Queering generativity and futurity: LGBTQ2IA+ stories of resistance, resurgence, and resilience

A preoccupation with heteronormative metrics of success in aging leaves many studies of “LGBT aging” focused on the needs, failings, and vul­nerabilities of older LGBTQ2IA+ people (i.e. lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, queer, two-spirit, intersex, asexual, and people of other nonnormative sexual and gender expressions). As a result, LGBTQ2IA+ olders are fre­quently depicted as isolated, re-closeted, or simply nonexistent. Heeding calls to intervene into such bleak and pathologizing portrayals of queer/ trans aging (e.g. Ramirez-Valles 2016; Sandberg & Marshall 2017), this article explores diverse subjectivities, nonnormative aging experiences, and their potential intergenerational implications. It draws on stories of queerness, gender, aging, futurity, and social change from 13 LGBTQ2IA+ people ranging in age from 23 to 74, recorded in an intergenerational research-generation workshop held in Nogojiwanong (Peterborough, Canada) in 2018. This article argues that queer and trans stories are crucial to confronting the erasure of LGBTQ2IA+ aging, aiming to extend ongoing efforts within aging studies to queer concepts of successful aging, aging futures, generativity, and intergenerationality. Ultimately, this article aims to complicate constricted understandings of queer/trans aging, instead of depicting LGBTQ2IA+ people aging with connection, pride, learning, and purpose, as well as with struggle and vulnerability.

Evaluating the Impact of State Policy Interventions for LGBT Aging: Comparative Case Study of New York and California

The majority of aging network service providers are unprepared to deliver targeted services to lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender (LGBT) older adults. In 2017, California legislature mandated ongoing LGBT sensitivity training for congregate living providers. Services and Advocacy for GLBT Elders (SAGE) developed a specialized training, Creating Inclusive Communities, for congregate living staff to learn the unique needs of LGBT elders. This secondary data analysis compared pre-test knowledge and attitudes of training participants in two states, one mandating LGBT aging sensitivity training (California, N=328) and one without the mandate (New York, N=622). Preliminary results show that prior to receiving training, California participants demonstrate significantly less knowledge of LGBT aging issues compared to New York participants; t(948)=-3.808, p<.001. Attitudinal differences were also demonstrated. These results suggest that laws mandating LGBT sensitivity training may help reach providers with greater training needs. Policy and practice implications will be discussed. Part of a symposium sponsored by Rainbow Research Group Interest Group.