A

Research paper
On

A Social Consciousness Identity Development And

Contemporary Conundrums In LGBT Community

By
Karan Jajal
A-4020
December 2015
[email protected]

A Research Paper
Submitted To Prof. Shamina Ansari
K.s School of Business Management
Gujarat University
Navarangpura
Ahmedabad

1
 K.S School of Business Management
Gujarat University
Navarangpura
Ahmedabad, Gujarat.

Researcher: Karan, Bhupendrabhai Jajal

Title of research paper: a Social Consciousness Identity Development and

Contemporary Conundrums in LGBT Community
Location of investigation: Collage hostels, surrounding of

Navarangpura and Face book Ids .

Research adviser: Professor Shamina Ansari

Month/year: December, 2015

Number of pages: 55

2
 ABSTRACT

Rationale of proposed research:

Before the last ten years, research on gay and lesbian adolescents has been
Scarce and has focused on the 'coming out' process, mental health issues, and
Stereotypes and discrimination the population encounters. More recently, research
has begun to examine school/collage experiences of gay and lesbian youth. Gay
and lesbian adolescents face the same developmental challenges as their straight
peers do with the added burden of dealing with negative social and psychological
school and collage climate experiences that significantly impact their ability to
learn. The Human Rights Watch(HRW) (2001), note that gay youth spend a high
level of energy planning how to get to and from school /collage safely, avoiding
hallways to avoid homophobic slurs, and escape being beaten up in gym class.
Succinctly, gay and lesbian youth learn to become invisible to avoid verbal and
physical attacks.

Justification:
The purpose of this paper is to review current literature and research on
school/collage climate experiences of gay and lesbian youth as related to peer
influences including, gender role conformity, homophobic language, physical
harassment, and staff attitudes. An analysis of the literature, limitations of current
research, implications for future research, implications for practice, and a summary
are also included. A follow-up study based on the literature review has been
conducted in November 2015.

3
Significance and scope of study:
The study will give the required understanding on social identity
development and contemporary issued in LGBT community as a subject and will
emphasize on its importance in contemporary thinking towards the most neglected
community. The outcome of the study will be beneficial for all the stakeholders
like –schools/collage students and its staff, organization for policy making and
society as whole. This study will help schools collage and organization to design
the subject curriculum policies rules and governing laws, panelizes of breaking
rules and all regarding acknowledges.
This study will acknowledge the strength of LGBT community people,
people will think towards them and their problems. We know that –all surrounding
will may not accept suddenly their special existence but with this study they will
affected to think towards them and I steadily and gradually may starts to support
them and help them towards their issues .

Introduction-concept

Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people are more likely to experience
intolerance, discrimination, harassment, and the threat of violence due to their
sexual orientation, than those that identify themselves as heterosexual. This is due
to homophobia (the fear or hatred of homosexuality). Some of the factors that may
reinforce homophobia on a larger scale are moral, religious, and political beliefs of
a dominant group. In some countries, homosexuality is illegal and punishable by
fines, imprisonment, life imprisonment and even the death penalty.
Human sexuality is diversely experienced, and can be fixed or fluid.
Male/female sexuality is blurred further with the existence of transgender,
transsexual and intersex identified people. Heterosexuality should no longer be

4
assumed; this assumption is called heterosexism. Although many societies have
made significant strides in human rights advocacy, LGBT rights struggle to find
universal acceptance. The fact that the Universal Declaration for Human Rights,
drafted in 1948, does not specifically include sexual orientation allows some
people to consider LGBT rights debatable.
Influential international human rights organizations such as Amnesty
International and Human Rights Watch continue to run effective campaigns. In the
coming years the major issues for LGBT rights on a global scale will be:
eradicating persecution based on sexual orientation; protection in the law from hate
crimes and hate propaganda; equal rights and privileges (marriage, common law
partnerships, medical-decision making, wills and estates, parenting and adoption)
and to work and educate others on homophobia and heterosexism.
They are singled out for physical attack – beaten, sexually assaulted,
tortured and killed. And in some 76 countries, discriminatory laws criminalize
private, consensual same-sex relationships – exposing individuals to the risk of
arrest, prosecution, imprisonment — even, in at least five countries, the death
penalty.

Concept of LGBT:
LGBT is an initialize that stands for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender.
The initialize LGBT is intended to emphasize a diversity of sexuality and gender
identity-based cultures and is sometimes used to refer to anyone who is non-
heterosexual or non cisgender instead of exclusively to people who are lesbian,
gay, bisexual, or transgender. To recognize this inclusion, a popular variant adds
the letter Q for those who identify as queer and/or are questioning their sexual
identity as LGBTQ, recorded since 1996. Whether or not LGBT people openly

5
identify themselves may depend on whether they live in a discriminatory
environment, as well as the status of LGBT rights where one lives.
Before the sexual revolution of the 1960s, there was no common non-
derogatory vocabulary for non heterosexuality; the closest such term, "third
gender", traces back to the 1860s but never gained wide acceptance in the United
States. The first widely used term, homosexual, was thought to carry negative
connotations and tended to be replaced by homophile in the 1950s and 1960s, and
subsequently gay in the 1970s. As lesbians forged more public identities, the
phrase "gay and lesbian" became more common.
Lesbians who held a more essentialist view that they had been born
homosexual and used the descriptor "lesbian" to define sexual attraction, often
considered the separatist, angry opinions of lesbian feminists to be detrimental to
the cause of gay rights. This was soon followed by bisexual and transgender people
also seeking recognition as legitimate categories within the larger community.

Review of literature study:

 LGBT has become a widely accepted designation for minorities based on
sexual and gender orientation. All members of these subgroups are subject to
similar prejudices rooted in beliefs and traditions about sexuality and gender.
LGBT people, as members of a social minority group, are suffering from
various forms of socioeconomic and cultural injustice. The lacks of social
recognition has an effect on the capacity of LGBT people to fully access and
enjoy their rights as citizens. They are more likely to experience intolerance,
discrimination, harassment, and the threat of violence due to their sexual
orientation, than those that identify themselves as heterosexual. Highlighting

6
 some major problems faced by LGBT people across the world is the theme
of this article.
By Chatterjee Subhrajit
Researcher, Dept. of Sociology (The University of Burdwan) and Teacher
(Sociology), Usatpur S. High School,
East Medinipur, W.B., India

 This research paper analysis the homosexual marriages in the indian context
as an invisible conflict which is successfully kept under cover. It also
attempts to describe and explain various aspects of homosexuality including
the evolution, the reasons, the societal attitude and reactions towards such
relations. The author also draws insight from the countries where
homosexual marriages are legalized and also highlights their outcome out of
legalizing homosexual relations. At the end taking fair and strong arguments
both in favors and in against the author concludes about the possibility of
legalizing homosexual marriages in India based on empirical and theoretical
facts and evidences.
Homosexuality In India – The Invisible Conflict
Anuradha Parasar
Department of Policy Science,
National Law University,
N.H.-65, Nagour Road,
Mandore, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India.

