Summary

Queer People of Color in Higher Education, pp. 9–29 Copyright © 2017 by Information Age Publishing All rights of reproduction in any form reserved. 9

CHAPTER 2

INTERSECTIONALITY IN PRACTICE

Moving a Social Justice Paradigm to Action in Higher Education

Christian D. Chan, Adrienne N. Erby, and David J. Ford

Several disciplines have contributed to the development of intersectionality theory, as both a complex construct and a theoretical paradigm. Intersec- tionality continues to emerge and develop, as many of these disciplines formulate a diversity of perspectives around intersectionality constructs and tenets. In addition, the evolution of intersectionality in specific disci- plines has created a significant interdisciplinary relationship that weaves the theoretical tenets together to enact social change. Historically, inter- sectionality takes a much more apparent presence in some disciplines (e.g., law, psychology, sociology) and continues its emergence in additional dis- ciplines of application (e.g., higher education, business, counseling) to extend theory into action in social justice (Carbado, Crenshaw, Mays, & Tomlinson, 2013; E. Cole, 2009; Collins, 2010; Crenshaw, 1989, 1991; McCall, 2005; Warner, 2008). As intersectionality continues to evolve, it is imperative to operationalize the theory for application in both research

C o p y r i g h t 2 0 1 7 . I n f o r m a t i o n A g e P u b l i s h i n g .

A l l r i g h t s r e s e r v e d . M a y n o t b e r e p r o d u c e d i n a n y f o r m w i t h o u t p e r m i s s i o n f r o m t h e p u b l i s h e r , e x c e p t f a i r u s e s p e r m i t t e d u n d e r U . S . o r a p p l i c a b l e c o p y r i g h t l a w .

EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 7/28/2020 3:57 PM via NEW JERSEY CITY UNIV AN: 1535640 ; Joshua Moon Johnson.; Queer People of Color in Higher Education Account: s6220230.main.ehost

10 C. D. CHAN ET AL.

and practice. However, the theory remains widely discussed in research to navigate the complexity of intersectionality as a construct (Bowleg, 2008; Clarke & McCall, 2013; Corlett & Mavin, 2014; McCall, 2005; Nash, 2008; Parent, DeBlaere, & Moradi, 2013; Warner, 2008; Warner & Shields, 2013), especially as intersectionality guides the construction of identity development and the exposition of social inequality. As numerous dis- ciplines continue to wrestle with the challenge of developing a complex set of constructs in intersectionality, we describe the historical context of intersectionality, identify tenets of the overarching theory, and apply inter- sectionality to better understand the experiences of queer people of color (QPOC) in higher education.

INTERSECTIONALITY THEORY AS A LENS

Historical Context

When Crenshaw (1989, 1991) offered a critical lens to the invisibility and missing voices of women of color, she reinforced the major gaps of social justice movements apart from her own experiences. Namely, women of color were excluded from policy regarding people of color, in which sexism largely pervaded these discussions. In addition, women of color were also excluded from women’s rights movements, which often reflected the voices of White women. In eliciting this information and observations, Crenshaw (1989) critiqued that political movements could not operate on a “single axis analysis” (p. 139) of antidiscrimination law. This message identified oppression as a multifaceted experience. The experiences of Black women were both unseen and unheard in the discourse of a political movement to advocate for their rights as Black women, despite efforts to attend to mar- ginalization in the larger communities of Black people and women at large. The problem lies in the privilege within one category (e.g., race, gender identity). Consequently, Crenshaw (1989) challenged efforts to identify privilege when it exists on a single axis. The battle against discrimination formulates knowledge and experience from a group of mutually exclusive categories that ignore the plight of Black women. The resulting effect, however, is the increased oppression and marginalization that occurs for individuals operating within the framework of multiple marginalizations and, ultimately, a multiple minority individual.

Crenshaw (1989) argued that the failure to acknowledge this complex- ity was clearly reinforcement of the privilege that existed for individuals having a dominant status in one of the identification categories. In this context, the experience of Black women would largely remain nonexistent. Attempting to challenge sociopolitical structures, Crenshaw (1989) utilized her development of the theory to critically examine cases of law involv-

EBSCOhost - printed on 7/28/2020 3:57 PM via NEW JERSEY CITY UNIV. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

Intersectionality in Practice 11

ing Black women and other women of color. In developing the theory, Crenshaw (1991) illuminated gaps in the perception of violence against women of color often masked by the construction of experiences based on mutually exclusive categories of social identity. Further, Crenshaw (1991) commented on the inequalities of sociopolitical structures failing to protect individuals living with a multiple-marginalized experience. This inter- action precipitates a lack of resources and safety available to individuals suffering in these experiences but also develops ineffective knowledge about interventions in social inequality without a critical examination of intersecting categories of social identity. Institutions addressing inequality from a singular lens will largely offer resources and services to an entire marginalized group on the basis of one minority status (e.g., White women) but will fail to include resources for individuals marginalized within this group (e.g., women of color, immigrant women).

Evolution of Intersectionality Theory

As intersectionality theory continues to emerge in other disciplines, its evolution extends the theoretical tenets for applicability in specific disciplines. Consequently, the conceptualization of intersectionality con- tinues to grow and change. Although Crenshaw (1989, 1991) initiated critical discourse of antiracist theory and feminist theory to illuminate the experiences of women of color, the representation of intersectional- ity across disciplines has expanded notions about identity development and social identity. As Crenshaw (1989, 1991) and Collins (1990) posited, intersectionality negotiates social identity as a multidimensional construct to validate the unique, lived experiences of individuals with multiple iden- tities in a variety of domains (e.g., race, sexual/affectional orientation, gender, ability, socioeconomic status). Thus, identity development is not limited to the unilateral perspective, which research has historically used to understand social identity.

Emphasizing one identity over another can negate experiences connected to another identity, which is difficult to ignore as social identity processes operate in tandem (E. Cole, 2008, 2009; Parent, DeBlaere, & Moradi, 2013; Shields, 2008; Singh, 2013; Velez, Moradi, & DeBlaere, 2015). These social identity processes offer a way of knowing, making sense of experiences, and gaining critical consciousness about the manner in which institutions shape those experiences. In the context of social identity and cultural identity, the interplay between individual and context guide how individuals come to know and view the development and understanding of their own cultural identifications (e.g., Asian American, gay, middle class, able-bodied).

