Search

PurposeThe authors aimed to identify the nature of customer harassment against lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) workers.Design/methodology/approachThe authors analyzed data from in-depth interviews with 30 LGBTQ service workers in the United States who had recently experienced customer harassment.FindingsAmong various forms of customer harassment LGBTQ workers reported, some showed commonalities with previously reported cases of race-based and gender-based customer harassment. However, other cases highlighted unique aspects of LGBTQ-based customer harassment—customers morally condemned their LGBTQ identities, refused their service while displaying emotional disgust, and made sexual advances while imposing sexual stereotypes and fantasies about LGBTQ people. Experiences of customer harassment varied across subgroups of workers who had specific sexual and gender identities, and LGBTQ workers of color were harassed for their LGBTQ and racial identities simultaneously.Originality/valuePast research on group-based customer harassment has focused on incidents against straight, cisgender women and workers of workers of color, but the present study identified the nature of customer harassment that targeted workers' LGBTQ status.

In the United States, an increasing number of people have come to express support for sexual minorities in recent decades, and more employers have implemented policies that protect sexual minority workers’ rights. Yet, heteronormativity remains in many workplaces. Considering this ambivalent social context, we examined the extent to which sexual minorities today see their workplaces as accepting and how they develop such a perception. We used a symbolic interaction framework to analyze data from in-depth interviews with 50 sexual minority young adults. The analysis revealed a general tendency among respondents to describe their workplaces as accepting. They used several strategies to feel accepted, including interpreting colleagues’ behaviors positively, creating dramatic narratives of key events, drawing on existing knowledge about the industry, and overlooking potential microaggressions. We use these results to discuss how minority individuals derive a sense of acceptance in contemporary social institutions, which emphasize the importance of diversity and inclusion but show signs of persistent inequality.

Recent US studies showed that perceptions of campus climate vary considerably across individual LGBQ students, with some students reporting friendly climates and others reporting persistent hostility. Although researchers have identified several factors that contribute to the perceptual variations, they have paid limited attention to the role of sexuality discourses. The present study sought to fill this gap in the literature by analyzing in-depth interviews. The analysis showed that LGBQ students drew on two major discourses to guide their interpretations of campus climate. A majority of students drew on post-closet discourse to celebrate their visibility on campus, LGBQ-friendly courses, and straight classmates' positive reactions. A smaller number of students drew on queer discourse to question the meaning of LGBQ students' visibility and criticize heterosexist biases in classrooms. Overall, these results highlighted the importance of the competing discourses, which set LGBQ students' expectations and guided their interpretations of campus experiences.

Past research has shown that sexual minority women have a higher rate of labor force participation and work more hours than heterosexual women, and that men show the opposite sexual orientation differences. Little is known, however, about sexual orientation differences in work history. Further, many past studies, especially US studies, defined sexual orientation by the gender of residing partners and therefore excluded people who do not have a partner from analysis. This study sought to overcome these limitations by analyzing US data from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent to Adult Health, Wave 4 (n = 14,707). The analysis showed that compared to women in different-sex marriage, those in same-sex partnerships had a higher rate of labor force participation, worked more hours, and had a greater number of jobs in their work histories, although these women showed very small differences from those in different-sex cohabitation. In contrast, single women did not show any sexual orientation differences in these outcomes. Although partnered men and single men also showed very little sexual orientation differences, single men with same-sex experience had more jobs in their work histories than those with different-sex experience, partly due to their greater chance of experiencing involuntary job loss.