‘The big ole gay express’: sexual minority stigma, mobility and health in the small city

Abstract

Recent research has examined how gay and bisexual men experience and navigate the variations in sexual minority stigma that exist across geographic contexts, with implications for their health. We extend this literature on stigma, mobility, and health by considering the unique and understudied setting of the small city. Drawing on semi-structured interviews (n = 29) conducted in two small US cities (New Haven and Hartford), we find that these small cities serve as both destinations and points of departure for gay and bisexual men in the context of stigma. New Haven and Hartford attracted gay and bisexual men from surrounding suburbs where sexual minority stigma was more prevalent and where there were fewer spaces and opportunities for gay life. Conversely, participants noted that these small cities did not contain the same identity affirming communities as urban gay enclaves, thus motivating movement from small cities to larger ones. Our data suggest these forms of mobility may mitigate stigma, but may also produce sexual health risks, thus drawing attention to small cities as uniquely important sites for HIV prevention. Furthermore, our analysis contributes to an understanding of how place, stigma and mobility can intersect to generate spatially distinct experiences of stigmatised identities and related health consequences.

The Geography of Sexual Orientation: Structural Stigma and Sexual Attraction, Behavior, and Identity Among Men Who Have Sex with Men Across 38 European Countries

“…Previous research shows inverse associations between local population size and structural stigma toward sexual minorities (Pachankis, Hatzenbuehler, & Starks, 2014). Less densely populated areas might contain less visible gay communities, or gay-related infrastructure, thereby perpetuating stigma toward MSM as well as providing fewer opportunities for MSM to locate and meet same-sex partners (Keene, Eldahan, White Hughto, & Pachankis, 2016; Weeks, 1985). In smaller towns/cities, therefore, identifying as heterosexual or bisexual and having sex with women might not only protect against discrimination but might also maximize sexual opportunities against a backdrop of constrained options.…”

“You Can’t Just Walk Down the Street and Meet Someone”: The Intersection of Social–Sexual Networking Technology, Stigma, and Health Among Gay and Bisexual Men in the Small City

“…Small cities represent unique and important environments in which to study social–sexual networking technologies among gay and bisexual men, given that small cities contain gay spaces and communities that may attract men from smaller towns, yet lack the plethora of brick-and-mortar spaces present in larger gay enclaves. Small cities also represent unique environments in terms of sexual minority stigma (Herrera & Scott, 2005; Keene, Eldahan, White Hughto, & Pachankis, 2016), given their placement at the crossroads between often socially conservative rural communities and generally more liberal urban areas (Knight, Tilcsik, & Anteby, 2016; McVeigh & Maria-Elena, 2009). Technology use in small cities may be shaped by these geographic variations in sexual minority stigma (Hatzenbuehler, Keyes, & Hasin, 2009; Hatzenbuehler, McLaughlin, Keyes, & Hasin, 2010).…”

Spatial Distribution of Partner-Seeking Men Who Have Sex With Men Using Geosocial Networking Apps: Epidemiologic Study (Preprint)

“…Smaller cities often differ from larger cities in terms of stigma [29,30] and availability of visible gay spaces [31][32][33]. As others have noted, research on sexual health and appfacilitated sexual behavior among MSM in mid-sized cities is limited [34][35][36].…”