Gender Diagnosticity for the Homosexual Community

Hi everyone,

SunnyZHENG and I have been discussing GD applied to the homosexual community in the Future Research: Improvements thread and I thought it would be easier to discuss and navigate through the various nested posts if we just made a separate entry.

Here's an outline of what we've been discussing so far:

• I summarized a study that looked at heterosexual and homosexual men and women: http://wiki.ubc.ca/Course:PSYC305/2013ST2/ClassProject/2.2.1_Introduction_-_GD_Studies#Gender-Related_Traits_of_Heterosexual_and_Homosexual_Men_and_Women
• The same occupational preferences that distinguish men from women are the same that distinguish heterosexual men from gay men and lesbian women from heterosexual women.
• Lesbian women are more likely than heterosexual women to be self-ascribed as masculine, while gay men are more likely than heterosexual men to be self-ascribed as masculine.
• From the study: "In absolute terms, the mean GD scores for gay men (0.51) and for lesbians (0.55) indicated that both groups, on average, had neither strongly male- nor female-typical occupational pref- erences. That is, both group means were near the mid- point of possible GD scores (i.e., 0.50)."
  • So since the differences between the homosexual and heterosexual community are offset by the average scores as a whole, they're not skewed.
• SunnyZHENG suggested that "in further studies, researchers might examine GD of homosexualities based on opposite sexes because participants’ sexual orientations and gender identities role in society do really effect the reliability of GD in this research. For future research, participants can be equal sample size of Lesbians and gays, maybe the same method to test the masculine and feminine extents of gay men and lesbian women (or do you have a better way to examine?). Do you agree or any advise?"

My response: I agree that a separate sample size of the homosexual community can and should be examined for insights on areas other than occupational preferences. However, what I'm wondering is how it would be any different if they were in the entire pool of participants (homosexual, transexual, heterosexual, asexual) or not since they are not skewing the results. In other words, I don't think it's affecting the reliability because reliability is based on how accurate the score is (eg. gender diagnosis, or IQ), and GD seems to be accurately identifying self-ascribed masculinity or femininity of an individual, regardless of sexual orientation.

HOWEVER, it's a different story when you apply GD as a predictor of other aspects of life, such as bullying or mental health (also discussed in the "Other GD Studies" section). Do you think GD (eg. A gay man with a feminine profile) would be a stronger predictor of an individual being subject to bullying or prone to mental health issues than other predictors?

OH! Also, if we're going to discuss GD in the homosexual community, how about future research in strictly gay men or lesbian women. In a similar example, do you think a gay man with a feminine profile would be more likely to suffer mental health issues or be subject to bullying over more a masculine gay man?

hi, looks like all really good information. If I'm following correctly are you saying because our biological sex doesnt necessarily predict our sexual orientation that in future studies we should include a standardized GD score?

I think this would present some really interesting trends. I also think it would show more accurate results. For example if a female identifies herself as a lesbian and also shows a more masculine score than her results of this questionnaire would be representing a different correlation with the results than compared to a women that identifies herself as heterosexual and scores higher on the feminine side.

Schuolee have you added your information into the page?

I think a standardized and universal GD should be what we're striving for, but what SunnyZHENG and I were considering for future research was looking at smaller populations, such as the homosexual community, or even narrower, a subset of that community (Eg. gay men).

I'd like to hear other people's input on how examining homosexual populations would be different from heterosexual populations. Because if there's no difference, then it doesn't really open up possibilities for future research, but if there is, then it does!

I haven't added this information to the page yet, as I'd like to hear everyone else's input. Hopefully we'll get more responses by Tuesday!

Ok reading over your summary of the study done by Lippa (2002)I completely agree that GD scores should be included in a future research of this type, because GD scores are different within the same genders and they are represented differently within the same sexual orientations. I would say for future research instead of seperating out a small subtype that there is a mixture as you previously mentioned of (transgender, homosexual and heterosexual orientations) that way we can compare the trends between genders and then compare trends based on GD. Does this make sense? I could find another reference supporting the importance of including GD scores?

Also are we going to include in this page just how GD scores can be predictors of other aspects in life outcomes (ie. bullying)or are we focusing on how GD scores of homosexuals could change the results in occupation, activites, life outcomes, etc.

Could you clarify your point on comparing trends between genders and comparing trends based on GD?

The reason we were discussing examining the homosexual community separately was because GD may prove to be better indicators of mental health for homosexual individuals; gay men especially (as mentioned below). If we were to consolidate all sexual orientations, do you think key insights would be buried since both homosexual groups in the Heterosexual/Homosexual Gender Traits study averaged out?

I think it is worth reiterating the importance of GD as predictors of other aspects of life outcomes. I know it's mentioned in the studies, but I'm not entirely sure where else it is explicitly stated that GD can predict certain life outcomes, such as bullying and mental health. Anybody know?

Hi Schuolee,

good work! You've organized the topic and developed further. Yes we can narrow the sample size, not only in homosexual community, but specify different roles in both gay and lesbian. That is, separate participants into four groups: butches (masculine lesbians), flamers (gay men who are more femme), femme(feminine lesbian) and masculine gay men. [I don't know whether these slangs are right or I write them in a polite way, I just Google..If so, I apologize...] For example, participants are the equal sample size of Lesbians and gays. Researchers can test the masculine extent both in butches (masculine lesbians) and flamers (gay men who are more femme), to identity whether the butch is more masculine than the flamer or not. Thus, researchers can both test same-sex homosexual and opposite-sex homosexual, and then compared with the data of same-sex and opposite-sex heterosexualities.

Previous studies support the stereotypes that gay men are more feminine than heterosexual men, and lesbian women are more masculine than heterosexual women (Kite & Deaux, 1984). Thinking, for example, that gay men look more effeminate than straight men and lesbian women look more masculine than straight women.

Hey SunnyZHENG,

I wrote a possible entry to the Future Research article below. Narrowing the sample size and looking at specific subsets of the community is a great idea. I think a standardized GD (As mentioned by NicolaVanderliek) paired with narrow focus/small population is much more effective at uncovering any insights that may be "buried" through averages when using large populations/samples.

Hi Schuolee, I believe that GD would be a strong predictor of bullying and/or mental health issues. In a society where heterosexualism is the norm, those who are different are more prone to stigmatization. This stigmatization leads to the idea known as minority stress, which is the conceptualization of internalized homophobia, stigma, and discrimination (Meyer, 1995, p. 38).

Thanks for bringing in that supporting evidence, CalvinChan! AmandaYuen did an excellent job of summarizing a study that examined bullying (http://wiki.ubc.ca/Course:PSYC305/2013ST2/ClassProject/2.2.1_Introduction_-_GD_Studies#Gender-Atypical_Behaviour_and_Adolescent_Bullying), which fits very well with the point you're getting at.

In the Adolescent Bullying study, it was found that gender atypical males were more subject to bullying than gender atypical females. Minority stress is a bigger issue for men than women. Given that there is so much stigmatization re: violating gender norms, future research could perhaps examine the differences between bullying/mental health of feminine heterosexual men and feminine gay men?

I think we're starting to develop some good ideas and contributions for the Future Research entry!

Hi CalvinChan and Schuolee, I took this paragraph from this page of the report (future research): Since the exact classification of behaviours and traits into masculine and feminine has been and remains a “subject of some debate” (Smiler & Epstein, 2010, p.150) among the academic community, while the link between gender identity and biological sex is being constantly challenged by the representations of gender fluidity, it could be useful to explore options beyond the binary. These options may include dispensing with both strict divisions rooted in dichotomy and a scale of binary characteristics, given that there is already a lack of consensus in terms of deciding which of these better reflects reality (Larsen & Buss, 2009; Lippa & Connelly, 1990; Smiler & Epstein, 2010). Instead, future research might look into classifying divisions into a corresponding array of gender identities and representations

Is this similiar to what we are talking about? Should we maybe just add on to it with your study that you found Schuolee and maybe some other references, basing it off of the last line in that paragraph that future research should look into classifying divisions

I think that's a good transition; from fluidity of gender identities to GD for various sexual orientations. Thanks for pointing that out!

Definitely a great topic for discussion. I read in another article about lesbian, gay, and bisexual individuals (LGB) that the majority of their stress comes from concealing their sexual orientation. Future research can also be conducted on how these GD affect HOW LSBs mask their orientation. I'm not sure if I'm phrasing that correctly, so I'll put an example.

How would a lesbian women act to conceal their sexual orientation vs how would a gay man act to conceal their sexual orientation?

Hopefully that clarified it.

CalvinChan, do you have a link to that study so we can cite it? That's a fantastic point, thanks for bring it up. That also ties into coping methods, which is mentioned in point 3 of Future Research.

To summarize, what we have so far/a potential entry to the actual post:

As outlined in the Gender-Related Traits of Heterosexual and Homosexual Men and Women study (Lippa, 2002), the occupational preferences that distinguished men from women also distinguished lesbian women from gay men. A narrower focus on the homosexual community, or even a subset of the community (eg. gay men, or lesbian women), could identify GD as a strong predictor of subjection to bullying, coping styles, and likelihood of mental illness for homosexual individuals.

People who deviate from socially-constructed, heterosexual gender roles are prone to stigmatization. This stigmatization leads to minority stress, which is the conceptualization of internalized homophobia, stigma, and discrimination (Meyer, 1995, p. 38). Future research could be conducted to examine how GD is related to bullying for gay and lesbian individuals. Since individuals will differ in their response to bullying, we may go on to investigate how GD affects coping styles in cases of homophobia. One response to homophobia may be concealing one's sexual orientation. (Study Name/Researcher) has found that the majority of lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) individuals' stress comes from concealing their sexual orientation. We could look into how GD affects the ways homosexual individuals conceal their sexual orientation.

As stated above, gender and personality can be predictors of mental illness. Because of the increased likelihood of stigmatization, we can also study the LGB community separately to identify differences or trends in prevalence of mental illnesses due to stress or maladaptive coping methods.

