a hypothetical building, can be a catalyst for more heinous crime (Center for Evidence-Based Crime Policy [CEBCP], 2017). The overall premise of the BWT algorithm is that if signs of disorder or violence/bullying go unaddressed, it transmits a strong signal that no one cares about the well-being of the LGBTIQ+ community, thereby causing fear, silence, and vulnerability on the part of the LGBTIQ+ community (Clark, 2013; Dowler & Zawilski, 2015; Herek, 2015; Kelling & Wilson, 1982). This theory is particularly relevant to the experiences of the LGBTIQ+ community, as it helps to understand how societal neglect and disorder can contribute to the fear and vulnerability experienced by this community. This finding underscores the need for a more caring and inclusive society that values and respects all individuals, regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity.

The Cass model of Homosexuality (Cass, 1979, 1984, 1996).

As a widely recognized and cited model, the first stage of the Cass model entails initial awareness of sexual/romantic feelings that are not exclusively heterosexual (Hall et al., 2021). The second stage involves going back and forth between LGBTIQ+ emotions and denial of reality. The third relates to the acceptance of an LGBTIQ+ identity. This process of acceptance is not straightforward and can be fraught with challenges. The fourth stage involved active participation with the LGBTIQ+ community and possible resentment toward heterosexist people and institutions. In the final stage, the individual realizes that the LGBTIQ+ orientation is their identity and synthesizes their identity into a gestalt sense of self. This model highlights the complexity of the LGBTIQ+ identity formation process and the various stages individuals go through to fully accept and integrate their identity.

Empirical Review of Related Literature

Several recent studies related to perceptions of the LGBTIQ+ orientation have been extensively reviewed. For instance, Ogueji and Ogueji (2022) explored the lived experiences of seven LGBTIQ+ persons and found that participants faced discrimination, lived in fear/denial, and, importantly, needed social support and recognition. This finding underscores the crucial role of empathy and support in the LGBTIQ+ community. Another study conducted by Leaders of the Global Fund (2023) found that approximately 64 countries have criminalized consensual same-sex acts, and 52 countries have employed legal barriers to freedom of expression on LGBTIQ+ issues. Folayan et al.(2023), while exploring the psychosocial variables and well-being of 4072 people during the COVID-19 period, found that the pandemic in Nigeria worsened socioeconomic inequality and well-being inequity in transgender people. In examining the role of social media, Ukonu et al. (2021) utilized data from 323 participants via Facebook and found that a tendency to express opinions, facilitated by "rising interest in the topic," accelerated negative attitudes toward homosexuality. To better understand issues bothering some members of the LGBTIQ+ in Nigeria, Ogunbajo et al. (2021) interviewed 30 members of the community and discovered that Nigeria's LGBTIQ+ community experienced identity stressors and rejection by family, which resulted in mental health problems, harassment, social isolation and violence perpetrated by members of the society and even security operatives.

Dutta and Srinivasan (2024), after interviewing 28 stakeholders in LGBTIQ+, found that regulatory, adopting international standards/norms, and societal and market pressures significantly influenced meso-level structures and practices. In their study, Sibanyoni et al. (2023) employed a review of theories explaining how LGBTIQ+ persons are victimized and found that LGBTIQ+ groups are stigmatized for their perceived sexual and gender "deviance" and rejection by the "straight" members of society (who view homosexuality or LGBTIQ+ as a sickness, a dreaded sin, antihuman and are thus motivated by intolerance and hate toward their sexual orientation), resulting in discrimination and violation and subsequently leading to homophobia, which sometimes results in violent "corrective rapes," assault causing grievous bodily harm (GBH), and other traumatic adverse effects. Hall et al. (2021), in a systematic review of sexual orientation identity covering 30 studies, indicated that LGBTIQ+ identity development milestones include becoming aware of queer attractions, questioning one's sexual orientation, self-identifying as LGBTIQ+, coming out to others, engaging in sexual activity, and initiating a romantic relationship. Christopher and Cook (2021), amidst the controversies surrounding causes of sexual orientation, revealed that a combination of genetic and environmental factors is responsible for sexual orientation, with approximately one-third of the variance currently attributed to genetic factors. Alday-Mondaca and Lay-Lisboa (2021), in a biographical study, found that internalized stigma negatively affects LGBTIQ+ parenting in terms of fear of violating children's rights, fear of passing on the stigma, fear of introducing their LGBTIQ+ partner, the impossibility of thinking of oneself as a parent, and discrimination that intersex people endures. Using 6 years (that is, from 2014 to 2019) of administrative data, Giwa et al. (2020) investigated the prevalence of police violence against LGBTIQ+ Nigerians and found that since the introduction of the law against the LGBTIQ+ community in Nigeria, violence against them has been sky-rocked by 214%, with survivors consistently reporting severe human rights violations and abuses being perpetrated by law enforcement agencies, thereby undermining the fundamental rights of LGBTIQ+ persons in Nigeria as allowedin the constitution.

Frohn (2013) independently explored the way LGBTIQ+ employees cope with their sexual or gender identity and found that LGBTIQ+ employees had resilience issues that affected their skills based on their experiences at the place of work. Additionally, Igundunasse et al. (2019) investigated the subjective perception of male homosexuals vis-à-vis their state of sexual orientation in society. They found that living as a homosexual in Nigeria is a very daunting and trying experience because of the fear of persecution and prosecution. Furthermore, TIERS (2022) investigated the perceptions of Nigerians toward LGBTIQ+ persons nationwide and discovered that the majority frowned at having someone with an LGBTIQ+ orientation as a family; a 30 percent acceptance was reported in 2019, and a total of 34 percent of the 2022 acceptance was reported by a family member who is LGBTIQ+ in Nigeria. The study also revealed a decline in SSMPA and punishment for homosexual individuals, from 77% in 2015 when the law came into being to 57% in a 2019 survey and a further decline to 48% in the 2022 survey. The study additionally revealed the significant role of religion in social perception, as well as the finding that younger people were more prone to homosexuality than people up to 55 years and above.However, the study did not elicit people's opinions on the type of punishment suitable for law enforcement agencies or the criminal justice system to consider (Makanjuola et al., 2018; Pew Research Center Global Attitudes Project, 2020). However, despite their ability to explain the variations in challenges faced by people with an LGBTIQ+ orientation, none of the studies considered projected pathways when gathering data on people's perceptions of the LGBTIQ+ community in Akwa Ibom State, Nigeria. Compared to those of other African countries, studies examining LGBTIQ+ persons in Nigeria are scarce, while the perceptions of people with an LGBTIQ+ orientation have not received adequate scholarly attention.

Study design and research area

This study employed a cross-sectional analytical survey design to recruit 302 participants in the cosmopolitan city of Uyo in Akwa Ibom State, Nigeria. Participants were simple and randomly selected to participate in this study, and all provisions of the Belmont Report were applied to ensure that they were treated with respect and professionally.

Participants

Of the 302 participants recruited, 43.7% (132) were male and 56.3% (170) were female. Age was measured categorically; hence, reporting the mean age became difficult. The ages of the participants were categorized as 21-25 years, and 77 (25.5%) were diagnosed; 26-30 years, 59 (19.5%); 31-35 years, 53 (17.5%); 36-40 years, 35 (11.6%); 41-45 years, 31 (10.3%); 46-50 years, 20 (6.6%); 51-55 years, 9 (3.0%); and 56-60 years, 18 (6.0%). The marital status data indicated that the majority were married (160 [53.0%]; 127 (42.1%) were single, 8 (2.6%) were divorced, and the other 7 were shared between 4 (1.3%) and 3 (1.0%). Educational status was measured, and the results revealed that 4 (1.3%) had primary education or FSLC, 40 (13.2%) had secondaryqualifications or WAEC, 24 (7.9%) had OND qualifications, the majority had tertiary education or HND/BSc—170 (56.3%), 40 (13.2%) had a postgraduate qualification or PGD/MSc, and 13 (4.3%) had PhD qualifications—while 11 (3.6%) did not respond to this variable. Other variables, such as occupation, ethnic group, occupation of spouse, and duration of marriage, were assessed. See Table 1 for more details.

