Queer People of Color: Connected but Not Comfortable 9781626377837

Citation preview

QUEER PEOPLE OF COLOR

QUEER PEOPLE OF COLOR Connected but Not Comfortable

Angelique Harris Juan Battle Antonio (Jay) Pastrana, Jr.

Published in the United States of America in 2018 by FirstForumPress A division of Lynne Rienner Publishers, Inc. 1800 30th Street, Boulder, Colorado 80301 www.firstforumpress.com

and in the United Kingdom by FirstForumPress A division of Lynne Rienner Publishers, Inc. Gray’s Inn House, 127 Clerkenwell Road, London EC1 5DB

© 2018 by Lynne Rienner Publishers, Inc. All rights reserved

ISBN 978-1-62637-715-8

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data A Cataloging-in-Publication record for this book is available from the Library of Congress.

British Cataloguing in Publication Data A Cataloguing in Publication record for this book is available from the British Library.

Printed and bound in the United States of America

The paper used in this publication meets the requirements of the American National Standard for Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials Z39.48-1992.

5  4  3  2  1

Contents

1

Community Connection Among Queer People of Color

1

2

Black Communities

23

3

Latinx Communities

51

4

Asian and Pacific Islander Communities

79

5

Looking at the Big Picture

105

Appendix Bibliography Index

115 119 141

v

1 Community Connection Among Queer People of Color

On June 12, 2016, over 100 people, most, but not all, queer1 people of color, were shot at a nightclub in Orlando, Florida. Forty-nine died from their wounds, making this one of the largest mass killings from gun violence in the 21st century and the largest mass killing of queer people in U.S. history. While the media covered this incident as an act of ISISinspired terrorism, the social and political aftermath highlights the intersections of race and sexuality in this country. The attack was devastating, regardless of the racial and sexual makeup of the victims; however, that the event took place in a queer bar on “Latin Night” speaks to how queer people of color often seek community and a sense of belonging with each other and how, even in this safe space, they are sometimes met with violence. This book explores identity and correlates of community involvement. We examine the sense of belonging and sociopolitical involvement that queer people of color experience within their various communities. This work is based on a quantitative study of over 5,000 respondents from all 50 states, Puerto Rico, and the District of Columbia and is one of the largest samples of queer people of color collected. Having historically faced race, gender, class, sexuality, immigrant-based oppression, and marginalization, queer Blacks,2 Latinxs,3 and Asian/Pacific Islanders4 offer unique perspectives through which to examine how feelings of belonging affect sociopolitical involvement within their communities. We study their involvement in primarily queer communities, in their racial/ethnic community, in communities of color, and in queer communities of color. We also examine how acceptance, “outness” (openness about one’s sexuality), identity, religiosity, and other demographic factors (such as age, education, and income) influence sociopolitical involvement.

1

2

Queer People of Color

Sociopolitical Involvement

We use the term “sociopolitical involvement” to emphasize the social and political nature of community engagement within marginalized groups. Expanding upon traditional ideas of community engagement, which we will discuss in this section, we argue that the best way to assess comfort and belonging within communities, particularly within marginalized communities, is to examine the level of sociopolitical involvement within the communities. Research on community engagement emphasizes the importance of community connectedness (e.g., attending social and cultural events) and its influence on feelings of belonging for individuals (Putnam, 2000). Many individuals, however, feel disconnected and marginalized within their social and cultural groups, particularly when they experience multiple forms of oppression. Examining sociopolitical involvement for members of queer communities, we argue, is a better way to measure engagement within this population. Sociopolitical involvement emphasizes the social, political, and cultural aspects of community involvement and consists of three distinct types of engagement: (1) civic engagement, (2) political engagement, and (3) social engagement, and their intersections. Civic engagement refers to the ways in which individuals work to serve their communities, most often but not exclusively through volunteer work, for example, volunteering in soup kitchens or hospitals (Goulding, 2009; Rogers & Robinson, 2004). Political engagement refers to engagement in the political life of a community (Chong, Ten, Er, & Koh, 2013; McCartney, Bennion, & Simpson, 2013) to improve community, local or otherwise (e.g., volunteering for political campaigns to canvass or register people to vote). Finally, social engagement focuses on how individuals participate in social life (Berkman, Glass, Brissette, & Seeman, 2000; Thomas, 2011) of their communities (e.g., attending block parties, gay or ethnic pride events). In the past, civic engagement and political engagement have been linked and used interchangeably, but each has fundamental aspects that differentiate them. Civic Engagement

Civic engagement can be a form of service, activism, protest behavior, organizational participation, or volunteerism that serves to benefit a community (Galston & Lopez, 2006). Past research on civic engagement primarily studied work on political engagement and overlooked community participation. Researchers, however, tend to think of civic

Community Connection Among Queer People of Color

3

engagement “as participation in voluntary, community-based organizations and association” (Hays, 2007, p. 402) with political participation emphasized separately. While civic engagement and political engagement are linked, they are distinct. (1) Civic engagement draws the citizen out of strictly personal concerns and into a greater awareness of shared, community needs. (2) Civic engagement develops skills in organizing and mobilizing people that are transferable to the political realm. (3) Civic engagement develops individual feelings of confidence and efficacy that make political activism more likely. (4) Civic engagement develops networks of relationships (the interpersonal aspect of social capital) and feelings of trust (the attitudinal aspect of social capital) that are critical to effective political action (Hays, 2007, p. 403). In Hays’s analysis of civic engagement, he argues that this engagement happens in the following zones: family relationships, peers and work relationships, civic engagement, and political engagement. Types of civic engagement may include volunteering at the local LGBTQ community center or at an AIDS service organization or group. Political Involvement

Political engagement or participation has been used to describe everything from social activism to campaigning for political candidates and addressing social issues (Putnam, 1995; 2000; Skocpol & Fiorina, 1999), or, as Verba, Nie, and Kim explained in 1978, “those legal activities by private citizens that are more or less directly aimed at influencing the selection of governmental personnel and/or the actions they take” (46). This consists of “voting, campaign contributions, marching in May Day or Patriots’ Day parades” (Verba et al., 1978, p. 46). Political engagement is the basis of political life, including outreach, and volunteering for the betterment of that community (Galston & Lopez, 2006).2 Political activism and participation are dependent on three factors: (1) having the means to act; (2) being motivated to act; and (3) the ability to mobilize to act (Wong, Ramakrishnan, Lee & Junn, 2011). Those who face multiple forms of oppression —most notably victims of racial, gender, and sexual oppression—are more likely to be involved in political activism and protest behavior to help bring attention to their plight (Balsam, Molina,

4

Queer People of Color

Beadnell, Simoni, & Walters, 2011; Poynter & Washington, 2005). Here it is important to note the focus on the community outreach associated in political participation and its goal of community improvement. Examples of political engagement include participation in political organizations and groups, such as the Queer Socialists Working Group or the Log Cabin Republicans. Social Engagement

Social engagement is the level of involvement in the social life of a community. The primary focus here is on participation in social groups and activities for both entertainment and community support. This includes eating in locally-owned or managed community restaurants, purposefully shopping in one’s community and reading local community literature. As such, social engagement might include activism or protest work. Social engagement is often necessary to encourage the feelings of belonging that promote community and civic activism. Hays (2007) argues that social engagement is a type of voluntary association, a form of civic engagement. He explains that social engagement involves interacting with social groups around “some common interest—say stamp collecting or genealogy—[and] facilitates satisfying social ties” (2007, p. 405). Hays goes on to note, however, that this type of activity, “is directed at no societal purpose other than the intrinsic satisfaction of the activity” (2007, p. 405). Although it can be argued that shopping in lesbian bookstores and frequenting queer bars, clubs, and restaurants can be considered political, the primary focus of community engagement, in social terms, is for enjoyment and socialization in a chosen community and not for political activism or volunteering. Robert Putnam’s classic work on community engagement argues that a sense of belonging is a fundamental aspect of social experience and encourages engagement within communities (2000). Putnam’s work, however, does not take into account the sociocultural factors that influence how and why groups participate in their various communities. He argues that community engagement is declining and presumes that people lack interest in community, ignoring that community varies. Not everyone has the same experiences with community, and consequently, not the same understanding of community participation and engagement. Sociopolitical involvement, on the other hand, emphasizes the social and political nature of community engagement and reveals not only the individual effects of civic, political, and social engagement but also how they intersect. Ultimately, the significance of sociopolitical involvement is this intersectional approach, which provides better insight into the

Community Connection Among Queer People of Color

5

daily lives of populations that inhabit multiple and intersecting identities (e.g., Black lesbians, as opposed to just Black people, women, Black women, or just lesbians). Feeling connected and included in a community (or multiple communities) is an engagement in that community (Heath & Mulligan, 2008). As such, analyzing civic, political, and social engagement individually can be a useful approach for analyzing race and gender-specific groups and for analyzing majority groups (e.g., Whites, men). In examining the intersections of race, gender, and sexuality, however, we should think more broadly about sociopolitical involvement and look at the intersections of political, civic, and social engagement. In previous publications (Battle & Harris, 2013; Battle, Harris, Donaldson, & Mushtaq, 2015; Harris & Battle, 2013; Harris, Battle, Pastrana, & Daniels, 2013; Harris, Battle, Pastrana, & Daniels, 2015), we focused on how sociopolitical involvement was interrelated with community engagement, but we did not discuss social engagement or sociopolitical involvement as a subset of community engagement. We argued that civic engagement consists of at least two interconnected elements: community engagement and sociopolitical involvement. Additionally, we accepted the definition of community engagement as a form of community-based service, activism, or volunteerism (Galston & Lopez, 2006). Although this is how we initially examined sociopolitical involvement among queer Black, Latinx, and API people, we now feel that sociopolitical involvement provides a more accurate framework through which to examine community engagement among queer people of color. Also, in this text we note that community engagement includes civic, political, and social engagement, with people who are at the intersections of various politicized identities, is a form of sociopolitical involvement. As such, when we discuss the intersection of race, gender, and sexuality, sociopolitical involvement becomes a more appropriate framework, as we not only look at the variance within the experience of being of color (e.g., Black, Latinx, or API), but we also examine how these inherently political, racial, and sexual identities intersect with gender. Typically, work that examines people of color implicitly compares their experiences to White experiences—at least when systematic exclusion does not make it impossible. In our examination of people of color, women, and queer populations, sociopolitical involvement that considers intersecting identities provides a much clearer framework. This examination of sociopolitical involvement among queer people of color uses quantitative data collected from thousands of respondents from across the nation. These respondents completed a survey

6

Queer People of Color

examining their lives, perceptions, and experiences as people who have historically faced race, gender, class, sexuality, and immigrant-based oppression and marginalization. Queer Black, Latinx, and API populations offer a unique angle through which to examine belonging within marginalized communities and the impact these identities and experiences have on sociopolitical involvement within communities of color, queer communities, and queer communities of color. Community Engagement in Society

Before we begin a discussion of community engagement, a question begs to be answered. Regardless of (racial or sexual) minority status, what actually motivates activism? Though there are many theories, Swank and Fahs’ (2012) four collective action frames serve as a useful lens. They argue: First, collective action frames initially render some societal norms as wrong, unacceptable, and unjust. Second, frames identify the causes of the injustice. By providing a diagnostic function, frames are etiologies that explain why problems exist and assign levels of blame or capability to different entities. Third, frames also convince bystanders that they should use political tactics to stop these violations. These prognostic aspects of frames usually emphasize the urgency of political action and a sense that challenges from less powerful constituencies can force concessions from a reluctant target (this confidence in movement tactics is sometimes called “agency” or a “sense of collective efficacy”). Finally, frames must provide a collective identity among the aggrieved. In doing so, collective identities establish social boundaries of “us” and “them” by specifying who belongs to the righteous in-group of the mistreated and who exemplifies the antagonistic wrongdoers who must be challenged. These collective identities often contest and refute societal claims that members of their group are inferior, worthless, sick, or maladjusted. Instead, collective action frames offer narratives about the virtues of similar people and they suggest that their group is illegitimately threatened, deprived, or treated badly (Swank & Fahs, 2012, p. 663).

We do not propose their frames are perfect but definitely useful. Especially since research has long indicated that community engagement among people in the United States has declined (Galston & Lopez, 2006; Putnam, 2000; Skocpol & Fiorina, 1999). This decline is due to a variety of social issues, including factors such as increased work hours and a rise in individualism (Putnam, 2000). Feeling connected, i.e., belonging to a social or cultural group, influences the

Community Connection Among Queer People of Color

7

likelihood of participating in communities (Putnam, 2000; Verba, Schlozman, & Brady, 1995). Community engagement has been examined in relation to a number of variables, including race, gender, income, education, geographic location, and age cohort (Putnam, 2000; Sander & Putnam, 2006; Verba, et al., 1995). Age cohort and sex appear to be the largest factors determining one’s community engagement across race and class lines (Putnam, 2000; Sander & Putnam, 2006). In examining age and community engagement, Galston and Lopez (2006) argue that people born in the United States “between the late 1920s and mid-1940s… tend to be more participatory and less individualistic in their outlook than are their younger fellow citizens” (2006, p. 5). Activities such as volunteering for organizations, voting, and even church attendance are heavily determined by age cohort; with older Americans participating in more of these activities than their younger counterparts (Galston & Lopez, 2006; Sander & Putnam, 2006). In terms of sex, data have long shown that both men and women report different types of engagement within their respective communities (Barreto & Munoz, 2003; Verba et al., 1978; Verba et al., 1995). Back in 1978, Verba, et al. found that women were much less likely to participate in political activities, including voting, than men, not just in the United States but also in countries such as Japan, the Netherlands, Nigeria, India, and Austria. Decades later, men are still more likely than women to partake in politically themed pursuits (Barreto & Munoz, 2003; Verba et al., 1995). They hypothesized that men had greater economic resources and, consequently, stronger political party affiliation than women. They explained, “If we find sex differences in resources and in the ability to convert resources into political activity, we shall have some explanation of the lower levels of political activity among women” (Verba et al., 1978, p. 236). More recently, women have reported higher levels of engagement in political issues that are more community orientated and social, such as reproductive rights, education, or poverty (Campbell, 2009). Women are also more likely to attend church services and dedicate time to charitable work than are men (Verba et al., 1995). Men, on the other hand, are more likely to engage in actual political work, reporting higher levels of voting, campaign work, and affiliation with a political organization (Barreto & Munoz, 2003). Queers and Community Engagement

The visibility of queer community engagement and activism increased after the infamous 1969 police raid on a New York City gay bar, the

8

Queer People of Color

Stonewall Inn. This raid led to rioting when queer and trans6 people of color, including famed queer activist Marsha P. Johnson, fought back against this police harassment. The 1970s saw gains in rights as Harvey Milk became the first openly queer politician elected to political office—he was assassinated only 11 months later. In the 1980s, HIV swept through queer communities, and queer activists fought for increased funding for AIDS research, a reduction in AIDS stigma, employment rights, the ability to serve openly in the armed forces, and to have and adopt their own children. Although federal recognition of same-sex marriage in 2015 was a great achievement, it in no way signaled the end of activism and community engagement in queer communities. In fact, trans issues and economic justice within queer communities are now gaining more widespread attention. Studies on activism among queer people have shown us that although income and education serve as important predictors for community engagement among queer people, it was primarily education, along with other factors, such as surviving hate crimes and joining political groups, and not income, that encouraged activism among lesbians and gays (Barrett & Pollack, 2005; Swank & Fahs, 2011; 2013b). Our research found that, for the most part, there are no statistically significant racial or gender differences within queer communities between those participating or not participating in community activities (Swank & Fahs, 2013a). This finding contradicts research that neglects race but argues that being “out” and experiencing discrimination are the most important predictors for political activism among queer women and men, regardless of race and sex (Swank & Fahs, 2013a). Nevertheless, research finds that Black lesbians are more likely to be politically engaged in the queer movement than White lesbians; a point that will be discussed in chapter 2 (Swank & Fahs, 2013a). Queer people in the United States vote at a much higher rate than the general population; over 80% of eligible queer voters participated in the 2012 election compared to only 53% of non-queer voters (Bipartisan Policy Center, 2012; Perez, 2014). Similarly high voting trends among queer voters occurred in the 2016 presidential election, where a vast majority(72%) came out in support of Hillary Clinton, with only 20% voting for her Republican opponent (Lapinski & Psyllos, 2016). The high rates of voting were evident where candidates vied for the “pink vote” with both Democratic and Republican presidential candidates voicing support for queer rights. One of the challenges in examining voting within queer communities is that research does not examine the intersections of race, sexuality, gender, and sex. We know that queer

Community Connection Among Queer People of Color

9

people voted, but we do not necessarily know much more about their demographic profile. Much of the high voter turnout is historically rooted in social justice activism within queer communities. San Francisco’s Compton Cafeteria Riots, New York City’s Stonewall Riots, and the HIV/AIDS epidemic ushered in decades of direct and highly visible activism targeting access to relationship benefits, job security, housing, and even access to treatment and services. The higher levels of sociopolitical involvement seen among queer Blacks relates back to their need to remain active to retain a connection to their communities; a fact further corroborated by research that shows White lesbians with lower levels of protest and participation in political activity compared to their Black peers (Swank & Fahs, 2013b). For example, some researchers argue that White lesbians are not as likely to vote or participate in protest activities as lesbians of color are (Swank & Fahs, 2013b). One of the reasons for higher levels of political engagement among queer Blacks, for example, is the connection to Black communities, which are much more likely to be sociopolitically involved (Moore, 2010). In essence, to maintain connection to Black communities, one must be sociopolitically active. This connection encourages the engagement of Black lesbians, who often can draw on cultural references in their activism and political work. Moore (2010) also found that their visibility and outness helped to promote queer acceptance in Black spaces, helping to propel and further motivate their activism, making their engagement in their communities sociopolitical in nature. Social and Political Issues Within Queer Communities

Same-sex attractions, gender, non-conformity, and queer identity are intensely personal and often dependent on self-identification. Sexual identity is not necessarily determined by sexual or romantic partners but on how an identity based on these attractions and behaviors is developed. As such, we do not know the number of queer women and men in the nation, much less the world, although we do have general estimates. There are likely 10 million queer people in the United States, making up roughly 3.5% of the population (Gates, 2017). A 2011 Williams Institute study estimated that 4.1% of the population is queer (Flores, Herman, Gates, & Brown, 2016). More women (4.4%) identify as queer than men (3.7%), which is likely due to the greater stigma associated with male homosexuality and the more severe impact that masculine and feminine gender roles have on men (Flores et al., 2016). Flores and colleagues estimate that just 0.3% of the population is trans (Flores et al., 2016). Although just over 3% identify as queer, 8% of

10

Queer People of Color

people in the United States have reported sexual activity with someone of the same sex, and 11% reported same-sex attraction (Gates, 2017). Millennials (those born between 1980-1998) are more likely to identify as queer (7.3%), than Generation X (1965-1979), 3.2% of whom identify as queer. Only 2.4% of Baby Boomers (1946-1964) identify as queer, and Traditionalists (1913-1945), where just 1.4% identify as queer (Gates, 2015). In fact, millennials account for almost half (43%) of the queer community (Flores et al., 2016). People of color are more likely to identify as queer than their White counterparts (Gates & Newport, 2012). Most queer people are out to their family and friends, and they are coming out as queer at much younger ages than they have in the past (Riley, 2010), which is likely due to a decrease in social stigma. Research indicates that there are no racial differences in the age of coming out (Riley, 2010). Riley (2010) found that over half (61%) of Black women were out to their parents compared to 80% of White women, 72% of Latinx women, and 68% of women who identified as “other” in their study. Among men, Riley found that 77% of Whites, 71% of Latinx, 69% of Black, and 62% of API men were out to their parents. Queer people of color often experience greater forms of discrimination than their White counterparts in and out of mainstream queer communities. This includes well-documented racism (Choi, Han, Paul, & Ayala, 2011; Teunis, 2007); transphobia; economic disparities (Lee Badgett, Durso, & Schneebaum, 2013; Gorman, Denney, Dowdy, & Medeiros, 2015;); increased interaction with the criminal justice system (Meyer et al., 2017); and issues with immigration (Chavez, 2011). Economic Disparities

Twenty-four percent of lesbians and bisexual women (single or in relationships) live in poverty, compared to 15% of gay and bisexual men (Lee Badgett et al., 2013). Bisexual adults also face heightened levels of poverty, with approximately 40% of bisexual men and 42% of bisexual women living in poverty (Gorman et al., 2015). Queer elderly populations face poverty at higher rates compared to their heterosexual counterparts. While only 4.6% of opposite-sex couples 65 and older live in poverty, and only 4.9% of older male same-sex couples live in poverty, 9.1% of female same-sex couples aged 65 and older live at or below the federal poverty line (Movement Advancement Project, 2013). Rates of poverty are higher among queer people of color than White

Community Connection Among Queer People of Color

11

queer women and men. Black same-sex couples are more than twice as likely to live in poverty as Black opposite-sex couples, while all samesex couples of color have much higher rates of poverty as White samesex couples. Moreover, queer people of color experience higher rates of unemployment, at 11% for queer API, 14% for queer Latinx, and 15% for queer Black individuals. Comparatively, unemployment rates for their heterosexual counterparts are 8%, 11%, and 12 %, respectively (Movement Advancement Project, 2013, p. 5). Prison Industrial Complex

Queer women and men are overrepresented within the U.S. prison industrial complex (Meyer et al., 2017). The prison industrial complex includes incarceration, interactions with the police, parole, etc. (Schlosser, 1998). A report suggesting various policy recommendations for addressing the experiences of queer people within the prison industrial complex found that a vast majority of all queer identifying individuals, 73%, have had face-to-face contact with law enforcement within five years prior to being surveyed (Hanssens et al., 2014). Of this group, 5% had been under correctional supervision, including jail or prison, probation, or parole, compared to only 3% of non-queer adults. A quarter of those who had contact with police and law enforcement reported misconduct or harassment on their part, while 20 to 40% reported verbal harassment (Hanssens et al., 2014). Another report found that although queer women and men only make up about 3.5% of the general population, queer men make up 5.5% of the male prison population, but approximately 33% of women in prison are queer (Meyer et al., 2017). Additionally, while queer youth comprise 5 to 7% of the juvenile population, they represent 13 to 15% of those who are in the juvenile justice system (Hanssens et al., 2014). Within prisons, queer women and men are more likely to be sexually harassed or assaulted, are more likely to be denied access to services, and face a higher likelihood of being placed in segregated housing or solitary confinement than their heterosexual counterparts. Trans prisoners face incarceration in gender-segregated prisons based on their assigned gender at birth instead of their current gender identity. They are more likely to be placed in solitary confinement “for their own protection” and are sexually victimized at 13 times the rate of cisgender people. Queer women and men in prison also face the prospect of limited or no healthcare, potentially problematic given the necessity of transition-related or HIV/AIDS care (Hanssens et al., 2014).

12

Queer People of Color

Queer people of color face additional difficulties with law enforcement and the criminal justice system, compared to non-queer people of color and White queer individuals. In interactions with police, trans people of color were 2.5 times as likely to experience physical violence than cisgender White individuals. Queer people of color were 1.82 times as likely to experience violence. Queer and trans youth also face increased incarceration. Approximately 300,000 queer youth are arrested or detained each year, of which 60% are Black or Latinx. (Movement Advancement Project, 2015). Immigration

Mainstream communities often overlook queer immigrants in dialogues on immigration and migration, and within queer communities, migrant needs are often ignored (Chavez, 2011). There are an estimated million queer immigrants living in the United States, a majority of whom identify as people of color, and 30% of whom are undocumented (Center for American Progress Immigration Team, 2014; Movement Advancement Project, 2015). Almost 70% of queer immigrants of color are male, almost 50% are under the age of 30, over 70% are Latinx, and 15% are API (Movement Advancement Project, 2015). A number of these immigrants are held in detention centers where they face high risks of sexual abuse and assault, neglect, harassment, solitary confinement, and lack of adequate or appropriate medical care (Hanssens et al., 2014). Queer migrants to the U.S. face multiple challenges and have unique needs. For example, many, especially if they are undocumented, lack access to health insurance or the jobs that would provide them with access to health insurance. Additionally, services are often socially and culturally inappropriate, and, in general, the health and wellness of queer migrants are often overlooked. Research on health and wellness among queer migrants primarily examines HIV and mental health issues within this population (Hirsch, Higgins, Bentley, & Nathanson, 2002; IzazolaLicea et al., 2000; Organista, 2007; Organista, Carrillo, & Ayala, 2004; Organista & Ehrlich, 2008; Organista et al., 1997; Yoshikawa, Wilson, Chae, & Cheng, 2004). Another issue queer immigrants face is housing—research on queers and housing often focuses on homelessness among youth (Hunter, 2008; Mottet & Ohle, 2006; Van Leeuwen, Boyle, Salomonsen-Sautel, & Baker, 2006) and the elderly (Cahill & South, 2002; de Vries, 2006; Donovan, 2001; Johnson, Jackson, Arnette, & Koffman, 2005; Orel, 2004). Finally, all migrants confront a system of immigration laws that shapes their day-to-day lives, but as Chavez (2011) argues, queer migrants are particularly negatively

Community Connection Among Queer People of Color

13

affected by the system. Decades ago, one’s homosexuality was used to ban queers from entering the United States (Canaday, 2003; Luibhéid, 2002; Somerville, 2005). Research has documented the experiences of queer migrants, but it primarily examines the difficulty they have in seeking asylum and, prior to the nation-wide recognition of same-sex marriage, this research also examined how partners were unable to sponsor queer migrants (Hazeldean & Betz, 2003; Morgan, 2006; Randazzo, 2005). Intersectional Frameworks, the Margins, and the Middle Intersectional Frameworks

As shown above, social issues and problems that affect communities of color disproportionally impact queer community members. Law professor Kimberlé Williams Crenshaw (1991) coined the term intersectionality, which posits that individuals occupy different social positions in society. As a result, individuals form identities based on the intersection of their differing statuses. This identity formation results from what Patricia Hill Collins (2000) refers to as the “matrix of domination.” For example, according to Collins (2000), a Black woman not only faces certain forms of oppression because of her race but also because of her sex and often because of her social class. “Intersectionality refers to the ways in which race, class, gender, sexual orientation, age, religion, and other locations of social group membership impact lived experiences and social relationships. The term emphasizes the mobility of social group identities and locations, not simply of their appearances in individual bodies” (Harris & Bartlow, 2015, p. 251). These intersecting identities influence feelings of belonging and, thus, sociopolitical involvement within their communities. The concept of intersectionality, or interlocking identities rooted in what some have called relative sociocultural power and privilege, has received much attention (Parent, DeBlaere, & Moradi, 2013; Shields, 2008). In 2008, a groundbreaking series of articles concerning intersectionality was published in which researchers addressed issues including, but not limited to, gender and sexual identity over time (Diamond & Butterworth, 2008); race, gender, and encounters with law enforcement (Dottolo & Stewart, 2008); questioning of concepts of feminism among feminist-identified Latinx men (Hurtado & Sinha, 2008); immigrant identities (Mahalingam, Balan, & Haritatos, 2008); as

14

Queer People of Color

well as methodological challenges in conducting intersectionality research (Bowleg, 2008). The importance of intersectionality has been lauded by many, but none more poignantly than McCall (2005), who, while at times also critiquing it, suggested that “intersectionality is the most important theoretical contribution that woman’s studies, in conjunction with related fields, has made thus far” (p. 1771). While supported and theorized by many, numerous also are the ways in which researchers conceptually frame their thinking. They could be summarized or categorized as additive, multiplicative, or interactionist (Parent et al., 2013). Black feminist theory (Beal, 1970; Collins, 2000; King, 1988) has contributed much to these understandings. The term “double jeopardy” was often used concomitantly with “additive” understandings of intersectionality. In short, scholars argued that minority statuses, like race and gender, work independently and combine additively to shape people’s experiences (Beal, 1970). Later, scholars extended this “additive” understanding and argued that these minority identities interact with each other and multiply their impact (Greene, 1994; King, 1988; Landrine, Klonoff, Alcaraz, Scott, & Wilkins, 1995). From there, scholars—championed by Collins (1990; 1998) and Crenshaw (1991)— contended that the multiplicative identities could not be reduced to their individual components, and they therefore create new and unique forms of identity, thus opportunities for oppression and liberation (Baca Zinn & Dill, 1996). Though differing in some of their assumptions, the consensus of the field is that each of these three perspectives can be useful analytic tools (Cole, 2009; Purdie-Vaughns & Eibach, 2008; Shields, 2008), especially for understanding how gender (Moradi & Parent, 2013; Moradi & Yoder, 2011; Swank & Fahs, 2012; West & Fenstermaker, 1995; Yoder, 2013), sexual orientation (Bowleg, 2012; Herek, 2010; Riggs, 2012; Singh, 2012; Worthen, 2012), and race (Galupo & Gonzalez, 2012) interact with each other as well as with other identities (Glenn, 1999; Norton & Herek, 2012). Intersectionality has also been utilized as a tool for understanding majority group members’ attitudes towards minority groups. For example, Worthen (2012) employed intersectionality to better understand heterosexual women’s and men’s attitudes toward queer populations. She found six theoretical reasons explaining these attitudes. The first attitude is the conflation of gays, bisexual men, and transgender individuals with HIV/AIDS (Fish & Rye, 1991; Herek & Capitanio, 1999; Miller, 2002). Second is straight people’s fear of sexual advances by queer individuals (Bortolin, 2010; Eliason, 1997; Kimmel, 2009; Worthen, 2011). The third attitude is the sexualization of lesbians and

Community Connection Among Queer People of Color

15

bisexual women (Rupp & Taylor, 2010; Russo, 2009; Torregrosa, 2010); while the fourth is “coveting” of gays by heterosexual women (Eliason & Raheim, 1996; Shugart, 2003). The fifth is gender nonconformity prejudice (Bornstein, 1998; Gordon & Meyer, 2007; Lombardi, Wilchins, Priesling, & Malouf, 2001; Sandfort, Melendez, & Diaz, 2007;); while the sixth is heterosexism, sexism, and cisnormativity (Gerhardstein & Anderson, 2010; Halberstam, 2003; Kimmel, 2009). It should be noted, however, that intersectionality is not without its critics (Robertson & Sgoutas, 2012). Some argue that it sometimes replicates the very concept it is trying to interrupt or deconstruct (McCall, 2005; Nash, 2008). Similarly, Warner and Shields (2013, p. 807) offer a strongly articulated and cited critique in three areas: First, applications of intersectionality do not adequately address the fluidity of identity (Choo & Ferree, 2010; Prins, 2006; Robertson & Sgoutas, 2012); second, applications of intersectionality do not sufficiently address the social construction of the identity categories themselves (Ackerly & McDermott, 2012; Helms, Jernigan, & Mascher, 2005; Robertson & Sgoutas, 2012); and, third, within applications of intersectionality, the act of labeling is itself problematic (Riggs, 2012). Moving to the Middle: Belonging and Connectedness

Feeling connected to a community is not only important for sociopolitical involvement, but it is also vital to identity formation processes (Flores et al., 2009; Heath & Mulligan, 2008). The feeling of belonging is heavily influenced by social location and role within the social group (Yuval-Davis, 2006). Exclusion, oppression, and isolation often increase the importance of belonging to social groups (GormanMurray, Waitt, & Gibson, 2008). This is especially the case for those who experience multiple forms of oppression, such as queer people of color who often experience simultaneous forms of homophobia within their racial or ethnic communities and racism within mainstream communities (Coloma, 2006; Lehavot, Balsam, & Ibrahim-Wells, 2009; Ordona, 2003). Yet, scholarship fails to adequately examine the sense of belonging, or connectedness, and sociopolitical involvement among people who experience multiple forms of discrimination and oppression. Community acceptance and involvement are also important as they help enhance feelings of belonging among those in marginalized communities. Intragroup marginalization, or “the downgrading and discrimination that more privileged group members have towards other, less privileged group members,” (Harris, 2009, p. 431) is an added stressor to groups

16

Queer People of Color

already facing marginalization by dominant groups (Harris, 2009; Rust, 2000). Examples of intragroup marginalization include homophobia among women and within communities of color, as well as gender and racial/ethnic discrimination within queer communities. Rust (2000) noted three coping mechanisms for sexual minorities of color. First, they conceal their sexuality to maintain the support from their racial/ethnic communities. Second, they leave their racial/ethnic community of origin and immerse themselves in the mainstream queer community. Third, they maintain a close connection to their racial/ethnic communities while being “out” and challenge homophobia within these communities. Regardless of their approach, when queer people of color experience intragroup marginalization it has an impact on their psychosocial wellbeing (Rust, 2000). Although everyone possesses multiple intersecting identities, those who possess intersecting marginalized identities may have a limited ability to engage in their communities because they face increased discrimination and aggression, consequently impeding a sense of belonging in their communities and their ability (and desire) to engage in their communities. Belonging to a community is not only important for individual psychosocial well-being and positive identity formation, but also directly linked to an individual’s level of community engagement (Flores et al., 2009; Heath & Mulligan, 2008). Belonging consists of “an unfolding space of attachment, affiliation, and recognition” (Gorman-Murray et al., 2008, p. 172), or as Nira YuvalDavis explains, belonging is as much about emotional connection as it is about “feeling ‘safe’” (2006, p. 198). Belonging is frequently determined by the amount of power and status one has within a group, as well as political values and identifications (Yuval-Davis, 2006). This sense of belonging is especially important for those who have experienced multiple levels of identity-based oppression and marginalization. Belonging does not simply concern identity and social location; it is also about how people view their attachments and how they feel those attachments are judged (Yuval-Davis, 2006). To seek a sense of community and belonging, those who feel marginalized are more likely to identify with other marginalized group members (Tatum, 2003). This exclusion often increases their need to belong to social groups (GormanMurray et al., 2008). For example, the sense of belonging is important for those who are recent immigrants (Bourhis, Barrette, El-Geledi, & Schmidt, 2009). For these groups, families and communities are key for their acculturation and support (Bourhis et al., 2009). This is also the case for those in communities of color and within queer communities,

Community Connection Among Queer People of Color

17

and, in particular, queer people of color. Lehavot, Balsam, and IbrahimWells (2009) explain that both communities of color and queer communities provide resources, a space where community members can socialize with each other, and are often the sites of community activism. Nonetheless, racial/ethnic communities and queer communities are not homogenous, and in-group marginalization often occurs as individuals occupy multiple intersecting identities. The interplay of sociopolitical involvement with a theoretical framework of intersectionality among queer populations, especially of color, is a rich experiential and intellectual playground in which to better understand and develop the concepts we describe in this book. Without question, in the United States, queer populations, regardless of race, have historically been treated poorly (Herek, 2009). Examining the intersections of race and sexuality has greatly informed the evolution of powerful theories such as minority stress (Meyer, 2003). As coping strategies, some may choose to stay in the closet (Gortmaker & Brown, 2006), while others, realizing as Audre Lorde reminds us that our silence will not protect us, come out, get politically involved, and feel their lives sustained (Taylor et al., 2009). Much of the research concerning racial minorities and sociopolitical activism focusses on heterosexual populations (Bobo & Gilliam, 1990; Leighley & Vedlitz, 1999; Schussman & Soule, 2005) or White privilege within queer communities (Balsam et al., 2011; Fingerhut, Peplau, & Ghavami, 2005; Ward, 2008). No matter, when studying sociopolitical involvement, it is pertinent to understand the unique experiences and internal heterogeneity among queer communities of color. As Stewart and McDermott (2004) remind us, “(a) no social group is homogenous, (b) people must be located in terms of social structures that capture the power relations implied by those structures, and (c) there are unique, non-additive effects of identifying with more than one social group” (pp. 531–532). Failing to employ methodologies that identify these differences will lead researchers to miss the fact that queer individuals are more likely to engage in queer social movements than their heterosexual counterparts are (Rollins & Hirsch, 2003; Swank & Fahs, 2011) and that racial minorities are more likely to join anti-racist movements than are their White counterparts (Bobo & Gilliam, 1990; Schussman & Soule, 2005). Intersectionality allows for even more nuanced findings. For example, in some instances, Black women tend to be more supportive of feminism (Cook & Wilcox, 1992; TollesonRinehart, 1992) and more politically active than their White counterparts (Cole & Sabik, 2010; Manza & Brooks, 1998). While, conversely, some argue that limited resources and inadequate access to power may prevent

18

Queer People of Color

gender, racial, sexual, and economic minorities from engaging in sociopolitical activities (Burns, Schlozman, & Verba, 1997; Coffé & Bolzendahl, 2010; Duncan, 1999; Manza & Brooks, 1998), nonetheless and not surprisingly, most social movements are born out of and nurtured by oppressed and marginalized populations (Simien, 2007; Stewart & McDermott, 2004). Historically, women were less likely than men to be sociopolitically involved (Barkan, Cohn, & Whitaker, 1995; Wallace & Jenkins, 1995), but recent research shows the disappearance and in some instances reversal of the gender gap (Bobo & Gilliam, 1990; Harder & Krosnick, 2008; Leighley & Nagler, 1992; Paulsen, 1994; Hritzuk & Park, 2000). It should also be noted that these differences may be behavior-specific, for example, voting vs. writing a politician (Coffé & Bolzendahl, 2010). Differences also exist within the queer community. For example, Herek et al. (2010) found certain sociopolitical behaviors to be more prevalent among lesbian women; while others were more prevalent among gay men (Lewis, Rogers, & Sherrill, 2011). Yet some have found no major gender differences in sociopolitical behaviors between gay men and lesbian women (Jennings & Andersen, 2003; Rollins & Hirsch, 2003; Taylor et al., 2009; Waldner, 2001). Concerning race, most of what we know centers on heterosexual populations. For example, though we know Whites are more likely to vote (Bobo & Gilliam, 1990; Harder & Krosnick, 2008; Leighley & Vedlitz, 1999), Blacks and Latinx populations were more likely to show up at protest rallies (Paulsen, 1994; Schussman & Soule 2005), leading some scholars to suggest that racial minorities prefer social movements over voting as a form of sociopolitical involvement (Swank & Fahs, 2012). Understandably, sociopolitical involvement among queer communities is fraught with problems and contradictions. For example, some may feel that by engaging in queer activism, they are denying their racial selves or communities (Moore, 2010); or they may be concerned with facing racism within the queer community (Alimahomed, 2010; Levitsky, 2007; Ward, 2008). Yet, others argue that because of those multiple forms of discrimination, queer people of color may even be more likely to be sociopolitically involved (Levitsky, 2007; White, 2006). While much has been theorized and chronicled concerning queer populations’ participation in the gay and lesbian rights movement (Jenness, 1995; Kane, 2003; Wald, Button & Rienzo, 1996), far too little of that work is actually empirical (Swank & Fahs 2011;2012; Taylor et al., 2009; Waldner, 2001). Subsequent chapters in this book attempt to address that gap.