This is good, could we include in first paragraph not only occupational preferences that distinguish men from women or lesbian women from gay men but also perhaps female heterosexuals compared to female homosexuals and heterosexuals males compared to homosexual males. I'm not sure if that is extending it too much but I thought we were trying to say the purpose of GD scores is important because results from this study are not as reliable if we only compare different genders but to be more specific and find variability between GD score and sexual orientation with question responses for more accurate results.

Also is this the first time GD is mentioned in this page? we may have to for the first time mentioned use the full word ie. Gender Diagnosticity.

I edited my opinions for the second paragraph just some minor grammar suggestions or clean up? but take or leave :)I put in italics what i changed:

People who deviate from socially-constructed, heterosexual gender roles are prone to stigmatization. This stigmatization leads to minority stress, which is the conceptualization of internalized homophobia, stigma, and discrimination (Meyer, 1995, p. 38). Future research could be conducted to examine how GD is related to bullying towards gay and lesbian individuals. Since individuals will differ in their response to bullying, we may go on to investigate how GD affects coping styles in cases of homophobia. One response to homophobia may be concealing one's sexual orientation.(Study Name/Researcher) has found that the majority of lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) individuals' stress comes from concealing their sexual orientation. We could look into how GD affects the ways homosexual individuals conceal their sexual orientation.

I think this part is really good but are we now going into bullying or since bullying is already mentioned previously on this page maybe we should focus more on how homosexuals and heterosexuals and their differing GD scores between and within each group can be predictors of future outcomes when combined with their personality traits. This is due to possible different coping mechanisms, lifestyle choices and individual preferences for activites/occupation, etc. (if we do go this way I will look for another reference to support or we can leave as in as the bullying is just an extension of why it is perhaps necessary to look at different groups as it presents possible different life outcomes due to external variables such as bullying and internal variables such as coping mechanisms along with personality traits

While I do think the importance of the bullying issue is worth discussing, I totally agree that we shouldn't go too much into detail, since it's already been explained earlier in the Future Research article.

And! I was trying to write about the internal/external interaction aspect, but couldn't find the words. I think you did a really good job of that, so yes, that would be an excellent point to include in the final write-up. More empirical support is always helpful, but the studies that CalvinChan have mentioned previously may also be sufficient if you want to stay within the realm of coping/stress.

Yes, we should also mention that. I forgot to include it in the summary!

Okay!

So I combined what you have all been saying, Schuolee, CalvinChan and SunnyZheng. Please feel free to take out stuff I have said as it is quite large, I do not think we should add to it though as this future research page is already quite large. I went off of your recent summary Schuolee. I also found a reference to how people concealing a stigma will cause more psychological stress. It wasnt specific to homosexuals but I think it is supporting our argument. I did change the paraphrasing a bit around due to it being a different article so I paraphrased it to this article. After you read over this Schuolee could you post it in the future research page, probably under the paragraph that I posted before where it was leading into our topic. Thanks!

In future studies comparing gender responses to a survey questionnaire we suggest that gender diagnosticity (GD) scores are necessary to combine with personality traits to produce more accurate results for predictors of future outcomes. This is due to possible different coping mechanisms, lifestyle choices and individual preferences for activities/occupation distinguished between not only male and female heterosexuals or male and female homosexuals but also female heterosexuals compared to female homosexuals and male heterosexuals compared to male homosexuals. It is also necessary not to assume that all female heterosexuals will have the same (GD) score or all the male heterosexuals will have the same (GD) scores. Research has supported that focusing on a smaller subgroup, such as homosexuals, presents possible different life outcomes due to external variables such as bullying and internal variables such as coping mechanisms along with personality traits. People who deviate from socially-constructed, heterosexual gender roles are prone to stigmatization. This stigmatization leads to minority stress, which is the conceptualization of internalized homophobia, stigma, and discrimination (Meyer, 1995, p. 38). Future research could be conducted to examine how gender diagnosticity (GD) is related to bullying towards gay and lesbian individuals. Since individuals will differ in their response to bullying, we may go on to investigate how GD affects coping styles in cases of homophobia. One response to homophobia may be concealing one’s sexual orientation. Pachankis (2007) has found that concealing a stigma can cause both negative psychological and physical stress on the individuals. In future research if we included GD scores combined with personality traits we could compare between and within each group possible predictors

Pachankis, J.E. (2007). The psychological implications of concealing a stigma: A cognitive-affective-behavioral model. Psychological Bulletin, 133(2), 328-345. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.2.328

Sounds awesome! Thanks for making our points more concise and clear. I'm just going to change the last sentence to:

Future research could pair GD scores with personality traits to identify and compare predictors between and within heterosexual and homosexual groups.

Also, do we have a citation for the citation: "(Meyer, 1995, pg. 38)"?

OK I saw that you put it in! it fits perfectly. I'm gona do a read through of the whole page as a final edit. great work! I did not find the reference for (Meyer, 1995, pg.38) I thought that was your reference. Is it not included in the reference page? we may have to take out.

Sorry for the late response. Here are the two sources:

http://www.jstor.org.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/stable/2137286?seq=1&

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2072932/

The first link you must login through your cwl. Hope this helps.

Thanks CalvinChan!

Nice work all, and you're getting directly at the points I made in the other discussion forum thread.