Thematic Analysis of My “Coming Out” Experiences Through an Intersectional Lens: An Autoethnographic Study

Abstract

For lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) youth, identity development is one of the most critical developmental task. LGBTQ youth are shown to be at risk for a variety of risk factors including depression and suicidal ideation and attempts due to how their identities are appraised in heteronormative societies. However, most LGBTQ educational psychology research have highlighted protective factors that are primarily relevant to support LGBTQ white-youth. One of the major developmental theories, Erikson’s stages of psychosocial development, has identified adolescence as the period where identity development occurs. However, through an intersectional lens, identity development appears to encompass more than adolescence but also emerging adulthood, a developmental stage not accounted for by Erikson’s stages of psychosocial development. The primary goal of this study is to seek to understand and question Erikson’s stages of psychosocial development through an intersectional lens of an autoethnography of my LGBTQ experiences. An autoethnographic approach [diary entries (N = 9), conversations (N = 12), interview (N = 1), social media websites and blogs (N = 2), and drawing (N = 1)] is used to understand my LGBTQ-person of color (POC) experiences of “coming out” or self-disclosure during my adolescence through emerging adulthood. Data was collected on April 2020 and spanned from 2006 through 2020 to account for the developmental period of adolescence and emerging adulthood (ages 13 through 27). Thematic analysis revealed four themes across the two developmental periods: (1) confusion and conflict between my gay and ethnic identity as a closeted adolescent, (2) my first “coming out” as a gay adolescent and “it got better,” (3) frustration arising from the internal conflict between my gay and POC identity as an emerging adult, and (4) frustration arising from external experiences with the flaws of LGBTQ community inclusivity. Results reflected a continuous theme of identity exploration and struggle through both adolescence and emerging adulthood, highlighting the need for future research to replicate similar experiences from other intersectional individuals during emerging adulthood stage, a developmental stage that is considered in between Erikson’s adolescent and young adulthood developmental stage.

Empowering Students via Autoethnography Assignment: Fostering Inclusive Communities for Gender and Sexuality in Social Inequality Class

“…There are multiple studies that use autoethnographies as a resource to be able to connect with students, especially students in the LGBTQIA+ community (Leung, 2021;Ream, 2018). Studies have shown that creating safe spaces for students and connecting with them can help make them more comfortable with their campus.…”

“…While our aim was to delve into the intricacies of gender, we recognize that the autoethnographies in this analysis were limited in acknowledging the experiences of non-binary and transgender individuals. Heteronormative social structures expect appropriate and normative gender and sexual expression in mainstream social settings (Leung, 2021). This interaction persists in dominant culture by conflating nonbinary and transgender identities with inequalities of sexuality, and while they are related, they are not reducible to one another.…”

Social support in schools and related outcomes for LGBTQ youth: a scoping review

“…The lack of association between peer support and positive social outcomes for racialized LGBTQ youth may be a result of the interplay of other identities that require other forms of support. For example, LGBTQ Asian youth may have an increased emphasis on the importance of family and familial piety, the need for racialized youth to bring pride to their family and minimize shame [68]. Perhaps for racialized LGBTQ youth, the lack of association between peer support and positive outcomes may be a result that lean towards family systems as increasingly important for such racialized youth.…”

An overview of coming out research: Introducing a three‐lens typology

“…Thus, many researchers adopted an intersectionality perspective to explore how the intersections of sexuality, gender, and other social categories of difference produce different coming out experiences, while considering various axes of oppression and privilege. The most dominant categories of difference considered in coming out studies in intersection with sexuality and gender (LGBTQ+) are: race and ethnicity (e.g., Adams‐Santos, 2020; Boe et al., 2018; Bowleg et al., 2008; Chazin & Klugman, 2014; Cisneros & Bracho, 2019; Fisher, 2003; Ford, 2017; Garvey et al., 2019; Gattamorta & Quidley‐Rodriguez, 2018; Keene et al., 2021; Leung, 2021; Logie et al., 2015; Mezey, 2008; Radis & Nadan, 2021; Thomsen, 2021; Uppal & Kelly, 2020; Wang, 2021), class (e.g., Barglowski et al., 2018; Lewis, 2012; Mezey, 2008), age (e.g., Lewis, 2012; Wilson et al., 2018), disabilities (e.g., Chazin & Klugman, 2014; Pieri, 2021), religion (e.g., Chazin & Klugman, 2014; Gold & Stewart, 2011; Shurts et al., 2020), professional identities (e.g., El Amoor, 2019; Ford, 2017), national identities (e.g., Bie & Tang, 2016), and polyamory (e.g., Gusmano, 2018).…”