Defining the Lesbian

Defining the Lesbian Theories behind Sexual Orientation, Identity Development and Issues Facing Homosexual Women in America Timothy McAlister Loyola University Chicago

Defining the Lesbian Abstract Prior theories about lesbian identity assumed that all homosexual development between men and women was similar. The problem was that sexual orientation was only being studied in men. Once gender fair research started to be conducted, it became clear that lesbian identity development and identity formation is actually vastly different from male homosexual development. Over the past three decades, the information about the lesbian identity has begun to grow rapidly. New theories about development, identity, coping mechanisms, and the coming out process have emerged. Information about how a homosexual identity affects women of color is also beginning to become prevalent. Research on lesbianism is still in very early stages, but the gains being made are providing a foundation for more research that provides a lens into understanding the lesbian identity.

Defining the Lesbian Defining the Lesbian Theories behind Sexual Orientation, Identity Development and Issues Facing Homosexual Women in America Most theoretical models that emerged studying the development of the lesbian identity have come from the studies about male sexual identity development. It was once assume that all homosexual were a homogenous group that all experience the same development pathways and adjustment problems. Gender fair research that arose in the 1980s showed that lesbians were actually similar to heterosexual women and different from gay men (Bailey, Gaulin, Agyei, & Gladue, 1994) and the development of the lesbian identity was more complex than the one for men (Brown, 1995). The results from research during the 1980s and 1990s showed that gender, not sexual orientation, seemed to be a defining characteristic. The question that then arises is how is lesbian development different from development of homosexual men and heterosexual women? Research has yet to find one significant answer, but results and conclusions are leading to new theory, improved psychotherapy, and increase information about how lesbians think, feel, come out, and cope with the world around them. Theories about Sexual Development of Lesbian and Bisexual Women

The first major developmental theory that attempted to explain the development of homosexuality was the psychoanalytic theory found my Sigmund Freud. In his 1920 paper, The Psychogenesis of a Case of Homosexuality in a Woman, Freud considered all human beings to be somewhat bisexual because they had feelings for both parent during development. Initially, Freud believed that female homosexual development was similar to the developmental of males, but years after the first publication, he revised his theory to state that male development was

actually simpler. Freuds new theory stated that lesbian development occur from a negative Electra complex situation, where the female continues to love the same sex. Freud believed that at the end of the Phallic stage, the female child continued to love the mother; that love continued to persist and more intense until other women become the object of love. Since romantic love continues throughout adulthood, the masculine component of the womans personality is retained, and the object choice becomes homosexuality. The second major theory that arose about the development of the homosexual identity in women was the learning theory. Clellan Ford and Frank Beach (1951) like Freud believe that humans display or are capable of homosexual activity. From their classical work with sexual behavior in humans and animals, they found evidence that bisexuality was inherently apart of sexual development. From the studies they concluded that, humans and animals maybe innately bisexual, but environment plays an influence on the choice of an appropriate sexual partner into adulthood. Therefore, this theory would conclude that heterosexuality is a behavior that is conditioned and socialized. Examples from preliterate cultures show males having other young males as sex partner while young, until a culture pushes them to take female partners in adulthood for mating purposes (Herdt, 1984). Thus, this model view homosexuality as a natural occurrence and not a deviant behavior that needed to be medically treated. The most current theory to explain the development of lesbianism is the sociological perspective. This perspective sought to shift the focus from internal factor (personality, adjustment, and early childhood) to external factors (society, laws, and interactions to others). Sociologists believed that earlier theories explaining homosexuality in women centered too much on internal factors. Another focus of sociologists is norms. Compulsory heterosexual refers the fact the heterosexuality is consider to be the dominate norm in culture. Under compulsory

heterosexuality, lesbians are seen as norm violators. Because lesbians defy norms, they become a minority group. Such lesbian are both women and homosexual, most lesbians occupy two minority statuses in society; lesbians, who are a racial minority or low SES, can possibly occupy three or more minority statuses. Besides theoretical views, empirical research has sought to explain why women develop minority sexual identities. From biological research, psychologists have proposed three possible biological explanations that explain sexual orientation: genetics, brain factors, and hormones. Researchers have tested their theories by taking lesbians, who are members of identical twin pairs, non-identical twin pairs, or had a sister by adoption to test for genetic differences. Identical twins have a 48% concordance rate for lesbian orientation. Non-identical twin have a 16% concordance rate, while there is only a 6% concordance rate for adopted sisters. This shows that there is so genetic basis for sexual orientation (Bailey et al., 1993). But since concordance rates are only 48%, that means that discordant rate are 52%, there environmental influence must occur with biological factor in order for women to develop a lesbian identity. The Human Genome Project has found linkages to traits and sexual orientation, but the research was only been conducted in men, so the relevance to women is unknown (Mustanski et al., 2005). Research on the brain factors also lack testing on lesbian group. Another possible biological explanation was that there was an endocrine imbalance causes homosexuality. The common hypothesis is that homosexual women have lower levels of estrogen and higher levels of testosterone than heterosexual women, but modern research has disproven this theory and shown no difference between homosexual and heterosexual womens hormone levels (Byne, 1996). Researchers have also conducted research to test hypothesis about experiences and psychological factors that might influence sexual orientation. However, there was been no