Although the salience of social identity may vary depending on context, the lived experience of multiple, intersecting identities is a more

EBSCOhost - printed on 7/28/2020 3:57 PM via NEW JERSEY CITY UNIV. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

12 C. D. CHAN ET AL.

representative experience of human and identity development, given that individuals cannot necessarily compartmentalize their identities as silos. Moreover, there is an inherent communication of privilege from both sociopolitical movements and social structures to determine that individuals choose between their identities. Hegemonic social structures often emerge from groups holding the power and privilege with a major voice to reflect experiences as single categories. As Crenshaw (1989, 1991) had articulated, some sociopolitical movements mask as advocacy for the human rights of a marginalized group. More often, these same movements, however, fail to accurately represent the experiences of individuals living within the intersections, which leave the same groups without a voice in a sociopolitical movement or policy change. It assumes that some identities are less important and expendable. Instead of asking individuals to face the task of choosing an identity based on singular conceptions, researchers and scholars (Bowleg, 2013; Hurtado & Sinha, 2008; Mahalingam, Balan, & Haritatos, 2008; Singh, 2013; Szymanski & Sung, 2010; Velez et al., 2015; Viruell-Fuentes, Miranda, & Abdulrahim, 2012; Warner & Shields, 2013; Yim & Mahalingam, 2006) are integrating these multidimensional experiences creatively. More important, identifying intersectional experiences of social identity challenges and rearranges hegemonic norms about how social identity should be constructed and which social identities matter. E. Cole (2009) and Shields (2008) identified the role of the intersectionality perspective for identifying historically and institutionally underrepresented groups in research and scholarship. Eliciting information about underrepresented groups offers further ideas about the expansion of diversity in research. Additionally, reflecting on which groups have historically remained invisible, especially in the identification of their intersections, represents a microcosm of social inequality occurring at large.

This perspective offers a more meaningful image about understanding how categories of identification influence each other, especially categories operating from privilege and bias (E. Cole, 2009). To challenge mutually exclusive treatment of social identity categories, intersectionality represents social identities within individuals as interlocking categories represent- ing an overarching system of privilege and oppression (Bowleg, 2008, 2012). With the advent of intersectionality theory, researchers, scholars, and practitioners can expand conceptualizations of social identity, includ- ing but not limited to race, ethnicity, sexual/affectional orientation, gender identity, social class/socioeconomic status, ability status, spirituality, age, and regional identity. The intersections among these identities lead to enhanced understanding about the identities excluded in specific examina- tions of social structures, policies, or contexts.

EBSCOhost - printed on 7/28/2020 3:57 PM via NEW JERSEY CITY UNIV. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

Intersectionality in Practice 13

Trends in Intersectionality and Its Social Justice Lens

Intersectionality operates with foundations in social justice, as its origins emerge from the critical race theory (CRT) and feminist theory movements (Carbado et al., 2013). By creatively engaging complex understanding on the representation of intersectional identities and experiences, intersectionality theory draws on narratives identifying the manners in which individuals have been othered in their lived experiences on micro- and macrosystemic levels (B. Cole, 2009; Corlett & Mavin, 2014). Although these narratives and lived experiences can encounter results of discrimination at the actions of perpetrators (e.g., hate crimes, microaggressions), the theory extends concerns about social inequality to change policies and context affecting groups residing in the intersections of particular categories. It explicates power relations, where particular groups remain subordinated beyond commonly assumed groupings of minority (e.g., sexual minorities among women). Many of these minority groupings are predicated on power relations perpetuated by privileged groups in an institution or a context. The intersectionality framework functions as a method to disrupt stereotypes and deconstruct assumptions embedded within a sociopolitical structure, specifically because social location and subordination are often determined by individuals and groups in privileged positions. Considering these power relations, individuals marginalized along multiple identities often carry less power to determine their own decisions and outcomes—a challenge to individualistic values often tied to hegemonic power structures.

It is significant to note how Crenshaw (1991) defined and explicated various definitions of intersectionality in comparison with modern defi- nitions of the theory’s tenets. Using definitions from Crenshaw’s (1991) article, Walby, Armstrong, and Strid (2012) identified structural intersec- tionality as “the intersection of unequal social groups” (p. 226), whereas political intersectionality refers to “the intersection of political agendas and projects” (p. 226). Connecting the Walby et al. (2012) angle on Crenshaw’s (1991) analysis, structural intersectionality refers to the difference in how reform and social structures are experienced. Political intersectionality refers to the political philosophies in particular movements geared toward a single-axis framework, where groups are excluded on the basis of carrying more than one oppressed identity. In addition, Crenshaw (1991) developed the construct of “representational intersectionality,” which defines cultural notions around particular groups living within their intersections (e.g., women of color) and how these groups are represented at large in relation to culture.

EBSCOhost - printed on 7/28/2020 3:57 PM via NEW JERSEY CITY UNIV. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

14 C. D. CHAN ET AL.

RELEVANCE FOR QPOC

Foundations of Identity

Identity development provides a central context necessary in under- standing the experiences of QPOC, particularly within the context of social identity groups (e.g., race, gender identity, sexual orientation). Identity development within social identity groups must be understood in the socio- political context of privilege and oppression (Allport, 1954; Black & Stone, 2005; Erikson, 1968).

For queer-identified individuals, identity development is an active process involving initial awareness of difference in attraction, relational and/or sexual encounters, LGBTQ group socialization, forming an LGBTQ identity, and coming out to others (Barret & Logan, 2002). Models of sexual/affectional orientation identity development (Cass, 1979; McCarn & Fassinger, 1996; Weinberg, Williams, & Pryor, 1994) are generally linear in nature and describe initial questioning of one’s sexual orientation from an assumed heterosexual identity. Similarly, individuals who identify as transgender often experience dissonance between their biological sex and gender identity at a young age (Beemyn & Rankin, 2011; Page & Peacock, 2013). Most children understand themselves as heterosexual/straight or cisgender, consistent with the socially constructed binaries assigned to sexual orientation and gender (Page & Peacock, 2013). Although many note feeling “different” early on, the understanding of that difference often does not come without active exploration culminating in identity achieve- ment (Konik & Stewart, 2004).

