Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
ABSTRACT LGBTIQ+ research acknowledges shared experiences of groups marginalized due to gender identities, sexualities, and sex characteristics. This universalist coalition approach has resulted in much affirmational research and progressive policy development. However, it risks homogenizing the unique experiences and needs of specific groups; a risk lessened by a particularist subgroup approach. In this theoretical paper, we reflect on the challenges of a coalition or subgroup approach by considering interdependencies and boundaries between sex, gender, and sexuality‐based identities. Through tracing the historical development of LGBTIQ+ research and activism and using examples from intersex studies, intersectionality, and political actions, we explore tensions between the collective identities that make up the LGBTIQ+ acronym. We further offer suggestions for reimagining LGBTIQ+ research, advocating for community‐driven approaches that respect the situated knowledge of LGBTIQ+ individuals, and use adaptable and inclusive research practices that bridge academia and activism that aim to improve the lives of the marginalized.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Amanda Klysing
Marta Prandelli
Miguel Roselló‐Peñaloza
Journal of Social Issues
Lund University
University of Massachusetts Boston
Clark University
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Klysing et al. (Tue,) studied this question.
www.synapsesocial.com/papers/68e58de3b6db643587529775 — DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12634
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: