Journal of Counseling Psychology © 2010 American Psychological Association

2010, Vol. 57, No. 1, 92–104 0022-0167/10/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/a0017930

Shame, Internalized Heterosexism, Lesbian Identity, and Coming Out to Others:

A Comparative Study of Lesbians in Mainland China and Hong Kong

Pizza Ka-Yee Chow and Sheung-Tak Cheng

Hong Kong Institute of Education

The purpose of this study was to investigate coming out to family and friends and their relationships to
shame, internalized heterosexism, lesbian identity, and perceived social support in Chinese lesbians from
2 different cultural settings—Mainland China (N ⫽ 244) and Hong Kong (N ⫽ 234). Results of structural
equation modeling showed that, in both samples, a sense of shame was related to internalized hetero-
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

sexism and a devaluation of one’s lesbian identity, which in turn was related to a decreased likelihood
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

of coming out to others. Shame was also associated with a reduced perception of support from friends,
which seemed in turn to exacerbate internalized heterosexism among lesbians. Family support was
generally unrelated to outness, except for outness to friends in the Hong Kong sample. Results are
discussed in relation to the cultural stigma attached to same-sex orientation and the cultural practice of
shaming that parents use to socialize children.

Keywords: coming out to others, shame, internalized heterosexism, lesbian identity, Chinese lesbians

Coming out to others, or outness, refers to verbally or behav-
iorally disclosing sexual orientation to others by sexual minorities.
Research has demonstrated the importance of outness as the ac-
complished negotiation between self and society, and a sign of
self-acceptance among lesbians and gays. Outness is a hallmark of
lesbian and gay identity development and promotes self-
integration, self-growth, and personal empowerment (Corrigan &
Matthews, 2003; Herek, 2003). More important, outness denotes
the resolution of inner stigma (Jordan & Deluty, 1998). Whereas
there is a small but respectable size of literature about coming out
and identity development in Asian gay men (Harada, 2001; Jones,
2007; Poon & Ho, 2008; Wong & Tang, 2004), little is known
about Asian lesbians. In this study, we focused on the predictors of
outness in Chinese lebians living in two societies with different
socioeconomic and political systems.
According to the modified labeling theory (Link, Cullen,
Struening, Shrout, & Dohrenwend, 1989), minorities internalize
cultural meanings about their condition and use such meanings to
judge themselves. When growing up in a predominantly hetero-
sexist environment, internalized heterosexism often results as les-
bians assimilate and internalize the majority view and public
stigma into schema about the self, leading to a devalued sense of
Pizza Ka-Yee Chow and Sheung-Tak Cheng, Department of Psycho-
logical Studies, Hong Kong Institute of Education, Hong Kong, China.
The Hong Kong data for this study were taken from Pizza Ka-Yee
Chow’s honors thesis completed under the supervision of Sheung-Tak
Cheng and submitted to the Department of Applied Social Studies, City
University of Hong Kong for partial fulfillment of the requirements of the
degree of bachelor of social sciences. We thank Michael Bender and Kin-Kit
Li for their helpful comments on an earlier version of the manuscript.
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Sheung-
Tak Cheng, Department of Psychological Studies, Hong Kong Institute
of Education, 10 Lo Ping Road, N.T., Hong Kong, China. E-mail:
takcheng@ied.edu.hk
self (Corrigan & Matthews, 2003; Friedman & Downey, 1999;
Herek, Chopp, & Strohl, 2007; Szymanski, Kashubeck-West, &
Meyer, 2008). Despite changes in social attitudes over the years,
prejudice and discriminatory practices against lesbians are still
common in contemporary societies, although the degree varies
from one society to another (National Coalition of Anti-Violence
Programs, 2007; Women Coalition of HKSAR, 2005). In a het-
erosexist environment, internalized heterosexism is the norm
rather than the exception for lesbians. This is especially true for
lesbians in Chinese societies, which are characterized by deeply
ingrained cultural attitudes against same-sex attraction. According
to Confucianism, daughters are expected to derive their identity
from relationships with men, performing their familial roles, and
having children. The cardinal concept of Yin and Yang being in
harmony further strengthens this gender role as fundamental to a
proper social order. Undeniably, a daughter with same-sex orien-
tation is not just a disillusionment to parents, but a cause for family
disgrace (Li & Orleans, 2001).
Because of internalized heterosexism, lesbians often construct a
negative identity, even to the point of rejecting their lesbian
identity, and see themselves as inferior to other heterosexuals (see
review by Szymanski et al., 2008). Lesbian identity refers to the
acceptance of oneself and the comfort level in being a lesbian, and
is a strong predictor of outness (Ellen, Joy, Amber, Scales, & Sue,
2008). According to McCarn and Fassinger (1996), lesbian iden-
tity is developed at both the personal and the collective level as
two parallel processes of construction. The identity construction is
expected to go through four phrases: awareness, exploration, com-
mitment, and internalization. Although it is not clear whether
every lesbian would go through these stages in sequence, a positive
development of lesbian identity along these lines requires a person
to acknowledge that she is different from the norm and to explore
her inner feelings for the same sex, as well as to see other lesbians
as a reference group for self-development and to recognize social
oppression against sexual minorities. However, this process is