evidence that support these psychoanalytic and learning theories. Data has shown that children who grow up in homes with homosexual parents are not any more likely to become homosexual (Bailey, Pillard, Neale, & Agyei, 1995). This would debunk theories that modeling plays a role in sexual orientation. Lesbians and heterosexual women also show no differences in the rate of heterosexual rape (Bell, Weinberg, & Hammersmith, 1981). This provides a counter argument for the hypothesis that homosexuality is learned as a coping mechanism because of a bad heterosexual encounter. The fact reminds that scientist, psychologist, and sociologist cannot give a definitive answer as to as cause differences in sexual orientation. It is clear both theoretical and empirical research provide excellent groundwork to exploring possible causes and explanations to multiple pathways of developing sexual orientation. The answer could possibly be that there is no one correct answers. Lesbian women are often looked at as a homogenous group that all follow the same developmental pathway. Like heterosexual women, lesbians develop distinctly different identities. Some lesbians are distinguished as lifetime lesbians (lesbians that were identified as lesbians ever since that have been sexual), and there are others that would be classified as adult lesbians (women that were heterosexual but became a lesbians during adulthood/midlife) (Valanis, 2000). There are self- identifying categories that lesbians were nominated themselves such as butch, femme, closeted, lipstick (Rhodes, 1994). It is possible that questions about the development of homosexuality maybe better answered if you were to look at each lesbian as an individual instead of a group. Theories about Sexual Identity Development of Lesbian Along with research and theory trying to find out why some women became lesbians, psychologists also wanted to study how lesbians developed and expressed their sexual identity.

Vivienne Cass (1979) and her six stage model of sexual identity development provided an early foundation for research in the area. Cass proposed that homosexual men and women moved through six stages: identity confusion, identity comparison, identity tolerance, identity acceptance, identity pride, and identity synthesis. Her model charts an individual moving through periods of confusion and denial, pride, and finally integration into everyday life. Until the 1990s, other stage models that explored homosexual identity development followed Cass model. SavinWilliams (1990) postulated that gay and lesbians developed in different trajectories depending on their responses to eight developmental challenges. Savin-Williams did believe that developmental changes occurred in various orders which created differences in sexual identity development, unlike Cass model that emphasis that success at one stage of development lead to the next developmental goal. Savin- Williams eight stages included: awareness of homosexual attraction, occurrence of first gay experience, occurrence of first heterosexual experience, labeling ones self as gay/lesbian, disclosing gay identity to other besides family, experience first romantic relationship with same sex partner, disclose gay identity to family, and fostering a positive identity. Savin-Williams believed that one lesbian woman could have a first gay occurrence than immediately experience first gay romantic relationship, while another lesbian woman might experience a heterosexual experience then a homosexual experience. His fluid eight stage model provides a broader view of lesbian and homosexual identity development and provides an explanation for the differences in identity development. Lesbian Sub-Culture The lesbian community is far from being a homogenous group as pervious stated. Just as the heterosexual community has several sub-cultural identities like Goth, Hipsters, and various others, the lesbian community has similar divisions. Rhodes (2004) hypothesized that various

expressions in the homosexual community arose from the intersection of culture, race, and socialization. From those intersections, lesbian could form an identity that conformed completely to the dominate culture, integrated aspects of the dominant and queer culture, or an identity that fully embraced the queer culture. This theory explains popular labels of lesbians: butch/manly, in-between, and femme/lipstick. The butch/manly lesbians are the lesbian identities fully embrace queer culture; their gender expression does not fit what is commonly expected of a women. In-between lesbians construct an that has aspects of queer and the dominant culture; they might appear masculine in some of their gender performance, while appearing feminine in other aspects. Femme/lipstick lesbians would be lesbians whose performance of gender fits the mold that the dominate culture dictates. It is commonly believed that butch lesbians have no adjustment problems and face more discrimination, but current research does not support either claim. Rosario, Schrimshaw, Hunter, & Levy-Warren (2009) found that butch lesbians showed no significant differences in self esteem and psychological distress compared to femme lesbians. However, researchers did find that most lesbians will not self classify themselves as butch lesbians. Only 5-7% of lesbians selfidentified as butch, but the out-group perception was around 30%. There have been no significant difference found between sexual discovery and debut age among butch and femme lesbians; however, femme lesbians have been shown to have fewer sexual partners and encounters. Butch lesbians also report integrating more gay-related activities into their everyday life. Despite differences in integration and frequency of homosexual encounters, both butch and femme identifying lesbians express similar commit to their lesbian identity. The Coming Out Process

