Professional Documents
Culture Documents
ABSTRACT
The chapter introduces the reader to select language of human sexuality and
the definitions and characteristics of some key terms related to lesbian, gay,
bisexual, transgender, and questioning/queer (LGBTQ+), identifies different
theoretical perspectives of human sexuality and sexual orientation, and dis-
cusses select LGBTQ+ theories and concepts in a historical context that library
and information science (LIS) professionals should consider while performing
their roles related to information creation–organization–management–dis-
semination–research processes. It helps better understand the scope of what is
LGBTQ+ information and traces its interdisciplinary connections to reflect on
its place within the LIS professions. The chapter discusses these implications
with the expectation of the LIS professional to take concrete actions in changing
the conditions that lack fairness, equality/equity, justice, and/or human rights
for LGBTQ+ people via the use of information. Important considerations in
this regard include the need for an integrative interdisciplinary LGBTQ+ infor-
mation model, growth of a diversified LGBTQ+ knowledge base and experi-
ences, holistic LGBTQ+ information representations, LGBTQ+ activism, and
participatory engagement and inclusion of LGBTQ+ users.
Keywords: Interdisciplinary connections; LGBTQ+; language of human
sexuality; theoretical perspectives; theories and concepts; implications for LIS
What is straight? A line can be straight, or a street, but the human heart, oh, no, it’s curved like
a road through mountains. Tennessee Williams (1947, A Streetcar Named Desire)
chapter builds on the definitions and characteristics of key terms and identifies the
various theoretical perspectives of human sexuality and sexual orientation to pro-
vide the LIS professional with accurate information on these topics to deliver to their
patrons, develop balanced points of views while addressing critical arguments, and
promote collections that contain authoritative and current information.
Human sexuality captures the myriad ways of how people experience the erotic
urge and express themselves as sexual beings. The Merriam-Webster Dictionary
(2019) defines the common use of the noun “sexuality” in terms of (paraphrased
and expanded):
According to the author, the definition of this third interrelated term “sexual
identity” represents how a person thinks of their self in who they are romanti-
cally or sexually attracted to. This is not always identical to sexual orientation
as “identity changes; orientation endures” even though owing to the complexi-
ties and diversities in the human experience, especially for minority sexualities,
scholars recognize these prescribed dictums to be highly controversial (Cass,
1984; Coleman, 1988; Richardson, 1984; Troiden, 1988). Unfortunately, also, the
nature of human experience and attraction is narrowly represented in these terms
that have the word “sex” integral to generate meanings that invariably end up
dwelling on only the physical aspects (Youdell, 2005).
sole purpose of human biology is procreation, and, if homosexual men are less
likely to procreate, their genes will not be passed on to their offspring, and the
“gay gene” determining their homosexual identity will eventually die out (Hu
et al., 1995; Wilson & Rahman, 2008).
The physiological perspective: Closely connected to the biological understand-
ing, the physiological perspective focuses on the formation and functioning of the
human body and mind and its urges and impulses as a physical entity (Bolin &
Whelehan, 2009). Connected to the physiological is also the evolutionary per-
spective that includes human growth and development in its basic reproductive
mechanism, the nature of erotic drive, including sexual intercourse and sexual
contact in all its forms, and sexual consciousness and communication (Buss,
2016; Ryabko & Reznikova, 2015). This point of view also recognizes that the
human physical attraction and the body’s stimulation can be understood as physi-
ological process(es) in terms of heat, energy, electrical impulses, chemical reac-
tions, as well as organic and neurological responses and hormonal issues (Ross &
Rapp, 1981). It explains sexuality in males and females as unique individuals who
need the various degrees of visual and/or emotional stimulation and more, to
generate these physically oriented processes to play themselves out (King, 2011).
Understanding of trans physiologies is only recently getting greater attention
than in the past (Bevan, 2016).
The psychological perspective: Extending to new levels Sigmund Freud’s basic
premise of the inherent bisexual nature of all human beings and his broad redefin-
ing of sexuality to include any form of pleasure emerging from the human body
(and mind) (1994), the psychological perspective recognizes that the human drive,
attractions, and interactions between people are shaped by a desire to fulfill a myr-
iad of human needs that include the physical, mental/intellectual, emotional, social,
spiritual, and others (Dess, Marecek, & Bell, 2018). These needs are fulfilled at vari-
ous levels and in various degrees from different (or same) individuals, irrespective
of the sex/gender of the individuals through who they are getting met (Coon &
Mitterer, 2007). It is then based on each person’s particular experienced social real-
ity in different environment(s) throughout their life that the person consciously
or unconsciously allows to dictate (i.e., “condition”) how and where they become
aware of, and desire, seek, and find fulfillment to these varied needs in different oth-
ers (or in the same individual) (Kelly, 2010). Expressing this idea, traditional eastern
20 BHARAT MEHRA
mythologies emerging from China, Japan, and India, as well those in the Greco-
Roman tradition and from the tribal aboriginal cultures are replete of gods and
goddesses, symbols, concepts, myths, and images that reflect this “bisexual” nature
of human beings (Gregg, 2017; Rodriguez, Lytle, & Vaughan, 2013). According
to the psychological perspective, sexuality is an integration of the various human
needs at different degrees and physical awareness and attraction are connected to
other aspects of the human experience. In the psychological perspective, the goal
is to provide a holistic understanding of a human being where sexuality is seen to
encompass thoughts (cognition), emotions (feelings and affective), actions (physi-
cal), and more (Lehmiller, 2017). The psychological (thoughts and feelings) and
physical (behavior) makeup of the individual are intimately connected in shaping
attractions and interactions between people that may or may not get translated into
Downloaded by Stockholm University Library At 10:15 25 April 2019 (PT)
sexual behavior and, yet, are part of the human nature and sexuality.
The child development and identity formation perspective: As a subset of the
psychological perspective, the focus here is on the processes associated with sex-
ual identity formation from birth to child development stages of puberty and
adolescence to adulthood (Cook & Cook, 2008). Even though the genetic code
provides a blueprint mapping human nature, the role of the human condition
and the human experience cannot be understated (Decker, 2010). They play a
mutual role as sexual identity emerges during the life course journey (Kimmel &
Plante, 2004). Personal experimentation in early life may help establish pref-
erences (Harwood, Miller, & Vasta, 2008). It is debatable if the role of family
structure, relationship with the father and mother, relationship between parents,
liberal versus conservative upbringing, etc., influence sexual identity and behavior
though these are determinants in individual child development, personal iden-
tity formation, and learning of social interactions with others (Jones, Duffey, &
Haberstroh, 2016). The Kinsey Reports (1948 and 1953) introduced the Kinsey
Scale a seven-point system identifying sexual orientation as a continuum that is
most commonly cited to support claims of 10% for homosexuality in the general
population even though findings were not meant to be considered absolute.
