Introduction

Despite improved legal positions and greater tolerance in many societies, same-sex love relationships are not accepted everywhere. The coming out process to the family and especially to parents remains difficult and is often the biggest challenge due to perceived fear of negative consequences (Denes & Afifi, 2014; Grafsky et al., 2018; Keuzenkamp et al., 2006; Savin-Williams, 2001; Tamagawa, 2018). Same-sex love (SSL) individuals can experience negative self-identification as well as rejection when revealing their sexual orientation to their family, which may lead to overloaded stress (Bakboord, 2017; Meyer, 2003). We assumed that this would be even more in so-called collectivistic cultures such as the Surinamese–Hindustani culture (Choenni & Choenni, 2012). In these cultures, individuals are encouraged to subordinate their own personal interests to group interests. Personal identity is often characterized as an interdependent self: a self that is interwoven with and inseparable from the family (Markus & Kitayama, 1991). In Surinamese–Hindustani culture, maintaining and protecting of ‘palvár ke íjjat’—family honour—is considered an extremely important cultural norm and SSL is considered a disgrace of this honour (Nanhoe & Omlo, 2017). This context may make it difficult for same-sex love individuals to come out to their families and especially to their parents since they are afraid of rejection and other negative reactions. Since same-sex love individuals in Surinamese–Hindustani collectivistic culture are themselves also strongly focused on the family (Choenni & Choenni, 2012; Nanhoe & Omlo, 2017), negative reactions from family members might hit them harder. With this in mind, we ask: which strategies do Surinamese–Hindustani same-sex love individuals develop to cope with these (expected) negative reactions?

Studying coping styles among Surinamese–Hindustani same-sex love individuals with a collectivistic orientation is particularly relevant given that research on coping has been criticized for using an individualistic perspective and focusing primarily on White Americans (Dunahoo et al., 1998; Yeh et al., 2006) or only on individuals in northern and western regions of Europe, North America, and Australia (Singelis, 1994). This paper aims to fill this lacuna by focusing on the coping behaviour of Surinamese–Hindustani same-sex love individuals, stemming from a non-Western collectivistic culture and living in the Netherlands and Suriname. The few studies that do look at coping in collectivistic cultures have shown that ‘members’ use coping strategies that differ from those adopted in individualistic cultures (Aldwin, 2004; Cross, 1995; Lam & Zane, 2004; Mosquera, 2015), a point we will return to later. We investigated how Surinamese Hindustani same-sex love individuals, living in the Netherlands and Suriname, cope with stress caused by their parents’ negative reactions when coming out to them for the first time as self-identified same-sex love individuals.

Theoretical Background: Coping Strategies

Coming out is related to energizing and supporting outcomes as well as hurtful and injurious consequences. Acquiring parental acceptance of one’s same-sex love feelings is extremely significant. Parental reactions to coming out can impact same-sex love individuals’ health and wellbeing later in life (Ryan et al., 2010). Scholars indicate that growing up in a heteronormative or homonegative environment and negative reactions from parents when their same-sex love children are coming out to them are associated with higher levels of depression, lower self-esteem, and higher levels of psychological distress (Puckett et al., 2017). Meyer (2003) defines this as minority stress as heterosexual individuals do not experience these kinds of stressors. Minority stress processes are related to an array of mental health problems including depressive symptoms, substance use and suicide ideation (Ryan et al., 2009; Sandfort et al., 2009). Therefore, same-sex love individuals learn how to cope with minority stress. As postulated by Meyer (2003) coping strategies can buffer the associations between minority stress and outcomes. Scholars found that same-sex love individuals respond to minority stressors by using avoidance (emotion-focused) and approach (problem-solving) coping strategies (Kuper et al., 2013; Sandfort et al., 2009).

Coping is generally understood as the “constantly changing cognitive and behavioural efforts to manage specific external and/or internal demands that are appraised as taxing or exceeding the resources of a person” (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984, p. 141). Hence, knowledge and awareness of specific coping strategies used by same-sex love individuals when coming out to their parents are significant for informing preventative interventions, policies, and future research. Lazarus and Folkman (1980) differentiate between problem- (also called active) versus emotion—(also called regulative) focused coping. Problem-focused coping is aimed at solving the problem that causes the stress, emotion-focused coping attempts to change the negative feelings that are caused by the problem. Which coping strategies are applied by same-sex individuals may change occasionally, depending on the situation. During challenging situations an individual often uses various coping strategies to reduce distress (Folkman & Lazarus, 1980).

