Student Health Services

Abstract

A national sample of 295 transgender adults and their non-transgender siblings were surveyed about demographics, experiences of the body, traditional conceptualizations of femininity and masculinity, perceptions of social support, and violence, harassment and discrimination. Identity development, levels of disclosure of transgender status, and relationship to community were examined among 166 transwomen, transmen, and genderqueers. Transwomen, transmen, and genderqueer participants were recruited via electronic communications, conferences, and social, cultural, and political events. These participants then recruited a sibling for the study. Transwomen were older than the other four groups. Transwomen, transmen, and genderqueers were more highly educated than non-transgender sisters and non-transgender brothers. However, despite having more education, transgender people did not have a corresponding higher income. Transwomen were least satisfied with aspects of their body whereas non-transgender brothers were most satisfied with these aspects of their body. There were no differences in satisfaction with bodily functioning or in attentiveness to internal bodily sensations. Transwomen were more attentive to observable aspects of the body than were transmen, genderqueers, and non-transgender brothers. Transwomen did not differ from non-transgender sisters in femininity or masculinity based on self-report or sibling report. Transmen did not differ from non-transgender brothers in femininity or masculinity based on self-report or sibling report. Sibling ratings characterized transmen and non-transgender brothers in a more sex-typed way than transmen’s and non-transgender brothers’ self ratings. Sibling ratings characterized transwomen and non-transgender sisters in a less sex-typed way than transwomen’s and non-transgender sisters’ self ratings. Transgender people were more likely to experience harassment and discrimination than non-transgender sisters and non-transgender brothers. There was no difference in perceptions of social support from friends. All transgender people perceived less social support from family than non-transgender sisters. There was no difference among transgender groups in age of first experiencing oneself differently from assigned birth sex. Transgender women first presented themselves to others in a gender-congruent way at a later age than transgender men. Transgender women were less likely to disclose their gender identity to their parents than were transgender men. Disclosure of assigned birth sex was more common among younger participants. Genderqueers felt more connected to the lesbian, gay, and bisexual community than did transwomen or transmen. There was no difference in the extent to which individuals felt connected to the transgender community. Characteristics differentiating the current sample from previous research studies are discussed.

Introduction T he present study was planned as a large United States sample of people who identify as transgender. Comparisons were planned across the following groups: those assigned male at birth who experience themselves as female (MTFs) 1 , those assigned female at birth who experience themselves as male (FTMs), and those who do not identify as male or female. Though people who do not identify as men or women Exploring gender identity and community among three groups of transgender individuals in the United States: MTFs, FTMs, and genderqueers A United States sample of 166 transgender adults including 50 male-to-females (MTFs), 52 female-to-males (FTMs), and 64 genderqueers (neither completely female nor completely male), were surveyed about identity development, levels of disclosure of transgender status, and relationship to community. There was no difference among transgender groups in age of first experiencing oneself differently from assigned birth sex. MTFs first identified as other than their assigned sex earlier than FTMs. However, they did not present themselves to others in a gender-congruent way until much later than FTMs. MTFs were less likely to disclose their gender identity to their parents than were FTMs. Disclosure of assigned birth sex was more common among younger participants. There was no difference in the extent to which individuals felt connected to the transgender community. Genderqueers felt more connected to the lesbian, gay, and bisexual community than did MTFs or FTMs. Implications for health care professionals and transgender communities are discussed.

Lesbians and their heterosexual sisters were compared on demographic variables and mental health subscales, so that the feasibility of using heterosexual sisters as a control group for lesbians could be investigated. Lesbians were significantly more educated, more likely to live in urban areas, and more geographically mobile than their heterosexual sisters. Heterosexual sisters were more likely than lesbians to be married and homemakers, to have children, and to identify with a formal religion. There was no difference in mental health, but lesbians had higher self-esteem. When all respondents were included, bisexual women had significantly poorer mental health than did lesbians and heterosexual women. This is the first study to use sisters as a control group in lesbian research.

Lesbians and bisexual women are often recruited for research via convenience sampling, but there has been little focus on the sources through which these women are recruited. This article focuses on two research projects that successfully recruited large samples of lesbian and bisexual women. The first, on lesbians and their bisexual and heterosexual sisters, contacted all lesbian periodicals, religious organizations, bars, bookstores, campus groups, and ethnic/multicultural groups listed in the Gayellow Pages. Different fictional P.O. box numbers appeared in the return address in each case, allowing us to see exactly where lesbians and bisexual women (and also older women and women of color) heard about the study. The second study, on health status of sexual minority women living in the greater Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, area, formed a community advisory board to reach all segments of the community. Questionnaires were sent to individuals on lesbian/gay mailing lists and social organizations; the research team also attended lesbian events and used a snowball distribution method. The results show the relative response rate of women reached through mailing lists, organizations, events, and networks, respectively. The results of both studies indicate that multiple sources of recruitment are ideal in order to reach a diverse sample of lesbian and bisexual women.

The Reader's Guide to Lesbian and Gay Studies surveys the field in some 470 entries on individuals (Adrienne Rich); arts and cultural studies (Dance); ethics, religion, and philosophical issues (Monastic Traditions); historical figures, periods, and ideas (Germany between the World Wars); language, literature, and communication (British Drama); law and politics (Child Custody); medicine and biological sciences (Health and Illness); and psychology, social sciences, and education (Kinsey Report).

Lesbians, gay men, and bisexuals (LGBs) often have heterosexual siblings. The authors have conducted several research projects comparing siblings of different sexual orientations, given that siblings usually have the same ethnicity, race, parental socioeconomic status, and religious background. This review article presents research on LGBs and heterosexuals, all recruited via siblings. In general, heterosexual siblings are more mainstream in terms of being in long-term relationships, having children, belonging to a formal religion, and having more contact with their family of origin. LGB siblings are more politically liberal, more highly educated, and have moved away from their families of origin. The article speculates about how siblings who grow up in the same families could be so demographically different in adulthood.

In his. recent bo~k. The Pecking Order: Which Siblings Succeed and Why, Conley (2004) examm~s how. slbh~gs .can start out on an equal footing in their family yet grow up to dIffer wIdely m mcome, occupational status, and education. VVe too have been interested in siblings, and our focus has been on the ways in which lesbians gay men, and bi:exu~ls.(LGBs)compare with heterosexuals. Whereas mostJewish pe~ple have}ewish slblmgs and most Asian Americans have siblings who are also ASIan Amencan, what is intriguing about LGBs is that they often have siblings who are h~terosexual. ~rue, some LGBs are only children or have siblings who are all lesbIan, gay, or bIsexual as well, but it is easy to find plenty of LGBs with heterosexual siblings. This provides a naturally-occurring comparison within families.

Lesbians and their heterosexual sisters were compared on demographic variables and mental health subscales, so that the feasibility of using heterosexual sisters as a control group for lesbians could be investigated. Lesbians were significantly more educated, more likely to live in urban areas, and more geographically mobile than their heterosexual sisters. Heterosexual sisters were more likely than lesbians to be married and homemakers, to have children, and to identify with a formal religion. There was no difference in mental health, but lesbians had higher self-esteem. When all respondents were included, bisexual women had significantly poorer mental health than did lesbians and heterosexual women. This is the first study to use sisters as a control group in lesbian research.

Lesbians and bisexual women are often recruited for research via convenience sampling, but there has been little focus on the sources through which these women are recruited. This article focuses on two research projects that successfully recruited large samples of ...