Running head: SEXUAL ORIENTATION IDENTITY THEORIES

Sexual Orientation Identity Theories: Past, Present, and Future

Moira Phippen and Ashley Trewartha
Loyola University Chicago

SEXUAL ORIENTATION IDENTITY THEORIES

Abstract
This paper explores the topic of sexual orientation identity development through the work of two
of the most prominent researchers in this area: V.C. Cass (1984) and A.R. DAugelli (1994).
Seeking to understand realistic critical application of these theories in higher education, the
authors analyzed each theory in relation to their own personal and professional experiences as
two queer women. The authors found key implications for practice related to contextual
sensitivity, building inclusive campus spaces and providing access to media depictions of queer
communities and relationships, while also discovering serious limitations in these theories
abilities to address polysexual and asexual identities as well as the intersectionality of sexual
orientation with other social identities. Student affairs practitioners are advised to apply these
theories critically rather than universally when working with students.
Keywords: student development theory, sexual orientation identity development

SEXUAL ORIENTATION IDENTITY THEORIES

Sexual Orientation Identity Theories: Past, Present, and Future

Development theories provide a useful foundation for understanding ourselves as well as
others. Identity development models, in particular, can help us understand how our own
experiences differ from the experiences of others and how, as higher education professionals, we
can support the experiences and journeys of our students. One of these identity development
theory subgroups is sexual identity development. Unfortunately, the prominent sexual identity
development models either assume that all queer spectrum development is similar or they
exclude the development of polysexual (attraction to multiple genders) individuals entirely. We
begin with a critical review of Casss (1984) and DAugellis (1994) models and incorporate our
own development to highlight both benefits and limitations of these prominent theories.
Consideration of intersecting social identities and sexual identities that are not included in these
models suggests that further research is needed. Both suggestions and cautions for application of
these theories as well as future research that would be beneficial in addressing these additional
populations are discussed.
Two Models for Sexual Orientation Identity
Cass (1984) and DAugelli (1994) both took mental health counseling perspectives on
sexual orientation identity development by tracing how lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB)
people can move from negative emotions such as confusion or self-loathing to ultimately more
positive relationships with their identities and others. However, the two diverge in very
significant ways. While Cass (1984) wrote her theory to describe lesbian and gay identifying
individuals exclusively and featured relatively neat and organizational stages, DAugelli (1994)
incorporated bisexual people to an extent and viewed sexual orientation development as separate
contextually sensitive processes.

SEXUAL ORIENTATION IDENTITY THEORIES

Casss Model of Lesbian and Gay Identity Formation

One of the most well known sexual identity models is Vivienne Casss (1984) sexual
identity formation model. Casss (1984) model, which studied lesbian women and gay men,
sought to understand how individuals develop a lesbian or gay self-image; how individuals
develop a lesbian or gay identity through interactions with others; what affective, cognitive, and
behavioral strategies individuals use in the process of developing and maintaining their identity,
and how their sexual identity is integrated into other identities individuals hold. As a clinical
psychologist, Cass (1996) paid close attention to factors that encourage positive identity
development and the factors that could lead to a negative self-image or foreclosure. Though
there are limitations to Casss (1984) theory, such as her homogeneous sample and the assumed
linear development of the model, her focus on social interactions and social environments can be
useful in assessing campus climate and support services.
Cass (1984) proposed six linear stages of sexual identity formation: identity confusion,
comparison, tolerance, acceptance, pride, and synthesis. Progression through the stages involves
accepting oneself and a label that matches ones sexual identity, forming a positive attitude about
ones sexuality, wanting to disclose ones sexual identity to others, and increasing connections
with others who share ones sexual identity (Cass, 1984). Individuals in the early stages
experience confusion about their identity and seek to resolve it, either through continuing to
explore their identity or dismissing their confusion and entering foreclosure (Cass, 1996). As
individuals begin to label themselves as lesbian or gay, many seek out communities to help
address the alienation they feel. Individuals seek out friendships with lesbian and gay peers
which, depending on the quality of those relationships, can lead to a positive or negative selfimage (Cass, 1996). For individuals who accept their identity, Identity Acceptance is marked by

