Despite growing evidence to suggest that gays, lesbians, and bisexuals experience a range of stressors and consequences related to their sexual minority status, no known studies to date have employed focus group discussion to explore and document their perceptions of sexual minority stress. In this exploratory study, we present focus group data on a range of sexual minority stressors as described by 43 gay men, lesbians, and bisexual men and women. We explore gender and sexual identity differences in the respondents' perceptions of heteronormativity, disclosure issues in different social settings, sources of support, and strategies for coping with stress. Respondents reported that women's same-sex relationships were eroticized and distorted to accommodate heterosexual male desire, while men were negatively depicted as sexually promiscuous and deviant. These differing stereotypes held important consequences for disclosure decisions and affected men's and women's social interactions with heterosexual men. Bisexual respondents reported unique strategies to cope with exclusion and isolation associated with misunderstandings about their sexual identities. Directions for future research on sexual minority stress are discussed.

A growing body of evidence indicates disproportionate rates of mental health disorders among bisexual women compared to both heterosexual and lesbian women. Such disparities are often attributed to stressors related to minority status, including experiences of prejudice and discrimination. Prior research has made little distinction between the prejudicial experiences of bisexual groups as compared to lesbian/gay groups. Based on qualitative data gathered in focus groups with 10, predominantly White, bisexual-identified women, which occurred in a large city in the USA, we posit that differences in prejudicial experiences do exist for bisexual groups, and that such differences reside in the realms of the epistemic, yet have very real implications for bisexual women's daily lived experiences. We discuss everyday slights and insults, also known as microaggressions, reported by the participants vis-à-vis their bisexual identity. These bisexual-specific microaggressions include hostility; denial/dismissal; unintelligibility; pressure to change; lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender legitimacy; dating exclusion; and hypersexuality. We consider how such microaggressions may adversely impact mental health and well-being and may assist in explaining the mental health disparities among bisexual women.

This study examines relationships among childhood sexual abuse (CSA), risky alcohol use, and adult sexual victimization among bisexual and lesbian women. Half (51.2%) of women reported CSA and 71.2% reported adult sexual victimization. Perpetrators were generally male, and 56.4% of women’s most recent adult sexual victimization incidents occurred after coming-out. Regression results indicated that adult sexual victimization severity was associated with a bisexual identity, more severe CSA history, more lifetime sexual partners, and higher alcohol severity scores. Compared to lesbians, bisexual women reported more severe adult sexual victimization experiences, greater revictimization, riskier drinking patterns, and more lifetime male sexual partners.

In this article, I use Cherlin’s notion of incomplete institutionalization as a conceptual tool for understanding the parenting stories of 40 lesbian mothers. Using data gathered from interviews with 40 respondents, I examine these issues within a framework that acknowledges the differences among the respondents based on their trajectories to motherhood. I also address the unique difficulties they face as they negotiate their roles and relationships within their families and the extra layer of problems they experience in their interactions with social institutions, such as the law. My analysis suggests that lesbian-headed families are faced with internal dynamics that are similar to heterosexual stepfamilies, but also different, in that they encounter problems in their interactions with institutions (e.g., schools, the law) due to their incompletely institutionalized status. I present three resilience strategies employed by the respondents, including normalization tactics, second-parent adoptions, and commitment ceremonies. I close with a discussion of the study’s implications, limitations, and directions for further research.

No abstract