The sociological perspective: Human sexuality is part and parcel of the social
experience of a person (Rahman & Jackson, 2010). There are explicit and implicit
rules, norms, and values of thoughts, feelings, and behavior a person learns
throughout their lifetime as they become “informed” who they are (Seidman,
2003). Conscious awareness and expression of sexuality might also be influenced
by the social dimensions of experience as an individual is “conditioned” based on
their past experience (Beard et al., 2015). Sociologist Paula Rodriguez Rust (2000)
calls for a more multidimensional characterization of sexual orientation:
Most alternative models of sexuality … define sexual orientation in terms of dichotomous bio-
logical sex or gender …. Most theorists would not eliminate the reference to sex or gender, but
instead advocate incorporating more complex nonbinary concepts of sex or gender, more com-
plex relationships between sex, gender, and sexuality, and/or additional nongendered dimen-
sions into models of sexuality.
societies (past and present) in terms of the cultural, political, religious, legal, social,
economic, and other aspects related to sexuality (Frayser, 1985). One controver-
sial example of this viewpoint applied to understanding of LGBTQ+ sexuality
in the twenty-first century is Charles Darwin’s (1859) kin selection evolutionary
model recorded in his seminal work The Origin of Species that explained the
behavior of sterile social honeybees who existed to insure the reproductive suc-
cess of their relatives (Block & Adriaens, 2004). LGBTQ+ people’s existence is
explained in terms of kin selection (Bobrow & Bailey, 2001) based on the assump-
tion that even if they may not procreate, their sexual identity (and the existence of
the “gay gene”) supports the survival of their relatives (e.g., siblings and parents)
and their relatives’ offspring (e.g., nieces and nephews), thereby, leading to the
propagation of their genes (VanderLaan, Forrester, Petterson, & Vasey, 2012).
Downloaded by Stockholm University Library At 10:15 25 April 2019 (PT)
regularly practiced policies and actions of human rights denial toward Palestine
(Ghosh, 2018). Though, this variation of the sociocultural perspective helps to
understand the global differences in the representation of sexuality and sexual
orientation (Buffington, Luibheid, & Guy, 2014). It is also insightful in the con-
text of understanding the varied experiences and realities for diverse demographi-
cally demarcated categories of people that include the individuals belonging to
the LGBTQ+, in addition to their intersections with those who belong to minor-
ity categories based on race/ethnicity, age, income, education, mental and physi-
cal abilities, etc. (Balsam, Molina, Beadnell, Simoni, & Walters, 2011).
The philosophical/religious perspective: The philosophical perspective of sexu-
ality includes a discussion of the topic in relation to the moral, ethical, theo-
logical, spiritual, or religious dimensions of the human experience (Kelly, 2013
Downloaded by Stockholm University Library At 10:15 25 April 2019 (PT)
on Foucault’s History of Sexuality Volume 1). Media attention has been given
to these discussions that vary from region to region and/or religion to religion
intersections (e.g., Kugle, 2003; Miller, 2017). The informed information profes-
sional should be aware and familiar with the varied philosophical positions of
religious denominations and at different levels of intersection depending upon
what environment they are working in based on what might be the demographic
characteristics of the communities they serve (Petro, 2016). For example, in the
broad region termed as the “South” in the United States, a common discussion
in LGBTQ+ communities is surrounding the “sexuality versus spirituality” dis-
course since their growing up experiences might have been greatly influenced by
the conservative Christian interpretations (e.g., Baptist) of religion (Johnson,
2011). There is still much cultural variations in attitudes, philosophies, and behav-
iors within the “South’s” geographical region to region as well (Creech, 2011).
Even recently in 2017, the religious leaders of the Southern Baptist Convention,
representing the largest Protestant denomination of a 15 million strong congrega-
tion, decried LGBTQ+ people as “inconsistent with God’s holy purposes in crea-
tion and redemption” (Human Rights Campaign, 2018a). This might not be so
for different denominational faiths of Christianity or other religions even in the
same region (Shore-Goss, Bohache, Cheng, & West, 2013). For example, in spite
of contentious histories on the topic, contemporary Quakers or the Unitarian
Universalists are believed to have embraced a more accepting and supportive
approach toward an understanding of sexuality (Doan & Kamphausen, 2013;
Morriss, Agate, Bassham, & Svoboda, 1999).
The humanistic perspective: The humanistic perspective (with roots in psychol-
ogy), with its core respect for all human beings, recognizes the individual limita-
tions of the above-identified perspectives (and others) taken separately since they
all provide an incomplete view regarding the notion of sexuality in the context
of the entirety of human experience (Human Rights Campaign, 2018b). Recent
discussions to “resist the ‘humanist enticements’ associated with sexuality” have
emerged from post-structuralism in “showing how the social produces culturally
specific sexual knowledgeabilities” and anti-humanist moves “to overturn anthro-
pocentric privileging of the human body and subject as the locus of sexuality”
(Fox & Alldred, 2013, p. 769). Limitations of typologies and formulations repre-
sented in the study of sexuality, sexual orientation, and gender, which spotlight
What is “LGBTQ+” Information? 23
the hegemonic dimension of physicality and the physical act beyond any other in
human interactions, are also discussed (Frenk & McCormack, 2016). A humanis-
tic perspective regards the complete person beyond just the sexual experiences in
what attracts and helps nurture connections in people to each other (Diamond,
2005). The humanistic perspective calls for a holistic view of human beings and
inclusivity. It draws intersections in the various perspectives to represent an inter-
twining understanding of sexuality with other experiences in particular contexts
that recognize us as human beings who are attracted to each in many ways for a
myriad of reasons (Laff, 2001).
Gender and sexuality: An outline of perspectives related to sexuality is incom-
plete without a note on the relationship between the concepts of gender/gender
identity and sexuality/sexual orientation (see Chapter 2 for select glossary of
Downloaded by Stockholm University Library At 10:15 25 April 2019 (PT)
LGBTQ+ terms). Terms and meanings associated with the two concepts have
been conflated in the public imagination especially in the context of LGBTQ+
people (Manalansan, 2006). Gender in terms of characteristics, behaviors, man-
nerisms, and representations of masculinity, femininity, etc., is socially con-
structed (Hall & Bucholtz, 2012). Scholars now believe socially experienced
realities do have some influence on the formation of human sexuality and sexual
orientation though the ambiguity of their influence as reflected in the past nature-
versus-nurture debates in popular culture might have played a role in the unin-
formed library patron assuming that they are both exactly the same (Herek, 1986).
Gender identity allows for more generous modes of expressions as a broader
entity while sexual identity is more specific based on who an individual is sexually
attracted to (or has sex with) (Diamond & Savin-Williams, 2003). Sexuality is also
broader than sexual orientation and sexual identity in that it is based on who an
individual might be attracted to (as compared to sexually attracted to) (Weeks,
2002). Obviously, there are overlaps in the meanings between these concepts and
varied interpretations. The inclusion of the word “sex” in sexuality and related
terms has also led to a limited understanding of human attractions pigeon-holed
in its focus only on the physical dimensions of the human experience (Nardi &
Schneider, 1998).
The emerging LIS perspective: The LIS perspective considers it of utmost
importance for the librarian and information professional to recognize that sex-
uality and sexual orientation should not be used to discriminate in the provi-
sion of information services, resources, programs, collections, materials, events,
spaces, and conducting other information-related work (Mehra & Tidwell, 2014).
LGBTQ+ patrons deserve respect and accurate, authoritative, and updated infor-
mation delivered in a friendly and non-judgmental manner just like everyone else
(Mehra & Braquet, 2011). Inclusiveness pervades all the six Articles of the Library
Bill of Rights that was initially adopted on June 19, 1939, and amended several
times since by the American Library Association Council. Libraries are identified
as forums for information and ideas and have stringent and unequivocal obliga-
tion to resist efforts that systematically exclude materials dealing with any subject
matter, provide information presenting all points of view, challenge censorship,
and cooperate with partners concerned with resisting abridgement of free expres-
sion. This includes LGBTQ+ subjects and needs of the LGBTQ+ patrons since
24 BHARAT MEHRA
they are part of the diverse communities that libraries serve. The LIS perspec-
tive also recognizes that LGBTQ+ people have been marginalized owing to their
sexuality, sexual orientation, and/or gender identities. It includes the mutually
informing of library science and information science traditions toward drawing
theory–practice intersections that further an active role of the LIS professional in
LGBTQ+ advocacy. The goal is to develop inclusivity and an equitable, fair, and
just representation of the LGBTQ+ in various information-related work at the
local, regional, national, and international levels (Mehra, Haley, & Lane, 2015).