Community Connection Among Queer People of Color

19

This book uses an intersectional framework to examine feelings of belonging and sociopolitical involvement among queer people of color in communities of color, in queer communities, and in queer communities of color. Using intersectionality and sociopolitical involvement as theoretical frameworks to study feelings of belonging among queer Black, Latinx, and API women and men is necessary because, unlike heterosexual people of color and White queer women and men, they do not represent the dominant group in their communities. We posit that the multiple levels of marginalization that queer people of color experience influences their engagement in their communities and as their very identities are often stigmatized and marginalized, the very nature of their engagement within their communities is sociopolitical. Project Methodology

This research study and resulting books are based on data collected as part of the Social Justice Sexuality (SJS) Project. The SJS Project began as a knowledge-based research agenda guided by two important theoretical frameworks in the study of race, ethnicity, and sexuality: critical race theory (CRT) and intersectionality. Within the study of race and ethnicity, CRT argues that racial oppression exists not only in the form of direct racist elements, but it also exists indirectly within our everyday social structures. A key component of CRT is the collection of narratives, or stories, that people tell about their everyday lives. Read as counter-narratives to what has historically been documented, theorists contend that collecting these stories sheds light on the pervasiveness of racial oppression – and these narratives do so by focusing on how individuals make sense of their own lives. CRT narratives are often told through the voices of people who have experienced racial oppression. The second theoretical framework employed by the SJS Project is intersectionality, which as we have described, is a way of examining how multiple forms of oppression come together. This approach has been influential in the study of race and sexuality because it further contextualizes how individual characteristics, or identities, are affected by specific and overdetermined forms of discrimination and oppression. Related to CRT, the intersectional framework highlights how multiple forms of discrimination or stigma (i.e., having a non-normative gender display, being a person of color, and being lesbian, gay, bisexual, or trans) affect individual lives within a heteronormative, White supremacist, and patriarchal society. The SJS Project, a knowledge-based research agenda, began as a way to document and contextualize the stories of queer people of color

20

Queer People of Color

while avoiding a focus on discrimination and pathology. One way to do this was to continuously collect and amass data that could be used to further understand social and cultural trends. Though scholars have studied various components of the lives of queer people of color, there has never been a longitudinal approach – a systematic method of gathering data across many years. One way to grasp the utility of a knowledge-based research approach is to consider how scholars and policy-makers make use of the U.S. Census data. As a knowledge-based survey, the Census provides continuous data on things like income and education. Because queer women and men are not necessarily included in large knowledge-based surveys like the U.S. Census,7 empirical data on the lives of queer people have been collected using a variety of social scientific approaches that include but are not limited to autoethnography, focus group and in-depth interviewing, experiments, and survey methodology. The social scientific picture of the lives of queer people of color often focuses on the presence of discrimination, disease, and stigma. Without a doubt, queer people face many of these and other forms of oppression. But how can other stories be told about the queer people of color experience? For example, how do individuals make sense of their own lives, and how can research be used to understand how privilege, health, and acceptance appear? That is, how can examples or stories of success help us understand such things as survival and happiness? Though these are some of the questions that guided the SJS Project, one important element was missing: Which social and demographic characteristics are important in the lives of queer people of color today? To address this question, the SJS Project embarked on a knowledgebased research agenda that employed a variety of methodologies and practices. (See the Appendix for a chronological accounting of the research methods used by the SJS Project and important phases of the project.8) Book Overview

The SJS Project collected data on the experiences of queer people of color in five areas: identity (both racial and sexual), physical/mental health, family, religion/spirituality, and sociopolitical involvement. In this book, we focus on the data pertaining to sociopolitical involvement among Black, Latinx, and API study participants. Each chapter in this book is meant to “stand alone” and therefore, much of the material in chapters 2 through 4 is repeated. Each chapter examines feelings of belonging and sociopolitical involvement within a different queer racial

Community Connection Among Queer People of Color

21

community. The following chapter examines sociopolitical involvement among queer Blacks, chapter 3 examines queer Latinx women and men, and chapter 4 examines queer Asian/Pacific Islanders (API). The chapters begin by providing demographic information concerning the racial community (i.e., Black, Latinx, and API) and continue with a discussion on community engagement within these mainstream communities. We move on to discuss queer communities, provide demographic information, and focus on the experiences of queers in these racialized communities and these racial groups in queer communities, as their experiences are fundamentally different. Work on community engagement often overlooks the influence that family and religious communities play in feelings of belonging and how they may influence community engagement—and in the case of our study sample, their sociopolitical involvement. As such, we also examine the role of family and religion within these communities. Following this discussion, we present demographic findings on the SJS study participants and assess their levels of sociopolitical involvement in communities of color and queer communities. We go on to show how connectedness and comfort, more so than demographic variables, influence sociopolitical involvement in queer communities. Connectedness and comfort are, in fact, the most important predictors of sociopolitical involvement within these communities. We conclude this book with a chapter summarizing and discussing our findings. We also consider study implications and how they can be used to improve the lives of queer people of color. Notes 1 Queer refers to those who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, queer, (LGBTQ) and to individuals and groups who do not completely and always selfidentify as heterosexual. Although there are trans people who participated in the research of this book, the overall focus of the project was on sexual orientation and queer identity. While many trans people identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, queer, etc., gender identity is different from sexual identity. 2 Black is a racial group that encompasses peoples of the African diaspora. Black describes all people of African descent, including Black Americans (African Americans), West Indians, Central and South American Blacks, and those from Sub-Saharan Africa. 3 Latino is often used to describe people born in the United States and abroad, who have ancestry in colonized places in the Americas in which Spanish and Portuguese are the primary languages. These include Mexicans, Brazilians, and Puerto Ricans. The "x" in Latinx clarifies gender, making the category inclusive of women, men, agender, trans, gender-nonconforming, gender-queer, and gender-fluid people. Like the term Black, Latinx is an

22

Queer People of Color

umbrella term. It encompasses all peoples of a diaspora and includes North, Central, and South America 4 Asian/Pacific Islanders are people who have origins in Asian and Pacific geographic regions and may identify as Central Asian, East Asian, South Asian, Southeast Asian, Native Hawaiians, or Pacific Islanders. 5 However, as the recent 2016 presidential elections shows, one’s level of political participation may not necessarily relate to the desire to improve the lives of loved ones and families. 6 People who are trans or gender non-conforming face additional challenges as they tend to have higher rates of poverty (Movement Advancement Project, 2016), homelessness (Movement Advancement Project, 2016), poor health (Grant et al., 2010), depression (Grant et al., 2010), suicide (Haas, Rodgers & Herman, 2014), and unemployment than their cisgender counterparts (Crissman, Berger, Graham, & Dalton, 2017). Most of this is related to the stigmatization and marginalization that trans people face in both mainstream cis-heterosexual and cis-LGB communities. Additionally, trans individuals are routinely subjected to violence at rates much higher than their heterosexual and LGB counterparts (Grant et al., 2010). 7 To date, though the U.S. Census does not include a question about sexual orientation or identity, some scholars have used data related to household composition to identify same-sex couple households. This has been done primarily by matching the sex of the “head of household” with the sex of the only other household member in one family unit. This technique, however, has not been able to identify lesbian, gay, bisexual, and trans people who are single. 8 For more information about the project, visit www.socialjusticesexuality .com.

2 Black Communities

Following the acquittal of the man who stalked, assaulted, and murdered unarmed teen Trayvon Martin, activists Alicia Garza, Opal Tometi, and Patrisse Cullors created the #BlackLivesMatter (BLM) hashtag, which quickly grew into an international social movement. Simply proclaiming, “Black Lives Matter,” the movement, whose initial goal was to bring attention to the killings of unarmed Blacks by law enforcement, soon grew to address globalism, disability rights, women’s rights, trans rights, queer rights and other social issues with the intent to fight for the dignity and success of all Black lives. On their website, they write, “We Affirm that ALL Black Lives Matter” and describe #BLM as “an ideological and political intervention in a world where Black lives are systematically and intentionally targeted for demise. It is an affirmation of Black folks’ contributions to this society, our humanity, and our resilience in the face of deadly oppression” (Black Lives Matter, n.d.). A likely reason for this intersectional approach to the work of BLM movement is that its founders are queer Black women, who, from the outset, have worked to make sure the movement addresses the oppressive social and identity-based issues that intersect with race—e.g., gender, class, and sexuality—and further marginalize all members of Black communities. Their approach is but one example of sociopolitical involvement within Black communities. This chapter explores sociopolitical involvement among queer Blacks. We use queer to refer to those who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, queer, as well as those who do not completely or always self-identify as heterosexual. We further use this term under the realization that it has different meanings for different people. To address this, we will pay special attention to these specific terms and will include exceptions whenever we believe that the original intent strays from our collective meaning. The use of the term queer in this book is also used to succinctly capture these disparate identities. Queer is not

23

24

Queer People of Color

necessarily used as a self-identifier for many; instead, queer is our way of highlighting some of the limitations of language and identity. For example, as mentioned later in this chapter, one of the other terms that we have encountered within Black queer communities includes “samegender loving.” Black is a racial group that encompasses all peoples of the African diaspora. Black is used to describe all people of African descent, including: Black Americans (African Americans), West Indians, Central and South American Blacks, and those from Sub-Saharan Africa. According to the Census Bureau, Blacks comprise 14.4% of the total U.S. population and those who identify as “Black only” (not part Latinx or only part Black) comprise 13.3% of the population (United States Census Bureau, 2016a), making Blacks the third largest racial/ethnic group in the nation behind Whites and Latinxs. Although most Blacks in the United States and in the Americas can trace their origins back to the chattel slavery trade of Africans in the Americas, during the transAtlantic slave trade, only 4.4-5.4% of Blacks from Africa came to the United States. A vast majority were sent to the West Indies, South America, or Central America. As such, most Blacks in America are African American (Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade Voyages Database, n.d.). A majority of Blacks currently in the United States were born here, and 3.8 million Blacks are immigrants, accounting for 8.7% of the total Black population (Pew Research Center [PRC], 2015) Blacks are often lost in the narrative on immigration, likely because “compared with all U.S. immigrants, immigrant [B]lacks are more likely to hold U.S. citizenship and to speak English proficiently” (PRC, 2015). Half of Black immigrants are from the Caribbean, with most hailing from Jamaica and Haiti (PRC, 2015). African immigrants make up 36% of the Black immigrant population, and those from South and Central America make up 5% and 4%, respectively (PRC, 2015). Blacks from Europe make up 2% of foreign-born Blacks, while those from South and East Asia make up only 1%. The Dominican Republic accounts for the largest number of the 11% of Latinx Black immigrants, followed by Mexico, Cuba, and Panama (PRC, 2015). Blacks are more likely to live in the southern and coastal regions of the United States than other areas of the country (Rastogi, Johnson, Hoeffel, & Drewery, Jr., 2011). Washington, DC has the largest percentage of Black residents in the country, but New York City has the largest Black population in the nation. Almost 20% of Black Americans have earned a bachelor’s degree or higher, this rate surpasses their Latinx (11%) counterparts but is still lower than those who are White (30%) or API (49%). A vast majority (84%) of Blacks have a high

Black Communities

25

school diploma. In 2014, the median annual income for Black households was only $35,398, with a poverty rate of 26.2% compared to the national averages of $53,657 and 14.8%. These statistics vary for Black immigrant populations but still show comparably lower rates of poverty, higher rates of college degrees, and a higher likelihood to be married compared to their U.S.-born counterparts (PRC, 2015). Twentyeight percent of Black adults over 18 are married, and 36% have a child (United States Census, 2016). Compared to APIs, Latinxs, and Whites, Blacks are less likely to feel satisfied with their family life and community (PRC, 2016). These findings, along with lower rates of Black financial satisfaction, are substantiated by research citing over 40% of Blacks, 33% of Latinxs, and 25% of Whites have experienced financial hardships (PRC, 2016). Blacks and Latinxs have analogously high national rates of poverty (27% for the former and 26.6% for the latter), but both of these groups have astronomically higher rates than do Whites (9.9% nationally). This economic disparity is worse in children and youth, where almost half of Black children live in poverty compared to only 14.5% of White children (Mishel, Bivens, Gould, & Shierholz, 2012). Many of these social challenges are associated with systemic racism and discrimination that result in a lack of financial stability and overall support for family life. Problems are commonly seen in many domains, ranging from high rates of divorce and incarceration (Black Demographics, n.d; National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, n.d.). Although these issues are rooted in the history of racial oppression and discrimination that Blacks in this nation have faced and continue to face, Black activists and communities have worked to address these issues and concerns. Black Mainstream Communities and Sociopolitical Involvement

A fundamental part of the Black experience in the United States has always been sociopolitical involvement. Since the founding of this nation, Blacks have been actively engaged in community and social justice activism to combat the limited opportunities caused by racism and discrimination. Additionally, there are expectations for community engagement within Black communities, which, according to scholars, are rooted in cultural notions of community support (Collins, 2000; Harvell, 2010). Valeria Harvell (2010) maintains that this humanist ideology found among Black Americans is a remnant of African culture known as “communalism,” which was an important part of Black culture before, during, and after slavery. In communalism, “the group constitutes the main focus of the lives of the individual members of that

26

Queer People of Color

group, and that the extent of the individual’s involvement in the interests, aspirations, and welfare of the group is the measure of that individual’s worth” (Harvell, 2010, p. 1056). Scholars have often noted that this emphasis on community involvement and engagement is not just an important part of Black culture in the United States, but it is also essential to the very identity of many Blacks (Collins, 2000; Gilkes, 2001). This cultural expectation for community activism is rooted in the experiences of Blacks in America and the need for self-care and community support. Blacks faced oppression and lack of external support during slavery, Reconstruction, and the Great Migration. Social justice movements such as the abolitionist, civil rights, and Black Lives Matter movements were the result of and encouraged Black activism and sociopolitical involvement. In essence, leadership, and overall community engagement proved necessary for group survival. Sociopolitical involvement is higher for Blacks than other racial/ethnic groups (Finlay, Flanagan, & Wary-Lake, 2011; Verba et al., 1995). For instance, in their 2011 study of first-time, full-time AmeriCorps volunteers enrolled between September 1999 and January 2000, researchers found that Blacks volunteered more frequently than Latinxs or Asian/Pacific Islanders (API) (Finlay et al., 2011). Research further maintains that Blacks are more likely than Whites to report campaign work and involvement in informal community activities and protest. More specifically, Blacks spent significantly more hours than Whites volunteering for political campaigns and are more likely to participate in issue-based activities, such as basic human needs, education, civil rights, and, in particular, criminal justice or drug issues (Verba et al., 1995). These issues are seen as addressing the root cause of problems within Black communities. The 2012 election was the first in the nation’s history where the percentage of Black voters was greater White voters, 66.2% to 64.1% (United States Census, 2016). A study of 1,466 respondents to the General Social Survey illustrated that Blacks in areas with high Black empowerment (defined as areas with a Black mayor) were more politically active than Whites of comparable socioeconomic status and Blacks living in areas of low empowerment (Bobo & Gilliam, 1990). Although this study is decades old, it highlights the importance of feelings of empowerment to political participation and suggests that Black leadership is important for increasing Black participation in the political arena. Another study of youth voters (those between 18 and 20 years of age) found that Black youth were more likely to feel that their vote influenced the outcome of an election and that their vote was an “expression of their choice” than other racial groups (Marcelo, Lopez, & Kirby, 2007).

Black Communities

27

Black women, have a long and well documented history of sociopolitical involvement and activism. Activists such as Harriet Tubman, Sojourner Truth, Ida B. Wells, Rosa Parks, and Angela Davis, have emphasized how the racial, gender, and often class-based oppressions that Black women experience intersect, and they have fought tirelessly to combat these injustices. Activism and community engagement among Black women is deeply rooted in their historical experiences of slavery and continue today (Weisenfeld, 1997). Black Queer Communities

Lena Waithe, a Black lesbian, is a writer and co-star of the popular Netflix series, Master of None, who, along with comedian Aziz Ansari, wrote perhaps the most well received episode of the series, “Thanksgiving.” In the series, Waithe plays the lifelong best friend of Ansari’s character, who, over the course of multiple Thanksgiving Day dinners, comes out to him and her family. Waithe explained that this episode mirrors her own coming out experience (Terrell, 2017). One reason for the positive critical response this episode received rests was the reaction of Waithe’s mother (played by Angela Basset), who, instead of rejecting her daughter, was concerned about the way her daughter would be treated by others. She accepts her daughter, as well as the partners her daughter brings home during these Thanksgiving meals. That a Black lesbian coming out to her accepting single mother during Thanksgiving was the focus of an entire episode in a popular Netflix series, where the focus of the show is on a heterosexual cisgender API man, is indicative of changing attitudes. Although often overlooked, queer Black individuals have always been actively involved in queer communities, just as queer identified people have always been actively involved in Black communities. In fact, it was Black queer scholars/activists who emphasized the important role sexuality and identity plays in systems of oppression. Audre Lorde (1984) challenged White feminism and heterosexism; Bayard Rustin worked to address racism while also facing homophobia from Black civil rights leaders; and Alice Walker actively wrote about sexism, racism, and issues of sexuality and misogyny within Black communities. In labeling themselves and their sexual identities, many Blacks avoid labels such as “lesbian,” “gay,” and “queer” as they believe they do not adequately represent their experiences or lives. Within Black communities, the fluidity of sexuality and the association of “lesbian” and “gay” with Whiteness have resulted in many opting for the more love and community orientated terms, such as “same-gender loving,”

28

Queer People of Color

“one of the children,” or “simply family” (Battle & Harris, 2013a). Research has uncovered varying levels of connection between Black queer people and mainstream queer communities as well as connections to the larger Black population (Brandt, 1999; Brooks, 1981; Cohen, 1999; Constantine-Simms, 2001; Greene, 1994). Some social commentators have argued that same-sex attraction was rooted in White communities (Asante, 1980), maintaining that queer identities were not prevalent in Africa and among Blacks until contact with Europeans (Murray & Roscoe, 1998); however, by the mid-1980s, this contention was dispelled (Beam, 1986; Boykin, 1996; Collins, 1998; McBride, 1998). In 2012, a Gallop Special Report found that Blacks were more likely to identify as queer, at 4.6%, compared to any other racial/ethnic group in the nation. Black queer people face the same societal disadvantage associated with being a person of color as their heterosexual counterparts, while also experiencing additional discrimination because of their sexual orientation. Four in ten queer Blacks have experienced employment discrimination due to race, sexuality, or gender identity, and 15% of queer Blacks are unemployed (Movement Advancement Project, 2013). In an effort to create a safe, welcoming, and affirming space in cities throughout the nation,1 a number of different organizations host Black Pride celebrations. As with “traditional” pride, which commemorates the Stonewall Riots, marking the start of the lesbian and gay rights movement, Black pride is a celebration of queer rights and identities but with an emphasis on Black communities and cultures. Queers in Black Communities

Contrary to popular belief, some research indicates that Black communities are no more homophobic than Whites or other communities of color (Durell, Chiong, & Battle, 2007; Herek & Capitanio, 1999; Waldner, Sikka, & Baig, 1999). Nonetheless, homophobia within Black communities worldwide has been well documented; from the laws calling for a life sentence for homosexual sex in Uganda to the killing of trans Black women in the Unites States. Homophobia, or the fear of homosexuals, exists within all communities. Homophobia within Black communities in the United States is largely due to conservative notions of sexuality, rooted in the history of sexuality-based oppression that Blacks have continuously experienced (Collins, 2000; Harris, 2010). From Saartjie Baartman’s, “Hottentot Venus” in the early 19th century, to current police shootings of Black women, men, and boys, the dual fascination and fear of the Black body

Black Communities

29

has helped to emphasize social and cultural notions of sexuality, masculinity, and femininity (Collins, 2000; hooks, 2001; West, 2001). Black men have been portrayed as aggressive, hypersexual predators of White women, and this stereotype has been used to justify lynchings and other indignities. Black women were portrayed as either sexually promiscuous Jezebels who seduced White men, or as asexual Mammies, expected to care for White children. Beyond delegitimizing the Black body, these depictions of Black people characterized them as subhuman, helping to support White supremacy and the belief that Blacks were deserving of the oppression that Whites inflicted upon them (Harris, 2010). In an effort to appear “respectable,” the Black middle class, especially those associated with religious institutions, condemned those perceived as “deviant,” in particular, homosexuals (Battle & Lemelle, 2002; Cohen, 1999; Collins, 2000; Harris, 2010; hooks, 2001). This same research goes on to suggest that this history has also directly led to homophobic attitudes among Blacks. Homophobia became a “cross cutting issue” that has had far reaching consequences, including, according to political scientist Cathy Cohen (1999), the delayed response to HIV within Black communities by Black religious institutions and the Black middle class. This delayed response likely led to increased rates of HIV, manifested in a lack of support for those infected, ignorance of modes of infection, and, importantly, AIDS stigma (Herek, 2009). Studies are inconsistent in their findings about the levels of homophobia in Black communities, with some arguing that Blacks hold more negative attitudes towards homosexuals (Lewis, 2003), while others suggesting that Blacks are much more likely to support legislation promoting queer equality (Herek & Capitanio, 1999). For example, Keith Boykin (1996) found that more Blacks than Whites supported military inclusion and equal job opportunities for queer people. It is also important to note that a majority of the research conducted examining homophobia within Black communities was published from the 1980s to the early 2000s. Recent years have shown a dramatic shift in support of queer communities, as many Black organizations and groups have shown open support towards queer people. One specific case was seen in 2012, when then NAACP President and CEO Benjamin Jealous spoke at the queer social justice conference, “Creating Change.” And in 2013, largely due to queer activists with the help of Black churches in Prince George’s County (a predominately Black community) pushing for legislation, Maryland became the first state to recognize same-sex marriage as a result of a voter-approved, statewide referendum.

30

Queer People of Color

Blacks in Queer Communities

There is a reason why, according to the United States Census; most Black same-sex couples live in predominately Black communities (Moore, 2010). Studies like the Say It Loud, I’m Black and I’m Proud: Black Pride Survey 2000, indicate that racism in queer communities is more problematic and upsetting to queer Blacks than homophobia in Black communities. Half of Black queer people who responded to the survey strongly agreed that racism was a problem in mainstream queer communities. In fact, most of the respondents in the survey, regardless of gender or gender expression, indicated that racial/ethnic discrimination was the primary form of discrimination that they experienced (Battle et al., 2002). Racism within predominantly White queer communities is often overlooked in research, but it is still very real. This particular type of racism has negative ramifications on the sense of inclusion that many Blacks feel within queer communities and, as expected, is highly distressing to queer people of color (Diaz, Ayala, Bein, Henne, & Marin, 2001; Flores et al., 2009). Studies on racial discrimination experienced by gay men of color in White queer spaces note the negative ramifications that this discrimination has on their self-esteem (Flores et al., 2009). This could be because Black gay men have reported experiencing more forms of discrimination within White queer spaces—e.g., bars, clubs, organizations, events, and within interpersonal relationships—than have Black women, who are less likely to socialize in public spaces and are more apt to do so through smaller social networks and in private home settings (Battle et al., 2002; Moore 2010). This likely mitigates the experiences that Black women have with racism in queer communities. For example, recent studies have noted the racism apparent in online dating applications targeting gay men like Grindr, Scruff and OkCupid. A study of OkCupid found that White gay men were less likely to respond to messages from gay men of color (Mula, 2017). Sexual racism, or “racial prejudice enacted in the context of sex or romance,” was studied by Australian scholars on a sample of predominately White and API men, with their research concluding that those men who display negative attitudes towards men of different races are also less likely to date men from these groups (Callander, Newman, & Holt, 2015). For many queer people of color, the findings of our project confirm the feelings of racism and discrimination they have felt in many dating and interpersonal interactions. In addition to impacting self-esteem and feelings of belonging, this discrimination also likely helps to fuel rates of HIV among Black queer

Black Communities

31

men, as data indicate that they have fewer sexual partners from which to choose. This smaller dating pool increases chances of sex with an infected partner (Peligri, 2015). Black queer men are at increased risk for HIV infection not because they participate in riskier sexual behaviors or have more partners than their White gay male counterparts but due, in part, to discrimination. According to Arnold, Rebchook, & Kegeles (2014) though they are more likely to participate in safer sex and have fewer partners, they are still more likely to have sex with an infected partner and have less access to health care and to anti-retroviral drugs. Families

Recently, celebrated musical artist, Jay-Z, rapped about the struggles his lesbian mother went through dealing with her sexuality while raising a young son and in poverty. In his song “Smile” on the album 4:44, Jay-Z writes, “Mama had four kids, but she's a lesbian / Had to pretend so long that she's a thespian / Had to hide in the closet, so she medicate / Society shame and the pain was too much to take.” This open recognition of his mother’s sexuality was emotional and quite brave. Not only did he support his mother, but he also gave voice to the pain she experienced while closeted. Many of the social challenges that Blacks have faced throughout history, including slavery and the Great Migration, have resulted in notions of “family” being redefined. For many Black individuals, family can include people who are not biological family, adoptive family, or family of birth. For many Blacks, family also includes what is referred to as “fictive kin,” or friends of the family who are as close as and thought of as biological family. Because of racism, poverty, and other societal pressures and challenges, families, both biological and fictive, are often the only form of support to which many Blacks have access. As such, studies have long emphasized the importance of family and the support that extended kinship networks have among Black communities in the United States, while at the same time problematizing Black families (Battle et al., 2003). For example, although we often hear the myth of the “absent” Black father, sociologist Roberta Coles (2009) found the opposite, explaining that Black fathers may be more active in their children’s lives than men of other racial groups. These findings were later supported in a 2013 Centers for Disease Control study, which noted that Black fathers were more active in their children’s lives than other fathers of other racial/ethnic groups (CDC, 2013). Similar to the myth of the absent Black father, there, too, is the myth of the homophobic Black family, where youth are closeted and unable to be

32

Queer People of Color

honest about their identities to their families. Most queer people of color, including queer Blacks are out to their families (Bimbi et al., 2006). And having family support is a strong predictor of being out (as lesbian, gay, bisexual, or trans) to others (Pastrana, 2014; 2015). Those who are neither welcomed in their homes nor feel safe in their homes when they come out often subsequently create new family units made up of other friends and partners (Schneider, 1984; Weston, 1991). Many Black and queer youth of color, particularly those in urban areas who are seeking safe, welcoming, and affirming “family” units, join the ballroom community to meet these needs. In his book on “ballroom culture,” Marlon Bailey (2013) describes how this community within the larger queer community consists of “three inextricable dimensions... the gender system, the kinship structure (houses), and the ball events (where ritualized performances are enacted)” (p. 4). Bailey goes on to explain these “kinship structures”: Houses are family-like structures that are configured socially rather than biologically… Houses are also alternative families that are led by “mothers” and “fathers.” House parents provide guidance for their “children” of various ages, race/ethnic identities (usually Black and Latino/a), genders, and sexualities, who come from cities and regions throughout North America. In general, a “house” does not signify an actual building; rather, it represents the ways in which its members, who mostly live in various locations, view themselves and interact with each other as a family unit. (p. 5)

These kinship ties are the key connections that hold this culture together, providing the support and structure lacking in the lives of many of the youth who are drawn to ballroom culture. In terms of children and romantic relationships, queer Black individuals and couples are more likely to raise, foster, and adopt children born before and during the course of their relationship compared to their Latinx or White queer counterparts (Arnold & Bailey, 2009; Movement Advancement Project 2011; Regnerus, 2012). A 2011 study indicates that 46.7% of Black lesbian couples and 32.9% of Black gay couples were raising children compared to 23.1% of White lesbian couples and 6.2% of White gay couples (Movement Advancement Project, 2011). Queer families of color are also more likely to struggle financially, with poverty, housing, and lack of insurance (Regnerus, 2012). In fact, about 20% of Blacks live in poverty, and Black same-sex couples are more than twice as likely to live in poverty as Black opposite-sex couples. A 2012 study indicated that almost one third of Black children raised in same-sex households live in poverty, compared

Black Communities

33

to 13% of children raised by Black heterosexual parents and just 7% of children raised by White heterosexual parents (Regnerus, 2012). Spirituality

In 2017 Bishop Eddie Long, senior pastor of New Birth Missionary Baptist church in DeKalb County, GA, just outside Atlanta, passed away. This mega church leader, famous for his energetic preaching style (along with his open homophobia), shocked his congregation when allegations of relationships with underage male congregants began to surface following lawsuits filed by his alleged victims (Associated Press, 2017). Although Long denied the claims of these young men, he did briefly step down, only to later return to his leadership position in the church thanks to the loyal support of his congregation, who reinstituted him after their investigation turned up no wrong doings. He died with the aura of suspicion still over him but with the devotion of his congregation. Blacks are among the most religious racial/ethnic group in the nation. Blacks have the highest rates of religiosity and church attendance in the nation (PRC, 2009). A 2009 Pew Research Center study found that 79% of Blacks believe that religion is an important part of their lives compared to only 56% of all U.S. adults (PRC, 2009). Compared to other racial/ethnic groups, Blacks are more likely to identify as religious or spiritual and report that religion plays an important role in their lives (PRC, 2009). In a 2014 study of religiosity among queer and non-queer people, 47% of queer respondents identified as not religious, while 24% identified as “highly religious.” In comparison, 30% of respondents in the general population identified as not religious, but 41% identified as “highly religious” (Newport, 2014). It would be difficult to talk about the role of religion and spiritualty within Black queer communities without a discussion of the role and influence of Black churches in their lives and communities. Black churches are typically Protestant where the leadership and majority of parishioners are Black. Black churches have a reputation for fighting for social justice issues that concern Blacks in the United States, but the churches have historically been challenged by issues of sex and gender (Harris, 2014). This was particularly a concern when large numbers of Black men began dying of AIDS in 1980s. Because HIV is transmitted via unprotected sex and intravenous drug use, Black churches had a difficult time addressing the high rates of HIV in Black communities. Although many Black churches developed AIDS ministries and worked to make their space welcoming and open to diverse groups, many other

34

Queer People of Color

churches maintained a conservative stance towards sex and sexuality, forcing many queer congregants out of the church (Harris, 2010). In 1982, in an effort to respond to homophobia in Black churches and promote feelings of belonging and acceptance, as well as the lack of religious leadership in addressing HIV, singer and songwriter Carl Bean became an ordained minister and formed Unity Fellowship Church, a predominantly African American denomination to serve queer members in Los Angeles. This space responded to the spiritual and material needs of queer people devastated by the first wave of the AIDS epidemic. Unity Fellowship was not the first queer church denomination—the Metropolitan Community Church (MCC) was formed in 1969 by Rev. Troy Perry—but Unity catered specifically to the Black queer community and currently has congregants spread out over a dozen locations, primarily on the West and East coasts. The Social Justice Sexuality Study

As examined in the first chapter, a sense of belonging to a community or group is important not only for the psychological well-being of the individual, but it also has great societal benefits. Individual who feel a sense of belonging are more likely to be involved in their communities through volunteering, protest activity, etc. In 2010, over 2,100 Blacks took part in the Social Justice Sexuality (SJS) Project, one of the largest national surveys of queer Blacks in the United States. Respondents ranged in age from 18 to 81, with a mean age of 37. A little over one-third of the women identified as single (36%) and almost half were parents (45%); while among men, a little over one-half identified as single (60%) and only 22% were parents. Black study participants were more likely to live in urban areas as opposed to rural or suburban ones. A little over a third lived in the South and the average person in the sample identified as politically liberal. Among women, the level of education ranged from less than high school (3.3%) to graduate/professional school (8.1%). Most women reported having at least some college education, with 19.2% reporting having a bachelor’s degree. Women reported household income from under $8,500 (9.2%) to over $100,000 a year (8.9%). Men had slightly higher levels of education and income than the women. The educational level of these men ranged from less than high school (2%) to graduate/professional school (20%). Most men reported having at least some college education, with 22% reporting having a bachelor’s degree. Men reported household income ranged under $8,500 (9%) to over $100,000 per year (10%).

