为什么 LGBTQ 成年人与父母保持矛盾的关系?团结理由 "的理论化。

IF 3 2区 社会学 Q1 SOCIOLOGY
Social Problems Pub Date : 2024-02-01 Epub Date: 2022-02-11 DOI:10.1093/socpro/spac007
Emma Bosley-Smith, Rin Reczek
{"title":"为什么 LGBTQ 成年人与父母保持矛盾的关系?团结理由 \"的理论化。","authors":"Emma Bosley-Smith, Rin Reczek","doi":"10.1093/socpro/spac007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Many LGBTQ adults have ongoing relationships with their parents that are ambivalent, typified by both solidarity (e.g., frequent contact, emotional or financial exchange) as well as conflict (e.g., parents' heterosexism and cissexism). Yet, why LGBTQ people remain in-rather than end-their ambivalent intergenerational ties is underexplored. We analyze qualitative in-depth interview data with 76 LGBTQ adults to answer this question. We find that LGBTQ adult children deploy narratives that privilege intergenerational solidarity over strain-what we call \"solidarity rationales\"- to explain why they remain in their ambivalent intergenerational ties. Four solidarity rationales were identified: 1) closeness and love, 2) parental growth, 3) the unique parent-child role, and 4) the importance of parental resources. Identifying LGBTQ adults' solidarity rationales pulls back the curtain on the compulsory social forces driving persistent intergenerational relationships. This study also advances our thinking about how socially marginalized people cope with complex social ties that include interpersonal discrimination and stigma.</p>","PeriodicalId":48307,"journal":{"name":"Social Problems","volume":"1 1","pages":"220-236"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10881195/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Why LGBTQ Adults Keep Ambivalent Ties with Parents: Theorizing \\\"Solidarity Rationales\\\".\",\"authors\":\"Emma Bosley-Smith, Rin Reczek\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/socpro/spac007\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Many LGBTQ adults have ongoing relationships with their parents that are ambivalent, typified by both solidarity (e.g., frequent contact, emotional or financial exchange) as well as conflict (e.g., parents' heterosexism and cissexism). Yet, why LGBTQ people remain in-rather than end-their ambivalent intergenerational ties is underexplored. We analyze qualitative in-depth interview data with 76 LGBTQ adults to answer this question. We find that LGBTQ adult children deploy narratives that privilege intergenerational solidarity over strain-what we call \\\"solidarity rationales\\\"- to explain why they remain in their ambivalent intergenerational ties. Four solidarity rationales were identified: 1) closeness and love, 2) parental growth, 3) the unique parent-child role, and 4) the importance of parental resources. Identifying LGBTQ adults' solidarity rationales pulls back the curtain on the compulsory social forces driving persistent intergenerational relationships. This study also advances our thinking about how socially marginalized people cope with complex social ties that include interpersonal discrimination and stigma.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48307,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Social Problems\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"220-236\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10881195/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Social Problems\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/socpro/spac007\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/2/11 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Problems","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/socpro/spac007","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/2/11 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

许多成年 LGBTQ 与父母的关系一直处于矛盾之中,既有团结(如频繁接触、情感或经济交流),也有冲突(如父母的异性恋主义和双性恋主义)。然而,对于 LGBTQ 群体为何会保持而非结束这种矛盾的代际联系,我们还缺乏深入的研究。我们分析了 76 位 LGBTQ 成年人的定性深度访谈数据来回答这个问题。我们发现,LGBTQ 的成年子女会用代际团结优于压力的叙述(我们称之为 "团结理由")来解释他们为何仍保持着矛盾的代际联系。我们确定了四种团结理由:1)亲密和爱;2)父母的成长;3)独特的亲子角色;4)父母资源的重要性。识别 LGBTQ 成年人的团结理由揭开了驱动代际关系持续存在的强制性社会力量的神秘面纱。这项研究还推进了我们对社会边缘人群如何应对包括人际歧视和污名化在内的复杂社会关系的思考。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Why LGBTQ Adults Keep Ambivalent Ties with Parents: Theorizing "Solidarity Rationales".

Many LGBTQ adults have ongoing relationships with their parents that are ambivalent, typified by both solidarity (e.g., frequent contact, emotional or financial exchange) as well as conflict (e.g., parents' heterosexism and cissexism). Yet, why LGBTQ people remain in-rather than end-their ambivalent intergenerational ties is underexplored. We analyze qualitative in-depth interview data with 76 LGBTQ adults to answer this question. We find that LGBTQ adult children deploy narratives that privilege intergenerational solidarity over strain-what we call "solidarity rationales"- to explain why they remain in their ambivalent intergenerational ties. Four solidarity rationales were identified: 1) closeness and love, 2) parental growth, 3) the unique parent-child role, and 4) the importance of parental resources. Identifying LGBTQ adults' solidarity rationales pulls back the curtain on the compulsory social forces driving persistent intergenerational relationships. This study also advances our thinking about how socially marginalized people cope with complex social ties that include interpersonal discrimination and stigma.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Social Problems
Social Problems SOCIOLOGY-
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
6.20%
发文量
56
期刊介绍: Social Problems brings to the fore influential sociological findings and theories that have the ability to help us both better understand--and better deal with--our complex social environment. Some of the areas covered by the journal include: •Conflict, Social Action, and Change •Crime and Juvenile Delinquency •Drinking and Drugs •Health, Health Policy, and Health Services •Mental Health •Poverty, Class, and Inequality •Racial and Ethnic Minorities •Sexual Behavior, Politics, and Communities •Youth, Aging, and the Life Course
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信