(More aspects related to the LIS perspective is at the end of the chapter.)
This section identifies select theories and concepts related to sexuality and same-
sex orientation in order to get better informed about the “LGBTQ+.” Fig. 1
visualizes the “two-way” relationships to represent the influences of these related
theories and constructs informing our understanding of LGBTQ+ sexualities
and sexual orientations (in plural) while themselves getting impacted by the
knowledge related to the LGBTQ+.
values) of the “other” to be a threat to their own existence. The concept of “orien-
talism” is a recently problematized and politicized construct that reflects these in its
fetishization of the non-European world within three actions of homogenization,
feminization, and/or essentialization (Lockman, 2009; Macfie, 2001). Just as soci-
ety has “othered” LGBTQ+ people around the world (Rothmann & Simmonds,
2015), white/Anglo-American LGBTQ+ communities have “othered” people of
color and/or non-western experiences/in their midst along some of these lines of
prejudices (Jones, 2016; Maxwell, 2016; Munoz, 2013).
men are not interested in women sexually) while the feminist commitment to
individual sexual self-determination includes, for most feminists, a commitment
to gay rights.
Radical feminism challenges existing social norms and social institutions
and seeks a radical restructuring of society in which patriarchy is abolished all-
together and male supremacy is completely eliminated in all social and economic
contexts, rather than through only a limited political process (Daly, 2016; Echols,
1986; Thompson, 2001). It includes challenging traditional gender roles, opposing
the sexual objectification of women, and raising public awareness about violence
and abuse of women (Chambers, 2005). Transnational feminism that emerged
in the 1970s is a contemporary feminist paradigm that examines the intersec-
tions between gender, race, sexuality, nationhood, and economic exploitation in
a global context (Ferree & Tripp, 2006). It critiques the social, political, and eco-
nomic conditions comprising imperialism; their connections to colonialism and
nationalism; and, the role of gender, state, race, class, and sexuality in the organi-
zation of resistance to hegemonies in the making and unmaking of nation and
nation-state (Campt & Thomas, 2008). Transnational feminist Chandra Talpade
Mohanty (2003) illustrates the concept by stating:
In this perspective, concrete struggles for survival rather than putatively common oppression
or shared identity is seen as the more reliable basis for solidarity, and “coalition” rather than
“unity” is the preferred political goal. (p. 117)
(Bernstein, 2002). John D’Emilio (1992), in the foreword to the reissue of Out
of the Closets, writes:
[A]s the 1970s wore on, the gay and lesbian movement began to travel along many different
paths. One of these might be labeled a gay rights movement. Composed mostly of white, middle-
class, gay men, though with some lesbians and people of color as well, this reform-orientated
politics focused on gay issues only and largely abandoned the broad analysis of oppression that
animated gay liberation. These activists, many of whom were quite militant in the tactics they
espoused, sought entry into the system on terms of equality. (p. xxv)
D’Emilio (1992), however, draws parallels with radical feminists in his cri-
tique of the gay liberationists who were “moralistic and condescending” and in
the radicalism of their agenda that constructed “prescriptive sexual politics” in
their attacks on “roles, anonymous sex, objectification, and bar culture,” similar
Downloaded by Stockholm University Library At 10:15 25 April 2019 (PT)
to accusations in the so-called feminist sexuality debates of the 1980s (p. xxvii)
where the radical feminist criticism of pornography and prostitutions was also
attacked for being right wing and moralistic (Vance, 1984).
Women’s studies recognize the intersections between gender, race, sexuality,
class, and nation in the creation of social inequalities and in identity formation
that is seen as a complex social process and phenomena (Jerkins, 2018). Scholars
in women’s studies draw ideally on a feminist pedagogy among a diverse set of
methodologies including standpoint theory, intersectionality, multiculturalism,
transnational feminism, auto-ethnography, reading practices associated with crit-
ical theory, post-structuralism, and queer theory, among others (Bowles & Klein,
1983; Smith, 2013). Identifying with the practical dimensions of feminist theory,
though gender and women are at the heart of feminist pedagogical practices while
promoting the importance of social change, women’s studies also affiliates itself
with other forms of critical pedagogy including those focused on race and eth-
nicity, sexual orientation, class, postcolonialism, and globalization (Chavez &
Griffin, 2012). In its objective to understand and analyze gender inequality, the
feminist theory provides a theoretical and philosophical base and examines wom-
en’s social roles, experience, interests, and feminist politics in a variety of fields,
such as anthropology, sociology, communication, psychoanalysis, economics, lit-
erature, education, and philosophy (Grant, 1993). Themes of challenged analysis
are applied toward discrimination, sexual objectification, oppression, patriarchy,
stereotyping, and others (hooks, 2000). As a form of critical pedagogy, feminist
pedagogy aims “to help students develop consciousness of freedom, recognize
authoritarian tendencies, and connect knowledge to power and the ability to take
constructive action” (Giroux, 2010, para. 1).
Critical Theory
Drawing on the critical methods of Karl Marx and Sigmund Freud, in the 1930s
Germany, the Frankfurt School coined the term critical theory in sociology and
political philosophy to provide a reflective assessment and critique of society and
culture by applying knowledge from various disciplinary domains (Felluga, 2015).
Max Horkheimer (1895–1973) described a theory as critical insofar as it seeks “to
liberate human beings from the circumstances that enslave them” (1982, p. 244).
What is “LGBTQ+” Information? 31
According to Raymond Geuss (1981), the critical theory asserts that ideology
is the principal obstacle to human liberation. Five significant Frankfurt School
theoreticians included: Herbert Marcuse, Theodor Adorno, Max Horkheimer,
Walter Benjamin, and Erich Fromm (Jay, 1996). Modern critical theorists
include György Lukács and Antonio Gramsci, as well as the second-generation
Frankfurt School scholars, notably Jürgen Habermas who took the critical theory
from its roots in German idealism and introduced elements of American pragma-
tism where concern for social “base and superstructure,” including the forces and
relations of production, employer–employee work conditions, division of labor,
property relations, cultural institutions, political power structures, roles and ritu-
als, and the nature of state control have become the cornerstones of contempo-
rary critical theory (Outhwaite, 1988).
Downloaded by Stockholm University Library At 10:15 25 April 2019 (PT)
The critical theory promotes progressive actions for change that question
traditional understandings and scrutinize existing values, practices, ideological
frameworks, and processes to promote a progressive society (Froomkin, 2003;
Habermas, 1993; Kellner, 1989). This includes points of view of the under-repre-
sented in order to “do justice to a diversity of socially defined perspectives while
providing a grounding for the evaluation of controversial problems” (Endres,
1996, p. 24; Mehra & Bishop, 2007). The development of modern thinking toward
sexuality and sexual orientation, LGBTQ+ advocacy and human rights discourse
focusing on gay rights, and other progressive development in contemporary soci-
ety is a result of practical applications of critical theory in today’s world.