Similarly, for racial minorities, an event or series of events results in awareness of one’s racial identity (Atkinson, Morten, & Sue, 1998; Cross, 1978; Helms, 1995). Models of racial identity encompass (a) attitudes toward oneself, (b) attitudes toward others in the same minority group, (c) attitudes toward others in the dominant group, and (d) attitudes toward others in different minority groups. In early stages of identity development, little attention is paid to race, and the dominant White culture is assumed to be the norm, even the ideal. As racial minorities progress through these stages or statuses, they experience dissonance between the dominant White culture and the minority culture to which they belong, and they question the hegemony of the dominant group culture. Through active exploration of their own culture, racial minorities begin to develop a positive view of their culture and, conversely, a negative view of the dominant culture. Models of minority racial identity development typically culminate with an increased sense of balance, including a positive view of self as a cultural being as well as appreciation of other cultures, including the dominant group (Atkinson et al., 1998).

EBSCOhost - printed on 7/28/2020 3:57 PM via NEW JERSEY CITY UNIV. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

Intersectionality in Practice 15

Despite many similarities in the minority identity development pro- cesses, several significant differences can impact the identity development process for racial minorities and queer-identified individuals. First, a queer identity drastically departs from the linear processes often asso- ciated with identity development toward a more fluid understanding of identity related to one’s sexual orientation, gender, and gender identity (Levy, 2009; Rosario, Schrimshaw, Hunter, & Braun, 2006; Savin-Williams & Ream, 2007). Queer theory challenges the very nature of finite labels, linear development, and binary categories. Second, racial minorities have family and others with whom they can readily recognize as similar who can provide a sense of community. As such, QPOC may find strong familial/ social support in developing a healthy racial identity but may find that support limited or entirely absent as they develop a queer identity (Chun & Singh, 2010). Because most queer-identified individuals are socialized in a heteronormative and cisgender culture and family context, they must forge their identities in relative isolation by comparison (Kus & Saunders, 1985). Last, the invisibility of a sexual minority identity can create a unique dis- sonance. A queer-identified person may be able to “pass” as heterosexual or as a cisgender man or woman; however, the burden of concealment, concern for safety, and continual task of “coming out” is ever-present. For QPOC, identity development is neither racial nor queer; rather, identity development is a multifaceted, dynamic, and fluid process of self-under- standing as a QPOC.

Intersectional Invisibility

Models of social identity group development typically have a singular focus (e.g., race, sexual orientation). Thus, models of racial identity devel- opment may not fully convey the experiences of QPOC and vice versa in sexual or gender identity development. Consistently, both the conceptual and empirical literature (Purdie-Vaughn & Eibach, 2008; Sawyer, Salter, & Thoroughgood, 2013; Seng, Lopez, Sperlich, Hamama, & Reed Meldrum, 2012) highlight the need for a more multidimensional approach in under- standing the experiences of QPOC.

Bowleg (2008, 2013) critiques the additive approach, in which experi- ences of oppression based on individual identities are explored in terms of cumulative cost (e.g., discrimination as a Latina, discrimination as a lesbian, and discrimination as a woman), thus the commonly used term “multiple jeopardy.” The additive approach has an implicit assumption that these identities are disparate and separate. To separate these identi- ties for a QPOC can result in a fragmented sense of self, in which one’s experience is manipulated to fit a racial or sexual orientation prototype

EBSCOhost - printed on 7/28/2020 3:57 PM via NEW JERSEY CITY UNIV. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

16 C. D. CHAN ET AL.

(Purdie-Vaughn & Eibach, 2008). Belonging to multiple minority groups can create an experience of intersectional invisibility, including pressure to choose a primary identity group and marginalization within their respec- tive social identity groups (Carbado, 2013; Purdie-Vaughns & Eibach, 2008). Although it is true that multiple minority identities can result in discrimination in multiple settings, intersectionality uses an “all” approach to understand oppression (e.g., discrimination as a Latina lesbian woman).

Focusing on the cumulative effects of oppression rather than the inter- section of identities truncates individual experience and results in a contest of who experiences the greatest oppression (Purdie-Vaughns & Eibach, 2008). Further, the additive approach does not recognize the simultane- ous presence of privileged and oppressed identity statuses. For example, a cisgender, gay-identified, Filipino man may experience discrimination and isolation in a largely heterosexual Filipino community and in a largely White LGBTQ community. The same Filipino, cisgender, gay man also has the benefit of privilege in a sexist and cisgender culture. Using an intersec- tionality lens results in more complete framing of experiences and identity within a complex layered social context.

Minority Stress and Resilience

Minority stress and resilience play an important role in understanding the experiences of QPOC. Minority stress is defined as the experience of the specific stressors related to one’s identification within a minority group (Meyer, 2003, 2014). Research on race (Driscoll, Reynolds, & Todman, 2015; Kim, 2013) and sexual orientation (Burns, Kamen, Lehman, & Beach, 2012; Cochran, Sullivan, & Mays, 2003; Feinstein, Goldfried, & Davila, 2012) suggests that the LGBTQ community experiences a higher prevalence of mental health issues and greater health disparities compared with the dominant group. These negative outcomes provide a foundation for understanding the cost of minority stress. The minority stress model for LGBTQ individuals identifies four factors: (a) experience of prejudi- cial events and conditions, (b) anticipation of rejection or mistreatment, (c) invisibility and the need to conceal identity, and (d) internalization of societal stigma (Meyer, 1995, 2003). Research suggests that minority stress contributes to negative outcomes, including mood and anxiety disorders, sense of being a burden to others, suicidal ideation, and intimate partner violence (Baams, Grossman, & Russell, 2015; Burns et al., 2012; Edwards & Sylaska, 2013; Feinstein et al., 2012).

Given the pervasiveness of homonegativity and cisgenderism, it is not surprising to find that queer-identified individuals experience dispropor- tionate rates of mental health issues and poorer health outcomes. Despite

EBSCOhost - printed on 7/28/2020 3:57 PM via NEW JERSEY CITY UNIV. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

Intersectionality in Practice 17

these significant challenges, QPOC often express a sense of strength associated with their identity, including freedom from traditional roles, opportunities to explore different experiences, forming strong social rela- tionships, and enjoying personal growth (Bowleg, 2013; Bowleg, Huang, Brooks, Black, & Burkholder, 2003). Themes of resilience are often found in the literature (Bowleg et al., 2003; Breslow et al., 2015; Meyer, 2010) as QPOC embrace their identities and experiences. Thus, a more com- plete understanding of intersecting identities can be a powerful strength in developing a strong sense of self as a QPOC.

