Pt 1/2: It's What Makes a House a Homo: Queer and Trans Residential Geographies of Toronto

IT’S WHAT MAKES A HOUSE A HOMO: QUEER AND TRANS RESIDENTIAL GEOGRAPHIES OF TORONTO, HOW IDENTITY AND KINSHIP INFLUENCES INHABITATION OF SPACE AND PLACE

by Sam Casola Bachelor of

Architectural Studies, Laurentian University, 2020

A Major Research Project presented to Ryerson University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Planning in Urban Development Toronto, Ontario, Canada, 2022

© Sam Casola, 2022

Author’s Declaration

I hereby declare that I am the sole author of this MRP. This is a true copy of the MRP, including any required final revisions.

I authorize Ryerson University to lend this MRP to other institutions or individuals for the purpose of scholarly research

I further authorize Ryerson University to reproduce this MRP by photocopying or by other means, in total or in part, at the request of other institutions or individuals for the purpose of scholarly research

I understand that my MRP may be made electronically available to the public.

IT’S WHAT MAKES A HOUSE A HOMO: QUEER AND TRANS RESIDENTIAL GEOGRAPHIES OF TORONTO, HOW IDENTITY AND KINSHIP INFLUENCES INHABITATION OF SPACE AND PLACE

Sam Casola, 2022 Master of Planning in Urban Development Ryerson University

ABSTRACT

Key words: Queer, Transgender, Gender non-conforming, Queer geography, residential geography, kinship formations, intersectionality

Since the inception of Toronto’s Church-Wellesley Village, mainstream discourse has classified the neighbourhood as the center of LGBT life in Toronto, grouping and defining LGBTQ2s+ histories and lives into one assumed universal experience (Idlewild, 2016; Nash, 2005; Ghazhani, 2014) Yet, The Village was established on a basis of homonormativity, which created an enclave for primarily white, middle-class, cisgender, gay men (Idlewild, 2016; Nash, 2005). The resulting marginalization of LGBTQIA2S+ individuals who did not conform to constructed norms of sexuality or gender led to their relocation beyond The Village (Nash, 2013; Bitterman & Hess, 2020). This research project explores the locations beyond The Church-Wellesley Village in which LGBTQIA2S+ individuals inhabit, including the neighbourhoods in which they reside, the housing typologies in which they live, and the ways in which identity and kinship influences inhabitation of space and place A historic exploration of LGBTQIA2S+ dwellings and lives across the City is conducted, and a map of findings is produced. Primary data representing the current landscape is then collected, coded and utilized in forming socio-spatial maps of LGBTQIA2S+ households across Toronto and respective information related to geographic location, dwelling type, identity and kinship. Analysis of the maps is completed through a comparative approach to identify location-based themes and patterns The project provides a deeper understanding of LGBTQIA2S+ community in Toronto by highlighting the communities’ spacial experiences and living needs beyond the basis of cisgender, white, gay men As individuals of all ages, ethnicities, genders and sexualities reside across the City, intersecting identities, kinship structures and spatial geographies of LGBTQIA2S+ individuals must be considered in order to understand and accommodate the range of lifestyles and households within the LGBTQIA2S+ community.

Acknowledgements

The completion of this project would not have been possible without my incredible supervisor, Professor Victor Perez-Amado Thank you for all of the time you have dedicated to assisting me, the effort and excitement that you have shown towards my work I am forever grateful to have worked with someone so genuine and supportive. Thank you.

Thank you to Alison Macleod, Professor Nina-Marie Lister and Dr Pamela Robinson, the care and support you have provided throughout my MRP and my time at SURP has been incredible

To my friends who have provided me with support and offered me help during hard times, thank you. It means a lot to me to have built a support system who cares so deeply A chosen family, some might say

And to my two furry housemates, thanks for making me laugh and quite literally watching me as I worked on this project. Your stares prompted me to get this over with so I no longer needed to endure them on the daily

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Previously referred to as ‘the ghetto’ by the LGBTQIA2S+ community (Costa, 2013), Toronto’s Church-Wellesley Village gained it’s name as it grew in popularity towards the late 1980’s, and is now widely known as The Gay Village Since the neighbourhood’s inception, mainstream discourse has classified it as ‘the center of LGBTQ life in Toronto’ (Destination Toronto, n.a.), welcoming to all members of the LGBTQIA2S+ - referring to the community as a whole Yet, the evolution of the name accurately reflects the Gay Village as it was just that - a space for gay men; specifically, a space for white, middle class, cisgender, gay men(Nash, 2005; Idlewild, 2016; Haritaworn & Moussa, 2019).