92
 SHAME AND COMING OUT
often painful, associated with anger, guilt, and embarrassment,
because having grown up in a heterosexist environment, one has
often engaged in heterosexist practices prior to coming to terms
with one’s sexual orientation and struggling toward self-
acceptance as a lesbian (McCarn & Fassinger, 1996). Thus, re-
search shows that internalized heterosexism is related negatively to
identity development and self-esteem, and positively to depression
and hiding one’s sexual orientation (i.e., “passing”), among lesbi-
ans (Peterson & Gerrity, 2006; Szymanski, Chung, & Balsam,
2001).
A more general concept related to internalized heterosexism is
self-stigma (Corrigan & Matthews, 2003; Mak et al., 2007). It is
sometimes used in an interchangeable fashion in the literature with
another concept—shame. Despite their apparent similarity, there
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
are subtle, yet important differences between them. Both con-
structs assumes either actual or imagined other disapproval, a
sense of powerlessness and worthlessness, and a desire to conceal
personal deficiencies and to avoid contact with others (see Corri-
gan & Matthews, 2003; Tangney, Wagner, & Gramzow, 1992;
H. B. Lewis, 1971; M. Lewis, 1998). However, self-stigma is
theoretically a more localized process and is a devaluation of that
aspect of the self that relates to the stigmatized status (in this case,
being a lesbian). Shame, however, involves a negative evaluation
of the entire self. In other words, “the ‘bad thing’ is experienced as
a reflection of a ‘bad self,’ and the entire self is painfully scruti-
nized and negatively evaluated” (Tangney et al., 1992, p. 469).
This distinction has significant import for the present study.
Research shows that the manifestations of self-conscious emo-
tions (e.g., shame, guilt) differ markedly between individualistic
and collectivistic cultures (Eid & Diener, 2001; Kitayama, Markus,
& Matsumoto, 1995). Indeed, compared with Western cultures,
shame is a more ubiquitous experience in the Chinese culture. It is
well documented that shaming is a preferred and commonly adopted
technique used by Chinese parents to socialize their children (Ho,
1986). Chinese children are taught that if they do certain things, and
fail to do others, then they bring dishonor to themselves and to their
families. A study showed that Chinese undergraduates responded
with higher shame ratings to all hypothetical scenarios of poten-
tially shameful events than their American counterparts (Tang,
Wang, Qian, Gao, & Zhang, 2008). Moreover, unlike individual-
ists who see their selves as unique and independent, collectivists
see their selves as interconnected and interdependent with each
other (Markus & Kitayama, 1991), and their opinions of them-
selves are more strongly influenced by those who are close to them
than those who are more distant in relationship (Tang et al., 2008).
Because of this, Chinese lesbians will experience greater diffi-
culty, compared with their Western counterparts, in forming opin-
ions of themselves that are independent of their significant others,
most notably parents.
We believe that the experience of shame, in contrast to inter-
nalized heterosexism, happens at a much earlier stage in the lives
of Chinese lesbians and gays. Whereas internalized heterosexism
is the eventual psychological consequence of living in a prejudiced
environment, shame is probably a deep-seated emotion that is
socialized in the family. Unlike basic emotions such as sadness and
anger, self-conscious emotions involve evaluations of the self in
relation to ideal- and ought-self representations (Tangney,
Niedenthal, Covert, & Barlow, 1998). Some of these representa-
tions are based on identity goals (Tracy & Robins, 2004), which
93
include gender-related norms. Conformity to these norms is essen-
tial to maintaining harmony in collectivistic societies. However,
gay people tended to be more feminine, and lesbians more mas-
culine, in their plays and manners, and in choosing their hobbies,
interests, and occupational preference during childhood (Bailey &
Zucker, 1995), although such behaviors are not necessarily asso-
ciated with same-sex orientation in adulthood (Carr, 2007). Nev-
ertheless, deviations from basic identity goals are likely to elicit
what Friedman and Downey (1999) called “gender-values self-
condemnation” (p. 327). Because such identity goals are internal-
ized at a young age, shame is probably a more fundamental
experience that predates internalized heterosexism in the develop-
ment of Chinese lesbian girls. Tracy and Robins (2004) further
argued that shame would be more likely when the triggering events
involve global and stable aspects of the self, as in the case of a
tomboyish girl or a feminine boy in a traditional Chinese family.
It is likely that the experience of chronic shame colors the way
future prejudice and discrimination from the public is interpreted,
increasing one’s proneness to internalized heterosexism, and the
devaluation of one’s identity as a sexual minority.
This leads to another related experience among lesbians—social
and psychological isolation, which probably starts early in life. It
is well documented that tomboyish girls and feminine boys expe-
rience more rejection from their peers and significant others,
especially parents (e.g., Carter & McCloskey, 1983–1984;
Landolt, Bartholomew, Saffrey, Oram, & Perlman, 2004), with
adverse consequences on their social competencies and self-worth
(Egan & Perry, 2001). In fact, once a lesbian internalizes dominant
social norms, expectations of prejudice from others often lead to
social withdrawal and secrecy as coping behaviors (Link et al.,
1989). Indeed, studies found anticipatory rejection from parents to
be a major deterrent to outness (Li & Orleans, 2001; Savin-
Williams & Dubé, 1998). Not only is support from parents typi-
cally lacking, support from aged peers can be disappointing in a
heterosexist society (Rosario, Schrimshaw, & Hunter, 2005), al-
though younger people are supposed to hold more liberal attitudes
toward lesbians and gays. Compared with friends with same-sex
orientation, the support from heterosexual friends might be more
meaningful and significant to the lesbians, as it signifies approval
from the heterosexual world. Research in other populations has
shown that a lack of social support can exacerbate the perception
of stigmatization a year or more later (Mueller et al., 2006). Beals
and Peplau (2005) suggested that supportive behaviors from sig-
nificant others are indicative of their readiness to understand and
accept the person, which in turn helped to affirm the lesbian
identity of the person. In the present study, weinvestigated the
relative contributions of friends and family support, as well as the
effects of shame, internalized heterosexism, and lesbian identity,
on outness. Specifically, we hypothesized that social support me-
diates the effect of shame on internalized heterosexism; individu-
als who are ashamed may perceive lesser social support as they
isolate themselves to avoid the social repercussions against their
deviant status, which ironically would reinforce further stigmati-
zation (Herek et al., 2007).
Stigma and Outness in Two Chinese Societies
Great strides in the social and legal rights of lesbians and gays
have been achieved in recent decades in China and Hong Kong.
 94 CHOW AND CHENG
After years of advocacy by ardent gay activists, homosexuality
was decriminalized in 1991 in Hong Kong and 1997 in China.
Beginning in 2001, homosexuality was no longer included in the
official nomenclature for mental illness in China. Lagging far
behind many Western countries, however, both societies have yet
to grant sexual minorities equal civil rights (e.g., the Equal Op-
portunities Ordinances in Hong Kong do not cover sexual minor-
ities), let alone the recognition and legalization of same-sex mar-
riage. In December 2008, as many as 66 countries signed a joint
United Nations (UN) declaration to decriminalize homosexuality
and to condemn all forms of discrimination and violence against
people on the basis of their sexual orientation or gender identity.
This declaration, however, was not endorsed by China (Hong
Kong is not an independent member of the UN). It is generally
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
believed that China adopts a “3-no” policy—no approval, no
disapproval, and no promotion— on homosexuality.
Despite decriminalization of homosexuality in both societies,
there is still much prejudice against individuals with same-sex
orientation, especially in mainland China. The Confucian notion of
filial piety stipulates the continuation of the family line as a basic
duty of children to parents. A woman’s role is therefore to marry
to another man and give birth to children, especially sons (Cheng
& Chan, 2006). The idea that same-sex attraction is deviant is
deeply rooted in the Chinese mind-set. However, Hong Kong was
under British rule for nearly a century and was returned to China
only about 10 years ago. China, however, has been closed to the
West until the last two decades. For this reason, Hong Kong may
represent a rather Westernized and modern society, although it
retains many Chinese cultural traditions (Chia, Allred, & Jerzak,
1997; King, 2004). This suggests that the cultural bias against
same-sex orientation should be stronger in China than in Hong
Kong. Moreover, because of Westernization, individualism has
shaped Hong Kong people’s lives, whereby individual rights and
freedom to express oneself is also respected. Hong Kong can
therefore be described as a mixture of individualism and collec-
tivism (King, 2004). Indeed, a meta-analysis showed that although
Hong Kong is more collectivistic than Western societies, it is
nonetheless less collectivistic and more individualistic than China
(Oyserman, Coon, & Kemmelmeier, 2002). Hence, it can be ex-
pected that deviation from mainstream social norms is less of a
concern to lesbians in Hong Kong, who may value their lesbian
identity more than their Mainland Chinese counterparts (see Mao,
McCormick, & van de Ven, 2002).
As the awareness of being members of an oppressed minority
group is critical for lesbian identity development (e.g., McCarn &
Fassinger, 1996), it is also noteworthy that social activism is
tolerated much differently in the two societies. Prior to the decrim-
inalization legislation in Hong Kong, public interest groups were
primarily concerned with drawing the public’s attention to the
“invisible” group of lesbians and gays in the society. After the
enactment of decriminalization legislation in 1991, however, ac-
tivities become multifaceted and large scale, including gay pride
parades and protests, in order to gain more rights for the group,
including the legalization of homosexuality. These collective ac-
tivities, some of which were joined by lesbians and gays from
other parts of the world, are no doubt beneficial for the identity
development of lesbians and gays in Hong Kong. Compared with
Hong Kong, lesbian and gay activities in China are carried out
mostly “underground,” and there are no formal gay associations in
China. Despite decriminalization, the deep-rooted prejudice
against same-sex orientation is still the norm, and social oppres-
sion is commonplace. The situation is slightly better in urban
settings, which are more open to Western influences, than in rural
areas. Across China, films with themes on same-sex attraction are
still strictly prohibited in the public and can be viewed only in
private. There are no such restrictions in Hong Kong, however,
where sexual minorities enjoy a lot more freedom. In Hong Kong,
gay bars, clubs, films, art exhibitions, websites, and organizations
are easy to find.
Because of a rather different social, cultural, and political back-
ground, we postulate that coming out, especially to one’s family,
would be more common among lesbians in Hong Kong than
among those in China and that the sense of shame and internalized
heterosexism would both be lower among lesbians in Hong Kong
than among those in China. In a similar vein, we assume that the
preception of family and friends support would be higher among
lesbians in Hong Kong than among those in China.
The Present Study
This study concerns the factors related to coming out to family
and friends among lesbians in China and Hong Kong. Because
those with a less affirmative lesbian identity would tend to conceal
their sexual orientation from others, even to the extent of avoiding
interactions (e.g., Szymanski et al., 2001), lesbian identity is
postulated as the proximal factor in outness. Shame and internal-
ized heterosexism are hypothesized to relate to outness through
devaluation of one’s lesbian identity. Because of the potential
effect of social support on internalized heterosexism (see Mueller
et al., 2006), perceived social support from family and friends are
hypothesized to be related to outness by way of internalized
heterosexism, and then lesbian identity. Finally, because of the
predominant nature of shame in Chinese societies, it was hypoth-
esized to be the common factor in both internalized heterosexism
and reduced support (i.e., individuals who felt more shameful of
themselves would tend to have more intense internalized hetero-
sexism about their same-sex orientation and tend to shy away from
others). For this reason, shame also has an indirect effect on
internalized heterosexism via reduced social support. This is our
theoretical model, and it is represented by Model A in Figure 1.
In addition, we tested three alternate models. Model B includes,
on top of Model A, two additional paths from shame and inter-
nalized heterosexism to outness (path a and b, respectively, in
Figure 1). This model therefore postulates that shame and inter-
nalized heterosexism related to outness directly, aside from the
indirect association by way of lesbian identity. Model C, however,
differs from Model A in that family and friends support are
postulated to be related to outness directly (path c and d, respec-
tively, in Figure 1). Finally, because internalized heterosexism can
lead to social withdrawal (Kaufman & Johnson, 2005), Model D
postulates that the relationships between internalized heterosexism
and social support are actually in the opposite direction; that is,
internalized heterosexism is associated with reduced family and
friends support, which in turn are associated with a higher likeli-
hood of coming out to others (see Figure 1b). Despite hypothesized
mean differences between China and Hong Kong in the study
variables as mentioned above, we expected to find the best fitting
models to be the same for both societies and that the way the
 SHAME AND COMING OUT 95
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

