``The Labels Don't Work Very Well´´: Transgender Individuals

Home , Boi (slang), Transgender sexuality

International Journal of Transgenderism

ISSN: 1553-2739 (Print) 1434-4599 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wijt20

“The labels don't work very well”: Transgender individuals' conceptualizations of sexual orientation and sexual identity

M. Paz Galupo, Shane B. Henise & Nicholas L. Mercer

To cite this article: M. Paz Galupo, Shane B. Henise & Nicholas L. Mercer (2016) “The labels don't work very well”: Transgender individuals' conceptualizations of sexual orientation and sexual identity, International Journal of Transgenderism, 17:2, 93-104, DOI: 10.1080/15532739.2016.1189373

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15532739.2016.1189373

Published online: 27 Jun 2016.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 14

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=wijt20

Download by: [M. Paz Galupo] Date: 30 June 2016, At: 04:55 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TRANSGENDERISM 2016, VOL. 17, NO. 2, 93–104 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15532739.2016.1189373

“The labels don’t work very well”: Transgender individuals’ conceptualizations of sexual orientation and sexual identity

M. Paz Galupo, Shane B. Henise, and Nicholas L. Mercer Psychology Department, Towson University, Towson, MD, USA

ABSTRACT KEYWORDS The conceptualization and measurement of sexual orientation for transgender individuals is Gender identity; sexual uniquely complicated by the way sexual orientation is rooted in dichotomous notions of sex and identity; sexual orientation; gender. The present research investigates the conceptualization of sexual orientation among transgender transgender individuals by exploring the sexual identity labels they choose, the descriptions they provide for these labels, and their general descriptions of their sexuality. Participants included 172 adult U.S. residents, ranging in age from 18 to 65, who self-identified as transgender, transsexual, gender variant, or having a transgender history. Participants individually completed an online survey. Qualitative responses were analyzed via thematic analysis. Six themes were identified related to transgender individuals’ descriptions of their sexuality: (1) trans sexuality as complex; (2) shifts in trans sexuality; (3) focus on beloved; (4) relationship style and status; (5) sexuality, bondage & discipline / domination & submission / sadism & masochism (BDSM), and kink; and (6) separating sexual and romantic attraction. Discussion focuses on the ways that transgender individuals’ descriptions of sexuality fall outside the traditional research frameworks that problematize transgender experience, conflate gender identity and sexual orientation, and inherently define transgender experience in both cisnormative and heteronormative terms.

Sexual orientation is a multidimensional construct only a few studies have focused directly on under- that encompasses identity, attraction, and behavior standing the sexual orientation of transgender indi- (Lauman, Gagnon, Michael, & Michaels, 1994) and is viduals, research from both of these perspectives understood as an internal mechanism that directs sex- has profound implications for the way in which ual and romantic interests (Diamond, 2003; Rosario & transgender sexuality has been conceptualized. In Schrimshaw, 2014). The present research investigates particular, sexual orientation is conceptualized for the conceptualization of sexual orientation among transgender individuals from each of these perspec- transgender individuals by exploring the sexual iden- tives in a way that contributes to the overall conﬂa-

Downloaded by [M. Paz Galupo] at 04:55 30 June 2016 tity labels they choose, the descriptions they provide tion of sexual orientation and gender identity. for these labels, and their general descriptions of their There is a general failure of sexuality researchers to sexuality. treat gender identity and sexual orientation as inde- pendent constructs (Fassinger & Arseneau, 2007)or to systematically explore the intersections of the Framing an understanding of sexual orientation two (Galupo, Bauerband, et al., 2014; Galupo, among trans individuals Davis, Gynkiewicz, & Mitchell, 2014). This general Sexual orientation research in the United States has conﬂation of gender identity and sexual orientation historically reﬂected two dominant trends, one often leads researchers focused on sexual minority stemming from a premise of sickness and pathol- experience to conceptualize sexual orientation ogy and the other from a framework of minority based on cisgender assumptions (Galupo, Davis, identity (Hammack, Mayers, & Windell, 2013). et al., 2014) and researchers focused on transgender Research on transgender sexuality has been simi- experience to conceptualize gender identity based larly shaped from within these trends. Although on heterosexual assumptions (Galupo, Bauerband,

