Search

This article provides an overview of current psychological research on mental health and sexual orientation, as well as clinical practice with sexual minorities. The historical context for current research questions and controversies is described, and the findings of recent empirical research on psychological well-being and distress among nonheterosexuals are summarized. The minority stress model is used to frame a discussion of stressors unique to sexual minorities and to consider their possible effects on psychological well-being. The possible ameliorative effects of adopting a sexual orientation identity are examined, followed by a discussion of how these ideas translate into contemporary clinical work with sexual minority clients. The review concludes with a brief discussion of priority areas for empirical research and clinical practice.

This paper critiques old models of women's sexual orientation that viewed heterosexuality as the norm for mental health, characterized lesbians as masculinized sexual “inverts,” and looked to biology to explain the development of homosexuality. A new paradigm for women's sexual orientation is presented. This paradigm emphasizes the importance of the social context and recognizes the multiple pathways that can lead a woman to identify as lesbian, bisexual or heterosexual. In addition, the main components of sexual orientation are considered as is the potential fluidity of women's sexuality. Throughout, implications of the new paradigm for psychotherapy with women are considered.

Major scientific findings about women’s sexuality and sexual orientation are reviewed. Sexual orientation is unrelated to mental health. There is no inherent association between gender conformity and women’s sexual orientation; masculinity and femininity are linked to sexual orientation in some social contexts but not in others. Research has so far failed to identify major biological or childhood antecedents of women’s sexual orientation. Women’s sexuality and sexual orientation are potentially fluid, changeable over time, and variable across social contexts. Regardless of sexual orientation, there are important commonalities in women’s sexuality. In particular, women tend to have a relational or partner-centered orientation to sexuality. Together, these findings provide the basis for a paradigm shift in the conceptualization of women’s sexual orientation. Scientific research on women’s sexuality and sexual orientation is still a young endeavor. Nonetheless, several basic findings have been supported consistently by empirical research. Taken together, these findings highlight the need to reject old models of women’s sexual orientation and to develop a new paradigm that is grounded in scientific research and sensitive to the realities of women’s lives. Too often, old theories have taken male experience as the norm for human experience. Yet there appear to be important differences in the sexualities of women and men that emerge when women’s lives are the central focus of investigation. Consequently, we believe that a necessary research strategy will be to develop separate analyses of women’s and men’s sexualities, each based on a

Researchers and theorists who attempt to generalize about sexuality and sexual orientation in both men and women simultaneously often take male experiences as the norm and ignore unique aspects of women's lives. The purpose of this issue is to focus attention on scientific research and theory about aspects of women's sexualities, with special emphasis on sexual orientation. A new paradigm is presented that recognizes the great diversity of women's erotic experiences and the many sociocultural factors that shape women's sexuality and sexual orientation across the lifespan. This introductory article highlights major themes and provides a brief summary of the articles in the issue. Four central topics are discussed: (1) the complexnature of women's sexualities and sexual orientations; (2) the importance of historical, social, and cultural contexts for adequately understanding women's sexualities; (3) the development of sexual orientation in women; and (4) implications for research and policy.

Two critiques of D. J. Bem's (1996) "Exotic Becomes Erotic" (EBE) theory of sexual orientation are presented. First, the core proposition of EBE theory is considered; that is, the idea that adults are erotically attracted to the gender-based class of peers (males or females) who were dissimilar or unfamiliar to them in childhood. Studies cited by Bem and additional research show that EBE theory is not supported by scientific evidence. Second, Bem's claim that his theory applies equally to both sexes is questioned; instead the argument that it neglects and misrepresents women's experiences is made. Bem's conceptualization of erotic desire and his analysis of gender nonconformity illustrate this problem. It is suggested that different theories may be needed to explain the development of men's and women's sexual orientation.

This article traces the history of empowerment efforts in lesbian and gay communities. Despite considerable progress, lesbians and gay men remain marginalized in American society. Their personal, family, and community development is hampered by social and institutional barriers to empowerment. Three powerful disempowering problems of contemporary lesbian and gay communities are detailed: (1) stresses related to coming out; (2) heterosexism; and, (3) difficulties identifying with a community. Four domains are suggested for future collaboration between community psychologists and lesbian/gay communities: (1) anti-lesbian/anti-gay prejudice, discrimination, and violence; (2) mental health and health enhancement; (3) the HIV/AIDS epidemic; and, (4) civil rights. Future collaborations must build on successful-social change strategies already used by activists in lesbian and gay communities.

This article describes some of the major psychosocial challenges faced by lesbian and gay male survivors of hate crimes, their significant others, and the gay community as a whole. When an individual is attacked because she or he is perceived to be gay, the negative mental health consequences of victimization converge with those resulting from societal heterosexism to create a unique set of problems. Such victimization represents a crisis for the individual, creating opportunities for growth as well as risks for impairment. The principal risk associated with anti-gay victimization is that the survivor's homosexuality becomes directly linked to her or his newly heightened sense of vulnerability. The problems faced by lesbian and gay male victims of sexual assault, and the psychological impact of verbal abuse also are discussed. Suggestions are offered to assist practitioners in helping the survivors of anti-gay hate crimes.

This article presents a new paradigm for understanding the complexity of human sexual, affectional, and erotic attractions--commonly known as sexual orientation. This new paradigm recognizes that there is great diversity among sexual orientations, erotic and emotional attractions, behaviors, and identities and that there are complex interrelations among these dimensions. Sexual orientation is determined by multiple influences, including a wide range of sociocultural factors. The development of sexual orientation is arrived at through multiple pathways. Individuals with the same sexual orientation may have little else in common. Thus, a model of sexual orientation is presented that is based on multiplicity, not sameness, and that examines the overlapping identities and statuses of culture, gender, age, race, ethnicity, class, disability, and sexuality.

Evelyn Gentry was born into a farm family and grew up in the hard life on the plains of Nebraska and Colorado. In 1924 she entered the University of Colorado and majored in psychology, earning a bachelor’s degree in 1928 and a master’s degree in 1930. In 1932 she received her PhD from Johns Hopkins University. Some years later she moved to California to recover from tuberculosis and stayed two years in a sanitarium. In 1939 she became an adjunct faculty member at the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA), where she taught through the extension program. While she and her second husband, Edward Hooker, a Distinguished Professor of History at UCLA, fought the anticommunist loyalty-oath issue of the 1950s, Evelyn began collecting the data that would change the psychological understanding of human sexuality. After her ground-breaking paper was presented at the American Psychological Association (APA) annual meeting in Chicago in 1955, one member of the audience commented, “What a light it shed” (Harrison & Schmiechen, 1991).