Cultural factors play a complex role in responses to stress. “Different cultural groups exposed to similar stressors may display different types of stress response” (Helman, 2007, p. 293). Cultural beliefs, values, expectations and practices affect the choice of coping strategies that an individual utilizes in a given situation (Aldwin, 2004). The link between culture and coping was first proposed in Lazarus and Folkman’s foundational discussion on stress and coping (1984). Research on culture and coping, has begun to uncover the relationship between cultural specificity in coping and broad cultural dimensions like collectivism–individualism, interdependence–independence, and acculturation (see Bhagat et al., 2009; Kuo, 2012). One of the findings is that emotion-focused coping styles are more common in collectivistic cultures (Bardi & Guerra, 2011; Cross, 1995; Fischer et al., 2010; Heppner et al., 2006; Kuo et al., 2006; Lam & Zane, 2004). Therefore, we expected that our same-sex love participants, coming from a collectivistic culture, would predominantly use emotion-focused coping strategies when coming out to their parents for the first time; in this way representing interdependence, social harmony and respect for authority (Kuo, 2012; McCarty et al., 1999).

Hindustani Culture, Family Honour and SSL

Hindustanis—most of whom are Christian, Muslim and Hindu—are an ethnic group in Suriname’s multi-ethnic society. They are descendants of indentured laborers from India brought to Suriname in the period 1873–1894 after the abolition of slavery in the Dutch empire (1863). In the turbulent period preceding Suriname’s independence in 1975, many Hindustanis migrated to the Netherlands, Suriname’s former colonizer. In 2013, the Hindustani population in the Netherlands was 175,000 (Choenni, 2014) and in Suriname it was 148,443 in 2012 (ABS, 2013).Footnote 1

In the Surinamese–Hindustani culture, procreation, marriage and the social prestige of the family are regarded as the main purposes of life and linked to maintaining family honour. Marriage is an important rite of passage; it determines the social status of children and it is the responsibility of parents to get all their adult children married (Choenni & Choenni, 2012). All members are expected to adhere to these values: they should ensure that their actions and behaviours are not negatively communicated in the community. It would bring shame to the entire family and especially the parents, and it will lower their status. This is reflected in the expression ‘manai ka boli—what will people say—a well-known concept in Hindustani culture (Choenni & Choenni, 2012). Although there are some exceptions within the Surinamese–Hindustani community, SSL is rarely accepted (Hekma & Anderson, 2010; Nanhoe & Omlo, 2017) and experienced as a violation of the family honour. Within this cultural framework of Hindustani family honour, Surinamese Hindustani same sex love (SHSSL) individuals in both the Netherlands and Suriname have to navigate how to cope with the stress caused by the negative responses from their parents when coming out to them.

Method

Study Design and Recruitment

This current investigation is part of a larger (49 interviews) qualitative study designed to understand how SHSSL men and women living in the Netherlands and Surinam experience their SSL within the family context. The current article, based on data from 30 interviews (14 women and 16 men), focuses only on the SHSSL individuals in the Netherlands and Suriname who have experienced negative reactions from their parents with respect to their first-time coming out as self-identified SSL individuals. The other 19 participants in the larger study did not experience negative reactions from their parents when coming out to them for the first time.

To be eligible to participate in this study, participants had to be 18 years or older; self-identified as gay, lesbian, or bisexual, or alternatively feel same-sex or bi-sexual attraction but do not self-identify as gay, lesbian or bisexual, and self-identify as a member of the Surinamese–Hindustani community. The first author was responsible for participant recruitment and conducted face-to-face, in-depth, semi-structured interviews at the locations preferred by the participants. Data collection took place between 2013 and 2019, for reasons explained below.Footnote 2

Participants

Participants consisted of nine men and eight women living in Suriname (17) and five women and eight men living in the Netherlands (13). During fieldwork, most participants in the Netherlands lived in big cities and those in Suriname resided in the capital and in the coastal area. The majority of participants are followers of Hinduism, while some belong to two religions such as Hindu/Christian or Hindu/Muslim and a few belong to the Christian or Islamic faith. With respect to education, two participants completed the primary school, four completed secondary school, while the others completed or were in the process of completing post-primary education (one), secondary vocational education (three), university for applied science (13), and university-level education (seven). The youngest participant was 18 and the oldest 61. The majority of the participants in the Netherlands were born in Suriname, though two men and three women were born in the Netherlands. While two male and two female participants in the Netherlands live with their parents or family, the majority live separately (they have established their own households). Two male participants in the Netherlands are each in an SSL marriage. All participants living in Suriname were born in Suriname, although some have previously lived in the Netherlands. The majority of the Surinamese sample—four male and four females—live separately from their families (they have their own households). None of the participants in Suriname are in a same-sex love marriage, though one (bisexual) participant is in a heterosexual marriage.

Positionality and the Role of the Researcher

Many scholars are scrutinizing the role of the researcher as a searcher for truth, discussions in which questions of objectivity and subjectivity in social research are being addressed. The researcher’s positionality influences both how research is conducted, its outcomes, and its results (Foote & Bartell 2011, Rowe, 2014; Savin-Baden & Howell-Major, 2013). The first author chose this topic as she feels closely connected to the Surinamese Hindustani community due to her long-standing relationship with a Hindustani woman. As a Surinamese human rights scholar-activist in the LGBT and women’s movement for over 35 years, she was aware of the difficulties Surinamese–Hindustani same-sex love individuals experience when disclosing their SSL feelings to their families.

The first author’s positionality and scholar-activism shaped aspects of this research (see Gilmore, 2008; Nagar, 2012; Pulido, 2008). The first author conducted interviews over six years in two countries, alongside urgent and ongoing human rights activism in Suriname. The first author shared her own narrative of being a Surinamese LGBT-activist and being in a relationship with a Hindustani woman for over thirty years with each participant. This opened the door for building rapport and participation. The first author’s intimate knowledge of the Hindustani community also helped her analyse and contextualize the participants’ narratives. As the first author, she was aware that her prior knowledge about this group through her LGBT activism and experiences with the Hindustani community could lead respondents to assume that things were familiar to her. Precisely because she was aware of this, she deliberately kept asking questions during the interviews, secure that the research findings were based on what respondents had actually said. The first author’s identity also posed research dilemmas. For example, when selecting sites to conduct interviews, some participants were fearful that onlookers would recognize the first author, who is well-known as an LGBT-activist. Some participants thought that people might connect the first authors’ LGBT activism to the participants’ same-sex love feelings. For this reason, interviews were conducted in private settings.

The second and third authors contribute to the study from partly overlapping insider positions. The second author has experiential knowledge of coming out processes as a white Dutch lesbian woman and is an engaged scholar and activist on gender and LGBT-issues. The third author has knowledge from her experiences with growing up in a collectivistic culture and is an expert on gender, sexuality and migration studies. The authors discussed our expectations, prejudices, and ideological biases before and during our research process and compared that with our results. Our positionality helped us to interpret our participants’ life stories using a reflexive approach (Malterud, 2001) and an etic as well as an emic point of view.

Topics and Data Analysis

The interviews were semi-structured, using a topic list with questions derived from the research question and based on a study of the relevant literature. The topics that were discussed in the interviews included childhood experiences with respect to SSL, the development of sexual orientation and SSL identification, (self) acceptance, coming out to parents and parents’ reactions to participant’s coming out in relation to family honour with regard to marriage, procreation and same-sex attraction. This topic list provided a general structure for the interviews. Frequently, participants were asked to elaborate on their life experiences. For example, we asked participants what their parents’ and family’s responses meant to them and what they had been taught during their adolescence about love, marriage and sexuality.

Data Analysis

All interviews were conducted, recorded, transcribed, translated from Dutch to English and anonymized by the first author.Footnote 3 Using direct content analysis, we used Lazarus and Folkman’s (1984) theory of problem and emotion-focused coping as guidelines for initial coding using MAXQDA (Hsieh & Shannon, 2005). The objective of a directed approach to content analysis is to validate or extend conceptually a theoretical framework or hypothesis. Using existing theory or prior research, researchers begin by identifying key concepts or variables as initial coding categories (Potter & Levine-Donnerstein, 1999). Hence, the authors selected all text that on first impression appeared to present subthemes related to the distinction between problem- and emotion-focused coping styles participants used in dealing with their parents’ negative reactions. Thereafter, the first author coded all highlighted passages using the predetermined codes. In the process of fine coding followed by axial coding—to generate subthemes and find patterns—we all noticed that this distinction was insufficient as most participants applied a combination of both coping styles. We ultimately established four patterns that each combine both problem- and emotion-focused coping styles. We named them: pattern 1. understanding parents’ negative reactions; pattern 2. conforming to parent’s ‘palvár ke ijjat’ values; pattern 3. silent withdrawal; and pattern 4. standing up for one’s own interests. Seven participants used multiple strategies: one used both the first and the second strategy, one used the first, the second and the third strategy, one used the second and the fourth strategy, while the other four used a combination of the third and the fourth strategy.

Findings

Same-Sex Love and Coming Out

While many scholars often use the concept of same-sex sexuality, in this study we introduce the concept of same-sex love (SSL). The majority of the research participants in our study emphasized love in their relationships and identities, rather than sexuality. Our research participants expressed the importance of the love and warmth they feel with being attracted to someone of their own sex, rather than sexual practices or sexual experiences. Following the interviewees’ narratives, we choose to emphasize the love between individuals of the same-sex and introduce the concept of SSL. In this article, this concept refers to the love, romantic (or sexual) attraction, or desire towards people of the same-sex. This perspective was expressed by research participant Sona; “My heart was racing and I was in that movie and I thought oh my God this really is the perfect time to tell her right now that I'm in love with her…” (Sona, age 30). Similarly, Armand emphasized:

We belonged together. He also went to pick me flowers. We walked hand in hand along the beach. We went to have fun. I had to go everywhere with him, like we had to be together for 24 hours. I cried when I had to go home. We started writing to each other every day... I was…..very obsessively in love with him. (Armand, age 34)

In our study, the phrase ‘coming out’ refers to both active and passive (involuntary) coming out. Our participants described two main forms of coming out: an active coming out, when the participant takes the initiative to disclose her or his SSL attraction to their parents, and a passive “being outed” or a ‘forced’ coming out, a response to the initiative of others to disclose the participant’s SSL attraction to their parents.

Understanding Parents’ Negative Reactions

The six participants (four live in Suriname and two in the Netherlands) who adopt the pattern understanding parents’ negative reaction narrated that initially SSL felt natural to them. It made them happy to experience feelings of being in love. Self-acceptance came to be a complex process for these individuals only once they were confronted with homonegative and heteronormative discourse from both the family and social environment only during adolescence. Based on the experience of observing their parents’ sadness when coming out to them, these participants realized that it would also be a process for their parents to accept their SSL attraction. While these participants felt compassion for their parents’ positions and a duty to protect the family honour, their parents’ negative responses did not ultimately have a negative influence on their own well-being:

I cried, also because my mother was crying like a little child. And I hated it, I saw her crying like this for the first time. Really like a broken child. I was sorry that I had to do this to her. But, I realized I had to do this (coming out to his mother). (Shareef, age 39)

These participants realized that their parents were brought up with traditional Hindustani cultural values with a strict traditional gender distribution where men and women are supposed to conform to heteronormativity, while striving to occupy an important position in society. Undermining heteronormativity by living an SSL lifestyle disrupted this vision, as emphasized by a female participant who reflected that “Parents have been taught that an intimate relationship is only destined for a man and a woman. And same-sex relationships will be disapproved of” (Indira, age 21).

Knowing their parents’ background, these participants did not expect their parents to understand them. As expressed by Anil, a male participant:

(….) They come from Nickerie (a rural district). They still live there. I understand. A very small community. I understand that they handle things differently, so if they need that space, my job is to give them space. (He laughs and hits the table gently.) I shouldn't force them to accept it. (Anil, age 27)

These participants were aware that their parents experienced an enormous amount of pressure from their extended families. They realized that their parents would have to find ways to deal with negative responses from their families once their SSL attraction became public knowledge. Their parents might be excluded from family celebrations and spoken of negatively. Parents and participants alike regularly confronted questions from their families about their son or daughter’s relationship status or marriage plans. Participants were aware that when their parents would find out their child does not meet these expectations, they must prepare themselves for the negative reactions from family members and the public shame that comes upon all of them. Therefore, without giving in to their parents’ expectations, the participants considered their parents’ feelings and their point of view as they navigated their SSL relationships.”

On the one hand, I don't mind. Whether or not they approve. It doesn't make me any happier. I have to be happy for myself, of course. If they would accept it or if they had trouble with it, I don't care. But I find it difficult for my mother. I find it difficult for my mother's family because they are very close. (Dinesh, age 39)

These participants understood their parents’ negative reactions as a defence anticipating the negative responses of extended family members to the participants’ SSL attraction. By understanding the grip of Hindustani cultural expectations on their parents, these participants considered the negative responses to their SSL attraction as a problem of parents who did not know how to deal with it. Yet, these participants refused to consider this their problem and, instead, viewed their parents as responsible for their own SSL acceptation process.

All participants explained that SSL was rejected within their families and all experienced, as we expected, significant pressure to conform, that is to marry and to start a heteronormative family life. Anand, an 18-year-old man, recalls what happened that when his family suspected him of being attracted to men:

I was interrogated by my parents and uncles. Everything was taken away from me, my mobile, I was not allowed to go out anymore ...and they took me to a brothel to have sex with a commercial sex worker. (Anand, age 18)

Conforming to Parent’s ‘Palvár ke Ijjat’ Values

Of the eight participants who adopted the pattern conforming to parent’s ‘palvár ke ijjat’ values, six live in Suriname and two in the Netherlands. All struggled with acknowledging their SSL attraction; some questioned themselves whether their SSL feelings are normal. During adolescence these participants were confronted with harassment at school, bullied by neighbours and received negative remarks from parents and family. They were not able to disconnect from their parents’ values. They feared that their parents might get sick, die or lose their family’s honour if their SSL attraction would come to be known, and they felt they would be responsible for that. Several participants shared that this kept them from prioritizing their own needs, describing this with a Dutch phrase that translates as “choosing for oneself” (voor mezelf kiezen). Their parents’ negative reactions also caused these participants stress and pain. They frequently communicated SSL-negative messages about homosexuals in general, made comments directly about the participants, and exposed non-verbal SSL negative behaviour. Therefore, these participants concluded that they were suspected of being attracted to someone of the same-sex and their parents did not accept their SSL orientation.

To cope with these verbal and non-verbal homonegative reactions, participants conformed to their parents’ cultural values in an effort not to hurt their parents. They refrained from disclosing their SSL feelings and refrained from SSL relationships. Some entered into heterosexual relationships and some even engaged in heterosexual marriage. Striking was participants’ anxiety that their SSL coming out might bring damage and disgrace to their parents and family. One young man, Sanjay, said this fear destroyed him and kept him awake almost every night. To conform to his parents’ expectations, he decided to date women. He explained,

What will people say. What do people think. In Hindustani we say ‘manai ka boli’. It is a crisis, it is the end of the world… they will cast me out, my parents will break. My family is also going to reject my parents because I am gay…My nephews and nieces who frequently ask me for help: can you help with my thesis? Is good. Bhai. -brother-, I need a hundred SRD, I say okay come get it. That contact will break… If I can make my parents happy, I will do it with a girl. Even if I have to take medicines to get a stand-up erection. I'll do it for my parents (Sanjay, age 27).

These participants did not visibly and actively resist their family’s negative reactions and attitudes. They perceived the well-being of their parents as both a responsibility and an obligation because they believed their parents have sacrificed much for their upbringing. Therefore, these participants subordinated their own happiness to their parents’. Conforming to Hindustani family honour values was not only enforced by the parents and the family, but also by the participants themselves, who considered their own SSL relations “not normal.” Nisha—who is in love with a woman—narrates the following:

It was difficult for me to accept myself … She said she wanted to have a relationship with me. I said it is not allowed. It was abnormal (Nisha, age 33).

Since marriage is not only a social obligation of Hindustani children but also a responsibility of the parents, two participants gave in to pressure to marry. One female participant suspected her mother knew she was attracted to a young woman when she was a teenager. She felt her mother must have noticed she was in love and the young woman frequently visited her at home. Her mother expressed her disapproval of SSL relationships by constantly promoting heterosexual relationships. The participant felt she was forced to marry. If not, her mother would have thrown her out of the house.

She married me off. I was 20 years old. She selected that man for me. Yes, she had made a comment, life starts with a man and a woman. She kept saying that and therefore I suspected she knew... I think the marriage is related to that. And I did not want to hurt her, she sacrificed so much for me (Roshni, age 41).

Only one participant managed to refrain from internalizing the shame coming from homonegative discourse within the family. She protected herself from being in a constant mode of fear and stress and feeling uncomfortable. Others were still in pain and damaged and felt deeply depressed.

I am stuck. The only thing I do is pay attention to my studies and my parents. I just do anything they ask me to do (Dev, age 18).

Engaging with someone of the opposite sex improved participants’ relationships with their parents, but it came at a high price. It worsened their depression, which resulted in four participants contemplating suicide. One participant attempted suicide: “I… um… I tried to slit my wrist once. But I was discovered in time” (Ram, age 45). He hid his SSL feelings for his mother and family and got married to a woman at a very young age.

Silent Withdrawal

In contrast to the participants who used the coping style conforming to parents’ palvár ke ijjat values, eleven participants opted for a strategy of ‘silent withdrawal.’ These participants—eight in Suriname and three in the Netherlands- did not conform to their parents’ expectations, but did not go against them either. They remained silent, led secret lives and withdrew themselves.

Participants who adopted this pattern primarily sought to prevent their parents from being hurt and protect their family’s cultural values. In addition, participants sought to stop the pain caused by the families’ negative reactions. Like the participants discussed above, these participants struggled to acknowledge their first-time experiencing SSL attraction and questioned whether their own feelings were normal. Their negative feelings increased as they were confronted with harassment at school, bullying by neighbours, and negative remarks from parents and family members. To deal with their situations these participants predominantly employed emotion-focused coping styles, which had often negative effects on their mental health.