 This study focused specifically on the impact of religious commitment,

previous training, and race in regards to homophobic and transphobic
attitudes. Of those variables, religious commitment and race were found to
be significantly correlated to these attitudes. It has also become clear that the

7
 effects of training must be more closely scrutinized in terms of how it
impacts social worker attitudes and perceptions. This information, in
conjunction with the best practices and guidelines set forth by the NASW
and the CWLA, will give agencies and individual practitioners the tools
needed to truly advocate for LGBT youth who find themselves in their care.
By
LOUISIANA SOCIAL WORKERS:
A STUDY ON ATTITUDES TOWARD LGBT YOUTH
Rachel O’Pry
B.A., Louisiana State University, 2010
May 2012

 Queering Indian sociology

A critical engagement
Pushpesh Kumar

The paper is an attempt towards queering Indian sociology by incorporating

the perspective of the hitherto ignored ‘publics’- the sexual minorities-
whose lives are waiting to be recognized as a ‘sub-field’ in South Asian
Sociology. It also dispels the myth that alternative sexual orientation is a
purely western idea and issues of ‘erotic justice’ are alien to Indian and
South Asian cultures. Further, queering here is not equated with only
protests through queer art, avant-garde experimentation and life-style
identity politics but includes a ‘critical sexuality perspective’ which
foregrounds experiences of subaltern sexual subjects like ‘working class
lesbians’, hijras and kothis to map the agenda of sexual transformation and
erotic justice. In this sense, the LGBT movement has to be critiqued for not
engaging with the issue of caste and class. The paper seeks to broader the

8
 concept of ‘erotic justice’ by delineating and emphasizing its connections
with class, caste and global politics of sexual liberation.

 ANCHORAGE LGBT DISCRIMINATION SURVEY:

FINAL REPORT
by
Melissa S. Green
The Anchorage LGBT Discrimination Survey came about as a result of a
perceived need for quantifiable data on the incidence of discrimination
against lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) individuals in the
Municipality of Anchorage. It represents the first effort since the late 1980s
to compile rigorous data about the incidence of sexual orientation bias and
discrimination in Anchorage and the first effort ever to document Anchorage
or Alaska-specific data about discrimination and bias on the basis of gender
identity and expression. The Anchorage LGBT Discrimination Survey was
conducted in January through March; 2011Its key findings on the violence,
intimidation, and discrimination experienced in the Municipality of
Anchorage by its 268 lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender respondents
were previously reported in the preliminary report (Green, 2011).

Research gap identification: - My view point about above reviews:

If we talking about chatterjee subhrajit’s research we more of found that his

talking is about only problem faces by LGBT community before that once should
understand means I m talking about general public if they are ready to accept
LGBT personality then half of the issue been vanish automatically so that point is

9
lacking in that and also his research is more of international means across the
world that may not be true for Indian LGBT community context.
In paper of Anuradha Parasar “The invisible conflict she has taken theme of
social awareness about homosexual marriage in geographical location of Mandore
Rajasthan and also only law studying student as target for research. The general
public awareness point is missing I must say again that without collective
bargaining nothing will be out come and community will be remain in deprived.
Rachel O’Pry research is about the religious training and about the race from
where actually they belong on that variable attitude she has develop the thesis of
social work force identity in that she has describe various hypotheses to come out
as which is the main variable that play significant role in the homosexual in
Louisiana state. So what I believe actually for her thesis that it is nice topic and
also most neglected aspect to understand from point of LGBT community but in
Indian context not much work done on that part also because the law is not
governing any kind of support and the people really don’t want to discuss either.

“Queering Indian sociology” by Puspesh Kumar, in that the research is

based on true psychological aspect from caste, global political and class of LGBT
community persona, in his writing more is about descriptive type, quoted more of
people finding and writing. Purely based on theory kind aspect is look only good
for reading purpose only may be it affect the sum of percentage of individual in
Indian context because off the current status quo of community but the thing is that
now people really doesn’t matter that from which class , community and caste you
belong .
In LGBT discrimination survey report, Melissa S. Green specifically focused
on the discrimination part of Alaska State’s LGBT community people in terms of
job, at home, in society and where the possibility is. So Indian scenario most
problem is nobody want to talk about the discrimination part either from society as

10
well LGBT community but now some reforms comes and people started talking
about that but people feel ashamed of it and not coming out as what actually they
are and believe.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Objectives of the Research work are as below:

 To identify the social identical development awareness among the general
public.
 To find out the contemporary conundrums of LGBT community in Indian
context
Research work
Based on the research objectives, the work has been divided in three phases
and they are as below,
Phase 1: Identification of factors and their attributes affecting social identity
devolvement questions and qualitative & quantitative analysis.
Phase 2: Identification of expectations and experiences of social awareness
development identity questions and qualitative & quantitative analysis.
Phase 3: Quantitative Analysis to the conclusion of research, its recommendations
and scope of future research study.

Research design:
The research work is based on the exploratory study of LGBT community
people from the point of view of social identity development. The research
technique is the blend of Quantitative and Qualitative approaches

11
A survey method was used to investigate these social identity development and
conundrums of LGBT community, and the research design was a combination of
comparison of frequencies data and its percentage with the several other factors of
questions.
One of the instruments used is Questionnaire which is based on the Inclusive
questions of demographics, social awareness LGBT community aspects and issues
/ problems of community. The instrument that was used to measure level and type
of involvement was created specifically for this study and is based in logical aspect
to catch the mind of people that what they actually think. The involvement
instrument was in the form of a questionnaire that was given to general public and
also to the LGBT community people.
This research design was intended to shed light on social awareness and
conundrums of community, development and involvement, relate to each other.
There were a number of challenges though, that needed to be resolved for this
design to work. These challenges involved the population being surveyed, the
sampling strategy, and the collection procedure.

Sample
This study surveyed general public, LGBT community people which
included the 30 student. The sample consisted of university students in which 11
identify as self as gay, lesbian, transgender bisexuals exploring, and/or
questioning; who experienced attraction to the same sex; or who engaged in same-
sex behavior and 19 from general public who believe to heterosexual (staight). The
sample was obtained from society and also from face book. .
The lesbian identities of students were not studied. It is possible, though, for
lesbian student who self identified as lesbian to take this survey. For these

12
participants the study focused on their sexual orientation but not their gender
identity. Since lesbian is a type of sexual orientation, it was not covered in this
study. The reason for excluding lesbians identities primarily had to do with the
lack of target and its difficult to approach them as they never want to come out
apart from one or two percentage of whole and assessment instrument to explain
the development identity.

Sampling Strategy

The goal of the sampling strategy was to obtain a sample diverse in terms of social
identity development and involvement of LGBT community. Multiple challenges
are associated with sampling the LGBT population, especially when trying to
obtain a representative sample of developmental phases.
The biggest challenge is accessing the population and getting a sufficient
response rate. Because of current attitudes towards LGBT individuals as well as
the potential discrimination and social isolation associated with being identified as
LGBT, this population is difficult to find, hard to reach, and very resistant to
identification with their personality.
Another challenge associated with sampling is obtaining a sufficiently diverse
Sample. The goal of this study was to analyze how different levels of identity
development relate to the multiple ways of being involved. Though it was
speculated that it would be difficult to find students with none to little
involvement, a large portion of participants indicated that they were not involved.
In response to these challenges non-probability sampling was used.
Specifically, a purposeful and snowball strategy was used. By being purposeful,
this normally hard to reach population was surveyed and students from a wide
variety of personality were reached. By using a snowball approach, researcher

13
themselves could contact individuals who are not as developed or as involved in a
society for social identity development.
Unfortunately, using non-probability sampling limits generalization of the
findings. The need to get a sample sufficiently large, however, was considered
more important than overall generalization. Even if a random sample approach
were used, it would still be very difficult to find a sufficient number of students at
the beginning their development.