Esteban Muñoz, and, Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick, among others (Pullen, Harding, &
Phillips, 2017). Queer theory extends feminist challenges to the notion that fixed
gender is part of the fundamental self and lesbian/gay studies that provided scru-
tiny of the social construction of sexual activities and sexual identities as part
of the human experience (Nagoshi, Nagoshi, & Brzuzy, 2013). The queer theory
keeps its focus on any form of sexual (and human) activity or sexual (and human)
identity irrespective of whether they fall under the so-called socially constructed
normative and deviant categories while going beyond gay/lesbian studies that ini-
tially were concerned with narrow inquiries of natural and/or unnatural homo-
sexual behaviors (Ruti, 2017). The term “homosexual” has now become defunct
and outdated owing to its dehumanizing and clinical connotations (Peters, 2014).
The fluidity of sex, sexuality, gender, identity, and desire is central to the queer
Downloaded by Stockholm University Library At 10:15 25 April 2019 (PT)
theory and its focus on ambiguities is based on deflating notions of stable and
correlated sexes, sexualities, and genders that has emerged specifically from les-
bian and gay assessment of the post-structuralist perspective of identity develop-
ment as an assemblage of multiple and unstable positions (Savin-Williams, 2017).
The queer theory, thus, places contemporary discourses surrounding the
“queer” in a historical and cultural context and recognizes the pros and cons
of using contemporary terminologies and descriptions associated with the
“LGBTQ+” since it will constantly keep growing as new understandings and
knowledge emerges. For example, new constructs have recently led to a crea-
tion of LGBT Studies and Transgender Studies (among others) to represent the
emerging valued areas of related knowledge domains in many institutions of
higher learning in the United States (Lovaas, Elia, & Yep, 2006; Stryker, 2013).
Intersectionality
As a study of interactions between forms or systems of oppression, domination,
and discrimination, intersectionality (or intersectionalism) traces back to the
nineteenth century, though, as a feminist sociological theory, it was first intro-
duced by Kimberlé Crenshaw in 1989. Intersectionality examines how various
intersecting categories, such as gender, sexual orientation, race, class, ability, reli-
gion, caste, species, and other markers of biological, social, and cultural identity,
lead to the systemic forms of oppression, injustice, and inequality at multiple and
often simultaneous levels (Davis, 2008). Such an understanding recognizes the
complexities of experience, behavior, identity, and reality beyond human beings
pigeonholed into simple categories and neat boxes in the classical conceptualiza-
tions of social oppression, such as racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia,
and religious bigotry, which are considered to act independently of each other
(Luyckx, Schwartz, Goossens, Beyers, & Missotten, 2011; McCall, 2008). In The
Social Organization of Sexuality: Sexual Practices in the United States, Edward
O. Laumann (1994) identifies the difficulties that arise due to the many complexi-
ties and problems associated in making “multidimensional conceptualizations”
(pp. 298–301). As an applicatory framework, intersectionality was initially used
to explore the oppression of women though today people across disciplines and
contexts employ its practices and analytical approaches to all populations to
What is “LGBTQ+” Information? 33
plinary connections and the various theories and concepts as well as the brief
historical milestones of interrelated constructs associated with sexuality and
same-sex orientation weaved into the narrative? How can these inform our efforts
to fill gaps and extend LIS work and the impact of librarianship in integrating an
“invisibilized” knowledge domain, meeting information behavior expectations of
a marginalized population, and developing specific information resources/systems
design for LGBTQ+ people that are more relevant and up-to-date with the expec-
tations of the current times? Use of the term “invisibilized” draws attention to the
reality of LGBTQ+ invisibility that has been intentionally created and imposed
over the years on every aspect of information provision thanks to the dictum of
social mores, religious values, and/or sociocultural and sociopolitical factors asso-
ciated with perpetuating heteronormativity as an all-encompassing human condi-
tion (Jackson, 2006; Oswald, Blume, & Marks, 2005; Schilt & Westbrook, 2009).
The LIS professions and their institutions of privilege have not been immune from
these effects. In order for LIS professionals to serve as proactive agents of social
justice, it is important for them to now critically assess their current knowledge,
standards, policies, and practices (Mehra & Braquet, 2014). It is also pertinent for
them to critically rectify on all aspects of their information creation–organiza-
tion–management–dissemination–education responses, services, and products to
identify what aspects of the “LGBTQ+” have been left out as a result of these
dysfunctional aspects of a hegemonic global culture (Mehra, 2011). The use of
the adjective “progressive” in describing the expected role of the LIS professional
in the chapter refers to an expectation to take concrete actions in changing the
conditions that lack fairness, equality/equity, justice, and/or human rights for
LGBTQ+ people via the use of information (Rioux & Mehra, 2016). The follow-
ing are a few important considerations in this regard.
the “interest, information, and enlightenment of all people of the community the
library serves,” non-exclusion of materials “because of the origin, background,
or views of those contributing to their creation,” and the obligation of libraries
to “provide materials and information presenting all points of view on current
and historical issues.” Fig. 2 integrates a few interdisciplinary LGBTQ+ perspec-
tives that were touched upon in this chapter. Such an integrative interdisciplinary
LGBTQ+ information model should also include the theories and constructs
related to sexualities and sexual orientations that were visualized in Fig. 1 and
discussed earlier in this chapter.
On one level, the various LGBTQ+ perspectives listed can be considered sim-
plistic. For example, the “philosophical” and “religious” perspectives can be sepa-
rated. Some examples of the listed disciplines might be considered too broad and
Downloaded by Stockholm University Library At 10:15 25 April 2019 (PT)
not at the same related levels as the others (e.g., there might be several perspec-
tives within the “psychological” perspective such as behavioral, cognitive, affec-
tive, etc.). The terminology and vocabulary representing the perspectives, too,
might be considered by some to need change. The strategy of listing the identified
perspectives is for the reader to consider them as “place-holders” to be reflected
upon and modified accordingly based on a conscious and deliberate assessment
by the progressive librarian in response to the need for representing diverse view-
points, contextually situated relevance, prevailing knowledge, and expectations of
localized user communities. A LGBTQ+ LibGuide of sorts is one example of an
information resource that can be designed to integrate some of these listings and
descriptions to contextualize and demarcate information-related resources, mate-
rials, and services that can get organized according to the identified (or modified)
categories in the model.
terminologies and vocabularies (Alder, 2009; Olson, 1998; Olson & Boll, 2001).
Contemporary literature continues to draw attention to the limitations and biases
in these authoritative sources, such as the Library of Congress Subject Headings,
the Library of Congress Authority Files (Name and Subject), the Dewey Decimal
Classification, and others, toward LGBTQ+ content in not being inclusive of even
some of the fundamental descriptors and headings as well as their relationships
(via broader, narrower, and related terms and semantic maps) (Drabinski, 2013;
Greenblatt, 2011; Olson, 2007). The need to provide mechanisms of integrating
localized folksonomies and globalized descriptions used by individuals belonging
to the categories and subgroups associated with the “LGBTQ+” is also important
(Bates & Rowley, 2011; Colbert, 2017; Ornelas, 2011). A highly prioritized task
for a concerned LIS professional should be to map current subjects, topics, words,
Downloaded by Stockholm University Library At 10:15 25 April 2019 (PT)
terms, and constructs representing various viewpoints across disciplines and user-
librarian/local-global demarcations based on gaps and limitations in the formal
professional tools and resources in specialized areas (Museus & Griffin, 2011;
Singh, 2016). Developing a holistic LGBTQ+ knowledge ontology will make visi-
ble these “invisiblized” content areas and vocabularies (e.g., related to transgender/
transsexual content) (Gustavson, 2009; Pereira & Baranauskas, 2018).
