My research on LGBTQ+ issues has typically focused upon the construction of gender with in LGBTQ+ subcultures and upon developing an intervention to support people in processing heterosexism and transphobia/cisnormativity. As a lesbian-identified mentor, it is important to me to work with LGBTQ-affirmative students in my research team as we are active in advocating for LGBTQ+ people's rights, justice, and affirmative approaches to psychology.
Gender Identities: I’ve had a longstanding program of research examining LGBTQ+ gender as it transpires within the lived experiences of sexual and gender subcultures (such as butch, femme bear, leather, drag, house/family, transgender and nonbinary communities). My research with my students and collaborators has focused upon not only gender identities but the development of a felt sense of gender, gender expressions, sexualities, and norms. This intersectional research has focused upon how sexual orientation and gender intersects with gender, race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status. To learn more, you can see the invited special issue of Psychology of Women Quarterly has focused on the theory of gender that has emerged from this line of work (Levitt, 2019a; Tebbe, 2019; Moradi, 2019; Watson, 2019; Levitt, 2019b). Instead of reifying gender identities as static forms, this work sees gender as serving purposes for individuals and communities that make sense within specific contexts, cultures, and times.
Healing from heterosexist, homophobic, biphobic, and transphobic experiences: In this program of research, we been developing freely-available tools for the LGBTQ community (e.g., focusing on heterosexism, LGBTQ people with autism, transphobia). These empirically-based exercises help sexual and gender minority people to heal from and develop responses to heterosexism, homophobia, biphobia, and transphobia in their lives. The client-centered exercises do not promote any one recommendation but offer questions and reflective prompts that clients can consider as they move towards their own solutions that are tailored for their own lives and contexts. The writing exercises have been found to be overwhelmingly successful, with just 85-99% of participants reporting change across studies, medium effects on depression, and large effects on the impact of the event (Levitt et al., 2022). Details are available at our website at www.LGBTQmentalhealth.com where our approach to intervention development, and the exercises are described in detail and references are available to help you find publications.
Likely upcoming projects: In the coming year, it is likely that an incoming student with LGBTQ+ interests would focus upon analyses with the data upon heterosexist/transphobic experiences and healing as a thesis project. There are many identities and questions that can be explored within the dataset we have been developing (e.g., LGBTQ+ people of color or specific gender identities), using both quantitative and qualitative methods.
Alternatively, there may be opportunities to explore the functions of gender within varied LGBTQ+ gender communities, including cishet genders. In addition, qualitative projects or meta-syntheses that explore LGBTQ+ gender identities and communities are likely as well.
Recommended reading
Levitt, H. M. (2019). A psychosocial genealogy of LGBTQ+ gender: An empirically based theory of gender and gender identity cultures. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 43(3), 275-297. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684319834641.
Levitt, H. M., Collins, K. M., Maroney, M. R. & Roberts, T. S. (2022). Healing from heterosexist experiences: A mixed methods intervention study using expressive writing. Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity, 9(2), 152–164. https://doi.org/10.1037/sgd0000478
Levitt, H. M., Kehoe, K. A., Day, L. C., Nadwodny, N., Chang, E., Rizo, J. L., Hand, A. B., Alfatafta, R., D’Ambrozio, G., Ruggeri, K., Swanson, S. E., Thompson, A., & Priest, A. (2024). Being not binary: Experiences and functions of gender and gender communities. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, 90, 1766–1786. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-024-01543-5