SEXUAL ORIENTATION IDENTITY THEORIES

select disclosure of their identity to others (Cass, 1984). Cass (1996) argued that many
individuals in this stage begin to experience a sense of peace and more stable self-concept.
However, this is dependent on ones social environment; individuals who experience negative
reactions toward their sexual identity are less likely to disclose their identity (Cass, 1996). After
individuals accept their sexual identity, some may experience a sense of pride that is
characterized by dismissing heterosexual individuals in favor of engaging more with lesbian and
gay peers and culture (Cass, 1996). When individuals are able to build positive relationships
with some heterosexual peers, individuals progress to Identity Synthesis which is characterized
by an understanding of their sexual identity as one part of their whole identity (Cass, 1996). This
realization further allows individuals to explore other social identities that they hold.
At first glance, Casss (1984) model seems to progress too neatly by failing to illustrate
the complexities of development. Indeed, the linear progression of Casss (1984) model
simplified development and did not account for being in multiple stages at once or how
intersecting social identities affect development. For example, full acceptance of sexual identity
is not required in order to understand that ones sexual identity is one of many social identities
that one person holds. The ability to synthesize multiple identities may come much earlier for
someone who holds other target identities that are very salient to them, whereas individuals who
hold significantly more agent identities may not be able to synthesize identities such as their
White racial identity until later in their development.
Another huge concern of Casss (1984) theory is the complete erasure of polysexual
identities from her work. Throughout her theory and later revisions of the theory, Cass (1996)
did not address polysexual identities such as bisexuality or pansexuality. In fact, Cass (1996)
only mentioned how bisexual identity is often used by lesbian or gay individuals in Identity

SEXUAL ORIENTATION IDENTITY THEORIES

Comparison as a strategy for reducing the sense of alienation (p. 237) individuals feel as they
continue to define their sexual identity. The erasure of polysexual identities does not just occur
in Casss (1984) model; this erasure occurs throughout Western culture. However, the emphasis
that Cass (1996) placed on social environments and social interactions for development is useful
in understanding how development for polysexual individuals might be different from
development for gay and lesbian individuals.
Despite Casss (1984) exclusion of polysexual individuals from her model, the emphasis
she placed on the role of social environments can be utilized to assess how environmental factors
affect polysexual identity development and thus, how polysexual identity development differs
from lesbian and gay identity development. Cass (1996) advocated for considering both
reciprocal interaction, how human beings simultaneously influence and are influenced by their
environments (p. 230), and psychological processes or individuals searching for their identity
and the need to be whole individuals. For example, one environmental factor that affects
development is social interactions with gay and lesbian individuals (Cass, 1996). These
interactions can help individuals feel less isolated, develop more positive feelings about their
identity, and determine how they want to express their identity (Cass, 1996). Unfortunately,
polysexual identities do not have the same level or visibility and additionally face
marginalization from both heterosexual and many lesbian and gay communities, which makes
development harder and often more negative. Because bisexuality and pansexuality are often
perceived as not real or legitimate sexualities, ones process of determining, defining, and
disclosing ones identity could take significantly longer than the process that lesbian and gay
individuals experience. Though Casss (1984) model was designed specifically for gay and
lesbian identities and did not account for bisexuality or pansexuality, her theorys attention to

SEXUAL ORIENTATION IDENTITY THEORIES

environmental factors could be applicable in understanding aspects of polysexual identity