LGBTQ+ Activism
Information advocacy and activism means venturing outside of our bastions
of privileged spaces embedded in the library or information agencies that we
are part of, to identify and develop collaborating initiatives and activities that
are mutually beneficial and further LGBTQ+ concerns and issues on everyday
lives (Markshamer & Tobin, 2014; Mehra & Braquet, 2007). The Public Library
Association (n.d.), a division of the American Library Association, considers
advocacy as “the process of acting on behalf of the public library to increase
public funds and ensure that it has the resources need to be up to date … critical
to the success of libraries.” This is a narrow, internalized, library-centric, self-
absorbed, and solely selfish definition on the website of a professional association
that represents a public service agency with a long history of rhetoric around
engaging with communities and generating external impact (de la McCook &
Bossaller, 2017; Mehra, Rioux, & Albright, 2009). Beyond serving as self-advo-
cates, where is the notion of advocating for external disenfranchised communi-
ties? Unfortunate is a complete absence of words representing understanding in
terms of advocacy in venturing out to make a difference in their communities of
which public libraries are a part of, and, that support them financially via the tax-
payer’s contributions (Lankes, 2016). Within such a limited climate and histori-
cal legacy, it is not surprising the professions have encountered strong resistance
to change from their passive role of bystanders and “neutral” stance (Gregogy
& Higgins, 2013; Moreillon, 2018; Shirley & Baharark, 2017). Nor is it unex-
pected that they have not been proactive supporters traditionally of LGBTQ+
concerns or expectations of other disadvantaged populations in significant and
substantial ways that these communities have considered meaningful (Mehra &
Braquet, 2006). Subsequently, public perceptions, including those of key political
What is “LGBTQ+” Information? 37
players in society too, have not always been very favorable toward public libraries
(Lankes, 2015).
move forward in how their information agency and organization can shape life
experiences that make a difference to people. It will in turn mobilize public opin-
ion in favor of the library and help it extend its impact.
CONCLUSION
What are human attractions? Various intertwining physical, psychological, emo-
tional, social, cultural, intellectual, and other needs shape us as human beings in
who we are attracted to on diverse levels. The inclusion of the term “sex” in the
words “sexuality” and “sexual orientation” does not cut it since they limit the
meanings to only the physical and prevents an encompassing understanding of
human nature in representing these myriad variables on influencing our thoughts,
feeling, actions, attitudes, values, beliefs, behaviors, identities, and other dimen-
sions of the human experience. This chapter briefly introduced readers to select
interdisciplinary LGBTQ+ connections to provide context, content, and subject
awareness related to these constructs relevant to the progressive professionals’
understanding of the “LGBTQ+.” Future directions to further LGBTQ+ librar-
ianship will involve extended work in the adaptation and implementation of vari-
ous directions of thought touched upon in this chapter.
REFERENCES
Alder, M. (2009). Transcending library catalogs: A comparative study of controlled terms in library
of congress subject headings and user-generated tags in librarything for transgender books.
Journal of Web Librarianship, 3(4), 309–331.
Alexander, J. F., Meem, D. T., & Gibson, M. A. (2017). Finding out: An introduction to LGBTQ studies
(3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
American Library Association. (Latest amended 1996). Library bill of rights. Retrieved from http://
www.ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/librarybill. Accessed on September 2, 2018.
American Psychological Association. (2000). Sexual orientation. In A. E. Kazdin (Ed.), Encyclopedia
of psychology 7. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Armstrong, E. A. (2002). Forging gay identities: Organizing sexuality in San Francisco, 1950–1994 (1st ed.).
Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Baim, T. (2015). Barbara Gittings: Gay pioneer. Scotts Valley, CA: CreateSpace Independent Publishing
Platform.
38 BHARAT MEHRA
Baral, S., Sifakis, F., Cleghorn, F., & Beyrer, C. (2007). Elevated risk for HIV infection among
men who have sex with men in low-and-middle-income countries 2000–2006: A system-
atic review. PLOS Medicine, 4(12), e339. Retrieved from http://journals.plos.org/plos
medicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.0040339. Accessed on April 16, 2015.
Balsam, K. F., Molina, Y., Beadnell, B., Simoni, J., & Walters, K. (2011). Measuring multiple minority
stress: The LGBT people of color microaggressions scale. Cultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority
Psychology, 17(2), 163–174.
Bates, J., & Rowley, J. (2011) Social reproduction and exclusion in subject indexing: A comparison
of public library OPACs and LibraryThing Folksonomy. Journal of Documentation, 67(3),
431–448.
Beard, K. W., Stroebel, S. S., O’Keefe, S. L., Harper-Dorton, K. V., Griffee, K., Young, D.
H., … Campbell, N. M. (2015). Childhood and adolescent sexual behaviors predict
adult sexual orientations. Cogent Psychology, 2(1). Retrieved from https://www.tandfo
nline.com/doi/full/10.1080/23311908.2015.1067568. Accessed on August 27, 2018.
Berstein, M. (2002). Identities and politics: Toward a historical understanding of the lesbian and gay
Downloaded by Stockholm University Library At 10:15 25 April 2019 (PT)
Chavez, K. R., & Griffin, C. L. (2012). Standing in the intersections: Feminist voices, feminist practices
in communication studies. New York, NY: Suny Press.
Colbert, J. L. (2017). Coming out of the controlled closet: A comparison of patron keywords for
queer topics to Library of Congress Subject Headings. Library Philosophy and Practice. http://
digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/1685/Retrieved via the DigitalCommons@University of
Nebraska - Lincoln.
Coleman, E. (1978). Toward a new model of treatment of homosexuality: A review. Journal of
Homosexuality, 3(4), 345–359.
Cook, J. L., & Cook, G. (2008). Child development: Principles and perspectives (2nd ed.). London:
Pearson.
Cooke, N. (2017). Posttruth, truthiness, and alternative facts: Information behavior and critical infor-
mation consumption for a new age. The Library Quarterly, 87(3), 211–221.
Coon, D., & Mitterer, J. O. (2007). Introduction to psychology: Gateways to mind and behavior (11th ed.).
Australia: Thomson/Wadsworth.
Cornog, M., & Perper, T. (1996). For SEX EDUCATION, see librarian: A guide to issues and resources.
Downloaded by Stockholm University Library At 10:15 25 April 2019 (PT)
Doan, P. L., & Kamphausen, E. P. (2013). Quakers and sexuality. In S. W. Angell & B. P. Dandelion
(Eds.), The Oxford handbook of Quaker studies (pp. 445–457). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Drabinski, E. (2013). Queering the catalog: Queer theory and the politics of correction. The Library
Quarterly: Information, Community, Policy, 83(2), 94–111.
Dibyendu, G. (2013). Negotiating sexual ‘otherness’: An exploratory study of harassment on male
homosexuals in metropolitan Kolkata, India. International Research Journal of Social Sciences,
2(3), 25–30.
Echols, A. (1989). Daring to be bad: Radical feminism in America: 1967–1975. Minneapolis, MN:
University of Minnesota Press.
Ehrlich, S. Meyerhoff, M., & Holmes, J. (2017). The handbook of language, gender, and sexuality.
Blackwell Handbooks in Linguistics (2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.
Endres, B. (1996). Habermas and critical thinking. Philosophy of education. Retrieved from http://www.
ed.uiuc.edu/EPS/PES-Yearbook/96_docs/endres.html. Accessed on August 15, 2004.