Figure 1. Alternate models showing the pathways by which shame and internalized heterosexism decrease
outness in lesbians. Figure 1a displays Models A, B, and C, with Model B being identical to Model A except
for the additional paths a and b, and Model C being identical to Model A except for the additional paths c and
d. Figure 1b displays Model D. Paths in black denote hypothesized positive relationships; those in shaded lines
denote negative relationships.

variables relate to each other (i.e., the strengths of the associations)
are also the same between them.
Method
Participants. Lesbians were recruited from relevant websites
(see below) in China (n ⫽ 244) and in Hong Kong (n ⫽ 237).
However, three Hong Kong participants with response set (filling
in the same score for every question) were removed, leaving 234
participants for the Hong Kong sample. Characteristics of the two
samples are presented in Table 1. Expectedly, the samples were
relatively young; almost all the participants were aged 30 or
younger. However, the Hong Kong participants were much
younger, with almost half the sample teenagers; on the contrary,
most of the participants from Mainland China were in their 20s.1
Partly because of this, participants from Hong Kong had on the
average lower educational attainment and were more likely to live
with parents, than those from China. Moreover, perhaps due to the
differential living standard between the two places, it was much
less likely for lesbians in Hong Kong to live alone or with their
partners anyway. Consistent with census figures (Census and Sta-
tistics Department, 2007; National Bureau of Statistics of China,
2002), the majority of participants in both samples declared to
have no religion. Finally, nearly half in both samples was perform-
ing the butch role, a quarter femme, and one third undifferentiated.
Measures. Except for the Self-Stigma Scale (which was de-
veloped in Chinese), all measures were translated into Chinese
using the back-translation procedure to ensure semantic equiva-
lence with the original English version.
Shame. The 25-item Experience of Shame Scale (Andrews,
Qian, & Valentine, 2002) measures affective, cognitive, and be-
havioral aspects of shame. Sample items are “Have you felt
ashamed of the sort of person you are?” and “Have you worried
about what other people think of your appearance?” In none of the
items was the term homosexuality, gay, lesbian, or sexual orien-
tation mentioned. Each item was rated on a 5-point scale ranging
from 1 (not at all) to 5 (very much), with higher scores indicating
more shame. The scale was shown to have high internal consis-
tency (␣ ⫽ .92) and 11-week test–retest reliability (r ⫽ .83).
Convergent validity was demonstrated by correlations with other
measures of shame and guilt, and nomological validity was sup-
ported by predicted changes in depressive symptoms over an
11-week interval (Andrews et al., 2002). Two items were removed
due to low item-total correlations, leaving 23 items for analysis.
Alpha coefficients for the 23-item scale equaled .92 and .94 for the
China and the Hong Kong sample, respectively.
Internalized heterosexism. Internalized heterosexism was as-
sessed using the Self-Stigma Scale, originally developed for Chi-
nese populations (Mak et al., 2007; Mak & Wu, 2006). It measures
the affective, cognitive, and behavioral dimensions of the experi-
ence of stigma. Compared with other measures of internalized
heterosexism (Szymanski et al., 2008), this scale was tailor-made
in the Chinese context and was intended to serve as a common
basis for assessing internalized stigmatization across different mar-
ginalized groups. Items were therefore developed on the basis of
focus groups with various social minorities, including lesbians,
1
Because we do not have access to membership information of the
various websites, we do not know to what extent membership character-
istics determine the different age distributions of the two samples. How-
ever, by examining activities on the various discussion forums belonging to
different age groups, the age distributions in both samples reflect the
relative frequency of discussions as seen on these webs. Note also that
admission to an Internet bar/cafe is limited to those aged 18 or over in
China.
 96 CHOW AND CHENG

Table 1 comfortable knowing that others judge me negatively for being

Sociodemographic Characteristics, China (N ⫽ 244) and Hong lesbian” and “I would rather be straight if I could.” Exploratory
Kong (N ⫽ 234) Samples factor analyses supported a six-factor structure—identity confu-
sion, identity superiority, internalized homonegativity, need for
% acceptance, need for privacy, and difficult processes—for both
Variable China Hong Kong ␹2 df lesbians and gays in the United States. Alpha coefficients for the
six subscales ranged from .65 to .81. Construct validity was
ⴱ
Age 118.20 4 supported by negative correlations with same-group orientation,
15–18 9.0 48.9 the internalized/synthesis phase of individual sexual identity de-
19–22 31.6 32.9
23–26 35.5 13.4 velopment, and self-esteem (Mohr & Fassinger, 2000). However,
27–30 17.2 2.6 in our pilot study of 49 lesbians in Hong Kong, the Difficult
30⫹ 6.7 2.2 Processes subscale (five items) correlated at r ⫽ .78 with the
Gender role as lesbian 4.78 2 Self-Stigma Scale, raising questions as to whether the two mea-
Butch 43.1 48.1
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

Femme 22.1 25.1 sures were sufficiently distinct. Moreover, these five items, along
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