The establishment of The Village as Toronto’s ''gayborhood" emphasizes the vastly differing experiences within the LGBTQIA2S+ community based on intersections of identity (Crawford-Lackey & Springate, 2020). Toronto’s first publicly visible space of LGBTQIA2S+ gathering, The Steps of a Second Cup on Church Street, originated in the mid-1980’s and became a location where QTBIPOC youth gathered in the absence of intentional spaces for BIPOC LGBTQIA2S+ folks (Haritaworn & Moussa, 2019) The emergence of The Steps and queer visibility in public resulted in white, cisgender gays and lesbians recognizing their ability to conform to normative standards which expanded their social acceptance within heteronormative society (Idlewild, 2016) Individuals unable to conform to homonormativity, including Trans*, queer, gender-nonconforming and BIPOC folks, were excluded from the formation of homonormative spaces within The Village (Haritaworn & Moussa, 2019; Nash, 2005). Despite their involvement and ability to conform to homonormativity, lesbians were being excluded from gay spaces prior to the 1980’s and their involvement in movements diminished over time; lesbians became less relevant as gay male interests dominated (Nash, 2005) As a result, homonormativity of largely white, middle-class, gay men became the basis on which The Village was built (Haritaworn & Moussa, 2019, Nash, 2005). Thus, at the hands of primarily cisgender, white, gay men, imposed homonormativity resulted in the marginalization of LGBTQIA2S+ individuals who did not conform to constructed norms of sexuality or gender Stigmitized within heteronormative society and the gay community, LGBTQIA2S+ individuals beyond the homonormative sphere, including gender-nonconforming individuals and folks marginalized based on social aspects such as race, ethnicity or class, were forced to relocate beyond The Village and form their own sense of community (Nash, 2013)

Existing research pertaining to LGBTQIA2S+ places, spaces and experiences expansivley explore those of gay male communities (Cain, 2013; Westwood, 2017; Ghaziani, 2015), at times grouping lesbian, bisexual and transgender experiences with them (Crawford-Lackey & Springate, 2020; Bitterman & Hess, 2020). Although literature identifying lesbian communities is more predominant than the latter, it is scant in comparison to research highlighting gay male experiences (Maynard, 2004; Lamble, 2009) Thus, ongoing attempts to group and define the individual experiences, communities and ways of life within the LGBTQIA2S+ community into the narrative experienced by white, middle-class, cisgender, gay men have prevailed (Nash, 2013). The precedence of the ‘universal narrative’ has resulted in a lack of research exploring the historical and current experience of place and space, including policing and marginalization within the LGBTQIA2S+ community, based on intersecting elements of identity (Crawford-Lackey & Springate, 2020). As a consequence, historic information regarding the whereabouts of the non-homonormative community beyond The Village goes largely undocumented and has led to a significant lack of knowledge surrounding the geographies of queer, Trans* and BIPOC LGBTQIA2S+ communities in Toronto (Haritaworn & Moussa, 2019) The existing fragments of early queer history confirm that LGBTQIA2S+ individuals have been present across the City for quite some time (Costa, 2013; Heritage Toronto, 2017; Silvera, 2021) yet there are substantial gaps in research concerning not only the historic but current LGBTQIA2S+ geographies of residence, communities and ways of life beyond The Village (Haritaworn & Moussa, 2019)

This research project explores the historic and current geographies of individuals excluded from the formation of Toronto’s Church-Wellesley Village - members of the LGBTQIA2S+ community beyond cisgender, gay, white men Specifically, it intends to determine the residential spaces and locations in which queer, Trans*, gender non-conforming and BIPOC LGBTQIA2S+ members exist within the City of Toronto. In order to address this, the project is guided by three main objectives and attending research questions:

1. Objective 1: Determine the neighbourhoods in which queer, Trans*, gender-nonconforming and QTBIPOC individuals reside in Toronto

2 Objective 2: Understand the role of chosen family and queer kinship in housing and living formations

3. Objective 3: Explore various ways in which differing identities influence the choices and experiences related to place and space

queer and trans geographies has the potential to influence policy and housing recommendations which address the varying ways in which the LGBTQIA2S+ communities live. In addition, more extensive research analyzing intersectional differences contributes to the ability to form diverse and equitable communities both within policy and governance, as well as the LGBTQIA2S+ community itself

To achieve these objectives, this research project will examine through a literature review Toronto’s neighbourhood and housing landscapes, both current and historic, within the context of queer exclusion, identity and kinship Three main research questions will guide the project in order to achieve the defined objectives:

● Where do individuals who identify as TQIA2S+ (queer and gender non-conforming) live in Toronto?

● In what ways do formations of community and kinship among LGBTQ2S+ populations and inhabitation of residential space mutually engage?

● How do differing or intersecting elements of identity influence the geographies of residence and inhabitation of space?

The research project aims to identify themes, patterns and key ideas related to residential geographies, typologies and living formations, in addition to evoking further questions for exploration The objective is exploratory; through engaging in research that has yet to be explored, the project contributes to a deeper understanding of the LGBTQIA2S+ community and begins to form a basis on which further research can be built. Emerging knowledge pertaining to

2.0 RESEARCH METHODS

2.1 METHODOLOGY

A literature review was performed order to analyze existing research involving the locations of the LGBTQIA2S+ community in Toronto and factors which contribute to living beyond the Church-Wellesley Village All three research questions are explored throughout the literature review Through analyzing the potential reasons for the current relocation of queer folks beyond gaybourhoods, the first research question, where do individuals who identify as TQIA2S+ live in Toronto?, is explored. The probable emergence of queer enclaves beyond The Village and neighbourhood choice are considered within the context of exclusion due to homonormativity Research which defines queer kinship and identifies its influences on space and place begin responding to the second research question, in what ways do formations of community and kinship among LGBTQ2S+ populations and inhabitation of residential space mutually engage? Historic research was discussed throughout the literature review in order to understand the events which resulted in differing experiences of the LGBTQIA2S+ community based on elements of identity, such sexual orientation, gender identity, expression or presentation, race, ethnicity and class. n attempt will be made to uncover the locations and formations of diverse queer communities beyond The Village which resulted from their exclusion.Such accounts provide context needed in order how recognize the ongoing attempts to define the experiences of LGBTQIA2S+ peoples through an assumed universal experience, which touches on the third research question, How do differing or intersecting elements of identity influence the geographies of residence and inhabitation of space? .

In order to assess current LGBTQ2S+ geographies beyond the Church-Wellesley Village in Toronto, primary qualitative & spatial data was utilized. Primary data was sourced from local posts within the Facebook group Homes for Queers Toronto as the information was publicly available and provided current information regarding the residential locations of LGBTQIA2S+ individuals in Toronto As collected, the data was separated into three categoriesNeighbourhood & Building data, Demographics data and Themes. Neighbourhood & Building data, which was spatial data that revealed where LGBTQIA2S+ individuals lived in Toronto, aided in responding to the first research question; the locations in which TQIA2S+ individuals live in

Toronto The second category was Demographics data, the social data which provided the information needed to analyze the relationship between identity, geographic location and living formations. Addressing the ways in which differing or intersecting elements of identity influence the geographies of residence and inhabitation of space - the third research question, locations and experiences based on identity are explored through the mapping of data collected The demographics data further assists in responding to the second research question as the relationship between elements of identity, living formations, and kinship is considered.

