In the United States, an increasing number of people have come to express support for sexual minorities in recent decades, and more employers have implemented policies that protect sexual minority workers’ rights. Yet, heteronormativity remains in many workplaces. Considering this ambivalent social context, we examined the extent to which sexual minorities today see their workplaces as accepting and how they develop such a perception. We used a symbolic interaction framework to analyze data from in-depth interviews with 50 sexual minority young adults. The analysis revealed a general tendency among respondents to describe their workplaces as accepting. They used several strategies to feel accepted, including interpreting colleagues’ behaviors positively, creating dramatic narratives of key events, drawing on existing knowledge about the industry, and overlooking potential microaggressions. We use these results to discuss how minority individuals derive a sense of acceptance in contemporary social institutions, which emphasize the importance of diversity and inclusion but show signs of persistent inequality.
PurposeThe authors aimed to identify the nature of customer harassment against lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) workers.Design/methodology/approachThe authors analyzed data from in-depth interviews with 30 LGBTQ service workers in the United States who had recently experienced customer harassment.FindingsAmong various forms of customer harassment LGBTQ workers reported, some showed commonalities with previously reported cases of race-based and gender-based customer harassment. However, other cases highlighted unique aspects of LGBTQ-based customer harassment—customers morally condemned their LGBTQ identities, refused their service while displaying emotional disgust, and made sexual advances while imposing sexual stereotypes and fantasies about LGBTQ people. Experiences of customer harassment varied across subgroups of workers who had specific sexual and gender identities, and LGBTQ workers of color were harassed for their LGBTQ and racial identities simultaneously.Originality/valuePast research on group-based customer harassment has focused on incidents against straight, cisgender women and workers of workers of color, but the present study identified the nature of customer harassment that targeted workers' LGBTQ status.
Black women start businesses at a rate above the national average. Yet, a revenue gap persists when compared to businesses owned by Black men and White men and women. Existing explanations for the differences in revenue highlight the lack of experience and limited access to start-up capital that constrain racial and gender minorities and also the type of industries in which they operate. Research specifically examining Black women business owners is very limited. In this article, we explore if Black women business owners’ gender and racial identities pose challenges to running their businesses. We find that, because of their race and gender, Black women business owners contend with unique challenges that many entrepreneurs do not face. In-depth interviews reveal that they confront negative stereotypes held about them and, surprisingly, experience difficulties interacting with Black clients. These entrepreneurs cite navigation strategies that include monitoring self-presentation, adopting standards of excellence, and creating clear professional boundaries. This study suggests that Black women business owners might be spending more time than other business owners navigating challenges specifically linked to their identity, which seems to impact their business directly.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.