Undifferentiated 34.8 26.8 with four others (distributed across the other subscales) that did not
Education 134.02ⴱ 3 function equivalently across the two samples were removed, leav-
Junior high 3.3 44.2 ing 18 items for the measure of lesbian identity.2 This 18-item
Senior high 21.3 25.5
College 67.2 29.0
scale had alpha coefficients of .82 and .85 for the China and the
Master’s degree or above 8.2 1.3 Hong Kong sample, respectively. A higher score indicates a less
Living arrangement 94.53ⴱ 2 affirmed identity.
With parents 47.1 89.2 Perceived social support. The Perceived Social Support
With partners 24.2 4.8 Scales (Procidano & Heller, 1983) measure perceived support
Alone 28.7 6.1
Employment 69.65ⴱ 4 from family and friends, each with 20 yes–no items. Sample items
Student 34.4 72.7 were “My family enjoys hearing what I think” and “My friends are
Blue collar, sales, clerical 25.4 17.3 sensitive to my personal needs.” Alpha coefficients for the Family
Professional 15.6 5.6 and Friends support subscales were reported to be .88 and .79 in
Unemployed 7.4 4.3
Others 17.2 0.0 Asian American college students (Gloria & Ho, 2003), and .89 and
Religion 64.27ⴱ 3 .85, respectively, in college students with bisexual orientation
No religion 76.2 65.8 (Sheets & Mohr, 2009). In support of their nomological validity,
Christianity 4.1 28.6 both subscales were found to be associated with depression and
Buddhism 16.8 5.2
Others 2.9 0.4
life satisfaction in bisexual individuals (Sheets & Mohr, 2009).
Again, due to nonequivalence across samples, three Family and
ⴱ
p ⬍ .001. two Friends support items were omitted, leaving 17 items for the
Family subscale and 18 for the Friends subscale (see Footnote 2).
For the China and the Hong Kong sample, respectively, alpha
gays, bisexuals, mental health consumers, and the like. It has a coefficients, based on the reduced set of items, were .91 and .91 for
long (22 items) and a short (15 items) version. The short version the Family subscale, and .83 and .80 for the Friends subscale.
was used in the present study, with the alpha coefficient reported Outness. The Outness Inventory (Mohr & Fassinger, 2000)
to be .95 in a previous Hong Kong sample (Mak & Wu, 2006). measures, using a 7-point Likert scale, the degree to which the
Sample items are “I feel pity for myself as being a _____,” and “I
participant’s same-sex orientation is known to another person and
don’t dare to make new friends lest they find out that I am
has been openly discussed with him or her (1 ⫽ definitely does not
a _____” and the word lesbian was inserted in the blank space in
know, 2 ⫽ might know but never talked about, 3 ⫽ probably knows
each item. The items were rated on a 4-point scale ranging from 1
but never talked about, 4 ⫽ probably knows but rarely talked
(strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree), with higher scores indi-
about, 5 ⫽ definitely knows and rarely talked about, 6 ⫽ definitely
cating more intense internalized heterosexism. In a sample of
knows and sometimes talked about, 7 ⫽ definitely knows and
Chinese adults with HIV/AIDS, exploratory factor analysis of the
openly talked about). On the basis of exploratory factor analysis in
long version supported the scale’s unidimensionality, and, in sup-
lesbians and gays, Mohr and Fassinger categorized the target
port of the measure’s nomological validity, it was found to be
persons into three categories: (a) family members (mother, father,
associated with less social support and more psychological distress
siblings, extended family, and relatives), (b) world (old and new
(Mak et al., 2007). The 15-item short form had alpha coefficients
heterosexual friends, strangers, work peers, and work supervisors),
of .92 and .95 for the China and the Hong Kong sample, respec-
and (c) members of religious groups (religious leader and religious
tively.
member). Alpha coefficients were reported to be .74, .79, and .97
Lesbian identity. Compared with other measures of identity
for outness to family, world, and religion, respectively. In support
development that focus on identity stages (e.g., Brady & Busse,
1994), the Lesbian and Gay Identity Scale (Mohr & Fassinger,
2000) focuses on dimensions of the lesbian and gay experience 2
We examined each scale one by one for cross-cultural equivalence first
that are relevant throughout the entire identity development pro- using the method of invariance analysis in confirmatory factor analysis.
cess. It contains 27 items rated on a 7-point scale (1 ⫽ disagree Items that were nonequivalent were removed prior to forming the item
strongly, 7 ⫽ agree strongly). Sample items are “I can’t feel parcels for the main analyses.
 SHAME AND COMING OUT
of construct validity of the scale, outness to the different targets
was associated positively with same-group orientation and the
internalized/synthesis phase of individual sexual identity develop-
ment, but negatively with the deepening/commitment phase of
group membership identity (Mohr & Fassinger, 2000). Similar to
what Mohr and Fassinger (2000) found in their U.S. sample,
missing values were plenty for the religious targets (in both soci-
eties, people with religious beliefs are a minority; Census and
Statistics Department, 2007; National Bureau of Statistics of
China, 2002). Moreover, most of our participants were not em-
ployed (see Table 1). Hence the “religious” and “work” targets
were dropped. Furthermore, because it was extremely unlikely for
our participants to disclose to strangers (M ⫽ 1.49, SD ⫽ 1.27 for
China; M ⫽ 1.62, SD ⫽ 1.18 for Hong Kong), this item was also
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
dropped. Thus, our data focused on outness to two broad catego-
ries of relationship—family and friends. The alpha coefficients for
the reduced set of items were .82 and .85 for the China and the
Hong Kong sample, respectively. A higher score indicates more
openness about one’s sexual orientation.
Procedure. Lesbians are a group of sexual minorities who are
more or less invisible in Chinese societies. Hence, for recruitment,
an anonymous online questionnaire link was posted in five lesbian
web forums in each society. These forums, connected to public
lesbian and gay organizations, are presented as a supportive com-
munication platform where plenty of self-identified lesbians
gather, interact, and exchange assorted information. Information
on (mostly social) activities of interest to lesbians is also publi-
cized on these webs. Recruitment was limited to those who were
ethnically Chinese, who provided informed consent on the web
questionnaire. Questionnaires printed in simplified Chinese char-
acters were placed on the China websites, and questionnaires in
traditional Chinese characters were placed on the Hong Kong
websites. The internet protocol (IP) address of each submission
was carefully checked to avoid possible duplicate submissions
from the same computer user. There were no identical IP addresses
in both samples, and hence all submissions were considered valid
entries.
Data analysis. The different theoretical models (see Figure 1)
were tested using structural equation modeling. The covariance
matrix of the indicators was subject to the maximum likelihood
estimation using LISREL Version 8.52. Because the outness data
were skewed, the Satorra-Bentler scaled chi-square is reported
(Satorra & Bentler, 1994), which corrects the chi-square statistic
(and all fit indices based on it) as well as the standard errors of
parameter estimates for nonnormality when the maximum likeli-
hood estimator is used. Besides chi-square, the comparative fit
index (CFI), nonnormed fit index (NNFI), standardized root-mean-
square residual (SRMR), and root-mean-square error of approxi-
mation (RMSEA) were used to evaluate model fit. In general, CFI
and NNFI ⱖ .95, SRMR ⱕ .08, and RMSEA ⱕ .06 (Hu & Bentler,
1999) represent good fit to the data, but these should not be taken
as rigid rules (Marsh, Hau, & Wen, 2004). In addition, to evaluate
the relative fit of nested models (Model B/Model C vs. Model A),
the difference between two scaled chi-square values were adjusted
using the procedure described in Satorra and Bentler (2001) so that
the critical values for normal theory chi-square can be used.
However, because Model D is not nested within Model A, the two
models in which the Akaike information criterion (AIC) was used
were compared, which corrects the chi-square statistic for model
97
complexity, with a lower value indicating a better model fit.
According to Burnham and Anderson (2002), an AIC difference ⱖ
10 is a strong indication that one model is inferior to the other, a
difference of 3–9 suggests different degrees of departure, and a
difference ⱕ 2 does not warrant interpretation. Finally, the joint
significance test (i.e., all mediating pathways need to be significant)
was used to identify significant mediation effects (MacKinnon,
Lockwood, Hoffman, West, & Sheets, 2002; Taylor, MacKinnon,
& Tein, 2008).3
Results
Coming out to family and friends. Table 2 presents data on
outness (scoring 5 or above on the Outness Inventory) to various
targets. Across the two samples, a lot more lesbians disclosed to
friends (particularly long-term heterosexual friends) than to family
members. With both samples combined, over half disclosed to
friends but only one third disclosed to any family member. Prom-
inent targets for disclosure within the family were siblings and the
mother. Across all targets, disclosure was much more common
among lesbians in Hong Kong than among those in China. Such a
difference was in general more pronounced with heterosexual
friends than with family members as targets.
Descriptive statistics of observed variables. The means and
standard deviations of the observed variables (the outness mea-
sures here were composites of the raw scores of constituent items)
are shown in Table 3. To further examine differences between
China and Hong Kong, we conducted a multivariate analysis of
variance with shame, internalized heterosexism, lesbian identity,
and family and friend support as dependent variables, and country
as the between-subjects factor. No multivariate outliers were iden-
tified using Mahalanobis distances. An overall main effect of
country, Pillai’s F(5, 472) ⫽ 3.89, p ⬍ .01, ␩2 ⫽ .04, was found.
Further univariate tests showed that lesbian identity, F(1, 477) ⫽
7.95, p ⬍ .01, ␩2 ⫽ .02, and friends support, F(1, 477) ⫽ 6.83, p ⬍
.01, ␩2 ⫽ .01, were significantly different between the two sam-
ples, with lesbians in Hong Kong reporting more positive identity
with their sexual orientation and better support from friends than
those in China. Thus, not only were lesbians in Hong Kong more
likely to disclose their sexual orientation to family and friends,
they also had a slightly more positive lesbian identity and received
more support from friends than the lesbians in China. Furthermore,
a paired-sample t test showed more perceived support from friends
than from family, whether in Hong Kong, t(233) ⫽ 11.16, p ⬍
.001, d ⫽ 1.39, or in China, t(243) ⫽ 10.55, p ⬍ .001, d ⫽ 1.23.
Measurement invariance. Before proceeding to test the full
structural models, it is paramount that the latent constructs are
equivalent and relate to each other the same way across groups
(i.e., measurement invariance). Given the relatively small within-
3
In the simplest A 3 B 3 C mediating model, the joint significance test
determines the existence of a mediation effect by variable B when the paths
A 3 B and B 3 C are both statistically significant. Although not
necessarily the most powerful test among different ways to test mediation
effects, it provides an effective control for Type I error rate but is not
necessarily the most powerful test (MacKinnon et al., 2002; Taylor et al.,
2008). We compared the results using this test and those from the more
powerful bias-corrected bootstrapping procedure (Mallinckrodt, Abraham,
Wei, & Russell, 2006). The results were the same.
 98 CHOW AND CHENG

Table 2 the number of estimated parameters, we conducted the analyses

Targets of Disclosure separately for outness to family and outness to friends as depen-
dent variables. The results based on the scaled chi-square statistics
% are reported in Table 6. (An estimation of standardized residuals
China Hong Kong Total ␹2(1)a
using multiple regressions with latent variable scores revealed no
outliers in all models.)
Family members Next, we examined whether Models B and C provided better fit
Father 4.9 12.8 8.8 9.31ⴱⴱ to the data than Model A. For outness to family, both Model B,
Mother 11.1 25.7 18.2 17.04ⴱⴱⴱ
adjusted ⌬␹2(2) ⫽ ⫺2.97 and 0.02, respectively, both ns, and
Brothers and sisters 18.9 28.6 23.6 6.33ⴱ
Other relatives 3.7 9.0 6.3 5.67ⴱ Model C, adjusted ⌬␹2(2) ⫽ ⫺3.71 and ⫺2.59 respectively, both
Any family member 27.5 40.6 33.9 9.20ⴱⴱ ns, were not significantly different from Model A in the China and
Friends the Hong Kong sample. Model D, however, was clearly less fitting
Old heterosexual friends 34.9 50.0 42.3 11.25ⴱⴱⴱ than Model A due to the substantial difference in AIC values in
New heterosexual friends 21.3 39.3 30.1 18.40ⴱⴱⴱ
both samples. Model A was therefore accepted as the model of
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

