Beyond minority stress: Toward a multidimensional psychology of trans/nonbinary gender

Feelings of LGBTQ+ community belonging among diverse youth with LGBTQ+ parents in the United States.

“…Some expressed that the LGBTQ+ community was not fully accepting of gender-expansive identities, even if an active local community was present. This aligns with literature on the LGBTQ+ community (McCormick & Barthelemy, 2021), with predictions from minority stress theory (Brooks, 1981; Levitt et al, 2023; Meyer, 2003), and with current anti-LGBTQ+ legislative efforts targeting trans and gender-diverse identities (Miller, 2023). People with marginalized gender identities face prejudice from LGB individuals who continue to emphasize gender as binary (Levitt et al, 2023).…”

“…Minority stress theory considers the impact of systemic and structural social inequality on people with marginalized identities (Brooks, 1981;Meyer, 2003). LGBTQ+ community members endure unique stressors stemming from law, policy, institutions, and cultural norms (Levitt et al, 2023;Meyer, 2003). Stigma toward those with LGBTQ+ parents appears regularly in hateful speech and challenges to family identity (e.g., asking a child who their "real" parent is; Breshears & Braithwaite, 2014;Cody et al, 2017;Farr et al, 2016).…”

Parental burnout, coparenting, and internalized sexual stigma during COVID-19 in parents with minoritized sexual identities.

“…Thirdly, although providing vital information about protective factors, the sexual minority stress framework (Brooks, 1981; Meyer, 2003) alone risks perpetuating a deficit-focused view of minoritized people by emphasizing the negative aspects associated with sexual and gender stigma (Levitt et al, 2023). To overcome these issues, future research and clinical interventions with lesbian and gay parents should incorporate the positive psychology framework (e.g., Horne et al, 2014; Levitt et al, 2023; Scandurra et al, 2023) to emphasize the strengths and the resources resulting from their minoritized sexual identities, including parental affirmation as a minoritized group and connectedness to the lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, and queer community (Horne et al, 2014). Such aspects need to be addressed by research and clinic as they may be protective against parental burnout.…”

Social Support, Identity Affirmation, and Psychological Well-Being: A Developmental and Intersectional Comparison between Italian Cisgender and Non-Binary People with Bisexual Orientation

“…The predominant theoretical framework in LGBTQ+ health research capable of explaining the psychosocial determinants of these health disparities is minority stress theory (MST), which posits that the stress experienced by people with a minority identity (i.e., due to poorer access to health, social, and economic resources than people who belong to a “majority” group, such as heterosexual and cisgender people) mediates the association between social minority status and health [ 6 ]. Although MST highlights the presence of significant resilience strategies that LGBTQ+ people use to protect themselves (e.g., social support, that is the function and quality of social relationships such as support received or perceived availability of help), recent research conducted within the framework of positive psychology [ 7 , 8 ] urges further emphasis on the resources and agency of this population by focusing on the positive aspects of LGBTQ+ identity to avoid propagating a portrayal of this population as powerless [ 9 ]. At the same time, recent research within the framework of intersectionality has increasingly emphasized the importance of viewing the bisexual population as nonhomogeneous [ 10 , 11 ].…”

“…Although MST is one of the most valuable frameworks for understanding LGBTQ+ health, three significant challenges should be considered. First, some scholars have recently criticized MST for its risk of generating negative narratives about LGBTQ+ people, although MST has played a critical role in depathologizing LGBTQ+ identity, strongly supporting the need for advocacy, and highlighting the presence of significant protective factors that can activate this population [ 8 ]. Nevertheless, most research in this area tends to describe LGBTQ+ people as stigmatized and powerless individuals who experience their sexual orientation and gender identity as catalysts of oppression.…”