State Marijuana Laws and Marijuana Use Among Sexual and Gender Minority Youth in the United States

Cannabis use trajectories over time in relation to minority stress and gender among sexual and gender minority people

Substance use disparities among sexual and gender minority (SGM) people are attributed to minority stress, but few studies have examined minority stress and cannabis use over time or investigated differences in cannabis use trajectories by less-studied gender subgroups. We examined if longitudinal cannabis use trajectories are related to baseline minority stressors and if gender differences persisted after accounting for minority stress. Cannabis use risk was measured annually over four years (2017-2021) within a longitudinal cohort study of SGM adults in the United States (N = 11,813). Discrimination and victimization, internalized stigma, disclosure and concealment, and safety and acceptance comprised minority stress (n = 5,673). Latent class growth curve mixture models identified five cannabis use trajectories: 'low or no risk', 'low moderate risk', 'high moderate risk', 'steep risk increase', and 'highest risk'. Participants who reported past-year discrimination and/or victimization at baseline had greater odds of membership in any cannabis risk category compared to the 'low risk' category (odds ratios [OR] 1.17-1.33). Internalized stigma was related to 'high moderate' and 'highest risk' cannabis use (ORs 1.27-1.38). After accounting for minority stress, compared to cisgender men, gender expansive people and transgender men had higher odds of 'low moderate risk' (ORs 1.61, 1.67) or 'high moderate risk' (ORs 2.09, 1.99), and transgender men had higher odds of 'highest risk' (OR 2.36) cannabis use. This study indicates minority stress is related to prospective cannabis use risk trajectories among SGM people, and transgender men and gender expansive people have greater odds of trajectories reflecting cannabis use risk.

Contextual Influences on Nonresponse to Health Survey Questions About Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity

Purpose: We examined the relationship between state context and survey nonresponse to sexual orientation (SO) and gender identity (GI) questions. Methods: We obtained data from the 2014-2020 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) surveys. Item nonresponse was defined as selecting "don't know/not sure" or "refused" for each of two questions about SO and GI. Nonresponse patterns included responding to both SO and GI questions; responding only to the SO question (nonresponse to GI); responding only to the GI question (nonresponse to SO); and responding to neither question. State-level contextual measures included legal protections for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, or other sexual or gender minority (LGBT+) people, LGBT+ social movement strength, and public opinion regarding LGBT+ issues. Results: The analysis included 1,459,525 respondents from 44 states (190 state-years). On weighted analysis, 96.5% of adults answered both SO/GI questions, 2.4% responded only to GI, 0.4% responded only to SO, and 0.7% responded to neither. The demographic profile of individuals with GI-only nonresponse differed markedly from the profile of adults with SO-only nonresponse. An increasingly favorable legal climate for LGBT+ people was associated with greater rates of response to SO and GI questions. However, a more LGBT+ friendly state climate measured by social movement strength or public opinion was not consistently associated with reduced SO and GI question nonresponse. Conclusion: Contextual factors have mixed association with nonresponse to SO and GI question on BRFSS surveys. Our results warrant continued development of health survey questionnaires to elicit accurate information on respondents' SO and GI.

Cannabis and Nicotine Dual Use among Sexual Minority Individuals: Relations to Cannabis Use and Negative Affect

Background: Sexual minority individuals report significantly more cannabis use and use-related problems than their heterosexual peers, and emerging data indicate sexual minority individuals who use cannabis are at greater risk for dual use of nicotine products (combustible smoking, e-cigarette use) than heterosexual individuals. Although cannabis-nicotine dual use is related to worse cannabis outcomes and negative affect, little work has identified factors related to dual use among sexual minority individuals or tested if sexual orientation-based discrimination (microaggressions, overt discrimination) is related to dual use. Objectives: The current study tested if cannabis-nicotine dual use is related to more frequent cannabis use, more cannabis-related problems, negative affect, and discrimination among sexual minority undergraduate students who endorsed current (past three-month) cannabis use (N = 328), 43.6% of whom endorsed dual nicotine use. Cannabis-nicotine dual use was related to more frequent cannabis use, more cannabis-related problems, more anxiety (but not depression), and more sexual orientation-based microaggressions and microaggressions-related negative affect (but not overt discrimination or non-sexual orientation-based daily stressors). Conclusions/Importance: Overall, this is the first known study to identify that sexual orientation-based discrimination is related to cannabis-nicotine dual use and that dual use is related to more frequent cannabis use, use-related problems, and negative affect (especially anxiety) among this underrepresented group.

Cannabis Practices Among a Gender-Diverse Sample of Young Adults

Background

Gender is an important factor in understanding cannabis patterns, yet few studies have explored cannabis patterns among gender minority (GM) individuals - particularly among high-risk age groups including young adults. The evolving cannabis market is reshaping typical patterns of cannabis use in the U.S. The combination of these factors warrants increased efforts to examine cannabis practices in gender-diverse samples.

Methods

Online survey participants between 18-34 years (N=2377) from the U.S. provided information on cannabis practices from May - July 2021. Gender differences across several cannabis outcomes (onset, methods of consumption, product potency, frequency, and quantity) were assessed. Bivariate tests and multiple regression models examined associations between gender (cisgender men: n=1020; cisgender women: n=1178; and GM: n=179) and cannabis outcomes adjusting for sociodemographic characteristics.

Results

In regression models adjusted for sociodemographic characteristics, GM identity was associated with later age of onset and lower likelihood of daily use compared to cisgender men and women. Identifying as GM or cisgender woman was associated with fewer lifetime methods of consumption and lower plant and concentrate potency usage.

Conclusions

Findings provide initial insights into potential gender differences in cannabis practices from a sample of heavy cannabis users. GM young adults report use patterns indicative of lower risk compared to cisgender men and women in our sample. Future investigations of gender differences in cannabis use that explore specific gender minority categories and that include alternative sampling strategies are needed to better understand differential risks associated with gender.