“Even If the Policy Changes, the Culture Remains the Same”: A Mixed Methods Analysis of LGBT Service Members’ Outness Patterns

Abstract

Despite repeal of the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy in 2011 and the ban on open transgender service from 2016 to 2019, lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) service members may be reluctant to disclose their identities to fellow military personnel. This study used data collected through the Department of Defense–funded mixed methods research study conducted from 2016 to 2018. A sample of 248 active duty LGBT service members completed a survey, while a sample of 42 LGBT active duty service members participated in an in-depth interview. Regression analyses tested for differences in outness by demographic and military traits; a thematic analysis of qualitative data contextualizes these findings. Outness to fellow service members varied greatly by rank, military branch, education level, sexual orientation, gender identity, and marital status. The lowest outness was to chaplains (38%), while the highest outness was to LGBT unit friends (93%). Implications for military leadership and service providers are discussed.

Acceptance matters: Disengagement and attrition among LGBT personnel in the U.S. military

“…Previous research on this community has found that some LGBT SMs, despite the repeal of DADT and the short-lived initial repeal of the transgender ban, continue to fear negative career repercussions as a result of LGBT disclosure to military colleagues, commanders, medical providers, counsellors, and chaplains. 21,37,45 These findings align with this study's results, because this community noted overall lower unit cohesion and LGBT unit acceptance. Research has found that higher perceived acceptance of one's LGB identity in the unit was associated with a decrease in posttraumatic stress, anxiety, depression symptomatology.46 Moreover, Schuyler et al and Klemmer et al found that LGBT SMs are at heightened risk for sexual harassment, assault, and stalking, and one study found that LGBT victimization was associated with elevated mental and physical health symptoms and with accessing mental health treatment.…”

“…Further information on study design, recruitment, and procedures can be found in McNamara et al and Schuyler and Klemmer. 21,22,37 The Human Protection Office of the U.S. military and the institutional review boards at the University of Southern California and University of California, Los Angeles, granted ethical approval for this study.…”

“…Other publications from the broader research project describe collection of these items in detail. 21,22,40 Analyses Data cleaning and analyses were completed using Stata version 15.1. 41 Analyses included χ 2 tests to estimate percentages and identify differences between groups (sexual orientation, gender, age, race, partnership status, education level, rank, branch of service, years of service, and deployment history) for further exploration in regression analyses and multinomial logistic regressions to calculate relative risk ratios and adjusted R2.While assessing for missingness in the data, the LGBT Climate Inventory was found to have 8% missingness; multiple imputation was used to impute mean scores for observations missing this measure.…”

“…20 It is therefore unsurprising that LGBT SMs of the U.S. military have reported barriers and fears of outness in service. 21 For example, a recent qualitative analysis of LGBT outness in the military found that nearly half of LGBT SMs interviewed were cautious in their identity disclosure because of feared misalignment between the accepting policy toward LGB personnel and the climate in which they work. 13 Half of respondents reported vigilance for cues of LGBT acceptance or rejection from other military members before disclosure.…”

Perceptions of family acceptance into the military community among U.S. LGBT service members: A mixed-methods study

“…This study is a secondary analysis of data collected in 2016-2018 as part of the DoD-funded Military Acceptance Project, which examined acceptance and integration of active-duty LGBT SMs and suggested that repeal of DADT, although monumental and much needed, did not uniformly build a climate of LGB inclusion in the military. 40 Data were collected during a period when transgender SMs could serve openly. In Phase 1 of this study, 42 LGBT SMs participated in interviews.…”