Any heterosexual friend 47.1 62.0 54.4 10.60ⴱⴱ

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

choice for the sake of parsimony. In other words, a strong lesbian

Note. Figures were based on responses to the Outness Inventory, with a identity was the key factor in coming out to family members, and
score of 5 (“definitely knows”) as the cutoff. Numbers add up to ⬎ 100% it completely mediated the effects of shame and internalized het-
because each person could have multiple targets of disclosure.
a erosexism on coming out. Thirteen percent of the variance in
Chi-square tests of differences between China and Hong Kong.
ⴱ
p ⬍ .05. ⴱⴱ p ⬍ .01. ⴱⴱⴱ p ⬍ .001. outness to family was explained by lesbian identity. Social support
was not related to outness directly, but only indirectly through
reduced internalized heterosexism. We further tested whether
group sample sizes and the dichotomous response format of the Model A was invariant between the two samples. On top of the
social support items, items (except those for outness to friends) equality of factor loadings, we forced all structural path coeffi-
tapping the same construct were randomized into three parcels, cients to be equal across the two groups (i.e., another nested
each being the average score of the items, because parcels help to model). This resulted in a nonsignificant increase in chi-square,
correct distribution problems, are more reliable than the individual adjusted ⌬␹2(8) ⫽ 4.20, ns, over and above the model that spec-
items themselves, and improve the ratio of sample size to indica- ified only factor loadings to be equivalent. Thus, the latent vari-
tors (Little, Cunningham, Shahar, & Widaman, 2002). Four items ables related to each other in the same way in both samples when
measuring outness to family were also randomized, with outness to accounting for outness to family. Figure 2 shows the estimates for
siblings and outness to other relatives being combined into one the common metric completely standardized solution. All paths
parcel (see Parcel 3 in Table 4), and outness to mother (Parcel 1) were significant and in the expected direction, except for the path
and outness to father (Parcel 2) being single-item parcels. As for leading from family support to internalized heterosexism.
outness to friends, the two constituent items each served as an For outness to friends in China, again, both Model B, adjusted
indicator for the latent factor, with old and new heterosexual ⌬␹2(2) ⫽ ⫺4.13, ns, and Model C, adjusted ⌬␹2(2) ⫽ ⫺4.18, ns, was
friends being Indicators 1 and 2, respectively (see Table 4). The not significantly different from Model A. The results, however, were
original 7-point items were used for forming the indicators for the different for the Hong Kong sample, in which Model C fit the data
outness constructs. better than Model A, adjusted ⌬␹2(2) ⫽ ⫺7.81, p ⬍ .05, but Model
Results showed that the indicators loaded on the same factors B was not, adjusted ⌬␹2(2) ⫽ ⫺2.36, ns. Moreover, Model D was
(i.e., factor-pattern invariance) in both samples, ␹2(298) ⫽ 397.21, inferior than Model A in the China sample, and it was also inferior to
p ⬍ .001; CFI ⫽ .97, NNFI ⫽ .97, SRMR ⫽ .05, and RMSEA ⫽ Model C in the Hong Kong sample. Thus, for outness to friends,
.04. We then forced all factor loadings to be equal across the two Model A and Model C should be adopted for the China and the Hong
groups, over and above factor-pattern invariance (i.e., a nested Kong sample, respectively. The completely standardized solutions for
model), resulting in adjusted ⌬␹2(20) ⫽ 21.78, ns. Thus, the same these models are displayed in Figures 3a and 3b, respectively. Com-
set of latent constructs was being measured, whether among les-
bians in China or those in Hong Kong, and shame, internalized
heterosexism, and lesbian identity could be distinguished from one
Table 3
another. Moreover, outness to family could also be distinguished
Descriptive Statistics of Observed Study Variables
from outness to friends. We report the overall factor loadings for
the combined sample (N ⫽ 478) in Table 4. All parcels loaded China Hong Kong
highly on their factors. Intercorrelations of the latent variables are
displayed in Table 5. Measure M SD M SD
Evaluating structural models. The establishment of mea-
Shame 58.17 17.58 58.93 17.91
surement invariance set the stage for testing structural models. Internalized heterosexism 21.81 7.40 21.54 7.84
Because of age and educational differences between the two sam- Lesbian identity 62.09 18.40 59.69 17.17
ples, we first compared models with and without controlling for Family support 16.50 9.93 17.42 9.67
the potential effects of age and education on outness. Results Friends support 27.04 6.91 28.59 5.95
Outness to family 7.68 4.23 10.43 5.35
showed that the path coefficients as well as the fit indices were Outness to friends 5.80 3.39 7.90 3.57
basically identical with or without the controls; hence, we elimi-
nated them from the model. To improve the ratio of sample size to Note. Ns ⫽ 244 for China sample and 234 for Hong Kong sample.
 SHAME AND COMING OUT 99

Table 4
Factor Loadings for the Measurement Model, China and Hong Kong Samples Combined

Unstandardized Standardized
Latent factor and indicators factor loading SE Z factor loading

Experience of shame
Shame Parcel 1 0.78 0.03 26.95 .89
Shame Parcel 2 0.79 0.02 32.33 .94
Shame Parcel 3 0.67 0.02 27.65 .88
Internalized heterosexism (IH)
IH Parcel 1 0.48 0.03 18.23 .89
IH Parcel 2 0.48 0.03 16.23 .92
IH Parcel 3 0.52 0.03 18.93 .94
Lesbian identity
Identity Parcel 1 0.80 0.04 19.64 .76
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

Identity Parcel 2 0.89 0.04 20.48 .85

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

Identity Parcel 3 0.75 0.04 18.87 .78

Perceived social support from family
Family support Parcel 1 0.54 0.02 32.79 .90
Family support Parcel 2 0.47 0.02 30.10 .88
Family support Parcel 3 0.44 0.01 31.84 .88
Perceived social support from friends
Friends support Parcel 1 0.33 0.02 18.46 .78
Friends support Parcel 2 0.32 0.02 15.68 .77
Friends support Parcel 3 0.25 0.02 14.86 .70
Outness to family
Family outness Parcel 1 0.98 0.09 10.40 .67
Family outness Parcel 2 1.44 0.09 16.87 .87
Family outness Parcel 3 0.57 0.08 7.42 .44
Outness to friends
Friend outness Indicator 1 1.45 0.12 12.62 .67
Friend outness Indicator 2 1.27 0.12 10.73 .58

Note. N ⫽ 478. All factor loadings were significant at the .001 level.

pared with the earlier analysis on outness to family, lesbian identity
accounted for more variance (34%) in outness to friends in the China
sample and, together with family support, accounted for 27% of the
variance in outness in the Hong Kong sample. The China model was
generally the same for the one with outness to family as the dependent
variable, and we do not discuss it further. Interestingly, however, for
the Hong Kong model, it was family support, not friends support, that
was directly associated with coming out to friends. Friends support
continued to exert its indirect effect on outness through the internal-
ized heterosexism 3 lesbian identity pathway, but its direct effect on
outness to friends was not significant.
The standardized direct and indirect effects of the different
latent variables are shown in Table 7. Both shame and internalized
heterosexism had small to moderate indirect effects on outness
across models; nevertheless, it was noteworthy that they had a
combined massive effect size of ⫺0.56 ([⫺0.29] ⫹ [⫺0.27]) on
outness to friends among lesbians in China. Across models, the
effect sizes of friends and family support tended to be noticeably
smaller than those for shame and internalized heterosexism.
Discussion
This study investigated whether outness, the disclosure of one’s
same-sex orientation, was related to lesbian identity, internalized
heterosexism, and social support from family and friends, within
the larger context of the experience of shame. To our knowledge,

Table 5
Within-Group Correlations Among Latent Variables

Latent variable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
ⴱⴱⴱ ⴱⴱⴱ ⴱⴱ ⴱⴱⴱ ⴱ
1. Shame — .38 .52 ⫺.18 ⫺.26 ⫺.21 ⫺.12
2. Internalized heterosexism .43ⴱⴱⴱ — .60ⴱⴱⴱ ⫺.19ⴱⴱ ⫺.47ⴱⴱⴱ ⫺.15ⴱ ⫺.33ⴱⴱ
3. Lesbian identity .47ⴱⴱⴱ .53ⴱⴱⴱ — ⫺.25ⴱⴱⴱ ⫺.33ⴱⴱⴱ ⫺.41ⴱⴱⴱ ⫺.60ⴱⴱⴱ
4. Family support ⫺.12 ⫺.13ⴱ ⫺.05 — .40ⴱⴱⴱ .19ⴱ .09
5. Friends support ⫺.38ⴱⴱⴱ ⫺.34ⴱⴱⴱ ⫺.31ⴱⴱⴱ .28ⴱⴱⴱ — .18ⴱ .45ⴱⴱⴱ
6. Outness to family ⫺.17ⴱ ⫺.19ⴱ ⫺.32ⴱⴱⴱ .17ⴱ .05 — .60ⴱⴱⴱ
7. Outness to friends ⫺.32ⴱⴱⴱ ⫺.38ⴱⴱⴱ ⫺.47ⴱⴱⴱ .20ⴱ .27ⴱⴱ .40ⴱⴱⴱ —