Black Communities

35

Examining the overall sample, the SJS Survey yielded important findings about how queer Blacks frame their experiences regarding racial/ethnic status and sexual identity, as well as important issues facing their communities. Almost three-quarters (73.6%) of Blacks in the study indicated that their racial/ethnic status was an important part of their identity (Battle, Pastrana, & Daniels, 2012). (See Figure 2.1.) Figure 2.1 Racial or Ethnic Status Is an Important Part of Identity (N=2,166)

No 26.4%

Yes 73.6%

Source: Social Justice Sexuality Survey: The Executive Summary for the Black Population (Socialjusticesexuality.com)

Nearly three-quarters (74.4%) indicated that their sexual orientation was an important part of their identity, emphasizing that one identity is not more important than another and that group membership is important for these study participants (Battle et al., 2012). (See Figure 2.2.)

36

Queer People of Color

Figure 2.2 Sexual Orientation Is an Important Part of Identity (N=2,166)

No 25.6%

Yes 74.4%

Source: Social Justice Sexuality Survey: The Executive Summary for the Black Population (Socialjusticesexuality.com)

For example, in a subsequent qualitative study conducted by the SJS Project, a respondent noted, “I personally don’t see a problem with identifying yourself as something as long as it is your choice. I think if you were to sit there and say I’m a lesbian and African American or I’m Black or whatever it takes to make you feel like you belong to a group… because sometimes it is better to be on the inside than on the outside” (Battle et al., 2012, p. 3). According to Black respondents, the most important issues facing Black queer communities were, in order: “sexual health education and HIV and AIDS,” “discrimination,” and “equality and acceptance” (Battle et al., 2012). Conversely, the most important individual issues facing Black respondents were economic issues (22%), equality and marriage/domestic partnership issues (10%) and reported equality/acceptance issues (10%). In comparison to Latinx, API, and multiracial people, Blacks feel less connected to mainstream

Black Communities

37

(predominately White) queer communities and Blacks are no more or less likely to feel that homophobia is an issue in their racial communities.2 In terms of social support, 70.4% of Black SJS study participants reported feeling at least somewhat supported by their families, with approximately 37% reporting feeling completely supported by their family members. (See Figure 2.3.) Figure 2.3 Feeling Supported from Family (N=2,166)

No 29.6%

Yes 70.4%

Source: Social Justice Sexuality Survey: The Executive Summary for the Black Population (Socialjusticesexuality.com)

Over 90% of the Black study sample were out to some family members while 62% were out to most of their family and 44% were out to all of their family members. Rates of outness among coworkers were similar to rates of outness among family members, although people were out to slightly fewer people at work than to family members. Only around 10% were not out to family. A little over 30% were out to

38

Queer People of Color

neighbors and people in their communities, 40% were out to some, and a little over 20% were not out to anyone in their neighborhoods. A little over 50% of the Black study respondents were out to all of their friends with less than five percent indicating that they were not out to their friends. Black study participants were more likely to indicate that religion and spiritualty are more “important” to them than their Latinx and API counterparts. Also, compared to other people of color, Black queer people reported that religion had neither a positive nor negative influence on them and they had neither positive nor negative experiences with their religious institutions. Although Black churches are often considered homophobic and unwelcoming to many queer people (Harris, 2010), religious attendance among Blacks is much higher than among other queer people of color. Additionally, about 40% of the Blacks were out to everyone in their religious communities, while fewer, 27% reported that they were out to no one in their religious community. Sociopolitical Involvement and the Social Justice Sexuality Project

The data presented in this study focus on sociopolitical involvement among queer Blacks in predominately White queer communities, in the Black community and communities of color, and in the queer Black and communities of color. Involvement in predominantly White queer communities may include attending mainstream Pride Events and volunteering for organizations such as the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force. In the Black community and communities of color, sociopolitical involvement may include attending neighborhood Kwanza celebrations or volunteering or donating to the NAACP. Black queer sociopolitical participation may involve attending Black Pride or volunteering in the National Black Justice Coalition. Here, we examine the correlates of sociopolitical involvement among our Black study participants to assess how sociopolitical involvement might influence feelings of belonging and acceptance within their communities. Further, of the over 2,100 Blacks who took part in the Social Justice Sexuality Project, 673 Black women and 833 Black men (N=1,506) provided valid responses to all the questions analyzed for this chapter. At core, we were interested in how these Black respondents’ experiences with community and identity affected their sociopolitical involvement within queer communities, within communities of color, and within their intersections—queer communities of color. Because of

Black Communities

39

their unique dynamics, each of these three measures was treated as a separate dependent variable in multivariate analyses. More precisely, to measure Queer Sociopolitical Involvement, respondents were asked, “Thinking about LGBT groups, organizations, and activities in general, during the past 12 months, how often have you”: a. Participated in political events (e.g., a march, rally, etc.) b. Participated in social or cultural events (e.g., clubs, movies, restaurants, etc.) c. Read newspapers or magazines d. Used the internet (e.g., chat rooms, social networking sites, blogs, etc.) e. Received goods and/or services (e.g., medical, counseling, food, etc.) f. Donated money to an organization. Then for each of those six questions, they could respond from “never” (1) through “more than once a week” (6). The same response structure was provided to measure both POC Sociopolitical Involvement, “Thinking about groups, organizations, and activities for people of color, during the past 12 months, how often have you”; and QPOC Sociopolitical Involvement, “Thinking about groups, organizations, and activities for LGBT people of color, during the past 12 months, how often have you.” (See Table 2.1.) Again, across all three of those dependent variables—sociopolitical involvement within queer communities, within communities of color, and within their intersections—we wanted to see the relative impact of two broad domains: community and identity. To measure community, five variables were analyzed. The first one, Connected to Queer Communities, measured the level of connection Black queer respondents felt to mainstream (predominately White) queer communities and the impact that might have on the sociopolitical involvement of these respondents. Study participants were asked to respond from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree” on three items: a. I feel connected to my local LGBT community b. I feel that problems faced by the LGBT community are also my problems c. I feel a bond with other LGBT people. Their responses were combined into one measure and that composite variable was analyzed.

40

Variables Alphas in parentheses (women/men)

Black Women (N=646) Mean

S.D.

Range

Black Men (N=833) Mean

S.D.

Range

Description: Social Justice Sexuality Variable Label

Dependent Variable Queer Sociopolitical Involvement (Alpha=.770/.751) POC Sociopolitical Involvement (Alpha=.837/.789) QPOC Sociopolitical Involvement (Alpha=.846/.810)

3.23

3.06

2.73

1.08

1.16

1.23

1-6

1-6

1-6

3.39

3.16

3.00

.98

1.09

1.16

1-6

Involvement in groups, organizations, and activities for Queer

1-6

Involvement in groups, organizations, and activities for POC

1-6

Involvement in groups, organizations, and activities for QPOC continues

Queer People of Color

Table 2.1 Black Queer Sociopolitical Involvement Means, Standard Deviants, Ranges, and Description

Table 2.1 continued Variables Alphas in parentheses (women/men)

Black Women (N=646)

Black Men (N=833)

Mean

S.D.

Range

Mean

S.D.

Range

Description: Social Justice Sexuality Variable Label

4.25

1.27

1-6

3.97

1.33

1-6

Connected to Queer Community/People

1-5

How many people within the following communities are you “out” to: family, friends, religious community, co-workers, etc.

1-6

As a Queer person, how much do you feel supported by your family

Independent Variable Community Connected to Queer Community (Alpha=.899/.787)

Family Support

3.79

4.42

1.27

1.65

1-5

1-6

3.55

4.31

1.17

1.67

41

continues

Black Communities

Outness (Alpha=.899/.900)

42

Variables Alphas in parentheses (women/men)

Black Women (N=646) Mean

S.D.

Range

Black Men (N=833) Mean

S.D.

Range

Description: Social Justice Sexuality Variable Label

1-6

How often have you felt uncomfortable in your Queer community because of your race or ethnicity

1-6

How often have you felt uncomfortable in your racial or ethnic community because of your sexual identity

1-6

Do you feel that your sexual orientation is an important part of your identity

1-6

Do you feel that your racial or ethnic status is an important part of your identity

Community

Comfort in Queer Communities

Comfort in Racial Communities

5.10

2.90

1.53

1.58

1-6

1-6

3.99

3.56

1.59

1.56

Identity Sexual Identity Importance Racial Identity Importance

4.78

4.60

1.47

1.59

1-6

1-6

4.47

4.50

1.61

1.61

Queer People of Color

Table 2.1 continued

Black Communities

43

All too often in social science research Outness is measured with a single-item question. We wanted to allow, however, for more dynamic measures of outness across different types of communities as well as within those communities. Thus, we created a composite variable from responses to “How many people within the following communities are you ‘out’ to?” Respondents could then answer, “None,” “some,” “about half,” “most,” or “all” for each of the following communities: a. Family b. Friends c. Religious community d. Co-workers e. People in your neighborhood f. People online. Realizing the importance of family and Family Support among communities of color, we asked respondents “As a LGBT person, how much do you now feel supported by your family?” Their responses could range from “not supported at all” (1) to “completely supported” (6). Similarly, a single-item measure was employed to capture both Comfort in Queer Communities “How often have you felt uncomfortable in your LGBT community because of your race or ethnicity;” as well as Comfort in Racial Communities “How often have you felt uncomfortable in your racial or ethnic community because of your sexual identity?” For each question, respondents could answer, “never” (1) through “always” (6). The values for these two “Comfort” variables were flipped to measure comfortable rather than uncomfortable feelings. To measure identity, we were interested in two aspects: a. Sexual Identity Importance: “Do you feel that your sexual orientation is an important part of your identity?”; and b. Racial Identity Importance: “Do you feel that your racial or ethnic status is an important part of your identity?” For each question, respondents could choose, “not important at all” (1) through “extremely important” (6). So then, how were the models built? To begin with, we realized that it would be very problematic to assume that experiences for women would be the same as men. Therefore, we decided to analyze the data separately based on sex. Unfortunately, there were not enough transgender respondents to allow for any meaningful analysis; therefore, they were not included in the analysis. Thus, employing only the female

44

Queer People of Color

sample, we took the variable Queer as our first dependent variable and entered the five variables measuring Community (see Model I). Then, we added the two variables measuring Identity (see Model II). Model II also included measures of sexual orientation, relationship status (single vs. not), parental status (has ever parented vs. not), age, nationality (foreign-born vs. US-born), urbanicity (big city vs. not), region (South vs. not), political views (conservative to liberal), education, and income. None of the variables, however, was significant. Therefore, for the purposes of space and visual parsimony, those results are not presented in the regression table. The same procedure employed for the dependent variable Queer Sociopolitical Involvement (Models I and II) was repeated for POC Sociopolitical Involvement (see Models III and IV), and for QPOC Sociopolitical Involvement (see Models V and VI). Subsequently, these same analyses were then repeated for the male sample (see Models VII through XII). Using Table 2.2 as a guide, the best way to see the impact of these variables across dependent variables and sex (females vs. males) is to look at a particular independent variable across all 12 models. Therefore, the findings section of this chapter will do just that. Doing so highlights our first and most poignant finding: Connection to queer communities is by far the most powerful and robust predictor—across all three dependent variables as well as for women and men—of sociopolitical involvement (see Models I through XII). In short, the more connected one feels to queer communities, the more likely engagement in sociopolitical activities for queer groups, people of color groups, and for queer people of color groups. For both women and men, outness is a significant predictor of queer sociopolitical involvement (see Models I, II, VII, and VIII). For people of color and for both women and men, sociopolitical involvement only approaches significance (see Models III, IV, IX, and X). There is a clear gender divide, however, when it comes to queer people of color’s sociopolitical involvement. More specifically, for Black women it is statistically significant; however, for men, it is not. Arguably, lesbian communities, of all races and ethnicities, tend to be more politically active. Coming out and joining lesbian communities typically means becoming more sociopolitically active. Conversely, gay men’s groups tend to be more social. Thus, for Black men, coming out may make one more social but not necessarily more political. Family support, surprisingly, was not a statistically significant predictor for women or men. It is probably confounded by the other variables in the initial models. For example, once the impact of being

Black Communities

45

connected to the queer community, outness, and comfort in queer and racial communities is controlled for (see Models I, III, V, VII, IX, and XI), it stands to reason that little variance remains for family support as an explanatory factor. To be clear, we are not suggesting that family support is not an important influence on sociopolitical involvement. Instead, we are suggesting its impact is muted based on the other variables simultaneously analyzed. For Black men, not too surprisingly, comfort in queer communities did not have any major impact on sociopolitical involvement (see Models VIII through XII). Again, we hypothesize that it is because the motivation for men coming out may be more social than political. Conversely, comfort in queer communities proved to have a statistically significant, yet negative impact, for Black women (see Models I through V). In other words, the more comfortable a Black woman is in queer communities, on average, the less likely she is to be engaged in sociopolitical activities. This finding may seem counterintuitive, yet is may be reflective of research that shows that sociopolitical involvement is an important coping mechanism for those facing multiple levels of minority-based stress (Balsam et al., 2011; Poynter & Washington, 2005). Additionally, this finding may begin to make more sense if we consider an implied “time” effect. When Black women first come out, their motivation may be political (for example, see our comments above concerning connection to queer communities). Over time, however, their relationships with the lesbian community may become more social than political, as we found with Black gay men. Unfortunately, because this dataset is cross sectional, we cannot tease out age/period/cohort effects. Nonetheless, longitudinal or qualitative research may offer much insight here. Comfort in racial communities tended to behave similarly for women and men. That is for both people of color sociopolitical involvement (see Models III, IV, IX, and X) and queer people of color sociopolitical involvement (see Models V, VI, XI, and XII), on average, the more comfortable one was in their racial communities, the more likely they were to be sociopolitically involved. Given that this was not the case for queer sociopolitical involvement (i.e., majority White queer spaces) speaks to the fact that these Black women and men are connecting with groups based more on racial identity than on sexual orientation. The findings and explanations delineated in the preceding paragraphs—(a) that for both men and women racial identity is more important than sexual identity; (b) that for women, the lesbian experience may be more political than social; and (c) that for men the

46

Queer People of Color

Table 2.2 Sociopolitical Involvement Unstandardized Regression Coefficients for the Queer, POC, and QPOC Sociopolitical Involvement of Black Women & Black Men (betas in parentheses) Black Women Queer N=648

POC N=646

QPOC N=673

Model I

Model IIa

Model III

Model IVa

Model V

Model VIa

Connected to Queer Community

.28* (.34)

.28* (.33)

.23* (.25)

.23* (.25)

.27* (.29)

.28* (.30)

Outness

.13* (.04)

.12* (.13)

.07§ (.07)

.07§ (.07)

.18* (.17)

.18* (.17)

Family Support

.01 (.01)

.01 (.01)

.04 (.05)

.03 (.90)

.01 (.01)

.00 (.00)

Comfort in Queer Communities

-.11* (-.16)

-.11* (-.02)

-.13* (-.17)

-.12* (-.16)

-.13* (-1.2)

-.12 (-.16)

Comfort in Racial Communities

.02 (.02)

.02 (.03)

.07‡ (.09)

.08‡ (.11)

.08‡ (.10)

.08‡ (.11)

Independent Variables Community

Identity Sexual Identity Importance

.03 (.04)

-.03 (-.03)

-.05 (-.06)

Racial Identity Importance

-.02 (-.03)

.07‡ (.09)

.062‡ (.08)

Constant

1.29*

1.27*

1.54*

1.46*

1.30*

1.20*

Adjusted R2

.160

.158

.088

.091

.14

.14 continues

Black Communities

47

Table 2.2 continued Black Men Queer N=833

POC N=833

QPOC N=817

Model VII

Model VIIIa

Model IX

Model Xa

Model XI

Model XIIa

Connected to Queer Community

.23* (.31)

.23* (.30)

.17* (.21)

.17* (.20)

.22* (.26)

.21‡ (.25)

Outness

.17* (.20)

.16* (.19)

.05§ (.05)

.05§ (.05)

.03 (.03)

.014 (.02)

Family Support

.00 (.00)

-.004 (-.01)

.04§ (.06)

.03§ (.05)

.04§ (.05)

.04§ (.05)

Comfort in Queer Communities

-.05‡ (-.08)

-.05 (-.08)

-.04§ (-.05)

-.04§ (-.05)

-.04§ (-.05)

-.04§ (-.05)

Comfort in Racial Communities

.01 (.02)

.02 (.02)

.05§ (.07)

.05‡ (.08)

.07 (.096)

.08† (.10)

Independent Variables Community

Identity Sexual Identity Importance

.002 (.004)

-.001 (-.001)

.04§ (.05)

Racial Identity Importance

.02 (.04)

.03 (.05)

.002 (.002)

1.97*

2.00*

1.80*

1.69*

.165

.058

.079

.079

2.06*

Constant Adjusted R2

.166

§

†

p≤.10

a

‡

p≤.05

p≤.01

*

p≤.001

The following demographic variables were included: heterosexual, single, has ever parented, age, foreign born, big city resident, south resident, political views, education, and income. However, none were significant. Therefore, for the purposes of space and visual parsimony, those results are not presented here.

48

Queer People of Color

“gay experience” maybe more social—are supported by our findings about identity. More specifically, the importance of sexual identity proved to be a significant predictor for neither women nor men, across all three types of sociopolitical involvement. Further, for Black women, racial identity was a significant predictor for people of color sociopolitical involvement (see Model IV) and queer people of color sociopolitical involvement (see Model VI). These findings have important implications and raise concerns for increasing the sociopolitical involvement of queer Blacks, not necessarily on the part of communities of color but on the part of queer communities and organizations. Clearly, feelings of belonging to the larger (White) queer community is the most important factor predicting sociopolitical involvement for the Black women and men analyzed here. Unfortunately, it is these same Black women and men who are frequently overlooked by not only mainstream queer communities, organizations, publications, events, etc. but also in the literature examining community connection and engagement among queer people. As such, queer organizations will want to make sure they are not only welcoming to their Black community members but are also affirming to them as well. The findings here contradict research arguing that demographic variables such as age, income, and education significantly affect civic engagement (Putnam, 2000; Sander & Putnam, 2006; Verba et al., 1995). Our contrary findings could be due to the specific measures used in this study, such as our focus on sociopolitical involvement instead of the focus of previous research on civic engagement, which ignores the social aspects of community involvement. Our findings show the social aspects of community involvement clearly matter for Black men. Also, our study participants may be more sociopolitically active in their communities considering that the sample was primarily found within queer communities, communities of color, and queer communities of color. It is likely that these Black women and men are not truly representative of the general queer Black population but are representative of those who are involved in sociopolitical events. This sample population may be more likely to participate in sociocultural events and activities or may see this participation as being more vital to their identity development than queer Blacks who do not attend these events.

Black Communities

49

Conclusion

We have seen a great increase in the representation of Black queer voices both in and out of the queer community. In 2017, Barry Jenkin’s Moonlight won the Academy Award for Best Picture, and the Best Supporting Actor award went to Mahershala Ali. In the film, Ali, a Black Muslim actor, portrays a cisgender Black man who supports and serves as a father figure to the young queer lead character in this all Black film. With activists and celebrities including Tracy Chapman, Meshell Ndegeocello, Laverne Cox, and even the recent portrayal of an interracial same-sex couple (voiced by actors Wanda Sykes and Portia de Rossi) raising Black children on the Disney cartoon Doc McStuffins, mainstream media are reinvigorating conversations about Black queer identities and communities. Nevertheless, based on the findings presented in this chapter, this growing recognition of Black queer communities does not appear to translate into feelings of acceptance or even comfort within mainstream queer communities. Most Black queer people are out to their families, friends, and in their religious communities. Findings show that comfort within queer communities is a strong predictor for sociopolitical involvement among Black queer individuals. That the identity or demographic variables did not prove statistically significant is quite telling. It speaks to the fact that the relationship between community (or lack thereof) and sociopolitical involvement holds across a host of demographic groups within Black queer communities. For those individuals, institutions, and organizations interested in increasing racial and sexual sociopolitical involvement, the prescription becomes clear: Focus on getting folks connected! Create safe queer spaces where issues important to Black queer populations can be foregrounded. Not doing so will lead to further racial/sexual isolation and, thus, arguably to political stagnation. Notes 1

Black pride celebrations have taken place in the following cities, most of which have very large Black populations: Atlanta, GA; Austin, TX; Baltimore, MD; Birmingham, AL; Boston, MA; Buffalo, NY; Charlotte, NC; Columbia, SC; Chicago, IL; Cleveland, OH; Dallas, TX; Detroit, MI; Indianapolis, IN; Houston, TX; Jacksonville, FL; Little Rock, AK; Los Angeles, CA; London, UK; Jackson, MS; Memphis, TN; Nashville, TN; Newark NJ; New Orleans, LA; New York, NY; Oakland, CA; Oklahoma City, OK; Philadelphia, PA; Pittsburgh, PA; Portland, OR; Raleigh-Durham, NC; Shreveport, LA; St. Louis, MO; Miami, FL; Tampa, FL; Washington, DC (Center for Black Equity, 2017).

50

Queer People of Color

2 For more information on these and other findings, please visit: www.socialjusticesexuality.com

3 Latinx Communities

There is Jennicet Gutiérrez, an undocumented Latinx trans activist for the Not1More campaign, which opposed former President Obama’s immigration policy and continues to resist deportations, who caused controversy when she interrupted him during his speech at the White House reception marking LGBTQ Pride Month in June 2015. Then there is Carlos Padilla, who was originally born in Mexico and is the coordinator of the Queer Undocumented Immigrant Project and cofounder of the Washington Dream Act Coalition, which helps undocumented students pursuing education in the United States get financial aid. There is also Bamby Salcedo, a trans activist who has spearheaded many projects benefiting trans youth; she also spoke at the White House for the 2012 Women and Girls National HIV/AIDS Awareness Day. And there’s Sgt. Shane Ortega, who served three tours in the United States military until a physical examination revealed him to be trans. Ultimately, Ortega came out publicly as a trans service member and continues to advocate for the over 15,000 trans citizens currently estimated to be serving in the military. All four of these courageous individuals highlight the many ways in which queer Latinx people engage in sociopolitical activities—both individually and institutionally. This chapter explores sociopolitical involvement among queer Latinx people. In this chapter, we use queer to refer to those who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, and queer, as well as those who do not completely or always self-identify as heterosexual. Further, we use this term realizing that it has different meanings for different people. Because of this, we will pay special attention to these specific terms and will include exceptions whenever we believe that the original intent strays from our collective meaning. The use of the term “queer” in this book is as an umbrella term that succinctly captures these disparate identities. It is worth noting that queer is not necessarily used as a self-

51

52

Queer People of Color

identifier for many; instead, queer is our way of highlighting some of the limitations of language and identity. For example, one of the other terms that we have encountered within Latinx queer communities is jota or joto. While some use “Latino” to refer to people from all the countries in Latin America, including Brazil and Haiti, this term also ties certain people together through a history of colonization. Bedolla (2014) uses “Latino… to describe all individuals, foreign and U.S.-born, who have ancestry in any of the Spanish-speaking nations of Latin America” (p. 3). However, in this book we use the term Latinx instead of Latino as the “x” in Latinx removes the emphasis on gender, making the category inclusive of women, men, agender, trans, gender-nonconforming, gender-queer and gender-fluid people. Finally, it bears noting that most people in Latin America do not refer to themselves as Latino, Latinx, Hispanic, or any other “racial” term placed on them after their arrival to the United States. Bedolla (2014) explains, “Pan-ethnic identifiers were designed by the U.S. government to erase the particular histories of Latin American groups in the United States, such as Mexicans and Puerto Ricans” (p. 3). Latinx is often used as an ethno-racial category and label. Racially, Latinx people can be Black, API, Indigenous American, White, or multiracial. Most are likely to be racially mixed between Indigenous, Black, and White. Nonetheless, “many Latinos choose to use different words to describe their identities – terms that are grounded in their particular historical, personal, and political experiences” (Bedolla, 2014, p. 3). In 2017, there were approximately 58.6 million Latinx people in the United States (Krogstad & Radford, 2017). Constituting about 17% of the nation’s total population, Latinx people are the nation’s largest ethnic or racial minority group. Of those, 64% have Mexican ancestry and 9.5% are Puerto Rican, while Cubans and Salvadorans each make up 3.7%. Slightly over half (55%) of the Latinx population lives in three states: California, Florida, and Texas. Although the South and Northeast have large Latinx populations and continue to see growth, the largest Latinx population growth is in counties in North Dakota, where their Latinx populations have doubled between 2007 and 2014 (Stepler & Lopez, 2016). While 73.3% of all U.S. households contain married couples, 61.6% of Latinx families have married couples. Almost three quarters (73.3%) of Latinx Americans, five years old and older, speak Spanish at home. Some 11% of Latinx Americans have earned a bachelor’s degree or higher, which is a lower rate than their Black (17%), White (30%), and API (49%) counterparts.

Latinx Communities

53

Not only are Latinx communities diverse, so too are their experiences. For example, the median age of Cubans is 40 years, much higher than that of Mexicans, whose median age is 25. Additionally, the median household income for Puerto Ricans and Cubans ($35,100 and $33,000, respectively) is considerably higher than Guatemalans and Salvadorans ($23,000 and $25,000, respectively). Cubans and Puerto Ricans are also more likely to have a college degree than Salvadorans and Guatemalans (23.7%, 16.3%, 7.3%, and 8.5%, respectively) (Bedolla, 2013; 2014). Although often overlooked, sex greatly influences the immigrant experience for Latinx people. For example, women are more likely to come from the Dominican Republic, while Mexican migrants are more likely to be male; additionally, undocumented migrants are also more likely to be male (Bedolla, 2013; 2014). In terms of income, research indicates that the median income of Latinx women is 40% lower than Latinx men (Bedolla, 2013; 2014). The Latinx population accounts for the largest share of population growth among racial/ethnic communities in the United States. Twothirds (66%) of Latinx people are U.S.-born (Stepler & Lopez, 2016). Although the Latinx population has been steadily increasing over the past decades, growth has slowed in recent years because immigration has slowed. In fact, in some years, Latinx immigrants have returned to their home countries at higher rates than they have entered the United States. The increase in the Latinx population has resulted from births over deaths, which has been the case since 2009 (Stepler & Lopez, 2016). Of the one million immigrants who come to the United States each year, most come from India, followed by Mexico, and then China, and most who emigrate (76%) do so with legal authorization. Unlike Black and API immigrants, who are more likely to have college and advanced degrees than those born in the U.S., Latinx immigrants are less likely to have high school diplomas compared to those born in the United States (Lopez & Bialik, 2017). Additionally, Latinx immigrants have the lowest rates of English proficiency compared to their Black or API immigrant counterparts (Lopez & Bialik, 2017). Unlike Black and API immigrants, Latinx immigrants are less likely to become U.S. citizens and are more likely to return to their home countries, this is particularly the case for those who are from Mexico (Gonzalez-Barrera, 2017). Among Latinx people who were born outside of the U.S., three in ten are documented. Latinx people make up a majority (78%) of undocumented immigrants in the United States As a result, issues of immigration and community have a great impact on this group and their sociopolitical involvement (Gonzalez-Barrera, 2017).

54

Queer People of Color

With the current presidential administration and its apparent disdain for marginalized communities and, in particular, immigrant groups from Black and Brown countries (Hirschfeld, Gay Stolberg, & Kaplan, 2018), Latinx people report feeling more uneasy about their place in the United States (Flores, 2017). Currently, half (54%) feel secure and confident about their place in the United States while 41% have “serious concerns” (Flores, 2017). Not surprisingly, those most likely to be concerned are those who are undocumented (Flores, 2017). Within recent years, more Latinx people report that the situation for Latinx people in the United States has worsened, with almost one in three reporting that it is worse now than a year ago (Flores, 2017). Almost half (47%) of Latinx adults “worry” that their family, friends, or they themselves could be deported (Flores, 2017). This has great implications for their engagement within communities. Latinx Mainstream Communities and Sociopolitical Involvement

As with most marginalized groups, Latinx people have a long history of writing about and fighting for the social justice issues and causes they face in the United States and abroad, from Cesar Chavez and his work with migrant farm workers to Sylvia Mendez and her family, who, in 1947, seven years before Brown versus the Board of Education, fought to desegregate California public schools. This Bridge Called My Back: Writings by Radical Women of Color, published in 1981, is one of the most seminal works in feminist scholarship. It examines the lives and experiences of women of color and simultaneously critiques White feminists for their myopic, and often racist, approach to feminism. Chicana lesbian feminist activists and scholars Gloria E. Anzaldúa and Cherríe Moraga edited this volume and worked to ensure that the voices of Indigenous, Black, Latinx, and API women were represented. Although these women are best known for their work on This Bridge Called My Back, both women were influential playwrights, activists, and academics. Anzaldúa, a native of Texas, and Moraga, a native of California, both not only documented the lives and struggles of Latinas, and more specifically, Chicanas, but they also provided a space for other women of color activists and scholars to better understand the ways that race, class, gender, sexuality, and nationality influence life, experiences, and worldviews. Compared to Blacks and Whites, Latinxs in the United States are significantly less likely to be sociopolitically involved in their communities (Finlay et al., 2011; Verba et al., 1995). For example, Latinxs are less likely to vote, work for campaigns, protest, contribute

Latinx Communities

55

money, or report any “informal community activity” than are Blacks or Whites (Verba et al., 1995, p. 233). To explain this disparity, Verba et al. (1995) argue, “like other immigrant groups, Latinos face special obstacles of language and legal status” (p. 230). Arguably, another reason for the lower levels of sociopolitical involvement among Latinx people is that so many activities are tied to racial identities, and notions of racial identity are much more complex among Latinxs than among Blacks and Whites. This is particularly the case when you take into account that Latinx people come from various countries and cultures, and beyond a shared history of colonization, these countries and cultures have great differences. Although we know that “feelings of group attachment are important to participation,” Bedolla explains, “this does not mean we can assume that Latinos automatically feel a particular attachment to ‘Latinos’ as a social group” (Bedolla, 2014, p. 21). Conversely, when comparing the sociopolitical involvement of Latinx citizens to non-citizens, Verba et al. (1995) found that those who are citizens are significantly more likely to vote than are non-citizens and are only slightly more likely to be sociopolitically involved than non-citizens. Social engagement is likely related to gender norms as it is heavily based on social networks, which are also highly gendered (Bedolla, 2014). In general, men report higher levels of voting, campaign work, and affiliation with a political organization, and women report higher levels of engagement on social issues, such as reproductive rights, education, and economic justice and are more likely to attend church services and give time to charitable work than are men (Barreto & Munoz, 2003; Campbell, 2009; Verba et al., 1995). Research also indicates that native-born and English-speaking Latinxs have greater access to the resources—such as time and money—necessary to participate more easily in their communities (de La Garza & DeSipio, 1992). Conversely, a study of protest activity among Latinxs found that recent immigrants and children born to immigrants are more likely to protest restrictions on immigration than their counterparts are (Lopez et al., 2006). As family interaction increases so does sociopolitical involvement among Latinxs (Wilkin, Katz, & Ball-Rokeach, 2009). In addition, among Latinxs, being married is positively correlated with electoral participation (Jang, 2009). Other research found that respondents with immediate family in the United States are more likely to engage in civic activities than respondents with family abroad (DeSipio, 2003). There is also a distinct difference in sociopolitical involvement within Latinx ethnic groups. For example, Cuban Americans are much more likely to be sociopolitically involved within their communities, in some cases at the same rate or even more than the

56

Queer People of Color

national average of other racial groups (Verba et al., 1995). Further, research finds that those Latinxs who identify strongly with a political party are more likely to participate in political activities (Barreto & Munoz, 2003). Sociopolitical involvement greatly increases with both income and education (Brand, 2010; Campbell, 2009). This is also the case specifically among Latinxs where education is positively correlated to political participation (Lien, 1994). For example, Latinx high school dropouts are less likely to vote than are Latinx high school graduates (Pacheco & Plutzer, 2008). That same study found that high school graduates are also more likely to vote if they had a political discussion in the 12th grade. In addition, full-time enrollment in a four-year college raises voter turnout by 14% among Latinxs (Pacheco & Plutzer, 2008). Latinx Queer Communities

One of the most prominent figures in the queer rights movement is trans activist Sylvia Rivera who, alongside her best friend and fellow activist Marsha P. Johnson, fought back against police brutality and assaults during a raid at a local gay bar, helping to initiate the Stonewall Riots and the queer rights movement. The activist, of Puerto Rican and Venezuelan ancestry, was involved in a number of early queer organizations and groups such as the Gay Liberation Front and, with Johnson, co-founded S.T.A.R. (Street Transvestite Action Revolutionaries) (Reyes, 2015). Like Rivera, many other queer and gender-fluid Latinx people, such as artists, scholars, and activists like Yosimar Reyes, Gloria Anzaldúa, and Ignacio Rivera have actively addressed issues at the intersection of gender, sexuality, and identity. These activists also challenge widely-held stereotypes concerning sexuality among Latinx people. They address the lack of open discussions among families and in religious communities about sex and sexuality and expectations concerning sex and sexuality. These issues are also cited as the reasons why Latinx individuals are less likely to be out to family and friends than their White queer counterparts (Riley, 2010). Much of the social scientific literature finds that familism, conservative religious beliefs, and silence about issues of sex and sexuality prevent open discussions and displays of sex and sexuality among queer Latinx people (Pastrana, 2015; Pastrana, Battle & Harris, 2017). Low educational attainment, traditional religious beliefs, SpanishEnglish language barriers, and support for traditional gender roles within families make coming out and being out difficult for many queer Latinx

Latinx Communities

57

individuals (Akerlund & Cheung, 2000). In addition, issues of immigration and economic justice intersect with race/ethnicity, gender, and social class. That intersection causes increased health disparities among queer Latinx women and men. For example, research finds that Latina lesbians had significantly poorer health than their White (nonLatinx) lesbian counterparts and their heterosexual Latinx counterparts (Kim & Fredriksen-Goldsen, 2012). Queers in Latinx Communities

Singer, dancer, and actress Jennifer Lopez has received recent applause for using gender-inclusive terms in describing her sister’s gender-fluid child. Lopez wrote, “This is Brendan my sister Leslie’s second child!!... They were the one person selected to represent their school at #globalyoungleadersconference in Washington DC….” (Brammer, 2017). Fans and commentators were excited that Lopez so effortlessly used gender neutral pronouns to refer to her nibling (“the gender-neutral term for niece/nephew”) (Brammer, 2017). This is just one of the many ways Lopez has shown her support for queer communities that importantly defy stereotypes concerning the ways in which queer identities are treated within Latinx families and are sparking new conversations about Latinx queer identities today. Although many Latinx families are accepting of their queer family and community members, homophobic and negative attitudes towards queer people vary based on sex. In their work on attitudes towards queer people among Mexican Americans, Herek and Gonzalez-Rivera found that men had a significantly more negative attitude towards gay men than towards lesbians. They also found, however, that women had more negative attitudes towards lesbians than towards gay men (Herek & Gonzalez, 2006). Research on homophobia within communities of color is plentiful and highlights how distressing this form of discrimination is for queer people of color (Crichlow, 2004; Dalton, 1989; Griffin, 2001; hooks, 2001; Thomas, 1996; Ward, 2005). Research finds that religion, family, and traditional understandings of gender roles may hinder the coming out process of queer youth of color and may lead to negative identity formation (Diaz, 1998; Loiacano, 1989; Martinez & Sullivan, 1998; Savin-Williams, 1996). A vast majority of the research on homophobia and the experiences of queer Latinx people focuses on men. In a study of discrimination among lesbians of color, Latinx women report the second highest rates (after Black women) of perceived discrimination (McLaughlin, Hatzenbuehler, & Keyes, 2010).