Sources of information

Sources of information are basically of primary nature that mentions above

Para that questionnaire made and fill and analysis the same with the primary base.
To go throughout the study some of reference that are secondarily information has
been taken from journals, blogs, articles, newspaper, once research paper and the
discussion from multiple people about the subject .

Ethical Concerns and Limitations

Ethical concerns were extremely important in the sampling (and collection)

Strategy. Confidentiality was paramount. Fortunately, the memberships of face
book are traditionally kept confidential by LGBT community as they seem like
normal person.
When personal message/e-mails was sent to these list-serves, the researcher
did not have to worry about breaching confidentiality. For mass e-mails that were
sent out, though, individual e-mail addresses were kept hidden by using the “blind
carbon copy’. All correspondence from participants who expressed an interest in

14
the study or had followed up questions after they had taken the survey was stored
in password protected files on one password protected computer.
Another ethical concern was intrusion into the space of the LGBT students.
Most students did not want to face to face meetings so I offer them on subscribe to
e-mail list-serves to receive support and information about LGBT topics
questionnaire. Meetings in particular are intended to be a safe space. It was not the
intention of the researcher to disrupt these meetings or to intrude. Therefore, the
permission of the students was obtained beforehand as I want to work directly with
LGBT students so that outcome would be best to distribute the surveys.
The limitation was that the target is only limited to studying students as
limited resource viability. Since the survey was web based and paper based and
individuals were asked to forward the respected questionnaire via email it’s very
likely to get some what good response from web based survey as they feel comfort
and confidentiality.

15
 Findings of research

Measures phrase-1
To identify social identity development –factors and its attributes.
Survey’s findings as follows:
A. Gender identity;
Gender identity
Gender %
Male 73.33
Female 23.33
transgender 3.333

A. Gender identity
80
60
40
%
20
0
Male Female transgender

In figure A. there 22 were male respondent that are almost 77%and only 7
were female respondents that are 23% as stated earlier in the study that because of
sensitivity of subject female part is negligible and they are only from general
public only, only one transgender is identifies as he was very willing to be part of
LGBT community study.
In these33.66% persons are identified as LGBT belonging that is no female
covers in that, one is identified as transgender and 33.33% respondents are male
including gay, bisexuals.

16
 B. Religious/spiritual affiliation:
Cast %
Hindu 50
Muslim 23.33333
Jain 10
Shikh 3.333333
Christian 10
Other 3.333333

B. religiouse and spiritual

affiliation
60
50
40
30
%
20
10
0
Hindu Muslim Jain Shikh christian Other

Figure B. is talking about the religious /spiritual affiliation, from this we can
do judge that may be cast also affect as one indicators to the social identity
development. In the survey I found that the more influencing cast is Hindu as also
because of the limited resource, proper identification it come out as 50% its says
that the Hindu classism is more among the social identity development.
From bivariate analysis if we look upon from 33.66% of LGBT community
students in that 54.54% are identified as Hindu, 27.27% are identified as Muslim
and 18.18% are Christian. So we can say that the most indicator attributes is the
Hinduism that means most of the student are belong to the Hindu religious.

17
 C. Religious service attendance:
Time %
More than a once/week 16.66667
Once a week 26.66667
Once a month 23.33333
Only spiritual occasion 16.66667
Once in a year 10
Never 6.666667

C.Religious sercive attandance

30
25
20
15
10
5 %
0

Figure c. says that from the entire survey 26.66% student says they visit their
religious place ‘once a week so as indicator attributes it means that its influence
comes from who visit a place in a week those they are kind of religious people that
govern their characteristic.
Now, if we compare this with LGBT community student we found that
27.27%of student answered that they visit their religious place ‘once in a year’ so
from entire survey if we look upon its contradictory to the same that LGBT
community student are no more of religious kind as they just visit the place once in
year. So from the prospective of LGBT community it is found that that there is no
as such good indication that says about its religious bounded, the LGBT
community people it’s now we can says that LGBT community is boundless to any
such prospects.

18
 D. Education level:
D.Education level %
High school 0
Bachelor 16.66667
Master 60
Doctorate degree 23.33333

D.Education level
80
60
40
20 %

0
High school Bacholar Master Docterate
degree

From the education level we found that the students are involved in master
program or may be completed , are 60%respondents that reviles that the samples
respondent are well educated to answer the survey. They have grate capability to
think towards their and others future prospective. One biggest happiness was that
there are 23.33% students are in the doctorate degree that means that understand
the LGBT scenario from the benefit prospective mostly doctorate studying students
are in favored off to legalize the LGBT community and sec.377 must be removed
from Indian constitutions.
I have bi-veritably analyzed this indicator to check, how much level they
actually follow. In that it was found that 54.54% student are involved in master
program that means that in LGBT community also the education level is high so it
can be believed that it’s the good sign for future of LGBT community as they are
competing to the other world for they survives and recently also many international
organization have made their policy in favored of such kind of belonging people as
they are good competing to other staff as well. And 18.18% students are found to
19
involve in doctorate program. So this indicator attributes to the good future
prospective of LGBT community.

E. Family status/background:
E.Family status %
Lower class 6.25
Middle class 43.33333
higher class 11.11111

E.Family status
50

%
0
Lower class Middle class higher class

Family background is found to be 43.33% as middle class that means that

the most of the students may be fall under the categories of lower middle class and
upper middle class. We can say that due to the sensitivity of subject might it
possible that students haven’t revile their true family background. We can also
conclude that family background as indicator hasn’t much importance to them.
But it’s the connected to the LGBT community, and we found that there is
no any such bifurcation toward family class will prove to prudent in the context of
LGBT communities as both middle and higher class have 45.45% of the LGBT
community. So as indicator attribute of family class or background is meaningless
to study in LGBT context as anyone can be come out as LGBT belonging there is
no restriction from that. As it’s the just mind set of people, we can’t be put them in
as conundrum just because of their family class or background. So from the figure
it indicates that there is no correlation toward LGBT community and their family
class/background.

20
F. Current relationship status:
F.Relationship status %
Single 73.33333
Married 3.333333
Live in relationship 13.33333
Involved with multiple partner 10
Other 0

F.Relationship status
80
70
60
50
40
30 %
20
10
0
Single Married Live in Involved with Other
relationship multipal
partner

From the above figure it can be sensed that all the respondent fall
under the single status as all are studying in any program except one
respondent. 73.33% respondents are of single status. While 13.33% are of
live in relationship status. That is of afterward position of single status.
If we compare with bi-variant of LGBT community, here we can say
that 63.63% respondents are of single status and 27.27%are of involved with
multiple partners. That means more of LGBT community people towards the
single and second one is of multiple partner, that is opposite with the general
form.

21
 G. Current living situation:
G. Current living situation %
Alone 0
With spouse 13.33333
Hostel/P.G 43.33333
Family / Guardian 43.33333

G.Current living situation

50
40
30
20 %
10
0
Alone With spouse Hostel/P.G Family /
Gaurdian

Figure G. rivals that most of the respondent’s current living situation ether is
hostel or with family/guardian, are of 43.33%. If we look upon to the LGBT
prospective we found that 54.54% are of from hostel as their current living status.
As we know that all the respondents are students belonging and can be sensed that
they may be here for just study purpose and it is very prudent for study that they
are free to take their own decision. They are their own belongingness to the future
life so the sample indicator attributes significant note to the study of this living
situation.