The coming out process can a confusing and stressful period for any woman that identifies as a lesbian. Despite the fact that women identifying as a lesbian may have accept her sexual identity, there is a consistent fear that friends and family members will not be as accepting. Most lesbians fear that abandonment, perhaps abuse, might follow the admission (Cohen and Savin-Williams, 1996). Often times, a same sex friend is the first person to be told, followed commonly by the persons mother (Savin-Williams, 1998). Depending of race, SES, and culture, 60-80% of lesbian teen disclose to their mothers, compared to the 50 to 65% that eventually discloses to their father (Savin-Williams, 1998). Accounts from many homosexual teens reveal that they choice to disclose to their mother first because they felt that she would be more accepting (Pilkington and DAugelli, 1995). Although between 60-80% of lesbians come out to at least one parent, the average age in which they reveal their homosexual identity to other is often later than their male homosexual counterparts (Savin-Williams, 1998). Despite the fact that coming out is often as the step before intergration in classic development models, it should be coming out can be problematic and come with another set of stressors. People commonly think that coming out is a one-time event, but every time a lesbian meets someone know or start a new group, they have to figure out if the people are accepting of their sexual orientation, integrate their orientation into their new life, and come out again. Many lesbian also find communities where there their sexual orientation is not acceptable, therefore they are only be partly out. When a lesbians are partly out, they accept their lesbian identity in their personal life, but at work or school they might omit details about their personal life or lie about their sexual identity. Mental Health Issues facing Non-Heterosexual Women Prior to 1973, homosexuality was a diagnosed disorder in the DSM. In 1973, the

American Psychiatric Association removed homosexuality because new research and theory began to challenge the validity of psychoanalytic theory as the sole explanation of homosexuality. Current research finds out glaring different between heterosexual and homosexual women on measures as such self-esteem and psychological distress. (Balsam, 2005). However, lesbian women are more like to consider and attempt suicide along with using psychotherapy (it is important to note that because so many lesbians seek psychotherapy the America Psychological Association adopted new guidelines for psychotherapy with homosexual). Researchers push that a lesbian identity is not an immediate prescription for adjustment problems; instead, it could be seen as a risk factor just like race or SES. Because lesbian women often face multiple minority status, they are often are at high risk for problems like depression and suicide, but it is important to remember that sexual orientation is not a determinate. Since lesbians face a great deal of prejudice and discrimination from misconception about their sexual orientation, they often have to develop coping mechanisms to deal with these problems. Shachar and Gilbert (1983) presented three different coping mechanisms that they found many lesbian women use to deal with role conflicts: structural role redefinition, personal role redefinition, and reactive behavior. Women who engaged in structural and personal role redefinition tended to be more successful, than those engage in reactive behavior and attempt to deny or tried to meet all of their role demands. Not only were women who engaged in structural and personal role redefinition, they also tended to show significantly higher levels of self esteem. Intersections of Sexual Identity, Race, and Social Status Lesbian women of color experience the treat of triple oppression: discrimination from sexual orientation, race, and gender. Each individual lesbian woman may experience different

conflicts depending on ethnic group membership. Although Latin culture encourages closeness, both physical and emotional, among women, Latin culture has proven to have even more restrictive attitudes about lesbianism than Euro-American culture. Because Latin cultures place an emphasis on the nuclear family (mother, father, children), lesbians feel like an outsider (Espin, 1978). The feelings of loneliness often result in Latino lesbians to become apart of the Euro-American lesbian community while remaining in the closet to their family members. This often causes the Latino women extreme difficulties when choosing an identity. Asian American lesbians often feel that same pressure to choose between their sexual and racial identity. In fact, studies have shown that many Asian American lesbians feel more strongly identified to their lesbian identity than their racial identity (Chen, 1993). Asian American lesbians, like Latin, are seen as denouncing their roles as wives and mothers; therefore, it is very stigmatized. Some Asian cultures even go as far to claim that homosexual does not exist in their culture; it is a white, Western phenomenon (Chan, 1993). It is heavy prejudice like this with pushes many Asian American lesbians to identify more with the white lesbian community. African American lesbians face equal ridicule and homophobic sentiments as Asian and Latin Americans. Because the African American community strives for respect and acceptance after historical race tension in the United States, any sexual behavior that deviates from norms is seen as an embarrassment because it reflects poorly on the Black community as a whole (Green, 2000). In addition to feeling separate from ethnic identity, minority homosexual individuals feel that they have fewer avenues for support than white individuals because most homosexual help centers are located in white homosexual communities (Gallor & Fassinger, 2010). Despite the fact that minority lesbians often face being disowned by their cultural background, there are some advantages to having these multiple minority statuses. African