58

Queer People of Color

Among the over 900 Latinx gay and bisexual men surveyed in Diaz and Ayala’s study of HIV/AIDS, a vast majority experienced homophobia, with 70% reporting that their same-sex attractions “hurt/embarrassed family” (Diaz & Ayala, 2001, p. 23). They quote a respondent as saying, “… you also grow up being told that being gay, you’re going to be punished for it. It’s something dirty” (p. 16). In fact, Latinx queer youth, even though they felt comfortable with their sexuality, disclosed their sexuality to fewer people compared to Black and White queer youth (Rosario, Schrimshaw, & Hunter, 2004). Rosario et al. (2004) hypothesized that the reason queer Latinx youth may be less likely to disclose their sexuality to their families could be tied to the high level of respect afforded to the family. In researching how discrimination and homophobia affects mental health, Diaz et al. (2001) examined the psychological ramifications that discrimination had on 912 queer Latinx men; they found high rates of mental health concerns and distress. These included thoughts of suicide (17%) and depression (80%) within six months of the survey. In essence, their oppression caused feelings of depression and social isolation among their study sample (Diaz et al., 2001). To explain that these men experienced more homophobia than racism, researchers hypothesized that as immigrants, these men had not lived a majority of their lives in environments where they would have experienced being a racial/ethnic minority. They would not have had as many opportunities to experience U.S.-based racism. Notably, Diaz et al. (2001) examined whether social support, particularly “sources of resiliency and strength—such as family acceptance supportive social networks and participation in social activism”—had any influence on how the perceived discrimination affected their study sample. The research found that if social support was lacking, subjects had higher psychological distress (p. 927). Those who not only experienced poverty and discrimination but also were more socially isolated had higher levels of mental health concerns (Diaz et al., 2001). In a study of trans (male to female) Latinx women, over one third had reported symptoms of depression and within a few weeks before the interview, another third had reported thoughts of self-harm or suicide. Also, most of the study respondents (6 in 10) were victims of intimate/sexual partner violence (Bazargan & Galvan, 2012). Latinxs in Queer Communities

In explaining the impact that Latinx culture has on queer culture, Susana Peña (2004) said Latinx gay men “do not assimilate into a static U.S.

Latinx Communities

59

gay culture and adopt its language, symbols and sexual systems. Rather, U.S. gay culture is itself changed by extensive contact with immigrant, non-English-speaking homosexual men and women” (p. 236). Nonetheless, just as Latinx queer people frequently experience homophobia not only within the larger society and within their racial group, they also experience racism within the mainstream (predominantly White) queer communities (Diaz et al., 2001; Flores et al., 2009; Han, 2007; Icard, 1986; Loiacano, 1989; Martinez & Sullivan, 1998; Savin-Williams, 1996). In 2006, queer Latinxs (mainly men) staged a rally in the Castro—a predominately queer neighborhood in an already queer friendly San Francisco—against racism and discrimination in mainstream queer communities. This rally was staged in response to experiences of discrimination, racism, and acts of hate against the community’s Latinx men, who were called racial slurs and told to “go home” (Akers, 2006). An individual who experienced such attacks stated, “it is sad to me, as a born U.S. citizen and gay Latino man, that because of my skin color and size I am a target of hate and racism… In a community that right now is fighting for equal rights and gay marriage, this type of hate and outright racism is alive and well. For people to stand by and say nothing is more of a crime in itself” (Akers, 2006). Experiences of racism such as this result in many Latinxs not participating in queer communities (Icard, 1986; Loiacano, 1989; Martinez & Sullivan, 1998; Savin-Williams, 1996). Racial, cultural, and class diversity among Latinx people means experiences of racism and discrimination within queer communities varies. A study of racism experienced by queer men in both mainstream communities and in queer communities found that men who had darker skin and had more Indigenous features, who were recent immigrants, and, importantly, who had low self-esteem, reported more experiences with racism in mainstream communities and in queer communities (Ibañez et al., 2009). Families

Out gay celebrity blogger and columnist, Perez Hilton, was born Mario Armando Lavandeira, Jr. in Miami, Florida to Cuban-born parents. In 2013, Hilton became a father to his first child, a son, carried by a surrogate and conceived with a donor egg. Two years later, he welcomed a daughter into his family. Announcing her birth, Hilton wrote, “family is everything to me! This is what I dreamed of and live for!” (Tharrett, 2015). Although Hilton is a single father, he is raising his children along with his mother and two nannies who work full time

60

Queer People of Color

(Solé, 2015). As a queer Latinx single father raising his children with his supportive mother, Hilton and his family not only defy stereotypes concerning traditional family structures but also stereotypes concerning gay men of color and parenting, homophobic Latinx family members, and being out as lesbian, gay, bisexual, or trans. Familism is a concept that emphasizes the importance of family and family structure within Latinx cultures and was first studied in an effort to understand the significant cultural differences observed between Latinx and European family relationships (Campos, Rojas Perez, & Guardino, 2016). Campos and colleagues (2016) write that “familism is a cultural value that emphasizes interdependent family relationships that are warm, close, and supportive” (p. 81). Originally, scholars emphasized, “position of ascendance over individual interests,” as familism was primarily focused on, “loyalty, reciprocity, and solidarity,” and was, “regarded as a ‘deficit’ of Latino culture” (Campos et al., 2016, p. 82). Studies now suggest, however, that although there might be some individual costs associated with this ideology of family importance, there are indeed great benefits that familism affords Latinx cultures (Campos et al., 2016). For example, familism has been tied to fewer depressive symptoms among Latinx adolescents (Gonzales, Germán, Yeong, Preethy, & Fabrett, 2008; Stein et al., 2014). This tie to the family has been especially important to Latinx families that have immigrated to the United States. Having close family ties has been shown to have a positive impact on recent immigrants and may help to protect against some of the discrimination they experience when coming to the United States (Potochnick & Perreira, 2010). Familism and the importance of the family is one of the reasons why coming out might be a challenge for many queer Latinxs. Nonetheless, most queer people of color were out to themselves and others, but they are less likely to be out to their friends and family than their White counterparts are (Grov, Bimbi, Nanin, & Parsons, 2006). Grov et al. (2006) found that 68% of Latinx women and 71% of Latinx men were out to their parents. Latinx men and women were more likely to be out to their parents than their Black study participants but less likely to be out than their White study participants. Studies on coming out among queer people have shown that they are coming out at younger ages (Floyd & Bakeman, 2006; Grov et al., 2006). In fact, some scholars have noticed that the coming out experiences of Black and Latinx adolescents are similar to those of Whites (Potoczniak, Crosbie-Burnett, & Saltzburg, 2009). Still, current research tells us very little about the array of experiences that exist within populations of people of color, and, arguably, this is true about

Latinx Communities

61

much of the scholarship on race and ethnicity. For example, more studies examine the differences between Latinx and Whites, but less is known about how Latinx populations differ from each other (e.g., coming out among Cubans, Mexicans, and other Latinx ethnicities) (Pastrana, 2015). Cultural factors play a role in how some families perceive sexuality and coming out. This is likely to be true for all family formations, not just within Latinx populations (Pastrana, 2015). Still, research has shown how some view homosexuality as a rejection of gender roles among Latinx people (García & Carrigan, 1998). An examination of relationship status among queer Latinxs shows that women are more likely to be in long-term same-sex relationships than men, and studies suggest that between 45-80% of lesbians and 4060% of gay men are in relationships (Patterson, 2000; Peplau & Cochran, 1990). For example, in Puerto Rico, 70% of same sex couples are female (Gates, 2015). Studies estimate anywhere between 2-3.7 million children in the United States under the age of 18 are being raised by a queer parent (Gates & Newport, 2015). A little over 29% of Latinx same-sex couples are raising children (Lee Badgett et al., 2013). While in Puerto Rico, the number of same-sex couples raising children in is only 17% (Gates & Newport, 2015). Approximately 22.6% of male Latinx same-sex couples are raising children and 41.5% of female Latinx same-sex couples are raising children. These rates are considerably higher than those for their White counterparts, where 6.2% of male couples and 23.1% of female couples are raising children (Movement Advancement Project, 2012). In general, according to the U.S. Census, Latinx same-sex couples earn more money and have higher levels of education than their opposite-sex counterparts (Lee Badgett et al., 2013). Although celebrity blogger Perez Hilton and singer Ricky Martin are notable out Latinx gay male single fathers, most Latinx queer parents are women. Sociologist Katie L. Acosta (2013) examined the ways in which Latinx women negotiated families of origin and families of choice in her book, Amigas y Amantes: Sexually Nonconforming Latinas Negotiate Family. Her work explores some of the tensions and challenges experienced by Latina lesbians as well as the lack of acceptance for many of these women among their families of origin. Acosta notes the resilience that these women exhibit in creating and maintaining their families. Obstacles in their relationships included differences in immigration status, language barriers, and understandings of cultural practices (Acosta, 2013).

62

Queer People of Color

Spirituality

When asked during a trip to Brazil in 2013 about gays in the priesthood, Pope Francis—a native of Argentina and the first pope from Latin America—responded, “If someone is gay and he searches for the Lord and has good will, who am I to judge?” This response challenged the teachings of the Catholic Church on homosexuality and the role of gay priests in the church, a position held by many Catholics, including the previous pope, Benedict XVI, who believed that homosexuality was “an intrinsic moral evil” (Mullady, 2011). This caused media outlets, like the New York Times to wonder if this ushered in a new understanding of homosexuality, gays in the priesthood, and same-sex marriage (Donadio, 2013). For queer Catholics, many of whom are Latinx, this kind, more accepting tone was a stark contrast to the homophobic, heterosexist, and hate filled rhetoric they were accustomed to hearing from the Roman Catholic Church. The teachings of the Catholic Church “on homosexuality is based on a distinction between being lesbian or gay and acting on it, accepting the former while at the same time considering the latter to be wrong and sinful” (Human Rights Campaign, 2015). A little over half (55%) of all Latinx people in the United States are Roman Catholic. An increasing number of Latinxs are Protestant (22%), and 18% identify as “religiously unaffiliated” (PRC, 2014). For the most part, Catholicism has been on the decline among Latinx people, both queer and heterosexuals, since the 1990s (PRC, 2012b). Catholicism is being replaced by evangelical Protestantism and non-religious affiliation. For example, 24% of Latinxs in the United States now identify as “former Catholics” (PRC, 2014). Nonetheless, there are over 35.4 million Latinx Catholic adults in the nation, and as such, the Catholic Church continues to play a major role in the lives of a majority of Latinx people in the nation. Some of the decline in Catholicism is tied to the recognition of the oppressive role Catholicism has played in the colonization of Indigenous lands and Latinx cultures in the Americas (Asencio, 2009). As such, religions with their roots in people of color and Indigenous belief systems have always been practiced among Latinx people, in particular queer Latinx people who are seeking more accepting religious practices. Santería, an Afro-Caribbean religious practice with its roots in Yoruba, Catholic, and Indigenous spiritual traditions has an estimated one million practitioners (Asencio, 2009). Salvador Vidal-Ortiz (2005) argues that Santería offers practitioners a more inclusive spiritual practice that recognizes and gives women and queer people

Latinx Communities

63

opportunities not found in the Catholic Church and other more traditional evangelical traditions. Much of the religious experience is rooted in people’s desire to feel connection and community with other individuals. There is much more to investigate and even more that is unknown about the everyday lives of Latinx queer people in particular and about queer people of color more broadly. Within Latinx queer research, such things as country of origin, relationship to the immigration experience, and other important characteristics are understudied. Among those understudied topics are sociopolitical involvement, in which little empirical research has been done. The Social Justice Sexuality Study

Community engagement and involvement is heavily dependent on feelings of belonging and community support. Marginalized groups, however, often do not experience the same level of community comfort and sense of belonging as their mainstream counterparts (Putnam, 2000). In chapter 1, we examined the ways in which race, gender, and sexuality influence engagement within communities and note that research does not examine how these identities intersect to influence engagement within queer communities, communities of color, and queer communities of color. In 2010, over 1,100 Latinx people took part in the Social Justice Sexuality (SJS) Project, one of the largest national surveys of queer Latinx and people of color collected in the United States. Latinx people who participated in the survey ranged in age from 18 to 81, with a mean age of 31. Almost half of the sample (49%) identified as female, and over a quarter of the sample was foreign-born (28%). Further, 44% identified as Mexican; 36% as Puerto Rican; 7% as Dominican, and 5% as Cuban. The average Latinx person in this sample had at least some college education and came from a household that earned between $20,000 and $29,000 the previous year. While just under a third (31%) of the women identified as single, over half (54%) of the men did. Over twice as many women (30%) identified as having ever parented, as compared to males (14%). Men (78%) were more likely than women (68%) to live in urban areas. Sex disparities, however, disappeared around liberal ideology and measures of socioeconomic status. For example, both men and women identified as politically liberal, earned around $25,000 per year, and had at least some college. For more information on the Latinx sample, see Pastrana et al. (2017) and Pastrana (2015).

64

Queer People of Color

The SJS Project yielded some important findings about how queer Latinx people frame their experiences with regard to racial/ethnic status and sexual identity, as well as important issues facing their communities. Over two-thirds (69%) of participants indicated that their racial/ethnic status was an important part of their identity (Battle, Pastrana, & Daniels, 2013a). (See Figure 3.1.) Figure 3.1 Racial or Ethnic Status Is an Important Part of Identity (N=1,159)

No 31%

Yes 69%

Source: Social Justice Sexuality Survey: The Executive Summary for the Black Population (Socialjusticesexuality.com)

Over 80% indicated that their sexual orientation was an important part of their identity, thus emphasizing the notion that one identity is not more important than another and that group membership is important for these study participants (Battle et al., 2013a). (See Figure 3.2.) For example, in a subsequent qualitative study conducted using data collected by the SJS Project, emphasizing the importance of identity, one respondent was quoted as saying, “it is important for people to

Latinx Communities

65

identify and fit into a group [in] order to benefit from [potential] support systems” (Battle et al., 2013a, p. 3). Figure 3.2 Sexual Orientation Is an Important Part of Identity (N=1,159)

No 18.9% Yes 81.1%

Source: Social Justice Sexuality Survey: The Executive Summary for the Black Population (Socialjusticesexuality.com)

According to the Latinx respondents, the most important issues facing Latinx queer communities were, in order, “discrimination,” “equality/acceptance,” and “racism.” Conversely, the most important individual issues facing Latinx respondents were economic issues (16%), marriage/domestic partnership (14%), and equality/acceptance (12%) (Battle et al., 2013a).1 In terms of family support, 70.6% of Latinx SJS Project participants reported feeling at least somewhat supported by their families. (See Figure 3.3.) The SJS Project also reported important findings concerning how queer Latinxs framed their experiences with regard to racial/ethnic status, sexual identity, and other issues confronting their communities.

66

Queer People of Color

For instance, findings show that, compared to other queer people of color, Latinx people are equally likely to feel their racial or ethnic status is an important part of their identity. Compared to other queer people of color, queer Latinxs are no more likely to feel homophobia is a problem in their neighborhood/community (Battle et al., 2013b). Almost all of the Latinx study participants (90%) were out to at least some of their friends and family; on average, they “come out” at around age 15, which is roughly the same age as when their queer of color counterparts “come out.” Over half (54%) of queer Latinxs feel supported by their families, with 38% feeling completely supported by their families. A little less than half (47%) were out to a majority of their family members, and 45% were out to all of their family members (Battle et al., 2013a). Figure 3.3 Feeling Supported from Family (N=1,159)

No 29.4% Yes 70.6%

Source: Social Justice Sexuality Survey: The Executive Summary for the Black Population (Socialjusticesexuality.com)

Latinx Communities

67

Religion and spirituality appear to be less important to Latinx than other respondents in the study; however, almost a third (29%) identified as Catholic. About an equal number of Latinx respondents were out (34%) in their religious communities as those who were not out (35%). Queer Latinx people attend religious services less frequently than do Black queer people. Religion is not likely to have any more of a negative or positive influence than it does for other queer people of color (Battle et al., 2013a). Sociopolitical Involvement and the Social Justice Sexuality Project

The data presented in this study focus on sociopolitical involvement among queer Latinxs in predominately White queer communities, in the Latinx and people of color communities, and in the queer Latinx and people of color communities. Involvement in predominantly White queer communities may include attending mainstream Pride Events and volunteering for organizations such as the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force. In the Latinx community and communities of color, sociopolitical involvement may include attending neighborhood Day of the Dead celebrations or volunteering or donating to LULAC. Latinx queer sociopolitical participation may involve attending Latinx Pride events or volunteering for the Latino GLBT History Project. Here, we examine the correlates of sociopolitical involvement among our Latinx study participants to assess how sociopolitical involvement might influence feelings of belonging and acceptance within their communities. Further, of the over 1,100 Latinx people who took part in the SJS Project, 388 Latinx women and 473 Latinx men (N=861) provided valid responses to all of the questions in the survey that are analyzed for this chapter. At core, we were interested in asking how Latinx respondent experiences with community and identity affected their sociopolitical involvement within queer communities, within communities of color, and then within their intersections—queer communities of color. Because of their unique dynamics, each of these three measures was treated as a separate dependent variable in multivariate analyses. More precisely, to measure Queer Sociopolitical Involvement, respondents were asked “Thinking about LGBT groups, organizations, and activities in general, during the past 12 months, how often have you”: a. Participated in political events (e.g., a march, rally, etc.)

68

Queer People of Color

b. Participated in social or cultural events (e.g., clubs, movies, restaurants, etc.) c. Read newspapers or magazines d. Used the internet (e.g., chat rooms, social networking sites, blogs, etc.) e. Received goods and/or services (e.g., medical, counseling, food, etc.) f. Donated money to an organization. Then for each of those six questions, they could respond from “never” (1) through, “more than once a week” (6). The same response structure was provided to measure both POC Sociopolitical Involvement, “Thinking about groups, organizations, and activities for people of color, during the past 12 months, how often have you…” and QPOC Sociopolitical Involvement, “Thinking about groups, organizations, and activities for LGBT people of color, during the past 12 months, how often have you…?” (See Table 3.1.) Again, across all three of the dependent variables— sociopolitical involvement within queer communities, within communities of color, and within their intersections—we wanted to see the relative impact of two broad domains: community and identity. Thus, to measure community, we analyzed five variables. The first, Connected to Queer Communities, measured the level of connection Latinx queer respondents felt to mainstream (predominately White) queer communities and the impact it might have on the sociopolitical involvement of respondents. Study participants were asked to respond from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree” on three items: a. I feel connected to my local LGBT community b. I feel that problems faced by the LGBT community are also my problems c. I feel a bond with other LGBT people. Their responses were combined into one measure and that composite variable was analyzed. All too often in social science research Outness is measured with a single-item question. We wanted to allow, however, for more dynamic measures of outness across different types of communities and within those communities. Thus, we created a composite variable from responses to “How many people within the following communities are you ‘out’ to?” Respondents could then answer “none,” “some,” “about half,” “most,” or “all” for each of the following communities:

Table 3.1 Latinx Queer Sociopolitical Involvement Means, Standard Deviants, Ranges, and Description Variables Alphas in parentheses (women/men)

Latina Women (N=379) Mean

S.D.

Range

Latino Men (N=473) Mean

S.D.

Range

Description: Social Justice Sexuality Variable Label

Dependent Variable Queer Sociopolitical Involvement (Alpha=.749/.755)

QPOC Sociopolitical Involvement (Alpha=.853/.837)

2.73

2.73

1.03

1.18

1.25

1-6

1-6

1-6

3.38

2.90

2.38

1.03

1.19

1.14

1-6

1-6

Involvement in groups, organizations, and activities for POC

1-6

Involvement in groups, organizations, and activities for QPOC

69

continues

Latinx Communities

POC Sociopolitical Involvement (Alpha=.827/.832)

3.29

Involvement in groups, organizations ,and activities for Queer

70

Variables Alphas in parentheses (women/men)

Latina Women (N=379)

Latino Men (N=473)

Mean

S.D.

Range

Mean

S.D.

Range

Description: Social Justice Sexuality Variable Label

4.32

1.20

1-6

4.13

1.32

1-6

Connected to Queer Community/People

1-5

How many people within the following communities are you “out” to: family, friends, religious community, co-workers, etc.

1-6

As a Queer person, how much do you feel supported by your family

Independent Variable Community Connected to Queer Community (Alpha=.711/.771)

Outness (Alpha=.856/.883)

Family Support

3.79

4.21

1.09

1.68

1-5

1-6

3.66

4.49

1.15

1.60

continues

Queer People of Color

Table 3.1 continued

Table 3.1 continued Variables Alphas in parentheses (women/men)

Latina Women (N=379) Mean

S.D.

Range

Latino Men (N=473) Mean

S.D.

Range

Description: Social Justice Sexuality Variable Label

1-6

How often have you felt uncomfortable in your Queer community because of your race or ethnicity

1-6

How often have you felt uncomfortable in your racial or ethnic community because of your sexual identity

1-6

Do you feel that your sexual orientation is an important part of your identity

1-6

Do you feel that your racial or ethnic status is an important part of your identity

Community

Comfort in Queer Communities

Comfort in Racial Communities

4.54

3.91

1.65

1.58

1-6

1-6

2.77

3.22

1.64

1.63

Sexual Identity Importance

4.34

1.60

1.75

1-6

1-6

4.91

4.34

1.43

1.69

71

Racial Identity Importance

5.23

Latinx Communities

Identity

72

Queer People of Color

a. Family b. Friends c. Religious community d. Co-workers e. People in your neighborhood f. People online. Realizing the importance of family and Family Support among communities of color, we asked respondents “As a LGBT person, how much do you now feel supported by your family?” Their responses could range from “not supported at all” (1) to “completely supported” (6). Similarly, a single-item measure was employed to account for both Comfort in Queer Communities “How often have you felt uncomfortable in your LGBT community because of your race or ethnicity?”; as well as Comfort in Racial Communities, “How often have you felt uncomfortable in your racial or ethnic community because of your sexual identity?” For each question, respondents could answer “never” (1) through “always” (6). The values for these two “Comfort” variables were flipped to measure comfortable rather than uncomfortable feelings. To measure identity, we were interested in two aspects: a. Sexual Identity Importance: “Do you feel that your sexual orientation is an important part of your identity?” b. Racial Identity Importance: “Do you feel that your racial or ethnic status is an important part of your identity?” For each question, respondents could choose “not important at all” (1) through “extremely important” (6). So then, how were the models built? To begin with, we realized that it is problematic to assume that experiences for women are the same as men. Therefore, we decided to analyze the data separately based on gender. Unfortunately, there were not enough transgender respondents to allow for any meaningful analysis; therefore, they were not included in the analysis. Thus, employing only the female sample, we took the variable Queer as our first dependent variable and entered the five variables measuring Community (see Model I). Then, we added the two variables measuring Identity (see Model II). Model II also included measures of sexual orientation, relationship status (single vs. not), parental status (has ever parented vs. not), age, nationality (foreign-born vs. U.S.-born), urbanicity (big city vs. not), region (South vs. not), political views (conservative to liberal), education, and income. None of the variables, however, was significant. Therefore, for the purposes of

Latinx Communities

73

space and visual parsimony, those results were omitted in the regression table. The same procedure employed for the dependent variable Queer Sociopolitical Involvement (Models I and II) was repeated for POC Sociopolitical Involvement (see Models III and IV) and for QPOC Sociopolitical Involvement (see Models V and VI). Subsequently, these same analyses were repeated for the male sample (see Models VII through XII). Using Table 3.2 as a guide, the best way to see the impact of these variables across dependent variables and sex, (females vs. males) is to look at a particular independent variable across all 12 models. Doing so highlights our first and most poignant finding: connection to queer communities is by far the most powerful and robust predictor – across all three dependent variables as well as for both women and men – of sociopolitical involvement (see Models I through XII). In short, the more connected individuals feel to queer communities, the more likely they are to engage in sociopolitical activities for queer groups, people of color groups, and queer people of color groups. For both women and men, outness is a significant predictor of queer sociopolitical involvement (see Models I, II, VII, and VIII). There is a clear gender divide, however, when it comes to the sociopolitical involvement of queer people of color. More specifically, for Latinx women outness is a statistically significant predictor; however, for men, it is not. Arguably, lesbian communities, of all races and ethnicities, tend to be more politically active. Coming out and joining lesbian communities typically means becoming more sociopolitically active. Conversely, gay men’s groups tend to be social. Thus, for Latinx men, coming out may make one more social, but not necessarily more political. Family support, surprisingly, was not a statistically significant predictor for women or men. It is probably confounded by the other variables in the initial models. For example, once the impact of being connected to the queer community, outness, and comfort in queer and racial communities is controlled for (see Models I, III, V, VII, IX, and XI), it stands to reason that little variance remains for family support as an explanatory factor. To be clear, we are not suggesting that family support is not an important influence on sociopolitical involvement. Instead, we are suggesting its impact is muted based on the other variables simultaneously analyzed. For Latinx men, interestingly, comfort in queer communities had a statistically significant negative impact on sociopolitical involvement

74

Queer People of Color

Table 3.2 Sociopolitical Involvement Unstandardized Regression Coefficients for the Queer, POC, and QPOC Sociopolitical Involvement of Latina Women & Latino Men (betas in parentheses) Latina Women Queer N=388

POC N=379

QPOC N=374

Model I

Model IIa

Model III

Model IVa

Model V

Model VIa

Connected to Queer Community

.22* (.36)

.23* (.27)

.13† (.14)

.13* (.13)

.13† (.29)

.12‡ (.13)

Outness

.16* (.17)

.16† (.17)

.05 (.05)

.07 (.06)

.12‡ (.11)

.13‡ (.12)

Family Support

-.03 (-.05)

-.02 (-.04)

-.01 (-.02)

-.02 (-.03)

-.03 (-.04)

-.04 (-.05)

Comfort in Queer Communities

-.01 (-.02)

-.01 (-.03)

-.13† (-.17)

-.11† (-.16)

-.09‡ (-.12)

-.08 (-.11)

Comfort in Racial Communities

.02 (.02)

-.05 (-.08)

.07‡ (.09)

-.06 (-.08)

.031 (.04)

.04 (.06)

Independent Variables Community

Identity Sexual Identity Importance

-.003 (-.003)

-.054 (-.08)

-.03 (-.03)

Racial Identity Importance

-.05 (-.08)

.06 (.09)

.07 (.10)

Constant

1.99*

2.20*

2.84*

2.787*

1.85*

1.68*

Adjusted R2

.095

.097

.055

.058

.03

.03 continues

Latinx Communities

75

Table 3.2 continued Latino Men Queer N=420

POC N=413

QPOC N=406

Model VII

Model VIIIa

Model IX

Model Xa

Model XI

Model XIIa

Connected to Queer Community

.16* (.21)

.18* (.23)

.14† (.15)

.12‡ (.20)

.17* (.18)

.15† (.16)

Outness

.13† (.15)

.13† (.15)

.01 (.01)

-.004 (-.004)

.01 (.01)

.01 (.09)

Family Support

.03 (.04)

.02 (.03)

.04§ (.06)

.04 (.05)

.02 (.02)

.01 (.02)

Comfort in Queer Communities

-.08‡ (-.13)

-.05 (-.08)

-.16* (-.22)

-.12* (-.16)

-.17* (-.22)

-.15* (-.20)

Comfort in Racial Communities

.03 (.05)

.04 (.06)

.04 (.06)

.07 (.09)

.11† (.14)

.13† (.16)

Independent Variables Community

Identity Sexual Identity Importance

-.04 (-.06)

.05 (.06)

.003 (.003)

Racial Identity Importance

.05 (.08)

.10‡ (.14)

.08 (.11)

1.96*

Constant Adjusted R2

.086

§

†

p≤.10

a

‡

p≤.05

p≤.01

2.04*

1.79‡

1.48*

1.72*

1.81*

.165

0.55

.072

.07

.07

*

p≤.001

The following demographic variables were included: heterosexual, single, has ever parented, age, foreign born, big city resident, south resident, political views, education, and income. However, none were significant. Therefore, for the purposes of space and visual parsimony, those results are not presented here.

76

Queer People of Color

(see Models VII through XII). We hypothesize that it is because the motivation for men to come out may be more social than political. That is, if Latinx men are more at ease with larger (White) queer communities, they would see that as a venue more for social connections than for sociopolitical activities. The same would be true, on average, for their female (lesbian) counterparts (see Models III through V). This finding may seem counterintuitive, yet it may be reflective of research that finds sociopolitical involvement is an important coping mechanism for those facing multiple levels of minority-based stress (Balsam et al., 2011; Poynter and Washington, 2005). Additionally, this finding may begin to make more sense if we consider an implied “time” effect. When Latinx individuals first come out, their motivation may be political (for example, see our comments above concerning connection to queer communities). Over time, however, their relationship with the queer community may become more social than political, as we found with Black gay men (see Chapter 2). Unfortunately, because this dataset is cross sectional, we cannot tease out age/period/cohort effects. Yet, longitudinal or qualitative research may offer much insight here. Comfort in racial communities tended to behave similarly for women and men. That is for both people of color sociopolitical involvement (see Models III, IV, IX, and X) and queer people of color sociopolitical involvement (see Models V, VI, XI, and XII), on average, the more comfortable one was in their racial communities, the more likely they were to be sociopolitically involved. Given that this was not the case for queer involvement (i.e., majority White queer spaces) speaks to the fact that these Latinx women and men are connecting with groups based more on racial identity than on sexual orientation. The findings and explanations delineated in the preceding paragraphs—(a) that for women and men racial identity is more important than sexual identity and (b) that the queer experience may be more political than social—are supported by our findings about identity. More specifically, the importance of sexual identity proved be a statistically insignificant predictor for either women or men, across all three types of sociopolitical involvement. These findings lead to another set of questions that merit attention. First, that connection to a queer community is such a strong and consistent predictor across all three dependent variables begs the question of causality: Is it that connection predicts involvement, involvement predicts connection, or some interaction of the two? The same could be asked concerning the impact of the outness measure. Are out people more likely to be involved, does being involved empower one to be out, or, again, some interaction of the two? The lack of

Latinx Communities

77

importance of family involvement is perplexing. One would assume that the more family support one has the more likely one would be sociopolitically involved. However, for it to have no impact at all was surprising. It was expected that those who are more comfortable in queer communities are less likely be involved in communities of color or queer communities of color. It appears that queer respondents are more likely to identify with their racial identity over their sexual identity. In an ideal world, respondents would not be inclined (or forced) to make such decisions and distinctions. Community connection and a sense of belonging influences sociopolitical involvement among queer Latinxs in their various communities (queer, Latinx and people of color communities, and Latinx and queer communities of color), supporting work that suggests belonging influences community engagement (Flores et al., 2009; Heath & Mulligan 2008). The findings here, however, contradict research arguing that various demographic variables such as age, income, immigrant status, and education significantly affect engagement within one’s communities (Putnam 2000; Sander & Putnam 2006; Verba et al. 1995). The implications of this study are particularly interesting because the most robust variable predicting sociopolitical involvement is simply feeling accepted, in particular by queer communities. The experiences of queer Latinx people within queer communities greatly influence their participation in not only queer communities but also communities of color. We did not expect to find that the greater levels of comfort in queer communities would have a negative impact on sociopolitical involvement in communities of color. This may be reflective of research that shows community engagement is an important coping mechanism for those facing multiple levels of minority-based stress (Balsam et al., 2011; Poynter & Washington 2005). In short, if these queer Latinx individuals feel alienated from queer communities, their coping strategy may be to become more sociopolitically involved in communities of color. Here, arguably, feelings of alienation operate uniquely and differently regarding issues of race than they do regarding issues of sexual orientation. In fact, we find that when queer Latinxs believe their racial/ethnic identity is an important aspect of their identity, it positively affects their level of participation in groups, organizations, and activities aimed at people of color. How this happens, however, merits further investigation. The implications of this study suggest that the variable that consistently predicts sociopolitical involvement—whether in queer, Latinx and people of color, and queer Latinx and people of color communities—is simply feeling connected to queer communities.