22
Analysis of part-2- This is specifically formed to check the societal consciousness’
identity development.

H. Social recognition of Homosexuality

H. Social recognition of Homosexuality %
Favor 73.33333
Oppose 3.333333
Neutral 23.33333

H. Social recognition of
Homosexuality

80

60

40
%
20

0
Favor Oppose Neutral

Fig. H shows the possibility about the social recognition of Homosexuality in India
The outcome of the all the respondent is that 73.33% favor, 3.33%were oppose and
23.33% were neutral about their answer. So from this we can say that rather than
oppose the ideology more of people wanted to be neutral about that.

I. Homosexual marriage in close relative

I. Homosexual marriage in close relative %
Accepted 86.66667
Rejected 13.33333

23
 I. Homosexual marriage in close relative
100

80

60

40 %

20

0
Accepted Rejected

Fig .I shows that 86.66% people accepted Homosexual marriage in their

close relative means they are accepted LGBT community people. Only 13.33%
respondents have rejected the close marriage in Homosexuals.
In figure H and I that is Homosexuality in social recognition and close
relative marriage, the acceptance of Homosexuality in close relative is higher than
social recognition and rejection is less than that so we can say that now day
because of end no. of factors, the awareness has increases and people want to talk
about their issues.
J. Homosexual marriage among community member
A. Homosexual marriage among community member %
Favor 80
Oppose 6.666667
Neutral 13.33333

J.Homosexual marriage among community

member
100

50
%
0
Favor Oppose Neutral

24
 Fig. J states the respondent opinion about Homosexual marriage among
community member that is that respondent’s acceptance to Homosexual relation
among neighbor’s friends etc. to theses response are 80% favored, 6.66% oppose
and 13.33% were neutral.
K. Homosexuality for one self when it is illegal:
K. Homosexuality for one self when it is illegal: %
Yes 0
No 80
Neutral 20

K. Homosexuality for one self when it is

illegal
100
80
60
40 %
20
0
Yes No Neutral

Above chart suggested that 80% of respondent says no to illegal marriage of

Homosexuals so that means they are not want to go beyond the law that is not
consider normal or punishable act towards the Indian constitution, While 20%
people remain neutral toward their response and none of the respondent say yes
towards the question so that shows the integrity towards the Indian low.

L. Legalize of Homosexuality

L. Legalize of Homosexuality %
Yes 73.33333
No 6.666667
Neutral 20

25
 L. Legalize of Homosexuality
80

60

40
%
20

0
Yes No Neutral

Fig. L says that 73.33% respondents says yes to legalize the Homosexuality
and 20% remain neutral while 6.66% said no towards legalization of
Homosexuality. We know that day by day people thinking on this issue and
because of the many problems faced by LGBT community people, now reforms
has already took place that shows by this graph as highest percentage response is in
‘yes’ to be legalize Homosexuality.
L.1
L.1 Bi variant of legalization
and gender identity % Yes % No % Neutral
Male 60 6.66 6.66
Female 10 0 13.33
transgender 3.33 0 0
Total 0 0 100

In figure L.1 it states that 60% male respondents say yes and 6.66% didn’t
want to say anything and say ‘no’. 10% female say ‘yes’ and one transgender say
‘yes to legalize the Homosexuality.

26
 L.2
L.2 Bi variant of cast and legalization of
Homosexuality % Yes % No % Neutral
Hindu 36.66 3.3333 10
Muslim 13.33 0 10
Shikh 3.33 0 0
Jain 3.33 0 6.66
Christian 10 0 0
Total 0 0 3.33

L.2 figure say that Hindu cast people said ‘yes’ are of highest that is 36.66%
,then of Muslim cast respondents said with 13.33%.6.66% of Jain respondent
remain neutral to say anything about legalization of Homosexuality.

M. Homosexual marriage for one when it is legal:

M. Homosexuality for one self when it is legal %
Favor 80
Against 20

M. Homosexuality for one self when it is

legal
100
80
60
40 %
20
0
Favor Against

Fig. M gives the preference of the respondents about the Homosexual

marriage for oneself when it is legal. The respondent’s entire only80% of the
respondents preferred the possibility of Homosexual marriage for oneself when it
is legal.

27
 It is believed that Homosexuality even if legalized will never become the
normal fact of society. It will be for those have inclination for Homosexuality that
they will prefer going for such type of behavior whether Homosexuality is
criminalized or decriminalized. Thus legalization of Homosexuality will not be
attractive for society because of its abnormality. But the benefit of legalization well
be that the Homosexual who are also normal people but with different orientation
will not be criminalized on this count.

N. Rights and benefits to Homosexuals:

N. Rights and benefits of Homosexuals %

Yes 73.33
No 3.33
Neutral 23.33

N. Rights and benefits of Homosexuals

80
70
60
50
40
%
30
20
10
0
Yes No Neutral

As shown in figure N above 73.33% respondents said yes and advocate that
homosexual s should also given rights and benefits equivalent to Heterosexuals
whereas 3.33% said no and 23.33% were neutral.

28
 O. Consciousness identity scale :

O. Consciousness identity scale : [1]% [2]% [3]% [4]% [5]%

1 36.67 36.67 23.33 3.33 0.00
2 36.67 40.00 20.00 3.33 0.00
3 43.33 33.33 20.00 0.00 3.33
4 43.33 33.33 20.00 0.00 3.33
5 46.67 30.00 20.00 0.00 3.33
6 46.67 26.67 23.33 3.33 0.00
7 46.67 33.33 13.33 3.33 3.33
8 3.33 0.00 6.67 46.67 43.33
9 0.00 3.33 6.67 46.67 43.33
10 0.00 3.33 10.00 33.33 53.33

250

[5]%
200
[4]%
150
[3]%
100
[2]%
50
[1]%
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Table O. says that all the respondent have made in favor of LGBT community
reforms. The statement that has been made to check the awareness among the
society, we found positive response from the respondent in the 10 statement

29
Part -3 is specifically made for LGBT community belonging, to check their
development identity in terms of LGBT community. General public has also
responded for the same part as that shows their support toward LGBT community

P. Homosexuality ever justify:

P. Homosexuality ever justify %

Never 76.66667
Always 3.333333
Neutral 20

P. Homosecuality ever justify

100

%
0
Never Always Neutral

As shown in figure P. that 76.66% respondents said that it is never justify as

expected that 20% respondents remain neutral about any sayings and 3.33% were
said always justify but as the current scenario is like that we sensed automatically
that Homosexuality never ever justify because of the psychology of society as well
as the Indian constitution.

Q. Identify as LGBT community belonging:

O. Identify as LGBT community belonging %

Yes 36.66667
No 33.33333
Can’t say 3.333333
Didn’t attend the question 26.66667

30
 O. Identify as LGBT community belonging
40

30

20
%
10

0
Yes No Cann't say didn’t attend
question

Fig. O says that 36.66% respondents were identified as LGBT community

belonging while 33.33% were NOT belonging from LGBT community. 3.33%
says that it is our privacy matter we can’t comment on that so they chosen ‘can’t
say. 26.66% respondent haven’t responded to this question that say that may be
they are not belongs to LGBT community.