American and Latina lesbians have been shown to engage in minority sexual exploration at an earlier age (14.5 years) than their White counterparts (17.5 years). Also, women are color tend to commit to their lesbian identities at somewhat earlier ages (21.5 years compared to 23). The research has also postulated that women of color tend to have fewer adjustment issues with their minority sexual status because they have already learned how to navigate minority statuses because of their race (Parks, Hughes, & Matthews, 2004). Conclusion Research about the lesbian experience has grown exponentially in the past 30 decades. However, there are still a great deal of information that is unknown about lesbians. Research about lesbianism is still relatively new with tentative results. As the literature on the topic grows, more conclusions find support- as well as created. Theories that once focused on disturbances and psychopathology now focus on differences in development. It is important to also remember many of the sexual identity studies are generated from self- reported information by the participants; there may be several lesbian identities and subcultures that empirical research has yet to discover. Despite the fact that research my never capture what being a lesbian means to every single individual, it will help create more resources to help lesbian identifying women and educate and eliminate societys prejudice and stigma towards lesbianism.

References Bailey, J.M., Pillard, R.C., Neale, M.C., & Agyei, Y. (1993). Hertiable factors influence sexual orientation in women. Archives of General Psychiatry, 50, 217-223. Bailey, J.M., Gaulin, S., Agyei, Y., & Gladue, B. (1994). Effects of gender and sexual orientation on evolutionary relevant aspects of human mating psychology. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 1081-1093. Balsam, K. (2005). Mental health of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and heterosexual siblings: Effects of gender, sexual orientation, and family. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 114, 471-476. Bell, A., Weinberg, M., Hammersmith, S. (1981). Sexual preference: Its development in men and women. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Brown, L. S. (1995). Lesbian identities: Concepts and issues. In A. R. D'Augelli & C. J. Patterson (Eds.), Lesbian, gay, and bisexual identities over the lifespan: Psychological perspectives (pp. 3-23). New York: Oxford University Press. Cass, V. (1979). Homosexuality identity formation: A theoretical model. Journal of Homosexuality, 4, 219-235. Chan, C.S. (1993). Issues of identity development among Asian-American Lesbians and gay men. In L.D. Garnets & D.C. Kimmel, Psychological perspectives on lesbian and gay male experience (pp. 376-387). New York: Columbia University Press. Cohen, K.M & Savin-Williams, R.C. (1996). Developmental Perspectives on Coming Out to Self and Others. In R. C. Savin-Williams and K.M. Cohen, The Lives of Lesbians, Gays, and Bisexuals: Children to Adults (pp.113-151). Fort Worth: TX: Harcourt Brace Espin, O. M. (1978). Issues of identity in the psychology of Latina Psychologies Collective, . Lesbian Psychologies. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. Ford, C. & Beach, F. (1951). Patterns of sexual behavior. New York: Harper & Row. Gallor, S. M. and Fassinger, R. E. (2010) Social Support, Ethnic Identity, and Sexual Identity of Lesbians and Gay Men. Journal of Gay & Lesbian Social Services, 22, 287- 231. Greene, B. (2000). African American lesbian and bisexual women. Journal of Social Issues, 56, 239-250. Herdt, G. (1984). Ritualized Homosexuality in Melanesia. Berkley: University of California Press. Parks, C., Hughes, T., Matthews, A. (2004). Race/ethnicity and sexual orientation: intersecting identities. Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology, 10, 241-254.

Rhoads, R. A. (1994). Coming out in college: The struggle for a queer identity. Westport, CT: Bergin & Garvey. Rosario, M., Schrimshaw, E., Hunter, J., Levy-Warren, A. (2009). The coming out process of young lesbians and bisexual women: are there butch/femme differences in sexual identity development? Journal of Sexual Behavior, 38, 34-49. Savin-Williams, R. C. (1990). Gay and lesbian youth: Expressions of identity. New York: Hemisphere Publishing. Savin-Williams, R. C. (1998). "...And then I became gay. New York: Routledge. Shachar, S. & Gilbert, L. (1983). Working lesbians: Role conflicts and coping strategies. Psychology of Women Quarterly,7. 244-256. Valanis, B. (2000). Sexual orientation and health: Comparisons in the Womens Health Initiative sample. Archives of Family Medicine, 9, 843-853.