Note. Ns ⫽ 244 for China sample and 234 for Hong Kong sample. Correlations for the China sample are displayed above the diagonal; those for the Hong
Kong sample are below.
ⴱ
p ⬍ .05. ⴱⴱ p ⬍ .01. ⴱⴱⴱ p ⬍ .001.
 100 CHOW AND CHENG

Table 6
Fit Indices for Alternate Models for Outness to Family and Outness to Friends

␹2 df CFI NNFI SRMR RMSEA AIC

Outness to family
China
Model A 213.18 127 .97 .97 .08 .05 301.18
Model B 209.74 125 .97 .96 .08 .05 301.74
Model C 209.35 125 .97 .96 .08 .05 301.35
Model D 230.38 126 .96 .95 .10 .06 320.38
Hong Kong
Model A 208.30 127 .97 .96 .06 .05 296.30
Model B 208.33 125 .97 .96 .06 .05 301.39
Model C 205.21 125 .97 .97 .06 .05 297.21
Model D 233.64 126 .96 .96 .08 .06 323.64
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

Outness to friends
China
Model A 194.20 111 .97 .97 .08 .06 278.20
Model B 189.79 109 .97 .97 .08 .06 277.79
Model C 189.96 109 .97 .97 .08 .06 277.96
Model D 216.33 110 .96 .95 .11 .06 302.33
Hong Kong
Model A 206.02 111 .97 .96 .06 .06 290.02
Model B 203.07 109 .97 .96 .06 .06 291.07
Model C 198.80 109 .97 .96 .06 .06 286.83
Model D 231.41 110 .96 .95 .09 .07 317.41

Note. Ns ⫽ 244 for China sample and 234 for Hong Kong sample. All chi-square values were significant at the .001 level. CFI ⫽ comparative fit index;
NNFI ⫽ nonnormed fit index; SRMR ⫽ standardized root-mean-square residual; RMSEA ⫽ root-mean-square error of approximation; AIC ⫽ Akaike
information criterion.

this is the first empirical study ever conducted in Chinese lesbian
populations. Consistent with our predictions, outness was much
less likely for those who had a weak and negative lesbian identity.
Because lesbian identity was more negative among lesbians in
China than among those in Hong Kong, coming out to family and
Figure 2. Final structural equation model for outness to family (Model
A), common metric solution for China (N ⫽ 244) and Hong Kong (N ⫽
234) samples. ⴱⴱⴱ p ⬍ .01.
friends was less common in the former. Identity, in turn, was
related to a sense of shame and internalized heterosexism. More-
over, shame had both direct and indirect (via negative associations
with perceived support from friends) effects on internalized het-
erosexism. These findings were by and large similar between
China and Hong Kong. The findings strongly supported the need
to examine the simultaneous effects of internalized heterosexism
and shame on the self-disclosure of sexual orientation by lesbians.
However, because coming out to family was more difficult for
Chinese lesbians, the models were more effective in explaining
outness to friends than in explaining outness to family.
In a heterosexist society, those with same-sex orientation are
often seen as deviant and treated unfairly. Such prejudice and
associated practices may come not only from the public but also
from close others, such as family members. Kanuha (1997) argued
that prejudice and discrimination against the outgroup were due to
the aversive valuations (i.e., same-sex orientation is morally wrong
and unacceptable) that culture delivers toward lesbians, or stigma.
Such cultural views become personally relevant and form the basis
for self-evaluation (Link et al., 1989). The paramount negative
valuations result in a stigmatized self, which in turn leads to an
ambiguous identity. Such an identity development makes disclos-
ing a socially ostracized status even more unlikely (Anhalt &
Morris, 1998; Szymanski et al., 2008; Tangney & Dearing, 2002).
It is therefore not surprising that coming out to others is not a
common phenomenon in Chinese lesbians, especially within fam-
ilies.
Noticeably, this study showed that the effect of shame has to be
distinguished from that of internalized heterosexism. Although
shame and internalized heterosexism may appear to be similar
 SHAME AND COMING OUT
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
Figure 3. Final structural equation model for outness to friends for (a) China sample (N ⫽ 244; Model A) and
(b) Hong Kong sample (N ⫽ 234, Model C). ⴱ p ⬍ .05. ⴱⴱ p ⬍ .01. ⴱⴱ p ⬍ .01.
constructs, they were only moderately correlated, and were both
uniquely associated with identity formation in this study. The
experience of shame involves discrepancies between actual self
and ideal selves, as well as those between actual self and ought
selves (Tangney et al., 1998). The ideal self represents hopes and
aspirations, whereas the ought self encompasses duties and obli-
gations; both of these selves receive input from others as well as
from oneself (Higgins, 1987). In this connection, the Chinese
parenting practice of shaming (Ho, 1986) is expected to accentuate
the effect of self-discrepancies so that Chinese are more likely than
Westerners to feel ashamed in response to potentially shameful
events (Tang et al., 2008), although this hypothesis is yet to be
tested. In any case, this study showed that shame was moderately
related to outness, partly through increasing internalized hetero-
sexism and weakening lesbian identity. Thus, those who are more
ashamed of themselves as a person are also more likely to inter-
nalize the public stigma about same-sex attraction. They are the
ones who see themselves in more negative ways globally, and
when they encounter prejudice and discrimination from others,
they are more ready to incorporate such stereotypical views into
their already negative self. The foregoing discussion implies a link
between parenting practice and internalizing heterosexism by les-
bians in Chinese societies, an important question that should be
investigated in future research.
The relationship between social support and outness was more
complicated than was initially assumed. We expected that per-
ceived support from both friends and family would mediate the
effect of shame on internalized heterosexism. However, only per-
ceived support from friends was associated with a more positive
lesbian identity through reduced internalized heterosexism,
whereas family support did not. A possible explanation is that,
under the principle of filial piety, one should honor the parents
(Cheng & Chan, 2006), and anything, such as a same-sex orien-
tation, that brings disgrace to them and to the family name should
be avoided. As a result, it may be difficult for Chinese lesbians to
develop a positive lesbian identity, whether the parents appear to
be understanding or not. The prospect of losing parental affection
101
may also be another factor that contributes further to the devalu-
ation of their identity. Accordingly, parents were unlikely targets
of disclosure within the immediate family in both samples. In fact,
disclosing to fathers was as unlikely as disclosing to distant rela-
tives, as fathers tend to be less tolerant and react more negatively
to their children’s same-sex orientation (D’Augelli, Hershberger,
& Pilkington, 1998). By comparison, siblings are typically per-
ceived as more like peers and tend to be more supportive (Cain,
1991).
On the contrary, the lesbians were more willing to disclose to
friends, whose support facilitated coming out. It should be noted
that the Perceived Social Support Scales taps support from friends
in general, without differentiation in sexual orientation. Neverthe-
less, data from the Outness Inventory suggested that lesbians were
quite ready to disclose to heterosexual friends, especially when
these were long-term relationships with probably a greater degree
of trust. This suggested that support was relatively forthcoming
from age peers, although they might not share the same sexual
orientation. Compared with the parent– child relationship, which is
hierarchical in nature, the relationship between friends is charac-
terized by equal status and mutuality that facilitate sharing and
disclosure. Moreover, the younger age groups have generally more
tolerant attitudes toward same-sex orientation than the older co-
horts (i.e., parents; Dube & Savin-Williams, 1999).
Although family support was not significantly related to coming
out by way of internalized heterosexism and lesbian identity, it
had, surprisingly, a small direct effect on coming out to friends in
the Hong Kong sample, but not on coming out to family members.
We suspect that this finding might be peculiar to our sample of
younger lesbians. As can be seen from Table 1, about half the
Hong Kong sample was teenagers. Observations suggest that par-
ents often treat nonconforming gender-typed behaviors during
adolescence as experimental and transient. When parents are more
supportive, a teenage girl may have more room exploring her
sexuality with her peers, some of whom may self-identify as
lesbian, and some as heterosexual, at various stages of develop-
ment (see Diamond, 2005). Thus, such girls might report more
 102 CHOW AND CHENG