Engel, S. M. (2013). Frame spillover: Media framing and public opinion of a multifaceted LGBT rights
agenda. Law & Social Inquiry, 38(2), 403–441.
Downloaded by Stockholm University Library At 10:15 25 April 2019 (PT)
Ettinger, B. (2006). The matrixial borderspace. Theory Out of Bounds. Minneapolis, MN: University
of Minnesota Press.
Felluga, D. F. (2015). Critical theory: The key concepts. Routledge Key Guides (1st ed.). New York,
NY: Routledge.
Ferree, M. M., & Tripp, A. M. (2006). Global feminism: Transnational women’s activism, organizing, and
human rights. New York, NY: New York University Press.
Foucault, M. (1976). The history of sexuality volume 1: An introduction. London: Allen Lane.
Fox, N. J., & Alldred, P. (2013). The sexuality-assemblage: Desire, affect, and anti-humanism. The
Sociological Review, 61(4), 769–789.
Frayser, S. G. (1985). Varieties of sexual experience: An anthropological perspective on human sexuality.
New Haven, CT: Human Relations Area Files Press.
Frenk, S. F., & McCormack, M. (2016). Focus: Looking critically at gender and sexuality. Discover
Society: Focus, 39. Retrieved from https://discoversociety.org/2016/12/06/focus-critical-
perspectives-in-gender-and-sexuality/. Accessed on August 28, 2018.
Freud, S. (1994). In J. Strachey (Trans.), The standard edition of the complete psychological works of
Sigmund Freud, 24 Vols. London: Hogarth Press.
Froomkin, M. A. (2003). Habermas@discourse.net: Toward a critical theory of cyberspace. Harvard
Law Rev, 116(3), 21.
Frye, M. (1983). Politics of reality: Essays in feminist theory. Crossing Press Feminist. Toronto, Canada:
Crossing Press.
Frye, M. (1996). The possibility of feminist theory. In A. Garry, & M. Pearsall (Eds.), Women, knowl-
edge, and reality: Explorations in feminist philosophy (2nd ed., pp. 34–47). London: Routledge.
Garber, M. (1995). Vice versa: Bisexuality and the eroticism of everyday life. New York, NY: Simon &
Schuster.
Gazzaniga, M. S. (1992). Nature’s mind: The biological roots of thinking, emotions, sexuality, language,
and intelligence. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Geuss, R., (1981). The idea of a critical theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ghosh, C. (2018). De-moralizing gay rights: Some queer remarks on LGBT+ rights politics in the US.
Cham, Switzerland: Palgrave Pivot.
Giroux, H. A. (2010). Rethinking education as the practice of freedom: Paulo Freire and the promise
of critical pedagogy. Policy Features in Education, 8(6), 715–721.
Gittings, B. (1998). Gays in library land: The Gay and Lesbian Task Force of the American Library
Association: The first sixteen years. In J. V. Carmichael, Jr. (Ed.), Daring to find our own names:
The search for lesbigay library history (Beta Phi Mu Monograph Series, No. 5) (pp. 81–94).
Westport, CN: Greenwood Press.
Gordon, C. (1988). By Foucault—power/knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings, 1972–1977
(1 American ed.). New York, NY: Random House USA.
Grant, J. (1993). Fundamental feminism: Contesting the core concepts on feminist theory. New York,
NY: Routledge.
Graybill, E. C., & Proctor, S. L. (2016). Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender youth: Limited repre-
sentation in school support personnel journals. Journal of School Psychology, 54, 9–16.
What is “LGBTQ+” Information? 41
Graziano, V. (2018). LGBTQ studies and interdisciplinarity: A citation analysis of master’s thesis.
Libraries and the Academy, 18(1), 93–116.
Greenblatt, E. (2011). The treatment of LGBTQI concepts in the library of congress subject headings.
In E. Greenblatt (Ed.), Serving LGBTIQ library and archives users: Essays on outreach, service,
collections and access (pp. 212–228). Jefferson NC: MacFarland & Company.
Gregg, J. R. (2017). Sex, the illustrated history: Through time, religion, and culture (Vol. II), Sex in Asia,
Australia, Africa, the South Pacific, and the Indigenous Americas (Reprint ed.). Bloomington,
IN: XLIBRIS.
Gregory, L., & Higgins, S. (2013). Information literacy and social justice: Radical professional praxis.
Sacramento, CA: Library Juice Press.
Grewal, I., & Kaplan, C. (2001). Global identities: Theorizing transnational studies of sexuality. GLQ:
A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies, 7(4), 663–679.
Griffith, D. M. (2012). An intersectional approach to men’s health. Journal of Men’s Health, 9(2),
106–112.
Gustavson, M. (2009). Bisexuals in relationships: Uncoupling intimacy from gender ontology. Journal
Downloaded by Stockholm University Library At 10:15 25 April 2019 (PT)
Kellner, D. (1989). Boundaries and borderlines: Reflections on Jean Baudrillard and critical theory.
Retrieved from http://www.gseis.ucla.edu/faculty/kellner/Illumina%20Folder/kell2.htm.
Accessed on July 27, 2015.
Kelly, G. (2010). Sexuality today (10th ed.). New York City, NY: McGraw-Hill Education.
Kelly, M. G. E. (2013). Foucault’s ‘history of sexuality volume I, the will to knowledge’: An Edinburgh
philosophical guide. Edinburgh Philosophical Guides (1st ed.). Edinburgh: Edinburgh
University Press.
Khan, S. (2001). Culture, sexualities, and identities: Men who have sex with men in India. Journal of
Homosexuality, 40(3–4), 99–115.
Killerman, S. (2017). A guide to gender: The social justice advocate’s handbook (2nd ed.). Austin, TX:
Impetus Books.
Kimmel, M. S., & Plante, R. F. (2004). Sexualities: Identities, behaviors, and society (1st ed.). New York,
NY: Oxford University Press.
King, B. M. (2011). Human sexuality today (7th edition). London: Pearson.
Kinsey, A., Pomeroy, W. B., & Martin, C. E. (1948). Sexual behavior in the human male. Philadelphia,
Downloaded by Stockholm University Library At 10:15 25 April 2019 (PT)
Marin, A. (2016). Us versus us: The untold story of religion and the LGBT community. Colorado
Springs, CO: NavPress.
Markshamer, J., & Tobin, H. J. (2014). Standing with LGBT prisoners: An advocate’s guide to end-
ing abuse and combating imprisonment. Washington, D.C.: National Center for Transgender
Equality. Retrieved from https://transequality.org/sites/default/files/docs/resources/JailPrisons_
Resource_FINAL.pdf. Accessed on August 26, 2018.
Martin-Jones, M., & Jones, K. E. (2001). Multilingual literacies: Reading and writing different worlds
(studies in written language and literacy). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins Publishing
Company.
Massad, J. (2002). Re-orienting desire: The gay international and the Arab world. Public Culture, 14(2),
361–385.
Maxwell, K. (2016). Voices: Racism is rife in the LGBT community. Gay people cannot call for
equality while discriminating against others. Independent, December 30. Retrieved from
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/racism-lgbt-gay-rights-equality-discrimination-
gay-nightclub-jeremy-joseph-facebook-post-soho-london-a7501911.html. Accessed on
Downloaded by Stockholm University Library At 10:15 25 April 2019 (PT)
September 2, 2018.
McCall, L. (2008). The complexity of intersectionality. In E. Grabham, D. Cooper, J. Krishandas, & D.