development. As we discuss below, later sexual identity development theories help unravel the
strictness of Casss (1984) stages and add more detail to her work on social contexts.
DAugellis Model of Lesbian-Gay-Bisexual Development
In 1994, A. R. DAugelli penned a new and more complex kind of identity model which
described identity as extremely context-dependent and fluid. DAugelli (1994) wrote extensively
about how, at least for lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) people, some levels of identity
development may not be possible for certain individuals depending on factors such as safety and
exposure to role models of similar identities, and other areas of identity development may
fluctuate throughout ones life according to the social contexts in which they live.
DAugellis (1994) Model of Lesbian-Gay-Bisexual Development was an expansion in
part on a previous identity theory he had written specifically for gay men in college (DAugelli,
1991). His theory took a lifespan approach to sexual orientation identity development and
attempted to cast a broader net on to whom it applied. However, although bisexual is included
in all references to DAugellis (1994) title, DAugelli consistently used gay and lesbian
throughout the text to describe the subjects of his theory and it is unclear if bisexual people were
ever actually included in DAugellis (1994) analysis.
DAugellis (1994) Model of Lesbian-Gay-Bisexual Development took care to recognize
the role of three important contexts of identity development: the personal, such as negotiating
internalized feelings of shame related to ones sexual identity, the interactive, such as navigating
unsupportive or supportive relationships with others, and the sociohistorical or societal, such as
navigating greater legal structure related to LGB rights. Each of these three contexts played a
role in six identity processes an LGB person may move through and around in their lives: exiting

SEXUAL ORIENTATION IDENTITY THEORIES

heterosexual identity, developing a personal lesbian-gay-bisexual identity status, developing a

lesbian-gay-bisexual social identity, becoming a lesbian-gay-bisexual offspring, developing a
lesbian-gay-bisexual intimacy status, and entering a lesbian-gay-bisexual community (DAugelli,
1994).
Although these processes seem to overlap, each process carried its own distinct task
(DAugelli, 1994). The individual ceases to identify themselves as heterosexual, makes meaning
of their orientation to themselves, finds others with whom they can comfortably be themselves,
develops healthy relationships with family, pursues and builds lesbian or gay relationships, and
engages civically with their identity on a broader scale of both advocacy and personal
understanding of heterosexism. However, each task remains affected by larger contexts of
personal, interpersonal, and societal factors (DAugelli, 1994). For example, DAugelli (1994)
discussed at length how without media representation of normative gay and lesbian sexual or
romantic experiences, an individual may have significantly more difficulty completing this task
as they lack the social subtext and codes media teaches. DAugelli (1994) also commented that
some stages could be completely unattainable for students in certain social contexts. For
example, if a person lives in a space that is both structurally and interpersonally unsupportive of
gay and lesbian identities, it may not be safe for the person to even pursue development on the
final identity process.
One benefit to DAugellis (1994) model not present in Casss (1984) model is a genuine
recognition of sexual fluidity. DAugelli (1994) wrote that older adults may come to terms with
their identities later in life due to the stigma attached to certain labels and individuals who feel
concretely lesbian or gay may later discover themselves to experience romantic or sexual interest
in a differently sexed partner and grapple with how to interpret this interest with limited terms or

SEXUAL ORIENTATION IDENTITY THEORIES

opportunities for understanding available. Thus, not only may a person be in different points in
their identity processes around context, they may also move through them with some degree of
fluidity as their understanding of their orientation changes over time. (DAugelli, 1994).
Despite these improvements, DAugelli (1994) left significant room for growth. As
mentioned previously, a serious flaw in DAugellis (1994) model is the inconsistencies of his
language. Given that bisexuality is referenced in the title but absent in the text, it is unclear to
whom the model can be applied. Although the model (DAugelli, 1994) may seem more
inclusive than Cass (1984), his model also leaves out many people across the queer spectrum.
DAugellis (1994) model includes developing a romantic and sexual partnership with a samesex individual, a step that does not make sense for polysexual individuals in differently-sexed
relationships, for individuals who may be or be partnered with someone who is non-binary, or
for individuals identifying anywhere on the ace spectrum. As with Cass (1984), the first process,
exiting heterosexual identity, (DAugelli, 1994) may not work for all students. For example, one
of the students Moira has worked with really did not have any particular assumed or unassumed
sexual or romantic identity at all. For him, and many others within the lesbian and gay
community, romantic and sexual pursuits had always been so far beyond interest to him that he
never even considered himself in any particular direction or non-direction at all. Lastly,
DAugelli (1994) prioritized certain contexts (such as family) which may not be as relevant
culturally for all individuals. Although DAugellis (1994) theory may imply the importance of
intersectionality in sexual orientation identity development through its emphasis on context,
DAugelli (1994) did not investigate this to a significant extent or directly describe how various
other social identities may influence development. It is unclear whether his theory (DAugelli,
1994) is supported in the cases of individuals with multiple salient targeted identities. In order to