IMPLICATIONS AT MICROLEVEL

College students of color who also self-identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, questioning, intersex, and/or asexual (LGBTQQIA) or QPOC are multiply marginalized and subject to microaggressions because of racism and heterosexism (Balsam, Molina, Beadnell, Simoni, & Walters, 2011). Balsam et al. (2011) posited that members of this community may also experience racism within the LGBTQQIA community and heterosex- ism within racial/ethnic minority communities, specifically within their own racial/ethnic communities. QPOC who face microaggressions due to being a racial/ethnic and sexual minority are more prone to poor mental and physical health (Meyer, 2003). Because of LGBT minority stress and stig- matization, which includes experiencing microaggressions, racism from the LGBTQQIA community, and heterosexism from their own cultural group, the identity development of QPOC may be adversely affected. Heterosex- ism may account for differences in the timing and process of coming out between White members of the LGBTQQIA community and QPOC (Grov, Bimbi, Parsons, & Nanín, 2006). QPOC need to feel safe at institutions of higher learning and must be able to have positive experiences while feeling welcomed and included in their campus environments. These microaggres- sions may lead to perceptions of hostility in school settings (Smith, Allen, & Danley, 2007).

The College Environment

The college environment should be welcoming and inclusive of QPOC. Senior student affairs officers are responsible for creating this environ- ment; they develop, articulate, and lead by a philosophy that supports the positive academic and psychosocial outcomes of queer students (Roper, 2005). Colleges and universities globally have committed to diversity and made it a ubiquitous word in their mission statements, strategic plans,

EBSCOhost - printed on 7/28/2020 3:57 PM via NEW JERSEY CITY UNIV. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

18 C. D. CHAN ET AL.

student recruitment brochures, and university websites (Morrish & O’Mara, 2011). Although universities have marketed diversity, they have rendered queerness invisible. Sexual orientation is viewed as private, a lifestyle, and a choice. Thus, it is not part of the university’s mission to enable students to realize difference. The language utilized in diversity mission statements must change to acknowledge real inclusion and empowerment of the queer persons in the university (Morrish & O’Mara, 2011). Ahmed (2007a, 2007b, 2012) reaffirmed the rampant disparity between diversity in practice and diversity statements. In response, Ahmed argued that practitioners can often fail to embody their diversity tenets, especially if they are not repre- sentative of a population. More often the language in diversity statements masks the stark realities of marginalization, oppression, and discrimination while misrepresenting the reality associated with a lack of inclusion. With universities rendering the queer identity invisible, QPOC are made to feel unwelcomed and not included because of their sexuality/sexual identity. Intersectionality may not be valued within the university population.

College Mental Health Professionals

Meyer (2003) posited that QPOC are more prone to poor mental health due to LGBT minority stress. College campuses have to be able to address the specific mental needs of QPOC, and college counseling centers and other college student personnel with counseling backgrounds have to be intentional in reaching QPOC. Mental health professionals should exude a deep level of empathy for QPOC. Smith and Shin (2015) found that having a greater level of empathy toward persons who experience heterosexism is critical toward interrupting systemic oppression. Neglecting to question essentializing stereotypes while committing the microaggression of exoti- cization—perceiving cultural groups to be fun and exciting and seeking ways to participate in the group by acquiring knowledge about their cultural artifacts (Nadal, Rivera, & Corpus, 2010)—leads to superficial understandings of discrimination. These superficial understandings have been associated with multicultural and diversity education (Andersen & Collins, 2007; Manning, 2009). Smith and Shin (2015) encourage helping professionals to adopt frameworks that bind racism and heteronormativity together, a framework aligned with the growing emphasis on social justice in the helping professionals. Therefore, human services providers become change agents instead of continually treating individuals for the damage done by systemic discrimination and exploitation (Smith & Shin, 2015). By doing so, mental health professionals on college campuses truly empathize with QPOC, are cognizant of the effects of racism and heteronormativity,

EBSCOhost - printed on 7/28/2020 3:57 PM via NEW JERSEY CITY UNIV. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

Intersectionality in Practice 19

and change the campus environment to make it more conducive for the expression of intersectionality.

College Student Personnel

College student personnel (faculty and staff) are also in a position to improve the campus climate for QPOC. Campus Pride rates campuses regarding their friendliness to students in the LGBTQQIA community (Morrish & O’Mara, 2011). It measures the presence of Safe Space pro- grams, a LGBTQ Resource Center, Queer Studies programs, a LGBTQ alumni association, and transgender-inclusive facilities on campus. College student personnel can be change agents and advocate for these services on campus. Generally, these safe spaces have been exclusionary toward QPOC, and college student personnel have to be deliberate about ensuring that students in this population feel welcomed and included. According to di Bartolo (2015), transgender and gender nonconforming (TGNC) students of color are the least supported on our campuses despite being the most at risk for being marginalized. To support these students, campus mental health professionals should be trained to provide culturally sensitive ser- vices to TGNC students of color. Faculty members can create an inclusive learning environment by letting students introduce themselves and use their preferred names and pronouns. Various offices and residences on campus should be assessed for the inclusiveness of TGNC students, and one cannot assume that LGBTQ centers are inclusive spaces, especially for TGNC students of color (di Bartolo, 2015).

Advising

Career and academic advising for QPOC should also come from an empowerment model. Like other college student personnel, advisers must exude a deeper level of empathy, validate the intersectionality of being a QPOC, and be mindful of how racism and heteronormativity work in tandem. For example, they must be aware of the advising concerns (i.e., having a career role model of their own sexual orientation and are out at work, having support and encouragement of important persons in their lives, identity formation and expression, and facing prejudice and oppres- sion) of QPOC and be aware of safe and inclusive spaces for curricular and co-curricular experiences (Nauta, Saucier, & Woodard, 2001; Palma & Stanley, 2002). Advisers must also have resources for internships and places of employment that include race/ethnicity and sexuality/sexual expression in their mission statements. If students disclose that they have experienced

EBSCOhost - printed on 7/28/2020 3:57 PM via NEW JERSEY CITY UNIV. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

20 C. D. CHAN ET AL.

microaggressions due to being a QPOC, advisers should listen, validate their experience, and be able to refer them to the proper resource.