Herman (Eds.), Intersectionality and beyond: Law, power and the politics of location (1st Ed.).
Boston, MA: Routledge.
Mehra, B. (2011). Integrating LGBTIQ representations across the library and information science
curriculum: A strategic framework for student-centered interventions. In E. Greenblatt (Ed.),
Serving LGBTIQ library and archives users: Essays on outreach, service, collections and access
(pp. 298–309). Jefferson NC: MacFarland.
Mehra, B. (2016). Cultural re-interpretation of race/ethnicity and sexuality: A gay South Asian “voice”
from between a rock and a hard place. In D. L. Barlow & P. T. Jaeger (Eds.), Celebrating the
James Partridge Award: Essays toward the development of a more diverse, inclusive, equitable
field of library and information science. Advances in Librarianship Series (Vol. 42, pp. 169–193).
Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing.
Mehra, B. (forthcoming). Information ACTism in “trumping” the contemporary fake news phenom-
enon in rural libraries. Open Information Science Journal (Special issue: Fake news in library
and information science).
Mehra, B., & Bishop, A. P. (2007). Cross-cultural perspectives of international doctoral students: Two-
way learning in library and information science education. International Journal of Progressive
Education, 3(1), 44–64. Retrieved from http://inased.org/v3n1/mehrabishop.htm. Accessed on
February 1, 2011.
Mehra, B., & Braquet, D. (March 2006). A “queer” manifesto of interventions for libraries to ‘come
out’ of the closet! a study of “queer” youth experiences during the coming out process. Library
and Information Science Research Electronic Journal, 16(1). Retrieved from http://libres-
ejournal.info/848/
Mehra, B., & Braquet, D. (2007). Library and information science professionals as community action
researchers in an academic setting: Top ten directions to further institutional change for people
of diverse sexual orientations and gender identities. Library Trends, 56(2), 542–565.
Mehra, B., & Braquet, D. (2011). Progressive LGBTQ reference: Coming out in the 21st century.
Reference Services Review (Special issue: Learning landscapes and the new reality), 39(3),
401–422.
Mehra, B., & Braquet, D. (2014). Marriage between participatory leadership and action research to
advocate benefits equality for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people: An extended
human rights role in library and information science. In B. Eden & J. Fagan (Eds.), Leadership
in academic libraries today: Connecting theory to practice (pp. 185–211). Toronto, Canada:
Scarecrow Press.
Mehra, B., Haley, E., & Lane, D. (2015). Culturally appropriate information support services for lesbian,
gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) South Asians: Representing multiple shades of identity
based on sexual orientation and ethnicity. In J. Hawley (Ed.), Expanding the circle: Creating
an inclusive environment in higher education for LGBTQ students and studies (pp. 317–339).
New York, NY: Suny Press.
44 BHARAT MEHRA
Mehra, B., & Hernandez, L. (2016). Libraries as agents of human rights protection and social justice
on behalf of sexual minorities in India: An action-based manifesto for progressive change. In
U. Gorham, N. G. Taylor, & P. T. Jaeger (Eds.), Perspectives on libraries as institutions of human
rights and social justice. Advances in Librarianship Series (pp. 147–182). Bingley: Emerald
Group Publishing.
Mehra, B., & Hernandez, L. (2017). Rural and urban queering alliances out of the library towards
legal protection of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and questioning people in India. In
R. Montague, & L. McKeever (Eds.), Queer library alliance: Global reflections and imaginings
(pp. 125–169). Sacramento, CA: Library Juice Press.
Mehra, B., Lemieux, P. A. III, Burwell, C., Hixson, T., Partee, R. P. II, Stophel, K., & Wood, N. E.
(2018). Expanding LIS education in the U.S. department of state’s diplomacy lab program:
GIS and LGBTI advocacy in Africa and Latin America. Journal of Education for Library and
Information Science, 59(3), 4–16.
Mehra, B., Rioux, K., & Albright, K. S. (2009). Social justice in library and information science. In
M. J. Bates, & M. N. Maack (Eds.), Encyclopedia of library and information sciences (pp. 4820–
Downloaded by Stockholm University Library At 10:15 25 April 2019 (PT)
Olson, H. A. (2000). Difference, culture and change: The untapped potential of LCSH. Cataloging &
Classification Quarterly, 29(1–2), 53–71.
Olson, H. A. (2002). The power to name: Locating the limits of subject representations in libraries.
Alphen aan den Rijn, the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Olson, H. A. (2007). How we construct subjects: A feminist analysis. Library Trends, 56(2), 509–541.
Olson, H. A., & Ball, J. J. (2001). Subject analysis in online catalogs (2nd ed.). Englewood, CO: Libraries
Unlimited.
Ornelas, A. (2011). Queer as folksonomies. In E. Greenblatt (Ed.), Serving LGBTIQ library and
archives users: Essays on outreach, service, collections and access (pp. 229–239). Jefferson NC:
MacFarland.
Oswald, R. F., Blume, L. B., & Marks, S. R. (2005). Decentering heteronormativity: A model for family
studies. In V. L. Bengtson, A. C. Acock, K. R. Allen, P. Dilworth-Anderson, & D. M. Klein (Eds.),
Sourcebook of family theory & research (pp. 143–165). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Oswin, N. (2008). Critical geographies and the uses of sexuality: Deconstructing queer space. Progress
in Human Geography, 32(1), 89–103.
Downloaded by Stockholm University Library At 10:15 25 April 2019 (PT)
Outhwaite, W. (1988). New philosophies of social science: Realism, hermeneutics and critical theory.
Contemporary Social Theory: Theoretical Traditions in the Social Sciences. Basingstoke:
Palgrave Macmillan.
Pereira, G. C., & Baranauskas, M. C. C. (2018) Empowering lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender
(LGBT) people with codesign: A critical evaluation through the lens of simplicity. In: A. Marcus,
& W. Wang (Eds.), Design, user experience, and usability: Theory and practice. DUXU 2018 Lecture
Notes in Computer Science (Vol. 10918, pp. 153–164). New York, NY: Springer Publishing.
Peters, J. W. (2014). Cultural studies: The decline and fall of the ‘H’ word. The New York Times, March
21. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/23/fashion/gays-lesbians-the-term-homo-
sexual.html. Accessed on September 2, 2018.
Petro, A. (2016). Race, gender, sexuality, and religion in North America. Oxford research encyclopedia
of religion. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Public Library Association. (n.d.). Leadership development & advocacy. Chicago, IL: American Library
Association. Retrieved from http://www.ala.org/pla/leadership/advocacy. Accessed on August
26, 2018.
Pullen, A., Harding, N., & Phillips, M. (2017). Feminists and queer theorists debate the future of critical
management studies. Dialogues in Critical Management Studies. Bingley: Emerald Publishing
Limited.
Rahman, M., & Jackson, S. (2010). Gender and sexuality: Sociological approaches (1st ed.). Cambridge:
Polity Press.
Rathus, S. A., Nevid, J. S., & Fichner-Rathus, L. (2007). Human sexuality in a world of diversity. Boston,
MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Reiter, L. (1989). Sexual orientation, sexual identity, and the question of choice. Clinical Social Work
Journal, 17(2), 138–150.
Richardson, D. (1984). The dilemma of essentiality in homosexual theory. Journal of Homosexuality,
9(2/3), 79–90.
Ridge, D., Hee, A., & Minichiello, V. (1999). “Asian” men on the scene: Challenges to “gay communi-
ties.” Journal of Homosexuality, 36(3–4), 43–68.