SEXUAL ORIENTATION IDENTITY THEORIES

10

address some of these gaps, we wanted to take a closer look at how these theories match with our
own experiences personally and professionally.
Biographical Identity Modeling
One of the challenges that both of us face with Casss (1984) and DAugellis (1994)
model is that neither match our own sexual identity development. In part, this may be that as
two polysexual women, our identities were never intended to be included in these theories,
although they may have been applied that way. Here, we each share our own developmental
journey to highlight how our experiences align or diverge from two prominent theories of our
field. Our experiences have shaped what we view to be the benefits and limitations of both
Casss (1984) and DAugellis (1994) models, the work that we do, and where we hope to see
developmental research go in the future.
Ashley Trewartha
There are a number of stereotypes about lesbian, gay, and bisexual people and limited
representations of us in media, and not one of them reflects me or my development. I identify as
pansexual or queer, but most often tell others that I identify as bisexual since it is better known.
For me, I can be both sexually and romantically attracted to anyone of any gender, which
usually only happens after I get to know and develop an intellectual or emotional connection
with someone. I say for me, because we use labels to simplify the complexities and details
that not everyone takes the time to hear, so not everyone who identifies as pansexual would
describe their sexual and romantic orientations the same way that I do.
Growing up in a heteronormative world, I was taught that I liked boys. No one in my
family has disclosed that they are queer and I did not know anyone who disclosed that they
identified as gay, lesbian, or bisexual to me until high school. My parents would always ask if

SEXUAL ORIENTATION IDENTITY THEORIES

11

there were any boys I liked, so it was just assumed that I was heterosexual. Casss (1984) and
DAugellis (1994) models assume that all individuals start by believing that they are
heterosexual. This is not the case for everyone, but it does reflect my own development. I grew
up in a society that assumes everyone is heterosexual until they say they are not and this
assumption tricked me into believing that I was heterosexual too.
I cannot pinpoint when I first began to question my sexuality, but I remember early in
college having small attractions to women. Due to a series of relationships with men, I was
rarely single enough to explore my sexuality. I also did not have many queer or questioning
people in my life; I had no choice but to question my sexuality on my own. It sounds ridiculous
now, but I assumed that in order for me to actually be attracted to women, I had to be attracted to
all women. My logic was that since I was not attracted to any Victorias Secret models, I could
not possibly be attracted to women. It was not until I compared this to not being attracted to all
men either that I realize how much my understanding of sexuality was a product of the pervasive
heteronormative society in which I was raised. I was not confused in the way that Cass (1984)
describes, but rather worried, and still do worry, that I am not queer enough to be queer. Cass
(1996) and DAugelli (1994) emphasized the importance of finding community with lesbian and
gay peers, but I had no one to help legitimize my identity or my development.
One of the ways in which I tried to find clarity on my identity was through attending Safe
Zone trainings, programs within my residence hall, and taking classes in Gender and Womens
Studies. I did not feel like I fit anywhere, so I looked to the internet and books for class to figure
it out on my own. I wrote an entire twenty page paper evaluating my campus climate for queer
and trans students, faculty, and staff. I knew every resource the LGBT Campus Center provided
but only utilized the resources the Campus Center provided online. Without being out, I found

