Queer Research and Queer Youth

D’Augelli and Grossman’s article offers an eloquent account of a complex longitudinal, interview-based study that surely has the potential to offer nuanced insights into the lives of lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) youth. To my knowledge, few, if any, studies in the field have created such a large amount of qualitative data–500+ participants over a period of two years. The authors’ copious efforts to recruit, retain, and involve youth while avoiding potential dangers to them offer future researchers resources to draw on as we seek to conduct ethical and meaningful empirical work with lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) youth. D’Augelli and Grossman’s work to document and understand youths’ experiences of and responses to what they call sexual orientation victimization (SOV)–or intimidation, harassment, and violence–that puts youth at risk, undoubtedly will enhance future scholarship at the same time that it informs practice and the provision of services to LGB youth. Reading about their study led me to ask what it means to put together the terms “research,” “queer,” and “youth.” I use the word queer to gesture toward less predictable identities and practices than L, G, B, and T commonly signify. What are the purposes of research related to queer youth? Implicit and explicit in D’Augelli and Grossman’s research are several premises. First, victimization, or oppression, is integral to un-