Table 7 2005; Sheets & Mohr, 2009), and whether the support comes from
Standardized Direct and Indirect Effects of Different Variables friends/relatives with cross-sex orientation versus support from
on Outness, Based on Different Structural Equation Models and those with same-sex orientation, would provide a more compre-
the Joint Significance Test hensive picture of the effect of support on coming out. Finally,
although the present study demonstrated the importance of a
Standardized effect size positive lesbian identity in coming out to others, it did not reveal
Independent and mediator variable Direct Indirect Total
the dynamic process of identity development in Chinese lesbians.
Future research should address this important issue.
Outness to family Despite these limitations, this study provides valuable insights
Shame 0.00 ⫺0.18 ⫺0.18 into the psychological issues faced by Chinese lesbians day in and
Via identity ⫺0.12 day out. Whether in China or in Hong Kong, the experience of
Via IH 3 identity ⫺0.05 lesbians with regards to shame, internalized stigma, self-
Via friend support 3 IH 3 identity ⫺0.01 devaluation, and the dilemmas of coming out to others are rather
IH 0.00 ⫺0.15 ⫺0.15
similar. We suspect that similar identity and outness issues are also
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

Via identity ⫺0.15

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

Friend support 0.00 0.05 0.05 common among Chinese/Asian lesbians beyond these two societ-
Via IH 3 identity 0.05 ies, including those residing in foreign countries such as the United
Outness to friends: China States. Such experiences would be especially relevant for those in
Shame 0.00 ⫺0.29 ⫺0.29 the first or second generations, due to entrenched cultural attitudes
Via identity ⫺0.19 against same-sex orientation. Psychologists working with these
Via IH 3 identity ⫺0.07 populations should be aware of the potential cultural issues that
Via friend support 3 IH 3 identity ⫺0.03 they face. It is recommended that counselors should help clients to
IH 0.00 ⫺0.27 ⫺0.27
identify oppressive experiences and suggest strategies for stigma
Via identity ⫺0.27
Friend support 0.00 0.11 0.11 management. Our findings suggest that the process of constructing
Via IH 3 identity 0.11 a lesbian identity takes place in the context of deep-rooted shame
Outness to friends: Hong Kong that involves the entire self. Thus, counselors working with Chi-
nese/Asian lesbians will probably need to deal with global issues
Shame 0.00 ⫺0.23 ⫺0.23
Via identity ⫺0.14 of self-image as well as issues related directly to lesbian identity.
Via IH 3 identity ⫺0.06 Moreover, because harmony and familism (including filial piety)
Via friend support 3 IH 3 identity ⫺0.01 are highly valued in these communities, it is likely that Chinese/
Via family support ⫺0.02 Asian lesbians will have strong hesitations engaging in actions that
IH 0.00 ⫺0.18 ⫺0.18
Via identity ⫺0.18 lead to confrontations with family members, including coming out
Friend support 0.00 0.04 0.04 and avoiding “fake” heterosexual marriage. Although some Chi-
Via IH 3 identity 0.04 nese/Asian lesbians may choose to come out to family members,
Family support 0.14 0.00 0.14 others may find a dual lesbian and mainstream (e.g., a good
daughter) identity (see Fingerhut, Peplau, & Ghavami, 2005) to be
Note. IH ⫽ internalized heterosexism.
a more acceptable resolution in the long run. Counselors will need
to be sensitive to the needs of different subgroups of lesbians when
disclosures, although one should caution against interpreting the working in a multicultural setting.
finding to mean that family support led directly to disclosure to
friends. To test our assumption that the relationship between References
family support and outness to friends was especially true for the
teenage lesbians, we ran correlational analysis for the two vari- Andrews, B., Qian, M., & Valentine, J. D. (2002). Predicting depressive
ables, broken down by age groups (15–18 and 19⫹). Product– symptoms with a new measure of shame: The Experience of Shame
Scale. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 41, 29 – 42.
moment correlations equaled .21 ( p ⬍ .05) for the former, but only
Anhalt, K., & Morris, T. L. (1998). Developmental and adjustment issues
.06 (ns) for the latter. Further controlling for friends support and of gay, lesbian and bisexual adolescents: A review of the empirical
lesbian identity (see Figure 1b) resulted in little changes to these literature. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 1, 215–230.
coefficients. Thus, the way family (or parental) support works may Bailey, J. M., & Zucker, K. J. (1995). Childhood sex-typed behavior and
depend on the age of the lesbian, a topic that begs further research. sexual orientation: A conceptual analysis and quantitative review. De-
Several limitations need to be mentioned before closing. First, velopmental Psychology, 31, 43–55.
participants were mainly teenagers and young adults; future re- Beals, K. P., & Peplau, A. (2005). Identity support, identity devaluation,
search should cover a broader age range in order to gain a more and well-being among lesbians. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 29,
thorough understanding about Chinese lesbians. Second, the 140 –148.
present cross-sectional data do not allow inferences about causal- Brady, S., & Busse, W. J. (1994). The Gay Identity Questionnaire: A brief
measure of homosexual identity formation. Journal of Homosexuality,
ity, and thus cannot illustrate the dynamic nature of identity
26, 1–22.
development overtime in lesbians. Third, although it is not possi- Burnham, K. P., & Anderson, D. R. (2002). Model selection and multi-
ble to recruit representative samples of lesbians, samples of much model inference: A practical information theoretic approach (2nd ed.).
larger sizes would enhance generalizability of the results. Fourth, New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.
in addition to assessing general perceived support, the inclusion of Cain, R. (1991). Relational contexts and information management among
measures of support for same-sex orientation (Beals & Peplau, gay men. Families in Society, 72, 344 –352.
 SHAME AND COMING OUT
Carr, C. L. (2007). Where have all the tomboys gone? Women’s accounts
of gender in adolescence. Sex Roles, 56, 439 – 448.
Carter, D. B., & McCloskey, L. A. (1983–1984). Peers and the mainte-
nance of sex-typed behavior: The development of children’s conceptions
of cross-gender behavior in their peers. Social Cognition, 2, 24 –314.
Census and Statistics Department. (2007). Hong Kong 2006 population
by-census main report, Vols. I & II. Hong Kong, China: Author.
Cheng, S.-T., & Chan, A. C. M. (2006). Filial piety and psychological
well-being in well older Chinese. Journal of Gerontology: Psychological
Sciences, 61B, P262–P269.
Chia, R. C., Allred, L. J., & Jerzak, P. A. (1997). Attitudes toward women
in Taiwan and China. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21, 137–150.
Corrigan, P. W., & Matthews, A. K. (2003). Stigma and disclosure:
Implications for coming out of the closet. Journal of Mental Health, 12,
235–248.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
D’Augelli, A., Hershberger, S., & Pilkington, N. (1998). Lesbian, gay, and
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
bisexual youth and their families: Disclosure of sexual orientation and its
consequences. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 68, 361–371.
Diamond, L. M. (2005). A new view of lesbian subtypes: Stable versus
fluid identity trajectories over an 8-year period. Psychology of Women
Quarterly, 29, 119 –128.
Dube, E. M., & Savin-Williams, R. C. (1999). Sexual identity development
among ethnic sexual-minority male youths. Developmental Psychology,
35, 1389 –1398.
Egan, S. K., & Perry, D. G. (2001). Gender identity: A multidimensional
analysis with implications for psychological adjustment. Developmental
Psychology, 37, 451– 463.
Eid, M., & Diener, E. (2001). Norms for experiencing emotions in different
cultures: Inter- and intra-national differences. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 81, 869 – 885.
Ellen, R. D. B., Joy, W. S., Amber, O., Scales, R. S., & Sue, S. (2008). The
positive aspects of being a lesbian or gay man. Professional Psychology:
Research and Practice, 39, 210 –217.
Fingerhut, A. W., Peplau, L. A., & Ghavami, N. (2005). A dual-identity
framework for understanding lesbian experience. Psychology of Women
Quarterly, 29, 129 –139.
Friedman, R. C., & Downey, J. I. (1999). Internalized homophobia and
gender-valued self-esteem in the psychoanalysis of gay patients. Psy-
choanalytic Review, 86, 325–347.
Gloria, A. M., & Ho, T. A. (2003). Environment, social, and psychological
experiences of Asian American undergraduates: Examining issues of
academic persistence. Journal of Counseling & Development, 81, 93–
105.
Harada, M. (2001). Japanese male gay and bisexual identity. Journal of
Homosexuality, 42, 77–100.
Herek, G. M. (2003). Why tell if you’re not asked? Self-disclosure,