SEXUAL ORIENTATION IDENTITY THEORIES

12

ways to engage with the LGB community. DAugelli (1994) claimed that individuals enter the
LGB community after coming out, but my experience is opposite of the trajectory he suggested.
On the outside, I looked like I was just supporting students and educating myself, but I was
really saving me. I was fortunate to attend a university that had a visible presence, a campus
center, online resources, and diverse and supportive residence hall staff. Because of this, I did
not experience shame until I moved to an environment that has been less inclusive. DAugelli
(1994) would suggest that the support interactive social context I experienced helped me
navigate personal development areas. Since then, as I have become more out, most of my
energy is focused on the interactive and sociohistorical contexts.
I found a label that fit for me when I was helping hang signs in my residence hall that had
definitions across the queer and trans spectrum. I started coming out in April before I graduated
to a few close friends and mentors, much like Casss (1984) Identity Acceptance. When I started
graduate school, I decided that I wanted to be visible, authentic, and in community with others.
Today, I am out (Acceptance), I understand intersectionality within my own life (Synthesis),
yet it takes me a long time to trust heterosexual people (Pride) and I still selectively disclose in
professional spaces (Cass, 1984). Though Cass (1984) marked individuals who were out as
needing the least clinical support, I believe I need support now more than ever. Being out did
not correspond to me accepting myself, it just became the time when I realized I needed
community and support the most. All of those things are a work in process, not the culminated
process that Cass (1984) described. I similarly fit into multiple processes of DAugellis (1994)
model. As a new professional, I am focused in the interactive context as I try to navigate
professional relationships (DAugelli, 1994). For this reason, I am still developing my social
identity and also entering queer communities as I look for connections within professional spaces

SEXUAL ORIENTATION IDENTITY THEORIES

13

(DAugelli, 1994). Today, I talk openly and say what needs to be said even when I cannot figure
out how to say it kindly because I was silent for far too long. I make myself visible because it is
what I needed. And I tell my colleagues that I want them to learn so they do not mess up with
students because despite the fact that I hid who I was for so long, the student affairs educators in
my life supported me without knowing they were.
Moira Phippen
Like Ashley, I also identify under the umbrella of polysexual identity, though I do not
identify with pansexuality and, after a time, have come to strongly identify with the term
queer. For me, this means that there is no definitive answer to sexuality, that sexual and
romantic attraction are distinct and may be fluid, that I am not attracted to solely one gender but
do not necessarily experience sexual and romantic attraction without any regard to gender at all.
In my own search to find an identity label that fit for me, queer is the most attractive to me
purely because it seems the most all-inclusive and the least rigidly defined by others - in many
ways I appreciate that it leaves a degree of mystery, that when I tell someone I am queer they do
not have a neat and easily categorizable set of behaviors to associate with me.
My personal developmental path looks significantly different from Ashleys, I believe
less likely due to the nuances between our identities themselves, and more due to the breadth of
difference in our exposure to queer people early in life. I grew up with a gay father estranged
from my family and blamed by others (and by extent, myself as a child) for many of our
economic and personal failures. Even as later I adapted a more open and accepting perspective
to queer identities, I still struggled with harbored resentment for him. Ultimately, despite having
a very near model for queer identity, I associated him with unreliability and failure. This
relationship with my father and his identity was only complicated further when I found out my

SEXUAL ORIENTATION IDENTITY THEORIES

14

dad was diagnosed HIV+ around the same time that my step-uncle, living with us and rumored to
secretly identify as gay, passed away from AIDS. Thus, although queerness was something I
could tolerate accepting politically in my youth I had no positive or happy associations with it
as an idea. In this extent, my experiences can resonate strongly with DAugellis (1994)
approach in that despite having role models, a lack of positive ones really prevented me from
exploring this side of myself until much later on when more were available to me. It was
convenient enough to pursue relationships with men, for whom I could hold romantic, though not
genuine sexual, interest. Thus, like Ashley, I can also identify with DAugellis (1994) process
of exiting heterosexuality.
Arriving at college provided me access with many more positive queer role models. Two
of my first friends in my residence hall identified within a queer spectrum, and we more or less
all came out around the same time. One of my friends identified as bisexual and had a very
positive relationship with her identity in that she said she more or less had always known and
knew her family would be supportive when she told them directly. Again, meeting her might
have provided me with the push I needed to finally explore myself more deeply. Myself and
another one of my friends quietly engaged in our institutions queer-serving student organization,
avoiding any prompts to self-identify, ultimately coming out together at a leadership retreat later
on. Speaking for my own experience, this final more public coming out was less motivated by
my own desire and more motivated by my interest in supporting other queer students in the space
who may have felt afraid to identify themselves. Neither Cass (1984) nor DAugelli (1994)
explored why coming out is or should be a goal for queer people, and I do not see my own
reasoning reflected in either, except perhaps as a function of DAugellis (1994) final process
related to community building.