O.1 if LGBT belonging then

To whom you came out as:
O.1 To whom you came out %
Family 3.333333
Friends 13.33333
co worker 3.333333
Didn’t respond 80

O.1 To whom you came out

100

50
%

0
1 2 3 4

31
Fig . O.1sayinf about those who say ‘yes’ that means they belong from LGBT
community, in that only 20% responded to whom they came out, while 80% do not
responded even though they belongs to LGBT community. In that 20%, 13.33%
rival themselves to their friend, 3.33% to their family and 3.33% to their co
workers.

R. Sexual orientation:

R. Sexual orientation %
Gay/Lesbian 16.66667
Bisexual 13.33333
Heterosexual 36.66667
other 3.333333
didn’t responded 30

R. Sexual orientation
40

30

20
%
10

0
Gay/Lesbian Bisexual Heterosexual other didn’t
responded

This shows the sexual orientation of respondents. 36.66% were identified as

heterosexual means they believe that they are straight and not belong to the
LGBT community, while 16.66% said they are fall under the category of
‘Gay/Lesbian ‘and 30% respondent didn’t seem to prudent to answer their sexual
orientation may be just because of their privacy. 13.33% were identified as
bisexual means they may be involved with multiple partners or in multiple
relationships.

32
 S. Member of any LGBT community group:

S. member of any LGBT

community group %
Yes 3.333333
No 56.66667
Can't say 13.33333
Didn't respond 26.66667

S. member of any LGBT community group

60
50
40
30
%
20
10
0
Yes No Can't say Didn't respond

Fig. S is about those who are part of any LGBT community group in any
city. Most of the respondents response in favor of ‘No’ are of 56.66% from entire
survey. In this question also 26.66% haven’t seemed to prudent to give answer and
13.33% respondents said they cannot say anything about that may because of their
privacy matter or still in India it is not legalized so any the reason can be as we
know the psychology of Indian society.

T. Participation in LGBT community pride:

T. Participation in LGBT community pride %

Yes 3.333333
No 53.33333
Can't say 16.66667
Didn't respond 26.66667
33
 T. Participation in LGBT community pride
60

50

40

30
%
20

10

0
Yes No Can't say Didn't respond

As shown in diagram T. 53.33% respondents from all said that they haven’t
take part in any LGBT community pride in any city, 26.66% student as expected
didn’t response to the question, 16.66% were said that because of our privacy we
can’t say anything as reason already discussed above. Only 3.33% said they take
part in any pride in any city
The recent scenario says that now a days this kind of pride is organized by
any of city based LGBT community just because of to fight against their right n
benefits towards the constitution. In last 5 year many pride has been organized and
also proven to succeed in city like Ahmedabad, Mumbai, Bangalore and the hub of
this kind of pride Delhi. It is good that due to this more n more awareness come to
the society.
On 29,November2015 first LGBT film festival has been organized in the
name of ‘KASISH’ by IIM Ahmedabad for the awareness of the society whole all
general interested public where invited on campus of IIM-A.s

34
 U. Active in social media:
U. Active in social media % LGBT%
Face book 36.66667 10
Watsup 50 23.33333
Twitter 6.666667 0
Instagram 6.666667 3.333333
Other 0 0

U. Active in social media

60

50

40

30 %
LGBT%
20

10

0
Face book Watsup Twitter Instagram Other

Figure U is all about the social media active response. The all general
respondents said that 50% are more active on ‘Watsup’ while 36.66% are on Face
book and 6.66% are on twitter and Instagram.
From the bivariate analysis if we look upon we find out that those who
belong to LGBT community in that 23.33% were identified more active on
‘Watsup’ and followed by face book is of 10% of LGBT community belonging.

35
 Phrase -2
Contemporary conundrums in LGBT community

1. Marginalization and Social Exclusion:

Marginalization is at the core of exclusion from fulfilling and full
social lives at individual, interpersonal and societal levels. People who are
marginalized have relatively little control over their lives and the resources
available to them; they may become stigmatized and are often at the
receiving end of negative public attitudes. Their opportunities to make social
contributions may be limited and they may develop low self-confidence and
self esteem and may become isolated. Social policies and practices may
mean they have relatively limited access to valued social resources such as
education and health services, housing, income, leisure activities and work.
The impacts of marginalization, in terms of social exclusion, are
similar, whatever the origins and processes of marginalization, irrespective
of whether these are to be located in social attitudes (such as towards
impairment, sexuality, ethnicity and so on) or social circumstance (such as
closure of workplaces, absence of affordable housing and so on). LGBT
individuals may experience multiple forms of marginalization-such as

racism, sexism, poverty or other factors – alongside homophobia or

transphobia that negatively impact on mental health. The stigma attached to

sexual orientation and gender identity or expression that fall outside the
expected heterosexual, non-transgender norm relegates many LGBT people
to the margins of society

36
 2. Impact of Exclusion and Discrimination:
The exclusion and discrimination have major impacts on the lives of lesbian, gay
and transgender persons. This has resulted in the following:
 Dropping out of school earlier
 Leaving Home and Family
 Unable to find regular jobs, have less options than others.
 Being ignored in the community and isolated
 Unable to access various services and Unaware of what they are entitled to
 Mobility, Move to other areas, (such as the city and urban areas)
 Lack of family and social support
 Migrate to other countries for seeking safer livelihood and acceptance
 Rejected from Religion (Esp. Muslim and some Christian Fundamentalist
sects)
 Attempt suicide
 Decide to follow their parents to marry opposite sex and then divorce.

3. 2.Impact of Family Reactions on LGBT Children: Conflict and

Rejection
In the past, very few adolescents ―came out‖ to their families or told others
they were gay. Most lesbians, gay men, and bisexuals (LGB) waited until they
were adults to talk about their LGB identity with others. Fear of rejection and
serious negative reactions kept many LGB adults from openly sharing their lives.
Until the 1990s, there were limited resources for LGBT youth. Gay and
transgender adolescents had few sources of information to learn about their identity
or to find support. More recently, the Internet, school diversity clubs, and LGBT
youth groups have helped gay and transgender youth find accurate information,
guidance, and support.

37
 With greater access to resources, more LGBT youth are coming out (sharing
their gay or transgender identity with friends, family, and other adults) during
adolescence. Until recently, little was known about how families react when an
LGBT young person comes out during adolescence. And even less was known
about how family reactions affect an LGBT adolescent‘s health and mental health.
Families and caregivers have a major impact on their LGBT children‘s risk and
well-being.
4. Problems of Homelessness:

The myriad problems facing LGBT people who are homeless include a lack
of housing and services that meet their specific needs. For example: An estimated
40-50% of the homeless youth living on New York City‘s streets identify as
LGBT. They are living there because they were thrown out of their homes for
being queer, or ran away to escape an abusive situation. Family housing in the
shelter system across the country is not available for homeless same-sex couples.
Transgender people are not allowed to choose with which gender they are more
comfortable living in the shelter system.
Abuse and harassment of LGBT homeless people is rampant in the shelter
system. Most domestic violence shelters do not accept gay men or transgender
people. There has been also a lack of any comprehensive plan for long-term
housing for people with AIDS Homeless LGBT youth are without economic
support, often engage in drug use and risky sexual behaviors, and often develop
mental health disorders.
5. Problems of Homophobia:

Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people are more likely to experience
Intolerance, discrimination, harassment, and the threat of violence due to their
sexual orientation, than those that identify themselves as heterosexual. This is due

38
to homophobia. Some of the factors that may reinforce homophobia on a larger
scale are moral, religious, and political beliefs of a dominant group. Living in a
Homophobic environment forces many LGBT people to conceal their sexuality, for
fear of the negative reactions and consequences of coming out..
Actually there is no single definition for the term ‗homophobia‘, as it covers a
wide range of different viewpoints and attitudes. Homophobia is generally defined
as hostility towards or fears of gay people, but can also refer to stigma arising from
social ideologies about homosexuality. Negative feelings or attitudes towards non-
heterosexual behavior, identity, relationships and community, can lead to
homophobic behavior and this is the root of the discrimination experienced by
many lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people. Homophobia
manifests itself in different forms, for example homophobic jokes, physical attacks,
discrimination in the workplace and negative media representation. For people who
have been brought up to believe that homosexuality is wrong, the realization that
they might be gay can cause feelings of shame and self loathing, leading to low
self-esteem.
6. Experiences that could negatively impact mental health:

 Hostility from or rejection by loved ones or religious groups

 Bullying at school, harassment by neighbors, danger of violence in public
places
 Casual homophobic comments on everyday basis
 Prejudice/embarrassed response from professionals
 No protection against discrimination at work, housing, pensions, etc.
 Childhood sexual abuse
 Verbal harassment, greater fear of physical violence and discrimination.

39
 7. Drug Addiction of LGBT people:
LGBT people are more likely to use alcohol, tobacco and other drugs
than the general population, are less likely to abstain, report higher rates of
substance abuse problems, and are more likely to continue heavy drinking into
later life. LGBT‘s use alcohol, tobacco and other drugs for the same reasons as
others, but their likelihood for doing so is heightened by personal and cultural
stresses resulting from anti-gay bias.
Reliance on bars for socialization, stress caused by discrimination, and
targeted advertising by tobacco and alcohol businesses in gay and lesbian
publications are all believed to contribute to increased pressures on LGBT
individuals to engage in substance abuse. Internalized homophobia is a form of
self-limiting, self-loathing— an important concept to understand in developing
substance abuse services for this population.

8. Victims of hate Crimes and Violence:

Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender people and those perceived

to be LGBT are regularly targeted as victims of hate crimes and violence. LGBT
people experience stigma and discrimination across their life spans, and are targets
of sexual and physical assault, harassment and hate crimes. Additional factors that
may impact on mental health and well-being for LGBT people include the process
of ―coming out‖ (sharing one‘s LGBTQ identity with others), gender transition,
internalized oppression, isolation and alienation, loss of family or social support,
and the impact of HIV and AIDS. However, LGBT individuals‘experiences of
violence and discrimination differ depending on a number of factors including
race, gender, income, and immigration status and language barriers. LGBT

40
immigrants are more likely to face violence based on race and ethnicity and/or
sexual identity and/or gender identity.

9. Problems of Terminology:
Problems in language occur when terminology is unclear or when terminology has
been associated with negative stereotypes. Problems occur in language
Concerning lesbians, gay men, and bisexual persons when the language is too
vague or the concepts are poorly defined. Language may be ambiguous in
reference, so that the reader is uncertain about its meaning or its inclusion and
exclusion criteria; and the term homosexuality has been associated in the past with
deviance, mental illness, and criminal behavior, and these negative stereotypes
may be perpetuated by biased language.
The term sexual orientation is preferred to sexual preference for
psychological writing and refers to sexual and affection relationships of lesbian,
gay, bisexual, and heterosexual people.
The word preference suggests a degree of voluntary choice that is not
necessarily reported by lesbians and gay men and that has not been demonstrated
in psychological research. The terms lesbian sexual orientation, heterosexual
sexual orientation, gay male sexual orientation, and bisexual sexual orientation are
preferable to lesbianism, heterosexuality, homosexuality, and bisexuality. The
former terms focus on people, and some of the latter terms have in the past been
associated with pathology

41
 Coming Out Trends

This study also showed that coming out is happening at an earlier age for
younger Students. This finding is understandable considering how much more
open society has become on topics related to sexual orientation. This finding may
also address an important characteristic of the “Millennial” generation of students
coming into higher education. The gay and lesbian students in the generation feel
more comfortable about their sexual orientation than previous generations. This
change suggests that the needs of gay and lesbian “millennial” may be different
than the generations before them. If this is true then higher education needs to
make greater strides in determining the needs of these students. Also, future studies
may want to separate undergraduates from graduate students and post graduate
student to examine them separately.

Implications for Practice

Just like with theory, implications for practice are limited since the data
lacks many significant findings. It was found that students in later phases are more
interested in social and support LGBT community. Professionals working with
lesbian and gay students can use this information to target programs that have
support and social components toward students who have an integrated identity.
This information can also benefit student leaders as they plan programs for their
peers.
For professionals and student leaders to offer better programs, more research
needs to occur to better understand why there is an interest in support organizations
for individuals in phase four; it needs to be determined what kind of needs and
developmental outcomes are needed at these different phases of sexual

42
consciousness identity development. The answers to this question can then shape
programming efforts amongst professionals who work directly with LGBT
students. This study also showed that more students are arriving at college having
not come out but they already possess an integrated sexual identity as tern ‘can’t
say’.
This trend can be helpful for professionals as they realize that the needs of
the millennial gay and lesbian students are different from students in previous
generations. The issue of coming out to family is less of importance for these
younger gay and lesbian students. As one participant pointed out, though, coming
out to coworkers is an ongoing process. Coming out to non-family members may
still be an issue for younger students as they become more autonomous in the work
world.
Identity development may not have explained a significant portion of the
variance of time spent with LGBT community students, but most likely other
factors could play a part in addition to identity development: time spent on
academic work, time spent at a job, living on or off campus, the availability of
LGBT organizations, the institutional climate toward lesbian and gay issues, and
the dynamics of the LGBT organizations that exist.

Suggestions for Future Research

This study has generated many unanswered questions that should be pursued in
the future. The study also has given insight into sampling procedures for lesbian
and gay students and ways to measure lesbian and gay identity development and
also it can be studied separately that contemporary issues in LGBT community and
social identity development.

43
 Methodological Issues to Consider

In addition to ideas for research, there is clearly a need to improve the

methodology related to research with lesbian and gay students. This study
experienced many challenges because it lacked a sufficient sample size of
individuals in the earlier phases of identity development. Future studies should
endeavor to take creative measures in addressing this challenge. The online version
of this study was useful in reaching many students, but because of the way the
study was advertised (by e-mail), the online survey reached only those students
who already had fairly integrated identities. Researchers should consider being
more proactive with working with the LGBT community to reach individuals who
are not as integrated. The Questionnaires need revision.
The directions of the questionnaire were difficult for participants to follow
and also limited the findings of the study. It is possible to reword the directions so
that participants can more easily complete the questionnaire. At the same time, the
questionnaire can be scored so that correlations can be done for each phase of
identity development. For example, the questionnaire could ask the participants to
respond affirmatively to all statements that ever applied to them.
This would require a change in how scores are interpreted. Also, the
questionnaire reinforced a gender dichotomy by having two different versions of
the study (one for gay males, and the other for lesbians). The questionnaire should
strive to have inclusive language that addresses the experiences of both gay men
and lesbians at the same time. It might be possible to use gender neutral terms.

