Content area
Abstract
The United States military has a long history of anti-LGB policies, which ended with the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (DADT).” However, the repeal of DADT did not undo the damage done by years of discrimination. Not a lot is known about actively serving LGB service members. However, research with their civilian peers demonstrates that LGB individuals experience discrimination and victimization due to their sexual orientation, and these negative experiences lead to psychological distress. While concealment may have protected them from experiencing discrimination and victimization due to their sexual orientation, even if an individual conceals their sexual identity, there are other ways in which a sexual minority orientation may be assumed, such as a nonconforming gender expression. Due to the high degree of masculinity present within military culture, research suggests that men who deviate from this norm, and present as more feminine, may experience more hostility than gender nonconforming women, who present as more masculine, in line with the culture of the military.
The purpose of this study was to explore gender and gender expression among currently serving LGB service members and their experiences of discrimination, victimization, and psychological distress. Participants in this study included 233 currently serving Active Duty, Reserve, and National Guard service members 18 years of age or older, who self identified as lesbian, gay, or bisexual. LGB service members were recruited, from July 2014 to May 2015, to voluntarily participate in this anonymous online study through advertisements, flyers and postings at NMCSD, local community agencies around the country, social networking sites, word-of-mouth within military units, and on LGB e-mail listservs. Some differences were found among experiences of discrimination, victimization, and psychological distress based on gender and gender expression. However, overall, gender and gender expression did not appear to have a significant role in their experiences. This lack of expected results may have been due to the low number of participants who endorsed a gender nonconforming gender expression