et al., 2014). This conflation distorts our under- the DSM-5 Gender Dysphoria diagnosis (American standing of sexual orientation and identity among Psychiatric Association, 2013). transgender individuals. Psychomedical perspectives of gender identity based on heteronormative assumptions of sexual ori- Transgender sexuality: Medical framework entation have led to a narrow interpretation of transgender experience and a narrow definition of Transgender experience has been consistently pathol- transgender sexuality. As such, this classification does ogized in the medical and psychological literature. not always resonate with the diversity of experience From this perspective the focus on transgender experi- among transgender individuals (Rowniak & Chesla, ence has been on classifying transgender types and 2013; Serano, 2010; Veale, Clarke, & Lomax, 2012). In diagnosing gender identity. The sexual orientation of fact, as much of the research on sexual orientation the individual has been central to the way this litera- among transgender individuals focuses on attraction, ture has approached an understanding of transgender more emphasis is needed to understand the role of identity and experience. The centrality of sexual orien- self-identification (Bockting, Benner, & Coleman, tation in the conceptualization of gender identity is 2009; Bockting & Coleman, 1991; Devor, 1993). illustrated in Blanchard’s highly contested model of male-to-female (MtF) transgenderism (1989a). In this Transgender sexuality: Minority identity framework model same-sex desire is hypothesized to be the rea- son behind gender dysphoria where homosexual trans- Transgender sexuality has also been conceptualized sexuals see themselves as women attracted to men. from within the larger LGBT minority framework. Sex- Similarly Blanchard’s autogynephilic transsexuals are ual minorities (lesbian, gay, bisexual, queer) and gender considered “nonhomosexual” individuals who are not minorities (transgender and gender nonconforming attracted to men but are instead are sexually aroused individuals) are often discussed as a unified group by the thought of themselves as women. The way this based on shared stigma and community. However, theory connects two constructs—sexual orientation transgender persons often experience more stigmatiza- and gender identity—that are now generally under- tion than sexual minorities (Weiss, 2004) and a unique stood to be distinct has not gone uncriticized in the form of prejudice/transphobia (Hill & Willoughby, academic literature (Coleman, Bockting, & Gooren, 2005;Nadal,Skolnik,&Wong,2012; Nagoshi et al., 1993; Moser, 2010; Serano, 2010). 2008) and do not always feel connected to the LGBT Blanchard (1989b) further suggested that sexual ori- community (Fassinger & Arseneau, 2007). Transgender entation for transgender individuals should be deter- concerns have historically been minimized within the mined on the basis of chromosomal sex regardless of larger LGBTQ community where issues surrounding gender presentation or surgical status and classified sexual orientation and LGBQ experience often take Downloaded by [M. Paz Galupo] at 04:55 30 June 2016 into four categories: homosexual, heterosexual, bisexual, precedence (Hill & Willoughby, 2005). and analloerotic. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual Research focused on understanding transgender of Mental Disorders Third Edition (DSM-III;American experience and influenced from a minority stress Psychiatric Association, 1980) similarly denoted indi- framework provides a wider understanding of sexuality viduals’ predominant prior sexual history as a subclassi- among transgender individuals. Instead of sexual orien- fication of transsexualism with options of asexual, tation defining transgender experience, sexual orienta- homosexual (same anatomic sex), heterosexual (other tion has been used in these studies as a way to describe anatomic sex), or unspecified. In the DSM-IV the diag- the diversity of transgender experience and is reported nosis of Gender Identity Disorder was accompanied by based on participant self-identification or stated attrac- designations that recharacterized sexuality outside of tion. This research broadens our understanding of the traditional sexual orientation labels that require a transgender sexuality by emphasizing sexual diversity; sex designation of self in relation to other (i.e. hetero- for example, this research suggests that transgender sexual, homosexual); instead subclassification options individuals report a range of current sexual identities were attraction to females, males, both, and neither (Dargie, Blair, Pukall, & Coyle, 2014;Diamond,Pardo, (American Psychiatric Association, 2000). No such sub- & Butterworth, 2011;Hines,2007), a range of sexual classification based on sexual orientation is included in identities prior to transition (Rowniak & Chesla, 2013), INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TRANSGENDERISM 95

andthatitiscommonfortransgenderindividualsto the confines of these traditionalsexualorientation endorse nonbinary/plurisexual sexual identities such as scales. bisexual, pansexual, and queer (Dargie et al., 2014; Recent research has documented parallel findings Galupo,Davis,etal.,2014; Kuper, Nussbaum, & Mus- for sexual identity; transgender and plurisexual tanski, 2012). In addition, transgender individuals individuals were less likely to feel that their sexual sometimes experience a shift in their sexuality following identity could be captured in a single sexual-orien- social or medical transition (Devor, 1993; Galupo, tation label (Galupo, Mitchell, & Davis, 2015). Mitchell, Grynkiewicz, & Davis, 2014; Kuper et al., Transgender and plurisexual individuals were more 2012; Meier, Pardo, Labuski, & Babcock, 2013). likely than their cisgender and monosexual coun- terparts, respectively, to endorse multiple sexual identity labels and more likely to provide additional Transgender sexuality: Measures of sexual context for their identity labels than were individu- orientation and sexual identity labels als with normative identities. It is likely that by Sexuality measures typically assess sexual orientation analyzing the descriptors provided by transgender on a single continuum with heterosexual on one end individuals, we can gain insight into the way they and lesbian/gay on the other (e.g., Kinsey scale; conceptualize their sexuality. Given that current Kinsey, Pomeroy, & Martin, 1948; Savin-Williams, conventions in sexual orientation measurement and 2010). Designed with the intent of better characteriz- identity labeling do not resonate with transgender ing the multidimensional aspects of sexuality, the individuals’ experiences, additional research focused Klein Sexual Orientation Grid (KSOG) expanded the onthesubjectiveexperienceoftransgenderindivid- measurement of sexual orientation by prompting indi- uals is necessary. In addition to providing a fuller viduals to rate their behavior, attraction, and fantasies characterization of transgender sexuality, this on a continuum of same- and other-sex attracted or to approach may also inform alternative ways of con- rate their community and political affiliation as falling ceptualizing sexuality in general, as Hammack, somewhere between heterosexual and lesbian/gay Mayers, and Windell (2013) suggest that a subject- (Klein, Sepekoff, & Wolf, 1985). focused investigation of sexuality is needed to dis- The way that sexual-orientation labels and meas- rupt the assumptions of the dominant frameworks. urements require participants to gauge their desire by making individual sex/gender designations in Statement of purpose relation to the individual/group of interest is particularly complicated by transgender identity or his- The present research investigates transgender sexual- tory (Dozier, 2005;Lev,2004; van Anders, 2015). ity by analyzing the sexual identity labels transgender Recent qualitative research has focused on the sub- individuals choose, the descriptions they provide for Downloaded by [M. Paz Galupo] at 04:55 30 June 2016 jective evaluation of typical measures of sexual ori- these labels, and the individuals’ general descriptions entation (i.e., Kinsey, KSOG). When asked how of their sexuality. By recentering on the lived experien- well these measures capture their experience, sex- ces of transgender individuals and removing the theo- ual- and gender-minority participants raised a retical frameworks of past research that conflate number of concerns surrounding the way sexual sexual orientation and gender identity, our thematic orientation is conceptualized and measured analysis focuses on identifying the aspects most salient (Galupo, Mitchell, et al., 2014). For example, par- to transgender sexuality. In addition, because past ticipants questioned whether a single continuum research has mostly investigated transgender sexuality scaleisabletocapturethecomplexityandfluidity separately for MtF (e.g., Moser, 2010; Veale, Clarke, of their sexuality. Many participants challenged the Lomax, 2008) and FtM (e.g., Devor, 1993; Dozier, conceptualization of sexual orientation as anchored 2005) individuals, we include a diverse nonclinical on binary dimensions of sex and gender. This was sample including transgender individuals who identify particularly true for transgender, bisexual, and with both transfeminine and transmasculine spec- other plurisexual1 individuals (Galupo, Davis, et al., trums. In addition, to better reflect the diversity of the 2014) who were most likely to express that their transgender community we also include individuals sexuality could not be represented accurately within who self-identify as gender variant and agender. 96 M. P. GALUPO ET AL.

