Gay & Lesbian Identity Theory

Seeking Self-Synthesis: A Review of Vivienne Cass’ Model

of Homosexual Identity Formation
Jason Makowsky
Indiana Wesleyan University

Submitted in fulfillment for
CSA 552: Process of Adult Development
Azusa Pacific University
Dr. Carol Lundberg

Abstract

This review of Vivienne Cass’ Homosexual Identity Formation (HIF) model will begin with a brief biographical sketch of the theorist, a historical review of the homosexual culture in America, including the early debate that birthed the model, and the research methods used to develop Cass’ theory. It will highlight the revisions made to the theory recently and site other contributing theories that respond to the Model. A complete outline of the theory as stages, its strengths and weaknesses, and practical uses for both Christian and secular student affairs practitioners will be presented.

Biography

When the term homosexual was first coined in America at the end of the nineteenth century (Rainbow, ¶ 6) we would wait one hundred years before America would begin to understand sexuality in terms of an identity. An Australian named Vivienne Cass is credited with scripting the first homosexual development model (Cass, 1979) which paved the way for later theories. With an earned counseling doctorate from Western Australia’s Murdoch University, and a bachelor and master’s degree from the University of Western Australia in Counseling, Cass is known widely as a clinician, speaker and writer. She is notable in the gay community for being: “The most frequently cited [theorist] of homosexual identity development” (Evans et al., 1998, p. 92). Instead of writing prolifically in Journals, Dr. Cass remains in private clinical practice in Australia. As well as her practice, Cass is also active speaking on the topic of sexology and women’s sexual issues. Her recent work in this area was published in March of 2004 and is heralded as the “…first sex book for women in 30 years” (Media Release, 2004).
Background

Some contend that homosexuality has been with us throughout the ages, but our understanding or even acceptance of it as a lifestyle, at least in America, is a recent phenomenon. A simplistic understanding of America’s history might outline the movement in phases. It began, in the 1930’s by defining the person within the lifestyle as “neurotic, mentally unstable, masochistic, repressed, and egocentric (Deacon et al., 1996, p. 242). It continued throughout the 1940’s and 1950’s by referring to the secretive lifestyle and behavior as ‘homosexual’ with a negative connotation. The 1960’s to present heard the term ‘gay,’ referring to those who identified themselves as such. They were open about issues of sexuality and fought for the rights of their cause. And the 1980’s onward those who strongly identified themselves as gay and openly opposed heterosexuality refer to themselves as ‘queer’ (Dilley, 2002). This typology proposed by Dilley frames the hostility in the twentieth century toward homosexual Americans.

Theory

Cass based her theory on observations during clinical work with gay and lesbian clients in Australia. Her early theory (1979) was a linear-stage model in response to earlier thoughts that homosexuals were merely defined by their behavior. She likely patterned her theory after the multi-stage models of personality development pioneered by people such as sociologist Charles Horton Cooley, philosopher George Herbert Mead, and psychoanalysts Sigmund Freud and Erik Erikson (Blumenfeld & Raymond, 1988, 1993). They believed that personal identity progressed along an interactive dialogue between the individual and his or her environment. Such models may differ in their nuances of human development but all share the basic assumption that humans move through life experiences within a particular framework or schema. Many other noted researchers proposed theoretical models during this time too, they include: Coleman, 1981-1982; Hencken & O’Dowd, 1977; Lee, 1977; McLellan, 1977; B. Miller, 1978; Plummer, 1975; Schafer, 1976; Schultz, 1976; Troiden, 1977 and Weinberg, 1977. This created a rich culture of theory during this time of the emerging homosexual movement aiding later researchers such as, D’Augelli, 1994a; Dilley, 2002; Fassinger, 1998, and Savin-Williams, 1995; built on these earlier theories.

Cass’ (1984) theory presupposes an identity that develops as the homosexual responds to their social environments. Thus, her “psycho-social” model outlines six stages individuals progress through as they seek to come to synthesis with self and society (Evans et al., 1998). In stage one, or identity confusion, a person is beginning to question their assumed heterosexuality. They may either seek to explore their confusion, and thus, move onto stage two or reject it and live in denial. Dilley (2002) suggests that men at this point usually fall into four categories: normal, closeted, parallel, or denying. Normal men are just that, like normal heterosexuals, except they have experimented with men, but it has not changed their identity or lifestyle. Closeted individuals have a same-sex attraction and may even acknowledge privately a gay identity, but don’t interact with other gay men for fear of making it public. Parallel men live two distinct lives keeping both very hidden from the other to avoid tensions. And finally denying men who don’t allow them selves to have an affective, emotional side; they deny it. All four seem to be a form of repression. It is in Cass’ second, identity comparison stage, that the person accepts that they may have homosexual feelings or inclinations, but they still view themselves as heterosexual. In the third stage, identity tolerance, the individual begins to tolerate the concept of a homosexual identity and seeks to be around other individuals who may also identify as homosexual. In moving beyond this toleration stage to acceptance of a homosexual identity, this person, in stage four, begins to identify as a part of a homosexual community. The person feels more comfortable around other homosexual men and women and also begins to self-disclose this identity to others. During identity pride; the fifth stage, the person intensely immerses themselves in homosexual communities and develops strong homosexual networks. They have a more intensified need to self-disclose this identity to others. In identity synthesis, which is stage six of the model, the person finds ways to incorporate this identity in other areas of their lives. The person’s roles and networks are no longer excluded to homosexuals.

Cass’ (1984) model outlined numerous cognitive, behavioral and, affective dimensions used to describe an individual more specifically in their identity development (see Table 1). The dimensions “fill-in the blanks” of the static stage model that might seem rigid at times. The stages are “distinguished by which dimensions are present in individuals at each stage and by the degree of importance given to these dimensions” (Cass, 1984, p. 147).

Method
Cass’ (1984) research elicited the help of sources she met at various events and through her clinical experience as a therapist. While this may seem like a conflict of interest her research methodology wasn’t dependent upon subjectivity. “The design did not require that subjects be randomly selected” (p. 154), she claims. She contacted 227 subjects and 78% of her questionnaires were returned filled-out. The gender split was 109 males and 69 females, of whom 103 and 63 respectively were able to define them selves to exactly one of her stages. She did not include the other 12 respondents in the survey results because they were between stages.

The instrument employed was an identity questionnaire of over two-hundred questions representing the sixteen dimensions she outlined as integral to stage formation (see Table 1). From this she was able to roughly fit her respondents into six grouped categories (stages) using a stage allocation measure. This measure summarized the dimensions into small paragraphs reflecting the value placed upon them. An addition of a level called pre-stage one was added (although no rationale could be found for this). Her questions were set-up on a likert-style scale, with some representing short answers. From the questions presented early predictions were made as to how certain levels of respondents would answer questions. This prediction-style developed the score key used to rate future respondents to the norm of responses. The test along with stage allocation sheet and biographical write-up were sent via mail to respondents assuring them of anonymity. A reminder letter was sent two weeks later with another self-addresses stamped envelop enclosed.

Support and Criticism

The strength of the theory [figure 1.1] initially lies in its psychological and social approach to development as well as a later update Cass (1984) made by adding empirical research. The model differs from others, taking a positive approach to becoming homosexual instead of viewing it through a negative lens (Cass, 1984). It also included gender research that could shed light into lesbian identity development. The most noted finding was the degree to which men tended to fit more neatly into her stages, while women tended to reflect the across-group hypothesis (predicted to actual score was lower). It was the first extensive research done on the most elaborate theory of it’s time.

