This article uses the concepts of intersectionality and linked fate to understand the relationship between group identification and political behavior among lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) and non-LGBTQ Latinx individuals. Drawing on the 2016 Collaborative Multiracial Post-Election Survey (CMPS), we find that LGBTQ Latinx respondents report feelings of linked fate to both the Latinx and LGBTQ community, and that LGBTQ Latinx respondents exhibit more political participation than their non-LGBTQ Latinx counterparts. We then find that Latinx and LGBTQ linked fate are significant predictors of participation for non-LGBTQ respondents, and LGBTQ linked fate to predict LGBTQ Latinx participation. Finally, we provide evidence that suggests that feeling linked fate toward more than one marginalized group does not necessarily translate into participation in a greater number of political activities, demonstrating the complexity of group identification for predicting political participation. This study contributes to the theorizing of linked fate and political participation by deploying an intersectional lens that challenges assumptions of Latinx and LGBTQ intragroup political coherence and illuminates the complex effects that different kinds of linked fate have on political participation.

Despite campaign promises to be the most “gay-friendly” Republican president, since assuming office, Donald Trump has been proactive in what many lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) advocates call a “rollback” of gains made during the Barack Obama administration, shocking many observers and bringing sexual and gender politics to the fore. How can we make sense of the contradictions and consequences of Trump's sexual and gender politics? I argue that examining the transnational processes of democratization, political homophobia, and homonationalism illuminates the significance of the administration's actions. A democratization approach reveals how Trump's reversal of Obama-era policies and appointment of conservative judges signifies a greater effort at de-democratization through the contraction of citizenship rights and weakening of the judiciary; political homophobia clarifies how the administration legitimizes its governance through opposition to LGBT people and issues with the appointment of openly homophobic and transphobic individuals to prominent positions; and homonationalism, or the entry of certain queer subjects into the nation at the expense of racialized “others,” aptly characterizes forms of queer inclusion still taking place under Trump. For these reasons, putting Trump's sexual and gender politics in transnational perspective can help us better understand this moment in U.S. politics.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract