- Email: [email protected]
Notes from the Margins: Integrating Lesbian Experience into the Vocational Psychology of Women
JOURNAL OF VOCATIONAL BEHAVIOR ARTICLE NO.
48, 160–175 (1996)
0016
Notes from the Margins: Integrating Lesbian Experience into the Vocational Psychology of Women RUTH E. FASSINGER University of Maryland at College Park This article integrates literature regarding lesbians and work into a comprehensive framework originally developed to articulate the unique vocational issues of women (Betz & Fitzgerald, 1987), and thereby explores the applicability of this framework to lesbian experience. More specifically, the article explores internal and external barriers to women’s career choice, implementation, and adjustment, with speculation about how such barriers function in the vocational experiences of lesbians. The article concludes with implications for theory and research. q 1996 Academic Press, Inc.
INTRODUCTION
The study of women’s career development has been identified as one of the most vigorous areas of research in vocational psychology (Borgen, 1991; Fitzgerald, Fassinger, & Betz, 1995; Fassinger, 1995). However, it has been noted that gaps exist in this literature, with critique focused on the limited theoretical and empirical attention to the impact of race and ethnicity, class, sexual orientation, and other demographic variables on women’s occupational behavior (Betz & Fitzgerald, 1993; Fitzgerald & Betz, 1994). Of particular interest in this special journal issue is the examination of theoretical assumptions regarding the vocational psychology of women in terms of their applicability to lesbians (and to bisexual women insofar as their lifestyle choices include other women). Because vocational identity is interrelated with other aspects of personal identity, both gender and sexual orientation may be assumed to exert influence on the vocational experiences of many lesbians (Fassinger, 1995). Existing literature in the vocational psychology of women provides an understanding of the gendered elements of lesbians’ career opportunities and behavior. In addition, an evolving literature has begun to document vocational issues of I thank Nancy Betz and Karen O’Brien for their helpful suggestions regarding earlier drafts of this article. Address correspondence and reprint requests to: Ruth E. Fassinger, Ph.D., Department of Counseling and Personnel Services, College of Education, University of Maryland at College Park, College Park, Maryland 20742. E-mail: [email protected]. 160 0001-8791/96 $18.00 Copyright q 1996 by Academic Press, Inc. All rights of reproduction in any form reserved.
6305$$1531
02-22-96 07:37:29
jvba
AP: JVB
LESBIAN CAREER
161
lesbians that are related to sexual orientation and the negotiation of a stigmatized identity in occupational settings. Most of the literature is atheoretical and anecdotal, and the few empirical studies that exist are quite compromised methodologically (Croteau, 1996). However, reviews by this author (Fassinger, 1995) and Morgan and Brown (1991) represent initial attempts to consider lesbian career issues within the larger context of personal and occupational identity development, and recent vocational choice theories, respectively. A foundation thus exists for a more formal articulation of the relationship between theory in women’s career development and lesbian vocational issues. The purpose of this article is to integrate the existing literature regarding lesbians in the workplace into a comprehensive framework originally developed to articulate the unique vocational issues of women, and thereby to explore explicitly the applicability of this framework to lesbian experience. Thus (similar to the earlier review; Fassinger, 1995), the present discussion is conceptualized according to internal and external barriers to women’s vocational choice and implementation and adjustment, adapted from Betz and Fitzgerald (1987) and shown in Figure 1. These barriers represent a summary of extensive literature aimed at elucidating two pervasive issues in women’s career development: the persistent underutilization of women’s abilities in their vocational choices and progress, and the overriding salience of marriage and children on their career achievement (Betz & Fitzgerald, 1987). As Figure 1 illustrates, vocational choice focuses on educational and vocational planning, including self variables (e.g., lack of confidence) and external constraints (e.g., occupational stereotyping). Vocational implementation and adjustment involve career entry and satisfaction in the workplace, also including self variables (e.g., fear of others’ attitudes) and external obstacles (e.g., occupational discrimination). Although all barriers listed in Figure 1 may potentially affect lesbians as women, starred items are those that have been (implicitly or explicitly) identified in previous literature as particularly relevant to sexual orientation and therefore are addressed specifically in the present discussion. It should be noted that this article builds on an earlier attempt (Fassinger, 1995) at theorizing in this area; the emphasis of the previous work was on the integration of lesbian identity development theories and career issues, whereas the present article focuses on systematically conceptualizing the vocational psychology of lesbians within a framework used to describe women’s career development. The article first presents discussion of issues regarding vocational choice, in terms of barriers to occupational choice related to coming out, as well as vocationally facilitative aspects of lesbian identity. The article then presents discussion of vocational implementation and adjustment, including workplace discrimination and its impact on identity management, as well as issues regarding the home–work interface. The article concludes with a brief discussion of implications of these issues for theory and research.
6305$$1531
02-22-96 07:37:29
jvba
AP: JVB
162
RUTH E. FASSINGER Barriers to Vocational Choice Internal/Self
External/Environmental
Home–Career Conflict Fear of Success Math Anxiety and Low Math Self-Efficacy Underestimation of Capabilities * Lack of Self-Confidence and DecisionMaking Skills
* Occupational Stereotyping and Limited Perceived Choices * Bias in Counseling and Testing * Lack of Role Models * Lack of Support from Parents, Families, Spouses, Peers, Faculty, Resulting in a ‘‘Null’’ Educational Environment
Barriers to Vocational Implementation and Adjustment Internal/Self
External/Environmental
* Self-Doubt, Internalizing Discrimination * Guilt * Fear of Others’ Attitudes
* Multiple Role Issues in the Home–Work Interface * Occupational Discrimination * Harassment * Occupational Stereotyping * Attitudes of Family, Spouse * Attitudes of Employers, Co-workers, Supervisees * ‘‘Old Boy’’ Systems Being Barred from Unions, Apprenticeships, Financial Aid * Lack of Role Models, Mentors, Colleagues (a ‘‘Null’’ Occupational Environment) Tokenism
FIG. 1. Barriers to women’s career development (adapted from Betz & Fitzgerald, 1987). *Indicates barrier discussed in this article.
ISSUES IN VOCATIONAL CHOICE
The critical importance and timing of the lesbian identity development process in relation to vocational behavior has been discussed in previous literature (e.g., Fassinger, 1995; Morgan & Brown, 1991). Unlike minority groups in which vocational development occurs within the context of an obvious, enduring identity, many lesbians do not become fully aware of their identity until adolescence or adulthood, when they already may be actively engaged in career planning. And timing notwithstanding, ‘‘coming out’’ to self and others confounds the vocational development of lesbians in several critical ways, internally in self-confidence and decision making, and externally in all of the areas noted in Figure 1. The following sections discuss vocational barriers related to coming out, and facilitative aspects of lesbianism in regard to career choice.
6305$$1531
02-22-96 07:37:29
jvba
AP: JVB
LESBIAN CAREER
163
Barriers Related to Coming Out
Lesbians in the coming-out process often are deeply absorbed in explorations of sexuality, intimacy, community, and family attitudes, allowing limited attention to vocational decisions and tasks. Because identity issues for lesbians often remain developmentally focal for an extended period of time, career issues may be severely neglected (Croteau & Hedstrom, 1993; Fassinger, 1995). This potentially exacerbates career indecision, anxiety, and lack of self-confidence, because one may be engaging in these tasks long after peers have done so and internalizing a normative developmental delay as individual inadequacy. Coming out as a lesbian also may interact with occupational stereotyping, a documented barrier to women’s career choice, in eliminating possible career options because of perceptions that those occupations might be inhospitable to or, conversely, are associated with lesbians (Fassinger, 1995; Hetherington & Orzek, 1989). The need to generate and explore additional alternatives will likely lengthen the process of vocational choice (Fassinger, 1995), especially given that the widespread invisibility of lesbian and gay people makes realistic assessment of occupational climates difficult at best. Relatedly, lack of role models, which has been documented consistently in the literature to have negative impact on the career development of women, is likely to be particularly detrimental to lesbian women, because many lesbians are ‘‘closeted’’ in the workplace (Fassinger, 1991; Garnets & Kimmel, 1991) and thus are not positioned to be mentors or models for other lesbians. Another barrier to career planning is that many lesbians are abandoned by their families as a result of coming out, with financial and psychological support withdrawn. Research suggests that normative processes of parental attachment and individuation are important to the vocational development of young women (O’Brien, in press; O’Brien & Fassinger, 1993). Moreover, parental and family support (particularly for nontraditional careers) repeatedly has been documented as a facilitative factor in women’s career development. Thus, the loss of such support is likely to seriously impede vocational planning for some lesbians (Fassinger, 1995). In addition, the coming-out process for many lesbians results in transitory but precipitous decreases in self-esteem and self-confidence, and new confusion and complexities in self-concept (Fassinger, 1995; Hetherington & Orzek, 1989). It is well documented in the women’s career development literature that a positive self-concept is strongly predictive of variables related to career choice optimization (e.g., decision making) and that an unhealthy self-concept constrains career planning (Betz & Fitzgerald, 1987). Again, an oft-cited barrier (low self-confidence) operating in the career planning and choice of women in general is likely to be particularly debilitating to those struggling with devaluation and disregard related to sexual identity. In addition, the anxiety and confusion of maintaining secrecy about identity can further impair
6305$$1531
02-22-96 07:37:29
jvba
AP: JVB
164
RUTH E. FASSINGER
productive career planning efforts (Elliott, 1993). Moreover, secrecy about emergent identity makes it very unlikely that professional help will be sought in dealing with fear and confusion related to lesbianism. Two final barriers to career choice in lesbians are related to potential bias in vocational testing and counseling. Pope (1992) has considered possible harmful effects of a minority sexual orientation on the results of vocational and personality tests; he points particularly to the likelihood of depression and anxiety provoked by atypical interests or fears of sexual orientation being revealed, and the resultant difficulties in interpreting flat, erratic, or pathological profiles. Test bias (including attempts at correction) is documented extensively in the women’s career development literature, and it certainly is plausible that lesbian identity further confounds the testing process. In addition, lesbians face the possibility of counselor bias when they seek professional assistance (Garnets, Hancock, Cochran, Goodchilds, & Peplau, 1991), particularly in organizational climates that are not affirmative of lesbian, gay, or bisexual people (Bieschke & Matthews, 1996). Such bias might range from overt discouragement regarding occupations in which lesbianism is assumed to have negative impact on vulnerable others (e.g., occupations involving children), to subtle bias against activities seen as encouraging manhating or unfeminine behavior (e.g., women’s studies programs). Bias also might be reflected in lack of counselor awareness of the potential impact of lesbian identity on vocational planning, or inadequate diagnostic sophistication in identifying counseling issues that signal struggles related to sexual identity. When bias related to sexual orientation potentially interacts with pervasive and well-documented bias related to gender, it becomes quite obvious that lesbians may encounter significant obstacles in choosing a career. Facilitative Factors in Vocational Choice
Fassinger (1995) has pointed out that, despite a number of vocational barriers that lesbians may face, there also are important facilitative aspects of lesbian identity related to career planning and choice. Most salient among these is that lesbians tend to demonstrate more nontraditional, androgynous gender roles than do heterosexual women (Browning, Reynolds, & Dworkin, 1991; Garnets & Kimmel, 1991; Hetherington & Orzek, 1989; Morgan & Brown, 1991), and many lesbians also are feminists, which further liberalizes their gender roles (Fassinger, 1995). Thus, lesbians, in comparison to heterosexual women, are less likely to make vocational and life choices based on accommodating men or conforming to traditional gender roles. Extensive literature in women’s career development repeatedly points to traditional feminine socialization as restrictive of women’s occupational choices and behavior, and documents the facilitative nature of more nontraditional gender roles (e.g., Betz & Fitzgerald, 1987; Fassinger, 1985, 1990; Fitzgerald et al., 1995). Thus, lesbians’ liberal gender roles might permit them considerable
6305$$1531
02-22-96 07:37:29
jvba
AP: JVB
LESBIAN CAREER
165
flexibility in career choice, particularly in selecting occupations that are nontraditional for women (Morgan & Brown, 1991). Another aspect of lesbian identity that may be facilitative of choosing a career is that lesbians, unlike many heterosexual women, do not anticipate depending on men for financial stability (Fassinger, 1995). Also, despite the pooling of resources in many lesbian couples, lesbians tend to maintain some degree of financial independence from their partners, perhaps partly because institutional prohibitions (e.g., laws, company policies) hinder economic and legal dependence in same-sex relationships (Morgan & Brown, 1991). Thus, lesbians may consciously or unconsciously anticipate the certainty of a career throughout the long process of vocational development, a speculation supported by an estimated employment rate of about 90% in this population (Elliott, 1993; Morgan & Brown, 1991). An expectation of providing for oneself financially, as well as the disregard for traditionally feminine occupations that sometimes exists in lesbian communities (Morgan & Brown, 1991), may further motivate the consideration of more nontraditional, lucrative careers among lesbians. Although this greater arena of opportunity appears to be severely compromised by pervasive occupational discrimination (see below), research suggests more certainty and satisfaction with career choices in lesbians than in gay men (Etringer, Hillerbrand, & Hetherington, 1990); it may be that the latitude in vocational planning experienced by many lesbians plays a part in accounting for these gender differences (Fassinger, 1995). Finally, it is possible that the strong vocational focus of many lesbians may, in fact, buffer the coming-out process. For some, career planning and preparation may provide a stable focus and positive aspects of identity at a time when identity and self-image are in tremendous flux. The maintenance of vocational focus also may help to remind families that the coming-out process they are witnessing is not indicative of mental collapse, and signals the stability of personality and interests despite changes in sexual identity and lifestyle choices. Indeed, a client of this author once commented that she was experiencing far more trepidation over telling her parents that she was changing her major than she had experienced over telling them that she was a lesbian! ISSUES IN VOCATIONAL IMPLEMENTATION AND ADJUSTMENT
In the process of implementing a career choice and adjusting to the workplace, age and cohort are critically important in the intersection between identity and work for lesbians. Coming out during adulthood within the context of a stabilized career is a common experience among lesbians; one’s emerging identity therefore must be integrated into an occupation in which prior investments of time, energy, and money make it unreasonable to consider other options (Fassinger, 1995; Morgan & Brown, 1991). The process of coming out, in turn, can be quite hindered by fear that one’s job will be endangered by one’s emerging lesbianism (Fassinger, 1995). Lesbian identity
6305$$1531
02-22-96 07:37:29
jvba
AP: JVB
166
RUTH E. FASSINGER
and vocational issues thus become inextricably interwoven as the individual grapples with the workplace negotiation of a stigmatized identity, and issues of identity management potentially intersect with almost every barrier to implementation and adjustment noted in Figure 1. The following sections discuss these issues in terms of occupational discrimination and identity management and the home–work interface. Workplace Discrimination and Identity Management
Similar to women in general, the most salient barrier to the vocational implementation and adjustment of lesbians is the cluster of environmental variables related to occupational stereotyping, discrimination, and harassment. Occupational discrimination against lesbians and gay men has been extensively documented (see Croteau, 1996; Elliott, 1993; Fassinger, 1991, 1993; Garnets & Kimmel, 1991; Lee & Brown, 1993). Lesbians, because they experience a double or, for women of color, triple minority status in the work world, are subject to even greater discrimination based on the intersection of gender, sexual orientation, and race (Elliott, 1993; Fassinger, 1995; Morgan & Brown, 1991). Lee and Brown (1993) point out that, although existing legal protections for lesbians and gay men are more extensive in the public than private sector, no federal or national standards exist for addressing employment discrimination based on sexual orientation. Discrimination problems documented in the literature include disclosure issues in hiring, wage inequities, legal prohibitions, retention and promotion problems, harassment and abuse, surveillance, poor work evaluations, underutilization of abilities and job tracking, hate crimes and violence, social and collegial ostracism, hostile work climate, limitation of future options, and dual public–private identities (Fassinger, 1995). It also is an unfortunate reality that despite the possible ameliorating impact of their substantial career commitment and liberal gender roles, lesbians (like women in general) often are employed beneath their levels of education and skill, clustered in stereotypic occupations that are low in pay and status, and underpaid in comparison to men (Morgan & Brown, 1991). Recent studies (e.g., Badgett, 1994) have demonstrated that both lesbians and gay men earn less than their heterosexual counterparts of similar age, occupation, and location, despite generally higher levels of education. Also, although many lesbians have employment records of greater length and seniority than heterosexual women due to the inhibiting effects of marriage and children experienced more often by the latter, this advantage does not appear to be reflected in higher earnings or greater career advancement. Moreover, given that lesbians tend to exhibit gender role flexibility, their occupational locations and progress might be expected to demonstrate wider variety. However, the pervasive effects of occupational stereotyping based on gender, along with the perception of some jobs (e.g., teaching) as inappropriate for lesbians, may in fact serve to further restrict occupational entry. Thus, the reality of dual discrimi-
6305$$1531
02-22-96 07:37:29
jvba
AP: JVB
LESBIAN CAREER
167
nation, based on both gender and sexual orientation, may overridingly influence the vocational lives of lesbians. Pervasive discrimination and hostility in the workplace make individual disclosure of sexual orientation a critical vocational decision for most lesbians and gay men (Croteau, 1996; Gonsiorek, 1993). It has been noted (Garnets & Kimmel, 1991; Morgan & Brown, 1991) that different workplace settings produce varying levels of ‘‘outness’’ on the job, suggesting that work environment is a large determinant of disclosure, regardless of personal comfort with lesbian identity (Fassinger, 1995). Interestingly, geographic location also appears to be a critical factor, with large urban areas more likely to contain greater attitudinal tolerance as well as wider occupational choice and more opportunity to locate a supportive environment. Indeed, the extreme importance of tolerant workplaces to the identity-management process renders credible Elliott’s (1993) suggestion that geographic location is one of the most salient predictors of job choice for lesbians and gay men. Perhaps due to variations in workplace climate, research indicates that degree of concealment or openness about identity differs widely among individual workers (Croteau, 1996). For lesbians who remain closeted at work, identity-management strategies are adopted that range from silence and invisibility to ‘‘passing’’ (either actively or passively) as heterosexual and sharply separating work and private lives (Croteau, 1996). Moreover, research confirms that fear and anticipation of discrimination are pervasive, and often provoke adoption of identity-management strategies even in workplaces where negative actions have not (yet) occurred (Croteau, 1996). It is thus clear that fear of others’ attitudes, an important internal barrier to the career development of women in general, may operate even more strongly for lesbians, who face homophobia and heterosexism as well as sexism in the workplace. Indeed, a visible identity is sometimes associated with increased discrimination and hostility (Croteau, 1996), so that passing as heterosexual may seem a realistic adaptation strategy in a hostile work climate. However, the debilitating strain of secrecy is likely to have negative impact on occupational satisfaction and performance, as well as general mental health (Croteau & Hedstrom, 1993; Elliott, 1993; Fassinger, 1993; Gonsiorek, 1993; Morgan & Brown, 1991). It also is plausible that these effects exacerbate the guilt, self-doubt, and attributions of personal inadequacy in response to discrimination that women generally experience in the workplace; again, it becomes obvious that a documented barrier to the career development of women may operate even more perniciously in the work lives of lesbians. In addition, there are clear advantages to coming out in the workplace, in terms of combatting isolation and developing collegial support for one’s occupational goals (Fassinger, 1993). It has been suggested that fear of disclosure often exceeds actual negative consequences (Croteau & Hedstrom, 1993; Fassinger, 1993), implying that coming out, at least selectively, at work may be a tenable choice for many lesbians. Moreover, openness about identity
6305$$1531
02-22-96 07:37:29
jvba
AP: JVB
168
RUTH E. FASSINGER
aids in the elimination of a salient external barrier to the vocational progress of women: a ‘‘null’’ or unsupportive work environment created by lack of role models, mentors, and collegial support. As woman-identified women, lesbians may experience an even greater need than their heterosexual counterparts for female support, again suggesting the additive effects on lesbians of a well-documented problem in women’s career development. Issues in the Home–Work Interface
Identity-management issues in the workplace (such as those discussed above) cannot be separated from private or home life for many lesbians. As Figure 1 indicates, career implementation and adjustment for women often involve issues and conflicts related to the home–work interface and dealing with multiple roles. One area of multiple role responsibilities for many lesbians involves one’s status as a partner in a relationship with another woman, and the management of each woman’s lesbian identity in the workplace is likely to have profound effects on their personal life together (Browning et al., 1991; Fassinger, 1995). Research suggests that about 75% of lesbians are in relationships at any given time (Fassinger & Morrow, 1995; Hetherington & Orzek, 1989); moreover, both partners are likely to be employed, out of commitment to a career or the need to survive financially. Like their heterosexual dual-career counterparts, lesbians face potential problems in negotiating roles and expectations within the relationship, as well as attitudes of employers, co-workers, families, and others regarding their job decisions and plans. However, these issues may be more complex for lesbians because of the high valuing of equality in many lesbian couples and the pressures of identity management in the workplace (Fassinger, 1995). For example, many lesbians, in their commitment to relationship equality, are highly invested in both partners obtaining equally attractive jobs, posing a difficult task (particularly where choices are limited). In addition, unlike heterosexuals, who may accept income differences due to gender roles or differential earning power, lesbians are likely to view large discrepancies in earnings as disruptive of an egalitarian relationship (Fassinger, 1995). They may therefore reject job possibilities that involve temporary positions or lower salaries, thus further constraining occupational options. Identity-management constraints due to secrecy about lesbianism further compromise the processes of obtaining and adjusting to jobs. Unwillingness to acknowledge a dual-career job search to a potential employer will likely result in awkward problems in negotiations, as well as conflicts between partners about how to handle the deteriorating process (Fassinger, 1995). On the other hand, disclosure may involve the risk of losing a job opportunity or ‘‘outing’’ a closeted partner, creating a double bind that can easily lead to internal guilt, self-doubt, and fear resulting in decisional paralysis. Moreover, even if both women are willing to acknowledge their relationship to prospective employers, the institutional supports that increasingly are avail-
6305$$1531
02-22-96 07:37:29
jvba
AP: JVB
LESBIAN CAREER
169
able for the placement of heterosexual partners in dual-career job searches are less likely to exist for lesbians. Finally, the couple must negotiate how their work and personal lives will intersect, including how they will acknowledge one another in the workplace. Differences between them in comfort with lesbian identity and disclosure to others makes resolution of such dilemmas extremely challenging (Browning et al., 1991; Fassinger, 1995), resulting in relationship conflict and workplace discomfort, and thus impeding occupational adjustment for one or both partners. In addition to managing their roles as intimate partners, many lesbians also manage the role of mother. Research indicates that lesbians are likely to have children living with them, with estimates of as many as 1.5 million lesbian mothers with children (Elliott, 1993). Moreover, lesbians who are in coupled relationships both may be bringing children into the family, while increasing numbers of lesbians are choosing to have children, either as single mothers or within the context of a relationship. Unfortunately, women’s earnings remain consistently about two-thirds those of men (Fitzgerald et al., 1995), and lesbian women who have acquired children through prior heterosexual marriages are even less likely than heterosexual women to pressure ex-spouses for child support out of fear that identity will become known and custody of children will be risked. In addition, legal and financial structures (e.g., insurance benefits, medical rights regarding the partner’s children) are largely nonexistent for lesbian families, making economic stress and legal anxieties overwhelming presses in many lesbian families (Fassinger, 1995; Morgan & Brown, 1991). Moreover, institutionalized heterosexism and pervasive social disapproval further complicate lesbians’ decisions involving children, such as obtaining maternity leave to be with a new baby when one is not the birth mother (Browning et al., 1991; Fassinger, 1995). Child-care issues are long-standing, well-documented problems for working women in general, and the presence of marriage and children have consistently emerged as the most salient variables in predicting women’s vocational direction and success. Lesbians with families are subject to the same constraints of partners and children, and often must manage their family roles with considerably less external support than heterosexual women. This suggests one more way in which an oft-cited barrier to the career development of women in general may function with heightened effects in lesbian lives. On the other hand, lesbians have potential advantages over heterosexual women in managing multiple roles. Much of the current discussion related to multiple role overload for (heterosexual) women decries the lack of active involvement of men in child care and household responsibilities. Research also suggests that the situation is unlikely to change, as women express greater desire for egalitarian relationships than do men, and are still assuming most of the real burden of organizing and running a home, even in heterosexual couples who consider themselves egalitarian (Unger & Crawford, 1992). Les-
6305$$1531
02-22-96 07:37:29
jvba
AP: JVB
170
RUTH E. FASSINGER
bian relationships, however, are more likely to manifest equality in roles and tasks, resulting in real sharing of household and child-care responsibilities and thus ameliorating the effects of multiple role overload. In addition, many lesbians choose not to have children and probably are not subject to the same intense pressure to do so that heterosexual women face. Because freedom from child-care responsibilities is a documented mental health benefit for lesbians (Fassinger & Morrow, 1995; Rothblum, 1989) and the absence of children potentially frees one for more intensive career pursuits, it again becomes clear that a documented vocational barrier (multiple role demands) may be experienced differently by lesbian and heterosexual women. Fassinger (1995) noted an important additional issue related to multiple role management for lesbians—the existence of lesbian and women’s communities and the possibility of inclusion in extensive social and political networks within those communities. Despite the desire of many lesbians to embrace their communities, some may feel that visibility risks negative consequences in their occupational settings. Indeed, legal precedents support such fears; some cases involving negative actions against lesbian or gay workers have rested on membership in gay organizations (Fassinger, 1993). The additional dilemma of including community activities on resume´s and in job interviews also may be stressful. Omission of such experiences presents an inadequate picture of talents and skills and can lead to claims of misrepresentation if identity later becomes known, whereas revelation of community activities risks loss of job possibilities (Fassinger, 1995). Moreover, even when involvement in the community is not overtly unsafe, it may lead to social habits that are detrimental in more subtle ways (Fassinger, 1995). For example, job advancement often depends on extensive social networking with ‘‘old boy’’ (and heterosexual) colleagues, and obtaining access to such networks has long constituted a barrier to women’s career advancement. Lesbians may unwittingly erect this barrier in their work lives by engaging in exclusively lesbian or female professional and social interaction, thus losing important occupational information and mentoring (Hetherington & Orzek, 1989). In addition, prioritizing a highly valued community in vocational decision making may jeopardize professional opportunities, such as being demoted for refusing to move (Elliott, 1993). That many lesbians are willing to take such risks points to the significance of the community in imparting support and combatting the isolation inherent in a stigmatized identity (Fassinger, 1995). The existence of important communities in the lives of many lesbians also serves as an alert to shifts in empirical attention that are essential to the study of lesbian experience. IMPLICATIONS FOR THEORY AND RESEARCH
Brown (1989) has eloquently described the potential benefits that accrue to a body of knowledge when the experiences of those previously marginalized are articulated and added to the knowledge base. There are many
6305$$1531
02-22-96 07:37:29
jvba
AP: JVB
LESBIAN CAREER
171
conceptual areas in theory and research on women’s career development where an understanding of lesbian vocational experience might contribute to a fuller understanding of women’s vocational patterns and problems. Several examples, related to two persistent issues in women’s career development (previously noted), illustrate this potential. The first problem is the underutilization of women’s abilities in their vocational choices, and their self-tracking into a narrow band of occupational possibilities. Salient internal forces operating to maintain this pattern are usually discussed in terms of women’s restricted gender roles and the resultant internal fears, conflicts, and lack of confidence noted in Figure 1. Lesbians, on the other hand, appear as a group to demonstrate more liberal gender roles and greater role flexibility, suggesting that lesbians might be expected to make more congruent career choices and demonstrate a wider range of occupational possibilities. Morgan and Brown (1991) have suggested exploring this question in relation to Gottfredson’s (1981) theory of circumscription and compromise. They postulated that where the theory predicts occupational sex-type as the critical variable to which most people adhere in making career compromises, the more liberal gender roles of lesbians may render them less likely to exhibit this pattern. In fact, however, limited research on Gottfredson’s theory to date has indicated that interests, not occupational sex-type, predict career compromises (Fitzgerald et al., 1995). Empirical attention specifically focused on career decision processes in lesbians might aid in determining how factors other than gender roles operate to restrict the occupational choices of women. Similarly, research in lesbian populations regarding perceptions of the occupational opportunity structure as discussed by Astin (1984) and Farmer (1985) might be fruitful. Morgan and Brown (1991) have argued that societal changes, such as the identity disclosure of public figures in particular jobs, can produce sudden and dramatic changes in stereotypes of the appropriateness of certain occupations for lesbians. If this is so, then an unprecedented opportunity exists to observe such changes with a degree of control unusual in field research, in that the effects of sexual orientation as a salient variable in perceptions of the occupational opportunity structure would be quite distinct from other influences. Such study also is consistent with the call by Betz and Fitzgerald (1993; Fitzgerald & Betz, 1994) for more vigorous exploration of the structural and cultural factors that constrain women’s career behavior. In terms of structural and cultural variables, it bears repeating that the vocational behavior of lesbians often mirrors the patterns of heterosexual women in terms of concentration in traditional occupations that are low in status and pay. This occurs despite expected and documented differences in many of the internal and self variables depicted in Figure 1, a pervasive pattern suggesting that the external barriers of sexism, discrimination, and lack of support undermine the potentially facilitative effects of internal variables in lesbians. Theory and research designed to examine the effects
6305$$1531
02-22-96 07:37:29
jvba
AP: JVB
172
RUTH E. FASSINGER
of environmental obstacles to career development would contribute a great deal not only to the understanding of lesbians’ occupational behavior, but to gaps in the knowledge base regarding the vocational psychology of women more generally. The second persistent issue affecting women’s career development is the overriding salience of marriage and children in determining women’s vocational progress and achievement. Internal guilt, fears, and anxieties about role conflicts, external expectations and lack of support, and role overload (all noted in Figure 1) are usually discussed as salient factors in the inhibitory effects of marriage and children on careers for (heterosexual) women. The exploration of career patterns within the context of lesbian relationships and families can aid in a fuller understanding of these issues. For example, examining the impact on career progress of family obligations when a woman’s partner is female (vs. male) can aid in disentangling the consequences of heterosexual marriage from those of motherhood, an issue that virtually has been untouched in the study of women’s career development (Fitzgerald et al., 1995). In addition, models that directly postulate relationships among family and career role variables and vocational choice (e.g., Fassinger, 1985, 1990; O’Brien & Fassinger, 1993) can be directly tested for fit in exclusively lesbian samples to determine whether patterns that are salient in the home– work interface for women hold when only lesbians are considered (see Ormerod, 1995, for promising work in this regard). Lesbian vocational patterns also can contribute to mapping the concept of ‘‘satisficing,’’ that is, choosing an occupation that is apparently inconsistent with interests or abilities, but that constitutes a ‘‘good enough’’ choice given other anticipated roles, demands, and life circumstances (Fitzgerald & Weitzman, 1992). Vocational decisions stemming from anticipated parenting roles, for example, might be examined in relation to decisions arising from expectations regarding homophobia and heterosexism in the workplace, in order to discover similarities and differences in conditions that motivate satisficing behaviors in women. The application of sociocognitive theory to lesbian vocational behavior may be particularly promising in this regard, as it specifically addresses the role of outcome expectations in career decision making (see Morrow, Gore, & Campbell, 1996). Finally, dual-career issues represent an arena in which theory and research regarding lesbians have much to offer in addressing issues related to vocational compromises and the concept of satisficing. For example, a decision about job mobility is an extremely gendered event for most heterosexual women, in that the partner whose job must be accommodated is male, bringing into play a well-documented gender hierarchy in earning power, occupational status, and role expectations, perceived both within the couple and by outside others such as work colleagues and family members. Lesbian couples, on the other hand, are making similar kinds of decisions, presumably in the absence of (differently) gendered expectations and often invisibly, with little or no
6305$$1531
02-22-96 07:37:29
jvba
AP: JVB
LESBIAN CAREER
173
input from others outside the relationship. This creates an unusual opportunity for examining the process utilized by a couple in making occupational compromises that will be satisfactory to both partners, relatively unconfounded by the constraints that are implicit for many women in heterosexual relationships. Similarly, the impact of isolation on dual-career decision making also might be explored in lesbian relationships, as well as the identity-management strategies used by lesbian couples in negotiating simultaneous job searches, in order to determine ways in which such situations may be related to satisficing behaviors in occupational decisions. In summary, it should be apparent that rethinking some of the common assumptions in the vocational psychology of women must occur in order to comprehensively integrate lesbian experience. In examining most of the presumed barriers to women’s career development, it appears that their effects may be intensified in the vocational experiences of lesbians, primarily due to the additive effects of homophobia and heterosexism overlaid upon pervasive sexism in lesbian lives. In a few areas, however, such as those tapping gender role issues and lesbian relationships and community, possible facilitative effects of a lesbian identity appear to exist. Responsible theorizing and research must begin with clear and consistent articulation of constructs that accurately describe lesbian vocational experience; qualitative approaches may be useful in this regard, particularly those that encompass theory building in their analytical methods. Then much-needed psychometric work can occur (Croteau, 1996; Fassinger, 1995), followed by research aimed at systematic testing of hypotheses, assumptions, and models. The theoretical and empirical journeys on which we can embark are seemingly endless, and offer to contribute much to understanding the vocational issues and needs of all women. REFERENCES Astin, H. S. (1984). The meaning of work in women’s lives: A sociopsychological model of career choice and work behavior. The Counseling Psychologist, 12, 117–126. Badgett, M. V. L. (1994). Equal pay for equal families. Academe, May-June, 26–30. Betz, N. E., & Fitzgerald, L. F. (1987). The career psychology of women. San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Betz, N. E., & Fitzgerald, L. F. (1993). Individuality and diversity: Theory and research in counseling psychology. Annual Review of Psychology, 44, 343–381. Bieschke, K. J., & Matthews, C. (1996). Career counselor attitudes and behaviors towards gay, lesbian, and bisexual clients. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 48, 243–255. Borgen, F. H. (1991). Megatrends and milestones in vocational behavior: A 20 year counseling psychology perspective. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 39, 263–290. Brown, L. S. (1989). New voices, new visions: Toward a lesbian/gay paradigm for psychology. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 13, 445–458. Browning, C., Reynolds, A., & Dworkin, S. (1991). Affirmative psychotherapy for lesbian women. The Counseling Psychologist, 19, 177–196. Croteau, J. M. (1996). Research on the work experiences of lesbian, gay, and bisexual people: An integrative review of methodology and findings. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 48, 195–209. Croteau, J. M., & Hedstrom, S. M. (1993). Integrating commonality and difference: The key to
6305$$1531
02-22-96 07:37:29
jvba
AP: JVB
174
RUTH E. FASSINGER
career counseling with lesbian women and gay men. Career Development Quarterly, 41, 201–209. Elliott, J. E. (1993). Career development with lesbian and gay clients. Career Development Quarterly, 41, 210–226. Etringer, B. D., Hillerbrand, E., & Hetherington, C. (1990). The influence of sexual orientation on career decision making: A research note. Journal of Homosexuality, 19, 108–111. Farmer, H. S. (1985). Model of career and achievement motivation for women and men. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 32, 363–390. Fassinger, R. E. (1985). A causal model of career choice in college women. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 27, 123–153. Fassinger, R. E. (1990). Causal models of career choice in two samples of college women. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 36, 225–240. Fassinger, R. E. (1991). The hidden minority: Issues and challenges in working with lesbian women and gay men. The Counseling Psychologist, 19, 157–176. Fassinger, R. E. (1993). And gladly teach: Lesbian and gay issues in education. In L. Diamant (Ed.), Homosexual issues in the workplace. (pp. 119–142). New York: Wiley. Fassinger, R. E. (1995). From invisibility to integration: Lesbian identity in the workplace. Career Development Quarterly, 44, 148–167. Fassinger, R. E., & Morrow, S. L. (1995). OverCome: Repositioning lesbian sexualities. In L. Diamant & R. McAnulty (Eds.), The psychology of sexual orientation, behavior, and identity: A Handbook (pp. 197–219). Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group, Inc. Fitzgerald, L. F., & Betz, N. E. (1994). Career development in cultural context: The role of gender, race, class, and sexual orientation. In M. Savickas & R. Lent (Eds.), Convergence in career development theories (pp. 103–117). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press. Fitzgerald, L. F., Fassinger, R. E., & Betz, N. E. (1995). Theoretical issues in the vocational psychology of women. In W. B. Walsh & S. H. Osipow (Eds.), Handbook of vocational psychology (2nd ed.) (pp. 67–109). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Fitzgerald, L. F., & Weitzman, L. M. (1992). Women’s career development: Theory and practice from a feminist perspective. In Z. Leibowitz & D. Lea (Eds.), Adult career development (2nd ed.) (pp. 124–160). Alexandria, VA: National Career Development Association. Garnets, L., Hancock, K. A., Cochran, S. D., Goodchilds, J., & Peplau, L. A. (1991). Issues in psychotherapy with lesbians and gay men: A survey of psychologists. American Psychologist, 46, 964–972. Garnets, L., & Kimmel, D. (1991). Lesbian and gay male dimensions in the psychological study of human diversity. In J. D. Goodchilds (Ed.), Psychological perspectives on human diversity in America. (pp. 137–192). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Gonsiorek, C. J. (1993). Threat, stress, and adjustment: Mental health and the workplace for gay and lesbian individuals. In L. Diamant (Ed.), Homosexual issues in the workplace (pp. 243– 264). New York: Wiley. Gottfredson, L. S. (1981). Circumscription and compromise: A developmental theory of occupational aspirations. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 28, 545–579. Hetherington, C., & Orzek, A. M. (1989). Career counseling and life planning with lesbian women. Journal of Counseling and Development, 68, 52–57. Lee, J. A., & Brown, R. G. (1993). Hiring, firing, and promoting. In L. Diamant (Ed.), Homosexual issues in the workplace. (pp. 45–62). New York: Wiley. Morgan, K. S., & Brown, L. S. (1991). Lesbian career development, work behavior, and vocational counseling. The Counseling Psychologist, 19, 273–291. Morrow, S. L., Gore, P. A., Jr., & Campbell, B. W. (1996). The application of a sociocognitive framework to the career development of lesbian women and gay men. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 48, 136–148.
6305$$1531
02-22-96 07:37:29
jvba
AP: JVB
LESBIAN CAREER
175
O’Brien, K. M. (in press). The influence of psychological separation and parental attachment on the career development of adolescent women. Journal of Vocational Behavior. O’Brien, K. M., & Fassinger, R. E. (1993). A causal model of the career orientation and career choice of adolescent women. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 40, 456–469. Ormerod, A. J. (1995). Lesbian and heterosexual women’s career choice: A covariance structural analysis. Unpublished manuscript, Indiana University, Bloomington. Pope, M. (1992). Bias in the interpretation of psychological tests. In F. Gutierrez & S. Dworkin (Eds.), Counseling gay men and lesbians: Journey to the end of the rainbow (pp. 277–292). Alexandria, VA: American Counseling Association. Rothblum, E. D. (1989). Introduction: Lesbianism as a model of a positive lifestyle for women. Women and Therapy, 8, 1–12. Unger, R., & Crawford, M. (1992). Women & gender: A feminist psychology. New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc. Received: May 22, 1995
6305$$1531
02-22-96 07:37:29
jvba
AP: JVB
48, 160–175 (1996)
0016
Notes from the Margins: Integrating Lesbian Experience into the Vocational Psychology of Women RUTH E. FASSINGER University of Maryland at College Park This article integrates literature regarding lesbians and work into a comprehensive framework originally developed to articulate the unique vocational issues of women (Betz & Fitzgerald, 1987), and thereby explores the applicability of this framework to lesbian experience. More specifically, the article explores internal and external barriers to women’s career choice, implementation, and adjustment, with speculation about how such barriers function in the vocational experiences of lesbians. The article concludes with implications for theory and research. q 1996 Academic Press, Inc.
INTRODUCTION
The study of women’s career development has been identified as one of the most vigorous areas of research in vocational psychology (Borgen, 1991; Fitzgerald, Fassinger, & Betz, 1995; Fassinger, 1995). However, it has been noted that gaps exist in this literature, with critique focused on the limited theoretical and empirical attention to the impact of race and ethnicity, class, sexual orientation, and other demographic variables on women’s occupational behavior (Betz & Fitzgerald, 1993; Fitzgerald & Betz, 1994). Of particular interest in this special journal issue is the examination of theoretical assumptions regarding the vocational psychology of women in terms of their applicability to lesbians (and to bisexual women insofar as their lifestyle choices include other women). Because vocational identity is interrelated with other aspects of personal identity, both gender and sexual orientation may be assumed to exert influence on the vocational experiences of many lesbians (Fassinger, 1995). Existing literature in the vocational psychology of women provides an understanding of the gendered elements of lesbians’ career opportunities and behavior. In addition, an evolving literature has begun to document vocational issues of I thank Nancy Betz and Karen O’Brien for their helpful suggestions regarding earlier drafts of this article. Address correspondence and reprint requests to: Ruth E. Fassinger, Ph.D., Department of Counseling and Personnel Services, College of Education, University of Maryland at College Park, College Park, Maryland 20742. E-mail: [email protected]. 160 0001-8791/96 $18.00 Copyright q 1996 by Academic Press, Inc. All rights of reproduction in any form reserved.
6305$$1531
02-22-96 07:37:29
jvba
AP: JVB
LESBIAN CAREER
161
lesbians that are related to sexual orientation and the negotiation of a stigmatized identity in occupational settings. Most of the literature is atheoretical and anecdotal, and the few empirical studies that exist are quite compromised methodologically (Croteau, 1996). However, reviews by this author (Fassinger, 1995) and Morgan and Brown (1991) represent initial attempts to consider lesbian career issues within the larger context of personal and occupational identity development, and recent vocational choice theories, respectively. A foundation thus exists for a more formal articulation of the relationship between theory in women’s career development and lesbian vocational issues. The purpose of this article is to integrate the existing literature regarding lesbians in the workplace into a comprehensive framework originally developed to articulate the unique vocational issues of women, and thereby to explore explicitly the applicability of this framework to lesbian experience. Thus (similar to the earlier review; Fassinger, 1995), the present discussion is conceptualized according to internal and external barriers to women’s vocational choice and implementation and adjustment, adapted from Betz and Fitzgerald (1987) and shown in Figure 1. These barriers represent a summary of extensive literature aimed at elucidating two pervasive issues in women’s career development: the persistent underutilization of women’s abilities in their vocational choices and progress, and the overriding salience of marriage and children on their career achievement (Betz & Fitzgerald, 1987). As Figure 1 illustrates, vocational choice focuses on educational and vocational planning, including self variables (e.g., lack of confidence) and external constraints (e.g., occupational stereotyping). Vocational implementation and adjustment involve career entry and satisfaction in the workplace, also including self variables (e.g., fear of others’ attitudes) and external obstacles (e.g., occupational discrimination). Although all barriers listed in Figure 1 may potentially affect lesbians as women, starred items are those that have been (implicitly or explicitly) identified in previous literature as particularly relevant to sexual orientation and therefore are addressed specifically in the present discussion. It should be noted that this article builds on an earlier attempt (Fassinger, 1995) at theorizing in this area; the emphasis of the previous work was on the integration of lesbian identity development theories and career issues, whereas the present article focuses on systematically conceptualizing the vocational psychology of lesbians within a framework used to describe women’s career development. The article first presents discussion of issues regarding vocational choice, in terms of barriers to occupational choice related to coming out, as well as vocationally facilitative aspects of lesbian identity. The article then presents discussion of vocational implementation and adjustment, including workplace discrimination and its impact on identity management, as well as issues regarding the home–work interface. The article concludes with a brief discussion of implications of these issues for theory and research.
6305$$1531
02-22-96 07:37:29
jvba
AP: JVB
162
RUTH E. FASSINGER Barriers to Vocational Choice Internal/Self
External/Environmental
Home–Career Conflict Fear of Success Math Anxiety and Low Math Self-Efficacy Underestimation of Capabilities * Lack of Self-Confidence and DecisionMaking Skills
* Occupational Stereotyping and Limited Perceived Choices * Bias in Counseling and Testing * Lack of Role Models * Lack of Support from Parents, Families, Spouses, Peers, Faculty, Resulting in a ‘‘Null’’ Educational Environment
Barriers to Vocational Implementation and Adjustment Internal/Self
External/Environmental
* Self-Doubt, Internalizing Discrimination * Guilt * Fear of Others’ Attitudes
* Multiple Role Issues in the Home–Work Interface * Occupational Discrimination * Harassment * Occupational Stereotyping * Attitudes of Family, Spouse * Attitudes of Employers, Co-workers, Supervisees * ‘‘Old Boy’’ Systems Being Barred from Unions, Apprenticeships, Financial Aid * Lack of Role Models, Mentors, Colleagues (a ‘‘Null’’ Occupational Environment) Tokenism
FIG. 1. Barriers to women’s career development (adapted from Betz & Fitzgerald, 1987). *Indicates barrier discussed in this article.
ISSUES IN VOCATIONAL CHOICE
The critical importance and timing of the lesbian identity development process in relation to vocational behavior has been discussed in previous literature (e.g., Fassinger, 1995; Morgan & Brown, 1991). Unlike minority groups in which vocational development occurs within the context of an obvious, enduring identity, many lesbians do not become fully aware of their identity until adolescence or adulthood, when they already may be actively engaged in career planning. And timing notwithstanding, ‘‘coming out’’ to self and others confounds the vocational development of lesbians in several critical ways, internally in self-confidence and decision making, and externally in all of the areas noted in Figure 1. The following sections discuss vocational barriers related to coming out, and facilitative aspects of lesbianism in regard to career choice.
6305$$1531
02-22-96 07:37:29
jvba
AP: JVB
LESBIAN CAREER
163
Barriers Related to Coming Out
Lesbians in the coming-out process often are deeply absorbed in explorations of sexuality, intimacy, community, and family attitudes, allowing limited attention to vocational decisions and tasks. Because identity issues for lesbians often remain developmentally focal for an extended period of time, career issues may be severely neglected (Croteau & Hedstrom, 1993; Fassinger, 1995). This potentially exacerbates career indecision, anxiety, and lack of self-confidence, because one may be engaging in these tasks long after peers have done so and internalizing a normative developmental delay as individual inadequacy. Coming out as a lesbian also may interact with occupational stereotyping, a documented barrier to women’s career choice, in eliminating possible career options because of perceptions that those occupations might be inhospitable to or, conversely, are associated with lesbians (Fassinger, 1995; Hetherington & Orzek, 1989). The need to generate and explore additional alternatives will likely lengthen the process of vocational choice (Fassinger, 1995), especially given that the widespread invisibility of lesbian and gay people makes realistic assessment of occupational climates difficult at best. Relatedly, lack of role models, which has been documented consistently in the literature to have negative impact on the career development of women, is likely to be particularly detrimental to lesbian women, because many lesbians are ‘‘closeted’’ in the workplace (Fassinger, 1991; Garnets & Kimmel, 1991) and thus are not positioned to be mentors or models for other lesbians. Another barrier to career planning is that many lesbians are abandoned by their families as a result of coming out, with financial and psychological support withdrawn. Research suggests that normative processes of parental attachment and individuation are important to the vocational development of young women (O’Brien, in press; O’Brien & Fassinger, 1993). Moreover, parental and family support (particularly for nontraditional careers) repeatedly has been documented as a facilitative factor in women’s career development. Thus, the loss of such support is likely to seriously impede vocational planning for some lesbians (Fassinger, 1995). In addition, the coming-out process for many lesbians results in transitory but precipitous decreases in self-esteem and self-confidence, and new confusion and complexities in self-concept (Fassinger, 1995; Hetherington & Orzek, 1989). It is well documented in the women’s career development literature that a positive self-concept is strongly predictive of variables related to career choice optimization (e.g., decision making) and that an unhealthy self-concept constrains career planning (Betz & Fitzgerald, 1987). Again, an oft-cited barrier (low self-confidence) operating in the career planning and choice of women in general is likely to be particularly debilitating to those struggling with devaluation and disregard related to sexual identity. In addition, the anxiety and confusion of maintaining secrecy about identity can further impair
6305$$1531
02-22-96 07:37:29
jvba
AP: JVB
164
RUTH E. FASSINGER
productive career planning efforts (Elliott, 1993). Moreover, secrecy about emergent identity makes it very unlikely that professional help will be sought in dealing with fear and confusion related to lesbianism. Two final barriers to career choice in lesbians are related to potential bias in vocational testing and counseling. Pope (1992) has considered possible harmful effects of a minority sexual orientation on the results of vocational and personality tests; he points particularly to the likelihood of depression and anxiety provoked by atypical interests or fears of sexual orientation being revealed, and the resultant difficulties in interpreting flat, erratic, or pathological profiles. Test bias (including attempts at correction) is documented extensively in the women’s career development literature, and it certainly is plausible that lesbian identity further confounds the testing process. In addition, lesbians face the possibility of counselor bias when they seek professional assistance (Garnets, Hancock, Cochran, Goodchilds, & Peplau, 1991), particularly in organizational climates that are not affirmative of lesbian, gay, or bisexual people (Bieschke & Matthews, 1996). Such bias might range from overt discouragement regarding occupations in which lesbianism is assumed to have negative impact on vulnerable others (e.g., occupations involving children), to subtle bias against activities seen as encouraging manhating or unfeminine behavior (e.g., women’s studies programs). Bias also might be reflected in lack of counselor awareness of the potential impact of lesbian identity on vocational planning, or inadequate diagnostic sophistication in identifying counseling issues that signal struggles related to sexual identity. When bias related to sexual orientation potentially interacts with pervasive and well-documented bias related to gender, it becomes quite obvious that lesbians may encounter significant obstacles in choosing a career. Facilitative Factors in Vocational Choice
Fassinger (1995) has pointed out that, despite a number of vocational barriers that lesbians may face, there also are important facilitative aspects of lesbian identity related to career planning and choice. Most salient among these is that lesbians tend to demonstrate more nontraditional, androgynous gender roles than do heterosexual women (Browning, Reynolds, & Dworkin, 1991; Garnets & Kimmel, 1991; Hetherington & Orzek, 1989; Morgan & Brown, 1991), and many lesbians also are feminists, which further liberalizes their gender roles (Fassinger, 1995). Thus, lesbians, in comparison to heterosexual women, are less likely to make vocational and life choices based on accommodating men or conforming to traditional gender roles. Extensive literature in women’s career development repeatedly points to traditional feminine socialization as restrictive of women’s occupational choices and behavior, and documents the facilitative nature of more nontraditional gender roles (e.g., Betz & Fitzgerald, 1987; Fassinger, 1985, 1990; Fitzgerald et al., 1995). Thus, lesbians’ liberal gender roles might permit them considerable
6305$$1531
02-22-96 07:37:29
jvba
AP: JVB
LESBIAN CAREER
165
flexibility in career choice, particularly in selecting occupations that are nontraditional for women (Morgan & Brown, 1991). Another aspect of lesbian identity that may be facilitative of choosing a career is that lesbians, unlike many heterosexual women, do not anticipate depending on men for financial stability (Fassinger, 1995). Also, despite the pooling of resources in many lesbian couples, lesbians tend to maintain some degree of financial independence from their partners, perhaps partly because institutional prohibitions (e.g., laws, company policies) hinder economic and legal dependence in same-sex relationships (Morgan & Brown, 1991). Thus, lesbians may consciously or unconsciously anticipate the certainty of a career throughout the long process of vocational development, a speculation supported by an estimated employment rate of about 90% in this population (Elliott, 1993; Morgan & Brown, 1991). An expectation of providing for oneself financially, as well as the disregard for traditionally feminine occupations that sometimes exists in lesbian communities (Morgan & Brown, 1991), may further motivate the consideration of more nontraditional, lucrative careers among lesbians. Although this greater arena of opportunity appears to be severely compromised by pervasive occupational discrimination (see below), research suggests more certainty and satisfaction with career choices in lesbians than in gay men (Etringer, Hillerbrand, & Hetherington, 1990); it may be that the latitude in vocational planning experienced by many lesbians plays a part in accounting for these gender differences (Fassinger, 1995). Finally, it is possible that the strong vocational focus of many lesbians may, in fact, buffer the coming-out process. For some, career planning and preparation may provide a stable focus and positive aspects of identity at a time when identity and self-image are in tremendous flux. The maintenance of vocational focus also may help to remind families that the coming-out process they are witnessing is not indicative of mental collapse, and signals the stability of personality and interests despite changes in sexual identity and lifestyle choices. Indeed, a client of this author once commented that she was experiencing far more trepidation over telling her parents that she was changing her major than she had experienced over telling them that she was a lesbian! ISSUES IN VOCATIONAL IMPLEMENTATION AND ADJUSTMENT
In the process of implementing a career choice and adjusting to the workplace, age and cohort are critically important in the intersection between identity and work for lesbians. Coming out during adulthood within the context of a stabilized career is a common experience among lesbians; one’s emerging identity therefore must be integrated into an occupation in which prior investments of time, energy, and money make it unreasonable to consider other options (Fassinger, 1995; Morgan & Brown, 1991). The process of coming out, in turn, can be quite hindered by fear that one’s job will be endangered by one’s emerging lesbianism (Fassinger, 1995). Lesbian identity
6305$$1531
02-22-96 07:37:29
jvba
AP: JVB
166
RUTH E. FASSINGER
and vocational issues thus become inextricably interwoven as the individual grapples with the workplace negotiation of a stigmatized identity, and issues of identity management potentially intersect with almost every barrier to implementation and adjustment noted in Figure 1. The following sections discuss these issues in terms of occupational discrimination and identity management and the home–work interface. Workplace Discrimination and Identity Management
Similar to women in general, the most salient barrier to the vocational implementation and adjustment of lesbians is the cluster of environmental variables related to occupational stereotyping, discrimination, and harassment. Occupational discrimination against lesbians and gay men has been extensively documented (see Croteau, 1996; Elliott, 1993; Fassinger, 1991, 1993; Garnets & Kimmel, 1991; Lee & Brown, 1993). Lesbians, because they experience a double or, for women of color, triple minority status in the work world, are subject to even greater discrimination based on the intersection of gender, sexual orientation, and race (Elliott, 1993; Fassinger, 1995; Morgan & Brown, 1991). Lee and Brown (1993) point out that, although existing legal protections for lesbians and gay men are more extensive in the public than private sector, no federal or national standards exist for addressing employment discrimination based on sexual orientation. Discrimination problems documented in the literature include disclosure issues in hiring, wage inequities, legal prohibitions, retention and promotion problems, harassment and abuse, surveillance, poor work evaluations, underutilization of abilities and job tracking, hate crimes and violence, social and collegial ostracism, hostile work climate, limitation of future options, and dual public–private identities (Fassinger, 1995). It also is an unfortunate reality that despite the possible ameliorating impact of their substantial career commitment and liberal gender roles, lesbians (like women in general) often are employed beneath their levels of education and skill, clustered in stereotypic occupations that are low in pay and status, and underpaid in comparison to men (Morgan & Brown, 1991). Recent studies (e.g., Badgett, 1994) have demonstrated that both lesbians and gay men earn less than their heterosexual counterparts of similar age, occupation, and location, despite generally higher levels of education. Also, although many lesbians have employment records of greater length and seniority than heterosexual women due to the inhibiting effects of marriage and children experienced more often by the latter, this advantage does not appear to be reflected in higher earnings or greater career advancement. Moreover, given that lesbians tend to exhibit gender role flexibility, their occupational locations and progress might be expected to demonstrate wider variety. However, the pervasive effects of occupational stereotyping based on gender, along with the perception of some jobs (e.g., teaching) as inappropriate for lesbians, may in fact serve to further restrict occupational entry. Thus, the reality of dual discrimi-
6305$$1531
02-22-96 07:37:29
jvba
AP: JVB
LESBIAN CAREER
167
nation, based on both gender and sexual orientation, may overridingly influence the vocational lives of lesbians. Pervasive discrimination and hostility in the workplace make individual disclosure of sexual orientation a critical vocational decision for most lesbians and gay men (Croteau, 1996; Gonsiorek, 1993). It has been noted (Garnets & Kimmel, 1991; Morgan & Brown, 1991) that different workplace settings produce varying levels of ‘‘outness’’ on the job, suggesting that work environment is a large determinant of disclosure, regardless of personal comfort with lesbian identity (Fassinger, 1995). Interestingly, geographic location also appears to be a critical factor, with large urban areas more likely to contain greater attitudinal tolerance as well as wider occupational choice and more opportunity to locate a supportive environment. Indeed, the extreme importance of tolerant workplaces to the identity-management process renders credible Elliott’s (1993) suggestion that geographic location is one of the most salient predictors of job choice for lesbians and gay men. Perhaps due to variations in workplace climate, research indicates that degree of concealment or openness about identity differs widely among individual workers (Croteau, 1996). For lesbians who remain closeted at work, identity-management strategies are adopted that range from silence and invisibility to ‘‘passing’’ (either actively or passively) as heterosexual and sharply separating work and private lives (Croteau, 1996). Moreover, research confirms that fear and anticipation of discrimination are pervasive, and often provoke adoption of identity-management strategies even in workplaces where negative actions have not (yet) occurred (Croteau, 1996). It is thus clear that fear of others’ attitudes, an important internal barrier to the career development of women in general, may operate even more strongly for lesbians, who face homophobia and heterosexism as well as sexism in the workplace. Indeed, a visible identity is sometimes associated with increased discrimination and hostility (Croteau, 1996), so that passing as heterosexual may seem a realistic adaptation strategy in a hostile work climate. However, the debilitating strain of secrecy is likely to have negative impact on occupational satisfaction and performance, as well as general mental health (Croteau & Hedstrom, 1993; Elliott, 1993; Fassinger, 1993; Gonsiorek, 1993; Morgan & Brown, 1991). It also is plausible that these effects exacerbate the guilt, self-doubt, and attributions of personal inadequacy in response to discrimination that women generally experience in the workplace; again, it becomes obvious that a documented barrier to the career development of women may operate even more perniciously in the work lives of lesbians. In addition, there are clear advantages to coming out in the workplace, in terms of combatting isolation and developing collegial support for one’s occupational goals (Fassinger, 1993). It has been suggested that fear of disclosure often exceeds actual negative consequences (Croteau & Hedstrom, 1993; Fassinger, 1993), implying that coming out, at least selectively, at work may be a tenable choice for many lesbians. Moreover, openness about identity
6305$$1531
02-22-96 07:37:29
jvba
AP: JVB
168
RUTH E. FASSINGER
aids in the elimination of a salient external barrier to the vocational progress of women: a ‘‘null’’ or unsupportive work environment created by lack of role models, mentors, and collegial support. As woman-identified women, lesbians may experience an even greater need than their heterosexual counterparts for female support, again suggesting the additive effects on lesbians of a well-documented problem in women’s career development. Issues in the Home–Work Interface
Identity-management issues in the workplace (such as those discussed above) cannot be separated from private or home life for many lesbians. As Figure 1 indicates, career implementation and adjustment for women often involve issues and conflicts related to the home–work interface and dealing with multiple roles. One area of multiple role responsibilities for many lesbians involves one’s status as a partner in a relationship with another woman, and the management of each woman’s lesbian identity in the workplace is likely to have profound effects on their personal life together (Browning et al., 1991; Fassinger, 1995). Research suggests that about 75% of lesbians are in relationships at any given time (Fassinger & Morrow, 1995; Hetherington & Orzek, 1989); moreover, both partners are likely to be employed, out of commitment to a career or the need to survive financially. Like their heterosexual dual-career counterparts, lesbians face potential problems in negotiating roles and expectations within the relationship, as well as attitudes of employers, co-workers, families, and others regarding their job decisions and plans. However, these issues may be more complex for lesbians because of the high valuing of equality in many lesbian couples and the pressures of identity management in the workplace (Fassinger, 1995). For example, many lesbians, in their commitment to relationship equality, are highly invested in both partners obtaining equally attractive jobs, posing a difficult task (particularly where choices are limited). In addition, unlike heterosexuals, who may accept income differences due to gender roles or differential earning power, lesbians are likely to view large discrepancies in earnings as disruptive of an egalitarian relationship (Fassinger, 1995). They may therefore reject job possibilities that involve temporary positions or lower salaries, thus further constraining occupational options. Identity-management constraints due to secrecy about lesbianism further compromise the processes of obtaining and adjusting to jobs. Unwillingness to acknowledge a dual-career job search to a potential employer will likely result in awkward problems in negotiations, as well as conflicts between partners about how to handle the deteriorating process (Fassinger, 1995). On the other hand, disclosure may involve the risk of losing a job opportunity or ‘‘outing’’ a closeted partner, creating a double bind that can easily lead to internal guilt, self-doubt, and fear resulting in decisional paralysis. Moreover, even if both women are willing to acknowledge their relationship to prospective employers, the institutional supports that increasingly are avail-
6305$$1531
02-22-96 07:37:29
jvba
AP: JVB
LESBIAN CAREER
169
able for the placement of heterosexual partners in dual-career job searches are less likely to exist for lesbians. Finally, the couple must negotiate how their work and personal lives will intersect, including how they will acknowledge one another in the workplace. Differences between them in comfort with lesbian identity and disclosure to others makes resolution of such dilemmas extremely challenging (Browning et al., 1991; Fassinger, 1995), resulting in relationship conflict and workplace discomfort, and thus impeding occupational adjustment for one or both partners. In addition to managing their roles as intimate partners, many lesbians also manage the role of mother. Research indicates that lesbians are likely to have children living with them, with estimates of as many as 1.5 million lesbian mothers with children (Elliott, 1993). Moreover, lesbians who are in coupled relationships both may be bringing children into the family, while increasing numbers of lesbians are choosing to have children, either as single mothers or within the context of a relationship. Unfortunately, women’s earnings remain consistently about two-thirds those of men (Fitzgerald et al., 1995), and lesbian women who have acquired children through prior heterosexual marriages are even less likely than heterosexual women to pressure ex-spouses for child support out of fear that identity will become known and custody of children will be risked. In addition, legal and financial structures (e.g., insurance benefits, medical rights regarding the partner’s children) are largely nonexistent for lesbian families, making economic stress and legal anxieties overwhelming presses in many lesbian families (Fassinger, 1995; Morgan & Brown, 1991). Moreover, institutionalized heterosexism and pervasive social disapproval further complicate lesbians’ decisions involving children, such as obtaining maternity leave to be with a new baby when one is not the birth mother (Browning et al., 1991; Fassinger, 1995). Child-care issues are long-standing, well-documented problems for working women in general, and the presence of marriage and children have consistently emerged as the most salient variables in predicting women’s vocational direction and success. Lesbians with families are subject to the same constraints of partners and children, and often must manage their family roles with considerably less external support than heterosexual women. This suggests one more way in which an oft-cited barrier to the career development of women in general may function with heightened effects in lesbian lives. On the other hand, lesbians have potential advantages over heterosexual women in managing multiple roles. Much of the current discussion related to multiple role overload for (heterosexual) women decries the lack of active involvement of men in child care and household responsibilities. Research also suggests that the situation is unlikely to change, as women express greater desire for egalitarian relationships than do men, and are still assuming most of the real burden of organizing and running a home, even in heterosexual couples who consider themselves egalitarian (Unger & Crawford, 1992). Les-
6305$$1531
02-22-96 07:37:29
jvba
AP: JVB
170
RUTH E. FASSINGER
bian relationships, however, are more likely to manifest equality in roles and tasks, resulting in real sharing of household and child-care responsibilities and thus ameliorating the effects of multiple role overload. In addition, many lesbians choose not to have children and probably are not subject to the same intense pressure to do so that heterosexual women face. Because freedom from child-care responsibilities is a documented mental health benefit for lesbians (Fassinger & Morrow, 1995; Rothblum, 1989) and the absence of children potentially frees one for more intensive career pursuits, it again becomes clear that a documented vocational barrier (multiple role demands) may be experienced differently by lesbian and heterosexual women. Fassinger (1995) noted an important additional issue related to multiple role management for lesbians—the existence of lesbian and women’s communities and the possibility of inclusion in extensive social and political networks within those communities. Despite the desire of many lesbians to embrace their communities, some may feel that visibility risks negative consequences in their occupational settings. Indeed, legal precedents support such fears; some cases involving negative actions against lesbian or gay workers have rested on membership in gay organizations (Fassinger, 1993). The additional dilemma of including community activities on resume´s and in job interviews also may be stressful. Omission of such experiences presents an inadequate picture of talents and skills and can lead to claims of misrepresentation if identity later becomes known, whereas revelation of community activities risks loss of job possibilities (Fassinger, 1995). Moreover, even when involvement in the community is not overtly unsafe, it may lead to social habits that are detrimental in more subtle ways (Fassinger, 1995). For example, job advancement often depends on extensive social networking with ‘‘old boy’’ (and heterosexual) colleagues, and obtaining access to such networks has long constituted a barrier to women’s career advancement. Lesbians may unwittingly erect this barrier in their work lives by engaging in exclusively lesbian or female professional and social interaction, thus losing important occupational information and mentoring (Hetherington & Orzek, 1989). In addition, prioritizing a highly valued community in vocational decision making may jeopardize professional opportunities, such as being demoted for refusing to move (Elliott, 1993). That many lesbians are willing to take such risks points to the significance of the community in imparting support and combatting the isolation inherent in a stigmatized identity (Fassinger, 1995). The existence of important communities in the lives of many lesbians also serves as an alert to shifts in empirical attention that are essential to the study of lesbian experience. IMPLICATIONS FOR THEORY AND RESEARCH
Brown (1989) has eloquently described the potential benefits that accrue to a body of knowledge when the experiences of those previously marginalized are articulated and added to the knowledge base. There are many
6305$$1531
02-22-96 07:37:29
jvba
AP: JVB
LESBIAN CAREER
171
conceptual areas in theory and research on women’s career development where an understanding of lesbian vocational experience might contribute to a fuller understanding of women’s vocational patterns and problems. Several examples, related to two persistent issues in women’s career development (previously noted), illustrate this potential. The first problem is the underutilization of women’s abilities in their vocational choices, and their self-tracking into a narrow band of occupational possibilities. Salient internal forces operating to maintain this pattern are usually discussed in terms of women’s restricted gender roles and the resultant internal fears, conflicts, and lack of confidence noted in Figure 1. Lesbians, on the other hand, appear as a group to demonstrate more liberal gender roles and greater role flexibility, suggesting that lesbians might be expected to make more congruent career choices and demonstrate a wider range of occupational possibilities. Morgan and Brown (1991) have suggested exploring this question in relation to Gottfredson’s (1981) theory of circumscription and compromise. They postulated that where the theory predicts occupational sex-type as the critical variable to which most people adhere in making career compromises, the more liberal gender roles of lesbians may render them less likely to exhibit this pattern. In fact, however, limited research on Gottfredson’s theory to date has indicated that interests, not occupational sex-type, predict career compromises (Fitzgerald et al., 1995). Empirical attention specifically focused on career decision processes in lesbians might aid in determining how factors other than gender roles operate to restrict the occupational choices of women. Similarly, research in lesbian populations regarding perceptions of the occupational opportunity structure as discussed by Astin (1984) and Farmer (1985) might be fruitful. Morgan and Brown (1991) have argued that societal changes, such as the identity disclosure of public figures in particular jobs, can produce sudden and dramatic changes in stereotypes of the appropriateness of certain occupations for lesbians. If this is so, then an unprecedented opportunity exists to observe such changes with a degree of control unusual in field research, in that the effects of sexual orientation as a salient variable in perceptions of the occupational opportunity structure would be quite distinct from other influences. Such study also is consistent with the call by Betz and Fitzgerald (1993; Fitzgerald & Betz, 1994) for more vigorous exploration of the structural and cultural factors that constrain women’s career behavior. In terms of structural and cultural variables, it bears repeating that the vocational behavior of lesbians often mirrors the patterns of heterosexual women in terms of concentration in traditional occupations that are low in status and pay. This occurs despite expected and documented differences in many of the internal and self variables depicted in Figure 1, a pervasive pattern suggesting that the external barriers of sexism, discrimination, and lack of support undermine the potentially facilitative effects of internal variables in lesbians. Theory and research designed to examine the effects
6305$$1531
02-22-96 07:37:29
jvba
AP: JVB
172
RUTH E. FASSINGER
of environmental obstacles to career development would contribute a great deal not only to the understanding of lesbians’ occupational behavior, but to gaps in the knowledge base regarding the vocational psychology of women more generally. The second persistent issue affecting women’s career development is the overriding salience of marriage and children in determining women’s vocational progress and achievement. Internal guilt, fears, and anxieties about role conflicts, external expectations and lack of support, and role overload (all noted in Figure 1) are usually discussed as salient factors in the inhibitory effects of marriage and children on careers for (heterosexual) women. The exploration of career patterns within the context of lesbian relationships and families can aid in a fuller understanding of these issues. For example, examining the impact on career progress of family obligations when a woman’s partner is female (vs. male) can aid in disentangling the consequences of heterosexual marriage from those of motherhood, an issue that virtually has been untouched in the study of women’s career development (Fitzgerald et al., 1995). In addition, models that directly postulate relationships among family and career role variables and vocational choice (e.g., Fassinger, 1985, 1990; O’Brien & Fassinger, 1993) can be directly tested for fit in exclusively lesbian samples to determine whether patterns that are salient in the home– work interface for women hold when only lesbians are considered (see Ormerod, 1995, for promising work in this regard). Lesbian vocational patterns also can contribute to mapping the concept of ‘‘satisficing,’’ that is, choosing an occupation that is apparently inconsistent with interests or abilities, but that constitutes a ‘‘good enough’’ choice given other anticipated roles, demands, and life circumstances (Fitzgerald & Weitzman, 1992). Vocational decisions stemming from anticipated parenting roles, for example, might be examined in relation to decisions arising from expectations regarding homophobia and heterosexism in the workplace, in order to discover similarities and differences in conditions that motivate satisficing behaviors in women. The application of sociocognitive theory to lesbian vocational behavior may be particularly promising in this regard, as it specifically addresses the role of outcome expectations in career decision making (see Morrow, Gore, & Campbell, 1996). Finally, dual-career issues represent an arena in which theory and research regarding lesbians have much to offer in addressing issues related to vocational compromises and the concept of satisficing. For example, a decision about job mobility is an extremely gendered event for most heterosexual women, in that the partner whose job must be accommodated is male, bringing into play a well-documented gender hierarchy in earning power, occupational status, and role expectations, perceived both within the couple and by outside others such as work colleagues and family members. Lesbian couples, on the other hand, are making similar kinds of decisions, presumably in the absence of (differently) gendered expectations and often invisibly, with little or no
6305$$1531
02-22-96 07:37:29
jvba
AP: JVB
LESBIAN CAREER
173
input from others outside the relationship. This creates an unusual opportunity for examining the process utilized by a couple in making occupational compromises that will be satisfactory to both partners, relatively unconfounded by the constraints that are implicit for many women in heterosexual relationships. Similarly, the impact of isolation on dual-career decision making also might be explored in lesbian relationships, as well as the identity-management strategies used by lesbian couples in negotiating simultaneous job searches, in order to determine ways in which such situations may be related to satisficing behaviors in occupational decisions. In summary, it should be apparent that rethinking some of the common assumptions in the vocational psychology of women must occur in order to comprehensively integrate lesbian experience. In examining most of the presumed barriers to women’s career development, it appears that their effects may be intensified in the vocational experiences of lesbians, primarily due to the additive effects of homophobia and heterosexism overlaid upon pervasive sexism in lesbian lives. In a few areas, however, such as those tapping gender role issues and lesbian relationships and community, possible facilitative effects of a lesbian identity appear to exist. Responsible theorizing and research must begin with clear and consistent articulation of constructs that accurately describe lesbian vocational experience; qualitative approaches may be useful in this regard, particularly those that encompass theory building in their analytical methods. Then much-needed psychometric work can occur (Croteau, 1996; Fassinger, 1995), followed by research aimed at systematic testing of hypotheses, assumptions, and models. The theoretical and empirical journeys on which we can embark are seemingly endless, and offer to contribute much to understanding the vocational issues and needs of all women. REFERENCES Astin, H. S. (1984). The meaning of work in women’s lives: A sociopsychological model of career choice and work behavior. The Counseling Psychologist, 12, 117–126. Badgett, M. V. L. (1994). Equal pay for equal families. Academe, May-June, 26–30. Betz, N. E., & Fitzgerald, L. F. (1987). The career psychology of women. San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Betz, N. E., & Fitzgerald, L. F. (1993). Individuality and diversity: Theory and research in counseling psychology. Annual Review of Psychology, 44, 343–381. Bieschke, K. J., & Matthews, C. (1996). Career counselor attitudes and behaviors towards gay, lesbian, and bisexual clients. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 48, 243–255. Borgen, F. H. (1991). Megatrends and milestones in vocational behavior: A 20 year counseling psychology perspective. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 39, 263–290. Brown, L. S. (1989). New voices, new visions: Toward a lesbian/gay paradigm for psychology. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 13, 445–458. Browning, C., Reynolds, A., & Dworkin, S. (1991). Affirmative psychotherapy for lesbian women. The Counseling Psychologist, 19, 177–196. Croteau, J. M. (1996). Research on the work experiences of lesbian, gay, and bisexual people: An integrative review of methodology and findings. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 48, 195–209. Croteau, J. M., & Hedstrom, S. M. (1993). Integrating commonality and difference: The key to
6305$$1531
02-22-96 07:37:29
jvba
AP: JVB
174
RUTH E. FASSINGER
career counseling with lesbian women and gay men. Career Development Quarterly, 41, 201–209. Elliott, J. E. (1993). Career development with lesbian and gay clients. Career Development Quarterly, 41, 210–226. Etringer, B. D., Hillerbrand, E., & Hetherington, C. (1990). The influence of sexual orientation on career decision making: A research note. Journal of Homosexuality, 19, 108–111. Farmer, H. S. (1985). Model of career and achievement motivation for women and men. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 32, 363–390. Fassinger, R. E. (1985). A causal model of career choice in college women. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 27, 123–153. Fassinger, R. E. (1990). Causal models of career choice in two samples of college women. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 36, 225–240. Fassinger, R. E. (1991). The hidden minority: Issues and challenges in working with lesbian women and gay men. The Counseling Psychologist, 19, 157–176. Fassinger, R. E. (1993). And gladly teach: Lesbian and gay issues in education. In L. Diamant (Ed.), Homosexual issues in the workplace. (pp. 119–142). New York: Wiley. Fassinger, R. E. (1995). From invisibility to integration: Lesbian identity in the workplace. Career Development Quarterly, 44, 148–167. Fassinger, R. E., & Morrow, S. L. (1995). OverCome: Repositioning lesbian sexualities. In L. Diamant & R. McAnulty (Eds.), The psychology of sexual orientation, behavior, and identity: A Handbook (pp. 197–219). Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group, Inc. Fitzgerald, L. F., & Betz, N. E. (1994). Career development in cultural context: The role of gender, race, class, and sexual orientation. In M. Savickas & R. Lent (Eds.), Convergence in career development theories (pp. 103–117). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press. Fitzgerald, L. F., Fassinger, R. E., & Betz, N. E. (1995). Theoretical issues in the vocational psychology of women. In W. B. Walsh & S. H. Osipow (Eds.), Handbook of vocational psychology (2nd ed.) (pp. 67–109). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Fitzgerald, L. F., & Weitzman, L. M. (1992). Women’s career development: Theory and practice from a feminist perspective. In Z. Leibowitz & D. Lea (Eds.), Adult career development (2nd ed.) (pp. 124–160). Alexandria, VA: National Career Development Association. Garnets, L., Hancock, K. A., Cochran, S. D., Goodchilds, J., & Peplau, L. A. (1991). Issues in psychotherapy with lesbians and gay men: A survey of psychologists. American Psychologist, 46, 964–972. Garnets, L., & Kimmel, D. (1991). Lesbian and gay male dimensions in the psychological study of human diversity. In J. D. Goodchilds (Ed.), Psychological perspectives on human diversity in America. (pp. 137–192). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Gonsiorek, C. J. (1993). Threat, stress, and adjustment: Mental health and the workplace for gay and lesbian individuals. In L. Diamant (Ed.), Homosexual issues in the workplace (pp. 243– 264). New York: Wiley. Gottfredson, L. S. (1981). Circumscription and compromise: A developmental theory of occupational aspirations. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 28, 545–579. Hetherington, C., & Orzek, A. M. (1989). Career counseling and life planning with lesbian women. Journal of Counseling and Development, 68, 52–57. Lee, J. A., & Brown, R. G. (1993). Hiring, firing, and promoting. In L. Diamant (Ed.), Homosexual issues in the workplace. (pp. 45–62). New York: Wiley. Morgan, K. S., & Brown, L. S. (1991). Lesbian career development, work behavior, and vocational counseling. The Counseling Psychologist, 19, 273–291. Morrow, S. L., Gore, P. A., Jr., & Campbell, B. W. (1996). The application of a sociocognitive framework to the career development of lesbian women and gay men. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 48, 136–148.
6305$$1531
02-22-96 07:37:29
jvba
AP: JVB
LESBIAN CAREER
175
O’Brien, K. M. (in press). The influence of psychological separation and parental attachment on the career development of adolescent women. Journal of Vocational Behavior. O’Brien, K. M., & Fassinger, R. E. (1993). A causal model of the career orientation and career choice of adolescent women. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 40, 456–469. Ormerod, A. J. (1995). Lesbian and heterosexual women’s career choice: A covariance structural analysis. Unpublished manuscript, Indiana University, Bloomington. Pope, M. (1992). Bias in the interpretation of psychological tests. In F. Gutierrez & S. Dworkin (Eds.), Counseling gay men and lesbians: Journey to the end of the rainbow (pp. 277–292). Alexandria, VA: American Counseling Association. Rothblum, E. D. (1989). Introduction: Lesbianism as a model of a positive lifestyle for women. Women and Therapy, 8, 1–12. Unger, R., & Crawford, M. (1992). Women & gender: A feminist psychology. New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc. Received: May 22, 1995
6305$$1531
02-22-96 07:37:29
jvba
AP: JVB