A MACROLEVEL PERSPECTIVE

Intersectionality in Higher Education Policy

Based on the multidimensional and transdisciplinary nature of inter- sectionality, there are a diversity of manners in which the intersectional experiences of individuals operate from a microlevel and apply to a mac- rosystem of policies, curriculum, and education. Intersectionality serves as the catalyst to question and challenge higher education practices to activate principles of social justice and equity for individuals living on the fringes of a system and multiple oppressions (e.g., sexism, racism, heterosex- ism, ableism, classism, genderism, colorism, ageism, colonialism). In the context of higher education, it is critical to identify the manners in which these multiple forms of oppression intersect. Otherwise, ignoring these interactions will bias the lens of individuals who operate in the privilege within their own minority groups. In fact, Nunez (2014) exemplified how intersectionality elicited information about the lack of Latino immigrant students’ access to education. The study illustrated how creating trans- formative initiatives for each individual would counter story experiences about Latino immigrants’ success in education, which would elucidate the lack of resources offered to Latino immigrants’ educational experiences. A notable argument within Nunez’s (2014) conceptual framework is the essence of multiple layers accounting for individualized experiences. As Nunez (2014) indicated, intersectionality examines beyond the microlevel to emphasize power relations among social categories, contextual under- standing, and historical influence. Consequently, an analysis of services and policies within higher education requires a considerably comprehensive process to explore both present and historical patterns of marginaliza- tion. While Hankivsky (2014), Hankivsky et al. (2014), and Bowleg (2012) argued the development of policy analysis in health policy and public health, respectively, their perspective on intersectionality highly relates to the sociopolitical nature of higher education and the way in which institu- tions of higher education shape marginalized and multiply marginalized individuals.

At its core, intersectionality aims to develop and represent social justice tenets in larger social structures. Hankivsky et al. (2014) utilize this per- spective specifically to formulate the basis for “Intersectionality-Based Policy Analysis” (IBPA) (p. 1). With the emergence of this framework, IBPA holds extensive weight in higher education to determine the stratification

EBSCOhost - printed on 7/28/2020 3:57 PM via NEW JERSEY CITY UNIV. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

Intersectionality in Practice 21

of social categories existing in student bodies and employee representa- tion. IBPA focuses heavily on targeting structures that have historically contributed to oppression. In this inquiry, IBPA notes the difficulties of individuals falling into multiple minority groups, especially in the number of ways they have historically been invisible and often misrepresented. IBPA generated its components of critical analysis from an intersection- ality foundation, with development of questions to critically analyze the problem and questions to formulate “transformative” change (Hankivsky et al., 2014, p. 3). Consequently, enacting change is tailored to the delivery of social justice principles and ideologies while working against inequi- ties affecting a diversity of sociocultural dimensions. Generating an IBPA framework would necessitate inquiry from diverse viewpoints, where each member of a team analyzing a set of policies operates from his or her own professional experience, cultural values, and social identities. This frame- work utilizes a core principle of reflexivity to examine how privilege affects personal bias when critically analyzing a system’s group or sets of policies.

As a particularly innovative contribution, Hankivsky et al. (2014) noted the challenge of operationalizing intersectionality and creating a meaning- ful praxis that moves beyond nebulous theoretical constructs. To arrive at a more critical analysis of policy, they propose a set of guiding principles and questions to examine reflexivity and social positioning. Examples of the values include “equity,” “social justice,” “intersecting categories,” “mul- tilevel analysis,” “power,” “reflexivity,” and “time and space” (Hankivsky et al., 2014, p. 3). These guiding principles work in tandem with the questions woven into the analysis. Based on the IBPA framework from Hankivsky et al. (2014), some specific questions driving an IBPA framework include the following:

• What knowledge, values, and experiences do you bring to this area of policy analysis?

• How have representations of the “problem” come about? • How are groups differentially affected by this representation of the

“problem?” • What inequities actually exist in relation to the “problem”? • How will you know if inequities have been reduced? (p. 4)

Intersectionality in Higher Education Curriculum and Academia

As Jones, Kim, and Skendall (2012) indicated, personal identity devel- opment is also at the heart of explicating and living the intersectionality tenets. Many of these tenets are innately tied to the lived experiences of

EBSCOhost - printed on 7/28/2020 3:57 PM via NEW JERSEY CITY UNIV. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

22 C. D. CHAN ET AL.

individuals constantly fighting, wrestling, negotiating, and making sense of their identities and the manner in which those identities are represented in a larger context. Most often these contexts manage to contain oppressive forces that reinforce the lack of representation around a marginalized iden- tity. To bridge individual and context, there is a connection between the aspects of personal identity development, categorization of social identity, and context of social structures. In this lens, the personal becomes political. The categorization of social identity and its subsequent stratification affect the lived experiences of these personal identities. Through explicating this relationship between personal experiences of privilege and oppression and policies influenced by social structures, there is a rationale for the process of reflexivity, where individuals critically analyze their own social identity categories and the personal experiences of privilege and oppression tied to those identities.

As Walsh (2015) poignantly pointed out, personal experiences are a reflection of dominant and hegemonic institutional policies only catering to individuals within privileged groups. Walsh (2015) detailed personal expe- riences as a genderqueer woman, where she argued the inherent difficulty in reaching a status as a scientist in academia due to a dubbed presence as a feminist. Walsh (2015) critiqued the oppressive social structures because cisgender White men would immediately be accepted into academic circles as scientists. Any other form of knowing beyond the cultural lens of cis- gender White male would represent a biased and subjective perspective. Walsh’s (2015) perspective was born out of the critique in a social struc- ture with encouragement to hire more faculty, scientists, and academics operating with marginalized experiences, especially when reducing to one category of marginalization only represents one set of perspectives and a reductionist view of feminism. Walsh’s (2015) perspectives bring up several points that influence higher education policies about faculty representation and employment. Higher education institutions, particularly examples that carry several students and faculty of privilege, perpetuate systems of privilege, bias, and hegemony. Without an understanding of experiences that differ from a privileged norm, it is largely difficult to operate in a more inclusive environment with recognition for diverse viewpoints. Higher edu- cation institutions also run into more difficult challenges systemically, with supporting faculty and scientists coming from minority statuses, especially when an oppressed group is reduced to one category.

Meanwhile, Walsh’s (2015) narrative is consistent with Bedolla (2014), who received negative feedback for trying to deliver her own lived expe- riences as a woman of color in political science academia. She was not accepted in those discursive spaces and received backlash at scholarly events. However, she channeled her experiences to create social change in academia and higher education through utilizing her own reflexivity as

EBSCOhost - printed on 7/28/2020 3:57 PM via NEW JERSEY CITY UNIV. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

Intersectionality in Practice 23

commentary for necessary changes in higher education. Bedolla (2014) noted the inherent challenge in particular groups with multiple minority intersections as lacking a “critical mass” (p. 450), but she observed that the ability to develop coalitions with a majority population was vital. Bedolla (2014) proposed coalitions that move across the multiple dimensions of cultural and social identity to create coalitions among faculty. In doing so, they would create representation for faculty across a diversity of identi- ties and, subsequently, a diversity of ideologies, where the personal can become political. Each person would wish to create change on the basis of identifying oppressions in the coalitions. Bedolla (2014) also offered that oppression often operates in a competition of comparing which group has received more oppression historically or which oppression is worse. More important, Bedolla (2014) detailed the distinction between oppression and suffering, where oppression is often a function of structural inequality. She cautioned about the misconception that, although privileged individuals can experience suffering, their experiences do not necessarily constitute oppression.