Measures

The demographic variables were used to obtain the demographic characteristics of the participants.One measurement with two sections was used for data collection. Section A consisted of respondents’ demographic variables, such as sex, age, marital status, duration of marriage, occupation of spouse, highest educational qualification, ethnic group, and occupation of participant—reported in Table 1. Section B is the 5-item perception of the LGBTIQ+ community and criminalization scale (PLGBTIQ-CSS). The first item is ‘what treatment is ideal for lesbian women caught in homosexual acts (women who have sex with women)?’ The second item is ‘what treatment is ideal for gay men caught in homosexual acts (men who have sex with men)?’; the third item is ‘how do you think transsexuals (people who undergo surgical operation to change their sex organs and bodies to that of the opposite sex) should be treated?’ The fourth item is ‘how do you think bestial (people who have sex with animals, e.g., dogs, horses, chickens) should be treated?’; and the fifth item is ‘how do you think of necrophilia’s (people who have sex with corpses, dead humans) should be treated. The five statements were followed with a 7-point Likert response format ranging from 1 = leaving them alone it is their life, 2 = they are mentally sick and should be treated in a psychiatric hospital, 3 = five years jail term, 4 = ten years jail term, 5 = twenty years jail term, 6 = life in prison, and 7 = death sentence or they should be executed/killed”.

The PLGBTIQ-CSS was developed by the researchers to fit into the present study. The development of the PLGBTIQ-CSS is premised on the fact that there is no suitable sexual orientation instrument that exactly addresses the objectives of this study. The PLGBTIQ-CSS was developed before the main study was conducted. The items in the PLGBTIQ-CSS were directly scored using a 7-point Likert response format. To guarantee the standardization of the scale, face and content validity was assessed by two psychometric experts, who vetted the scale thoroughly and suggested improvements. To determine the construct validity of the PLGBTIQ-CSS, an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was used to assess the factor structure and enrich the item pool of the PLGBTIQ-CSS. In the EFA, one factor was extracted using varimax rotation because the factors are assumed not to be directly related, coupled with seeking a basis such that each individual can be well described by a linear combination of a few basic functions. The model fit was also assessed in accordance with the chi-square(X2/df) and communality ratios. The EFA for the study sample with reference to the Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin (KMO) criterion was pegged at.721, and “Bartlett’s test of sphericity” was significant [X2 (df = 10) = 938.587, p < .001], showing that relationships between the PLGBTIQ-CSS items were adequate for the analysis (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2013). An analysis of the “scree plot” indicated that one factor had an eigenvalue greater than 1, and the first 3 factors explained 93.18% of the variance. That is, factor analysis for the instrument produced one factor measure. The rotated factor matrix was highest for item 2 (gay) = 0.80, followed by item 4 (bestial) = 0.78, item 1 (lesbian) = .75, item 5 (necrophilia) = .72, and item 3 (transsexual) = .68. Factor 1 has an initial total eigenvalue of 3.23 and a variance of 64.57%; the extracted sums of the squared loadings were 2.80 and 55.84%, respectively. The other 4 factors had eigenvalues less than 1, ranging accordingly; the second factor had eigenvalues of 0.93 and 18.49%, and the third factor had eigenvalues of 0.48 and 9.67%. The reliability coefficient was also determined, and a Cronbach’s alpha value coefficient of α = 0.857 was reported, with Cronbach’s alpha deleted ranging from 0.81 to 0.84; the squared multiple correlation coefficient was 0.42 for item 3, 0.60 for item 5, 0.63 for item 4, 0.77 for item 1, and 0.79 for item 2.

Procedure

Participants were recruited from various fields of study and in different settings within Uyo cosmopolitan city, which was evident from the demographic features of the participants. Informed consent was obtained from each participant after briefing about the study and the importance of the study findings. Two research assistants were recruited, and it took the researchers 13 working days to complete the data collection. One of the complaints was that the questions were slightly unsettled, some declined to participate, and some discontinued at some point without any consequences. A total of 350 copies of the PLGBTIQ-CSS were administered, and at the end of the exercise, 302 were retrieved, yielding a return rate of 86.3%. The rationale for the sample size was gleaned from some extant studies that held that a sample size greater than three hundred (300) participants is acceptable in analytical surveys (Tabachnick et al., 2018; Williams et al., 2010). Ethical clearance was obtained from the Research and Ethics Committee (REC) of Topfaith University, Mkpatak, Akwa Ibom State.

Data analyses

To analyze the data, descriptive statistics such as the mean, frequency, percentage, standard deviation and Pearson correlation were calculated. For the inferential statistics, hierarchical regression and one-way ANOVA were employed to test the study’s hypotheses after coding the questionnaires using IBM SPSS Statistics (version 23) and subjecting the raw data to statistical analysis. Specifically, descriptive and item-by-item analyses were utilized to test hypotheses 1 and 5, while hierarchical regression was employed to test hypotheses 2, 3, and 4, in addition to one-way ANOVA.

Table 1: Summary of demographic variables among participants in the Uyo metropolis

Demographics

Gender

Male

Female

132

170

43.7

56.3

Age

21-25 years

26-30 years

31-35 years

36-40 years

41-45 years

46-50 years

25.5

19.5

17.5

11.6

10.3

6.6

51-55 years

56-60 years

Marital status

Single

Married

Divorced

Separated

Widowed

127

160

3.0

6.0

42.1

53.0

2.6

1.3

1.0

Duration in marriage

1-2 years

3-5 years

6-10 years

11-15 years

16-20 years

21-25 years

26 & above

No Response

26.5

24.5

10.9

7.9

5.0

3.3

1.3

20.5

Ethnic group

Ibibio

Igbo

Annang

Efik

Oron

Yoruba

Idoma

Others (Urhobo, Ijaw, Hausa, Edo, Esan, & Berom)

No Response

154

51.0

17.5

15.6

2.6

1.0

0.7

1.8

7.0

Occupation

Business

Civil service

Banker

Paramilitary

Health worker

No Response

159

31.8

52.6

2.6

0.7

5.6

6.6

Highest educational qualification

FSLC

SSCE

OND

HND/BSc

PGD/MSc

PhD

No Response

170

1.3

13.2

7.9

56.3

13.2

4.3

3.6

Source: Field data (2021)

The descriptive results in Table 4.1 provide a comprehensive overview of the 302 participants, with 132 (43.7%) males and 170 (56.3%) females. Other variables, such as age, marital status, educational qualification, occupation, ethnic group, occupation of spouse, and duration of marriage, were also assessed. A key finding is the norm score of 15.98 on the PLGBTIQ-CSS in the present study. Descriptive results indicated that 123 participants out of the 302 surveyed reported more severe criminal sentencing/measures, translating to a prevalence rate of 40.7%. The remaining 179 (59.3%) reported less severe criminal sentencing/measures. This significant increase in prevalence underscores the urgency of this issue. The confirmation of the first hypothesis, which states a high incidence of perceived severe criminalization of LGBTIQ+ persons in Nigeria, is a significant outcome of this research. For every 10 sampled participants, 4 recommended more severe criminal sentencings/measures.

Table 2: Summary of the correlation matrix showing the key variables employed.

