“Perhaps the single most defining characteristic of sexual-minority youths’ intimate relationships is that they have no single defining characteristic: the types of casual, intimate, platonic, and romantic relationships these youths pursue with same-sex and other-sex peers are as diverse as the youths themselves.” (from Diamond and Savin-Williams)

This passage sums up the most important point of this article very simply. Sexual minority youth can, like any other group, be studied. However, sexuality across the lifespan cannot be examined categorically. There are countless factors in the formation of sexual identity, orientation, and relationships which exist on a sliding scale and not as yes/no answers.

These few lines of the reading hint at what many LGBT youths I have worked with have told me; there are not only many steps between gay and straight, between male and female–these things shift and change form as we grow up. As a former psychology major, I think of Alfred Kinsey. Kinsey studied sexuality, in a time when sex was simply not seen as an appropriate thing to be studying. He is perhaps most widely remembered for his conception of orientation and identity as a sliding scale, which is the very first step in understanding human sexuality to the extent it can possibly be understood. Essentially, after so many studies, books, and references, it must be acknowledged that there are exceptions to any rule. Understanding this is crucial in order to end stigma and better empathize with sexual minority youth. In my (relatively limited) experience with urban sexual minority youth, the differences between individuals’ unique orientations and identities are as great or greater than the similarities. Many, many people fall somewhere between gay and straight, or male and female. This is something we as a society are just beginning to understand and accept, and this is crucial to understanding and connecting with LGBT youth.