Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
KiS baner

Vol. 69 No. 4 (2025): Symbolic Boundaries in Social Communication

Articles and essays

Tokenism or Inclusion? Symbolic Boundaries Between “Us” and “Them” in the Polish Queer Community’s Reception of LGBT+ Ads

DOI: https://doi.org/10.35757/KiS.2025.69.4.10
Submitted: February 27, 2025
Published: December 12, 2025

Abstract

LGBT+ representation in advertising elicits diverse reactions, influenced by social identity, cultural norms, and individual beliefs. In Poland, where LGBT+ rights remain a contested issue, such portrayals can generate both acceptance and resistance. This study examines how members of the Polish queer community respond to LGBT+ advertisements, using Social Identity Theory and symbolic boundaries as analytical frameworks. Based on focus group interviews with 13 participants, the findings reveal tensions between the need for authentic representation and concerns about tokenism and corporate motives. Applying Constructivist Grounded Theory, the study highlights how queer individuals navigate these portrayals, offering insights into media, identity, and inclusive marketing in polarized societies.

References

  • Aaker Jennifer, Brumbaugh Anne, Grier Sonya, 2000, Nontarget Markets and Viewer Distinctiveness: The Impact of Target Marketing on Advertising Attitudes, „Journal of Consumer Psychology”, 9(3): 127–40.
  • Åkestam Nina, Rosengren Sara, Dahlen Micael, 2017, Think about It — Can Portrayals of Homosexuality in Advertising Prime Consumer-perceived Social Connectedness and Empathy?, “European Journal of Marketing”, 51(1): 82–98.
  • Angelini James, Bradley Samuel, 2010, Homosexual Imagery in Print Advertisements: Attended, Remembered, But Disliked, “Journal of Homosexuality”, 57(4): 485–502.
  • Appiah Osei, 2001, Ethnic Identification on Adolescents’ Evaluations of Advertisements, “Journal of Advertising Research”, 41(5): 7–22.
  • Barbour Rosaline, 2011, Badania fokusowe, tłum. Barbara Komorowska, Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN, Warszawa.
  • Bhat Subodh, Leigh Thomas, Wardlow Daniel, 1996, The Effect of Homosexual Imaginary in Advertising on Attitude toward the Ad, “Journal of Homosexuality”, 31(1–2): 161–76.
  • Bourdieu Pierre, 2010, Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste, London: Routledge.
  • Charmaz Kathy, 2000, Grounded Theory: Objectivist and Constructivist Methods, in: Norman Denzin (ed.), Yvonna Lincoln (ed.), The Handbook of Qualitative Research, Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, pp. 509–31.
  • Charmaz Kathy, 2006, Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide through Qualitative Analysis, London: Sage Publications.
  • Cunningham George, Melton Nicole, 2014, Signals and Cues: LGBT Inclusive Advertising and Consumer Attraction, „Services Marketing Quarterly”, 23(1): 37–46.
  • Dimitrieska Savica, Stamevska Elizabeta, Stankovska Aleksandra, 2019, Inclusive Marketing — Reality or Make Up, “Economics and Management”, 16(2): 112–9.
  • Eisend Martin, Hermann Erik, 2019, Consumer Responses to Homosexual Imagery in Advertising: A Meta-Analysis, “Journal of Advertising”, 48(8): 380–400.
  • Gerbner George, 1967, Newsmen and Schoolmen: The State and Problems of Education Reporting, „Journalism Quarterly”, 44(2): 211–24.
  • Gerbner George, 1998, Cultivation Analysis: An Overview, „Mass Communication & Society”, 1(3/4): 175–94.
  • Gerbner George, Gross Larry, 1976, Living with Television: The Violence Profile, „Journal of Communication”, 26(2): 173–99.
  • Grier Sonya, Brumbaugh Anne, Thornton Corliss, 2006, Crossover Dreams: Consumer Responses to Ethnic-Oriented Products, “Journal of Marketing”, 70(2): 35–51.
  • Hall Stuart (ed.), 1997, Representation: Cultural Representations and Signifying Practices, London: Sage Publication.
  • Hooten Mary, Noeva Kristina, Hammonds Frank, 2009, The Effects of Homosexual Imagery in Advertisements on Brand Perception and Purchase Intention, “Social Behaviour and Personality: An International Journal”, 37(9): 1231–38.
