MINISTERIO DE AMBIENTE Y ESPACIO PÚBLICO

Three respondents had identified as bisexual at some point in their life (Liz, Carla and Fern). Fern (the only respondent identifying as bisexual at the time of the research) was positive about her bisexuality from the age of 14 when she told a youth worker that she liked girls. On being given a booklet entitled ‘I think I’m a lesbian, now what?’ Fern was very clear that lesbian was not the label that fitted her feelings or sexual identity. As a consequence, Fern decided to do her own research at the local library, so demonstrating ‘great confidence ... [and] asking the librarian to

order some books’ about bisexuality despite her young age. Liz identified as bisexual from the age

of sixteen until she was in a settled relationship with a woman at the age of thirty when she began to name herself lesbian. Carla identified as bisexual from the age of about twelve until she was fifteen but was not openly out as bisexual or gay until the age of seventeen. Since then Carla has identified as gay or queer rather than bisexual. Two other respondents had had relationships with boys or men but did not identify as bisexual. Issie, who in her teen years had flirtations with both girls and boys only had relationships with women since she was about seventeen and was very clear, even passionate, that she never saw herself as bisexual. Rosie had had a short sexual relationship with a man with whom she then had a child. She worked at staying in this relationship because she wanted her child to have a father as she felt that she had suffered for having grown

110 | P a g e

up in poverty with a single mother. She was still close friends with this man but had not had an intimate relationship with any man since.

This reluctance to name oneself as bisexual may link to the biphobia often found within lesbian or gay communities (Monro, 2015). Interestingly, Fern felt that she faced ‘less oppression as a

bisexual woman’ than women identifying as homosexual. This is a perception that is at odds with

the literature which suggests that bisexual women are likely to suffer more oppression as they face both homophobia and biphobia (Monro, 2015) as discussed above (3.1.5).

Eight respondents talked about having had close friendships with boys in their younger days, often to hide their sexuality from their peers or parents (Amy, Beth, Gaby, Issie, Liz, Nell, Sabidah and Rosie). For some, these close male friends might have been gay or bisexual themselves (as in the cases of Amy and Beth) or just accepting that the respondent did not want to have a physical relationship with them (for Nell). These friendships were often important and ensured that respondents were safe from some hostility as they were not so likely to be labelled as gay and therefore not so vulnerable to bullying. Issie pointed out that her experiences in her teens reflected this. She recounted that her interest ‘in boys as well as girls [meant that] ... people couldn’t put me into a box’. Gaby said that she ‘made up crushes on male teachers’ when in fact it was women teachers that she fancied. Liz talked about having a series of relationships with men when she was quite young so that she ‘never had time to think’ about her sexuality, although as noted above she did identify as bisexual from being sixteen to her mid-thirties. Other respondents noted that they had never had any interest, pretend or otherwise, with boys (Jane and Marie). The usefulness of finding support from male friends is noted in other research (Bragg et al, 2018) where young women had ‘respectful male friends … or boy true friends … who supported … [them] in their non-conformity’ (Bragg et al, 2018, p425).

The discussion regarding bisexuality might confirm the suggestion within the literature of biphobia within lesbian and gay communities (following Monro, 2015). Despite having had sexual attractions or relationships with men these respondents were mostly not comfortable with naming themselves as bisexual.

Conclusion

The variety of coming out stories shared by respondents suggests a breadth of different approaches to managing their transitions from young person to an out and proud LGBQ adult.

111 | P a g e

Coming out was, for all respondents, an on ongoing process of ‘self-definition and self- clarification’ (see Rich, 1980a, p.xx) not a one-off disclosure. This corroborates other research (Rich, 1980a; Weeks et al 2001; D’Augelli, 2002; Valentine et al, 2003; Almack, 2007) which viewed coming out as this ‘ongoing process’ (Rich, 1980a, p.xx) through which people have to negotiate the ‘heterosexual assumptions’ (Weeks et al 2001, p80) of those around. Being able to prevent homophobia or biphobia becoming a negative issue in their lives depended on the context in which the stigma which was thrown at them (Goffman, 1968 cited in Almack, 2007), sometimes by physically fighting back (following Scourfield, et al, 2008). Whilst most of these respondents seemed to have thrived through this coming out process it cannot be assumed that these youth workers were typical of LGBQ young women as they found their place within the wider community at whatever age they started this coming out process.

It was also evident from the data that respondents had very different experiences in terms of being accepted by family, peers and friends and this did not appear to be linked to issues of ethnicity, social class or age. There was some commonality around the age of their awareness of their LGBQ sexuality or difference (between eight and eleven years for most), which reflects findings from other research (Bridget and Lucille, 1996; D’Augelli et al, 1998; Diamond & Savin- Williams, 2000; Schneider, 2001; D’Augelli, 2002), although there were a few respondents who seemed to have some awareness of their own difference at a much earlier age. Most respondents came out to their peers around the age of sixteen; reflecting the age noted in the literature (Diamond & Savin-Williams, 2000). Coming out to peers first was safer than coming out to family and those with whom they had closer relationships (reflecting Orne, 2011). The naming of their LGBQ sexuality was probably important in developing their own agency and self-confidence as such naming can recreate ‘the past and validates the present’ (see Rich, 1980a, p.xx). Most respondents came out to parents when they were ready to leave home or had already left home (often eighteen), again reflecting other research (Valentine et al, 2003). A few respondents decided to make their LGBQ sexuality known to their parents earlier; possibly a ‘dangerous decision’ (see Orne, 2011, p696). Nell had felt very isolated and in need of support from her parents. She may have felt that naming her feelings to others could ‘validate’ (see Rich, 1988, p.xx) her own LGBQ sexuality. Unfortunately, this ‘explosive knowledge’ (Orne, 2011, p693) when shared with Nell’s parents led to unforeseen and negative consequences for Nell (following Orne, 2011) when she was asked to leave the family home: something that is common for many LGBT young people when they first come out to their parents (Tierney and Ward, 2017). Amongst these

112 | P a g e

respondents being rejected in this way by family was only experienced by two of the fifteen respondents, although some went for years without their parents (usually mothers) talking to them. This emphasises again that these women youth workers were not representative of the wider LGBQ population in their experiences through their teenage years.

Most respondents managed their school years without being the victim of bullying, unlike the 45% of LGB young people who are currently bullied at school (Stonewall, 2017). For some respondents this involved them in standing out, either verbally or being willing to fight, to support their peers or siblings who might have been bullied due to sexuality or other issues. Most (thirteen of the fifteen) respondents were called butch or tom boys (a term not necessarily linked to LGBQ sexuality: Schneider, 2001). All, apart from Gaby, seemed to have been comfortable with these labels and most (including Gaby) spoke positively about having short hair, dressing in non- feminine clothes and being involved in sports and hobbies that were usually seen as male interests such as football. Understanding their gender identity as a space on a continuum of gendered identities offers a better fit than the more usual binaried division of gender (drawing on Monro, 2005).

Many respondents (eight) talked about having important relationships with boys or young men as they were growing up. For some this was because they were attracted to boys as well as girls even though most did not name themselves as bisexual. For others this was to provide a safe space, sometimes to hide their LGBQ sexuality from others, or just to find some solidarity as discussed in other research (Bragg et al, 2018).

This chapter, focussing on stories of becoming in the respondents’ younger days now moves on to chapter 6 which focusses on their adult lives and how ideas of intersectionality may be useful in understanding how they named their selves.

113 | P a g e