78

Queer People of Color

Conclusion

Intersections of race, gender, sexuality, class, and immigrant status often keep queer Latinx people hidden from view in queer mainstream and Latinx communities. This chapter examined sociopolitical involvement among queer Latinxs. Our analysis provides a more nuanced account of the experiences of queer Latinxs in their queer, Latinx, and queer Latinx communities and sociopolitical involvement. The SJS study finds that queer Latinx individuals are connected to their communities and these connections have the capacity to influence subsequent sociopolitical involvement. It is important to note that none of the identity or demographic variables proved statistically significant. This speaks volumes to the relationship that community (or lack thereof) and sociopolitical involvement hold across a host of demographic groups within the Latinx queer community. For those individuals, institutions, and organizations interested in increasing racial and sexual sociopolitical involvement, the prescription becomes clear: Focus on getting folks connected! Create safe queer spaces where issues important to Latinx queer populations can be foregrounded. Not doing so will lead to further racial/sexual isolation, and thus, arguably to political stagnation. The implications of our study highlight the potential impact that feelings of acceptance and discrimination within queer communities can have on individuals. We find that these feelings influence the sociopolitical involvement, or lack thereof, in social events and issues in their various communities. Consequently, queer social service organizations and groups should work to include the experiences and perceptions of Latinx queer people. To do this, these organizations should visibly include issues of concern to Latinxs. For example, according to a recent Gallup Poll, immigration, poverty, and unemployment are the top concerns among Latinx people (Saad, 2012). Mainstream queer organizations should incorporate and discuss these issues in their policies and agendas. Importantly, these service organizations could explicitly explain how issues of immigration, and even unemployment, can be included in all rights-based organizing efforts. Note 1

For more information on these and other findings, please visit: www.socialjusticesexuality.com

4 Asian and Pacific Islander Communities

Daniel Choi, a Korean-American solider, West Point graduate, former member of the National Guard who fought in combat in Iraq between 2006 and 2007, publicly came out as gay in 2009 on The Rachel Maddow Show. Choi revealed his sexuality despite the ban on openly queer service members and was consequently discharged from the military. As a result of his actions, Choi became the face of those negatively affected by President Clinton’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy, which barred openly queer individuals from serving in the military. Choi’s fearless advocacy helped bring increased attention to this issue, resulting in the end of this discriminatory policy. In his letter to President Barack Obama, Choi described his discharge from the military as “a slap in the face.” He went on to note that it was not just a “slap in the face” to him but, “it is a slap in the face to my soldiers, peers and leaders who have demonstrated that an infantry unit can be professional enough to accept diversity, to accept capable leaders, to accept skilled soldiers” (Choi, 2009). Choi went on to write, “My subordinates know I’m gay. They don't care. They are professional” (Choi, 2009). Even with his appeal to the president, he was still discharged from the military. Choi went on to continue his advocacy for the rights of soldiers to serve openly. In 2010, Choi stood by as President Obama signed the bill repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” His story, and many more like his, highlight the important role of Asian/Pacific Islanders (API)—past and present—in shaping the sociopolitical landscape of the United States. Like Daniel Choi, many queer API individuals have worked tirelessly in a variety of ways to address the social and political concerns facing them and their communities.

79

80

Queer People of Color

This chapter examines sociopolitical involvement among queer Asian/Pacific Islanders. We use queer to refer to those who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, queer, and to individuals and groups who do not completely or always self-identify as heterosexual. And we further use this term realizing that it has different meanings for different people. Because of this, we will pay special attention to these specific terms and will include exceptions whenever we believe that the original intent strays from our collective meaning. As in previous chapters, we use the term queer to succinctly capture these disparate identities. Queer is not necessarily used as a self-identifier for many; instead, queer is our way of highlighting some of the limitations of language and identity. As with all racial groups, there is great diversity within API communities, “in terms of ethnicity, national origin, language, religion, cultural orientation, socioeconomic status, and immigrant histories” (Wong et al., 2011, p. 9). APIs have origins in Asian and Pacific geographic regions and may identify from among the following: Central Asian (Armenian, Mongolian, and Uzbek), East Asian (Chinese, Korean, Japanese), Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders (Hawaiian, Samoan, Guamanian), Southeast Asian (Burmese, Cambodian, Hmong, Filipino, Laotian, and Vietnamese), and South Asian (Bangladeshi, Indian, Pakistani, and Bhutanese) (Yoshioka, DiNoia & Ullah, 2001). Also, often included as “Asian” are West Asians or those from the Middle East, which, among others, includes those from Palestine, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Iran, and Israel. Like Latinx people, APIs typically do not refer to themselves using racial terms placed on them after their arrival in the United States Instead, they usually refer to themselves based on whichever country or group with which their predecessors identified most closely (e.g., Korean, Chinese, Indian, etc.). APIs are the fastest growing population in the United States (Lopez & Bialik, 2017). Nationwide, the API population grew by approximately 46% and, again, by 10% between 2000 and 2010 and 2010 and 2013 (Yoshioka et al., 2001). Beginning in 2000 and over the next eight years, APIs grew by 30% in most states (Wong et al., 2011). Three quarters of APIs live in urban communities. Currently, the five most numerous API groups in the United States are Chinese, Indian, Filipino, Vietnamese, and Korean. Almost half of all APIs live on the West Coast of the United States, with California serving as home to the largest number of APIs in the nation, and Hawaii has an API majority population (Yoshioka et al., 2001). Nation of birth varies among API groups; for instance, 80% of Malaysians were born outside of the United States while for Hmong and Japanese, 43% and 40%, respectively, immigrated

Asian and Pacific Islander Communities

81

to the United States (Yoshioka et al., 2001). Unlike Blacks, Whites, and Latinx immigrants, API immigrants are more likely to come to the United States as refugees seeking asylum. Sixty-two percent of refugees come from Asian countries, and 44% of people granted asylum are from Asian countries (Yoshioka et al., 2001). Although on average, APIs have higher poverty rates and lower home ownership rates than Whites, APIs have higher average incomes, lower poverty rates, and higher home ownership rates than other people of color (Wong et al., 2011). The median income for APIs is $66,000 compared to $49,800 for other people of color. The higher incomes and educational levels are due, in part, to their higher likelihood of being employed in STEM (science, technology, engineering, and math) fields and having college and advanced degrees (Wong et al., 2011). Compared to other immigrant groups, immigrant APIs are more likely to obtain permanent resident status because of an employer instead of through family sponsorships and other immigrant visas; permanent resident status is easier to obtain for those who work in STEM fields (PRC, 2013). As such, API immigrants and those who are U.S.-born tend to have a higher educational attainment compared to other people in the United States, with 49% having a college degree compared to 32% overall (PRC, 2013). In fact, 61% of APIs who recently migrated to the United States as adults have at least a bachelor’s degree (PRC, 2013). Nonetheless, there is great in-group disparity among APIs in terms of educational attainment and income. For instance, Indians are more likely to have a college degree than their Vietnamese counterparts (74% vs. 26%) (Wong et al., 2011). APIs who are from poorer nations or came to the United States as refugees—such many Laotians, Thai, and Hmong— on average, make less money and have less education than Japanese, South Korean, or Chinese immigrants (Wong et al., 2011). This ethnic, cultural, and class diversity among APIs helps to explain their varied approaches to and experiences with sociopolitical involvement. API Mainstream Communities and Sociopolitical Involvement

The Chinese American social justice activist, writer, and philosopher, Grace Lee Boggs, was perhaps most well known for her work in the civil rights movement and Black power movement and was active in a variety of social justice movements in the United States and abroad. Boggs, who lived to be almost 100, died in 2015, and was the author of several books, including The Next American Revolution: Sustainable Activism for the Twenty-First Century. This book provides an analysis and advice on community activism and participation (Boggs, 2012;

82

Queer People of Color

Rosen, 2015). She even actively worked with famous social justice advocates and actors such as Ruby Dee, Ossie Davis, and Danny Glover, who wrote the forward to her 2012 book. Boggs recognized and advocated for sustained activism and emphasized the role social justice advocates can play in working for a better society. A trained philosopher, Boggs did not just address issues of racial equality but also issues of gender and social class. API activists, like Boggs, have often been overlooked in social justice history in the United States. Other such figures include Yuri Kochiyama, the Japanese American activist photographed kneeling over Malcom X’s body after he was assassinated, and Richard Aoki, from California, who was known for helping to arm and defend the Black Panther Party. Today we see a new generation of API social justice activists. One example is Ranier Maningding, a Filipino blogger and author at NextShark and the face behind the popular Facebook page Love Life of the Asian Guy, who writes about issues facing not only APIs but also issues facing others from marginalized and disadvantaged groups. While actively involved in their communities, APIs tend to have lower rates of community and political involvement than their White counterparts and only slightly lower than their Black counterparts (Xu, 2002). In a study of sociopolitical involvement among people in the United States, findings indicated that approximately 19% of APIs and 20% of Blacks volunteered in a formal organization, compared to 32% of Whites who did so (Foster-Bey, 2008). Native-born U.S. citizens are almost three times more likely to be involved in more intensive community political activities as foreign-born non-citizens. A little over 2% of APIs attended a community meeting or worked on a neighborhood problem compared to 3.3% of Blacks, 1.9% of Latinxs, and 4.2% of Whites (Foster-Bey, 2008). Again, those who are nativeborn are more likely to be involved in community activities than those who are foreign-born (Foster-Bey, 2008). There tends to be a correlation between education and income with political participation and voting (Wong et al., 2011). For APIs, however, there is a “mismatch between the high average economic and education achievement of the Asian American community and its correspondingly modest levels of political activity” (Wong et al. 2011, p. 5). Research indicates that APIs and Latinxs vote at similar rates, but there is a significant difference in terms of income and educational achievement (Wong et al., 2011). Interestingly, however, there does not appear to be much of a difference in terms of voting behavior (66% and 62%, respectively). As income and education increase, so too does volunteering among different groups. For example, 12.5% of low income (bottom quartile) APIs

Asian and Pacific Islander Communities

83

volunteer in a formal organization in their communities, compared to 19% of middle income (third quartile), and 27% of high income (top quartile) APIs (Foster-Bey, 2008). Attending a community meeting or working on a neighborhood problem did not increase significantly with social class for any group, and among APIs, it actually decreased as income increased from the bottom to the next poorest quartile. FosterBey (2008) found that 2.4% of low income APIs participated in community activities, while that number decreased to 2.1% among moderate income (second quartile) APIs, increased to 2.7% for middle income, and increased to 3.1% for high income APIs. Even for those with college educations, APIs were less likely to participate in community activities than their Black and White counterparts but were more likely to participate than their Latinx counterparts (Foster-Bey, 2008). As expected, native-born U.S. citizens were more likely to participate in volunteer and community activities than foreign-born noncitizens (Foster-Bey, 2008). Followed by Blacks, API middle-income women and men are more likely to volunteer for religious organizations than Latinxs (Foster-Bey, 2008). API sociopolitical involvement is likely greatly affected by the realities of immigrant experiences. APIs are much more likely to be recent immigrants than other racial/ethnic groups and may be less likely to feel connected to the political and social life of their communities (Jang, 2009; Xu, 2002). Even when taking socioeconomic status and educational attainment into account, as shown above, APIs are still less likely to be sociopolitically involved than other racial or ethnic groups, including Latinxs, another group that has high immigrant and firstgeneration populations (Jang, 2009). Length of residence and being born in the United States, however, appears to be a significant predictor of overall sociopolitical involvement among APIs (Leighley & Vedlitz, 1999). For example, “the means of participation here range from individual-level resources, such as time, money, civic skills, and political knowledge, to institutional rules, such as voter eligibility requirements, in-language ballots, redistricting, and voter-recording technologies,” (Wong et al., 2011, p. 6). Not surprisingly, there are between-group differences in community participation. Wong et al. (2011) note that Indians are the most active in their communities, while Japanese Americans are the least active in their communities. In specifically examining voting behaviors, there appears to be little difference in sociopolitical involvement and voting between API women and men (Lien, 2001). Although not as significant as what we would find among other racial/ethnic groups, the higher the educational attainment of APIs, the more likely they are to have a party affiliation

84

Queer People of Color

and vote (Hoene, 2011). While a higher income increases chances of registering to vote among APIs, it does not necessarily increase the likelihood to vote (Jang, 2009). And even though cohort appears to be the largest determinant, overall, of civic engagement across the country—older people participating in more civic activities than younger ones—this does not appear to be the case among APIs, as age does appear to have a significant impact on voting registration rates (Jang, 2009; Putnam, 2000; Sander & Putnam, 2006). Even though political participation and voter turnout rates remain traditionally low for APIs, there is a strong history of community engagement in a broad range of venues within this group, as Aguirre and Lio (2008) note, APIs “have organized worker cooperatives, mobilized community support, and led worker struggles” (2008, p. 6). Asian/Pacific Islander American Queer Communities

“Orientalism”—the process by which Whites impose their images and stereotypes on API experiences and bodies—greatly affects stereotypes concerning gender and sexual identity among API women and men (Prashad, 2003; Said, 1978). API men have often been stereotyped as homosexual, emasculated, asexual (Eng, 2001; Espiritu, 2008; Takaki, 1998) or even as warriors and martial artists (Feagin, 2006), and women have been portrayed as passive and sexually available (Prasso, 2006). APIs are also often stereotyped as homophobic. Nonetheless, queer and gender nonconforming people have historically played a significant role in API cultures (Chung & Singh, 2009). A study examining the experiences of queer API people found that 80% believed that both their racial/ethnic identity and their sexual identity played an important role in their lives (Dang & Hu, 2004). The authors also found that immigration (40%), hate violence/harassment (39%), and media representation (39%) were the top three issues facing APIs (Dang & Hu, 2004). An equal number of study participants (82%) experienced homophobia and racism. Far fewer men (20%) reported having experienced sexism and gender-based discrimination than women (74%) and trans (67%) study participants (Dang & Hu, 2004). APIs in Queer Communities

Studies examining the experiences of APIs within queer communities have found that most have felt either overlooked or have experienced overt racial discrimination (Chan, 1989; Dang & Hu, 2004; Han, 2007; Loicano, 1989; Nemoto et al., 2003). Dang and Hu (2004) found that

Asian and Pacific Islander Communities

85

over 82% of API respondents had experienced racism from White queers, with one third strongly agreeing that queer API people experience racism from White queers. Overall, however, Dang and Hu found that most of the people within their sample (53%) reported positive experiences within mainstream queer communities and their experiences were more positive in queer communities than in API communities (2004). Unlike the API lesbian and bisexual women who reported more racial discrimination, the men in Chan’s (1989) sample experienced more sexual discrimination within API communities than racial discrimination within queer communities. Interestingly, however, research focuses more on the racism in queer communities experienced by API men than women. Over the past several years, increased attention has been placed on racism within queer communities, and this racism is most evident and can be easily observed in online dating patterns and stated preferences. In quoting one API man who describes his experiences in the gay dating scene, David Ly (2017) writes: The ways Asians are treated online directly correlate with Alex's reasons for feeling less desired. He questions his own physical attractiveness in the eyes of [W]hite men and wonders if his Asian heritage is what keeps him from catching the eye of other men. “But after being told time and time again online that I’m unattractive due to my ethnicity, I can’t help but believe that that’s the reason. All the time. Either way, feeling invisible is the norm for me,” he said. Because of this, Alex dissociates himself from gay communities, keeping to himself and not going out much. (2017, para. 7).

Queers in API Communities

In examining the experiences of queer API individuals in New York City, researchers found that almost all respondents (96%) believed that homophobia/transphobia were problems in the API communities (Choi et al., 2011). This number was a bit higher than the 82% who believed that racism was a problem in queer communities. Research argues that the stigmas associated with homosexuality are due to the belief that homosexuality is a “White, western phenomenon” (Chan, 1989, p. 19). Additionally, in some API cultures, sexuality is not a means by which to identify oneself (Asthana & Oostvogels, 2001; Laurent, 2005). Since for many APIs, in both the United States and abroad, sexuality is not perceived to be an identity in the same way in which Western culture views it, this could likely help explain Singh, Chung, and Dean’s (2007) finding that API lesbian and bisexual women were less likely to

86

Queer People of Color

experience internalized homophobia than were their non-API counterparts. Research on homophobia within communities of color often highlights the negative impact homophobia has not only on identity formation for queer racial and ethnic minorities but also on their sense of self-worth (Crichlow, 2004; Griffin, 2001; Ward, 2005). A variety of factors such as family of origin, religious beliefs, and cultural traditions may influence the choice not only to come out to one’s families but also to accept sexual orientation as a part of identity (Chan, 1989; Espiritu, 2010; Loicano, 1989; Uba, 1994). For example, a study of the experiences of queer API individuals quotes a respondent as saying, “I wish I could tell my parents – they are the only ones who do not know about my gay identity, but I am sure they would reject me” (Chan, 1989, p. 19). Those participants who found it harder to come out in API communities felt this was because homosexuality was viewed as taboo. Operario, Han, and Choi (2008) report that their API gay male sample felt as if they have consistently experienced sexual stigma and discrimination within their racial/ethnic communities. Similarly, and as mentioned above, Chan discovered that the men in her sample experienced more sexual discrimination than race-based discrimination (Chan, 1989). In her study of API women, Lora Foo (2002) found that 87% of lesbians reported being verbally assaulted because they were thought to be lesbians, while over 50% reported being threatened with physical violence, and 15% reported physical injury. Families

In examining family of origin and family values, APIs are more likely to be married than other people in the United States (59% and 51%, respectively) (PRC, 2013). A 2013 national study found that 54% of APIs believed that success in marriage is important compared to 34% of others in the United States in general (PRC, 2013). Additionally, compared to other races, APIs are more likely to marry outside their racial group, as 36.1% of API women marry interracially, compared to 9.3% among Blacks, 25.4% among Latinxs, and 9.4% among Whites (PRC, 2012a). Compared to the general population (41%), API newborns are less likely to be born to unmarried mothers (16%) (PRC, 2012a). They are also more likely (80%) to be raised in a two-parent household compared to the general population (63%). Approximately 77% of APIs believed that being a good parent is important compared to 50% of non-API Americans (PRC, 2012a). We even see higher

Asian and Pacific Islander Communities

87

educational attainments found among API same-sex couples (Lee Badgett et al., 2013). The National Queer Asian Pacific Islander Alliance (NQAPIA) is an organization that promotes queer API visibility and rights and provides support to queer API communities. NQAPIA’s website provides suggestions on coming out in API families and has a three-part public service campaign that includes nine multilingual public service announcements, resources and talking points on coming out translated into dozens of languages (The National Queer Asian Pacific Islander Alliance [NQAPIA], n.d.). These resources consider the unique challenges that cultural factors play in the coming out process of API people. Studies suggest that API families are not individualistic like many White families; they are, instead, more likely to express collective values and emphasize family harmony (Liu &Chan, 1996). For many APIs, the sense of self is intrinsically part of the family’s sense of itself (Han, 2000). “Western psychological theories of family systems and interpersonal relationships often fall short in understating the East Asian family because familial relationships are so strongly defined by centuries of religious, philosophical, and cultural traditions” (Liu & Chan, 1996, p. 140). Adherence to traditional API values informs a place in society and the family, based on highly structured, strictly defined gender and generational roles (Liu & Chan, 1996; Uba, 1994). This cultural structure likely has great impact on the coming out process and acceptance within families as expectations and traditions likely hold more importance for APIs than other groups that might be more individualistic in nature. Nonetheless, “the tight bond of family and the instilment of traditional values for APIs on the one hand can be harsh and oppressive for LGBT individuals but, on the other hand, can give support” (Liu & Chan, 1996, p. 142). A variety of factors such as family of origin, religious beliefs, and cultural traditions may affect the choice not only to come out to families (Chan, 1989) but also to accept sexual orientation as a part of identity (Operario et al., 2008). For example, Connie Chan’s (1989) study, which examines sexuality among APIs, found that only 26% had come out to parents compared to 77% who had come out to other family members and the nearly 100% who had come out to friends. Dang and Hu (2004) found that among their queer API study respondents, more were out to their siblings (73%) than they were to their parents (60%). Only 30% were out to their cousins, 27% out to their aunts and uncles, and very few, only 8%, were out to their grandparents (Dang & Hu, 2004).

88

Queer People of Color

Spirituality

In the United States, a plurality of APIs are Christians (42%); those who are Buddhist and Hindu comprise 14% and 10% of APIs, respectively (PRC, 2013). Slightly over a quarter of APIs are religiously unaffiliated (PRC, 2013). API evangelicals attend religious worship services at a higher rate than their White evangelical counterparts (PRC, 2012a). Religion, though, tends to hold less significance for APIs than for the general U.S. population, where 58% indicate that religion plays an important role in their lives compared to only 39% of APIs (PRC, 2012a). Religious affiliations vary among API subgroups, with each of the major API ethnicities practicing different religions. For example, the majority (61%) of Korean Americans identify as Protestant, the majority (51%) of Indian Americans identify as Hindu, and many (43%) of Vietnamese Americans identify as Buddhist; the majority (52%) of Chinese Americans identify as religiously unaffiliated, and the majority (65%) of Filipino Americans identify as Catholics (PRC, 2012a). Approximately 33% of Japanese Americans identify as Protestant, while 32% identify as religiously unaffiliated (PRC, 2012a). Critics argue, however, that “this data appears flawed” because “[it]fails to take into account those that identify as multiple religions” (Tannenbaum, 2013, p. 8). For instance, in Korean Protestant Churches, Shrake (2009) notes the role that traditional Confucian values play in the belief system of the Protestant Church for Korean Americans. Overall, queer people are much less likely to be religious. In a 2014 study of religiosity among queers and their non-queer counterparts, 47% of the queer respondents did not identify as religious, while only 24% identified as highly religious, compared to respondents in the general population where 30% did not identify as religious but 41% identified as “highly religious” (Newport, 2014). Emergent groups that work to provide a safe and welcoming place for queer religious individuals include Muslims for Progressive Values, which is a group that works to support inclusion and acceptance in Muslim communities, including for queer Muslims, and Al-Fatiha which provides a support group specifically designed for queer Muslims (Muslims for Progressive Values, 2017). Many religious, queer API individuals are able to find a welcoming home within their respective religious institutions. In an article published on their website, the Human Rights Campaign wrote, “Some LGBTQ Asian Pacific Americans find that the religion they grew up with isn’t as homophobic as they first thought” (Human Rights Campaign, n.d., para. 7). They go on to quote Prateek Chaudhary, a former medical student at the Texas College of Osteopathic Medicine: “I

Asian and Pacific Islander Communities

89

was raised as a Hindu and today consider myself to be loosely religious… Many Hindus find that their religion isn’t necessarily an obstacle to coming out, especially those who study Hindu mythology, which includes references to same-sex relationships and alternative gender roles” (Human Rights Campaign, n.d., para. 7). The Social Justice Sexuality Project

In chapter 1 we examined notions of belonging and argued that belonging to a community or group is important for both the individual and the larger community. This feeling of belonging determines a person’s level of engagement within their communities, yet these feelings of belonging frequently go unexamined for API queer people, who often have to navigate numerous social and cultural worlds. In 2010, over 550 Asian/Pacific Islander individuals took part in the Social Justice Sexuality (SJS) Project, one of the largest national surveys of Black, Latinx, API, and multiracial lesbian, gay, bisexual, and trans people (Battle et al., 2013b). Subsequent analyses found that participants in this study ranged in age from 14 to 78, with a mean age of 31. A little less than one-third (32%) of the female respondents identified as single while 60% of the male respondents identified as single. Almost one-fifth (18.7%) of the women were parents compared to one-tenth of their male counterparts. More female respondents were born in the United States (82%) than males (63%) and more male respondents lived in urban areas (81%) than females (69%). The average API respondent identified as being politically liberal, had at least an associate’s degree, and made between $30,000 and $39,999 per year. Examining the overall sample, the SJS Project yielded some important findings about how queer API people frame their experiences with regard to racial/ethnic status, sexual identity, and important issues facing their communities. Almost three-quarters (72.8%) of participants indicated that their racial/ethnic status was an important part of their identity (Battle et al., 2013b). (See Figure 4.1.) Over 80% indicated that their sexual orientation was an important part of their identity, thus emphasizing the idea that both identities are important and that group membership is important for these study participants (Battle et al., 2013b). (See Figure 4.2.) For example, in a subsequent qualitative study conducted by the SJS Project, emphasizing the importance of identity, a respondent was quoted as saying, “I feel like there is a lot of pressure from everyone else to prove that you’re American. There’s a lot of pressure for us to be

90

Queer People of Color

Westernized and be as American as can be, and forget our Asian heritage” (Battle et al., 2013b, p. 3). Figure 4.1 Racial or Ethnic Status Is an Important Part of Identity (N=558)

No 27.2% Yes 72.8%

Source: Social Justice Sexuality Survey: The Executive Summary for the Black Population (Socialjusticesexuality.com)

According to API respondents, the most important issues facing API queer communities were, in order, “discrimination,” “equality/acceptance,” and “racism.” Conversely, the most important issues facing individual API respondents were marriage/domestic partnership (16%), economic issues (15%), and equality/acceptance (14%) (Battle et al., 2013b).1 In terms of family support, overall, 67% of the API SJS study participants reported feeling at least somewhat supported by their families. (See Figure 4.3.)

Asian and Pacific Islander Communities

91

Figure 4.2 Sexual Orientation Is an Important Part of Identity (N=558)

No 17.4%

Yes 82.6%

Source: Social Justice Sexuality Survey: The Executive Summary for the Black Population (Socialjusticesexuality.com)

The SJS Project also reported important findings concerning how queer API individuals framed their experiences regarding racial/ethnic status, sexual identity, and other issues confronting their communities. For instance, compared to other queer people of color, queer API individuals feel just as connected to the broader queer community. Compared to other queer people of color, queer APIs are no more likely to feel that homophobia is a problem in their neighborhood/community and that queer APIs are significantly more likely to feel their racial or ethnic status is an important part of their identity. In fact, APIs are more likely to feel their racial/ethnic identity is an important part of their identities than other people of color in the SJS project (Battle et al., 2013b). Most API individuals felt just as connected to the larger queer community as other people of color, and APIs were no more likely to feel as if homophobia was a problem in their community than other

92

Queer People of Color

people of color. On average, queer APIs come out at around the age of 15, which is roughly the same age as when their queer people of color counterparts come out. About 80% of API people reported feeling supported by their families, and 34% felt completely supported by their families. For example, one respondent stated, “when I told [my mom] over the phone… her response was very emotional but very loving and supportive…” Half of API respondents reported being out to at least some of their family members, and 41% reported being out to all family members. Study participants were out to all their friends (58%), coworkers (46%), family members (41%), and people online (49%) (Battle et al., 2013b). Figure 4.3 Feeling Supported from Family (N=558)

No 33% Yes 67%

Source: Social Justice Sexuality Survey: The Executive Summary for the Black Population (Socialjusticesexuality.com)

Concerning spirituality, queer API individuals attend religious services less frequently than do other queer people of color. Also,

Asian and Pacific Islander Communities

93

compared to other queer people of color, API respondents indicate that spirituality and religion are much less important to them. Significantly, for queer API individuals, religion has a slightly more negative influence on coming out and the coming out experience than it does for other queer people of color (Battle et al., 2013b). Compared to Black and Latinx people, APIs have more religious diversity not only within the population but also within families. For example, a respondent noted, “My mom is Buddhist, and my father is Catholic. My upbringing was Roman Catholic, so I went to church, and my mom would even bring [us] to Buddhist temples” (Battle et al., 2013b, p. 4). API respondents appeared to feel less comfortable in their religious communities compared to other queer people of color, with 40% out to none in their religious communities. Only about 6% were out to about half of the people in their religious communities while another 6% indicated that there were out to most. Approximately 16% of API respondents indicated that they were out to some of their religious communities and almost one third (32%) were out to all in their religious communities (Battle et al., 2013b). Sociopolitical Involvement and the Social Justice Sexuality Project

The data presented in this study focus on sociopolitical involvement among queer API people in predominately White queer communities, in API and people of color communities, and in queer API and people of color communities. Involvement in predominantly White queer communities may include attending mainstream Pride Events and volunteering for organizations such as the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force. In the API community and communities of color sociopolitical involvement may include Diwali celebrations or volunteering or donating to API Americans for Equality. API queer sociopolitical participation may involve attending South Asian Lesbian and Gay Association-NYC events or volunteering for the National Queer Asian Pacific Islander Alliance. Here, we examine the correlates of sociopolitical involvement among our API study participants to assess how sociopolitical involvement influences feelings of belonging and acceptance within their communities. Further, of the over 550 API people who took part in the Social Justice Sexuality (SJS) Project, 175 API women and 222 API men (N=397) provided valid responses to all questions analyzed for this chapter. At core, we were interested in asking how API respondents’ experiences with community and identity affected their sociopolitical

94

Queer People of Color

involvement within queer communities, within communities of color, and within their intersections—queer communities of color. Because of their unique dynamics, we treated each of these three measures as a separate dependent variable in multivariate analyses. More precisely, to measure Queer Sociopolitical Involvement, respondents were asked “Thinking about LGBT groups, organizations, and activities in general, during the past 12 months, how often have you”: a. Participated in political events (e.g., a march, rally, etc.) b. Participated in social or cultural events (e.g., clubs, movies, restaurants, etc.) c. Read newspapers or magazines d. Used the internet (e.g., chat rooms, social networking sites, blogs, etc.) e. Received goods and/or services (e.g., medical, counseling, food, etc.) f. Donated money to an organization. Then for each of the six questions, participants could respond from “never” (1) through “more than once a week” (6). The same response structure was provided to measure both POC Sociopolitical Involvement, “Thinking about groups, organizations, and activities for people of color, during the past 12 months, how often have you”; and QPOC Sociopolitical Involvement, “Thinking about groups, organizations, and activities for LGBT people of color, during the past 12 months, how often have you.” (See Table 4.1.) Again, across all three of the dependent variables— sociopolitical involvement within queer communities, within communities of color, and within their intersections—we wanted to see the relative impact of two broad domains: community and identity. Thus, to measure community, we analyzed five variables. The first, Connected to Queer Communities, measured the level of connection API queer respondents felt to mainstream (predominately White) queer communities and the impact that might have on the sociopolitical involvement of these respondents. Respondents were asked to respond from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree” on three items: a. I feel connected to my local LGBT community b. I feel that problems faced by the LGBT community are also my problems

Table 4.1 API Queer Sociopolitical Involvement Means, Standard Deviants, Ranges, and Description Variables Alphas in parentheses (women/men)

Asian Women (N=174) Mean

S.D.

Range

Asian Men (N=222) Mean

S.D.

Range

Description: Social Justice Sexuality Variable Label

Queer Sociopolitical Involvement (Alpha=.744/.658) POC Sociopolitical Involvement (Alpha=.821/.810) QPOC Sociopolitical Involvement (Alpha=.851/.852)

2.95

2.50

2.44

1.00

1.13

1.18

1-6

1-6

1-6

3.25

2.60

2.08

1.03

1.19

1.14

1-6

Involvement in groups, organizations, and activities for Queer

1-6

Involvement in groups, organizations, and activities for POC

1-6

Involvement in groups, organizations, and activities for QPOC

95

continues

Asian and Pacific Islander Communities

Dependent Variable

96

Variables Alphas in parentheses (women/men)

Asian Women (N=174)

Asian Men (N=222)

Mean

S.D.

Range

Mean

S.D.

Range

Description: Social Justice Sexuality Variable Label

4.07

1.21

1-6

4.15

1.32

1-6

Connected to Queer Community/People

1-5

How many people within the following communities are you “out” to: family, friends, religious community, co-workers, etc.

1-6

As a Queer person, how much do you feel supported by your family

Independent Variable Community Connected to Queer Community (Alpha=.722/.727)

Outness (Alpha=.895/.893)

Family Support

3.68

4.20

1.13

1.66

1-5

1-6

3.53

4.28

1.15

1.60

continues

Queer People of Color

Table 4.1 continued

Table 4.1 continued Variables Alphas in parentheses (women/men)

Asian Women (N=174) Mean

S.D.

Range

Asian Men (N=222) Mean

S.D.

Range

Description: Social Justice Sexuality Variable Label

1-6

How often have you felt uncomfortable in your Queer community because of your race or ethnicity

1-6

How often have you felt uncomfortable in your racial or ethnic community because of your sexual identity

1-6

Do you feel that your sexual orientation is an important part of your identity

1-6

Do you feel that your racial or ethnic status is an important part of your identity

Community

Comfort in Racial Communities

4.82

3.84

1.60

1.55

1-6

1-6

2.95

3.29

1.64

1.63

Identity Sexual Identity Importance

4.26

1.23

1.62

1-6

1-6

4.84

4.41

1.43

1.69

97

Racial Identity Importance

5.02

Asian and Pacific Islander Communities

Comfort in Queer Communities

98

Queer People of Color

c. I feel a bond with other LGBT people. Their responses were combined into one measure, and that composite variable was analyzed. All too often in social science research Outness is measured with a single-item question. However, we wanted to allow for more dynamic measures of outness across different types of communities and within those communities. Thus, we created a composite variable from responses to “How many people within the following communities are you “out” to? Respondents could then answer “none,” “some,” “about half,” “most,” or “all” for each of the following communities: a. Family b. Friends c. Religious community d. Co-workers e. People in your neighborhood f. People online. Realizing the importance of family and Family Support among communities of color, we asked respondents, “As a LGBT person, how much do you now feel supported by your family?” Their responses could range from “not supported at all” (1) to “completely supported” (6). Similarly, a single-item measure was employed to account for both Comfort in Queer Communities, “How often have you felt uncomfortable in your LGBT community because of your race or ethnicity?”; as well as Comfort in Racial Communities, “How often have you felt uncomfortable in your racial or ethnic community because of your sexual identity?” For each question, respondents could answer “never” (1) through “always” (6). The values for these two “Comfort” variables were flipped to measure comfortable, rather than uncomfortable, feelings. To measure identity, we were interested in two aspects: a. Sexual Identity Importance: “Do you feel that your sexual orientation is an important part of your identity?” and b. Racial Identity Importance: “Do you feel that your racial or ethnic status is an important part of your identity?” For each question, respondents could choose, “not important at all” (1) through “extremely important” (6).

Asian and Pacific Islander Communities

99

So then, how were the models built? To begin with, we realized that it would be very problematic to assume that experiences for women would be the same as men. Therefore, we decided to analyze the data separately based on sex. Unfortunately, due to the number of transgender respondents being too low to allow for any meaningful analysis, they were not included in these findings. Thus, employing only the female sample, we took the variable Queer as our first dependent variable and entered the five variables measuring Community (see Model I). Then, we added the two variables measuring Identity (see Model II). Model II also included measures of sexual orientation, relationship status (single vs. not), parental status (has ever parented vs. not), age, nationality (foreign-born vs. U.S.-born), urbanicity (big city vs. not), region (South vs. not), political views (conservative to liberal), education, and income. None of the variables, however, was significant. Therefore, for the purposes of space and visual parsimony, those results were not presented in the regression table. The same procedure employed for the dependent variable Queer Sociopolitical Involvement (Models I and II) was repeated for POC Sociopolitical Involvement, (see Models III and IV) as well as for QPOC Sociopolitical Involvement (see Models V and VI). Subsequently, these same analyses were then repeated for the male sample (see Models VII through XII). Using Table 4.2 as a guide, the best way to see the impact of these variables across dependent variables and sex (females vs. males) is to look at a particular independent variable across all 12 models. Doing so highlights our first and most poignant finding: connection to queer communities is by far the most powerful and robust predictor—across all three dependent variables and for both women and men—of sociopolitical involvement (see Models I through XII). In short, the greater the connection to queer communities, the more likely engagement in sociopolitical activities for queer groups, people of color groups, and for queer people of color groups. The only exception to this was for API men and the full model of people of color sociopolitical involvement (see Model X). For API women, outness has no impact on sociopolitical involvement (see Models I through VI). For API men, on average, there is a positive effect. That is, the more people they are “out” to, the more likely API male respondents are to engage in sociopolitical activities. Many API men who are “out” are likely to be connected to White queer communities. Therefore, being out for these men may serve two purposes: political and social.