Variables	Lesbian	Gay	TR	Bestial	Necrophilia
Lesbian	1
Gay	.87**	1
TR	.46**	.48**	1
Bestial	.47**	.50**	.61**	1
Necrophilia	.40**	.49**	.55**	.75**	1

Note: TR = Transsexuals; **Correlation significant at the 0.01 level

The zero-order correlation matrix in Table 2 provides insights into the relationships between the pLGBTIQ+ scale items. The results showed that the homosexual-linked item was strongly and positively associated with the lesbian-linked item (r= .87; p<0.01). Transsexuals also had positive, albeit moderate, relationships with lesbian individuals and homosexual individuals or gay individuals (r = .46; p<0.01; r = .48; p<0.01). The bestial construct was moderately significant across three variables: lesbian, gay, and transsexual (r = .47; p<0.01; r = .50; p<0.01; r = .61; p<0.01, respectively). Finally, necrophilia was positively related to lesbian, gay, transsexual, and bestial (r = .40; p<0.01; r = .49; p<0.01; r = .55; p<0.01; r = .75; p<0.01). It is crucial to note that these relationships do not imply cause or effect among the variables, and the findings should be interpreted with utmost caution due to the study's limitations, ensuring a balanced and informed understanding.

Table 3: Summarizing hierarchical regression on variables predicting perceptions of the LGBTIQ+ community and criminalization dimensions.

Note: EQ = Educational Qualification; AR² - Step 1 = .014; Step 2 = .013; Step 3 = .013; pLGBTIQ+ = perceptions of the LGBTIQ+ community.

Regarding the primary objectives and hypotheses tested in the study, the hierarchical regressions in Table 4 above were utilized to construct a model for predicting perceptions of the LGBTIQ+ community and criminalization dimensions among selected cross-sectional participants in Uyo cosmopolitan city. In step one, the introduction of ‘gender’ significantly contributed to the regression model, F (1, 301) = 5.37, p = .02. This finding underscores the crucial role of ‘gender’ in explaining 1.8% of the variance in perceptions of the LGBTIQ+ community and criminalization dimensions (β = -.13, SE = .06, p = .02). The second hypothesis, which posited that the gender identity of participants would significantly predict severe criminalization of LGBTIQ+ persons, thereby suggesting that males would be more severe in their perception than females, was confirmed.

Introducing ‘age’ in the second model, F (2, 301) = 2.96, p = .05, slightly changed the variance percentage from 1.8% to 1.9% of the variance in perceptions of the LGBTIQ+ community, with a significant predictive value for perceptions of the LGBTIQ+ community and criminalization dimensions (β= -.04, SE = .02, p = .05). Considering this, the third hypothesis, which proposed that age significantly predicts severe criminalization in LGBTIQ+ people such that younger participants are more liberal than their older counterparts in their perception, was accepted. Moreover, there was a change in the second step; the change was also significant enough to require an empirical difference by revealing a joint prediction of sex and age. This implies that the ‘gender’ component alone can make a difference, as seen in the inverse relationship of beta, which means that male participants reported more severe criminal sentencing than females did, and the ‘age’ component, in addition to gender, also had a significant impact. Furthermore, at step three, when ‘educational qualification’ was added, the model changed to 2.3% variance in perceptions of the LGBTIQ+ community, and criminalization dimensions were explained by the three dimensions (gender, age and educational qualification) F (3, 301) = 2.34, p = .07. Educational qualification almost significantly moderated the relationship between ‘gender’ and ‘age’ (β = .06, SE = .03, p = .07). That is, those with OND (M = 18.18, SD = 8.23), SSCE (M = 16.62, SD = 7.76), and HND/BSc (M = 16.13, SD = 8.29) scores were taller than those at both extremes of the educational range. In other words, participants with meager educational qualifications and those with very high qualifications reported less severe criminal sentencing/measurement in the LGBTIQ+ community: PGD/MSC (M = 13.80, SD = 8.01), PhD (M =13.23, SD = 8.02), and FSLC (M = 13.17, SD = 10.87). Therefore, the fourth hypothesis was not tested.

Table 4: Summary of item-by-item analysis results for participants in the Uyo metropolis

Items

1(n/%)

2(n/%)

3(n/%)

4(n/%)

5(n/%)

6(n/%)

7(n/%)

8(n/%)

What treatment is ideal for lesbian women caught in homosexual

acts (women who have sex with women)?

82(27.2)

133(44.0)

24(7.9)

13(4.3)

15(5.0)

16(5.3)

13(4.3)

6(2.0)

What treatment is ideal for gay men caught in homosexual acts (men who have sex with men)?

68(22.5)

129(42.7)

22(7.3)

18(6.0)

26(8.6)

15(5.0)

6(2.0)

How do you think transsexuals (people who undergo surgical operation to change their sex organs and bodies to that of the opposite sex) should be treated?

67(22.2)

122(40.4)

19(6.3)

4(1.3)

17(5.6)

35(11.6)

32(10.6)

6(2.0)

How do you think bestial (people who have sex with animals, e.g., dogs, horse, chicken) should be treated?

25(8.3)

138(45.7)

12(4.0)

6(2.0)

9(3.0)

42(13.9)

63(20.9)

7(2.3)

How do you think necrophiliacs (people who have sex with corpse, dead humans) should be treated?

15(5.0)

132(43.7)

7(2.3)

9(3.0)

7(2.3)

20(6.6)

104(34.4)

8(2.6)

Note: 1 = Leave them alone it is their life; 2 = They are mentally sick and should be treated in a psychiatric hospital; 3 = Five years jail term; 4 = Ten years jail term; 5 = Twenty years jail term; 6 = Life in prison, 7 = Death sentence or they should be executed/killed’, and 8 = No Response.

The item-by-item analysis in Table 2 revealed the qualitative outcome of the study. Here, additional findings showed that most respondents suggested severe measures such as death sentence/execution and life in prison for people with necrophilia and bestial and transsexual orientations. At the same time, they were moderate toward gay and lesbian individuals. Positive correlations were highest for the perception of lesbian or gay (r = 0.87, p<0.01) and were similar for the other categories. The details are given in the following paragraphs. When asked “What treatment is ideal for lesbian women caught in homosexual acts (women who have sex with women)?” The majority, 133 (44.0%), suggested that they should be labeled ‘mentally sick’, and instead of handling them with a 14-year jail sentence as stipulated by the SSMPA, they should be sentenced to the asylum where they will be given psychiatric attention, which invariably will serve as their punishment and help them recover. Next, 82 (27.2%) reported that nothing should be done to such people (i.e., lesbians) because they have the right to choose their sexual preference, and they should be left alone. However, 24 (7.9%) suggested that such a category of LGBTIQ+ should be jailed for 5 years instead of the 14-year jail provided by Nigerian law. Additionally, 16 (5.3%) recommended life imprisonment; 15 (5.0%) suggested a 20-year jail term, an additional 6 years to the 14-year jail term, which is already a law. The item-by-item analysis yielded a draw response of 13 (4.3%), where one group suggested a 10-year jail term and the other group of the same percentage indicated that capital punishment should be handed to such person(s). Finally, 6 (2.0%) participants chose not to respond to this question and were neutral.

When the second statement was posed to participants, “What treatment is ideal for gay men caught in homosexual acts (men who have sex with men)?”, there was slight variation in the results, as the majority (42.7%) suggested that they should be labeled ‘mentally sick’; instead of handling them a 14-year jail sentence as stipulated by law, they should be sentenced to the asylum where they will be given psychiatric attention. Similarly, 68 (22.5%) reported that nothing should be done to such people (i.e., gays) because they have the right to choose their sexual preference. However, 26 (8.6%) suggested that this category of LGBTIQ+ should be jailed for life. Additionally, 22 (7.3%) recommended a 5-year imprisonment; the item-by-item analysis had a draw response of 18 (6.0%), where one group suggested a 10-year jail term and the other group of the same percentage suggested a 20-year jail term. Fifteen (5.0%) of the respondents recommended the death sentence for homosexuals, while 6 (2.0%) did not respond to this question.