Method trans, trans woman, trans man, MtF, FtM, genderqueer, bigender, gender nonconforming, and agender, with Participant demographics many participants utilizing multiple labels simulta- Participants were 172 adults who self-identified as neously. For the purpose of describing our participant transgender, as transsexual, as gender variant, or as demographics and ensuring diversity of trans identities having a transgender history. Participants ranged in within our sample we asked participants to group age from 18 to 65 (M D 32.29, SD D 11.62). All partic- themselves in one of four gender categories, provided ipants were U.S. residents representing all 50 United by the researchers, that best describes their experience. States and Washington, DC. Table 1 includes partici- Participants chose transfeminine (n D 47), transmascu- pant demographics with regard to racial/ethnic diver- line (n D 84), gender variant (n D 31), and agender (n sity, highest level of education, and socioeconomic D 10). Several demographic characteristics differed status. There was limited racial/ethnic diversity within across these four groups (age, sex assigned at birth, and the sample, with 75.0% of participants identifying as primary sexual orientation identity), and we provide White/Caucasian and 19.8% identifying as a racial/ this information in Table 2. Transfeminine participants ethnic minority, with another 5.2% identifying as were older, most likely to be assigned male at birth “other.” (98.8%), and most likely to endorse bisexual (25.5%) Participants self-identified with a range of gender and lesbian (25.5%) as their most frequent primary sex- identity labels including female/woman, male/man, ual-orientation labels. Transmasculine (97.6%), gender variant (74.2%), and agender (80%) participants, in Table 1. Participant demographics. contrast, were most likely to be assigned female at (n)%birth. Transmasculine participants were most likely to Gender identity endorse queer (28.6%) and heterosexual (26.2%) as Transfeminine 47 27.3 Transmasculine 84 48.8 their most frequent primary sexual-orientation labels. Gender variant 31 18.0 Gender variant participants were most likely to endorse Agender 10 5.8 Sex assigned at birth queer (48.4%), bisexual (12.9%), and pansexual (12.9%) Female 116 67.4 labels while agender participants were most likely to Male 49 28.5 Intersex 4 2.3 endorse queer (50.0%) and asexual (30.0%) labels. No answer 3 1.7 Sexual orientation Queer 48 27.9 Recruitment Heterosexual 30 17.4 Pansexual 28 16.3 Recruitment announcements, including a link to the Bisexual 23 13.4 Lesbian 14 8.1 online survey, were posted on social media sites, Gay 8 4.7 online message boards, and emailed via transgender Asexual 6 3.5 Downloaded by [M. Paz Galupo] at 04:55 30 June 2016 Fluid 4 2.3 listservs. Some of these resources were geared toward Other 11 6.4 specific transgender communities (e.g., nonbinary, gay Race/ethnic identity White/Caucasian 129 75.0 FtMs, Two Spirit), while others served the transgender Bi/multiracial 12 7.0 Black/African American 8 4.7 community more generally. Participants heard about Hispanic/Latino 5 2.9 the study primarily through online means, including American Native 4 2.3 Asian American 3 1.7 Facebook (76.8%), Tumblr (7.7%), Twitter (0.5%), Other 9 5.2 research-oriented websites/message boards (4.3%), No answer 2 1.2 Education and receiving a forwarded email through an acquain- High school 88 51.2 tance or listserv (5.3%). Other participants were College 43 25.0 Graduate school 30 17.4 directed to the survey by a friend or significant other No answer 11 6.4 (4.8%), and one participant (0.5%) did not provide an Socioeconomic status Working class 58 33.7 answer to this question. Lower-middle class 35 20.3 Middle class 29 16.9 Upper-middle class 22 12.8 Measures and procedure Upper class 2 1.2 Don’t know 16 9.3 The present study focused on information obtained No answer 10 5.8 from a demographic section of a larger online study INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TRANSGENDERISM 97

Table 2. Demographics across gender identity.

Transfeminine Transmasculine Gender variant Agender (n D 47) (n D 84) (n D 31) (n D 10)

Age M (SD) 41.36 (14.85) 29.12 (9.73) 30.0 (9.50) 23.5 (4.72) Sex assigned at birth (%) Male 98.8 — 19.4 — Female — 97.6 74.2 80 Intersex — 1.2 6.5 10 No answer 2.1 1.2 — 10 Sexual orientation (%) Asexual — 1.2 6.5 30 Bisexual 25.5 8.3 12.9 — Fluid 2.1 3.6 —— Gay 2.1 7.1 3.2 — Heterosexual 12.8 26.2 3.2 10 Pansexual 17 17.9 12.9 10 Queer 8.5 28.6 48.4 50 Lesbian 25.5 — 6.5 — Other 6.4 7.1 6.5 —

investigating gender identity and transgender experi- at the end of the survey we provided participants with ence. A structured sexual orientation question was pre- the opportunity to reflect upon how our questions sented to participants where they chose their primary captured (and failed to capture) their individual expe- sexual orientation from discreet options: heterosexual, riences. Participants were also asked to provide feed- gay, lesbian, bisexual, pansexual, fluid, queer, asexual, back to improve the present and future studies. and other. All participants were then asked to describe Responses obtained were incorporated into our analy- their sexual orientation and to list any other sexual sis. Second, throughout the data analysis process we identities they use via free response. discussed the themes and made decisions via consensus. Because of the range of our collective experiences across sexual orientation, gender identity, gender pre- Data analysis sentation, and relationship experiences we came to Thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006)wasusedto these discussions with different perspectives. Our consider how participants described their sexual orien- research team includes a professor of psychology who tation and how they defined and used sexual identity self-identifies as a bi/pansexual cisgender woman (first labels. Analysis began with the second and third author author), an advanced undergraduate student of psy- independently coding data, looking for themes related chology and LGBTQ studies who self-identifies as a to each category of identity. The research team met pansexual trans man (second author), and an and discussed the coding categories and agreed upon advanced undergraduate student of family studies and Downloaded by [M. Paz Galupo] at 04:55 30 June 2016 an initial set of codes. The second and third authors community development and LGBTQ studies who then coded and sorted the data set using the initial set self-identifies as a gay cisgender man (third author). of codes and provided the first author (who served as external auditor) with a list of themes and sorted Results and discussion quotes based on theme. There was significant overlap in the ratings across the two coders; only three discrep- Six major themes emerged in participants’ descrip- ant codes needed to be resolved via consensus of the tions of their sexuality: (1) trans sexuality as complex; entire research team. All three members of the research (2) shifts in trans sexuality; (3) focus on beloved; (4) team agreed upon the final coding structure and met relationship style and status; (5) sexuality, BDSM, and several additional times to discuss and solidify which kink; and (6) separating sexual and romantic attrac- quotes would fit under each theme. Final quotes were tion. All participant responses in the data set are rep- chosen to simultaneously exemplify each theme and to resented in the coding structure and reflected at least ensure that the table of quotes best represented the one of the themes. Quotations are used throughout diversity of trans2 identities endorsed by the sample. the paper to illustrate the themes and are accompa- Several checks were included in our data analysis nied by the gender identity label provided as a free process to increase the credibility of our results. First, response by the participant. 98 M. P. GALUPO ET AL.