100

Queer People of Color

Table 4.2 Unstandardized Regression Coefficients for the Queer, POC, and QPOC Sociopolitical Involvement of Asian Women & Asian Men (betas in parentheses) Asian Women Queer N=174

POC N=175

QPOC N=171

Model I

Model IIa

Model III

Model IVa

Model V

Model VIa

Connected to Queer Community

.13* (.14)

.28* (.34)

.26* (.28)

.26* (.28)

.25* (.27)

.31* (.33)

Outness

.03 (.04)

.02 (.03)

-.07 (-.07)

-.06 (-.06)

.12 (.12)

.13 (.13)

Family Support

-.02 (-.03)

-.014 (-.02)

-.06 (-.09)

-.06 (-.09)

-.05 (-.08)

-.05 (-.07)

Comfort in Queer Communities

.03 (.04)

.02 (.03)

-.06 (-.78)

-.05 (-.08)

-.07 (-.09)

-.07 (-.10)

Comfort in Racial Communities

-.18† (-.28)

-.18† (-.28

-.10 (-.14)

-.11 (-.14)

-.07 (-.10)

-.09 (-.12)

Independent Variables Community

Identity Sexual Identity Importance

-.05 (-.06)

-.02 (-.03)

-.18‡ (-.20)

Racial Identity Importance

-.05 (-.06)

.02 (.03)

-.01 (-.02)

Constant Adjusted R2

2.46*

2.83*

2.61*

2.60*

1.58*

2.33*

.17

.17

.12

.11

.11

.133 continues

Asian and Pacific Islander Communities

101

Table 4.2 continued Asian Men Queer N=195

POC N=194

QPOC N=191

Model VII

Model VIIIa

Model IX

Model Xa

Model XI

Model XIIa

Connected to Queer Community

.23* (.30)

.22* (.29)

.14‡ (.15)

.13 (.14)

.20‡ (.19)

.18‡ (.18)

Outness

.12‡ (.16)

.11 (.14)

.20† (.21)

.18‡ (.18)

.14§ (.13)

.13§ (.12)

Family Support

-.10‡ (-.04)

-.11† (.20)

-.13† (-.19)

-.15† (-.22)

-.08§ (-.11)

-.09§ (-.12)

Comfort in Queer Communities

-.054 (-.10)

-.06 (-.12)

-.17* (-.25)

-.15† (-.22)

-.13‡ (-.17)

-.11§ (-.15)

Comfort in Racial Communities

-.02 (.05)

-.002 (-.003)

.07 (.11)

.11‡ (.17)

.07 (.10)

.09§ (.12)

Independent Variables Community

Identity Sexual Identity Importance

.003 (.004)

-.06 (-.07)

-.04 (-.05)

Racial Identity Importance

.05 (.09)

.20* (.28)

.12‡ (.17)

2.07*

Constant Adjusted R2 §

p≤.10

a

‡

p≤.05

.15 †

p≤.01

1.99*

1.60†

1.43*

1.39†

.15

0.13

.18

.078

*

p≤.001

The following demographic variables were included: heterosexual, single, has ever parented, age, foreign born, big city resident, south resident, political views, education, and income. However, none were significant. Therefore, for the purposes of space and visual parsimony, those results are not presented here.

102

Queer People of Color

A clear sex divide also manifested for family support. For API women, family support had no impact on sociopolitical involvement. This is probably confounded by the other variables in the initial models. For example, once one controls for the impact of connection to the queer community, outness, and comfort in queer and racial communities (see Models I, III, and V), it stands to reason that there is little variance remaining for family support to explain. To be clear, we are not suggesting that family support is an unimportant influence on sociopolitical involvement for API women. Instead, we are suggesting its impact is muted based on the other variables simultaneously analyzed. Conversely, for API men, the more family support they had, the less likely they were to be sociopolitically involved. Arguably, for API men, if they are getting (social) support from their family, they may not find any reason to venture into sociopolitical activities, for either social or political reasons. Comfort in queer communities proved not to be statistically significant for API women (see Models I through VI). Nonetheless, for API men, when it came to people of color sociopolitical involvement and queer people of color sociopolitical involvement, the more comfortable they were, the less likely they were to be involved (see Models IX through XII). Again, this speaks to the fact that for API men, their affiliation with queer communities may be more social than political. This finding may seem counterintuitive, yet it may be reflective of research that shows sociopolitical involvement is an important coping mechanism for those facing multiple levels of minority-based stress (Balsam et al., 2011; Poynter & Washington, 2005). Additionally, this finding may begin to make more sense if we consider an implied “time” effect. When API men first come out, their motivation may be political (for instance, see our comments above concerning connection to queer communities). Nevertheless, over time, their relationship with the queer community may become more social than political, as we found with some Black (see chapter 2) and Latinx (see chapter 3) people. Unfortunately, because this dataset is cross sectional, we cannot tease out age/period/cohort effects. Yet, longitudinal or qualitative research may offer much insight here. For API women, when it came to comfort in racial communities, the more comfortable they were, the less likely they were to engage in queer sociopolitical involvement (see Models I and II). To the degree this relationship did not hold for people of color (Models III and IV) and queer people of color sociopolitical involvement (Models (V and VI), it speaks to the fact that for these women their racial ties may trump their ties based on sexual orientation.

Asian and Pacific Islander Communities

103

The findings and explanations delineated in the preceding paragraphs—(a) that for both men and women racial identity is more important than sexual identity; (b) that for API men, the queer experience may initially be more political then become more social; and (c) that for API men, family support has a negative effect on sociopolitical involvement—are supported by our findings about identity. More specifically, except for Model VI, the importance of sexual identity proved to be an insignificant predictor for women and men, across all three types of sociopolitical involvement. Further, for API men, racial identity importance was a significant predictor for people of color sociopolitical involvement (see Model X) and queer people of color sociopolitical involvement (see Model XII). There was great variation between the women and the men in the sample. It might appear that their experiences as women greatly influence their relationships in their communities as there are virtually no similarities in the sociopolitical involvement of the women and men in the sample. These findings lead to a whole set of other questions that merit attention. First, that connection to queer communities is such a strong and consistent predictor across all three dependent variables begs the question of causality. Is it that connection is predicting involvement, involvement is predicting connection, or some interaction of the two? That outness had such inconsistent effects for API men speaks, arguably, to this population’s ongoing negotiation with their racial and sexual identities, not to mention the confounding effects of masculinity. Ideally, one would not have to make such distinctions and decisions, but clearly, it is just not that easy. This sentiment is echoed for men by the fact that the more comfortable they are in their queer communities, the less likely they are to engage in communities of color and queer communities of color. Although not as pronounced for API women, the findings presented here speak to a similar social and cognitive process. More specifically, API women who are more comfortable in their racial communities are less likely to engage in queer community organizations or activism. Noting that none of the identity or demographic variables proved statistically significant is quite telling. It speaks to the fact that the relationship of community (or lack thereof) and sociopolitical involvement holds across a host of demographic groups within queer API communities. Conclusion

This chapter examined sociopolitical involvement among queer APIs. It found that feelings of connectedness to queer communities mattered

104

Queer People of Color

when predicting queer involvement and that believing in the importance of race or ethnicity mattered when predicting involvement in communities of color. The primary findings of this study note that the most important variable for sociopolitical involvement in queer communities is feeling connected to queer communities, while the most important variable for sociopolitical involvement in communities of color is believing that one’s race/ethnicity is important. As expected, within queer spaces, connectedness to queer communities plays an important role, and within communities of color, race and ethnicity plays a more prominent role. Using sociopolitical indicators as a marker of identity, our results found that API women and men in our sample value their connection to their ethnic communities and to their queer communities. Family support was a significant and negative predictor of sociopolitical involvement within queer and people of color settings. For example, among queer API men in our study, belief that family is supportive of sexual orientation leads to a decrease in sociopolitical involvement within both queer spaces and people of color settings. There is something about having family support that negatively influences chances of being involved in sociopolitical activities aimed at queer communities and communities of color. There are several possible explanations. Men may seek out support from queer and POC communities that they may not necessarily receive from their families. Conversely, it is possible that these men have neither the time nor the resources to devote to these communities if they are engaged with their families. Also, these men may feel supported by their families and, as such, may not feel the need to seek out additional support from queer communities or communities of color. These findings leave us with many more questions, however, and more research is needed to advance knowledge about how queer people of color live and engage with their communities. Note 1 For more information on these and other findings, please visit: www.socialjusticesexuality.com

5 Looking at the Big Picture

To help celebrate Pride festivities, in June of 2017, the Philadelphia Office of LGBT Affairs unveiled an updated pride flag with the colors black and brown added to the traditional six-colored (red, orange, yellow, green, blue, purple) flag in which many are accustomed. They argued that this flag calls attention to the Black and Brown queer people who often feel marginalized within queer communities and believed that this would begin a discussion on the issues of racism and discrimination within queer communities. This new flag had the desired impact, as photos of the flag immediately went viral. This new pride flag, along with discussions about racism and discrimination within queer communities, happened around the one-year anniversary of the Pulse nightclub shooting. We began this volume describing the Pulse massacre as the epitome of the violence that drives queer people of color to safe spaces, seeking a sense of belonging. Queer Black, Latinx, and Asian/Pacific Islander (API) people connect with and express feelings of belonging to numerous types of communities. Attachments are not limited to one specific community with some feeling attached to racial communities, others to queer communities, and others still feeling attachment to queer communities of color. As more research centers on the lives of queer people of color and privileges their unique experiences of connection to and comfort in community, there is a growing understanding that being in multiple communities means that you often get to experience intersectional connections where communities can be seen through racial ties, sexual identity, their intersections, or something else entirely. Overall Findings

As described in the first chapter, sociopolitical involvement is social, political, cultural, and community involvement that consists of three

105

106

Queer People of Color

types of unique and intersectional engagements: (1) civic, (2) political, and (3) social. Sociopolitical involvement is the term we use to describe the social and political nature of the community engagement of queer people of color as they experience intersecting marginalized and even politicized identities. Previous work examining community engagement underscores the importance of social connection (e.g., attending social and cultural events) on feelings of belonging (Putnam, 2000). These feelings of acceptance could be difficult to achieve for people who may feel multiple levels of marginalization within their social and cultural groups. Employing multiple forms of data, including the Social Justice Sexuality Project, this book examined how feelings of connection, community, and identity influence sociopolitical involvement within the various communities of queer Black, Latinx, and API people. Realizing the importance of creating space to tell both unique and nuanced stories, we utilized intersectionality as our theoretical framework and hierarchical regression modeling as our methodology. Doing so allowed for an exploration of variance across racial groups (e.g., Blacks compared to Latinx populations), as well as within them (e.g., API women compared to API men), thus avoiding the assumption, for example, that all women of color experience queer sociopolitical involvement equally. From a methodological standpoint, hierarchical regression modeling afforded us the opportunity to interrogate simultaneously the unique contribution of a particular variable (e.g., outness) as well as the impact of a block or domain of variables (e.g., identity). Finally, by predicting multidimensional aspects of sociopolitical involvement—queer, people of color, and queer people of color—separately for women and men, we take an even greater advantage of the intersectional and methodological possibilities of this powerful dataset. But before diving into our multivariate findings, some of the univariate and bivariate findings merit mention. For instance, our study sample showed a number of similarities across racial and ethnic groups. All respondents were around the same general age, with APIs being slightly younger than Blacks and Latinxs in the sample. More women were in a relationship than men. Women were also more likely to be parents than men, and Black women (45%) were more likely to be parents and API men least likely to be parents (10%) compared to any other group. Roughly the same number of Blacks reported that their racial identity and sexual identity were important, unlike Latinx and APIs respondents, where more Latinx and APIs report their sexual identity was more important than their racial identity.

Looking at the Big Picture

107

In examining social issues, Blacks reported that the most important issues facing them were, “economic issues,” “equality and marriage/domestic partnership,” and “healthcare.” Latinxs reported, “economic issues,” “marriage/domestic partnership,” and “equality/acceptance” were the most important issues facing them. APIs reported that the most important issues facing them were, “marriage/domestic partnership,” “economic issues,” and “equality/acceptance.” Blacks believed the most important issues facing queer communities of color were “sexual health education and HIV and AIDS,” “discrimination,” and “equality and acceptance.” APIs responded: “discrimination,” “equality/acceptance,” and “racism.” Latinxs answered: “discrimination,” “equality/acceptance,” and “racism.” Blacks and Latinxs are equally connected to mainstream communities of color as they are queer communities, and they are no more likely to think that homophobia is a problem in their communities. Given our particular theoretical and methodological approach, what did we find? In the earlier chapters, we discussed our findings within Black (see Chapter 2), Latinx (see Chapter 3) and API (see Chapter 4) populations. As a summary and to highlight the importance of an intersectional approach, we present the findings both within and across racial groups. Further, as we did in the earlier chapters, this summary will focus on how the independent variables operated for the different measures of sociopolitical involvement and for the different racial and gender groups examined. First, connection to queer community was by far the most powerful predictor of sociopolitical involvement. This was true for both sexes, all three racial groups, and for all three dependent variables. In other words, for the 36 models, stronger levels of connection led to greater levels of sociopolitical involvement. Of course, there is a question of time-order here. Does the connection lead to involvement or vice versa? We believe the relationship to be symbiotic, meaning they actually simultaneously influence each other. Because these data are cross sectional and not longitudinal, however, truly unpacking that order effect is not feasible. Our measure of outness and how it behaves across our 36 models highlights the advantage of employing our theoretical and methodological strategy to capture nuance across the populations interrogated here. Within the Black sample, for example, outness has a positive impact on Black women’s sociopolitical involvement with queer people of color, but not for their Black male counterparts. While this variable behaves similarly for both Latinx women and men as it did for Black women and men, it does not do so for API women and men. For API women, for instance, outness has no impact on any measure of

108

Queer People of Color

sociopolitical involvement, while for API men, its most consistent impact is for people of color sociopolitical involvement. In the absence of the theoretical framework and methodological procedure employed here, that difference would not have been detected. The unique experiences of API men, compared to all other groups analyzed, not only appears in terms of outness but also when looking at family support. For all the groups analyzed, across all three dependent variables, family support is not statistically significant, except for API men, for whom it actually has a statistically significantly negative impact on queer as well as people of color sociopolitical involvement, and approaches significance for queer people of color sociopolitical involvement. Comfort in queer communities operated interestingly for women. For Black women, the impact was consistently negative and statistically significant; for Latinx women it did not matter for queer sociopolitical involvement, while for API women it was never a significant predictor. Among Black men, it was not a significant predictor. For Latinx men, however, it, on average, negatively predicted sociopolitical involvement. For API men, it mattered most for people of color’s sociopolitical involvement. Comfort in racial communities also operated differently for the three different racial groups. Looking at Black women, for example, the more comfortable they were in their racial communities, the more likely they were to engage in both people of color and queer people of color sociopolitical involvement. Conversely, for Latinx women, that relationship really did not hold. Interestingly, however, while comfort in racial communities did not predict queer sociopolitical involvement for either Black or Latinx women, it did so for API women. For men, comfort in racial communities mattered most for Latinx men when predicting queer people of color sociopolitical involvement. With the exception of predicting queer people of color sociopolitical involvement for API women, the importance of sexual identity was not significant for any other group nor outcome measure. The importance of racial identity—across the different groups and outcome measures— however, was consistently inconsistent. More specifically, among Black women, Latinx men, and API men, it predicted people of color sociopolitical involvement. For Black women and API men, it predicted queer people of color sociopolitical involvement. Conversely, it was never a significant predictor of queer sociopolitical involvement for any of the racial and gender groups analyzed here. In sum, this study yielded a number of important findings. Among all queer Black women and men, Latinx women and men, and API

Looking at the Big Picture

109

women and men, their sociopolitical involvement in their various communities was heavily dependent on connection to queer communities. Blacks felt less connected to queer communities than Latinx and APIs in the sample. Blacks were no more likely to feel that homophobia is a problem in their community than other Latinxs and APIs. The belief that sexual orientation and race/ethnicity is an important aspect of identity was not significant for Latinx women, and the importance of sexual orientation only mattered for API women in the sample. These findings support research that argues sociopolitical involvement is an important coping mechanism for those facing multiple levels of minority-based stress (Balsam et al., 2011; Poynter & Washington, 2005). Arguably, feelings of alienation operate uniquely and differently for these different groups of people. It is important to recognize the unique experiences and contributions of people of color, queer people, and people who are placed at their intersections. “Community” is uniquely important to these groups and tapping into that would be beneficial because queer people of color tend to be more sociopolitically involved if they feel connected to their communities. As this research highlights, the intersections of race, gender, and sexuality requires that different constituencies address different concerns. For example, in academia, professors should work to incorporate such issues and topics into classroom discussion. Additionally, universities can actively work to create and facilitate culturally appropriate student organizations and curricula that reflect and incorporate experiences of queer people of color. Campus queer resource centers can set up listservs and working groups to facilitate discussion of issues, research, activism, and art among, queer, people of color, and queer communities of color. Contributions

Although the data presented in this book was collected in 2010, this research provides important information to help us better understand the experiences of queer people of color and their sociopolitical involvement in their various communities, particularly in dealing with the current presidential administration. Research often overlooks the influence that race, gender, and sexuality, as well as their intersections, play in the sociopolitical involvement of queer people of color. In the end, this book highlights the need for more elaborate investigations that directly and indirectly link connection to comfort levels within communities. In other words, connectedness to community and comfort

110

Queer People of Color

within community are both intertwined (especially when seeking to understand levels of sociopolitical involvement), but there continues to be a need to better understand the mechanisms behind how exactly this functions. This is particularly the case in examining sociopolitical involvement, a framework, which we argue, provides the most nuanced way of examining community involvement among queer communities of color. This project (and the SJS data overall), speaks to the importance of queer communities for queer Black, Latinx, and API people. Research often emphasizes the influence that communities of color have on queer people of color, such as the work that examines homophobia among people of color and, in particular, the work we see on homophobia in Black communities (Lasala & Frierson, 2012; Swartz, 2015). However, research often overlooks the influence that queer communities have for queer people of color, failing to account for things like racism in queer communities. This study works to fill the existing voids in information, addressing the diversity within queer communities and queer communities of color. Studies show that “individuals may choose not to participate because they can’t, because they don’t want to, or because nobody asked (Verba et al., 1995, p. 15). This book provides extended accounts of the lives and experiences of queer Black, Latinx, and API people. We examine not just their political activism (as has been done in other studies), but also their level of overall engagement with their communities, or sociopolitical involvement. Those in public policy should take special note of the unique challenges facing queer people of color because issues such as rates of poverty, homelessness, and incarceration are higher among queer people of color than among their heterosexual or solely queer counterparts. As this research indicates, age, income, and education do not appear to affect significantly the sociopolitical involvement of queer people of color. As the geopolitical map within the United States changes (as evidenced in the most recent presidential election), it would behoove policy makers to understand why these variables do not matter among queer populations of color. Groups hoping to either increase or take advantage of the sociopolitical involvement within diverse queer populations should consider the findings presented here. There are numerous organizations and groups to offer support and resources for queer communities of color, and they include such national groups as the National Black Justice Coalition (NBJC), Unid@s, and the National Queer Asian Pacific Islander Alliance (NQAPIA). The data presented in this study can be especially helpful in the recruitment and

Looking at the Big Picture

111

organizing efforts of these groups as they work to encourage sociopolitical involvement among queer people of color. For instance, as the data presented in this book indicate, sociopolitical involvement is heavily dependent on feelings of connection to queer communities. To increase the sociopolitical involvement of queer people of color, queer groups and organizations of color may work to increase the comfort levels of these people of color within queer communities. Conversely, groups working to increase the sociopolitical involvement of queer people of color may examine ways to help them feel more connected to mainstream queer communities. Additionally, queer organizations and groups should work to include people of color on planning boards and the like, as the more connected they are within queer communities, the more likely queer people of color are engaged in queer, communities of color, and queer communities of color. Continuing, we must also understand that organizations targeting people of color and queer people tend to be underfunded and understaffed. Further, they do not have the luxury of only focusing on one aspect of their constituents’ lives (e.g., HIV, housing, or education). Therefore, these organizations are much less likely to be in a position to write large formal grants, as would their majority (read: White) counterparts. Thus, technical support and general operating funding is not only desired, but it is much needed. There is an overwhelming lack of research and resources for queers, Blacks, Latinxs, and APIs, and queer Blacks, Latinxs, and APIs beyond needs assessments. Additionally, researchers should realize that survey questions and interview schedules that are appropriate for majority populations may not be appropriate for marginalized populations. These scholars should also be aware that people of color and queer people of color are not monolithic. Thus, their research instrument may need (serious) and thoughtful adjustments. As such, we would suggest that concepts be made concrete and allow for multiple response categories when accounting for race, ethnicity, sex, gender, and sexuality. Keep in mind that there are always people who will feel left out from the collection of data. In the future, we must allow these voices to be recorded and included in subsequent discussions or analyses. Moreover, scholars should work to collect data about sociopolitical involvement that goes beyond the classroom setting. In other words, foster collaboration with researchers who can collect data from respondents who are not college students, as much of the research on community engagement is limited to students. This will better help scholars understand how traditional and contemporary theories about inequality and intersectionality inform knowledge about sociopolitical involvement

112

Queer People of Color

and what the links are between current knowledge production and traditional frameworks. Conclusion

This book examined factors that contribute to greater understanding of sociopolitical involvement among queer people of color in their multiple communities. It looks beyond political activism among queer people of color and provides a more holistic account of community involvement among these understudied populations. Although this is a strength of this project, it is also a limitation. Our conceptualization of sociopolitical involvement includes community, civic, and social engagement. Previous research primarily examines political activism within queer communities and communities of color. Consequently, because of our slightly more expansive concepts, some of our findings may not be able to withstand precise comparisons to previous studies. It is likely that political activism requires more of a connection with one’s community than simply reading queer specific newspapers or eating at queer-owned restaurants. Regardless of this limitation, the implications of this study are particularly interesting because the most important variable for sociopolitical involvement is simply feeling connected to community, in particular to queer communities. In much of the research literature, intersections of race, gender, and sexuality keep queer Black, Latinx, and API people hidden from view. Our research is intended to help address this erasure by focusing on a sample within the Social Justice Sexuality Project—one of the largest national surveys of queer communities of color—and by expanding knowledge of the experiences of queer people of color. The project highlights the importance of feeling connected to queer communities and its role in acting as a conduit to sociopolitical involvement for queer communities of color. The significance of this finding calls attention to one of the realities of sociopolitical involvement: There often are cleavages that exist due to race and sexuality. For example, being connected to queer communities is distinct from being connected to the communities of color and different from being connected to queer communities of color. As this project was focused on sociopolitical involvement and feelings of belonging to queer communities, we did not inquire about respondents’ connectedness, or feelings of belonging, to communities of color; however, we did assess comfort in racial communities based on respondents’ sexual orientation. Future research should do the following:

Looking at the Big Picture

• •

• • •

113

Explore whether feelings of belonging within communities of color are as important as feelings of belonging within queer communities in affecting engagement for both communities. Examine the influence of community connectedness on volunteerism within queer, communities of color, and queer communities of color. This may help shed light on the importance of mainstream queer communities for these groups of women and men. Study sociopolitical involvement among other queer people of color to see if results emerge similar to those we have found among queer Black, Latinx, and API people. Ascertain the influence of community connectedness to activist and non-activist volunteerism within queer communities of color. Use qualitative research to investigate how different groups understand their level of connection to their community, their racial and sexual identity, and its effect on their own sociopolitical involvement.

As you can see, this book ends with more questions and potential areas of future research. Nonetheless, our findings highlight that a major casualty of not recognizing the diversity within and across these communities and not resolving issues surrounding their sociopolitical involvement is that racial and sexual minorities may feel connected to a larger community but not necessarily comfortable within it.

Appendix

Social Justice Sexuality Data Collection Phase I – Preliminary Work

In 2008 and 2009, the Social Justice Sexuality Project designed a series of brainstorming gatherings that included activists, academics, artists, and key stakeholders from organizations that had research expertise and programmatic experience with queer people of color issues. In collaboration with the Social Science Research Council, the SJS Project created a workshop titled “Building Infrastructure for Race/Sexuality Studies: A Workshop on Methods, Training, and Strategic Planning.” This gathering of over 50 participants helped to identify, frame, and inform specific areas of importance within the broad field of race and sexuality studies. A second workshop was held in 2009 and titled, “Best Practices from the Field: A Workshop on Accessing & Recruiting Respondents, and Data Collection & Dissemination for Latina/o LGBT Populations within the United States.” This gathering of over 20 participants helped to identify important survey questions and methodological techniques used to study queer Latinxs in the United States. Some important observations resulted from these gatherings. First, academic inquiry and artistic exploration of the intersection of race and sexuality need support from other structural forces like the government and school systems (K-12 levels, especially). Second, there is a clear need for more basic knowledge about queer people of color communities. Third, sustained efforts to examine and explore the intersection of race and sexuality are limited, mainly due to strained and inconsistent funding sources. Fourth, research on queer people of color tends to use a pathological lens that focuses mainly on disease, discrimination, and stigma. Fifth, in addition to basic demographic characteristics (like age, education, and income), at least five other subject areas were identified as being important areas of inquiry: racial and sexuality identity; spirituality and religion; mental and physical health; family formations and dynamics; and civic and community

115

116

Queer People of Color

engagement. And last, much of the social scientific study of queer people of color does not adequately address how variation exists within sub-populations. For example, while some important and seminal queer research exists on Black, Latinx, and API communities, little inquiry has shown how variation within these racial populations exists with regard to ethnicity, age, social class status, or sex. Since its inception, the SJS Project has formed and maintained key relationships with social service groups across the country whose missions have included serving queer people of color populations. These relationships became quite instrumental to the success of what eventually became known as the SJS Survey 2010. During the latter half of 2009, the SJS Survey instrument was created, piloted, and revised. This resulted in a 10-page, 105-item, selfadministered questionnaire that included basic demographic characteristics and questions about racial and sexual identity; spirituality and religion; mental and physical health; family formations and dynamics; and civic and community engagement.1 Many of the items used in the SJS survey were taken from other instruments to ensure reliability and build upon existing research. Some questions were modified, or new ones created to tailor them specifically to queer people of color. Sources used to develop the survey included but were not limited to the following: the Black Pride Survey 2000 (Battle et al., 2002), which serves as one of the largest survey projects to gather data from queer Blacks in the United States; the Black Youth Project,2 which continues to amass relevant data on Black youth today; the General Social Survey;3 the Lavender Islands Study on Family (Henrickson, Neville, Jordan, & Donaghey, 2007), which specifically examined the roles of family in the lives of queer people; the Living in the Margins Survey (Dang & Vianney, 2007), which gathered data on Asian and Pacific Islander populations; the National Black Lesbian Needs Assessment Survey (Ramsey, Hill, & Kellam, 2010), which collected data on issues specific to Black lesbians; the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey;4 Nuestras Voces (Diaz, Bein & Ayala, 2006), which serves as one of the largest survey projects to gather data on Latino gay and bisexual men; and the Santa Clara Strength of Religious Faith Survey (Plante, Vallaeys, Sherman, & Wallston, 2002), which has continued to measure the importance of religion in this country.

Appendix

117

Phase II – Field Period for Quantitative Survey

The field period for the SJS Survey spanned 12 months (from January 2010 to December 2010). Recruitment for the national survey included such methods as venue-based sampling, where research participants were sought at political, social, and cultural events; snowball sampling, where community organizers or opinion leaders often distributed surveys at other events not initially identified as a recruitment venue; community partnerships with national and local queer groups and organizations like the Latino GLBT History Project, the National Black Justice Coalition, Portland Latino Gay Pride, Unid@s, Unity Fellowship Church, the Zuna Institute; on the Internet; and other strategic partnerships developed over the course of the survey field period. With the support of a team of over 75 research assistants and community partners—who administered surveys, coded and cleaned the raw data collected, and conducted on-going reports throughout the field period—the SJS Survey 2010 collected over 5,000 surveys from across the United States, including Washington, DC and Puerto Rico. Ultimately, a sample of 558 API respondents, 2,166 Black respondents, and 1,159 Latinx respondents was obtained. Research and community reports outlining key findings were created to maintain our initial agreement with various partners.5 This aspect of the project was important because it quickly contributed to the discourse on queer people of color issues and identities at both the activist and academic level. Phase III – Reports and Academic Articles

In addition to the race-specific summary reports housed on the SJS website, the project engaged in a wider dissemination strategy that included a larger audience of research practitioners as well as students at both the undergraduate and graduate levels. In 2013, the Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research (ICPSR) published the SJS Survey 2010 dataset. ICPSR is an internationally recognized leader in housing large datasets for social science researchers to use widely. It is a consortium of more than 700 academic institutions and research organizations, maintains a data archive of more than 500,000 files, and hosts 16 specialized collections of data in education, aging, criminal justice, substance abuse, terrorism, and other fields. Throughout the data collection process and even today, the SJS Project has maintained a website that houses relevant project information, updates, and important reports created by researchers who

118

Queer People of Color

use the SJS dataset. This digital presence has created new and on-going relationships with activists, students, and scholars from around the world. Within the academic field, the SJS dataset has been used in peerreviewed journals that represent a spectrum of disciplines from psychology and social work to race-specific serial publications.6 This book is a part of that academic work. Though it goes beyond the scope of what is included here, the SJS project had two more phases. Phase IV included qualitative interviews; and Phase V included a digital image project. Notes 1

A copy of the survey instrument can be accessed at www.socialjusticesexuality

.com. 2

For more information about this project, visit: www.blackyouthproject

.com. 3 Known throughout the social sciences, the GSS is one of the largest national data-collecting projects in the United States. 4 Housed at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, this on-going national survey project is best known for collecting data that combines information obtained via interviews and physical examinations. 5 Key findings for the Black, Latinx, and API samples can be found at www.socialjusticesexuality.com. 6 For a complete list of publications, visit www.socialjusticesexuality.com.

Bibliography

Acosta, K. L. (2013) Amigas y Amantes: Sexually Nonconforming Latinas Negotiate Family. New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press. Aguirre, A.J. & Lio, S. (2008). Spaces of mobilization: The Asian American/Pacific Island struggle for social justice. Social Justice, 25(20), 1-17. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/29768485. Akerlund, M. & Cheung, M. (2000). Teaching beyond the deficit model: Gay and lesbian issues among African Americans, Latinos, and Asian Americans. Journal of Social Work Education, 36(2), 279-292. Retrieved from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/23043820. Akers, R. L. (2006), Commentary on part I: Theory and research in the sociology and social psychology of crime and deviance. In M. Deflem (Ed.), Sociological Theory and Criminological Research: Sociology of Crime, Law and Deviance, Volume 7 (pp.137-155). West Yorkshire, United Kingdom: Emerald Group Publishing Limited. Alimahomed, S. (2010). Thinking outside the rainbow: Women of color redefining queer politics and identity. Social Identities, 16(2), 151–168. doi:10.1080/13504631003688849. Arnold, E.A. & Bailey, M.M. (2009). Constructing home and family: How the ballroom community supports African American GLBTQ youth in the face of HIV/AIDS. Journal of Gay & Lesbian Social Services, 21(2-3), 171– 188. doi:10.1080/10538720902772006. Arnold, E.A., Rebchook, G.M., & Kegeles, S.M. (2014). “Triply cursed”: Racism, homophobia, and HIV-related stigma are barriers to regular HIV testing, treatment adherence, and disclosure among young Black gay men. Culture, Health & Sexuality, 16(6), 710-722. doi:10.1080/13691058.2014 .905706. Asencio, M. (2009). Migrant Puerto Rican lesbians: Negotiating gender, sexuality, and ethnonationality. NWSA Journal, 21(3), 1-23. Johns Hopkins University Press. Retrieved from https://muse.jhu.edu/article/369864. Asante, M.K. (1980). Afrocentricity: The theory of social change. Chicago: African American Images. Associated Press (2012, Jan. 17). Bishop Eddie L. Long, accused of sexual misconduct, dies at 63. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01 /17/us/bishop-eddie-l-long-accused-of-sexual-misconduct-dies-at-63.html. Asthana, S. & Oostvogels, R. (2001). The social construction of male “homosexuality” in India: Implications for HIV transmission and prevention. Social Science & Medicine, 52(5), 707-721. doi:10.1016/S0277 -9536(00)00167-2. Baca Zinn, M. & Dill, B. T. (1996). Theorizing difference from multiracial feminisms. Feminist Studies, 22(2), 321–331. doi:10.2307/3178416.

119

120

Queer People of Color

Bailey, M. M. (2013). Butch queens up in pumps: Gender, performance, and ballroom culture in Detroit (triangulations: Lesbian/gay/queer theater/ drama/performance). Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press. Balsam, K., Molina, Y., Beadnell, B., Simoni, J., & Walters, K. (2011). Measuring multiple minority stress: The LGBT people of color microaggressions scale. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 17(2), 163–174. doi:10.1037/a0023244. Barkan, S., Cohn, S., & Whitaker, W. (1995). “Beyond recruitment”: Predictors of differential participation in a national antihunger organization. Sociological Forum, 10(1) 113–134. doi:10.2307/j100768. Barrett, D. C. & Pollack, L. M. (2005). Whose gay community? Social class, sexual self-expression, and gay community involvement. Sociological Quarterly, 46(3), 437–456. doi:10.111/j.1533-8525.2005.000021.x. Barreto, M.A. & Munoz, J.A. (2003). Reexamining the “Politics of Inbetween”: Political participation among Mexican immigrants in the United States. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 25(4), 427-447. doi:10.1177/0739986303258599. Battle, J., Cohen, C. J., Harris, A., & Richie, B. E. (2003). We are family: Embracing our lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) family members. In L.A. Daniels (Ed.), The State of Black America (pp. 93-106). Washington, DC: National Urban League, Publications Department. Battle, J., Cohen, C., Warren, D., Fergerson, G., & Audam, S. (2002). Say it loud: I’m Black and I’m proud; Black Pride Survey 2000. New York, NY: The Policy Institute of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force. Battle, J. & Harris, A., (2013). Belonging and acceptance: Examining the correlates of sociopolitical involvement among bisexual and lesbian Latinas. Journal of Gay and Lesbian Social Services, 25(2), 141-157. doi:10.1080/10538720.2013.78520. Battle, J., Harris, A., Donaldson, V., & Mushtaq, O. (2015). Understanding belonging in the context of sociopolitical involvement among Asian and Pacific Islander American lesbians and bisexual women. Women, Gender, and Families of Color. 3(2), 209-226. Battle, J. & Lemelle, A.J. (2002). Gender differences in African American attitudes toward gay males. Western Journal of Black Studies, 26(3), 134139. Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/200359878?pqorigsite=gscholar. Battle, J., Pastrana, A.J., & Daniels, J. (2012). Social Justice Sexuality Survey: The executive summary for the Black population. Social Justice Sexuality Project. New York, NY. http://socialjusticesexuality.com/files/2014/09 /SJSBLACK_ExSum_2012.pdf. Battle, J., Pastrana, A.J., & Daniels, J. (2013a). Social Justice Sexuality Survey: The executive summary for the Latina/o population. Social Justice Sexuality Project. New York. http://socialjusticesexuality.com/files/2014 /09/Latino_ExecutiveSummary_062013.pdf. Battle, J., Pastrana, A.J., & Daniels, J. (2013b). Social Justice Sexuality Survey: The executive summary for the Asian/Pacific Islander population. Social Justice Sexuality Project. New York. http://socialjusticesexuality.com/files /2017/12/SJSAPI-Ex-Summary-13.08.21.pdf.