SEXUAL ORIENTATION IDENTITY THEORIES

15

Contrary to the image Cass (1984) and DAugelli (1994) both promoted where increasing
levels of outness are associated with more positive self-image, I struggled with my sexual
orientation consistently throughout college, even as I entered a job necessitating me to openly
self-identify to large groups of unknown people regularly. My familys reaction to my identity
ranged from complete intolerance of any non-heterosexual identity to distrust of the validity of
the (polysexual) experiences and identities I described to them, creating an increasingly toxic
atmosphere for me at home. I had some opportunity for sexual and romantic relationships with
women before ultimately falling in love with a man again - but for years in this relationship,
despite his support, I was constantly plagued with fears around if I could ever truly feel happy
with exclusively a male partner, and if my want for women was infidelity and dishonesty as it
may have originally been for my father, despite my partner knowing my sexual orientation. It
was not until much later that we were able to work through our boundaries more explicitly and
find an arrangement that feels authentic to us, but even today I do not believe these anxieties will
ever be completely absent for me.
If I had to place myself in DAugellis (1994) model today, I would say that I am
operating largely from that 6th process related to community. Although issues around
offspring and other pieces of DAugelli (1994) had fleeting significant moments in my life, a
sense of duty and protectiveness to my sexual orientation and others with it has always laid
dominance over other concerns except during some instances of my own personal internalized
shame. It is significantly more difficult to place myself in Cass (1984), as the words generally
feel less applicable for me. I did not experience confusion, I experienced denial. Comparison,
tolerance, and acceptance are fluid stages I move throughout on a regular basis. In my later
years in college I also more or less abandoned sexual orientation as a salient identity, focusing on

SEXUAL ORIENTATION IDENTITY THEORIES

16

my racial identity instead, while my internalized issues around sexual orientation would brew
and pop at every pause I had. Thus, conceptually synthesis does not work for me - I may have
entered conversations about identity thinking about my targeted identities such as being queer,
but I did not come anywhere close to developing fully in those areas before moving on to
examining my intersectionality.
Theory to Practice
Despite the difficulty we both had relating to many parts of Casss (1984) and
DAugellis (1994) theories, we recognize how they can be a useful tool in working with
monosexual students who may see us as resources due to existing under a more general queer
umbrella, but whose experiences we may not be able to fully relate to or understand. Casss
(1984) and DAugellis (1994) have implications for our work with students.
Both Cass (1996) and DAugelli (1994) emphasized the role of the environment in sexual
identity development. Student affairs educators play an integral role in shaping, maintaining,
reinforcing, and restoring campus environments. At minimum, college environments should be
safe for students, staff, and faculty. This means not only providing safe spaces for queer
students, faculty, and staff, but also educating faculty, staff, and students as much as possible to
create a more holistically inclusive space. Some of these initiatives can include Ally Training or
Safe Zone Training, having reporting processes in place for discrimination and harassment that
could occur, hiring staff whose work is devoted to providing resources, creating events, and
advocating for student needs, and training counseling staff on working with queer students. Safe
space initiatives should occur at an institutional level as well. For example, in our experiences
working at Loyola University of Chicago, some spaces have been more welcoming than others.

SEXUAL ORIENTATION IDENTITY THEORIES

17

As an institution rooted in Catholicism, though we feel supported by some individuals on

campus, it is difficult to determine in what spaces we are and are not safe and supported.
Students are not only immersed in campus environment; they are also part of
environments outside of the university setting, such as a home community. When individuals
experience environments with varying levels of safety, support, and inclusion, individuals are
forced to transition to different environments, which can be challenging. This could occur when
students are leaving or returning before and after break periods, when students arrive to college
for the first time, or transfer between institutions. Ashley experienced this in transitioning from
undergraduate to graduate institutions, which has caused her to regress to earlier stages because
she experiences less support from her campus environment. Moira has also witnessed this in
working with a student who generally had a positive self-image but frequently regressed to
feelings of shame and guilt around her sexuality after school breaks where she visited her family.
Student affairs educators should be prepared for these transition times and more formal
programs and campus organizations could intentionally time their most healing programs to
occur around these times.
Another environment that should be considered is the one created by technology and
media. This includes social media sites, phone apps, internet resources, news sources, television,
and film. When students cannot find community on campus or are still trying to understand their
sexuality, they may seek other spaces, such as media and the internet, for knowledge,
understanding, community, and support. Cass (1996) noted that when individuals are first
coming to an understanding that they may be lesbian or gay, they often feel isolated from
heterosexual peers and begin to seek out relationships with people who are gay or lesbian.
Additionally, according to DAugelli (1994), having role models to showcase the breadth of

