Hong (63, separated, gay man) noted that he hoped to stay in a gay-friendly long-term care home in order to avoid any potential instances of inadequate care, due to discrimination
Finally, similar to the experiences of heterosexual individuals, participants’ concerns about utilizing paid care were driven by financial instability (Cicero & Pynoos, 2016). Beth (76, partnered, lesbian) remarks that she cannot afford to stay in a long-term care home. Others discussed the availability of LGBTQ-friendly retirement communities across the country, but noted that they often are not financially accessible. ” He elaborated, “I don’t know why … people assume that all LGBT people have money.” As mentioned earlier, cumulative inequality largely created financial distress in late adulthood, which has spill-over effects on participants’ ability to afford housing (see also de Vries et al. 2019 for a discussion of this). Indeed, older LGB people’s exposure to poverty may be exacerbated due to the effects of discrimination on wages over time (Badgett, 2020; Grant et al., 2010).
Aging in LGBTQ-Friendly Communities
Participants emphasized that they wished to age in community with one another or minimally with LGBTQ-friendly people in shared residences and long-term care homes; this departs from heteronormative (i.e., heterosexual-centric) understandings of aging with a predominate reliance on biological family for care. In addition, participants also desired to live in gay neighborhoods and shared living situations, including private homes in gay neighborhoods for those who are 55+, and/or shared houses. Frank (68, married, gay man) currently resides in one of the only gay neighborhoods for 55+ people in the country. He noted that many members of his community intentionally left homophobic areas where they were “afraid to come out to people” and now embraced an opportunity to be away from individuals in their age group who are homophobic. Aging in gay-friendly communities may also ensure that participants can avoid the concealment sexy slovenian women of their identities and secure social support that is pivotal for reducing risks of social isolation, loneliness, and depression that are commonly experienced among older LGB adults (Wilson et al., 2021).
Participants envision a “cohousing revolution” in the states, where LGBTQ people provide care for one another in shared residences (see Arrigoitia Fernandez & West, 2021; Tummers & MacGregor, 2019 for more on this concept). Joseph (83, married, gay man) noted that he is part of an advocacy group for older adults, and that his group is currently “looking for facilities to put people in their own private unit where they’ll have their own private bathroom, their own bedroom, maybe a little kitchenette, and then a community dining room, a community rec room ….” Here and in other participants’ narratives emerges a discussion of an interdependent approach to care. Lorena (59, partnered, lesbian) and Judy (55, engaged, lesbian) both described nearly identical visions, expressing plans to build a cooperative living arrangement where women congregate, share land, garden, and provide care for each other. Similarly, Jackie (61, married, lesbian) wished her current 55+ gay-friendly neighborhood would further evolve, and stated that she would like “to be able to have somewhere where you could go to the big house. You could have a shared dinner meal … if you’re in trouble, you can call somebody and they’re there.” Moreover, Jackie also emphasized that gays and lesbians have historically “had to take care of each other. we had to stay together because no one else would.” Thus, queer history is referenced in these visions of interdependent care (see also de Vries et al. 2019 for a discussion of this). Moreover, participants’ visions of social support in late adulthood centered on being surrounded by other LGB people with shared culture and values.