Critics of the theory disagree with its premise that one must understand it as an identity and not just a set of behaviors. DuBay (1979) views “homosexual identity as a construct expressly created by professional in the field” (Cass, 1984, p.165). Cass (1984) admits that her results only show significance at stages one, five and six (p < .001), with stage three registering low significance (p < .05). She offers fair evidence to support reasons why her findings didn’t fully support her research theory and admits that further work on her method, assumptions and, assessment tools are necessary. Another deviation from her findings is the research of Ritch Savin-Williams (1995), who contends that gender identity for women is more emotional in nature, and for men it is more sexual. He says, “If you want to understand a young woman with same-sex attraction you would do better to understand that she is a young woman first and foremost. She is more like a straight young woman than a gay young man” (Winter, 2004, p. 15). Others such as Kathleen Edwards assert, “Sexual identity is a complex concept that involves biological factors, gender roles, sociocultural influences, and sexual orientation in relation to sexual development” (Edwards & Brooks, 1999, p. 1). And the response from the Christian scholar’s has been varied. While no response in the form of a proposed theory is appropriate, since some conservative Christians label homosexuality’s etiology as a choice, not an identity, many have proposed healing therapies that seem to reverse the stages proposed by identity theorists, moving struggling gays back to heterosexuality (Throckmorton, 1998). Other scholarly reviews have supported the claims of Throckmorton and others and these represent a vast array of literature that has yet to gain credence with the clinical world. Worth noting is the findings of Dr. Robert Spitzer, one time President of the American Psychological Association (APA), whose interest in homosexuals digressing through identity development and attaining heterosexuality again, ruffled the research community (Throckmorton, 2004). Applications

Whether in a secular or religious environment the research suggests volumes of recommendations for student affairs professionals as they seek to meet the needs of the emerging generation of college students entering our campuses. Some practical steps are to create environments that are safe for the exploration of sexual identity. Newly created centers for Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgendered and Queer (GLBTQ) students are becoming many universities way of providing support for this sexual-minority. Other ideas encourage a complete examination of the entire institution (Sanlo, 2002). He proposes changes in what language we use, how silent we are, how well we train, mentor and research new ways to address the needs of GLBTQ students. Other schools have adopted specialized living environments, clubs and gay-strait initiatives and have found success. The increased population of gay and lesbian students in Christian institutions of higher education has prompted the bravest of schools to host colloquium on the subject.

Conclusions

Cass’ (1984) theory of homosexual identity formation is useful to this researcher as he seeks to understand the life experiences of many young men who daily “squirm in the closet” with their sexual identity in a hostile Christian environment. It also is helpful in framing the social nature of this model and how it is inextricably linked to living in community. And it serves as a reference point to move beyond the etiology of the issue and begin to ask why homosexual identity forms so similarly for so many students? More profound exegesis of scripture will be required for the new generation of church leaders as this issue will continue to polarize our nation, as was evident in our recent election. Christians have been forced into a catch-22 scenario between love and justice. Must we love our neighbor or defend our heritage?



Figure 1.1 Cass’ (HIF) Model

Stage One, identity confusionä
Information about homosexuality becomes personally relevant for the individual at this stage, thus causing the person to be confused about his or her sexual identity. A person begins to wonder if he or she is gay or lesbian.

Stage Two, identity comparison ä
A person in this stage accepts the possibility that he or she is gay or lesbian. For many, it is a

way to help cope with the confusion that is prevalent in stage one.

Stage Three, identity tolerance ä
The individual accepts the fact that he or she is gay. This leads to a process of recognizing the needs associated with being gay.

Stage Four, identity acceptanceä
A person desires more contact with gay culture, which increases contact with other gay people. The increased contact leads to a more positive gay self-image. This is an important step in the coming-out experience.

Stage Five, identity prideä
The individual in this stage becomes immersed in gay life, which means that they spend little time interacting with heterosexual people. There can be anger at heterosexual people who are no longer viewed as allies during this stage.

Stage Six, identity synthesis
A person realizes that it is not an us-versus-them situation. The anger experienced in the previous stage subsides and it is now possible to believe that people who are not gay can be allies and can be trusted
*adapted from a University of Maine web-publication (Graham & Phelps, 2003-2004)


References

Blumenfeld, W.J. & Raymond, D., (1988, 1993). Looking at gay and lesbian life. Boston: Beacon Press. Retrieved as a partial reprint at http://www.geocities.com/
WestHollywood/Parade/9548/article_sexual_identity.html

Cass, V. (1979). Homosexual identity formation: A theoretical model. Journal of homosexuality. 4(3), 219-235.