The third statement, “How do you think transsexuals (people who undergo a surgical operation to change their sex organs and bodies to that of the opposite sex) should be treated?”, was quizzed. The response showed once again that the majority (122; 40.4%) suggested that they be labeled ‘mentally sick’, and instead of handling them with a 14-year jail sentence as stipulated by the SSMPA, they should be sentenced to the asylum where they will be given psychiatric attention, which invariably will serve as their punishment and help them recover. Sixty-seven (22.2%) participants reported that nothing should be done by such people (i.e., transsexuals) because they have the right to choose their sexual preference and because they should be left alone. However, 35 (11.6%) recommended a life sentence for such a category. While 32 (10.6%) recommended that they be handed life imprisonment, 19 (6.3%) suggested that this category of LGBTIQ+ should be jailed for 5 years instead of the 14-year jail provided by Nigerian law. Additionally, 17 (5.6%) suggested a 20-year jail term. Four (1.3%) participants suggested a 10-year jail term; again, 6 (2.0%) participants chose not to respond to this question and were neutral.

Furthermore, according to the fourth statement, “How do you think bestial (people who have sex with animals, e.g., dogs, horses, chickens) should be treated?”, this time, their response deviated sharply from all their previous ones except the first one. The majority, 138 (45.6%), suggested that they be labeled ‘mentally sick’, and instead of handling them with a 14-year jail sentence as stipulated by the SSMPA, they should be sentenced to the asylum where they will be given psychiatric attention, which invariably will serve as their punishment and help them recover. However, during this time, the second 63 (20.9%) of the participants recommended that they receive capital punishment; 25 (8.3%) suggested that they should be left alone to live their life the way they deem fit; 42 (13.9%) also indicated that they should hand life imprisonment; 12 (4.0%) suggested that this category of LGBTIQ+ should be jailed for 5 years; 9 (3.0%) indicated a 20-year jail term; and 6 (2.0%) suggested a 10-year jail term; again, 7 (2.3%) chose not to respond to this question.

Finally, the fifth question was presented to the participants: “How do you think necrophiliacs (people who have sex with corpses, dead humans) should be treated?”, 132 (43.7%) still believed that they should be labeled ‘mentally sick’, and instead of handling a 14-year jail sentence as stipulated by the SSMPA, they should be sentenced to the asylum where they will be given psychiatric attention.104 (34.4%) recommended a death penalty for this category, 20 (6.6%) recommended life in prison, 15 (5.0%) said that nothing should be done to them, 9 (3.0%) suggested a 10-year jail term, 7 (2.3%) recommended that a 20-year jail term be given to such persons, and another 7 (2.3%) suggested not responding to this question. Given the above, the fifth hypothesis, which states that there would be a high rate of intolerance and acceptability of necrophilia and bestiality in criminal sentencing compared to gays and lesbians, was confirmed. This can be delineated from the item-by-item analysis in which more participants—104 (34.4%)—were intolerant of necrophilia and recommended the death penalty as punishment in criminalization, second only to bestial, who was 63 (20.9%). Considering the option for life imprisonment, the highest number of participants, 42 (13.9), was recorded for bestial. This was further confirmed by 138 (45.7%) recommended mental asylum for bestials, while 132 (43.7%) recommended the same psychiatric treatment as punishment for necrophilia defaulters. Conversely, aligning with the fifth hypothesis, participants were more liberal for lesbian individuals (82, 27.2%), gay individuals (68, 22.5%), and transsexual individuals (67, 22.2%). The lowest number of participants who were liberal toward necrophilia was 15 (5.0%).

In this study, we confirmed the first hypothesis, which stated that there would be a high prevalence of perceived severe criminalization of LGBTIQ + persons in Nigeria. These findings are in line with the work of Giwa et al. (2020) and the nationwide study of the TIERS (2022). These studies revealed that most respondents still do not accept a family member who is LGBTIQ+. We also confirmed the second hypothesis that the gender identity of participants would significantly predict severe criminalization of LGBTIQ + persons such that males would be more vicious than females. This finding is a possible explanation for this finding, which can be seen rationally: most men reason and interpret life, whereas females utilize their emotions and are more perceptive, especially in a patriarchal society such as Nigeria. These findings corroborate the work of Christopher and Cook (2021), who discovered that one-third of the factors responsible for sexual orientation were genetic, of which sex was a subset or genetically controlled.

However, the third hypothesis, which proposed that age significantly predicts severe criminalization in LGBTIQ + people such that younger participants are more liberal than their older counterparts are, was not confirmed. However, age and sex were combined to predict the criterion variable. This finding agrees with the study of TIERS (2022), which showed that people younger than 55 years were likely to accept homosexuality. The fourth hypothesis, which stated that the educational qualification of participants would significantly predict severe criminalization of LGBTIQ + persons, such that more educated participants would be more liberal than their less educated counterparts in their perception, was not accepted. Although the educational component did not significantly predict the criterion variable independently or jointly, the one-way ANOVA results indicated that participants in the middle of the academic range reported more severe criminal sentencing/measures in the LGBTIQ + community. In other words, participants with meager educational qualifications and those with very high qualifications reported less severe criminal sentencing/measures to the LGBTIQ + community in Nigeria. This finding aligns with Emile Durkheim’s social integration theory that personal inclinations are conditioned by shared cultural orientations and social systems such as education, religion, and culture (Adeboye, 2016; Amoah & Gyasi, 2016; Arimoro, 2018; Durkheim, 1987; Durkheim, 2005; Zhang et al., 2020). The fifth hypothesis, which stated that there would be a high rate of intolerance and acceptability of necrophilia and bestiality in criminal sentencing compared to gays and lesbians, was retained. This finding can likely be attributed to the three influences of culture, religion, and criminalization on sexual preferences, such as LGBTIQ+. Hence, any addition to the already ‘unsettling’ sexual orientation, as seen by the majority of the people, can bring about severe disgust and a high rate of intolerance to necrophilia and bestiality, as seen in the study. This finding underscores the urgent need for societal change and acceptance and the importance of addressing these issues in public discourse, as they are crucial for the well-being and rights of the LGBTIQ + community.

The present study synthesized participants' cross-sectional and analytical data to yield a holistic picture of the LGBTIQ + community in a cosmopolitan Nigerian city. Conclusively, the challenges (referred to as 'vicissitudes') faced by LGBTIQ + persons in a typical Nigerian society are diverse and require urgent psychosocial attention. The study was built on social science research methods by constructing and validating a 5-item PLGBTIQ-CSS, uniquely assessing perceptions of the LGBTIQ + community and criminalization projections. This scale, being new and fitting, provides nuanced insights into the diverse patterns of sexual orientations and societal acceptance of the ever-evolving trend.