Rioux, K., & Mehra, B. (2016). Introduction. In B. Mehra & K. Rioux (Eds.), Progressive com-
munity action: Critical theory and social justice in library and information science (pp. 1–10).
Sacramento, CA: Library Juice Press.
Rizvi, F., Lingard, B., & Lavia, J. (2006). Postcolonialism and education: Negotiating a contested ter-
rain. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 14(3), 249–262.
Rodriguez, E. M., Lytle, M. C., & Vaughan, M. D. (2013). Exploring the intersectionality of bisexual,
religious/spiritual, and political identities from a feminist perspective. Journal of Bisexuality,
13(3), 285–309.
Ross, E., & Rapp, R. (1981). Sex and society: A research note from social history and anthropology.
Comparative Studies in Society and History, 23(1), 51–72.
Rothmann, J., & Simmonds, S. ‘Othering non-normative sexualities through objectification of ‘the
homosexual’: Discursive discrimination by pre-service teachers. Agenda: Empowering Women
for Gender Equity, 29(1), 116–126.
46 BHARAT MEHRA
Rust, P. C. R. (2000). Bisexuality: A contemporary paradox for women. Journal of Social Issues
(Special issue: Women’s sexualities: New perspectives on sexual orientation and gender),
56(2), 205–221.
Ruti, M. (2017). The ethics of opting out: Queer theory’s defiant subjects. New York, NY: Columbia
University Press.
Ryabko, D., & Reznikova, Z. (2015). On the evolutionary origins of differences in sexual prefer-
ences. Frontiers of Psychology, 6. Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/
PMC4439540/. Accessed on August 27, 2918.
Said, E. W. (1978). Orientalism (25th Anniversary ed.). New York, NY: Pantheon Books.
Saraswati, L. A., & Shaw, B. (2017). Introduction to women’s, gender, and sexuality studies:
Interdisciplinary and intersectional approaches (1st ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sartre, J. (1993). In H. E. Barnes (Trans.), Being and nothingness (Reprint ed.). New York, NY:
Washington Square Press.
Savin-Williams, R. C. (2017). Mostly straight: Sexual fluidity among men. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press.
Downloaded by Stockholm University Library At 10:15 25 April 2019 (PT)
Schilt, K., & Westbrook, L. (2009). Doing gender, doing heteronormativity: “Gender normals,”
transgender people, and the social maintenance of heterosexuality. Gender & Society, 23(4),
440–464.
Scott, J. W. (1999). Gender and the politics of history (Rev. ed.). New York, NY: Columbia University
Press.
Segal, M. T., & Martinez, T. A. (2006). Intersections of gender, race, and class: Readings for a changing
landscape (1st ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Seidman, S. (2003). The social construction of sexuality. New York, NY: W. W. Norton.
Shirley, L., & Baharark, Y. (2017). Feminists among us: Resistance and advocacy in library leadership.
Gender and Sexuality in Information Sciences. Sacramento, CA: Library Juice Press.
Shore-Goss, R. E., Bohache, T., Cheng, P. S., & West, M. (2013). Queering Christianity: Finding a place
at the table for LGBTQI Christians. Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger.
Shoveller, J. A., Johnson, J. L., Langille, D. B., & Mitchell, T. (2004). Socio-cultural influences on young
people’s sexual development. Social Science & Medicine, 59(3), 473–487.
Singh, P. (2016). Between legal recognition and moral policing: Mapping the queer subject in India.
Journal of Homosexuality, 63(3), 416–425.
Smiley, L. (2016). LGBT: Why the nature vs. nurture debate is a waste of time. The Society for Diversity.
Retrieved from http://www.societyfordiversity.org/lgbt-why-the-nature-vs-nurture-debate-is-a-
waste-of-time/. Accessed on August 22, 2018.
Smith, B. G. (2013). Women’s studies: The basics (1st ed.). Abingdon: Routledge.
Sullivan, N. (2003). A critical introduction to queer theory. New York, NY: New York University Press.
Stryker, S. (2013). (De)subjugated knowledges: An introduction to transgender studies. In S. Stryker, &
S. Whittle (Eds.), The transgender reader (pp. 1–18). New York, NY: Routledge.
Subhrajit, C. (2014). Problems faced by LGBT people in the mainstream society: Some recommen-
dations. International Journal of Interdisciplinary and Multidisciplinary Studies, 1(5), 317–331.
Taylor, J. (2013). Claiming queer territory in the study of subcultures and popular music. Sociology
Compass, 7(3), 194–207.
Thompson, D. (2001). Radical feminism today. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Thoreson, R. (2018). “All we want is equality”: Religious exemptions and discrimination against LGBT
people in the United States. Washington, D.C.: Human Rights Watch. Retrieved from https://
www.hrw.org/report/2018/02/19/all-we-want-equality/religious-exemptions-and-discrimina-
tion-against-lgbt-people. Accessed on August 22, 2018.
Troiden, R. (1988). Gay and lesbian identity: A sociological analysis. New York, NY: General Hall.
Valentine, J. (2008). Narrative acts: Telling tales of life and love with the wrong gender. Forum
Qualitative Sozialforschung.[Forum: Qualitative Social Research.], 9(2), Article 49. Retrieved
from http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs0802491. Accessed on September 2, 2018.
Vance, C. (1984). Pleasure and danger: Exploring female sexuality. Boston, MA: Routledge & Kegan
Paul.
VanderLaan, D. P., Forrester, D. L., Petterson, L. J., & Vasey, P. L. (2012). Offspring production among
the extended relatives of Samoan men and Fa’afafine. PLoS One, 7(4). Retrieved from http://jour-
nals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0036088. Accessed on August 27, 2018.
What is “LGBTQ+” Information? 47
Verma, R. K., & Collumbien, M. (2004). Homosexual activity among rural Indian men: Implications
for HIV prevention. AIDS: Official Journal of the International AIDS Society, 18, 1845–1847.
Wallerstein, I. (2004). World systems analysis: An introduction. Durham, NA: Duke University Press.
Warner, M. (1990). Homo-narcissism; Or, heterosexuality. In J. A. Boone, & M. Cadden (Eds.),
Engendering men (pp. 190–206). New York, NY: Routledge.
Warner, M. (1991). Fear of a queer planet. Social Text, 29(1991), 3–17.
Warner, M. (1999). The trouble with normal: Sex, politics, and the ethics of queer life. New York, NY:
The Free Press.
Watson, L. W., & Johnson, J. M. (2013). Authentic leadership: An engaged discussion of LGBTQ work as
culturally relevant. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
Weber, S. (2012). What’s wrong with be(com)ing queer? Biological determinism as discursive queer
hegemony. Sexualities, 15(5–6), 679–701.
Weeks, J. (2002). Sexuality and its discontents: Meanings, myths, and modern sexualities (1st ed.).
London: Routledge.
Weeks, J. (2005). Remembering Foucault. Journal of the History of Sexuality, 14(1/2), 186–201.
Downloaded by Stockholm University Library At 10:15 25 April 2019 (PT)
Wiesner-Hanks, M. E. (2010). Gender in history: Global perspectives (2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-
Blackwell.
Wilson, G., & Rahman, Q. (2008). Born gay: The psychobiology of sex orientation (2nd ed.). London:
Peter Owen Publishers.
Youdell, D. (2005). Sex–gender–sexuality: How sex, gender, and sexuality constellations are constituted
in secondary schools. Journal of Gender and Education, 17(3), 249–270.