SEXUAL ORIENTATION IDENTITY THEORIES

18

identity as well as the reality of healthy queer relationships is crucial for complete lesbian, gay,
and bisexual identity development. Together, these theories suggest that individuals need
healthy, positive, and accurate representations of their identities to help avoid identity
foreclosure and to progress through development. There are many ways in which student affairs
professionals can create this. Firstly, we need to support the hiring of queer staff with a variety
of intersecting identities so that there are positive representations and visibility on campus.
Additionally, campuses can provide online resources for students so that they can find accurate
information. Ashley was fortunate that her campus provided online resources that she could use
since she never sought out campus resources in person. Individuals will also turn to television
shows and films. One student Moira worked with first began exploring his sexual and romantic
interest around the same time he began watching a television show primarily focused on the lives
of gay men. As the first season came to a close, he gradually gained the confidence to disclose
his identity to one other person. Media helps us learn and build cultural scripts for social
activities, but with so little material available showing queer relationships, individuals do not
have a lot of choices. Having a variety of role models, resources, safe spaces, and programming
can, together, help provide students more options for support and peer interactions.
In considering campus, off-campus, and online environments, it is also important to
consider how students are utilizing various resources. Often, many of the stereotypically queer
events, such as drag shows, queer proms, and pride events are not inclusive or welcoming to
everyone because they target people who are already publicly out and people who feel welcome
in the queer community. In both of our experiences, we sought out ways to take part in the queer
community that did not require disclosing our identities. Polysexuality and asexuality are erased
and invalidated by the larger queer community, spaces for queer women are often minimal in

SEXUAL ORIENTATION IDENTITY THEORIES

19

comparison to those that cater to gay men, and queer people of color experience even less
positive and accurate representation than White queer people do. Utilizing sexual identity
development models in conjunction with other developmental models and theories is useful in
helping make the resources that are available more inclusive and welcoming.
Analysis of Available Research
Although the current research offers some valuable implications and support for queer
programming on college campuses, it is insufficient to fully support a modern student body. In
this section, we highlight major areas research is lacking in the area of sexual orientation identity
development, including media application, intersectionality, and polysexual erasure.
Sexual Orientation Identity Development & the Role of Media
Sexual and romantic orientations are various and diverse. Would the student searching
for new media to guide his social scripts have the same struggle if more characters resembling
him were readily accessible? We have discussed how these theories frequently forget sexual
fluidity, various polysexual identities, aromanticism, and asexuality. DAugellis (1994) model
calls for stronger prevalence of real and fictional queer social role models, but we do not know
how functional narrow representations (e.g. media depicting gay men) are in supporting other
sexual identifications.
The Role of Intersectionality in Sexual Orientation Identity Development
One of the challenges in using identity development models such as Cass (1984) and
DAugelli (1994) is that the models focus on one specific identity and tend to overlook how
varied experiences might be based on the other identities that individuals hold. For example,
Casss (1984) final stage, Identity Synthesis, is characterized by ones ability to understand that
their sexual identity is only one aspect of who they are, which allows individuals to focus on