The outcome of this study brings us to the dynamism and understanding that the negative feelings and rejection of the LGBTIQ + community make such persons very uncomfortable in Nigeria. The LGBTIQ + community in other parts of Africa and the world is not criminalized or accepted; thus, the social cloak of neglect and disdain may not be worn around their 'neck', as seen in this study. The current criminalization of LGBTIQ + activities and communities worsens the situation for these sets of Nigerians. Apart from the pressure to compel them to be law-abiding, these LGBTIQ + participants may desire to retain their sexual preference, be afforded their fundamental rights, and be socially accepted like any other person in society. This also brings to the fore the generalizing of our findings to other members of the LGBTIQ + in Nigeria. However, with some caution, the views expressed by participants are balanced representations of what they feel about LGBTIQ + members in Nigeria. The prevalence of perceived severe criminalization of LGBTIQ + persons in Nigeria was relatively high, which reflects a glimpse of what happens on a day-to-day basis among the LGBTIQ + community in Nigeria, especially at their place of work, school, and religious gatherings. Gender, especially male sex, frowned during the activities of LGBTIQ + individuals who experienced neglect and nonacceptance, while age and sex jointly contributed to the criterion variable. The evolving perpetuation of these unpopular media outlets, such as bestial and necrophilia, further compounded the challenges faced by these individuals. However, to address these issues, it is crucial to foster awareness, structured intervention programs, special education, and aggressive promotion of inclusive policies among LGBTIQ + persons.

Invariably, a multipronged approach is essential for addressing the mindset of the majority of Nigerians to realize that demonizing and dehumanizing LGBTIQ + is not a civilized and correct approach to adoption, assuming that their perceptions are empirical and objective. It is pertinent for people, communities, institutions, and governmental bodies to begin improving the standard of life among marginalized communities such as LGBTIQ + persons via legal mediums. Next, one should advocate for inclusive legislation and policies at the micro, meso, and macro levels, such as employment anti-discrimination laws, education, housing, healthcare, and education against LGBTIQ + individuals. More significantly, sensitization programs should be organized to forge empathy and understanding and promote LGBTIQ + diversity and inclusion in such a way that/they will dispel hate and have a good media projection; hence, psychological assessments and insightful counseling should be encouraged among LGBTIQ + persons. A significant limitation of the study is the survey instrument used, which may not address other issues surrounding the criterion variable. Another factor is the possibility of social desirability bias, which involves concealing one's genuine opinion to make oneself appear suitable before others. Future studies should include a comparative analysis and structured interviews of participants on their perceptions of LGBTIQ + criminalization and projected pathways. Future researchers can also employ diverse samples from different states of Nigeria, and more robust longitudinal methodologies should be applied.

Author Contributions

Organization, validation, reliability and statistical analysis: David Okanandu Iloma. Conceptualization and draft preparation: James Edem Effiong. Writing - review and editing: Ignatius Nnamdi Ijere. All the authors have agreed to publish the manuscript after thoroughly reading through.

Disclosure statement of interest

The author(s) declare no conflicts of interest or potential conflicts of interest whatsoever with regard to this article.

Data availability statement

The data supporting the findings were stored in software and can be produced by the corresponding author when needed.

Ethical considerations and informed consent

Ethical research clearance was obtained from the Research and Ethics Committee of Topfaith University, Akwa Ibom State, Nigeria, with the certificate reference number TUM23-RECNO-EX002, while informed consent was objectively obtained from participants through a formal letter attached to the first page of the instruments administered.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research from any institution or individual.

ORCID iD

David O. Iloma https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4370-437x

James E. Effionghttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-0990-9811

Ignatius Ijere https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2400-9806