44
 Conclusion

Overall this study did not produce more insight into the relationship between
identity development, level of involvement and conundrums of LGBT community.
It did find that type of involvement in LGBT organizations is related to identity
development. Those later in identity development tend to prefer social and support
type organizations over cultural and educational type organizations. The study also
provided insight into identity development theory, how to measure it, and ways to
prevent certain flaws in sampling and data analysis in future research.
The study also provided some insight into measuring involvement and found
that age, coming out, and identity development are all positively associated with
each other. These findings support the concept that development occurs over time,
and that for gay and lesbian identity development, coming out can serve as
important milestones. This study also shows the contemporary conundrums of
LGBT community and the whole theory has been written on that to understand it
from societal and LGBT community identity development.

Some Recommendation

1. Support the most marginalized of the LGBT community—people of color, low-

income, young, elderly and transgender people.
2. Establish collaborations on cross-issue work that includes LGBT issues affecting
low-income and people of color populations.
3. Engage foundation staff in public education around issues affecting LGBT low
income people and LGBT people of color, especially as they relate to transgender
issues.

45
4. Schools and teacher education programmers are crucial sites where LGBT issues
and concerns need to be addressed. To help promote health and safety among
LGBT youth, schools can implement the following policies and practices:
i) Encourage respect for all students and prohibit bullying, harassment, and
violence against all students.
ii) Identify ―safe spaces,‖ such as counselors‘ offices, designated
classrooms, or student organizations, where LGBTQ youth can receive
support from administrators, teachers, or other school staff.
iii) Encourage student-led and student-organized school clubs that promote
a safe, welcoming, and accepting school environment (e.g., gay-straight
alliances, which are school clubs open to youth of all sexual orientations).
iv) Ensure that health curricula or educational materials include HIV, other
STD, or pregnancy prevention information that is relevant to LGBTQ youth;
such as, ensuring that curricula or materials use inclusive language or
terminology.
v) Encourage school district and school staff to develop and publicize
trainings on how to create safe and supportive school environments for all
students, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity and encourage
staff to attend these trainings.
vi) Facilitate access to community-based providers who have experience
providing health services, including HIV/STD testing and counseling, to
LGBTQ youth. Facilitate access to community-based providers who have
experience in providing social and psychological services to LGBTQ youth.
5. Consider LGBT issues as a central theme in all economic and racial justice
work.
6. Advocate with philanthropic peers to support LGBT racial and economic justice
work.
46
7. To change societal attitude media has to play a responsible role by reporting on
LGBT issues and promoting a culture of tolerance and freedom for minorities.
8. Legal funds need to be created that can take on Public Interest Litigation on
LGBT issues.
9. Training needs to be conducted for health professionals to increase their
understanding of LGBT identity as potential risk factor for self-harm suicidal
behavior and depression. Respective authorities should ensure that health, mental
health and social care services are provided in a way that is accessible and
appropriate to LGBT people.
10. National as well as state government should develop initiatives to support
employers in making workplace and workplace culture more supportive and
inclusive of LGBT people.
11. To check the violence that is perpetrated in the home as well as in the public
sphere, the domestic violence law has to be expanded to include non-spousal and
parental violence as well.
12. Police force at all level needs to be sensitized on LGBT issues and also on the
general principles of fundamental human rights.
13. Stigmatizing or anthologizing language regarding gay men, lesbians, and
bisexual persons should be avoided (e.g., "sexual deviate", "sexual invert").
14. Local authorities, policy makers, schools and family need more education on
accepting gender variant children, and in treating people of different sexuality and
gender identity equally, and in applying policies and programs in a ―friendly‖
manner, rather than being hostile.

47
 Glossary:

 Bisexual— A person who is sexually attracted to both men and women or to

a set of qualities that do not necessarily line up with biological sex.
 Come out—To publicly affirm one‘s homosexual identity, sometimes to one
person in conversation, sometimes by an act that places one in the public
eye. It is not a single event, but rather a lifelong process.
 Gay—used to describe people whose enduring physical, romantic,
emotional, and/or spiritual attractions are to people of the same sex. In
contemporary contexts; ―Lesbian‖ is often a preferred term for women.
 Gender Identity—the gender that a person sees themselves as. This can
include refusing to label oneself with a gender.
 Heterosexual privilege- The benefits granted automatically to heterosexual
people that are denied to gay men and lesbians.
 Homophobia- A fear and hatred of LGBT individuals based on a lack of
knowledge and cultural conditioning. It is also manifested as a fear of being
or being perceived as gay, or the fear of one‘s own attraction to the same
gender.
 Internalized Homophobia-The process by which a member of the LGBT
community comes to accept and live out inaccurate, disparaging myths and
stereotypes about LGBT persons.
 Lesbian-A woman who has emotional, social, psychological, and physical
commitments and responses to other women.
 Marginalization- The process whereby something or someone is pushed to
the edge of a group and accorded lesser importance. This is predominantly a
social phenomenon by which a minority or sub-group is excluded, and their
needs or desires ignored. Marginalization can be defined as the process in

48
 which groups of people are excluded (marginalized) by the wider society.
Marginalization is often used in an economic or political sense to refer to the
rendering of an individual, an ethnic or national group, or a nation-state
powerless by a more powerful individual.
 Queer-Once a derogatory term, the word ―queer‖ has been embraced by the
GLBT community and is used as an umbrella term for all sexual minorities.
 Questioning—Being unsure of one‘s sexual orientation and/or gender
identity.
 Sexual Orientation or Identity—Emotional, physical, and/or sexual
attraction to others, which may be towards the same sex (homosexual), the
other sex (heterosexual), or both sexes (bisexual).
 Social Exclusion- The European Commission and European Council
defined social exclusion as a: ―process whereby certain individuals are
pushed to the edge of society and prevented from participating fully by
virtue of their poverty, or lack of basic competencies and lifelong learning
opportunities, or as a result of discrimination. This distances them from job,
income and education and training opportunities as well as social and
community networks and activities. They have little access to power and
decision-making bodies and thus often feel powerless and unable to take
control over the decisions that affect their day to day lives.
 Transphobia- is a range of negative attitudes and feelings towards
transsexuality and transsexual or transgender people, based on the
expression of their internal gender identity.
 Transgender—Refers to persons whose self-perception as male or female is
different than their biological sex and who live full-time as the other sex.

49
 Appendix
A. APPENDIX : E-mail Advertisement

Subject: social consciousness identity development and contemporary conundrums

of LGBT community
Dear friends,
My name is Karan jajal, and I am a master student here at Gujarat
University, K.s school of business management, Navarangpura, Ahmedabad,
Gujarat I am conducting a study on lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender
(LGBT) student And societal identity development involvement. It is very
important that I get participants to complete my survey. The results of the study
will help the LGBT community here at the University and add to the body of
knowledge surrounding LGBT students and society as well.
Please consider spending a few minutes of your time by participating in this study
Who should participate?
- H.S.C student, Undergrads, graduate students, master students and doctorate
students,
--Those who self identify as gay, lesbian, exploring, and/or questioning;
experience attraction to the same sex; OR engage in same-sex behavior; --Those
who are involved, semi-involved, or NOT involved in the LGBT community.
(If you are not involved in any way, please consider participating in this study!)
ALL INDIVIDUAL RESULTS WILL BE KEPT CONFIDENTIAL.
Need more information? Contact Karan jajal at karanjajal22gmail.com

50
 B. Appendix

GUJARAT UNIVERSITY
K. S. SCHOOL OF BUSINESS MANAGEMENT [FIVE YEARS FULL –
TIME M.B.A INTEGRATED DEGREE COURSE] SEVENTH SEMESTER
OF FOURTH YEAR M.B.A
THIS QUESTIONNAIRE IS FOR ACADAMIC RESEARCH PURPOSE
ONLY. ALL THE INFORMATION SHOULD BE CONFIDENCIAL.

