Beyond ‘LGB’
Sexual Orientation Identity Diversity Among Sexual and Gender Minority Youth in the U.S.
Title: Beyond LGB: Sexual Orientation Identity Diversity Among Sexual and Gender Minority Youth in the U.S.
Christopher Wheldon, PhD
Temple University, Philadelphia PA
Ryan J. Watson, PhD
University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT
Background:
In 2022 the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) recommended the following item for the routine measurement of sexual orientation identity (SOI): “Which of the following best represents how you think of yourself? Identity options were limited to “Lesbian or Gay,” “Straight, that is not gay or lesbian,” “Bisexual,” “Two-Spirited” (if American Indian/Alaskan Native), or “I use a different term.” These response categories may not sufficiently represent diverse SOI among sexual and gender minority youth (SGMY). We tested the following hypotheses: (H1) A significant percentage (>25%) of SGMY will not be captured by the NASEM SOIs; (H2) Transgender/Gender non-binary youth will be less likely to be captured by NASEM SOIs compared to cisgender youth. There were two exploratory research questions: (RQ1) What are the most reported SOIs not captured by the NASEM SOI categories? (RQ2) What demographic groups are mostly likely to be underrepresented by the NASEM SOI categories?
Methods:
Data were from the 2022 LGBT National Teen Survey (N=10,028). All respondents identified as SGMY, were aged 13-18, and resided in the U.S. Community-based recruitment was done with the assistance of the Human Rights Campaign. SOI was coded as a NASEM response option (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Straight) vs. non-NASEM identity (all other SOIs). Multiple logistic regression was used to test H2 and RQ2.
Results:
Approximately 42.6% of SGMY did not identify with a NASEM SOI response option. The majority (55.0%) of gender nonconforming/queer/fluid/non-binary youth did not identify with NASEM SOIs. The odds of identifying with a NASEM category were significantly lower for cisgender girls (aOR=0.49), transgender boys (aOR=0.27), transgender girls (aOR=0.25), gender nonconforming/non-binary (aOR=0.17), and gender questioning (aOR=0.19) compared to cisgender boys. The most common non-NASEM SOIs were (1) pansexual, (2) queer, and (3) asexual. Non-Hispanic (independent of race) and older SGMY were underrepresented by NASEM SOI categories.
Conclusions:
A significant proportion of SGMY are not adequately represented by the NASEM standard SOI response categories supporting H1. Moreover, transgender and gender non-binary youth, as hypothesized in H2, were less likely to be captured by the NASEM categories. Exploratory research questions provided further insights, identifying pansexual, queer, and asexual as the most frequently reported SOIs not covered by the NASEM item. The narrow set of response categories may present less burden to the general population but may introduce systematic bias for younger gender diverse subgroups.