intergroup contact, and heterosexuals’ attitudes toward lesbians and gay
men. In L. D. Garnets & D. C. Kimmel (Eds.), Psychological perspec-
tives on lesbian, gay, and bisexual experiences (2nd ed., pp. 270 –298).
New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
Herek, G. M., Chopp, R., & Strohl, D. (2007). Sexual stigma: Putting
sexual minority health issues in context. In I. H. Meyer & M. E.
Northeidge (Eds.), The health of sexual minorities: Public health per-
spectives on lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender populations (pp.
171–208). Berlin, Germany: Springer.
Higgins, E. T. (1987). Self-discrepancy: A theory relating self and affect.
Psychological Review, 94, 319 –340.
Ho, D. Y. F. (1986). Chinese pattern of socialization: A critical review. In
M. H. Bond (Ed.), The psychology of the Chinese people (pp. 1–37).
New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance
structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struc-
tural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55.
Jones, R. H. (2007). Imagined comrades and imaginary protections: Iden-
103
tity, community and sexual risk among men who have sex with men in
China. Journal of Homosexuality, 53, 83–115.
Jordan, K., & Deluty, R. H. (1998). Coming out for lesbian women: Its
relations to anxiety, positive affectivity, self-esteem, and social support.
Journal of Homosexuality, 35, 41– 63.
Kanuha, V. K. (1997). Stigma, identity, and passing: How lesbians and gay
men of color construct and manage stigmatized identity in social inter-
action. Dissertation Abstracts International, 58, 4811A. (UMI No.
9819258)
Kaufman, J. M., & Johnson, C. (2005). Stigmatized individuals and the
process of identity. The Sociological Quarterly, 45, 807– 833.
King, A. (2004). ₼⦚䤓䚍ⅲ懘⚠ [Modern turn of China]. Hong Kong:
Oxford University Press.
Kitayama, S., Markus, H. R., & Matsumoto, H. (1995). Culture, self, and
emotion: A cultural perspective on “self-conscious” emotions. In J. P.
Tangney & K. W. Fischer (Eds.), Self-conscious emotions: The psychol-
ogy of shame, guilt, embarrassment, and pride (pp. 439 – 464). New
York, NY: Guilford Press.
Landolt, M. A., Bartholomew, K., Saffrey, C., Oram, D., & Perlman, D.
(2004). Gender nonconformity, childhood rejection, and adult attach-
ment: A study of gay men. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 33, 117–128.
Lewis, H. B. (1971). Shame and guilt in neurosis. New York, NY:
International Universities Press.
Lewis, M. (1998). Shame and stigma. In P. Gilbert & B. Andrews (Eds.),
Shame: Interpersonal behavior, psychopathology, and culture (pp. 126 –
140). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Li, L., & Orleans, M. (2001). Coming out discourses of Asian American
lesbians. Sexuality & Culture: An Interdisciplinary Quarterly, 5, 57–78.
Link, B. G., Cullen, F. T., Struening, E., Shrout, P. E., & Dohrenwend,
B. P. (1989). A modified labeling theory approach to mental disorders:
An empirical assessment. American Sociological Review, 54, 400 – 423.
Little, T. D., Cunningham, W. A., Shahar, G., & Widaman, K. F. (2002).
To parcel or not to parcel: Exploring the question, weighting the merits.
Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 151–173.
MacKinnon, D. P., Lockwood, C. M., Hoffman, J. M., West, S. G., &
Sheets, V. (2002). A comparison of methods to test mediation and other
intervening variable effects. Psychological Methods, 7, 83–104.
Mak, W. W. S., Cheung, R. Y. M., Law, R. W., Woo, J., Li, P. C. K., &
Chung, R. W. Y. (2007). Examining attribution model of self-stigma on
social support and psychological well-being among people with HIV⫹/
AIDS. Social Science & Medicine, 64, 1549 –1559.
Mak, W. W. S., & Wu, C. F. M. (2006). Cognitive insight and causal
attribution in the development of self-stigma among individuals with
schizophrenia. Psychiatric Services, 57, 1800 –1802.
Mallinckrodt, M., Abraham, T. W., Wei, M., & Russell, D. W. (2006).
Advances in testing the statistical significance of mediation effects.
Journal of Counseling Psychology, 53, 372–378.
Mao, L., McCormick, J., & van de Ven, P. (2002). Ethnic and gay
identification: Gay Asian men dealing with the divide. Culture, Health
& Sexuality, 4, 419 – 430.
Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications
for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 224 –
253.
Marsh, H. W., Hau, K.-T., & Wen, Z. (2004). In search of golden rules:
Comment on hypothesis-testing approaches to setting cutoff values for
fit indexes and dangers in overgeneralizing Hu and Bentler’s (1999).
findings. Structural Equation Modeling, 11, 320 –341.
McCarn, S. R., & Fassinger, R. E. (1996). Revisioning sexual minority
identity formation: A new model of lesbian minority and its implications
for counseling and research. The Counseling Psychologist, 24, 508 –534.
Mohr, J. J., & Fassinger, R. E. (2000). Measuring dimensions of lesbian
and gay male experience. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling
and Development, 33, 66 –90.
Mueller, B., Nordt, C., Lauber, C., Rueesch, P., Meyer, P. C., & Roessler,
 104 CHOW AND CHENG
W. (2006). Social support modifies perceived stigmatization in the first
years of mental illness: A longitudinal approach. Social Science and
Medicine, 62, 39 – 49.
National Bureau of Statistics of China. (2002). Tabulation of the 2000
population census of the People’s Republic of China, Vol. 3. Beijing,
China: China Statistics Press.
National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs. (2007). Anti-lesbian, gay,
bisexual, and transgender violence in 2006. New York, NY: Author.
Oyserman, D., Coon, H. M., & Kemmelmeier, M. (2002). Rethinking
individualism and collectivism: Evaluation of theoretical assumptions
and meta-analyses. Psychological Bulletin, 128, 3–72.
Peterson, T. L., & Gerrity, D. A. (2006). Internalized homophobia, lesbian
identity development, and self-esteem in undergraduate women. Journal
of Homosexuality, 50, 49 –75.
Poon, M. K., & Ho, P. T. (2008). Negotiating social stigma among gay
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
Asian men. Sexualities, 11, 245–268.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
Procidano, M. E., & Heller, K. (1983). Measure of perceived social support
from friends and from family: Three validation studies. American Jour-
nal of Community Psychology, 11, 1–24.
Rosario, M., Schrimshaw, E. W., & Hunter, J. (2005). Psychological
distress following suicidality among gay, lesbian, and bisexual youths:
Roles of social relationships. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 34,
149 –161.
Satorra, A., & Bentler, P. M. (1994). Corrections to test statistics and
standard errors in covariance structure analysis. In A. von Eye & C. C.
Clogg (Eds.), Latent variables analysis: Applications for developmental
research. (pp. 399 – 419). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Satorra, A., & Bentler, P. M. (2001). A scaled difference chi-square test
statistic for moment structure analysis. Psychometrika, 66, 507–514.
Savin-Williams, R. C., & Dubé, E. M. (1998). Parental reactions to their
child’s disclosure of a gay/lesbian identity. Family Relations, 47, 7–13.
Sheets, R. L., Jr., & Mohr, J. J. (2009). Perceived social support from
friends and family and psychosocial functioning in bisexual young adult
college students. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 56, 152–163.
Szymanski, D. M., Chung, Y. B., & Balsam, K. F. (2001). Psychosocial
correlates of internalized homophobia in lesbians. Measurement and
Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 34, 27–38.
Szymanski, D. M., Kashubeck-West, S., & Meyer, J. (2008). Internalized
heterosexism: Measurement, psychosocial correlates, and research di-
rections. The Counseling Psychologist, 36, 525–574.
Tang, M., Wang, Z., Qian, M., Gao, J., & Zhang, L. (2008). Transferred
shame in the cultures of interdependent-self and independent self. Jour-
nal of Cognition and Culture, 8, 163–178.
Tangney, J. P., & Dearing, R. L. (2002). Shame and guilt. New York, NY:
Guilford Press.
Tangney, J. P., Niedenthal, P. M., Covert, M. V., & Barlow, D. H. (1998).
Are shame and guilt related to distinct self-discrepancies? A test of
Higgins’s (1987) hypotheses. Journal of Personality and Social Psy-
chology, 75, 256 –268.
Tangney, J. P., Wagner, P., & Gramzow, R. (1992). Proneness to shame,
proness to guilt, and psychopathology. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 101, 469 – 478.
Taylor, A. B., MacKinnon, D. P., & Tein, J.-Y. (2008). Tests of the
three-path mediated effect. Organizational Research Methods, 11, 241–
269.
Tracy, J. L., & Robins, R. W. (2004). Putting the self into self-conscious
emotions: A theoretical model. Psychological Inquiry, 15, 103–125.
Women Coalition of HKSAR. (2005). Sexual orientation discrimination in
Hong Kong. Hong Kong, China: Author.
Wong, C., & Tang, C. S. (2004). Coming out experiences and psycholog-
ical distress of Chinese homosexual men in Hong Kong. Archives of
Sexual Behavior, 33, 149 –157.
Received December 19, 2008
Revision received October 6, 2009
Accepted October 7, 2009 䡲