Part -1
Please tell us about yourself:-
1. Which is best describing your gender identity?
 Male  Female  Transgender
2. What is your religious /spiritual affiliation?
 Hindu  Muslim Jain
 Christian  Sikh  Other
3. Tell your religious service attendance.
 More than once/week  Only spiritual occasion /holidays
 Once a week  One in a year
 Once a month  Never
4. What is the highest education level you have completed/ running?
 High school (H.S.C)  Bachelor
 Master  Doctoral Degree
5. Which class represents your family status/ background?(Upper and lower includes )
 Lower class  middle class  Higher class
6. Mark your current relationship status:
 Single  Married  Leave in relationship
 Involved with multiple partner  Other specify________
7. What is your current living situation?
 Alone  With spouse
 Hostel/P.G  Family/ Guardian

51
 Part -2
[To check, the societal consciousness’ identity development]
8. Mark your preference about Homosexuality in social recognition.
 Favor  Oppose  Neutral
9. Give your attitude about Homosexual marriage in close relative.
 Accepted  Rejected
10. What is your response about Homosexual marriage among community member?
 Favor  Oppose  Neutral
11. Will you support Homosexual marriage for one when it is illegal?
 Yes  No  Neutral
12. Do you think that Homosexual marriage should be legalized?
 Yes  No  Neutral
13. Give your preference for Homosexual marriage for one when it is illegal.
 Favor  Against
14. Mark your preference towards giving rights and benefits to Homosexuals equal to
heterosexual.
 Yes  No  Neutral
15. Round or square the best suitable No. for your answer.
Information…
Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly
disagree
1 2 3 4 5

Statements Numbers
1. I like the company of Homosexuals; they are like normal 1 2 3 4 5
human being.
2. It would be beneficial to society to recognize Homosexuality 1 2 3 4 5
as normal.
3. Homosexuals should be given social equality. 1 2 3 4 5
4. Homosexuals should have equal opportunity of employment. 1 2 3 4 5
5. Homosexuality should accept completely in our society. 1 2 3 4 5
6. Homosexuals have right to moral justices to any abuse. 1 2 3 4 5
7. Supreme court should remove the SEC.377. 1 2 3 4 5
8. Homosexuality is sin. 1 2 3 4 5
9. Homosexuals should not allow to work/ stay with children. 1 2 3 4 5
10. Homosexuality is like poverty in society. 1 2 3 4 5

52
 Part -3
[Note: This part is specifically made for LGBT community belonging, but if
you are a true supporter of that you may go through this and give your
valuable answer]
16. Is Homosexuality ever justices?
 Never Always  Neutral
17. Do you identify / will as LGBT community belonging?
 Yes  No  Can’t specify
If yes then,
To whom you came out as that to the individual following.
 Family  Friends  Co workers/organization
18. Your identity in terms of your sexual orientation:
 Gay/ Lesbian  Bisexual
 Heterosexual  other specify___________
19. Are you member of any LGBT community group in city?
 Yes  No  Can’t say
20. Have you ever take part in any LGBT community pride in any city?
 Yes  No  Can’t say
If yes then;
How was the experience?  Good  Bad  Neutral
21. Are you active in any social media? (mark one - you spend more time)
 Face book  Wats up  Twitter
 Instagram  If other specify ____________
22. Tick mark or write the problem or issues in LGBT community that you are actually
come across by witnessed /experienced / herded, from society or LGBT community
itself.
 Experience of violation/ intimidation  Sexual assault
 Verbal abuse/ Name calling  Bad dependency
 Threats of physical violence  Bad addictions
 Followed/ Chased  Criminal damaged
 Significant emotional distress  Property damaged
 Depression/ Anxiety  Panic attack
 Stress/ Anger management  Suicidal thought
 Insomnia  Harassed by employer /ee
 Turn down for job otherwise qualified  Harassed by landlords
 Denied promotion  Denied lease/ rental home
 Forced to leave job by harassment  Denied school financial aid
 Delayed or conceal gender transition to avoid discrimination
 Denied admission in school or college  Problem of Homelessness
 Denied campus housing/ hostel facility  Problem of Homophobia
53
 Denied service in restaurant/ bar/ others  Legal justice barrier
 Denied service in hotel/ motel  Problem of terminology
 Denied membership or access of gym/ clubs
 Harassed/ verbally abused by medical care provider
 Impact of family reaction on LGBT: conflicts & rejection
23. Please feel free to provide us with any other information you would like to share
below.
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________

References
 http://www.ijims.com ISSN: 2348 – 0343 International Journal of
Interdisciplinary and Multidisciplinary Studies (IJIMS), 2014, Vol 1, No.5,
317-331.
 The relationship of lesbian and gay identity development and involvement in
lesbian, gay bisexual, and transgender student organizations by john wiley
lynch
 Queering Indian Sociology
A Critical Engagement Pushpesh Kuma ,CAS WORKING PAPER
SERIES Centre for the Study of Social Systems Jawaharlal Nehru
University, New Delhi May 2014 CAS/WP/14-7

 Louisiana social workers: A study on attitudes toward lgbt youth by

Rachel O’Pry B.A., Louisiana State University, 2010 May 2012
 http/:indianjpscharitry .org

54
 Homosexuality In India – The Invisible Conflict-Anuradha Parasar
Department of Policy Science,National Law University,N.H.-65, Nagour
Road,Mandore, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India
 http://www.ilga.info/index.html
 findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2065/is_n1_v50/ai_20344099/pg_4 - 28k -
 http://www.umiacs.umd.edu/users/sawweb/sawnet/news/news337.txtg
 http://www.fsw.ucalgary.ca/ramsay/gay-lesbian-bisexual/3ta-south-asia-
homosexuality.htm#India%20Films
 India's Pioneer: Ashok Row Kavi Interview by Perry Brass at
ww.gaytoday.badpuppy.com
 2.LGBT From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, Retrieved 11 feb 2014 from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT
 Stances of Faiths on LGBT Issues: Islam; Retrieved 12 March 2014 from
 http://wwwIndia: Supreme Court rules to overturn decriminalization of
homosexuality (December 11, 2013) Retrieved
 12 March 2014 from http://www.examiner.com/article/india-supreme-court-
rules-to-overturn-decriminalizationof
homosexuality.hrc.org/resources/entry/stances-of-faiths-on-lgbt-issues-islam
 See “Study Description: [India],” 2006, available from
http://www.wvsevsdb.com/wvs/WVSDocumentation.jsp?Idioma=I
 Green, Melissa S. (2012). Anchorage LGBT Discrimination Survey: Final
Report. Anchorage, AK: Identity, Inc..

55