SEXUAL ORIENTATION IDENTITY THEORIES

20

other identities. However, based on the other identities that an individual holds, they may not
need to fully develop their sexual identity in order to be aware of intersecting identities. For
example, people of color who are often forced to think about their race because of systematic
racism and microaggressions will likely follow a different developmental trajectory because of
the need to navigate both race and sexuality. Both of us identify as White, which affords us the
privilege to be able to write about sexuality development without considering racial identity
development. Most of the suggestions we raised as ways to incorporate theory into practice did
not include intersecting identities that affect how individuals experience campus environments.
More research is needed to help us understand how students develop when navigating various
combinations of identities. Additionally, those who have privilege within queer spacespeople
who are White, cisgender, educated, able-bodiedmust find ways to help amplify the
experiences and needs of our peers within the queer community. This includes doing more
comprehensive and inclusive research, supporting projects and research done by our queer peers,
and educating ourselves on the variety of needs and experiences of those who have identities that
we do not hold. We must be more inviting in our safe spaces that are often utilized only by
White, cisgender individuals, and we must build solidarity across various marginalized groups,
both on and off campus.
Polysexual Erasure in Sexual Orientation Identity Development Research
Although both Casss (1984) and DAugellis (1994) models are cited in articles referring
to queer people generally, given that Cass (1984) did not examine polysexual people at all and
the extent to which DAugelli (1994) considered polysexual populations is unclear, there may be
other theories which can more accurately capture our experiences. For example, in 2004, M.
Bradford structured a model of bisexual identity development emphasizing only four stages:

SEXUAL ORIENTATION IDENTITY THEORIES

21

questioning reality, inventing the identity, maintaining the identity, and transforming adversity.
Bradford (2004) acknowledged that bisexual populations are heterogeneous, think and act in
different ways, and use different words to describe themselves, which is more extensive and
complex than the way in which bisexual populations have been described in more prominent
theories.
Like DAugelli (1994) and Cass (1996), Bradford (2004) was sensitive to how social
context affects individual navigation through identity. However, unlike both theories, Bradford
(2004) also recognized that bisexual people face greater difficulty in areas of development
connected to community, as they may feel ostracized even by other queer people who are
monosexual. Her work supports many of the suggestions we have already made related to the
incongruence of stages such as identity pride (Cass, 1984) with our personal experiences. We
need to expand upon our knowledge related to working with polysexual individuals, as Bradford
(2004) is not the only one to expose how polysexual people fail to fit in these models (Brown,
2002; Knous, 2006). Additional research can support polysexual students by seeking to
empirically test models such as Bradfords 2004 theory.
Conclusion
In order to accurately represent queer student development, we cannot solely rely on
research testing predominantly monosexual (gay and lesbian) students. Although prevailing
theories such as those by Cass (1984) and DAugelli (1994) provide a strong start with excellent
implications for student affairs practice, supporting additional research more inclusive of
polysexual and asexual identities can give us a richer understanding of queer student experience.
Through our analysis we have also seen that the theories of Cass (1984) and DAugelli (1994)
hold an incomplete and insufficient grasp on the intersectionality sexual orientation may hold

SEXUAL ORIENTATION IDENTITY THEORIES

with other identities. Our personal and professional experiences support the research
implications offered by Cass (1984) and DAugelli (1994) related to the power of media
representation, access to queer community, and climate of campus safety, but we urge
professionals to use care when seeking to apply some of the more specific implications of
predominant sexual orientation theories to all students.

22

SEXUAL ORIENTATION IDENTITY THEORIES

23

References
Bradford, M. (2004). The bisexual experience: Living in a dichotomous culture. Journal of
Bisexuality, 4(1-2), 7-23.
Brown, T. (2002). A proposed model of bisexual identity development that elaborates on
experiential differences of women and men. Journal of Bisexuality, 2(4), 67-91.
Cass, V. C. (1984). Homosexual identity formation: Testing a theoretical model. Journal of Sex
Research, 20(2), 143-167.
Cass, V. C. (1996). Sexual orientation identity formation: A western phenomenon. In R. P. Cabaj
& T. S. Stein (Eds.) Textbook of homosexuality and mental health (pp. 227-251).
Washington, D.C.: American Psychiatric Press.
DAugelli, A.R. (1991). Gay men in college: Identity processes and adaptations. Journal of
College Student Development, 32(2), 140-146.
DAugelli, A. R. (1994). 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.
Knous, H.M. (2006). The coming out experience for bisexuals: Identity formation and stigma
management. Journal of Bisexuality, 5(4), 37-59.