Search

Young bisexual women experience worse mental and sexual health outcomes in comparison to their heterosexual and lesbian peers. These disparities are associated with stigma and devaluation of bisexual identities. The current paper addresses a community-based focus group project in which participants discussed bisexual stigma in regard to bisexual erasure and other stereotypes. Specifically, participants detailed experiences of feeling pressured to provide evidence of their bisexual identity, modifying their relationship or sexual behavior to conform to these expectations, as well as feeling excluded from queer community. Further, participants discussed how these experiences were related to decreased mental and sexual health. Future research should further investigate the relationship between bisexual stigma, pressure to provide evidence of bisexual identity, and negative mental and sexual health outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The disappointing results of many public health interventions have been attributed in part to the lack of meaningful community engagement in the planning, implementation, and evaluation of these initiatives. Community-based participatory research (CBPR) has emerged as an alternative research paradigm that directly involves community members in all aspects of the research process. Their involvement is often said to be an empowering experience that builds capacity. In this paper, we interrogate these assumptions, drawing on interview data from a qualitative study investigating the experiences of 18 peer researchers (PRs) recruited from nine CBPR studies in Toronto, Canada. These individuals brought to their respective projects experience of homelessness, living with HIV, being an immigrant or refugee, identifying as transgender, and of having a mental illness. The reflections of PRs are compared to those of other research team members collected in separate focus groups. Findings from these interviews are discussed with an attention to Foucault’s concept of ‘governmentality’, and compared against popular community-based research principles developed by Israel and colleagues. While PRs spoke about participating in CBPR initiatives to share their experience and improve conditions for their communities, these emancipatory goals were often subsumed within corporatist research environments that limited participation. Overall, this study offers a much-needed theoretical engagement with this popular research approach and raises critical questions about the limits of community engagement in collaborative public health research. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]