As organizations become more diverse, leaders must become more culturally competent in order to manage an inclusive culture and bring the best out of their employees.  Although members of all social identity groups occasionally experience cultural misunderstandings at work, cultural misunderstandings about LGBTQIA people are too often commonplace at work and within our society.  From September 16-19, 2015, the National Black Justice Coalition held their Sixth Annual Out on the Hill Black LGBT Leadership Summit:

A Focus on the Health and Wellness of Our Community.  The theme of the conference was "We are Family: Building Stronger Roots Together."  Matthew Shaw, J.D., who is also a doctoral student at Harvard University, and I had the pleasure of presenting at the conference on Friday morning*.  Our session entitled, "That's So Gay! Exploring Scientific Research to Answer Common Questions and Beliefs about LGBTQ People was intended to help clear up some cultural misunderstandings about LGBTQ people.  Similar to the popular TV show Mythbusters, Matthew and I surveyed a large sample of people and asked them what common sayings, beliefs, and/or questions they had about LGBTQ people that they wanted to know whether or not were true.  In order to answer their questions, Matthew and I surveyed the scientific literature to find answers to their questions and presented our findings to a wonderfully engaged NBJC audience.  Please find below some of the questions and answers that were presented at the NBJC conference.  

 Is gaydar real?

True—GLBTQ people have a distinct culture and methods of communication.  Since GLBTQ people typically do not have phenotypical identity characteristics, a variety of methods have been created in an effort to communicate one’s identity.  Sometimes, these methods are borne out of a need to “survive” in a heteronormative society.  One such method is the eye gaze, also known as gaydar gaze (Nicholas, 2004).  Rutter (1984) stated that eye contact consists of 1) the pattern of looking, 2) contextual cues, and 3) the function of the gaze.  The direct stare, which is prolonged eye contact and the broken stare, which is the “stare-look-away-stare-again” are the two most cited forms of eye gaze used to activate gaydar. It is also possible for heterosexuals to obtain “gaydar” if they spend enough time with GLBTQ people and gain sufficient levels of gay cultural competencies.  Not surprisingly, Ambady, Hallahan, and Conner (1999) found that gays and lesbians outperformed heterosexuals in accurately identifying the sexual orientation of target individuals when provided only a “thin-slice” of information from a picture or one-second video (lesbians were the most accurate).  However, gaydar is not innate, people learn the skill through experience and cultural interactions (Bennett, 2006).
Lyons, M., Lynch, A., Bruno, D., & Brewer, G. (2014). Detection of sexual orientation ("gaydar") by homosexual and heterosexual women. Archives Of Sexual Behavior, 43(2), 345-352. doi:10.1007/s10508-013-0144-7

Stern, C., West, T. V., Jost, J. T., & Rule, N. O. (2013). The politics of gaydar: Ideological differences in the use of gendered cues in categorizing sexual orientation. Journal Of Personality & Social Psychology, 104(3), 520-541. doi:10.1037/a0031187
Bennett, J. A. (2006). In defense of gaydar: Reality television and the politics of the glance. Critical Studies In Media Communication, 23(5), 408-425. doi:10.1080/07393180601046154
Rieger, G., Linsenmeier, J. W., Gygax, L., Garcia, S., & Bailey, J. M. (2010). Dissecting “gaydar”: Accuracy and the role of masculinity–femininity. Archives Of Sexual Behavior, 39(1), 124-140. doi:10.1007/s10508-008-9405-2
Nicholas, C. L. (2004). Gaydar: Eye-gaze as identity recognition among gay men and lesbians. Sexuality & Culture, 8(1), 60-86.