Adebanjo, A. T. (2015) ‘Culture, morality and the law: Nigeria’s anti-gay law in perspective’, International Journal of Discrimination and the Law, 15(4), pp. 256–270.
Adeboye, E. (2016). Reversing the irreversible: Classic expositions from the Holy Ghost. Technopol Publishers.
Adeoye, A. (2019) Nigerian police officer tells gays: leave country or face prosecution. Available at: https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/23/health/nigeria-police-gayprosecution-warning/index.html
Ahaneku, H., Ross, M. W., Nyoni, J. E., Selwyn, B., Troisi, C., Mbwambo, J., Adeboye, A., & McCurdy, S. (2016). Depression and HIV risk among men who have sex with men in Tanzania. AIDS Care, 28(sup1), 140–147.
Alday-Mondaca, C., & Lay-Lisboa, S. (2021). The impact of internalized stigma on LGBT parenting and the importance of health care structures: A qualitative study. International Journal of Environment, Resources and Public Health, 18, 5373. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18105373
Allport, G. W., Clark, K., & Pettigrew, T. (1954). The nature of prejudice.
Alozie, N., Thomas, K., & Akpan-Obong, P. (2017). Global liberalization on homosexuality: Explaining the African gap. The Social Science Journal, 54(2), 120–131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soscij.2016.09.001
Amnesty International, Amnesty International Report 2015/16 - Nigeria, 24 February 2016, available at: https://www.refworld.org/docid/56d05b2915.html [accessed 16 May 2019].
Amoah, P., & Gyasi, R. (2016). Social institutions and same-sex sexuality: Attitudes, perceptions and prospective rights and freedoms for nonheterosexuals. Cogent Social Sciences, 2(1), 1198219. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2016.1198219
Andersen, M., & Taylor, H. F. (2007). Sociology: Understanding a diverse society (4th ed.). Thomson Learning.
Andrews, T. (2013). What is social constructionism? The Grounded Theory Review, 11(1), 39–46.
Arimoro, A. (2018). When love is a crime: Is the criminalization of same sex relations in Nigeria a protection of Nigerian culture? Liverpool Law Review, 39(2), 221–238. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10991-018-9217-y
Asue, D. U. (2018). A Catholic inclusive approach to homosexuality in Nigeria. Theology Today, 74(4), 396-408 https://doi:10.1177/0040573617731710
Baams, L., Grossman, A. H., & Russell, S. T. (2015). Minority stress and mechanisms of risk for depression and suicidal ideation among lesbian, gay, and bisexual youth. Developmental Psychology, 51, 688–696. https://doi: 10.1037/a0038994
Balsam, K. F., Rothblum, E. D., & Beauchaine, T. P. (2005). Victimization over the life span: A comparison of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and heterosexual siblings. Journal of Consultant Clinical Psychology, 73:477. https://doi: 10.1037/0022-006X.73.3.477
Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1991). The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. Penguin Books.
Bieber, I. (1962). Homosexuality—A Psychoanalytic Study of Male Homosexuals. United States: Basic Books.
Bieber, I. (1967). “Homosexuality,” in Comprehensive Textbook of Psychiatry. eds. A. M. Freedman and H. Kaplan (United States: Williams and Wilkins), 963-976.
Bieber, I. (1969). Homosexuality. American Journal of Nursing, 69, 2637-2641.
Cass, V. (1996). “Sexual orientation identity formation: A Western phenomenon,” in Textbook of Homosexuality and Mental Health. eds. R. P. Cabaj and T. S. Stein (Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Association), 227–251.
Cass, V. C. (1979). Homosexuality identity formation: A theoretical model. Journal of Homosexuality, 4, 219-235.
Cass, V. C. (1984). Homosexual identity formation: Testing a theoretical model. J. Sex Res., 20, 143-167.
Centre for Evidence-Based Crime Policy. (2017). What is broken windows policing? Department of Criminology. Retrieved September 26, 2017, from https://cebcp.org/evidence-based-policing/what-works-in-policing/research-evidence-review/broken-windows-policing/
Choi, S. K., & Meyer, I. H. (2016). LGBT aging: A review of research findings, needs, and policy implications. United States: Williams Institute.
Christopher, C. H., & Cook, H. (2021). The causes of human sexual orientation. Theology & Sexuality, 27(1), 1-19, https://doi: 10.1080/13558358.2020.1818541
Clark, B. (2013). The broken windows theory and how context defines meaning and motivation. Precision Profiling [Blog]. From http://precisionprofiling.com.au/the-broken-window-theoryand-how-context-defines-meaning-and-motivation/
Devine, P. G. (1989). Stereotypes and prejudice: Their automatic and controlled components. Journal of personality and social psychology, 56(1), 5.
Dowler, K., & Zawilski, V. (2015). Hate crime victimization, 2004–2012—Statistical tables. Bureau of Justice Statistics.
Drescher, J. (2015). Out of DSM: depathologizing homosexuality. Behavioral Science, 5, 565-575. https://doi: 10.3390/bs5040565
Drushel, B. E. (2017). LGBTQ representation and the concept of community. Locating queerness in the media: A New Look, 11-24.
Durkheim, E. (1987). Suicide. The Free Press.
Dutta, D., & Srinivasan, V. (2024). Inclusion for LGBTQ talent: A practice theory approach. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion, Vol. ahead-of-print No. ahead-of-print. https://doi.org/10.1108/EDI-09-2023-0296
Endong, F., & Calvain, P. (2015). Christian resistance to gay proselytism in secular Nigeria: Anathema or social heroism? European Review of Applied Sociology, 8(11), 6-13. https://doi:10.1515/eras-2015-0006
Everett, B. G. (2013). Sexual orientation disparities in sexually transmitted infections: examining the intersection between sexual identity and sexual behavior. Arch. Sex. Behav. 42, 225-236. https://doi: 10.1007/s10508-012-9902-1
Folayan, M. O., Yakusik, A., Enemo, A., Sunday, A., Muhammad, A., Nyako, H. Y., Abdullah, R. M., Okiwu, H., & Lamontagne, E. (2023). Socioeconomic inequality, health inequity and well‑being of transgender people during the COVID‑19 pandemic in Nigeria. BMC Public Health, 23:1539, 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-023-16482-1
Fredriksen-Goldsen, K. I., Kim, H. J., Barkan, S. E., Muraco, A., & Hoy-Ellis, C. P. (2013). Health disparities among lesbian, gay, and bisexual older adults: Results from a population-based study. American Journal of Public Health, 103, 1802-1809. https://doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2012.301110
Freud, S. (1905). “Three essays on the theory of sexuality and trans,” in The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud. Vol. 7. ed. J. Strachey (United Kingdom: Hogarth Press), 123-245.
Freud, S. (1935). “Anonymous (letter to an American mother),” in The Letters of Sigmund Freud. ed. E. Freud (United Kingdom: Hogarth Press), 423–424.
Friedman, M. S., Marshal, M. P., Guadamuz, T. E., Wei, C., Wong, C. F., Saewyc, E. M., et al. (2011). A meta-analysis of disparities in childhood sexual abuse, parental physical abuse, and peer victimization among sexual minority and sexual nonminority individuals. American Journal of Public Health, 101, 1481–1494. https://doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2009.190009
Frohn, D. J. T. (2013). Subjective theories of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transsexual employees concerning how they deal with their sexual or gender identity in the workplace - An exploratory qualitative study. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 14(3), https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-14.3.1933
Giwa, S. A. O., Logie, C. H., Karki, K. K., Makanjuola, O. F., & Obiagwu, C. E. (2020). Police violence targeting LGBTIQ+ people in Nigeria: Advancing solutions for a 21st century challenge. Greenwich Social Work Review, 1(1), 36-49. https://doi.org/10.21100/gswr.v1i1.1108
Gladstone, R. (2014). Nigerian President signs ban on same-sex relationships. The New York Times.
Gonzales, G., & Henning-Smith, C. (2017). Health disparities by sexual orientation: results and implications from the Behavioral risk factor surveillance system. Journal of Community Health, 42, 1163-1172. https://doi: 10.1007/s10900-017-0366-z
Hall, W. J., Dawes, H. C., & Plocek, N. (2021). Sexual orientation identity development milestones among lesbian, gay, bisexual, and queer people: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 12:753954. https://doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.753954
Herek, G. M. (2009). Sexual stigma and sexual prejudice in the United States: A conceptual framework. In Contemporary perspectives on lesbian, gay, and bisexual identities (pp. 65-111). New York, NY: Springer New York.
Herek, G. M. (2015). Beyond “homophobia”: Thinking about sexual prejudice and stigma in the twenty-first century. Sexuality Research & Social Policy Journal of NSRC, 12(1), 1-17.
Human Rights Watch, “Tell Me Where I Can Be Safe': The Impact of Nigeria’s Same Sex Marriage (Prohibition) Act.” (2016). https://www.hrw.org/report/2016/10/20/tell-me- where-i-can-be-safe/impact-nigerias-same-sex-marriage-prohibition-act