“It’s complicated”: Trans sexuality as complex I tick queer because although I have come out as attracted to women, as I don’t ID as a woman, lesbian When asked to describe their sexual orientation, trans- doesn’t work for me. Also I am still married to a man. Ã gender participants’ responses can be summed up by (genderqueer/trans ) the main sentiment, “It’s complicated.” Many participants described their sexual orientation using a series Calling myself heterosexual doesn’t feel quite right of labels, as illustrated by the following quotation: “It’s because I still have some female parts. (transgender) complicated. Graysexual, autosexual, questioning les- Ã ’ bian but so far pansexual” (genderqueer, trans ). The Consistent with past research, trans participants complexity is exemplified further by the following par- understandings of their sexuality was complicated by the ticipants’ simultaneous endorsement of labels that are way sexual orientation is anchored on binary conceptual- conceptualized in the literature as mutually exclusive izations of sex and gender (Galupo, Mitchell, et. al, 2014) (e.g., gay/straight; homo/bi): “Queer, Gay. Straight, Bi, and the way sex and gender is often tied to gendered Pan, Homo” (genderqueer). The use of multiple labels notions of the body (Spade, 2011). Despite medical per- is consistent with recent quantitative research finding spectives on transgender sexuality that have traditionally fi that sexual minority individuals who are also trans- rooted de nitions of sexual orientation solely on natal gender are more likely than cisgender sexual minority sex (Blanchard, 1989b; DSM-III; American Psychiatric individuals to endorse multiple sexual orientation Association, 1980), biological notions of sex/gender were ’ labels (Galupo et al., 2016). The present findings sug- not the sole consideration in our trans participants gest that for trans individuals, sexuality is not easily understanding of their sexuality though it was sometimes captured in a single label. Multiple labels, then, are one consideration of many that informed the way sexual used to attempt to capture the complexity of trans orientation was regarded. individuals’ sexuality. Even when choosing a single When discussing the complexity of their sexual ori- ’ label, participants described choosing broader entation, participants general conclusion was that the ’ “umbrella” terms while acknowledging their choice as current system of labeling doesn t quite capture their a way to reduce the confusion or complexity of their experience. sexuality. This is exemplified in the following three In the past, I was a man, attracted exclusively to quotations: women—aka heterosexual. Then I was in transition, expressing an appearance of being a women—while fi I often de ne myself as gay to simplify my sexuality. retaining male sexual parts—and I was attracted to (male) women—aka Bisexual. Now, I’m expressing being a women, and having female sexual parts-and am attracted to women—aka Lesbian. The labels don’t work I like the term queer. As a bisexual trans person, I like very well. (transgender woman)

Downloaded by [M. Paz Galupo] at 04:55 30 June 2016 using queer to sum up the otherness of it all. (female)

I am primarily asexual, but I think “queer” may apply, as “My orientation flipped”: Shifts in trans sexuality things get complicated sometimes. (genderqueer/FtM) A central theme to the way our trans participants discussed their sexuality was by noting the shifts in their In addition to providing their preferred sexual ori- sexual orientation. Most often this shift was discussed entation labels, transgender participants often quali- in terms of their gender identity. Sometimes this was fied their responses by including in their descriptions on the basis of their coming out to themselves or their sex/gender assigned at birth, their gender iden- others, “I identified as a straight woman before com- tity (present and past), the status of their bodies or ing to terms with being trans; now I identify as a gay body parts, and/or the way in which others classify man” (FtM or male). Often the shift in sexual orienta- them. tion was based on social or medical transition: “Cur- I feel heterosexual based on my birth gender, but lesbian rently I would be Gay, but after MTF-SRS I will be based on my gender-identity. I feel like I am a lesbian, Hetero” (female) and “My orientation flipped on but lesbians do not accept me as such. (female) HRT, but still straight” (female). This shift of sexual INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TRANSGENDERISM 99