Some participants described hiding in their bedrooms, drifting between suicidal thoughts and trying to think about positive things. Another way of coping was to flee the house as much as possible. One of the participants was constantly being tormented by his parents, his siblings and other family members. To avoid his hostile home environment, he looked for outdoor activities every day.

The following interview fragment illustrates how participants coped with the pressure to get married, while being cursed or physically assaulted by their parents:

I was crying, laid in bed, laid very still, I did not speak anymore. I sat alone... She (his mother) recently said again that if I don't change, I have to leave the house. I try to make my schedule so busy to stay on the street. If I had the option to live separately and if it is not too expensive with all the necessities. But it has not yet succeeded. I would then be independent. I'm not that strong yet to do that (Farid, age 18).

Some participants were not able to escape from negative thoughts, manai ka boli (what would they [the family] say). These thoughts kept them imprisoned and constantly anxious. For many, the pathway to self-acceptance and finding ways to cope with their parents’ negative responses was lonely. They did not have the courage to talk to their friends and family members about their SSL relationships anymore. Tara and Mala, for instance, even avoided contact with the LGBT community. Tara said she would rather engage in a relationship with a woman who is still in the closet. She believed that LGBT people who are out only think about themselves and might not accept her for not being out yet. The prospect that a relationship would unveil her SSL attraction publicly frightened Tara as it would have had negative consequences for her parents’ social status. For this reason, Tara did not feel able to seek support from LGBT organizations or hanging out with members of that community. Instead, she surrounded herself with heterosexual friends to avoid being associated with the LGBT community.

Mala and Tara fantasized about their futures and imagined living lives without their parents. While Mala imagined her parents moving out, Tara daydreamed about studying abroad where she would be far away from her parents and live a life free of homonegativity and stress. She even started browsing websites for study options. Making plans for their future SSL lives appeared to be a solution for Mala and Tara. By daydreaming they were able to transform their sad feelings and insecurity into moments of happiness. As Mala reflected,

My parents are going to live somewhere else later. I'm waiting for that. That everyone leaves. I hope to have some freedom. I can finally breathe then. I just want to be happy (She smiled) (Mala, age 27).

While some participants sought distraction in their studies and future plans, others adopted less healthy coping styles, including excessive alcohol use. Six participants contemplated suicide and two attempted suicide. Ongoing pressures to marry and have children—compounded by participants feeling responsible for their parents’ grief—led to these participants feeling they did not belong in this world. Maya, for instance, was pressured to marry and have children, and she herself also believed this was her goal in life. She viewed her own attraction to a young woman as abnormal, a belief reinforced by her family’s painful attitudes and responses towards her. This worsened her depression and led to suicide attempts.

During that time, I’ve tried to commit suicide a few times. I drank my parents' blood pressure and diabetes medicine with alcohol. It was the situation at home. ... I had to get married (Maya, age 23).

These participants mainly adopted emotion focused coping styles with negative consequences for their mental health. Escaping was common such as fleeing the house, daydreaming about another life, seeking distraction in their studies, excessive alcohol use, contemplating suicide and attempting suicide.

Standing up for One’s Own Interests

Twelve participants (five live in Suriname and seven in the Netherlands) used coping style 4, standing up for one’s own interests. Like the participants who adopted pattern number 1, understanding parents’ negative reactions, they also felt their first SSL experience was natural and it made them happy to experience feelings of being in love. Yet, these participants had been confronted with negative experiences during their adolescence. Their parents’ negative responses resulted in stress for participants and had a negative influence on their well-being. Nevertheless, this did not stop participants from confronting their parents with their needs; they went against their parents’ expectations by standing up for their own interests. As these participants had considered their own SSL to be “normal” and some expressed their feelings openly to their families during their childhood and adolescence. For some participants, both male as well as female, this led to physical abuse. A few participants reported that they left their homes to stop the violence, while others went abroad, sought support or acted against their parents. One participant, Arun, recalled that, as a child, he expressed his love for the boy next door during a family dinner. This disclosure led to a period in which his mother, siblings and extended family members physically and emotionally abused him. This is how Arun dealt with the situation:

Every time I look at myself in the mirror, I see the scars that my own mother has inflicted on my body. Burned with cigarette butts, burned with hot spoons with which she started cooking (he shows me his scars). I was fed up that they (my family) were going to hit me. …Because I am Hindustani. And the emphasis at the time was on beauty, being spotlessly beautiful. If you have a cut, the scars would stick or stay. So, I didn't take it anymore. I too wanted to be beautiful... but I had those scars. I didn't want to have it anymore. (…) So, my mother takes the broomstick to hit me. And just when she threw it at me, I took it and then I said: if you touch me one more time, I will kill you. (He becomes silent). Uhmm how it ended? My mother didn't dare to hit me anymore (Arun, age 33).