Bibliography

121

Battle, J., Pastrana, A.J., & Harris, A. (2017). An examination of Black LGBT populations across the United States: Intersections of race and sexuality. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan. Bazargan, M. & Galvan, F. (2012). Perceived discrimination and depression among low-income Latina male-to-female transgender women. BMC Public Health, 2012(12), 1-8. doi:10.1186/1471-2458-12-663. Beal, F. M. (1970). Double jeopardy: To be black and female. In T. Cade (Ed.), The Black woman: An anthology (pp. 90–100). New York, NY: Signet. Beam, J. (1986). In the life: A Black gay anthology. New York, NY: Alyson Books. Bedolla, L.G. (2013) Considering intersections: Latina/o gender, migration and U.S. immigration policy. Migration and Citizenship, 2(1), 24-30. Bedolla, L.G. (2014). Latino politics (US minority politics). Boston, MA: Polity. Berkman, L.F., Glass, T., Brissette, I., & Seeman, T.E. (2000). From social integration to health: Durkheim in the new millennium. Social Science & Medicine, 51(6), 843-857. doi:10.1016/S0277-9536(00)00065-4. Bimbi, D.S., Nanin, J.E., Parsons, J.T., Vicioso, K.J.., Missildine, W., & Frost, D.M. (2006). Assessing gay and bisexual men’s outcome expectancies for sexual risk under the influence of alcohol and drugs. Substance Use & Misuse, 41(5), 643-652. doi:10.1080/108260805000411080. Bipartisan Policy Center (2012). 2012 Annual report. Retrieved from: https://bipartisanpolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/default/files/files /AR12-report_0.pdf. Black Demographics (n.d.) Marriage in Black America. Retrieved from http://blackdemographics.com/households/marriage-in-black-america/. Black Lives Matter (n.d.) About. Retrieved from https://blacklivesmatter.com /about/. Bobo, L. & Gilliam, F. D. (1990). Race, sociopolitical participation, and Black empowerment. The American Political Science Review, 84(2), 377–393. doi:10.2307/j100077. Boggs, G.L. (2012) The next American revolution: Sustainable activism for the twenty-first century. Oakland, CA: University of California Press. Bornstein, K. (1998). My gender workbook. New York, NY: Routledge. Bortolin, S. (2010). I don’t want him hitting on me: The role of masculinities in creating a chilly climate. Journal of LGBT Youth, 7(3), 200–223. doi:10.1080/19361653.2010.486116. Bourhis, R.Y., Barrette, G., El-Geledi, S., & Schmidt Sr., R. (2009). Acculturation orientations and social relations between immigrant and host community members in California. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 40(3), 443-467. doi:10.1177/0022022108330988. Bowleg, L. (2008). When Black + lesbian + woman =/= Black lesbian woman: The methodological challenges of qualitative and quantitative intersectionality research. Sex Roles, 59(5-6), 312–325. doi:10.1007/s11199 -008-9400-z. Bowleg, L. (2013). Once you’ve blended the cake, you can’t take the parts back to the main ingredients: Black gay and bisexual men’s descriptions and experiences of intersectionality. Sex Roles, 68(11-12), 754-767. doi:10.1007/s11199-012-0152-4. Boykin, K. (1996). One more river to cross: Black & gay in America. New York, NY: Anchor.

122

Queer People of Color

Brammer, J.P. (2017, July 21). Fans applaud Jennifer Lopez for using genderinclusive pronouns. Retrieved from https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbcout/fans-applaud-jennifer-lopez-using-gender-inclusive-pronouns-n785391. Brand, J. (2010). Civic returns to higher education: A note on heterogeneous effects. Social Forces, 89(2). 417-433. doi:10.1353/sof.2010/0095. Brandt, E. (1999). Dangerous liaisons: Blacks & gays and the struggle for equality. New York, NY: New Press. Brooks, V.R. (1981). Sex and sexual orientation as variables in therapists’ biases and therapy outcomes. Clinical Social Work Journal, 9(3), 198-210. doi:10.1007/BF00757178. Burns, N., Lehman Schlozman, K., & Verba, S. (1997). The public consequences of private inequality: Family life and citizen participation. American Political Science Review, 91(2), 373–389. doi:10.2307/2952362. Callander, D., Newman, C., & Holt, M. (2015). Is sexual racism really racism? Distinguishing attitudes toward sexual racism and generic racism among gay and bisexual men. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 44(7), 1991-2000. doi:10.1007/s10508-015-0487-3. Cahill, S. & South, K. (2002). Policy issues affecting lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people in retirement. Generations, 26(2), 49-54. Campbell, D.E. (2009). Civic engagement and education: An empirical test of the sorting model. American Journal of Political Science, 53(4), 771–786. Campos, B., Rojas Perez, O.F., & Guardino, C. (2016). Familism: A cultural value with implications for romantic relationship quality in U.S. Latinos. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 33(1), 81-100. doi:10.1177/0265407514562564. Canaday, M. (2003). Who is homosexual? The consolidation of sexual identities in mid-twentieth-century American immigration law. Law & Social Inquiry, 28(2), 351-386. doi:10.1111/j.1747-44692003.tb00196.x. Center for Black Equity (2017). Official Black Prides Calendar. Retrieved from: http://centerforblackequity.org/pdf/2017OfficialCBEBlackPrideCalendar.pdf. Center for American Progress Immigration Team (2014, Oct.). The facts on immigration today. Retrieved from: https://www.scribd.com/document /244107038/The-Facts-on-Immigration-Today. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2013, Dec. 20). Fathers’ involvement with their children: United States, 2006-2010. Retrieved from https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhsr/nhsr071.pdf. Chan, C.S. (1989). Issues of identity development among Asian-American lesbians and gay men. Journal of Counseling & Development, 68(1), 16-20. doi:10.1002/j.1556-6676.1989.tb02485. Chavez, K.R. (2011). Identifying the needs of LGBTQ immigrants and refugees in Southern Arizona. Journal of Homosexuality, 58(2), 189-218. doi:10.1080/00918369.2011.540175. Choi, D. (2009, May 11). An open letter to President Obama and every member of Congress [Open letter]. ABC News. Retrieved from http://abcnews.go .com/US/story?id=7569476. Choi, K-H., Han, C-S., Paul, J., & Ayala, G. (2011). Strategies for managing racism and homophobia among U.S. ethnic and racial minority men who have sex with men. Aids Education and Prevention, 23(2), 145-158. doi:10.1521/aeap.2011.23.2.145.

Bibliography

123

Chong, S.T., Ten, W.K., Er, A.C., & Koh, D. (2013). Neighborhood participation as a proxy to civic engagement. Pertanika Journal of Social Science and Humanities, 21 (Dec), 143-154. Choo, H. Y. & Ferree, M. M. (2010). Practicing intersectionality in sociological research: A critical analysis of inclusions, interactions, and institutions in the study of inequalities. Sociological Theory, 28(2), 129–149. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9558.2010.01370.x. Chung, Y.B., & Singh, A.A. (2009). Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Asian Americans. In N. Tewari & A.N. Alvarez (Eds.), Asian American psychology: Current perspectives (pp. 233-246). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis. Coffé, H. & Bolzendahl, C. (2010). Same game, different rules? Gender differences in political participation. Sex Roles, 62(5-6), 318–333. doi:10.1007/s11199-009-9729-y. Cohen, C.J. (1999). What is this movement doing to my politics? Social Text, 17(4), 111-118. Cole, E. R. (2009). Intersectionality and research in psychology. American Psychologist, 64(3), 170–180. doi:10.1037/a0014564. Cole, E. R. & Sabik, N. J. (2010). Associations between femininity and women’s political behavior during midlife. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 34(4), 508–522. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.2010.01600.x. Coles, R.L. (2009). The best kept secret: Single Black fathers. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. Collins, P. H. (1990). Black feminist thought: Knowledge, consciousness, and the politics of empowerment. New York, NY: Routledge. Collins, P. H. (1998). The social construction of Black feminist thought. In K. A. Myers, C. D. Anderson, & B. J. Risman (Eds.), Feminist foundations: Toward transforming sociology. Gender and society readers (pp. 371-339). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Collins, P. H. (2000). Black feminist thought: Knowledge, consciousness, and the politics of empowerment. New York, NY: Routledge. Coloma, R.S. (2006). Putting queer to work: Examining empire and education. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 19(5), 639-657. doi:10.1080/09518390600886437. Constantine-Simms, D. (2001). The greatest taboo: Homosexuality in Black communities. Los Angeles, CA: Alyson Books. Cook, E. A., & Wilcox, C. (1992). A rose by any other name: Measuring support for organized feminism using ANES feeling thermometers. Women & Politics, 12(1), 35–51. doi:10.1300/ J014v12n01_02. Crenshaw, K. (1991). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. Stanford Law Review, 43(6), 12411299. doi:10.2307/1229039. Crichlow, W.E. (2004). History, (re)memory, testimony and biomythography: Charting a Buller man’s Trinidadian past. In R. Reddock (Au.), Interrogating Caribbean Masculinities: Theoretical and Empirical Analyses (pp. 185-222). Kingston, Jamaica: University of West Indies Press. Crissman, H.P., Berger, M.B., Graham, L.F., & Dalton, V.K. (2017). Transgender demographics: A household probability sample of US adults,

124

Queer People of Color

2014. American Journal of Public Health, 107(2), 213-215. doi:10.2105 /AJPH.2016.303571. Dalton, H.L. (1989). AIDS in blackface. Daedalus, 118(3), 205-227. Dang A. & Hu, M. (2004). Asian Pacific American lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people: A community portrait. New York, NY: National Gay and Lesbian Task Force Policy Institute. Dang, A.A-T. & Vianney, C. (2007). Living in the margins: A national survey of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Asian and Pacific Islander Americans. Washington, DC: National Gay and Lesbian Task Force Policy Institute. de Vries, B. (2006). Home at the end of the rainbow. Generations, 29(4), 64-69. de la Garza, R.O. & DeSipio, L. (1992). From rhetoric to reality: Latinos and the 1988 election. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. DeSipio, L. (2003). Learning there and doing here: Transnational politics, civic engagement among Latino immigrants. Conference Papers—American Political Science Association, 1-29. doi:apsa_proceeding_667.PDF. Diamond, L. M. & Butterworth, M. (2008). Questioning gender and sexual identity: Dynamic links over time. Sex Roles, 59(5-6), 365–376. doi:10.1007/s11199-008-9425-3. Diaz, R.M. (1998). Latino gay men and HIV culture, sexuality, and risk behavior. New York, NY: Routledge. Diaz, R.M. & Ayala, G. (2001). Social discrimination and health: The case of Latino gay men and HIV risk. New York: The Policy Institute of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force. Diaz, R., Ayala, G., Bein, E., Henne, J., & Marin, B.V. (2001). The impact of homophobia, poverty, and racism on the mental health of gay and bisexual Latino men: Findings from 3 US cities. American Journal of Public Health. 91(6), 927-932. PMCID: 11392936. Diaz, R.M., Bein, E., & Ayala, G., (2006). Homophobia, poverty, and racism: Triple oppression and mental health outcomes in Latino gay men. In A.M. Omoto & H.S. Kurtzman (Eds.), Contemporary perspectives on lesbian, gay, and bisexual psychology. Sexual orientation and mental health: Examining identity and development in Lesbian gay and bisexual people (pp.207-224). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Donadio, R. (2013, July 29). On gay priests, Pope Francis asks, “Who am I to judge?” Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/30/world/europe /pope-francis-gay-priests.html. Donovan, T. (2001). Being transgender and older. Journal of Gay & Lesbian Social Services, 13(4), 19-22. doi:10/1300/J041v13n04_04. Dottolo, A. L. & Stewart, A. J. (2008). Don’t ever forget now, you’re a Black man in America: Intersections of race, class and gender in encounters with the police. Sex Roles, 59(5-6), 350–364. doi:10.1007/s11199-007-9387-x. Duncan, L. (1999). Motivation for collective action: Group consciousness as mediator of personality, life experiences, and women’s rights activism. Political Psychology, 20(3), 611–635. doi:10.2307/j100556. Durell, M., Chiong, C., & Battle, J. (2007). Race, gender expectations, and homophobia: A quantitative exploration. Race, Gender and Class, 14(1-2), 299-317.

Bibliography

125

Eliason, M. J. (1997). The prevalence and nature of biphobia in heterosexual undergraduate students. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 26(3), 317–326. doi:10.1023/A:1024527032040. Eliason, M., & Raheim, S. (1996). Categorical measurement of attitudes about lesbian, gay, and bisexual people. Journal of Gay & Lesbian Social Services, 4(3), 51-65. doi:10.1300/J041v04n03_03. Eng, D.L. (2001). Racial castration: Managing masculinity in Asian America. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Espiritu, Y.L. (2008). Asian American women and men: Labor, laws and love. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Feagin, J.R. (2006). Systemic racism. Hoboken, NJ: Routledge. Fingerhut, A., Peplau, L., & Ghavami, N. (2005). A dual identity framework for understanding lesbian experience. Psychology of Women, 29(2), 129-139. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.2005.00175.x. Fish, T. & Rye, B. (1991). Attitudes toward a homosexual or heterosexual persons with AIDS. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 21(8), 651-667. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.1991.tb00541.x. Finlay, A.K., Flanagan, C., & Wary-Lake, L. (2011). Civic engagement patterns and transitions over 8 years: The AmeriCorps national study. Developmental Psychology, 47(6), 1728–1743. PMCID: 21910528. Flores, A.R., Herman, J.L., Gates, G.J., & Brown, T.N. (2016, June). How many adults identify as transgender in the United States? Retrieved from https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/How-Many-Adults -Identify-as-Transgender-in-the-United-States.pdf. Flores, A. (2017, Sept. 18) How the U.S. Hispanic population is changing. Retrieved from http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/09/18/how-theu-s-hispanic-population-is-changing/. Flores, S., Mansergh, G., Marks, G., Guzman, R., & Colfax, G. (2009). Gay identity-related factors and sexual risk among men who have sex with men in San Francisco. AIDS Education and Prevention, 21(2), 91-103. PMCID: 19397432. Floyd, F.J. & Bakeman, R. (2006). Coming-out across the life course: Implications of age and historical context. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 35(3), 287-296. doi:10.1007/s10508-006-9022-x. Foo, L.J. (2002). Asian American women: Issues, concerns, and responsive human and civil rights advocacy. New York: Ford Foundation. Foster-Bey, J. (2008). Do race, ethnicity, citizenship and socio-economic status determine civic engagement? (CIRCLE Working Paper No. 62). Medford, MA: Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement, Jonathan M. Tisch College of Citizenship and Public Service, Tufts University. Galston, W.A., & Lopez, M. (2006). Civic engagement in the United States. In: L.B. Wilson & S.P. Simson (Eds.), Civic engagement and the baby boomer generation: Research, policy, and practice perspectives (pp. 3-19). Binghamton, NY: The Haworth Press, Inc. Galupo, M. P. & Gonzalez, K. A. (2012). Friendship values and cross-category friendships: Understanding adult friendship patterns across gender, sexual orientation and race. Sex Roles, 68(11-12), 779-790. doi:10.1007/s11199012-0211-x.

126

Queer People of Color

Garcia, L.T. & Carrigan, D. (1998). Individual and gender differences in sexual self-perceptions. Journal of Psychology & Human Sexuality, 10(2), 59-70. doi:10.1300/J056v10n02_04. Gates, G. (2011, Apr.). How many people are lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender? Retrieved from https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wpcontent/uploads/Gates-How-Many-People-LGBT-Apr-2011.pdf. Gates, G. & Newport, F. (2012, Oct. 18). Special report: 3.4% of U.S. adults identify as LGBT. Retrieved from http://news.gallup.com/poll/158066 /special-report-adults-identify-lgbt.aspx. Gates, G. (2015) Marriage and family: LGBT individuals and same-sex couples. The Future of Children, 25(2), 67-87. doi:10.1353/foc.2015.0013. Gates, G. (2017). In the U.S. More aduls identifying as LGBT. Retrieved from http://news.gallup.com/poll/201731/lgbt-identification-rises.aspx. Gates, G. & Newport, F. (2015, Apr. 25). An estimated 780,000 Americans in same-sex marriages. Retrieved from http://news.gallup.com/poll/182837 /estimated-780-000-americans-sex-marriages.aspx. Gerhardstein, K. & Anderson, V. (2010). There’s more than meets the eye: Facial appearance and evaluations of transsexual people. Sex Roles, 62(56), 361–373. doi:10.1007/s11199-010-9746-x. Gilkes, C. (2001). If it wasn’t for the women …: Black women’s experience and womanist culture in church and community. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books. Glenn, E.N. (1999). The social construction and institutionalization of gender and race: An integrative framework. In M. M. Feree, J. Lorber, & B. B. Hess (Eds.), Revisioning gender (pp. 3-43). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Gonzales, N.A., Germán, M., Yeong, K.S., Preethy, G., & Fabrett, F.C. (2008). Mexican American adolescents’ cultural orientation, externalizing behavior and academic engagement: The role of traditional cultural values. American Journal of Community Psychology, 41(1-2), 151-164. doi:10.1007/s10464007-9152-x. Gonzalez-Barrera, A. (2017, June 29) Mexican lawful immigrants among the least likely to become U.S. citizens. Retrieved from http://www.pewhispanic .org/2017/06/29/mexican-lawful-immigrants-among-least-likely-to-become -u-s-citizens/. Gordon, A. & Meyer, I. (2007). Gender nonconformity as a target of prejudice, discrimination and violence against LGB individuals. Journal of LGBT Health Research, 3(3), 55–71. doi:10.1080.15574090802093562. Gorman, B.K., Denney, J.T., Dowdy, H., & Medeiros, R.A. (2015). A new piece of the puzzle: Sexual orientation, gender, and physical health status. Demography, 52(4), 1357-1382. doi:10.1007/s13524-015-0406-1. Gorman-Murray, A., Waitt, G., & Gibson, C. (2008). A queer country? A case study of the politics of gay/lesbian belonging in an Australian country town. Australian Geographer, 39(2),171–191. Gortmaker, V. J. & Brown, R. D. (2006). Out of the college closet: Differences in perceptions and experiences among out lesbian and gay students. College Student Journal, 40(3), 606-619. Goulding, A. (2009). Engaging with community engagement: Public libraries and citizen involvement. New Library World, 110(1-2), 37-51. doi:10.1108/03074800910928577. Grant, J.M., Mottet, L.A., Tanis, J. Herman, J.L., Harrison J., & Keisling, M. (2010, Oct.). National Transgender Discrimination Survey report on health

Bibliography

127

and health care. Retrieved from http://www.thetaskforce.org/static_html /downloads/resources_and_tools/ntds_report_on_health.pdf. Greene, B. (1994). African-American women. In L. Comas-Diaz & B. Greene (Eds.), Women of color: Integrating ethnic and gender identities in psychotherapy (pp. 10-29). New York, NY: Guilford. Griffin, H. (2001). Their own received them not. In D. Constantine-Simms (Ed.), The greatest taboo: Homosexuality in Black communities (pp. 110123). New York, NY: Alyson Books. Grov, C., Bimbi, D.S., Nanin, J.E., & Parsons, J.T. (2006). Race, ethnicity, gender and generational factors associated with the coming-out process among gay, lesbian, and bisexual individuals. The Journal of Sex Research, 43(2), 115-121. Haas, A.P., Rodgers, P.L., & Herman, J.L. (2014, Jan.). Suicide attempts among transgender and gender non-conforming adults: Findings of the National Transgender Discrimination Survey. Retrieved from https://williamsinstitute .law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/AFSP-Williams-Suicide-Report-Final.pdf. Halberstam, J. (2003). The Brandon Teena archive. In J. Corber & S. Valocchi (Eds.), Queer studies: An interdisciplinary reader (pp. 159–169). Malden, MA: Blackwell. Han, C. (2007). They don’t want to cruise your type: Gay men of color and the racial politics of exclusion. Social Identities, 13(1), 51–67. Hanssens, C., Moodie-Mills, A.C., Ritchie, A.J., Spade, D., & Vaid, U. (2014, May). A roadmap for change: Federal policy recommendations for addressing the criminalization of LGBT people and people living with HIV. Retrieved from https://web.law.columbia.edu/sites/default/files/microsites /gender-sexuality/files/roadmap_for_change_full_report.pdf. Harder, J. & Krosnick, J. (2008).Why do people vote? Journal of Social Issues, 64(3), 525-549. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.2008.00576.x. Harris, A. (2010). Sex, stigma, and the Holy Ghost: The Black church and the construction of AIDS in New York City. Journal of African American Studies, 14(1), 21–43. doi:10.1007/s12111-009-9105-6. Harris, A.C. (2009). Marginalization by the marginalized: Race, homophobia, heterosexism, and “the problem of the 21st century.” Journal of Gay and Lesbian Social Services, 21(4), 430–448. doi:10.1080/10538720903163171. Harris, A.C. (2014). AIDS activism among African American women: Identity and social justice. In M.L. Woehrle (Ed.), Intersectionality and social change (pp181-204). Bingley, England: Emerald Group. Harris, A. & Bartlow, S. (2015). Intersectionality: Race, gender, sexuality, and class. In J. DeLamater & R. Plante, (Eds.), Handbook of the Sociology of Sexualities (pp. 261-271). New York, NY: Springer. Harris, A. & Battle, J. (2013). Unpacking civic engagement: The sociopolitical involvement of same-gender loving Black women. Journal of Lesbian Studies, 17(2), 195-207. PMCID: 23514213. Harris, A., Battle, J., Pastrana, J. & Daniels, J. (2013). The sociopolitical involvement of Black, Latino, and Asian/ Pacific Islander American gay and bisexual men. Journal of Men’s Studies, 21(3), 236-254. doi:10.3149 /jms.2103.236. Harris, A., Battle, J., Pastrana, J. & Daniels, J. (2015). Feelings of belonging: An exploratory analysis of the sociopolitical involvement of Black, Latina,

128

Queer People of Color

and Asian/Pacific Islander sexual minority women. Journal of Homosexuality, 62(10), 1374-1397. doi:10.180/00918369.2015.1061360. Harvell, V.G. (2010). Afrocentric humanism and African American women’s humanizing activism. Journal of Black studies, 40(6), 1052-1073. doi:10.1177/0021934708325380. Hays, R.A. (2007). Community activists’ perceptions of citizenship roles in an urban community: A case study of attitudes that affect community engagement. Journal of Urban Affairs, 29(4), 401-424. doi:10.1111/j.14679906.2007.00353.x. Hazeldean, S. & Betz, H. (2003). Years behind: What the United States must learn about immigration law and same-sex couples. Human Rights: Journal of the Section of Individual Rights & Responsibilities, 30(1), 17-18. Heath, M. & Mulligan, E. (2008). Shiny happy same-sex attracted women seeking same: How communities contribute to bisexual and lesbian women’s well-being. Health Sociology Review, 17(3), 290-302. doi:10.5172 /hesr.451.17.3.290. Helms, J. E., Jernigan, M., & Mascher, J. (2005). The meaning of race in psychology and how to change it: A methodological perspective. American Psychologist, 60(1), 27-36. doi:10.1037/0003- 066X.60.1.27. Henrickson, M., Neville, S., Jordan, C., & Donaghey, S., (2007). Lavender Islands. Journal of Homosexuality, 53(4), 223-248. doi:10.1080/00918360802103514. Herek, G. M. (2009). Hate crimes and stigma-related experiences among sexual minority adults in the United States. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 24(1), 54-74. doi:10.1177/0886260508316477. Herek, G. M. (2010). Sexual orientation differences as deficits: Science and stigma in the history of American psychology. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5(6), 693–699. doi:10.1177/1745691610388770. Herek, G. & Capitanio, J. (1999). AIDS stigma and sexual prejudice. American Behavioral Scientist, 42(7), 1130-1147. doi:10.1177/ 0002764299042007006. Herek, G.M., & Gonzalez-Rivera, M. (2006). Attitudes toward homosexuality among U.S. residents of Mexican descent. The Journal of Sex Research, 43(2), 122-135. doi:10.1080/00224490609552307. Hirsch, J.S., Higgins, J., Bentley, M., & Nathanson, C. (2002). The cultural constructions of sexuality: Marital infidelity and STD/HIV risk in a Mexican migrant community. American Journal of Public Health, 92(8), 1227-1237. Hirschfeld Davis, J., Gay Stolberg, S., & Kaplan, T. (2018, Jan. 11). Trump alarms lawmakers with disparaging words for Haiti and Africa. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/11/us/politics/trump-shithole-countries .html?rref=collection%2Fbyline%2Fsheryl-gay-stolberg. Hoene, E. (2011). Asian Americans and politics: Voting behavior and political involvement [Unpublished senior thesis]. Retrieved from https://www .bemidjistate.edu/academics/departments/political-science/wp-content/uploads /sites/40/2015/05/libby-thesis.pdf. hooks, b. (2001). Homophobia in Black communities. In: D. Constance-Simms (Ed.), The greatest taboo: homosexuality in Black communities (pp.67-75). Los Angeles, CA: Alyson Books. Hritzuk, N., & Park, D. K. (2000). The question of Latino participation: From an SES to a social structural explanation. Social Science Quarterly, 81(1), 152-177.

Bibliography

129

Human Rights Campaign. (n.d.). Religion and coming out issues for Asian Pacific Americans. Retrieved from https://www.hrc.org/resources/religionand-coming-out-issues-for-asian-pacific-americans. Human Rights Campaign. (2015, Sept. 5). Stances of faiths on LGBTQ issues: Roman Catholic church. Retrieved from https://www.hrc.org/resources /stances-of-faiths-on-lgbt-issues-roman-catholic-church. Hunter, E. (2008). What’s good for the gays is good for the gander: Making homeless youth housing safer for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender youth. Family Court Review, 46(3), 543-557. doi:10.1111/j.1744-1617.2008 .00220.x. Hurtado, A. & Sinha, M. (2008). More than men: Latino feminist masculinities and intersectionality. Sex Roles, 59(5-6), 337-349. doi:10.1007/s11199008-9405-7. Ibañez, G.E., Van Oss Marin, B., Flores, S.A., Millett, G., & Diaz, R.M. (2009). General and gay related racism experienced by Latino gay men. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 15(3), 215-222. doi:10.1037/a0014613. Icard, L. (1986). Black gay men and conflicting social identities: Sexual orientation versus racial identity. Journal of Social Work and Human Sexuality, 4(1-2), 83-93. doi:10.1300/J291v04n01_10. Izazola-Licea, J.A., Gortmaker, S.L., Tolbert, K., De Gruttola, V., & Mann, J. (2000). Prevalence of same-gender sexual behavior and HIV in a probability household surveiy in Mexican men. The Journal of Sex Research, 37(1), 37-43. doi:10.1080/00224490009552018. Jang, S. (2009). Get out on behalf of your group: Electoral participation of Latinos and Asian Americans. Political Behavior, 31(4), 511-535. doi:10.1007/s11109-009-9086-0. Jenness, V. (1995). Social movement growth, domain expansion, and framing processes: The gay/lesbian movement and violence against gays and lesbians as a social problem. Social Problems, 42(1), 145-170. doi:10.2307/j100365. Jennings, M. K. & Andersen, E. A. (2003). The importance of social and political context: The case of AIDS activism. Political Behavior, 25(2), 177-199. doi:10.1023/A:1023851930080. Johnson, M.J., Jackson, N.C., Arnette, K.J., & Koffman, S.D. (2005). Gay and lesbian perceptions of discrimination in retirement care facilities. Journal of Homosexuality, 49(2), 83-102. Kane, M. D. (2003). Social movement policy success: Decriminalizing state sodomy laws, 1969–1998. Mobilization, 8, 313-334. Kim, H-J. & Fredriksen-Goldsen, K.I. (2012). Hispanic lesbians and bisexual women at heightened risk of health disparities. American Journal of Public Health, 102(2), e9-e15. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2011.300378. Kimmel, M. S. (2009). Masculinity as homophobia: Fear, shame, and silence in the construction of gender identity. In A. Ferber, K. Holcomb, & T. Wentling (Eds.), Sex, gender, and sexuality (pp. 58–70). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. King, D. K. (1988). Multiple jeopardy, multiple consciousness: The context of a Black feminist ideology. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 14(1), 42-72. doi:10.1086/494491.

130

Queer People of Color

Krogstad, J.M. & Radford, J. (2017, Jan. 30). Key facts about refugees to the U.S. Retrieved from http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/01/30/key -facts-about-refugees-to-the-u-s/. Landrine, H., Klonoff, E. A., Alcaraz, R., Scott, J., & Wikins, P. (1995). Multiple variables in discrimination. In B. Lott & D. Maluso (Eds.), The social psychology of interpersonal discrimination (pp. 183-224). New York, NY: Guilford. Lapinkski, J. & Psyllos, S. (2016, Sept. 23). Poll: LGBT Voters support Clinton over Trump. Retrieved from https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbcout/poll-lgbt-voters-support-clinton-over-trump-n653491. Lasala, M.C., & Frierson, D.T. (2012). African American gay youth and their families: Redefining masculinity, coping with racism and homophobia. Journal of GLBT Family Studies, 8(5). 428-445. doi:10.1080/1550428x .2012.729948. Laurent, E. (2005). Sexuality and human rights: An Asian perspective. Journal of Homosexuality, 48(3-4), 163-225. doi:10.1300/J082v48n03_09. Lee Badgett, M.V., Durso, L.E. & Schneebaum, A. (2013, June). New patterns of poverty in lesbian,gay, and bisexual community. Retrieved from https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/research/census-lgbt-demographics-studies /lgbt-poverty-update-june-2013/. Lehavot, K., Balsam, K.F., & Ibrahim-Wells, G.D. (2009). Redefining the American quilt: Definitions and experiences of community among ethnically dives lesbian and bisexual women. Journal of Community Psychology. 37(4), 439-458. doi:10.1002/jcop.20305. Leighley, J. E. & Nagler, J. (1992). Individual and systemic influences on turnout: Who votes? Journal of Politics, 54(3), 718–740. doi:10.2307/2132308. Leighley, J. E. & Vedlitz, A. (1999). Race, ethnicity, and political participation. Journal of Politics, 61(4), 1092-1114. doi:10.2307/2647555. Levitsky, S. R. (2007). Niche activism: Constructing a unified movement identity in a heterogeneous organizational field. Mobilization, 12, 271-286. Lewis, G. B. (2003). Black-white differences in attitudes toward homosexuality and gay rights. Public Opinion Quarterly, 67, 59-78. doi:10.1086/346009. Lewis, G. B., Rogers, M. C., & Sherrill, K. (2011). Lesbian, gay, and bisexual voters in the 2000 U.S. presidential elections. Politics & Policy, 39(5), 655677. doi:10.1111/j.1747-1346.2011.00315.x. Lien, P. (2001). The making of Asian America through political participation. Philadelphia, PA: University Press. Lien, P. (1994). Ethnicity and political participation: A comparison between Asian and Mexican Americans. Political Behavior, 16, 237-264. Loiacano, D.K. (1989). Gay identity issues among Black Americans: Racism, homophobia, and the need for validation. Journal of Counseling & Development, 68(1), 21-25. doi:10.1002/j.1556-6676.1989.tb02486.x. Lombardi, E., Wilchins, R., Priesling, D., & Malouf, D. (2001). Gender violence: Transgender experiences with violence and discrimination. Journal of Homosexuality, 41(1), 89-101. Lopez, G. & Bialik, K. (2017, May 3). Key findings about U.S. immigrants. Retrieved from http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/05/03/keyfindings-about-u-s-immigrants/.