Even more disturbing, some higher education institutions are without policies to protect and enact justice for victims of violence, rape, assault, or discrimination on the basis of a marginalized identity. For example, Calafell (2014) relayed her own experiences about how her institution had experienced confusion and lack of knowledge to address sexism and racism in confluence while she was a victim of sexual assault on multiple occasions. Although the university was unsure of how to handle such a process involving assault from an individual privileged in gender and race, Calafell (2014) explained how she received a slow process in resolving the issues and disputes around the assault and faced further isolation from her colleagues. Although Calafell’s experience can account for a unique issue, which is not necessarily transferable to other experiences of mutually constituted oppression, the experience serves as an indicator of policies that do not necessarily reflect the navigation. In another account, Patton (2014) identified the reinforcement of hegemonic masculinity due to a homophobic stance on gender expression. In particular, Patton (2014) raised questions about the Appropriate Attire Policy at Morehouse College, where heterosexism and genderism pervaded despite its presence as a historically Black college and university serving men of color. There is an inherent challenge when faculty and students living as QPOC have difficulty negotiating for resources in an oppressive system because they are not offered the protections and proper supports as victims of interpersonal violence, discrimination, and oppression.

Several of these narratives describe issues on a more macrolevel per- spective in higher education. Intersectionality teaches higher education professionals to utilize critical thinking differently by working through

EBSCOhost - printed on 7/28/2020 3:57 PM via NEW JERSEY CITY UNIV. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

24 C. D. CHAN ET AL.

a diversity of narratives relevant to intersectional identities. In addition, the theory offers perspectives in how multiple minority statuses converge to relegate some individuals within a minority group to severe invisibility. These statuses also illuminate issues within the context of policy in higher education. Although it is common for unique lived experiences of QPOC to appear less frequently, the evidence from the empirical and conceptual literature details the constant invisibility in discriminatory experiences at the microlevel and the lack of protections and safety at the macrolevel— both serving as a function of the historical origins of hegemonic structures constructed by members of privileged groups.

CONCLUDING THOUGHTS

Intersectionality extends the critical thinking of scholars, researchers, and practitioners to move beyond the single axis of social categorization and social identity. Although the historical foundation of intersectionality grew in the law discipline and remained historically theoretical, its adaptation and application reach many more disciplines as a result of state-of-the-art research and a growing body of conceptual and empirical literature around the theoretical constructs. In fact, a movement is underway to delineate subcontent specializations within intersectionality due to the wide range of applicability and philosophical interpretation. As a result of the diverse interpretations and applications, numerous researchers are adapting this theoretical framework to enhance research methods that would creatively meet the lived experiences of marginalized individuals. Because the expe- riences of individuals living with multiple marginalizations or multiple minority statuses are often hidden, intersectionality proves to disrupt this pattern and norm while extending the voice to include those groups, such as QPOC.

In the context of higher education scholarship and practice, intersectionality represents a significant change in critical thinking, social justice, and advocacy. It operates with a social justice framework to take microlevel experiences and initiate social change across the meso- and macrolevels. Taking into account the lived experiences of QPOC, many students within this population are often left unseen and unheard due to the lack of services or policies reflecting their voices. Intersectionality further challenges practitioners to expand the notion of social identity in praxis because individuals cannot operate within a single axis of social identity. Most important, intersectionality challenges the nature of social inequality within social structures by taking reflexivity into account. As a wider audience reviews the constructs of intersectionality, this reflexivity

EBSCOhost - printed on 7/28/2020 3:57 PM via NEW JERSEY CITY UNIV. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

Intersectionality in Practice 25

process speaks to the forefront of embodying the social justice paradigm and changing context to meet the needs of multiple-marginalized individuals.

REFERENCES

Ahmed, S. (2007a). You end up doing the document rather than doing the doing: Diversity, race equality and the politics of documentation. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 30(4), 590–609.

Ahmed, S. (2007b). The language of diversity. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 30(2), 235–256.

Ahmed, S. (2012). On being included: Racism and diversity in institutional life. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Retrieved from http://www.ebrary.com

Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Andersen, M. L., & Collins, P. H. (2007). Why race, class, and gender still matter.

In M. L. Andersen & P. H. Collins (Eds.), Race, class and gender: An anthology (pp. 1–16). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Atkinson, D. R., Morten, G., & Sue, D. W. (1998). Counseling American minorities (5th ed.). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.

Baams, L., Grossman, A. H., & Russell, S. T. (2015). Minority stress and mecha- nisms of risk for depression and suicide ideation among lesbian, gay, and bisexual youth. Developmental Psychology, 51, 688–696..

Balsam, K., Molina, Y., Beadnell, B., Simoni, J., & Walters, K. (2011). Measuring multiple minority stress: The LGBT people of color microaggressions scale. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 17(2), 163–174.

Barret, B., & Logan, C. (2002). Counseling gay men and lesbians: A practice primer. Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Bedolla, L. G. (2014). How an intersectional approach can help to transform the university. Politics & Gender, 10(3), 447–455.

Beemyn, G., & Rankin, S. (2011). The lives of transgender people. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.

Black, L. L., & Stone, D. (2005). Expanding the definition of privilege: The concept of social privilege. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 33, 243–255.

Bowleg, L. (2008). When black + lesbian + woman ≠ black lesbian woman: The methodological challenges of qualitative and quantitative intersectionality research. Sex Roles, 59(5–6), 312–325.

Bowleg, L. (2012). The problem with the phrase women and minorities: Intersection- ality—an important theoretical framework for public health. American Journal of Public Health, 102(7), 1267–1273.

Bowleg, L. (2013). “Once you’ve blended the cake, you can’t take the parts back to the main ingredients”: Black gay and bisexual men’s descriptions and experi- ences of intersectionality. Sex Roles, 68(11–12), 754–767.