As Hindustani families derive honour (palvár ke íjjat’) from social prestige, another strategy participants used was improving their social status. Prim (18 years), for example, recalled that, ever since he was a child, he loved to do household chores and put on mehndiFootnote 4 and make-up on brides. Furthermore, he used to perform khathakali (an Indian dance) and Bollywood dance on stage. His family—especially his father—did not approve of Prim doing these ‘girly’ things. For this reason, he was bullied and driven out of the house by his father when he was 14. This is how Prim dealt with this situation:

…And then I was kicked out of the house. …Only when I won an award my father apologized and asked me to come back home. My dance colleagues told me that I gave the family honour by winning the award: ‘People will express that you are his son. And people will know that you won the award’ (Prim, age 18).

Studying and public recognition are significant factors contributing to family prestige. Therefore, many participants viewed moving out of the house for the purpose of academic study as a good strategy to escape from their parents’ negative responses and experience a free homosexual life.

.... In our culture, you will live with mom and dad for as long as possible... I actually told them that I am going to live separately telling them that it was because of my work and that I wanted to go to school. I used that as an excuse. That's how I left home (Milan, age 26).

The longing to live a life where they can freely express their SSL feelings was a significant stimulus for participants who rebelled against their parents’ expectations and to make them understand their desires. Not all participants succeeded to be accepted by their parents, however. Five broke contact with their parents after coming out to them. Although these participants missed their parents, many felt that not having contact with their families was a solution. It offered them the space to live their own life and not be confronted with negative reactions from their families. Male and female participants alike expressed that prioritizing their own well-being means not having to conform to expected gender roles, including the choice to wear the clothes and hairstyles they prefer.

…I didn't want to pretend to be the typical Hindustani girl with a dress and a bow in her hair. Because I wasn't like that. I didn't want to wear skirts or dresses. My parents are actually quite against it. Being Hindustani, being lesbian... and being dressed and act like a boy. … I have really taken the step for myself. I said let it go. I just don't want any contact anymore. It feels just as well, because I am finally myself. I can finally walk the way I want. Where I go. Just really strong on myself (Monisha, age 26).

By visibly expressing their SSL attraction and behaviour, these participants were not disturbed by their family perceptions, expectations and what people would tell others, ‘manai ka boli’. These participants took rebellious actions and gradually developed strategies to live the life they prefer. Participants’ defiance regularly led to victimization by their parents. While this hurt the participants deeply, it did not constrain them.

Discussion

Disclosing SSL feelings to parents was challenging for many SSL Hindustani individuals. This research shows that when participants disclosed their SSL feelings to their parents for the first time, their parents’ negative reactions could hit them very hard. The pressure to adapt to palvár ke ijjat, or family honour (Choenni, 2009), weighed heavily on participants’ shoulders. Yet our study found that not all individuals experience coming out in the same way. We identified and analysed four different patterns or strategies adopted by participants, each differing in their emphasis on emotion-focused and problem-focused coping styles. First, some participants sought to understand their parents’ negative reactions (pattern 1). In cases where the family knew about but disapproved of SSL, some participants accepted this disapproval but continued their lifestyle. Second, some participants conformed to family expectations and were unable to resist the pressure and the expectations of their parents and could not “choose for themselves” (pattern 2). Third, some participants tried to make themselves invisible. These individuals did resist, although not openly. For some of them, however, it had become possible to have a covert sexual lifestyle (pattern 3: silent withdrawal). Finally, some participants adopted a rebellious, overt SSL lifestyle, which came at the expense of the parents’ perceptions of honour and which often lead to a breakdown of family relationships (pattern 4: standing up for one’s own interests).

Participants who predominantly adopted pattern 1, understanding parents’ negative reactions, initially understood their SSL experiences as natural. However, when these participants were confronted during adolescence with homonegative and heteronormative discourse from both their families and social environment, self-acceptance became a complex process. After observing their parents’ sadness when they came out to them, these individuals perceived that their parents needed time to accept their SSL attraction.

Participants who predominantly used pattern 2, conforming to parents’ ‘palvár ke ijjat’ values, as their coping style struggled to recognise and accept their first experience of SSL during childhood and adolescence. They questioned whether their SSL feelings were normal. Being confronted with harassment at school, bullied by neighbours and the constant confrontation with negative remarks from parents and family, strengthened these feelings of being “not normal.” They felt unable to disconnect from their parents’ values.

