“We are fewer but not weaker”: Understanding the intersectional identities among Chinese immigrant young gay men in Toronto

Abstract

Background and Purpose: Sexual minorities (i.e., lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender) of color in North America are frequently defined as a “double minority” group. Intersectionality theory has inspired investigations into how different forms of marginalization intersect to shape the lives of people with multiple minority statuses. Along this line, sexual minorities of color are assumed to be prone to internal identity conflicts and intersectional minority stress. However, intersectionality research has not yielded univocal evidence for the premise that sexual minorities of color have worse psychosocial outcomes than those with a single minority status. Moreover, intersectionality theory has been criticized for reinforcing a deficit-focused view and drawing our attention to the experience of oppression among sexual minorities of color while overlooking their agency and strengths in negotiating intersectional identities and maintaining a thriving life. To empirically examine the notion of intersectionality, this study uses interview data collected from Chinese immigrant gay men to answer a research question: How do Chinese immigrant gay men understand, experience, and negotiate their intersectional identities? Methods: In this constructivist grounded theory study, 18 Chinese immigrant gay men aged between 18 and 28 participated in a semi-structured individual interview to narrate their lived experiences related to their intersectional identities. All participants needed to move to Canada when they were 12 years old or older. All interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed through a constant comparative method where the transcripts were first coded line-by-line to generate initial codes and categories, followed by a focused coding process to identify relevant themes. Memoing, audit trails, and peer consultations were used to ensure study rigor. Results: Several themes pertaining to intersectionality emerged from the data. First, study participants perceive their sexual identity as either compatible with or irrelevant to their cultural identity and do not experience negotiating conflicts between their sexual and cultural identities. Second, the intersectionality is context-specific. While rejecting ubiquitous existence of intersectional oppression, study participants have experienced certain form of marginalization that occurs in the contexts of disclosing the gay identity to their Chinese friends/families and finding a dating partner within a gay community. Third, participants consider the label of “double minority” oversimplified and derogatory. They emphasize that their daily lives are located in a complex power structure that is constituted by more than two identity categories. As well, the marginalization based on their ethnic and sexual identities weighs differently and should not be understood as simple math. Lastly, while carrying the status of being a minority, these gay men indicate that their intersectional identities, in fact, serve as a source of social support. Conclusions and Implications: This study contributes to the knowledge base around intersectionality by uncovering its qualitative nuance and brings to light its contextual specificity. The simplistic view of Chinese immigrant gay men as a “double minority” group should be challenged. Social work practitioners who work with this population should begin with a genuine understanding of these men’s lived experiences, and approach it from an asset-focused, rather than a deficit-focused orientation.