Bowleg, L., Huang, J., Brooks, K., Black, A., Burkholder, G. (2003). Triple jeopardy and beyong: Multiple minority stress and resilience among Black lesbians. Journal of Lesbian Studies, 7, 87–108.

EBSCOhost - printed on 7/28/2020 3:57 PM via NEW JERSEY CITY UNIV. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

26 C. D. CHAN ET AL.

Breslow, A. S., Brewster, M. E., Velex, B. L., Wong, S., Geiger, E., & Soderstrom, B. (2015). Resilience and collective action: Exploring buffers against minority stress for transgender individuals. Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity, 2, 253–265.

Burns, M. N., Kamen, C., Lehman, K. A., & Beach, S. R. H. (2012). Minority stress and attributions for discriminatory events predict social anxiety in gay men. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 36, 25–35.

Calafell, B. M. (2014). “Did it happen because of your race or sex?”: University sexual harassment policies and the move against intersectionality. Frontiers, 35(3), 75–95, 207. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1636 560017?accountid=11243

Carbado, D. W. (2013). Colorblind intersectionality. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 38, 811–845.

Carbado, D. W., Crenshaw, K. W., Mays, V. M., & Tomlinson, B. (2013). Intersec- tionality. Du Bois Review, 10(2), 303–312.

Cass, V. C. (1979). Homosexual identity development: A theoretical model. Journal of Homosexuality, 4, 219–235.

Chun, K. Y. S., & Singh, A. A. (2010). The bisexual youth of Color intersecting iden- tity developmental model: A contextual approach to understanding multiple marginalization experiences. Journal of Bisexuality, 10, 429–451.

Clarke, A. Y., & McCall, L. (2013). Intersectionality and social explanation in social science research. Du Bois Review, 10(2), 349–363.

Cochran, S. D., Sullivan, J. G., & Mays, V. M. (2003). Prevalence of mental disor- ders, psychological distress and mental health services use among lesbian, gay and bisexual adults in the United States. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 71, 53–61.

Cole, B. A. (2009). Gender, narratives and intersectionality: Can personal experi- ence approaches to research contribute to “undoing gender”? International Review of Education, 55(5–6), 561–578.

Cole, E. R. (2008). Coalitions as a model for intersectionality: From practice to theory. Sex Roles, 59(5-6), 443-453. doi: 10.1007/s11199-008-9419-1

Cole, E. R. (2009). Intersectionality and research in psychology. American Psycholo- gist, 64(3), 170–180.

Collins P. H. (1990). Black feminist thought: Knowledge, consciousness and the politics of empowerment. New York and London: Routledge.

Collins, P. H. (2010). The new politics of community. American Sociological Review, 75, 7–30.

Corlett, S., & Mavin, S. (2014). Intersectionality, identity and identity work. Gender in Management, 29(5), 258–276.

Crenshaw, K. (1989). Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antira- cist politics. University of Chicago Legal Forum, 139–167.

Crenshaw, K. (1991). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. Stanford Law Review, 43(6), 1241–1299.

Cross, W. E., Jr. (1978). The Thomas and Cross models of psychological Nigres- cence: A literature review. Journal of Black Psychology, 4, 13–31.

EBSCOhost - printed on 7/28/2020 3:57 PM via NEW JERSEY CITY UNIV. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

Intersectionality in Practice 27

di Bartolo, A. N. (2015). Rethinking gender equity in higher education. Diversity & Democracy, 18(2). Retrieved from https://www.aacu.org/diversitydemoc- racy/2015/spring/dibartolo

Driscoll. M. W., Reynolds, J. R., & Todman, L. C. (2015). Dimensions of race-related stress and African American life satisfaction: A test of the protective role of collective agency. Journal of Black Psychology, 41, 462–486.

Edwards, K. M., & Sylaska, K. M. (2013). The perpetuation of intimate partner violence among LGBTQ college youth: The role of minority stress. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 42, 1721–1731.

Erikson, E. H. (1968). Identity: Youth and crisis. New York: W. W. Martin & Company. Feinstein, B. A., Goldfried, M. R., & Davila, J. (2012). The relationship between

experiences of discrimination and mental health among lesbians and gay men: An examination of homonegativity and rejection sensitivity as possible mediators. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 80, 917–927.

Grov, C., Bimbi, D. S., Parsons, J. T., & Nanín, J. E. (2006). Race, ethnicity, gender, and generational factors associated with the coming-out process among gay, lesbian, and bisexual individuals. Journal of Sex Research, 43(2), 115–121.

Hankivsky, O. (2014). Rethinking care ethics: On the promise and potential of an intersectional analysis. The American Political Science Review, 108(2), 252–264.

Hankivsky, O., Grace, D., Hunting, G., Giesbrecht, M., Fridkin, A., Rudrum, S., & Clark, N. (2014). An intersectionality-based policy analysis framework: Criti- cal reflections on a methodology for advancing equity. International Journey for Equity in Health, 13(119), 1–16.

Helms, J. E. (1995). An update of Helms’ White and People of Color identity models. In J. G. Ponterotto, M. J. Casas, L. A. Suzuki, & C. M. Alexander (Eds.), Handbook of multicultural counseling (pp. 181–198). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Hurtado, A., & Sinha, M. (2008). More than men: Latino feminist masculinities and intersectionality. Sex Roles, 59(5–6), 337–349.

Jones, S. R., Kim, Y. C., & Skendall, K. C. (2012). (Re-) framing authenticity: Con- sidering multiple social identities using autoethnographic and intersectional approaches. The Journal of Higher Education, 83(5), 698–724.

Kim, M. (2013). Racial/ethnic disparities in depression and its theoretical perspec- tives. Psychiatry Quarterly, 85, 1–8.

Konik, J., & Stewart, A. (2004). Sexual identity development in the context of com- pulsory heterosexuality. Journal of Personality, 72, 815–844.

Kus, R. J., & Saunders, J. M. (1985). Stages of coming out: An ethnographic approach. Western Journal of Nursing Research, 7, 177–198.

Levy, D. L. (2009). Gay and lesbian identity development: An overview. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 19, 978–993.

Mahalingam, R., Balan, S., & Haritatos, J. (2008). Engendering immigrant psychol- ogy: An intersectionality perspective. Sex Roles, 59, 326–336.

Manning, K. (2009). Philosophical underpinnings of student affairs work on differ- ence. About Campus, 14(2), 11–17.

McCall, L. (2005). The complexity of intersectionality. Signs, 30(3), 1771–1800.