The participants who adopted pattern 3, silent withdrawal, as their coping style underwent the same agonies as the participants who adopted pattern 2. They too struggled to acknowledge their SSL attraction and experienced mental health problems. Yet this group did not conform to their parents’ expectations, nor did they go against it them. Instead, they choose to make themselves invisible. They remained silent, led secret lives and withdrew themselves.

Participants who primarily used pattern 4, standing up for one’s own interests, narrated how they had become aware of their own SSL feelings, a period of coming to awareness during which they either gradually or quickly understood their SSL feelings. Moreover, they reported SSL initially felt natural to them; it made them happy to experience feelings of being in love. A significant characteristic of this pattern is the participants’ rebellious performance. While their parents’ negative responses brought them grief, pain and stress, this did not stop them from confronting their parents with their needs. These participants resisted family expectations while standing up for their own interests.

Participants sometimes pointed to external resources like support from pundits (religious leaders). Yet our participants strongly emphasized the importance of their coping patterns—rather than external resources—in responding to negative reactions from their families. Our findings suggest that an important explanation for the differences in coping styles is found in the participants’ self-acceptance and the extent to which the participants believe they have to conform to Hindustani cultural expectations regarding family honour being conditional and being in a heterosexual marriage. The defining factors explaining the different coping styles appear to be the extent to which the participants accepted their own SSL attraction, how they could disconnect from their families, and how they could see themselves as separate or independent from their families and acted accordingly.

Limitations and Research Suggestions

We found that the majority of participants who adopted pattern 2. Conforming to parents’ ‘palvár ke Ijjat’ values and pattern 3. Silent withdrawal, which both came with a high personal cost, and pattern 1. Understanding parents’ negative responses live in Suriname. The majority of participants that adopted pattern 4. Standing up for your own rights live in the Netherlands. Therefore, we suspect that living in the Netherlands offers better opportunities for choosing this strategy. Therefore, it is interesting to compare how national contexts may affect the coming out processes of SSL individuals with a collectivistic orientation.

A limitation of the methodology of the present study was our use of snowball sampling, which relied on referrals. Potential interviewees may not have been referred to the researcher due to social network limitations or the decisions of intermediaries. Moreover, individuals who desired to maintain a low profile may have been less willing to participate, which may have created a certain bias in the research findings.

Our study focused on the coping strategies that SSL Hindustani individuals develop in response to the negative reactions of parents when coming out to them for the first time. As such, the experiences of individuals with parents who had positive reactions remain outside the scope of this study.

Conclusion

Our study examined the distinction between problem- and emotion-focused coping styles with regard to coming out to parents for the first time. Previous research showed that SSL individuals from collectivistic cultures predominantly adopt emotion-focused coping styles (Bardi & Guerra, 2011; Cross, 1995; Fischer et al., 2010; Heppner et al., 2006; Kuo et al., 2006; Lam & Zane, 2004). However, our study of Surinamese Hindustani SSL individuals finds that participants adopted a combination of problem- and emotion-focused coping styles. We established four patterns: 1. understanding parents’ negative responses, 2. conforming to parents’ ‘palvár ke Ijjat’ values, 3. silent withdrawal, and 4. standing up for your own rights. In patterns 2 and 3 emotion-focused coping is more dominant, whereas the first pattern—‘understanding parents’ negative reactions’—may not be an act of problem-focused coping but rather an act of wisdom. The fourth pattern was the most problem-focused pattern. These patterns demonstrated that SSL individuals in collectivistic cultures do not necessarily solely use emotion-focused coping strategies; our participants’ narratives illustrate that Hindustani collectivistic culture leaves space for multiple coping styles.

We conclude that SSL self-acceptance and ability to distance themselves from ‘palvár ke ijjat’ appear to be significant factors explaining the adoption of different coping styles. Participants who were not able to distance themselves from the heteronormativity in Surinamese–Hindustani culture and reacted to their parents’ rejection with negative SSL self-identification opted for patterns 2 and 3, where emotion-focused coping is dominant. Participants who opted for patterns 1 and 4 exhibited self-acceptance and rejection of cultural heteronormativity. Relevant for professionals in counselling and other service providers is that, while all patterns came with a price, patterns 2 and 3 came with a particularly high personal cost. Many participants who opted for these patterns suffered from depression and attempted suicide, thus confirming Lazarus and Folkman’s (1984) finding that emotion-focused coping tends to be associated with poor mental health.