Cass, V. C. (1984). Homosexual identity formation: Testing a theoretical model. Journal of Sex Research, 20(2), 143-167.

Coleman, E., (1981-1982). Developmental stages of the coming-out process. The Journal of Homosexuality.

D'Augelli, A. R. (1994a). Identity development and sexual orientation: Toward a model of lesbian, gay, and bisexual development. In E. J. Trickett, R. J. Watts, & D. Birman (Eds.), Human diversity: Perspectives on people in context (pp. 312-333). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Deacon, S. A., Reinke, L., & Viers, D. (1996). Cognitive-behavioral therapy for bisexual couples: Expanding the realms of therapy. The American Journal of Family
Therapy, 24, 242-258.

Dilley, P. (2002). Queer man on campus: A history of non-heterosexual college men, 1945–2000. New York: Routledge-Falmer.

DuBay, W.H., (1979). Gay identity: Concept problems and alternatives. Unpublished manuscript.

Edwards, K. & Brooks, A. (1999). The development of sexual identity. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 84, 49-57.

Evans, N., Forney, D. & Guido-DiBrito, F. (1998). Student development in college: Theory, research and practice (pp. 89-106). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Fassinger, R. E. (1998). Lesbian, gay, and bisexual identity and student development theory. In R. L. Sanlo (Ed.), Working with lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender college students: A handbook for faculty and administrators (pp. 13-22). Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.

Graham, J., Phelps, L., (2003-2004). Creating safe spaces for all youth: Working with gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender and questioning youth. Family Issues: Current research on family topics for Maine educators, 4428. Retrieved from http://www.umext.maine.edu/ onlinepubs/htmpubs/4428.htm

Hencken, J.D. & O’Dowd, W.T. (1977). Coming out as an aspect of identity formation. Gay academic union journal: Gay saber, 1, 18-26.

Lee, J.A. (1977). Going public: A study in the sociology of homosexual liberation. Journal of homosexuality, 3, 49-78.

McLellan, E.A. (1977), Lesbian identity: A theological and psychological inquiry into the developmental stages of the identity of a lesbian. Unpublished manuscript.

Media Release. (2004). Retrieved Novemeber 4, 2004 from Brightfire Press’ Web site: http://www.brightfire.com .au/press_room_-_media_releases_-_03_04_-_doc_01.php

Miller, B. (1978). Adult sexual resocialization: Adjustments towards a stigmatized identity. Alternative lifestyles, 1, 207-234.

Plummer, K. (1975). Sexual stigma: An interactionist account. New York: Routledge & Kegan-Paul.

Rainbow Educators. (n.d.). Retrieved Novemeber 4, 2004 from University of San Diego’s, United Front Web site: http://www.sandiego.edu/unitedfront/Rainbow411.htm

Sanlo, R. (2002). Scholarship in student affairs:
thinking outside the triangle, or tabasco on cantaloupe. NASPA Journal, 39(2).

Savin-Williams, R. C. (1995). Lesbian, gay male, and bisexual adolescents. In A. R. D'Augelli & C. J. Patterson (Eds.), Lesbian, gay, and bisexual identities over the lifespan: Psychological perspectives (pp. 165-189). New York: Oxford University Press.

Schafer, S. (1976). Sexual and social problems of lesbians. The journal of sex research, 12, 50-69.

Schultz, S. (1976). Coming out and the growth of gay people in society. Unpublished manuscript.

Throckmorton, W. (1998). Efforts to modify sexual orientation: A review of the outcome literature and ethical issues. Journal of Mental Health Counseling, 20, 283-304.

Throckmorton, W. (2004). I do exist. Video on becoming heterosexual again. Truth comes out project.

Troiden, R.R. (1977). Becoming a homosexual: Research on acquiring a homosexual identity. Unpublished manuscript.

Weinberg, T. (1977). Becoming homosexual: Self-discrepency, self-identity, and self-maintenance. Unpublished manuscript.

Winter, M. (2004). ReConceptualizing the gay teen. Human ecology, June, 14-16.