Abstract
This article presents a quantitative content analysis of 10,473 comments from two opposing online petitions related to the legal status of a section of the penal code in Singapore used to ban sex between men. Results indicate numerous significant differences in how the two sides discussed the law and its significance. In particular, they used different types of arguments to support their views and expressed different kinds of concerns over the potential impact of changing or maintaining the law. The patterns of language use seem to reflect distinctly different approaches to the debate and suggest the difficulty of finding common ground amid this contentious social issue, but they also reveal similarities to how Western cultures have framed the debate.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 1313-1333 |
| Number of pages | 21 |
| Journal | Journal of Homosexuality |
| Volume | 61 |
| Issue number | 9 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Sept 2014 |
| Externally published | Yes |
ASJC Scopus Subject Areas
- Gender Studies
- Social Psychology
- Education
- General Psychology
Keywords
- content analysis
- human rights
- public debate
- Singapore
- sodomy law