orientation is consistent with past research that has This “focus on the beloved” (Weinrich, 2014) documented sexuality shifts among trans men follow- approach taken by our participants reduces sexual orien- ing testosterone use (Meier et al., 2013; Rowniak & tation from two parameters (requiring a match of identity Chesla, 2013). Our participants, however, saw the shift or characteristic of the individual to that of the beloveds) as relevant to their overall descriptors of sexuality. to one (characteristic of the beloved). These findings sup- In addition to gender-identity-specific attributions port Kuper et al.’s(2012) contention that some trans for shifts in trans sexuality, some participants individuals “may wish to represent their attractions in described their sexuality as changing across context ways that do not specifically reference their own sex or and time. gender, which may be in transition, fluid or not fully captured by gay, lesbian, or heterosexual identity labels.” (p. It changes and depends on the context. I sometimes say I am gay, fag queer, bi but lean towards men, that I don’t 251). This approach has also been shown to resonate have an orientation, gray asexual for stretches of time, with transgender individuals in the context of sexual ori- periods of time when I fantasize about cis women then I entation measurement (Galupo, Lomash, & Mitchell, lose interest … so queer. But gay. Basically, I don’t know 2016) as this system of classification is seen as more inclu- and I’ve given up trying to tie myself down, but my sive of trans individuals’ identity and experience. For attraction to men is a part of my identity and I think example, Galupo et al. (2016) describe a novel sexual ori- people assume I’m more interested in women as a trans guy if I say I’m queer. I’m much more immersed in gay entation measure, the Gender-Inclusive Scale, that male culture than queer culture. (male) assesses attraction to masculinity, femininity, androgyny, and gender nonconformity (in addition to attraction to These general shifts in sexuality are consistent with the same- and other-sex in the original version of the multidimensional measurements of sexual orientation, scale). Transgender individuals felt this measure better such as the Klein Sexual Orientation Grid, which captured their experience of sexuality than do traditional allows for measurement of attraction in the past, the measures of sexual orientation. The authors offer a slight present, and ideal contexts (Klein et al., 1985). These modification to address the wording of the same- and shifts are also reflective of general theories of sexual other-sex dimensions. The suggested version of the scale fluidity and flexibility (Diamond, 2008; Zinik, 1985). includes attraction to women, men, masculine individuals, feminine individuals, androgynous individuals, and Who “I’m attracted to,”“like,” and “date”: Focus on gender nonconforming individuals (Galupo et al., 2016). fi beloved This modi cation allows all six dimensions to be assessed without requiring individuals to describe their attractions Many of our participants described their sexuality in in reference to their own sex or gender designation. ways that avoided the use of traditional sexual orientation labels and favored instead descriptions that “ ”“ ”

Downloaded by [M. Paz Galupo] at 04:55 30 June 2016 Monogamy, polyamory, relationship style and focused on the characteristics that guide their attrac- status tion. Sometimes the descriptions focused on the identity of whom they were attracted to—I like girls Relationship style and status was an important context (transgender) and Tri-sexual (I like male female and for many of our trans participants when describing “ trans) (female). Sometimes descriptions included gen- their sexual orientation: Technically I am bi, but I der and gender expression: often just say gay since I am engaged to another man (male) and “Queer. Polyamorous. Submissive” ’ I m attracted to feminine, and/or females and/or androg- (agender). For some, it was the central factor or only … — ynous (other) or body parts I only like vaginas label provided by trans participants when describing gender expression is moot. (genderqueer) their sexuality.

People usually read me as a guy, which is close enough In a committed non monogamous relationship (poly- for comfort in most situations. People rarely read me as amorous) for 18 years with a cis-gendered woman who ﬁ genderqueer. Re sexual identities, I mostly date trans- has identi ed as straight, bi, and queer. (transfeminine) masculine genderqueers, sometimes trans men and occasionally non-trans men. (genderqueer FTM) Polyamorous. (transmasculine) 100 M. P. GALUPO ET AL.

This finding is consistent with recent research that and sexual attraction: “homoromantic asexual,” and has suggested that relational status and relationship “panromantic greysexual.” type play a role in some individuals’ conceptualization Others provided more detail in their descriptions of sexual orientation (Galupo, Mitchell, et al., 2014), regarding the way sexual/romantic attraction may be and these relational factors may account for shifts in more or less important to their experience. sexuality across time and context (Manley, Diamond, I also consider myself grey-asexual, in the sense that I & van Anders, 2015). seem to feel about sex the way most people feel about bowling. On occasion, I am attracted to people, but I “Power exchange friendly”: Sexuality, BDSM, and don’t seem to be as interested in that whole area of life kink as most people. (male side of neutral) Another theme that emerged from the way our While I am gay and attracted 99% to men (I only want to participants described their sexuality included ele- have romance with men, only strongly desire or go out ments of BDSM and kink. Sometimes this was indi- of my way for relationships with men) sexually I am cated with single labels, (“BDSM”), or in reference more flexible and would fuck a girl, although I wouldn’t to particular roles (“submissive,” Switch boi, pan- want to commit to her etc. I don’t have interest in spe- sexual,” and “demisexual submissive”). Others pro- cific females the way I do with males. (male) vided more context regarding this aspect of their sexuality. I’m not attracted to much of anyone these days. On the other hand, my interest in having sex (with any gender) I am orientated to people based on their heart and not is rather high. (mtf but a little nonbinary) their genitals. My sexuality is also sensitive to power and kinky dynamics. (female to guy) Gray a, almost asexual in addition to being pan. (agender) I’m into bdsm and the daddy C boy dynamic. (ftm/ genderqueer) Pan-romantic, The idea that you can be romantically involved with out being lustful, so you can have two Power exchange friendly. (m2f transsexual pre-op) straight men dating they may have sex, but it’s because of the proximity they have together and the amount I am a sex worker and heavily into BDSM. (nonbinary) they care for another not because of the lust. (agender) ’ Our participants responses regarding BDSM and Asexual due to end stage cancer. (male) kink go beyond framing their involvement as an individual or community experience. Rather, these find- The disaggregation of sexual and romantic

Downloaded by [M. Paz Galupo] at 04:55 30 June 2016 ings suggest that for some transgender individuals attraction is often highlighted in the asexuality lit- BDSM and kink are seen as relevant to the core of erature. Consistent with the way asexual individu- their sexual orientation and identity. These ﬁndings als often endorse dual identity labels to make the resonate with emerging theories of BDSM as inform- distinction explicit (Flore, 2014;Przbylo,2013)it ing sexual identity (Bauer, 2014) and even of being a is important to note that even nonasexual/verisex- type of sexual orientation (Gemberling, Cramer, & ual individuals ﬁnd the distinction meaningful Miller, 2015). (Galupo, Lomash, & Mitchell, 2016). This was made clear in our trans participants’ responses “I feel about sex the way most people feel about where sexual and romantic attraction were bowling”: Separating sexual and romantic attraction described in discordant ways. Many participants described their sexuality in ways Conclusions that made distinctions between sexual and romantic attraction. Sometimes this was indicated by using one The present research focuses on understanding trans- label: “Aromantic,”“Gray-A,”“autosexual,” and gender sexuality from the perspective of trans individ- “demisexual.” Sometimes two separate labels were uals by exploring the sexual identity labels they used to document the discordance between romantic choose, the descriptions they provide for these labels, INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TRANSGENDERISM 101

