Queer Black and Latinx Men's Counterstories of Undergraduate STEM Education as a White, Cis-Heteropatriarchal Space

• In Event: Future Directions in Queer of Color Scholarship Across Educational Settings

Abstract

This paper presents findings from a study of undergraduate STEM as a white, cis-heteropatriarchal space (Author, forthcoming), focusing on the experiences of four queer men of color (QMOC) at large, private, and historically white research university in the southeastern U.S. We framed our analysis using intersectionality, a structural theory of oppression that captures how interlocking systems of power shape unique forms of marginalization and resistance (e.g. Crenshaw, 1991). Counter-storytelling methodology (Solórzano & Yosso, 2002) was used to construct analytical narratives for each participant to center queer of color experiences as valid sources to theorize for the dismantling of white, cis-heteropatriarchy. We developed these counter-stories through data from STEM autobiographies, semi-structured individual and group interviews, and event journaling (a collection of events in STEM classrooms and support spaces perceived as socially affirming or disaffirming; Author, 2019c).

A cross-case analysis of the counter-stories revealed three themes across ideological, institutional, and relational levels of experience. For brevity, we highlight an illustrative example for each theme. Ideologically, QMOC described the influence of racialized, heteronormative discourses of competence in STEM. Eric (Latinx, gay, neuroscience) reflected on simultaneously navigating racialized messages of “riding affirmative action to medical school” and stereotypes that queer individuals do not pursue STEM. He chose neuroscience as a “major of reputation” and with “scientific substance” for job security purposes, which he viewed as a function of family loyalty to protect himself from homophobia that his mother feared for his future.

Institutionally, QMOC acknowledged erasure of queerness, race, and their intersections in STEM coursework, which perpetuated white and heteropatriarchal assumptions. Chris (Black, gay, biomedical engineering) described how engineering as an “objective, golden ratio type discipline” leaves racist and heterosexist biases unquestioned, thus shaping instruction that upholds images of the “ideal student” as straight, white men. Senior design, however, was an exceptional experience where Chris felt like he as a “person [was] becoming relevant in engineering classes,” especially with a Black instructor who challenged default thinking.

Relationally, QMOC remarked on conscious performances of their identities to manage STEM faculty members’ and peers’ racialized, heteronormative perceptions. Marcus (Black, gay/pan-romantic, neuroscience) felt his “queerness almost alleviat[ed] the Blackness” of his identity, so he “present[ed] stereotypically gay” (e.g., flamboyant dress, high-pitched talk), particularly among white women peers to appear less threatening as a Black man and make study partners. With white men faculty, Marcus assumed them to be heterosexual and socially conservative, so he consciously acted “way more straight” (e.g., lowered voice) to present as a “younger version” of them and maximize his chances of receiving academic support.

Our study’s scholarly significance is twofold. First, our findings build on prior work that theorizes queer of color pedagogies (Brockenbrough, 2016; Cruz, 2013), which are yet to be explored in undergraduate STEM teaching and student support contexts. Second, our study fills the void of intersectional inquiry on queer students in STEM (Cech & Waidzunas, 2011; Hughes, 2017) and higher education broadly (Author, 2018; Renn, 2010) where single-identity analyses leave queer of color experiences implicit.

Authors

• Luis Antonio Leyva, Vanderbilt University

• Taylor McNeill, Vanderbilt University

• Zander Alley, Vanderbilt University

• Oscar Guzman, Vanderbilt University

• Virginia Elizabeth King, University of Georgia