Bibliography

131

Lorde, A. (1984). Sister outsider: Essays and speeches. Berkeley, CA: The Crossing Press. Liu, P.M. & Chan, C.S. (1996). Lesbian, gay, and bisexual Asian Americans and their families. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Luibhéid, E. (2002). Entry denied: Controlling sexuality at the border. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press. Ly, D. (2017, Apr. 20). Online racism makes IRL dating hell for gay Asian men. Retrieved from https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/mgy7wx/how-onlineracism-towards-gay-asian-men-effects-irl-dating. Mahalingam, R., Balan, S., & Haritatos, J. (2008). Engendering immigrant psychology: An intersectionality perspective. Sex Roles, 59(5-6), 326–336. doi:10.1007/s11199-008-9495-2. Manza, J. & Brooks, C. (1998). The gender gap in U.S. presidential elections: When? Why? Implications? American Journal of Sociology, 103(5), 12351266. doi:10.1086/231352. Marcelo, K.B., Lopez, M.H., & Kirby, E.H. (2007). Civic engagement among minority youth. Washington, DC: Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement. Martinez, D.G., & Sullivan, S. (1998). African American gay men and lesbians: Examining the complexity of gay identity development. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 1(2-3), 23-264. doi:10.1080/10911359 .1998.10530795. McBride, D.A. (1998). Can the queen speak? Racial essentialism, sexuality and the problem of authority. Callaloo, 21(2), 363-379. McCall, L. (2005). The complexity of intersectionality. Signs, 30, 1771-1800. doi:10.1086/426800. McCartney, A.R.M., Bennion, E.A., & Simpson, D.W. (2013). Teaching civic engagement: From student to active citizen. Washington, DC: American Political Science Association. McLaughlin, K.A., Hatzenbuehler, M.L., & Keyes, K.M. (2010). Responses to discrimination and psychiatric disorders among Black, Hispanic, female, and lesbian, gay, and bisexual individuals. American Journal of Public Health, 100(8), 1477-1484. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2009.181586. Meyer, I. H. (2003). Prejudice, social stress, and mental health in lesbian, gay, and bisexual populations. Psychological Bulletin, 129(5), 674-697. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.129.5.674. Meyer, I.H., Flores, A.R., Stemple, L., Romero, A.P., Wilson, B.D., & Herman, J.L. (2017). Incarceration rates and traits of sexual minorities in the United States: National inmate survey, 2011-2012. American Journal of Public Health, 107(2), 267-273. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2016.303576. Miller, M. (2002). “Ethically questionable?” Popular media reports on bisexual men and AIDS. Journal of Bisexuality, 2(1), 92-112. doi:10.1300/J159v02n01 _08. Mishel, L., Bivens, J., Gould, E., & Shierholz, H. (2012). The state of working America. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. Moore, M. (2010). Articulating a politics of multiple identities: LGBT sexuality and inclusion in the black community. Du Bois Review, 7, 1–20. doi:10.10170S1742058X10000275. Moradi, B., & Parent, M. C. (2013). Assessment of gender-related traits, attitudes, roles, norms, identity, and experiences. In K. F. Geisinger (Ed.),

132

Queer People of Color

APA Handbook of testing and assessment in psychology (Vol. 2) (pp. 467488). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Moradi, B., & Yoder, J. D. (2011). The psychology of women. In E. M. Altmaier & J. C. Hansen (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of counseling psychology (pp. 346-374). New York: Oxford University Press. Morgan, D. (2006). Not gay enough for the government: Racial and sexual stereotypes in sexual orientation asylum cases. Law and Sexuality, 15, 13560. Mottet, L. & Ohle, J. (2006). Transitioning our shelters: Making homeless shelters safer for transgender people. Journal of Poverty, 10(2), 77-101. doi:10.1300/J134v1002_05. Movement Advancement Project (2011, Aug.). The Momentum report, 2011 edition: An analysis of key indicators of LGBT equality in the U.S. Retrieved from https://www.lgbtmap.org/file/momentum-report-2011.pdf. Movement Advancement Project (2012, Jan.) LGBT families of color: Facts at a glance. Retrieved from http://www.nbjc.org/sites/default/files/lgbtfamilies-of-color-facts-at-a-glance.pdf. Movement Advancement Project (2013, Nov.). A broken bargain for LGBT workers of color. Retrieved from http://www.lgbtmap.org/file/a-brokenbargain-for-lgbt-workers-of-color.pdf. Movement Advancement Project (2015, May 28). Mapping LGBT equality in America. Retrieved from http://www.lgbtmap.org/file/mapping-equality.pdf. Movement Advancement Project (2016, July). Understanding issues facing transgender Americans. Retrieved from http://www.lgbtmap.org/file /understanding-issues-facing-transgender-americans.pdf. Mula, R. (2017). Wonky Wednesday: Racism in gay online dating. Retrieved from http://www.thetaskforce.org/wonky-wednesday-racism-in-gay-onlinedating/. Mullady, B. (2011). Pope Benedict XVI on the priesthood and homosexuality. The Linacre Quarterly, 78(3), 294-305. doi:10.1179/002436311803888311. Murray, S., & Roscoe, W. (1998). Boy-wives and female husbands. Studies of African homosexualities. New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press. Muslims for Progressive Values (2017). Who we are. Retrieved from http://www.mpvusa.org/who-we-are. Nash, J. C. (2008). Re-thinking intersectionality. Feminist Review, 89(1), 1-15. doi:10.1057/fr.2008.4. National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (n.d.). Criminal justice fact sheet. Retrieved from http://www.naacp.org/criminal-justicefact-sheet/. National Queer Asian Pacific Islander Alliance [NQAPIA] (n.d.). About. Retrieved from http://www.nqapia.org/wpp/home/. Nemoto, T., Operario, D., Soma, T., Bao, D., Vajrabukka, A., & Crisotomo, V. (2003). HIV risk and prevention among Asian/Pacific Islander men who have sex with men: Listen to our stories. AIDS Education and Prevention, 15(1), 7-20. doi:10.1521/aeap.151.5.7.23616. Newport, F. (2014, Aug. 11). LGBT populations in U.S. significantly less religious. Retrieved from http://news.gallup.com/poll/174788/lgbtpopulation-significantly-less-religious.aspx.

Bibliography

133

Norton, A. T. & Herek, G. M. (2012). Heterosexuals’ attitudes toward transgender people: Findings from a national probability sample of US adults. Sex Roles, 68(11-12), 738-753. doi:10.1007/s11199-011-0110-6. Operario, D., Han, C., Choi, K. (2008). Dual identity among gay Asian Pacific Islander men. Culture, Health, and Sexuality, 10(5), 447-461. doi:10.1080/1369105701861454. Ordona, T.A. (2003). Asian lesbians in San Francisco: Struggles to create a safe space, 1970s-1980s. In S. Hune & G.M. Nomura (Eds.), Asian/Pacific Islander American women: A historical anthology (pp.319-334). Pullman: Washington State University Press. Orel, N.A. (2004). Gay, lesbian, and bisexual elders. Journal of Gerontological Social Work, 43(2-3), 57-77. doi:10.1300/J083v43n02_05. Organista, K.C. (2007). Towards a structural-environmental model of risk for HIV and problem drinking in Latino labor migrants: The case of day laborers. Journal of Ethnic & Cultural Diversity in Social work, 16(1-2), 95-125. doi:10.1300/J051v16n01_04. Organista, K.C., Carillo, H., & Ayala, G. (2004). HIV prevention with Mexican migrants: Review, critique, and recommendations. Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes, 37. S227-s239. doi:10.1097/01.qai.0000141250 .jenk08475.91. Organista, K.C. & Ehrlich, S.F. (2008). Predictors of condom use in Latino migrant day laborers. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 30(3), 379396. doi:10.11770739986308320881. Organista, K.C, Organista, P.B., Garcia de Alba, J.E., Castillo Moran, M.A., & Ureta Carillo, L.E. (1997). Survey of condom-related beliefs, behaviors, and perceived social norms in Mexican migrant laborers. Journal of Community Health, 22(3), 185-98. Pacheco, J.S. & Plutzer, E. (2008). Political participation and cumulative disadvantage: The impact of economic and social hardship on young citizens. Journal of Social Issues, 64(3), 571-593. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560 .2008.005878.x. Parent, M., DeBlaere, C., & Moradi, B. (2013). Approaches to research on intersectionality: Perspectives on gender, LGBT, and racial/ethnic identities. Sex Roles, 68(11-12),639-645. doi: 10.1007/s11199-013-0283-2. Pastrana, A.J. (2014). It takes family: An examination of outness among Black LGBT people in the United States. Journal of Family Issues, 37(6), 765788. doi:10.1177/0192513X14530971. Pastrana, A.J. (2015). Being out to others: The relative importance of family support, identity and religion for LGBT Latina/os. Latino Studies, 13(1), 88-112. doi:10.1057/lst.2014.69. Pastrana, A.J., Battle, J., & Harris, A. (2017). An examination of Latinx LGBT populations across the United States: Intersections of race and sexuality. New York, NY: Palgrave MacMillan. Patterson, C.J. (2000). Family relationships of lesbians and gay men. Journal of Marriage and Family, 62(4), 1052-1069. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2000 .01052.x. Paulsen, R. (1994). Status and action: How stratification affects the protest participation of young adults. Sociological Perspectives, 37(4), 635–44. Retrieved from http://www.jstor. org/stable/1389282.

134

Queer People of Color

Peligri, J. (2015, July 10) Op-ed: How the media looks at HIV in 2015 (it mostly doesn’t). Retrieved from https://www.advocate.com/commentary/2015/07 /10/op-ed-how-media-looks-hiv-2015-it-mostly-doesnt. Peña, S. (2004). Pájaration and transculturation: Language and meaning in Miami’s Cuban American gay worlds. In W. Leap & T. Boellstorff (Eds.), Speaking in queer tongues: Globalization and gay language (pp.231-250). Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press. Peplau, L.A., & Cochran, S.D. (1990). A relationship perspective on homosexuality. In D.P. McWhirter, S.A. Sanders, & J.M. Reinisch (Eds.), Homosexuality/heterosexuality: The Kinsey scale and current research (pp. 321-349). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Perez, V.M. (2014, June). Political participation of LGBT Americans. Retrieved from http://www.projectvote.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/RESEARCH -MEMO-LGBT-PARTICIPATION-June-20-2014.pdf. Pew Research Center [PRC] (2009, Jan. 30). A religious portrait of AfricanAmericans. Retrieved from http://www.pewforum.org/2009/01/30/a-religious -portrait-of-african-americans/. Pew Research Center [PRC] (2012a, Feb. 16) The rise of intermarriage. Retrieved from http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2012/02/16/the-rise-ofintermarriage/. Pew Research Center [PRC] (2012b, Apr. 4). When labels don’t fit: Hispanics and their views of identity. Retrieved from http://www.pewhispanic.org /2012/04/04/when-labels-dont-fit-hispanics-and-their-views-of-identity/. Pew Research Center [PRC] (2013, Apr. 4). The rise of Asian Americans. Retrieved from http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2012/06/19/the-rise-ofasian-americans/. Pew Research Center [PRC] (2014, May 7). The shifting religious identity of Latinos in the United States. Retrieved from http://www.pewforum.org /2014/05/07/the-shifting-religious-identity-of-latinos-in-the-united-states/. Pew Research Center [PRC] (2015, Apr. 9). A rising share of the U.S. Black population is foreign-born. Retrieved from http://www.pewsocialtrends.org /2015/04/09/a-rising-share-of-the-u-s-black-population-is-foreign-born/. Pew Research Center [PRC] (2016, June 26). On views of race and inequality, Blacks and Whites are worlds apart. Retrieved from http://www.pewsocialtrends .org/2016/06/27/on-views-of-race-and-inequality-blacks-and-whites-are-worlds -apart/. Plante, T.G., Vallaeys, C.L., Sherman, A.C., & Wallston, K.A. (2002). The development of a brief version of the Santa Clara Strengths of Religious Faiths questionnaire. Pastoral Psychology, 50(5), 359-368. Potochnick, S.R. & Perreira, K.M. (2010). Depression and anxiety among firstgeneration immigrant Latino youth: Key correlates and implications for future research. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 198(7), 470-477. doi:10.1097/NMD.0b013e3181e4ce24. Potoczniak, D., Crosbie-Fett, M., & Salttzburg, N. (2009). Experiences regarding coming out to parents among African American, Hispanic, and White gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, and questioning adolescents. Journal of Gay & Lesbian Social Services, 21(2-3), 189-205. doi:10.180/10538720902772063.

Bibliography

135

Poynter, K.J., & Washington, J. (2005). Multiple identities: creating community on campus for LGBT students. New Directions for Student Services, 111, 41-47. doi:10.1002/ss.172. Prashad, V. (2003). Bruce Lee and the anti-imperialism of Kung Fu: A polycultural adventure. Positions, 11(1), 51-90. doi:10.1215/10679847-111-51. Prasso, S. (2006). The Asian mystique: Dragon ladies, geisha girls, & our fantasies of the exotic Orient. New York: Public Affairs. Prins, B. (2006). Narrative accounts of origins: A blind spot in the intersectional approach? European Journal of Women’s Studies, 13(3), 277-290. doi:10.1177/1350506806065757. Purdie-Vaughns, V. & Eibach, R. P. (2008). Intersectional invisibility: The distinctive advantages and disadvantages of multiple subordinate-group identities. Sex Roles, 59 , 377–391. doi:10.1007/s11199-008-9424-4. Putnam, R. (1995). Tuning in, tuning out: The strange disappearance of social capital in America. PS: Political Science and Politics, 28(4), 644-683. Putnam, R. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster. Ramsey, F., Hill, M.J., & Kellam, C. (2010). Black lesbians matter: An examination of the unique experiences, perspectives and priorities of the Black lesbian community. Sacramento, CA: Zuna Institute. Randazzo, T. (2005). Social and legal barriers: Sexual orientation and asylum in the United States. In E. Luibheid & I. Cantu (Eds.), Queer migration: Sexuality, U.S. citizenship and border crossings (pp.30-60). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press. Rastogi, S., Johnson, T.D., Hoeffel, E.M., & Drewery, Jr., M.P. (2011, Sept.). The Black population 2010. Retrieved from https://www.census.gov/prod /cen2010/briefs/c2010br-06.pdf. Regnerus, M. (2012). How different are the adult children of parents who have same-sex relationships? Findings from the New Family Structures study. Social Science Research, 41(4), 752-770. doi:10.1016/j-ssresearch.2012.03 .009. Reyes, R.A. (2015, Oct. 6). A forgotten Latina trailblazer: LGBT activist Sylvia Rivera. Retrieved from https://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/forgottenlatina-trailblazer-lgbt-activist-sylvia-rivera-n438586. Riggs, D. W. (2012). Anti-Asian sentiment amongst a sample of white Australian men on gaydar. Sex Roles, 68(11-12), 768-778. doi:10.1007/ s11199-012-0119-5. Riley, B.H. (2010). GLB adolescent’s “coming out”. Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Nursing, 23(1), 3-10. doi:10.1111.j.17446171.2009.00210.x. Robertson, M. A. & Sgoutas, A. (2012). Thinking beyond the category of sexual identity: At the intersection of sexuality and human trafficking policy. Politics & Gender, 8, 421-429. doi:10.1017/ S1743923X12000414. Rollins, J., & Hirsch, H. N. (2003). Sexual identities and political engagements. Social Politics, 10(3), 290-312. doi:10.1093/sp.jxg017. Rogers, B., & Robinson, E. (2004). The benefits of community engagement: A review of the evidence. London, England: Active Citizenship Centre. Rosario, M., Schrimshaw, E.W., & Hunter, J. (2004). Ethnic/racial differences in the coming-out process of lesbian, gay, and bisexual youths: A

136

Queer People of Color

comparison of sexual identity development over time. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 10(3), 215-228. doi:10.1037/10999809.10.3.215. Rosen, Z. (2015, Oct. 5). Remembering Detroit’s Grace Lee Boggs. Retrieved from http://michiganradio.org/post/remembering-detroits-grace-lee-boggs. Rupp, L. & Taylor, V. (2010). Straight girls kissing. Contexts, 9(3), 28-32. doi:srsp.2007/ctx.2010.9.3.28. Russo, J. (2009, Feb. 19). Myths about bisexual women, debunked. Associated Content. Retrieved from http://www. associatedcontent.com/article/1464780 /myths_about_bisexual_ women_debunked.html?cat041. Rust, P.C. (2000). The Impact of Multiple Marginalization. In E. Disch (Ed.), Reconstructing gender: A multicultural anthology (pp. 248–254). Mountain View, CA: Mayfield. Saad, L. (2012, June 25). Hispanic voters put other issues before immigration. Retrieved from http://www.businessinsider.com/hispanic-voters-put-otherissues-before-immigration-2012-6. Said, E.W. (1978). Orientalism: Western representations of the Orient. London, England: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Sander, T.H. & Putnam, R.D. (2006). Social capital and civic engagement of individuals over age fifty in the United States. In L.B. Wilson & S.P. Simson. (Eds). Civic engagement and the baby boomer generation: Research, policy, and practice perspectives (pp. 21-39). Binghamton, NY: The Haworth Press, Inc. Sandfort, T., Melendez, R., & Diaz, R. (2007). Gender nonconformity, homophobia and mental distress in Latino gay and bisexual men. The Journal of Sex Research, 44(2), 181-189. doi:10.1080/00224490701263819. Savin-Williams, R.C. (1996). Ethnic-minority and sexual-minority youth. In R.C. Savin-Williams & K.M. Cohen (Eds.), The lives of lesbians, gays, and bisexuals (pp. 152-165). New York, NY: Harcourt Brace College Publishers. Schlosser, E. (1998). The prison-industrial complex. The Atlantic Monthly, 282(6), 51-77. Schneider, B.E. (1984). The office affair: Myth and reality for heterosexual and lesbian women workers. Sociological Perspectives, 27(4), 443-464. Schussman, A. & Soule, S. A. (2005). Process and protest: Accounting for individual protest participation. Social Forces, 84, 1083–1108. doi:10.1353/sof.2006.0034. Shrake, E. (2009). Homosexuality and Korean immigrant Protestant churches. In G. Masequesmay & S. Metzger (Eds.), Embodying Asian/American sexualities (pp.145-156). Lanham, MD: Lexington Books. Shields, S. A. (2008). Gender: An intersectionality perspective. Sex Roles, 59 (5-6), 301-311. doi:10.1007/s11199-008-9501-8. Shugart, H. (2003). Reinventing privilege: The new (gay) man in contemporary popular media. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 20 (1), 67-91. doi:10.1080/0739318032000067056. Simien, E. M. (2007). Doing intersectionality research. Politics & Gender, 3(2), 36-43. doi:10.1017/S1743923X07000086. Singh, A. A. (2012). Transgender youth of color and resilience: Negotiating oppression and finding support. Sex Roles, 68(11-12). doi:10.1007/s11199012-0149-z.

Bibliography

137

Singh, A. A., Chung, Y.B., & Dean, J.K. (2007). Acculturation level and internalized homophobia of Asian American lesbian and bisexual women. Journal of LGBT Issues in Counseling, 1(2), 3-19. Skocpol, T. & Fiorina, M.P. (1999). Civic engagement in American democracy. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press. Solé, E. (2015, Aug. 13). Single dad Perez Hilton reflects on his controversial career, raising kids. Retrieved from https://www.yahoo.com/news/singledad-perez-hilton-reflects-on-his-126530613362.html. Somerville, S.B. (2005). Notes toward a queer history of naturalization. American Quarterly, 57(3), 659-675. doi:10.1353/aq.2005.0054. Stein, G.L., Cupito, A.M., Mendez, J.L., Prandoni, J., Huq, N., & Westerberg, D. (2014). Familism through a developmental lens. Journal of Latina/o Psychology, 2(4), 224-250. Stepler, R., & Lopez, M.H. (2016, Sept. 8). U.S. Latino population growth and dispersion has slowed since onset of the Great Recession. Retrieved from http://www.pewhispanic.org/files/2016/09/PH_2016.09.08_Geography.pdf. Stewart, A. J. & McDermott, C. (2004). Gender in psychology. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 519-544. doi:10.1146/ annurev.psych.55.090902.141537. Swank, E. & Fahs, B. (2011). Pathways to political activism among Americans who have same-sex sexual contact. Research in Sexuality and Social Policy, 8(1), 126-138. doi:10.1007/s13178-011-0034-5. Swank, E. & Fahs, B. (2012). An intersectional analysis of gender and race for sexual minorities who engage in gay and lesbian rights activism. Sex Roles, 68(11-12). doi:10.1007/s11199-012-0168-9. Swank, E. & Fahs, B. (2013a). An intersectional analysis of gender and race for sexual minorities who engage in gay and lesbian rights activism. Sex Roles. 68(11-12), 660–674. doi:10.1007/s11199-012-0168-9. Swank, E. & Fahs, B. (2013b). Predicting electoral activism among gay and lesbians in the United States. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 43(7), 1382-1393. doi:10.1111/jasp.12095. Swartz, O. (2015). Gay rights/African American rights: A common struggle for social justice. Socialism and Democracy, 29(2), 1-24. doi: 10.1080/08854300.2015.1034984. Takaki, R. (1989). Strangers from a different shore. Boston, MA: Little Brown. Tannenbaum, C. (2013). Gay, Asian, and religious: The search for religious community by queer Asian Americans (Doctoral Dissertation). Retrieved from http://www.queerasianspirit.org/uploads/7/0/3/7/7037096/celeste _tannenbaum_2013.pdf. Tatum, B.D. (2003). Why are all the Black kids sitting together in the cafeteria? And other conversations about race. New York, NY: Basic Books. Taylor, V., Kimport, K., Van Dyke, N., & Andersen, E. A. (2009). Culture and mobilization: Tactical repertoires, same-sex weddings, and the impact on gay activism. American Sociological Review, 74, 865–890. doi:10.1177/000312240907400602. Terrell, K. (2017, May 27). “Master of None’s” Lena Waithe on coming out in the “Thanksgiving” episode: “It was really important to get this right.” Retrieved from https://www.theroot.com/master-of-none-s-lena-waithe-oncoming-out-in-the-than-1795586018.

138

Queer People of Color

Teunis, N. (2007). Sexual objectification and the construction of Whiteness in the gay male community. Culture, Health, and Sexuality, 9(3), 263-275. doi:10.1080/13691050601035597. Tharrett, M. (2015, May 11). Perez Hilton welcomes new baby girl: “This is what I dreamed of and live for!”. Retrieved from http://www.newnownext .com/perez-hilton-welcomes-new-baby-girl-this-is-what-i-dreamed-of-andlive-for/05/2015/. Thomas, K. (1996). Ain’t nothin’ like the real thing: Black masculinity, gay sexuality, and the jargon of authenticity. In M. Blount & G.P. Cunningham (Eds.), Representing Black men (pp. 55–69). New York, NY: Routledge. Thomas, P.A. (2011). Trajectories of social engagement and limitations in late life. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 52(4), 430-443. doi:10.1177/0022146511411922. Tolleson-Rinehart, S. (1992). Gender consciousness and politics. New York, NY: Routledge. Torregrosa, L. (2010, June 7). Sandra Bullock and Scarlett Johansson on MTV: The perfect kiss? Politics Daily. Retrieved from http://www.politicsdaily .com/2010/06/07/sandra-bullock-and-scarlettjohansson-on-mtv-the-perfectkiss/. Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade Voyages Database (n.d.). Introductory Maps. Retrieved from http://www.slavevoyages.org/assessment/intro-maps. Uba, L. (1994). Asian Americans: Personality patterns, identity, and mental health. New York, NY: Guilford. United States Census Bureau (2016, Jan. 1). Facts for features: Black (AfricanAmerican) history month: February 2016. Retrieved from https://www.census.gov/newsroom/facts-for-features/2016/cb16-ff01.html. Van Leeuwen, J. M., Boyle, S., Salomonsen-Sautel, S., & Baker, D. N. (2006). Lesbian, gay, and bisexual homeless youth: An eight-city public health perspective. Child Welfare, 85(2), 151-170. Verba, S., Nie, N. H., & Kim, J. O. (1978). Participation and political equality: A seven-nation comparison. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Verba, S., Schlozman, K.L. & Brady, H.E. (1995). Voice and equality: Civic voluntarism in American politics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Vidal-Ortiz, S. (2005). Sexuality and gender in Santeria: LGBT identities at the crossroads of Santeria religious practices and beliefs. In S. Thumma & E.R. Gray (Eds.), Gay religion: Continuity and innovation in spiritual practice (pp.115-138). Lanham, MD: AltaMira Press. Wald, K. D., Button, J. W., & Rienzo, B. A. (1996). The politics of gay rights in American communities: Explaining antidiscrimination ordinances and policies. American Journal of Political Science, 40(4), 1152–1178. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/ 2111746. Waldner, L.K., Sikka, A., & Baig, S. (1999). Ethnicity and sex differences in university students’ knowledge of AIDS, fear of AIDS, and homophobia. Journal of Homosexuality, 37(3), 117-133. doi:10.1300/J082v37n03_07. Waldner, L. K. (2001). Lesbian and gay political activism: An analysis of variables predicting political participation. Research in Political Sociology, 9, 59-81. Wallace, M. & Jenkins, J. C. (1995). New class, postindustrialism, and neocorporatism: Three images of protest in Western societies. In J. C.

Bibliography

139

Jenkins & B. Klandermans (Eds.), The politics of social protest (pp. 96137). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press. Ward, E.G. (2005). Homophobia, hypermasculinity, and the U.S. Black church. Culture, Health & Sexuality, 7(5), 493-504. doi:10/1080/13691050500151248. Ward, J. (2008). White normativity: The cultural dimensions of whiteness in a racially diverse LGBT organization. Sociological Perspectives, 51(3), 563586. doi:10.1525/sop. 2008.51.3.563. Warner, L. R. & Shields, S.A. (2013). The Intersections of sexuality, gender, and race: Identity research at the crossroads. Sex Roles, 68(11-12) 803-810. doi:10.1007/s11199-013-0281-4. Weisenfield, J. (1997). African American women and Christian activism: New York’s Black YWCA, 1905-1945. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. West, C., & Fenstermaker, S. (1995). Doing difference. Gender and Society, 9, 8-37. doi:10.1177/089124395009001002. West, C. (2001). Black sexuality: The taboo subject. In R.P. Byrd & B. GuySheftall (Eds.), Traps: African American men on gender and sexuality (pp. 301-307) Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press. Weston, K. (1991). Families we choose: Lesbians, gays, kinship. New York, NY: Columbia University Press. White, A. M. (2006). Racial and gender attitudes as predictors of feminist activism among self-identified African American feminists. Journal of Black Psychology, 32(4), 455-478. doi:10.1177/ 0095798406292469. Wilkin, H.A., Katz, V.S., & Ball-Rokeach, S.J. (2009). The role of family interaction in new immigrant Latinos’ civic engagement. Journal of communication, 59(2), 387-406. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2009.01421. Wong, J., Ramakrishnan, S.K., Lee, T. & Junn, J. (2011). Asian American political participation: Emerging constituents and their political identities. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation. Worthen, M. G. F. (2011). College student experiences with an LGBTQ ally training program: A mixed methods study at a university in the southern United States. Journal of LGBT Youth, 8(4), 332-377. doi:10.1080/19361653.2011.608024. Worthen, M. G. F. (2012). An argument for separate analyses of attitudes toward lesbian, gay, bisexual men, bisexual women, MtF and FtM transgender individuals. Sex Roles, 68(11-12), 703-723. doi:10.1007/s11199- 012-0155-1. Xu, J. (2002). The political behavior of Asian Americans: A theoretical approach. Journal of Political and Military Sociology, 30(1), 71-89. Yoder, J. D. (2013). Women and gender: Making a difference. Cornwall-onHudson, NY: Sloan. Yoshikawa, H., Wilson, P., Chae, D.H., & Cheng, J-F. (2004). Do family and friendship networks protect against the influence of discrimination on mental health and HIV risk among Asian and Pacific Islander gay men? AIDS Education and Prevention, 16(1), 84-100. doi:10.1177/10778010122182820. Yoshioka, M.R., Dinoia, J., & Ullah, K. (2001). Attitudes toward marital violence: An examination of four Asian communities. Violence Against Women, 7(8), 900-926. doi:10.1177/10778010122182820. Yuval-Davis, Nira. 2006. Belonging and the politics of belonging. Patterns of Prejudice, 40(3), 197-214. doi:10.1080/00313220600769331.

Index Chavez, Karma R., 12 Choi, Daniel, 79 Choi, Kyung-Hee, 86 Chung, Y. Barry, 85 cisgender, 11-12, 22, 27, 49 civic engagement, 4-5, 84; definition 2-3; prior research, 48 civil rights, 26-27, 81 Clinton, Hillary. See queer: voting Coles, Roberta, 31 collective action frames. See Swank, Eric Collins, Patricia Hill, 13-14 “communalism,” 25-26 Compton Cafeteria Riots. See queer: voting Crenshaw, Kimberle Williams, 13-14 critical race theory (CRT), 19 CRT. See Critical Race Theory Cullors, Patrisse. See “Black Lives Matter”

Acosta, Katie L., 61 Ali, Mahershala. See Moonlight (film) Ansari, Aziz. See Master of None Anzaldua, Gloria E., 54, 56 Asian Pacific Islander communities (API): activism, 81-84; definition, 22, 80; educational attainment/income, 81, 89; most numerous U.S. groups, 80; spirituality, 88-89 Ayala, George, 58 Baartman, Saartjie. See “Hottentot Venus” Bailey, Martin, 32 Basset, Angela. See Master of None Bean, Carl, 34 Bedolla, Lisa Garcia, 52, 55 belonging, 1-2, 4, 20-21, 106, 112113; community engagement, 6; and connectedness, 15-16, 19; intersectional frameworks, 13. See also under each racial group Black communities: Black feminist theory, 14; educational attainment/income, 24-25, 34-35; families, 31-33; pride, 28; racial definition, 21, 24-25; spirituality, 33-34 “Black Lives Matter,” 23, 26 Black Pride Survey, 30, 116 Boggs, Grace Lee, 81-82 Buddhism. See Asian Pacific Islander communities (API): spirituality

Davis, Angela, 27 Dean, Jennifer K., 85 Diaz, Rafael, 58 discrimination, 8,10, 15-16, 18-20. See also under each racial group “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” See Choi, Daniel election: 2012, 8, 26; 2016, 8, 22, 54, 109, 110 Fahs, Breanne, 6 Filipino. See Asian Pacific Islander communities (API): most numerous U.S. groups

Campos, Belinda, 60 Catholicism: in APIs, 88-89; in Latinx, 62-63; Roman, 62, 93 Chan, Connie S., 85-87 Chapman, Tracy. See Moonlight (film) Chaudhary, Prateek, 88 Chavez, Cesar, 54

Galston, William A., 7 Garza, Alicia. See “Black Lives Matter” Gay Liberation Front. See Rivera, Sylvia General Social Survey, 26

141

142

Queer People of Color

Generation X, 10 Gonzalez-Rivera, Milagritos, 57 Great Migration, 26, 31 Gutiérrez, Jennicet, 51 Han, Chong-Suk, 86 Harvell, Valeria, 25 Hays, R. Allen, 3-4 Herek, Gregory M., 18, 57 heterosexual: elderly, 10; imprisonment, 11; poverty, 11 Hilton, Perez, 59-61. See also Latinx: queer families Hindu. See Asian Pacific Islander communities (API): spirituality HIV/AIDS, 8-14, 107, 111; in Black communities, 29-33; in Latinx communities, 51, 58 homophobia, 15-16, 109-110; in API communities, 84-91; in Black communities, 27-38; in Latinx communities, 57-66 “Hottentot Venus,” 28 immigration, 12-13, 24, 53-57, 61, 78. See also under each racial group Indian. See Asian Pacific Islander communities (API): most numerous U.S. groups intersectionality: and the big picture, 105-111; of Black Lives Matter movement, 23; definition, 13-15; interplay with sociopolitical involvement, 17-19 Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research (ICPSR), 117 intragroup marginalization, 15-16 Jay-Z. See Black communities: families Jenkins, Barry. See Moonlight (film) Jezebel, 29 Johnson, Marsha, P. See Stonewall Riots Kim, Jae-on, 3, 7 kinship, 31-32 Kochiyama, Yuri, 82

Korean. See Asian Pacific Islander communities (API): most numerous U.S. groups Korean Protestant Church. See Shrake, Eunai Kwanza. See Black communities; sociopolitical involvement Latino: definition, 21, 52. See also Latinx Latino GLBT History Project, 67 Latinx: Black immigrants, 24; definition, 52; educational attainment/income, 52-53, 56,61; queer families, 59-61; spirituality, 62-63 Lehovat, Balsam, and Ibrahim-Wells, 17 Long, Eddie, 33 Lopez, Jennifer, 57 Lopez, Mark, 7 Lorde, Audre, 17, 27 Ly, David, 85 McCall, Leslie, 14 McDermott, Christa, 17 Mammies, 29 Maningding, Rainier, 82 Martin, Trayvon, 23 Maryland. See same-sex marriage: legalization Master of None, 27 Mendez, Sylvia, 54 Metropolitan Community Church (MCC). See Perry, Rev. Troy Milk, Harvey, 8 millennials, 10 Moonlight (film), 49 Moore, Mignon R., 9 Moraga, Cherrie, 54 Muslims for Progressive Values, 88 NAACP. See National Association for the Advancement of Colored People National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), 29, 38 National Black Justice Coalition, 38, 110

Index

National Queer Asian Pacific Islander Alliance (NQAPIA), 87, 93, 110 Next American Revolution: Sustainable Actvism for the Twenty-First Century, The. See Boggs, Grace Lee Nie, Norman H., 3, 7 Not1More campaign. See Gutiérrez, Jennicet Obama, Barack. See Choi, Daniel; Gutiérrez, Jennicet “one of the children.” See “samegender loving” Operario, Don, 86 “Orientalism,” 84 Ortega, Sgt. Shane, 51. See also trans: activism “outness,” 1, 9, 106-108; in API communities, 96, 98-103; in Black communities, 37, 41, 4347; in Latinx communities, 68, 70, 73-76 Padilla, Carlos, 51 Parks, Rosa, 27 Pastrana, Antonio J., 63 Peña, Susana, 58 Perry, Rev. Troy, 34 “pink vote.” See queer: voting Pope Francis. See Latinx: spirituality Pride, 2, 28, 38, 49, 67, 93, 105, 117; LGBTQ month, 51 prison industrial complex, 11-12 Protestant. See spirituality under each racial group Putnam, Robert, 4 queer, 1-22; community engagement, 7-9; definition, 21, 23,51, 80; elderly, 10; immigrant population, 12; population, 9-10; voting, 8-9 queer churches. See Bean, Carl; Perry, Rev. Troy Queer Socialists Working Group, 4 Queer Undocumented Immigrant Project. See Padilla, Carlos

143

Reyes, Yosimar, 56 Rivera, Sylvia, 56 Roman Catholic. See Catholicism Rosario, Margaret, 58 Rustin, Bayard, 27 Salcedo, Bamby, 51 “same-gender loving,” 27 same-sex marriage: legalization, 8, 29; and Pope Francis, 62. See also Latinx: spirituality Say It Loud, I’m Black and I’m Proud: Black Pride Survey 2000, 30 Shrake, Eunai, 88 Singh, Annelise A., 85 Social Justice Sexuality Survey: API population, 90-103; Black population, 35-49; data collection 115-118; Latinx population, 6479 sociopolitical involvement: definition, 2. See also under each racial group S.T.A.R. See Street Tranvestite Action Revolutionaries Stewart, Abigail, 17 Stonewall Inn. See Stonewall Riots Stonewall Riots, 7-9, 56. See also Black communities: pride Street Tranvestite Action Revolutionaries (S.T.A.R.), 56 Swank, Eric, 6 This Bridge Called My Back: Writings by Radical Women of Color. See Mendez, Sylvia Tometti, Opal. See “Black Lives Matter” traditionalist, 10 trans, 8, 14, 19, 22, 28, 84, 99; activism, 51, 56; prisoners, 1112; U.S. population, 9 transphobia, 10, 85 Truth, Sojourner, 27 Tubman, Harriet, 27 Undocumented queer immigrants. See queer: immigrant population

144

Queer People of Color

Unity Fellowship Church. See Bean, Carl Verba, Sidney, 3, 7, 55 Vietnamese. See Asian Pacific Islander communities (API): most numerous U.S. groups Waithe, Lena, 27. See also Master of None Walker, Alice, 27 Washington Dream Act Coalition, 51 Wells, Ida B., 27 White communities: 5, 8-12, 17, 19; and API communities, 82, 83, 85, 87, 88, 93, 99; and Black communities, 24-34, 38, 45; and Latinx communities, 52, 54, 5658, 60-61, 67, 76 White feminism, 27 Whiteness, 27 White privilege, 17 Yuval-Davis, Nira, 16

About the Book

As individuals who historically have faced multiple forms of oppression, queer people of color often find themselves struggling to “fit in.” What impact does this have on their sociopolitical involvement within their communities of color? Within the queer community? And to what effect? Based on one of the largest surveys to date of African American, Latina/o, Asian American, and Pacific Islander American LGB people, this book offers a unique angle through which to examine belonging, and its converse, within marginalized communities. Angelique Harris is associate professor of sociology at Marquette University. Juan Battle is professor of sociology, public health, and urban education at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York (CUNY). Antonio (Jay) Pastrana, Jr., is associate professor of sociology at John Jay College of Criminal Justice, CUNY.

145