and their general descriptions of their sexuality. In Wright, & Mustanski, 2014; Levitt, Horne, Puckett, addition to providing a fuller characterization of Sweeney, & Hampton, 2015). Additional research is transgender sexuality it has been suggested that a sub- necessary to evaluate whether the themes identified in ject-focused investigation of sexuality is needed to dis- the present research related to transgender sexuality rupt the assumptions of the dominant frameworks of would resonate with transgender and gender-noncon- sexuality (Hammack, Mayers, & Windell, 2013). As forming people of color. such, this approach may also inform alternative ways Despite the limitations of recruitment, we received for conceptualizing sexuality in general. In particular, a geographically diverse sample with a strong repre- by centering on transgender experience, the present sentation across gender identities. The present research allows a conceptualization of transgender research extends the current transgender sexuality sexuality outside of the traditional research frame- research by including individuals who endorse gen- works that problematize transgender experience, con- der-identity labels within both transfeminine and flate gender identity and sexual orientation, and transmasculine spectrums and also by including indi- inherently define transgender experience in both cis- viduals who identify as gender variant/nonbinary and normative and heteronormative terms. agender. We did find demographic differences across transfeminine, transmasculine, gender variant, and agender participants with regard to age, sex assigned Limitations and directions for future research at birth, and primary sexual orientation identity. We recruited participants who identify as transgender, Future research is needed, however, to consider how transsexual, gender variant, or having a transgender the themes described in the present research might be history, which we used as broad terms intended to similarly or differently expressed across participants’ encompass many different gender identities. Because gender identity. our recruitment strategy emphasized recruitment through transgender community resources, individu- Implications for research and theory als who see their trans experience as more of a history or status may be underrepresented within our sample. Participants described their sexuality in ways that Although our intention was to recruit broadly within challenge traditional research frameworks for under- the transgender communities, it is important to note standing transgender experience. The medical litera- that the use of transgender as an umbrella term is ture in particular has used “biological/anatomical” sex rooted in White middle- to upper-class conceptualiza- as a basis for classifying the sexual orientation of tions of gender and can function to erase distinct sub- transgender individuals (Blanchard, 1989b; DSM-III; groups (Valentine, 2007), which may partially account Hammack, Mayers, & Windell, 2013). However, our for why less than 25% of our participants identified as participants did not use biological indicators of sex/ Downloaded by [M. Paz Galupo] at 04:55 30 June 2016 racial minorities. gender as the sole basis for describing their sexual ori- Our sample demographics may have also been entation, and in many cases it was not a factor at all. impacted by our choice to recruit our participants Rather, individual (gender) identity was more likely to online. Participants represented a convenience sample guide sexual orientation self-identification. This find- collected online. Although online sampling is useful ing was consistent with recent qualitative research on for LGBTQ research, where privacy and access issues critiques of sexual orientation measures where partici- are unique from the general population (Riggle, pants’ sexual and gender identities were central to the Rostosky, & Reedy, 2005), online samples have been way in which they viewed sexual orientation (Galupo, shown to disproportionately represent educated, mid- Davis, et al., 2014). In addition to being more likely to dle class, White individuals (Dillman, Smyth, & Chris- focus on gender identity (versus gender/sex) our par- tian, 2008). Because our sample demographics reflect ticipants described their sexuality in ways that this trend, interpretation of our findings should be highlighted fluidity, relational factors, and a disaggre- done within the noted demographics. This is particu- gation of sexual and romantic attraction. Participants larly important given that recent research has also described their sexual orientation in reference to highlighted the way gender and sexuality may be transgender-specific experiences. For example, partici- uniquely experienced among people of color (Kuper, pants described shifts in their sexual attraction and 102 M. P. GALUPO ET AL.

sexual identities that they attributed to coming out as sexualities and gender identities, while making distinc- trans to themselves or others and/or to transition-spe- tions between eroticism and nurturance (which paral- cific experiences (e.g., hormone therapy, gender affir- lels the way our participants’ discuss sexual/romantic mation treatments and surgeries). attraction). Van Anders’s model moves beyond a These findings have important implications for focus on just gender or sex and adopts an integrated sexual orientation researchers, who should note the gender/sex framework by including both socialization unique context in which transgender individuals and biology/evolution while also remaining sensitive experience and define their sexuality. This may be to identity. particularly important when interpreting trans indi- The present findings suggest that a reframe around viduals’ scores on traditional measures of sexual gender/sex is critical for making trans identities visible orientation or when trans individuals are given in a model of sexuality. By including identities not forced-choice labels and grouped based on sexual specifically related to binary conceptualizations of sex identity for research purposes. Caution should also or gender, van Anders’s(2015) gender/sex framework be exercised when comparing sexual orientation or is inclusive of multiple labels including “woman, man, identity labels across transgender and cisgender trans woman, trans man, ciswoman, cisman, gender- individuals. Recent research has focused on the queer, intersex.” By allowing for binary/nonbinary development of sexual orientation measures that and cisgender/transgender articulations of gender/sex, better capture the experience of transgender indi- the types of nuanced dimensions of sexuality provided viduals (such as the Gender Inclusive Scale by our participants are able to come into view. Future described earlier in this article). The Gender Inclu- research is needed to consider the ways that transgen- sive Scale may represent a measure of sexual orien- der individuals’ experiences of sexuality directly map tation that avoids cisgender assumptions present in onto these new ways of measuring or theorizing about traditional scales (Galupo et al., 2016)whilestill sexuality. resonating with cisgender experience. fi The present ndings also have important implica- Notes tions for transgender researchers, as they suggest a need to expand our understanding of transgender sex- 1. We use plurisexual to refer to identities that are not explic- fl itly based on attraction to one sex and leave open the uality in ways that better re ect the lived experience of — fi potential for attraction to more than one sex/gender for trans individuals. In particular, these ndings point to example, bisexual, pansexual, queer, and fluid. The term the need to conceptualize transgender sexuality in a plurisexual is used instead of nonmonosexual because the way that decenters models of sexual orientation from former does not linguistically assume monosexual as the exclusively focusing on gender/sex or from making ideal conceptualization of sexuality (see Galupo, Davis, cisnormative assumptions. One such example is the Grynkiewicz, & Mitchell, 2014). Downloaded by [M. Paz Galupo] at 04:55 30 June 2016 2. When discussing the results of the present study and when recent work of Tate (2012), who posits two lesbian referring to our participants, we use the term trans as an identity models that acknowledge trans identities. The inclusive term to be sensitive to the range of gender identi- current identity model includes cisgender women, ties endorsed by our participants. transgender women, and genderqueer (female identi- fi fi ed) individuals within the de nition of lesbian; the Funding life-course identity model also includes transgender men and genderqueer individuals of all identities as This research was supported by a research grant from the American Institute of Bisexuality awarded to the first author. long as they identified as female at some point in their life. By allowing for the possibility of gender diversity, Tate (2012) provides a way for conceptualizing lesbian References identity that does not assume a cisgender identity. Van Anders (2015) provides a new and comprehen- American Psychiatric Association. (1980). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (3rd ed.). Washington, sive framework for understanding sexuality that DC: American Psychiatric Association. extends beyond traditional theories of sexual orienta- American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and sta- tion. Sexual Configurations Theory (SCT) is a model tistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed., text rev.). of partnered sexuality that is inclusive of diverse Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TRANSGENDERISM 103