Human Rights Watch. (2016). Tell me where I can be safe. The impact of Nigeria’s same sex marriage. https://www.hrw.org/report/2016/10/20/tell-me-where-i-can-be-safe/impact-nigerias-same-sex-marriage-prohibition-act#page
Igundunasse, A., Odiase, N., & Alao, T. (2019). What is it like for a Gay, Nigerian Male living in Nigeria? American Journal of Qualitative Research, 3(1): 20-36. https://doi.org/10.29333/ajqr/5809
Kamody, R. C., Grilo, C. M., & Udo, T. (2020). Disparities in DSM-5 defined eating disorders by sexual orientation among US adults. International Journal of Eating Disorder, 53, 278–287. https://doi: 10.1002/eat.23193
KatzWise, S. L., & Hyde, J. S. (2012). Victimization experiences of lesbian, gay, and bisexual individuals: A meta-analysis. The Journal of Sex Research, 49(2–3), 142-167. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2011.637247
Kelling, G. L., & Wilson, J. Q. (1982). Broken windows: The police and neighborhood safety. Atlantic Monthly, 249(3), 29-38.
Krafft-Ebing, R. (1965). Psychopathia Sexualis. New York: Paperback Library.
Laumann, E. O., Gagnon, J. H., Michael, R. T., & Michaels, S. (1994). The social organization of sexuality: Sexual practices in the United States. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Leaders of the Global Fund, UNAIDS and PEPFAR (June 22, 2023). LGBTQ+: a community united by stigma. Editorial, e421 https://doi.org/10.1016/S2352-3018(23)00147-9
Lewes, K. (1988). The Psychoanalytic Theory of Male Homosexuality. United States: Simon and Schuster.
Lumen Learning. (2017). The social construction of gender: introduction to Sociology. Retrieved June 20, 2018, from https://courses.lumenlearning.com/cochise-sociology-os/chapter/the-social-construction-of-gender/
Major, B., & Eccleston, C. P. (2004). Stigma and social exclusion. In Social psychology of inclusion and exclusion (pp. 81-106). Psychology Press.
Makanjuola, O., Folayan, M., & Oginni, O. (2018). On being gay in Nigeria: Discrimination, mental health distress, and coping. Journal of Gay & Lesbian Mental Health, 22(4), 372-384.
Mapayi, B. M., Oginni, A., Akinsulore, A., & Aloba, O. O. (2016). Homophobia and perceptions about homosexuality among students of a tertiary institution in Nigeria. Gender and Behavior, 14(30), 7624-7637.
Marshal, M. P., Dietz, L. J., Friedman, M. S., Stall, R., Smith, H. A., & McGinley, J. (2011). Suicidality and depression disparities between sexual minority and heterosexual youth: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Adolescent Health, 49, 115–123. https://doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2011.02.005
Mays, V. M., & Cochran, S. D. (2001). Mental health correlates of perceived discrimination among lesbian, gay, and bisexual adults in the United States. American Journal of Public Health, 91(11), 1869-1876.
Mendos, L. R. (2019). State-sponsored homophobia.13th ed. Available at: https://ilga.org/downloads/ILGA_State_Sponsored_Homophobia_2019_light.pdf
Meynert, M. J. (2015). Conceptualizations of childhood, pedagogy and educational research in the postmodern era: A critical interpretation. Cambridge Scholars.
Miletski, H. (2002). Understanding Bestiality & Zoophilia. Bethesda: East‒West Publishing.
Miller, J. M., & Luk, J. W. (2019). A systematic review of sexual orientation disparities in disordered eating and weight-related behaviors among adolescents and young adults: Toward a developmental model. Adol. Res. Rev., 4, 187-208. https://doi: 10.1007/s40894-018-0079-2
Morgan, E. M. (2012). Contemporary issues in sexual orientation and identity development in emerging adulthood. Emerging Adulthood, 1, 52-66. https://doi:10.1177/2F2167696812469187
Morgan, E. M. (2012). Contemporary issues in sexual orientation and identity development in emerging adulthood. Emerging Adulthood, 1, 52–66. https://doi: 10.1177/2F2167696812469187
Morris, J. F., Balsam, K. F., & Rothblum, E. D. (2002). Lesbian and bisexual mothers and nonmothers: Demographics and the coming-out process. Journal of Family Psychology, 16:144. https://doi: 10.1037/0893-3200.16.2.144
Mustanski, B., Kuper, L., & Greene, G. J. (2014). “Development of sexual orientation and identity. In APA handbook of sexuality and psychology,” in Person-Based Approaches. Vol. 1. eds. D. L. Tolman, and L. M. Diamond (United States: American Psychological Association), 597–628.
Nadeem, M. (2013). Beyond misfortune and fault: Islam, same-sex sexuality and liberation. [Master's Thesis University of Johannesburg].
Nkosi, S., & Masson, F. (2017). Christianity and homosexuality: Contradictory or complimentary? A qualitative study of the experiences of Christian homosexual university students. South African Journal of Higher Education, 31(4), 72–93. https://doi.org/10.20853/31-4-891
Nwaubani, A. (2017, May 17). LGBT acceptance slowly grows in Nigeria, despite anti-gay laws. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-nigeria-lgbt-survey/lgbt-acceptance-slowlygrows-in-nigeria-despite-anti-gay-laws-idUSKCN18C2T8
Nwazuoke, A. N., & Igwe, C. A. (2016). A critical review of Nigeria’s Same Sex Marriage (Prohibition) Act. JL Pol’y & Globalization, 45, 179.
Obasola, K. E. (2013). An ethical perspective of homosexuality among the African people. European Journal of Business and Social Sciences, 12, 77-85.
Obidimma, E., & Obidimma, A. (2013). The travails of same sex marriage relations under Nigerian law. Journal of Law, Policy & Globalization, 17, 42-48.
Oduah, C. (2014, January 26). Gay Nigerians targeted as “un-African.” Aljazeera Online. https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2014/1/26/gay-nigerians-targeted-as-unafrican
Oginni, O. A., Mapayi, B. M., Afolabi, O. T., Obiajunwa, C., & Oloniniyi, I. O. (2019). Internalized homophobia, coping, and quality of life among Nigerian gay and bisexual men. Journal of Homosexuality, 1-24.
Oginni, O. A., Mosaku, K. S., Mapayi, B. M., Akinsulore, A., & Afolabi, T. O. (2017). Depression and associated factors among gay and heterosexual male university students in Nigeria. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 47(4), 1119–1132. https://doi:10.1007/s10508-017-0987-4
Ogueji, I. A. & Ogueji, A. M. (2022). What are the lived experiences of LGBT persons in Nigeria? A qualitative study informing nondiscriminatory psychosocial interventions. Trends in Psychology, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43076-022-00241-z
Ogunbajo, A., Iwuagwu, S., Williams, R., Biello, K. B., Kahler, C. W., Sandfort, T. G. M., & Mimiaga, M. J. (2021). Experiences of minority stress among gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (GBMSM) in Nigeria: The intersection of mental health, substance use, and HIV sexual risk behavior. Glob Public Health, 16(11): 1696–1710. https://doi:10.1080/17441692.2020.1834598.
Okanlawon, K. (2017). Homophobic bullying in Nigerian schools: The experiences of LGBT university students. Journal of LGBT Youth, 14(1), 51–70. https://doi.org/10.1080/19361653.2016.1256244
Okanlawon, K. (2018). Cultures of public intervention regarding LGBTQ issues after Nigeria's Same-Sex Marriage Prohibition Act (SSMPA). College Literature, 45(4), 641-651.
Okanlawon, K. (2020). Homophobia in Nigerian schools and universities: Victimization, mental health issues, resilience of the LGBT students and support from straight allies, a literature review. Journal of LGBT Youth. https://doi.org/10.1080/19361653.2020.1749211
Okuefuna, S. O. (2016). LGBT and the law: Protecting the rights of minorities in Nigeria. Masters Degree Thesis.
Olaogun, O. J. (2024). The Experiences and challenges of LGBTQ+ individuals in accessing social work practices in Nigeria. African Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities Research, 7(2), 66-76. https://doi 10.52589/AJSSHR-BVMKK508
Olumide, M., Morenike, O., & Olakunle, A. (2018). On being gay in Nigeria: Discrimination, mental health distress, and coping. Journal of Gay & Lesbian Mental Health, 22(4), 372–384. https://doi.org/10.1080/19359705.2018.1482809
Operario, D., Gamarel, K. E., Grin, B. M., Lee, J. H., Kahler, C. W., & Marshall, B. D. (2015). Sexual minority health disparities in adult men and women in the United States: National Health and nutrition examination survey, 2001–2010. American Journal of Public Health, 105, e27–e34. https://doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2015. 302762
Petrocchi, N., Pistella, J., Salvati, M., Carone, N., Laghi, F., & Baiocco, R. (2020). I embrace my LGB identity: Self-reassurance, social safeness, and the distinctive relevance of authenticity to well-being in Italian lesbians, gay men, and bisexual people. Sexual. Res. Soc. Policy, 17, 75-86. https://doi: 10.1007/s13178-018-0373-6
Pew Research Center’s Global Attitudes Project. (2020). The Global Divide on Homosexuality Persists. [online] Available at: https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2020/06/25/global-divide-on-homosexualitypersists/