  • Johnson Guillaume, Elliott Roger, Grier Sonya, 2010, Conceptualizing Multicultural Advertising Effects in the “New” South Africa, “Journal of Global Marketing”, 23(3): 189–207.
  • Keller Reiner, Charmaz Kathy, 2016, A Personal Journey with Grounded Theory Methodology. Kathy Charmaz in Conversation with Reiner Keller, “Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung Forum: Qualitative Social Research”, 17(1), n.p.
  • Kim Kacy, Um Namhyun, Kwon Eun, Wilcox David, 2013, Symbols or Icons in Gay-Themed Ads: How to Target a Gay Audience, „Journal of Marketing Communications, 21(6): 1–15.
  • Kitzinger Jenny, 2005, Focus Group Research: Using Group Dynamics to Explore Perceptions, Experiences and Understandings, in: Immy Holloway (ed.), Qualitative Research in Health Care, Maidenhead: Open University Press, pp. 56–70.
  • Lamont Michèle, 2010, Looking Back at Bourdieu, in: Silva Elizabeth (ed.), Warde Alan (ed.), Cultural Analysis and Bourdieu’s Legacy: Setting Accounts and Developing Alternatives, London: Routledge, pp. 128–41.
  • Lamont Michèle, 2012, How Has Bourdieu Been Good to Think with? The Case of the United States, „Sociological Forum”, 27: 228–37.
  • Lamont Michèle, Molnár Virag, 2002, The Study of Boundaries in the Social Sciences, „Annual Review of Sociology”, 28: 167– 95.
  • Lamont Michèle, Pendergrass Sabrina, Pachucki Mark, 2015, Symbolic Boundaries, in: James Wright (ed.), International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (Second Edition), Elselvier, Oxford: 850–5.
  • Liamputtong Pranee, 2015, Focus Group Methodology: Principles and Practice, London: Sage Publications.
  • Morgan David, 2021, Robert Merton and the History of Focus Groups: Standing on the Shoulders of a Giant?, „The American Sociologist”, 53(3): 364–73.
  • Naderifar Mahin, Goli Hamideh, Ghaljaei Fereshteh, 2017, Snowball Sampling: A Purposeful Method of Sampling in Qualitative Research, “Strides in Development of Medical Education”, 14(3): sdme.67670.
  • Oakenfull Gillian, 2013, What Matters: Factors Influencing Gay Consumers’ Evaluations of “Gay-Friendly” Corporate Activities, “Journal of Public Policy & Marketing”, 32: 79–89.
  • Oakenfull Gillian, Greenlee Timothy, 2004, The Three Rules of Crossing over from Gay Media to Mainstream Media Advertising: Lesbians, Lesbians, Lesbians, “Journal of Business Research, 57(11): 1276–85.
  • Oakenfull Gillian, Greenlee Timothy, 2005, Queer Eye for a Gay Guy: Using Market-Specific Symbols in Advertising to Attract Gay Consumers without Alienating the Mainstream, „Psychology and Marketing”, 22(5): 421–39.
  • Oakenfull Gillian, Mccarthy Michael, Greenlee Timothy, 2008, Targeting a Minority Without Alienating the Majority: Advertising to Gays and Lesbians in Mainstream Media, “Journal of Advertising Research”, 48(2): 191–98.
  • Read Glenna, Driel Irene, Potter Robert, 2018, Same-Sex Couples in Advertisements: An Investigation of the Role of Implicit Attitudes on Cognitive Processing and Evaluation, “Journal of Advertising”, 47(1): 1–16.
  • Tajfel Henri, 1978, Differentiation between Social Groups: Studies in the Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations, London, New York, San Francisco: Academic Press.
  • Tajfel Henri, Turner John, 1986, The Social Identity Theory of Intergroup Behaviour, in: William Austin (ed.), Stephen Worchel (ed.), Psychology of Intergroup Relation, Chicago: Hall Publishers, pp. 7–24.
  • Turner John, Hogg Michael, Oakes Penelope, Reicher Stephen, Wetherell Margaret, 1987, Rediscovering the Social Group: A Self-Categorization Theory, Oxford, New York: Basil Blackwell.
  • Um Namhyun, 2016, Consumers’ Responses to Implicit and Explicit Gay-Themed Advertising in Gay vs. Mainstream Media, „Journal of Promotion Management”, 22(3): 461–77.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Similar Articles

1 2 3 4 5 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.