American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and sta- Flore, J. (2014). Mismeasures of asexual desires. In K. J. Ceran- tistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). Washington, kowski & M. Milks (Eds.), Asexualities: Feminist and queer DC: American Psychiatric Association. perspectives (pp. 17–34). New York, NY: Routledge. Bauer, R. (2014). Queer BDSM intimacies: Critical consent and Galupo, M. P., Bauerband, L. A., Gonzalez, K. A., Hagen, D. B., pushing boundaries. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan. Hether, S., & Krum, T. (2014). Transgender friendship Blanchard, R. (1989a). The concept of autogynephilia and the experiences: Benefits and barriers of friendships across gen- typology of male gender dysphoria. Journal of Nervous and der identity and sexual orientation. Feminism and Psychol- Mental Disease, 177, 616–623. ogy, 24(2), 183–215. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/ Blanchard, R. (1989b). The classification and labeling of non- 10.1177/0959353514526218 homosexual gender dysphorias. Archives of Sexual Behavior, Galupo, M. P., Davis, K. S., Grynkiewicz, A. L., & Mitchell, R. 18, 315–324. C. (2014). Conceptualization of sexual orientation identity Bockting, W. O., Benner, A., & Coleman, E. (2009). Gay and among sexual minorities: Patterns across sexual and gender bisexual identity development among female-to-male trans- identity. Journal of Bisexuality, 14, 433–456. Retrieved from sexuals in North America: Emergence of a transgender sex- http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15299716.2014.933466 uality. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 38, 688–701. Retrieved Galupo, M. P., Lomash, E., & Mitchell, R. C. (2016). “All of my from http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10508-009-9489-3 lovers fit into this scale”: Sexual minority individuals’ Bockting, W. O., & Coleman, E. (1991). A comment on the responses to two novel measures of sexual orientation. Jour- concept of transhomosexuality, or the dissociation of the nal of Homosexuality, online advanced publication. meaning. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 20(4), 419–421. Galupo, M. P., Mitchell, R. C., & Davis, K. S. (2015). Sexual Braun,V.,&Clarke,V.(2006).Usingthematicanalysisinpsy- minority self-identification: Multiple identities and com- chology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3,77–101. plexity. Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diver- Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa sity. Advance online publication. Coleman, E., Bockting, W. O., & Gooren, L. (1993). Homosex- Galupo,M.P.,Mitchell,R.C.,Grynkiewicz,A.L.,&Davis,K.S. ual and bisexual identity in sex-reassigned female-to-male (2014). Sexual minority reflections on the Kinsey Scale and transsexuals. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 22(1), 37–50. the Klein Sexual Orientation Grid: Conceptualization and Dargie,E.,Blair,K.,Pukall,C.,&Coyle,S.(2014).Somewhere measurement. Journal of Bisexuality, 14,404–432. Retrieved under the rainbow: Exploring the identities and experiences from http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15299716.2014.929553 of trans persons. Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality, 23 Gemberling, Cramer, & Miller. (2015). BDSM as sexual orien- (2), 69–74. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.3138/cjhs.2378 tation: A comparison to lesbian, gay, and bisexual sexuality. Devor, H. (1993). Sexual orientation identities, attractions, and Journal of Positive Sexuality, 1,37–43. practices of female-to-male transsexuals. Journal of Sex Hammack, P. L., Mayers, L, & Windell, E. P. (2013). Narrative, Research, 30(4), 303–315. Retrieved from http://www.jstor. psychology and the politics of sexual identity in the United org/stable/3813004. States: From “sickness” to “species” to “subject.” Psychology Diamond, L. M. (2003). What does sexual orientation orient? A and Sexuality, 4(3), 219–243. Retrieved from http://dx.doi. biobehavioral model distinguishing romantic love and sexual org/10.1080/19419899.2011.621131 desire. Psychological Review, 110(1), 173–192. Retrieved from Hill, D. B., & Willoughby, B. L. B. (2005). The development http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.110.1.173 and validation of the genderism and transphobia scale. Sex Diamond, L. M. (2008). Sexual fluidity: Understanding wom- Roles, 53, 531–544. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/ Downloaded by [M. Paz Galupo] at 04:55 30 June 2016 en’s love and desire. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University 10.1007/s11199-005-7140-x Press. Hines, S. (2007). Transforming gender: Transgender practices of Diamond, L., Pardo, S. T., & Butterworth, M. R. (2011). Trans- identity, intimacy, and care. Bristol, UK: Policy Press. gender experience and identity. In S. J. Schwartz, K. Luyckx Kinsey, A., Pomeroy, W. B., & Martin, C. E. (1948). Sexual & V. L. Vignoles (Eds.), Handbook of identity theory and behavior in the human male. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders. research (Vol. 2, pp. 629–647). New York, NY: Springer. Klein, F., Sepekoff, B., & Wolf, T. (1985). Sexual orientation: A Dillman, D., Smyth, J., & Christian, L. M. (2008). Internet, multivariate dynamic process. Journal of Homosexuality, mail, and mixed-mode surveys: The tailored design method. 11,35–49. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/ New York, NY: Wiley. J082v11n01_04 Dozier, R. (2005). Beards, breasts, and bodies: Doing sex in a Kuper, L. E., Nussbaum, R., & Mustanski, B. (2012). Exploring gendered world. Gender and Society, 19, 297–316. Retrieved the diversity of gender and sexual orientation identities in from http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0891243204272153 an online sample of transgender individuals. Journal of Sex Fassinger, R. E., & Arseneau, J. R. (2007). “I’d rather get wet Research, 49, 244–254. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/ than be under the umbrella”: Differentiating the experien- 10.1080/00224499.2011.596954 ces and identities of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender Kuper, L. E., Wright, L., & Mustanski, B. (2014). Stud identity people. In K. J. Biesche, R. M. Perez & K. A. DeBord (Eds.), among female-born youth of color: Joint conceptualizations Handbook of counseling and psychotherapy with lesbian, of gender variance and same-sex sexuality. Journal of gay, bisexual, and transgender clients (pp. 19–49). Washing- Homosexuality, 61(5), 714–731. Retrieved from http://dx. ton, DC: American Psychological Association. doi.org/10.1080/00918369.2014.870443 104 M. P. GALUPO ET AL.