Puckett, J. A., Horne, S. G., Surace, F., Carter, A., Noffsinger-Frazier, N., & Shulman, J. (2017). Predictors of sexual minority youth’s reported suicide attempts and mental health. Journal of Homosexuality, 64, 697-715. https://doi: 10.1080/00918369.2016.1196999
Rado, S. (1940). A critical examination of the concept of bisexuality. Psychosom. Med. 2, 459–467. https://doi: 10.1097/00006842-194010000-00007
Rado, S. (1949). “An adaptational view of sexual behavior,” in Psychosexual Development in Health and Disease. eds. P. H. Hoch and J. Zubin (New York: Grune and Stratton), 159-189.
Raifman, J., Charlton, B. M., Arrington-Sanders, R., Chan, P. A., Rusley, J., & Mayer, K. H. (2020). Sexual orientation and suicide attempt disparities among US adolescents: 2009–2017. Pediatrics 145:20191658. https://doi: 10.1542/peds.2019-1658
Refworld (2019). Nigeria: Same Sex Marriage (Prohibition) Act, 2013. Available at: https://www.refworld.org/docid/52f4d9cc4.html
Reynolds, A. L., & Hanjorgiris, W. F. (2000). “Coming out: lesbian, gay, and bisexual identity development,” in Handbook of Counseling and Psychotherapy with Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Clients. eds. R. M. Perez, K. A. DeBord and K. J. Bieschke (United States: American Psychological Association), 35-55.
Rice, C. E., Vasilenko, S. A., Fish, J. N., & Lanza, S. T. (2019). Sexual minority health disparities: An examination of age-related trends across adulthood in a national cross-sectional sample. Ann. Epidemiol. 31, 20-25. https://doi: 10.1016/j.annepidem.2019.01.001
Riggle, E. D., Mohr, J. J., Rostosky, S. S., Fingerhut, A. W., & Balsam, K. F. (2014). A multifactor lesbian, gay, and bisexual positive identity measure (LGB-PIM). Psychol. Sex. Orientat. Gend. Divers. 1, 398-411. https://doi: 10.1037/sgd0000057
Riggle, E. D., Rostosky, S. S., Black, W. W., & Rosenkrantz, D. E. (2017). Outness, concealment, and authenticity: associations with LGB individuals’ psychological distress and well-being. Psychol. Sex. Orientat. Gend. Divers. 4, 54-62. https://doi: 10.1037/sgd0000202
Rodriguez-Hart, C., Bradley, C., German, D., Musci, R., Orazulike, I., Baral, S., Liu, H., Crowell, T.A., Charurat, M., & Nowak, R. G. (2018). The synergistic impact of sexual stigma and psychosocial well-being on HIV Testing: A mixed-methods study among nigerian men who have sex with men. AIDS and Behavior, 22(12), 3905-3915.
Ross, L. E., Salway, T., Tarasoff, L. A., MacKay, J. M., Hawkins, B. W., & Fehr, C. P. (2018). Prevalence of depression and anxiety among bisexual people compared to gay, lesbian, and heterosexual individuals: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J. Sex Res. 55, 435–456. https://doi: 10.1080/00224499.2017.1387755
Rostosky, S. S., Cardom, R. D., Hammer, J. H., & Riggle, E. D. (2018). LGB positive identity and psychological well-being. Psychological Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity, 5, 482-489. https://doi: 10.1037/sgd0000298
Rouget, V. (2021). Tolerance still in short supply for LGBT rights in Sub-Saharan Africa. [online] Controlrisks.com. Available at: <https://www.controlrisks.com/our-thinking/insights/tolerance-stillin-short-supply-for-lgbt-rights-in-subsaharan-africa> [Accessed 24 February 2022].
Same Sex Marriage Prohibition Act (2013). Nigr. Retrieved from https://www.refworld. org/pdfid/52f4d9 cc4.pdf
Savin-Williams, R. C. (2019). “Developmental trajectories and milestones of sexual-minority youth,” in The Cambridge Handbook of Sexual Development: Childhood and Adolescence. eds. S. Lamb and J. Gilbert (United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press), 156–179.
Savin-Williams, R. C., and Cohen, K. M. (2015). Developmental trajectories and milestones of lesbian, gay, and bisexual young people. Int. Rev. Psychiatry 27, 357–366. https://doi: 10.3109/09540261.2015.1093465
Schuler, M. S., Rice, C. E., Evans-Polce, R. J., & Collins, R. L. (2018). Disparities in substance use behaviors and disorders among adult sexual minorities by age, gender, and sexual identity. Drug Alcohol Depend. 189, 139-146. https://doi:10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2018.05.008
Schwartz, G., Kim, R. M., Kolundzija, A. B., Rieger, G., & Sanders, A. R. (2010). Biodemographic and physical correlates of sexual orientation in men. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 39, 93–109.
Servick, K. (2014). New support for “gay gene.” Science, 346(6212), 902-902. https://doi:10.1126/science.346.6212.902
Sibanyoni, E. K., Mkhize, S., & Amali, S. E. (2023). LGBTQIA+ victimization: A theoretical discourse. Sexuality, Gender & Policy, 6(4), 253-262. https://doi.org/10.1002/sgp2.12080
Silverberg, C. (2017, July 14). A dalmatian dog sitting against a white background. Retrieved from https://brainly.in/question/2135926
Socarides, C. (1968). The Overt Homosexual. New York: Grune and Stratton. Savin-Williams, R. C., and Cohen, K. M. (2015). Developmental trajectories and milestones of lesbian, gay, and bisexual young people. International Review of Psychiatry, 27, 357-366. https://doi: 10.3109/09540261.2015.1093465
Sogunro, A. (2017). Discriminating against persons based on sexual orientation and gender identity expression in Nigeria. Available at: https://theinitiativeforequalrights.org/wpcontent/uploads/2017/12/Compenduim-of-Law-.pdf
Soyinka, W. (1972). The Man Died. New York: Harper & Row. p. 13.
Stahlman, S., Grosso, A., Ketende, S., Pitche, V., Kouanda, S., Ceesay, N., Ouedraogo, H.G., Ky-Zerbo, O., Lougue, M., & Diouf, D. (2016). Suicidal ideation among MSM in three West African countries: associations with stigma and social capital. International Journal of Social Psychiatry, 62(6), 522-531.
Strutz, K. L., Herring, A. H., & Halpern, C. T. (2015). Health disparities among young adult sexual minorities in the US. Am. J. Prev. Med., 48, 76–88. https://doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2014.07.038
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2013). Using multivariate statistics (6th ed.). Pearson.
Tabachnick, B. G., Fidell, L. S., & Ullman, J. B. (2018). Using Multivariate Statistics, 5th ed.; Pearson: Boston, MA, USA, pp. 481-498.
Terre-Blanche, M., Durrheim, K., & Painter, D. (Eds.). (2006). Research in practice: Applied methods in social sciences (2nd ed.). University of Cape Town Press.
The Federation of Nigeria (1916). Criminal Code Act. Available at: https://www.wipo.int/edocs/lexdocs/laws/en/ng/ng025en.pdf
The Initiative for Equal Rights (2021). “Report: Human Rights Violations Based on Real or Perceived Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity/Expression and Sex Characteristics,” 2021, https://theinitiativeforequalrights.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/2021-Human-Rights-Violations-Report.pdf.
TIERS. (2019). 2018 Report on Human Rights Violations based on Real or Perceived Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity in Nigeria, 1-40.
TIERS. (2022). Social perception survey on lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender persons’ rights in Nigeria. Silverchip Fox Consulting, 1-50. https://theinitiativeforequalrights.org/resources/.
Ukah, A. (2018). Pentecostal apocalypticism: Hate speech, contested citizenship, and religious discourses on same-sex relations in Nigeria. Citizenship Studies, 22(6), 633-649. https://doi:10.1080/13621025.2018.1494906
Ukonu, M. O., Anorue, L. I., Ololo, U., & Olawoyin, H. M. (2021). Climate of conformism: Social media users’ opinion on homosexuality in Nigeria. SAGE Open, 1-12. https://doi:10.1177/21582440211040773
United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. (2011). Discriminatory laws and practices and acts of violence against individuals based on their sexual orientation and gender identity. Retrieved from http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/docs/19 session/a.hrc.19.41_english.pdf
Velody, I., & Williams, R. (Eds.). (1998). The politics of constructionism. SAGE. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446279014
Williams, B., Onsman, A., & Brown, T. (2010). Exploratory factor analysis: A five-step guide for novices. Australia’ Journal of Paramedics, 8, 1-15.
Wilson, J. Q., & Kelling, G. L. (1982). Broken windows: The police and neighborhood safety. Atlantic Monthly, 82(3), 1-18.
Zhang, J., Yan, Q., Guo, W., Gong, X., Cheng, M., & Yu, N. (2020). Rainbow over the internet: How internet use curtails homophobia in China. Technology in Society, 62, 101300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2020.101300

The authors declare no competing interests.

Download PDF

Version 1

posted

You are reading this latest preprint version

Perceptions of Lgbtiq+ Population in a Nigerian Cosmopolitan City: Implications and Projected Pathways in Criminalization

Status:

Version 1

Abstract

Figures

Introduction

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion and policy implications

Declarations

References

Additional Declarations

Status:

Version 1