EBSCOhost - printed on 7/28/2020 3:57 PM via NEW JERSEY CITY UNIV. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

28 C. D. CHAN ET AL.

McCarn, S. R., & Fassinger, R. E. (1996). Revisioning sexual minority identity for- mation: A new model of lesbian identity and its implications for counseling and research. The Counseling Psychologist, 24, 508–534.

Meyer, I. H. (1995). Minority stress and mental health in gay men. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 36, 38–56.

Meyer, I. H. (2003). Prejudice, social stress, and mental health in lesbian, gay, and bisexual populations: Conceptual issues and research evidence. Psychological Bulletin, 129(5), 674–697.

Meyer, I. H. (2010). Identity, stress, and resilience in lesbians, gay men, and bisexu- als of Color. The Counseling Psychologist, 38, 442–454.

Meyer, I. H. (2014). Minority stress and positive psychology: Convergences and divergences to understanding LGBT health. Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity, 1(4), 348–349.

Morrish, L., & O’Mara, K. (2011). Queering the discourse of diversity. Journal of Homosexuality, 58(6–7), 974–991.

Nadal, K. L., Rivera, D. P., & Corpus, M. J. H. (2010). Sexual orientation and trans- gender microaggressions. In D.W. Sue (Ed.), Microaggressions and marginality: Manifestation, dynamics, and impact (pp. 217–240). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

Nauta, M. M., Saucier, A. M., & Woodard, L. E. (2001). Interpersonal influences on students’ academic and career decisions: The impact of sexual orientation. Career Development Quarterly, 49(4), 352–362.

Nash, J. C. (2008). Re-thinking intersectionality. Feminist Review, (89), 1–15. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org.proxygw.wrlc.org/stable/40663957

Nunez, A.-M. (2014). Employing multilevel intersectionality in educational research: Latino identities, contexts, and college access. Educational Researcher, 43(2), 85–92.

Page, A. D., & Peacock, J. R. (2013). Negotiating identities in a heteronormative context. Journal of Homosexuality, 60, 639–654.

Palma, T. V., & Stanley, J. L. (2002). Effective counseling with lesbian, gay, and bisexual clients. Journal of College Counseling, 5(1), 74–89.

Parent, M. C., DeBlaere, C., & Moradi, B. (2013). Approaches to research on inter- sectionality: Perspectives on gender, LGBT, and racial/ethnic identities. Sex Roles, 68(11–12), 639–645. doi: 10.1007/s11199-013-0283-2

Patton, L. D. (2014). Preserving respectability or blatant disrespect? A critical dis- course analysis of the Morehouse Appropriate Attire Policy and implications for intersectional approaches to examining campus policies. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 27(6), 724–746.

Purdie-Vaughns, V., & Eibach, R. P. (2008). Intersectional invisibility: The advan- tages and disadvantages of multiple subordinate-group identities. Sex Roles, 59, 377–391.

Roper, L. D. (2005). The role of senior student affairs officers in supporting LGBT students: Exploring the landscape of one’s life. New Directions for Students Services, 111, 81–89.

Rosario, M., Schrimshaw, E. W., Hunter, J., Braun, L. (2006). Sexual identity devel- opment among lesbian, gay, and bisexual youths: Consistency and change over time. The Journal of Sex Research, 43, 46–58.

EBSCOhost - printed on 7/28/2020 3:57 PM via NEW JERSEY CITY UNIV. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

Intersectionality in Practice 29

Savin-Williams, R. C., & Ream, G. L (2007). Prevalence and stability of sexual ori- entation components during adolescence and young adulthood. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 36, 385–394.

Sawyer, L., Salter, N., & Thoroughgood, C. (2013). Studying individual identities is good, but examining intersectionality is better. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 6, 80–84.

Seng, J. S., Lopez, W. D., Sperlich, M., Hamama, L., & Reed Meldrum, C. D. (2012). Marginalized identities, discrimination burden, and mental health: Empirical exploration of an interpersonal-level approach to modeling inter- sectionality. Social Science Medicine, 75, 2437–2445.

Shields, S. A. (2008). Gender: An intersectionality perspective. Sex Roles, 59(5–6), 301–311.

Singh, A. A. (2013). Transgender youth of color and resilience: Negotiating oppres- sion and finding support. Sex Roles, 68(11–12), 690–702.

Smith, L. C., & Shin, R. Q. (2015). Negotiating the intersection of racial oppression and heteronormativity. Journal of Homosexuality, 62(11), 1459–1484.

Smith, W. A., Allen, W. R., & Danley, L. L. (2007). “Assume the position … you fit the description”: Psychosocial experiences and racial battle fatigue among African American male college students. American Behavioral Scientist, 51(4), 551–578.

Szymanski, D. M., & Sung, M. R. (2010). Minority stress and psychological distress among Asian American sexual minority persons. The Counseling Psychologist, 38(6), 848–872.

Velez, B. L., Moradi, B., & DeBlaere, C. (2015). Multiple oppressions and the mental health of sexual minority Latina/o individuals. The Counseling Psycholo- gist, 43(1), 7–38.

Viruell-Fuentes, E., Miranda, P. Y., & Abdulrahim, S. (2012). More than culture: Structural racism, intersectionality theory, and immigrant health. Social Science & Medicine, 75(12), 2099–2106.

Walby, S., Armstrong, J., & Strid, S. (2012). Intersectionality: Multiple inequities in social theory. Sociology, 46(2), 224–240.

Walsh, R. J. (2015). XI. “Objectivity” and intersectionality: How intersectional feminism could utilise identity and experience as a dialectical weapon of liberation within academia. Feminism & Psychology, 25(1), 61–66.

Warner, L. R. (2008). A best practices guide to intersectional approaches in psycho- logical research. Sex Roles, 59(5–6), 454–463.

Warner, L. R., & Shields, S. A. (2013). The intersections of sexuality, gender, and race: Identity research at the crossroads. Sex Roles, 68(11–12), 803–810.

Weinberg, M. S., Williams, C. J., & Pryor, D. W. (1994). Dual attraction: Understanding bisexuality. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Yim, J. Y., & Mahalingam, R. (2006). Culture, masculinity, and psychological well- being in Punjab, India. Sex Roles, 55(9–10), 715–724.

EBSCOhost - printed on 7/28/2020 3:57 PM via NEW JERSEY CITY UNIV. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

EBSCOhost - printed on 7/28/2020 3:57 PM via NEW JERSEY CITY UNIV. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use