Laumann,E.,Gagnon,J.H.,Michael,R.T.,&Michaels,S. American Psychological Association. Retrieved from http//dx. (1994). The social organization of sexuality: Sexual practices doi.org/10.1037/14193-018 in the United States. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Rowniak, S., & Chesla, C. (2013). Coming out for a third time: Lev, A. (2004). Transgender emergence: Therapeutic guidelines Transmen, sexual orientation, and identity. Archives of Sex- for working with gender-variant people and their families. ual Behavior, 42, 449–461. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/ New York, NY: Haworth Clinical Practice Press. 10.1007/s10508-012-0036-2 Levitt,H.M.,Horne,S.G.,Puckett,J.C.,Sweeney,K.K., Savin-Williams, R. C. (2010). Sexual orientation label (7-point). & Hampton, M. (2015). Gay Families: Challenging Retrieved from http://www.human.cornell.edu/hd/sexgen Racial and Sexual/Gender Minority Stressors through der/research.cfm. Social Support. Journal of GLBT Family Studies, 11(2), Serano, J. M. (2010). The case against autogynephilia. Interna- 173–202. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ tional Journal of Transgenderism, 12(3), 176–187. Retrieved 1550428X.2014.958266 from http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15532739.2010.514223 Manley, M. H., Diamond, L. M., & van Anders, S. M. (2015). Spade, D. (2011). About purportedly gendered body parts. Polyamory, monoamory, and sexual fluidity: A longitudinal Retrieved from http://www.deanspade.net/wp-content/ study of identity and sexual trajectories. Psychology of Sex- uploads/2011/02/Purportedly-Gendered-Body-Parts.pdf. ual Orientation and Gender Diversity, 2(2), 168–180. Tate, C. C. (2012). Considering lesbian identity from a social- Meier, S. C., Pardo, S. T., Labuski, C., & Babcock, J. (2013). psychological perspective: Two different models of “being a Measures of clinical health among female-to-male transgen- lesbian.” Journal of Lesbian Studies, 16(1), 17–29. Retrieved der persons as a function of sexual orientation. Archives of from http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10894160.2011.557639 Sexual Behavior, 42, 463–474. Retrieved from http://dx.doi. Valentine, D. (2007). Imagining Transgender: An ethnography org/10.1007/s10508-012-0052-2 of a category. Durham, NC and London, UK: Duke Univer- Moser, C. (2010). Blanchard’s autogynephilia theory: A cri- sity Press. tique. Journal of Homosexuality, 57(6), 790–809. Retrieved Van Anders, S. M. (2015). Beyond sexual orientation: Integrating from http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00918369.2010.486241 gender/sex and diverse sexualities in sexual configurations the- Nadal, K. L., Skolnik, A., & Wong, Y. (2012). Interpersonal and ory. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 44(5), 1177–1213. systemic microaggressions toward transgender people: Veale, J. F., Clarke, D. E., & Lomax, T. C. (2008). Sexuality of Implications for counseling. Journal of LGBT Issues in male-to-female transsexuals. Archives of Sexual Behavior, Counseling, 6(1), 55–82. 37(4), 586–597. doi:10.1007/s10508-007-9306-9 Nagoshi,J.L.,Adams,K.A.,Terrell,H.K.,Hill,E.D.,Brzuzy, Veale, J. F., Clarke, D. E., & Lomax, T. C. (2012). Male-to- S., & Nagoshi, C. T. (2008). Gender differences in correlates female transsexuals’ impressions of Blanchard’s autogyne- of homophobia and transphobia. Sex Roles, 59,521–531. philia theory. International Journal of Transgenderism, 13, Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11199-008-9458-7 113–139. Przybylo, E. (2013). Producing facts: Empirical asexuality and Weiss, J. T. (2004). GL vs. BT: The archaeology of biphobia the scientific study of sex. Feminism and Psychology, 23(2), and transphobia in the U.S. lesbian and gay community. 221–242. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/ Journal of Bisexuality, 3,25–55.Retrieved from http://dx. 0959353512443668 doi.org/10.1080/1553273 Riggle, E. D. B., Rostosky, S. S., & Reedy, C. S. (2005). Online Weinrich, J. D. (2014). Multidimensional measurement of sex- surveys for BGLT research. Journal of Homosexuality, 49,1– ual orientation: Ideal. Journal of Bisexuality, 14(3–4), 544– Downloaded by [M. Paz Galupo] at 04:55 30 June 2016 21. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J082v49n01-01 556. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15299716. Rosario, M., & Schrimshaw, E. W. (2014). Theories and etiolo- 2014.960958 gies of sexual orientation. In D. L. Tolman & L. M. Diamond Zinik, G. (1985). Identity conflict of adaptive flexibility? Bisex- (Eds.), APA handbook of sexuality and psychology: Vol. 1. uality reconsidered. Journal of Homosexuality, 11,7–20. Person-based approaches (pp. 555–596). Washington, DC: Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J082v11n01_02