Once collected, the first two categories of data were normalized and geocoded within ArcGIS to produce a series of socio-spatial maps of LGBTQIA2S+ households within Toronto. Employing the collected data through mapping visually responds to the research questions identified. Information related to the geographic location, dwelling type, identity and living formations of the mapped households was analyzed through a comparative overlay approach to identify location-based themes and patterns

To further understand the formation and impacts of residence on kinship, the third category entitled Themes was formed As data within the first two categories was collected for the purpose of mapping socio-spatial data, information relating to living structures and desired or existing kinship formations was quoted. From each quote, key points were extracted and assigned themes. As emerging themes were identified and assigned for each household, the analysis of themes acted as a response to the second research question Engaging in analysis involved identifying the ways in which queer kinship was formed and upheld while residing with one another, which provided a deeper understanding of the second research question; the ways through which formations of community and kinship among LGBTQ2S+ populations and inhabitation of residential space mutually engage

2.2 LITERATURE REVIEW

The literature review is divided into three sections, each responding to one of the three questions guiding the research objectives. The first section,Trans-cending Homonormativity: Queering Neighbourhoods intends to understand queer geographies in Toronto beyond The Village Toronto’s Church-Wellesley Village is examined; the neighbourhood's history and ongoing gentrification are discussed within the context of embedded homonormativity The potential reasons for relocation, emergence of queer enclaves and queering of neighbourhoods beyond The Village are explored. The second section, Structures: Family and Residential considers the formations and structures of queer community and kinship in relation to residence Scholarly discussions around ‘chosen family’ are reviewed in order to gasp the importance and methods of non-biological kinship formation. The reciprocal relationship between the nuclear family and residential structures is explored, in addition to Toronto’s housing landscape. Non-traditional living formations are discussed, and the history of 101 Dewson Street is explored The third section, When Worlds Collide: Intersections of Identity, highlights the impacts of intersectionality on the lives and experiences of LGBTQIA2S+ individuals. Differentiation is made between the ways gender non-conformity and sexual orientation impact an individuals lives; the experiences of additional intersections such as race, ethnicity and class are then discussed The discussion intends to uncover potential ways through which intersections of identity impact spatial experiences and living formations.

1) TRANS-CENDING HOMONORMATIVITY: QUEERING NEIGHBOURHOODS

Many gay neighbourhoods, including Toronto’s Church-Wellesley Village, emerged and developed primarily as spaces for white, cis, gay, men and is still evident in the state of The Village today (Bitterman and Hess, 2021). Gaybourhoods are experiencing a shift in demographics and it is often debated as to if they are in a state of decline (Usher & Morrison, 2010; Nash & Gorman-Murray, 2014; Brown, 2014) based on the increase of LGBTQIA2S+ individuals which have expanded beyond gay villages Holding the promise of freedom and safety as a space to gather and form collective experiences and address shared challenges of the LGBTQ community (Ghaziani, 2014; Chauncey, 2008), gay neighborhoods first emerged as the result of social and societal needs of comfort and community following Stonewall (Bitterman &

Hess, 2016). The social and societal needs of younger generations, specifically those beyond white, cisgender gay men and lesbian women differ from their queer elders which has resulted in shifting geographies of Toronto’s LGBTQIA2S+ community.

1A) ‘STRAIGHT IS GREAT’: HETERONORMATIVE COMPLIANCE

In the book The Life and Afterlife of Gay Neighborhoods, Hess and Bitterman (2021) analyze gayborhoods in order to discern the self-segregation of gay men and lesbian women in particular locations while other members of the LGBTQIA2S+ community live beyond gay villages One reason identified is that members of the LGBTQIA2S+ community beyond gay men have continued to view gaybourhoods as predominantly gay male spaces, and are therefore less likely to feel connected to such locations (Hess & Bitterman, 2021). Toronto’s Gayborhood holds a history rooted in homonormativity - the compliance of cisgender gays and lesbians with heteronormative structures to reduce their marginalization This became the basis on which The Village was built, and caused a divide between cisgender gays and lesbians who were able to confirm and individuals who could not. The inability to engage in homonormativity implied that the queer, Trans*, gender-nonconforming and LGBTQIA2S+ BIPOC communities were not welcome for leisurely activities in The Village lewild (2016) draws attention to the exclusion rooted in the formation of Toronto's gay neighborhood; at the hands of cis gays and lesbians, The Village became a space that provided safety for the cisgender gays and lesbians while further marginalizing all other members of the LGBTQIA2S+ community. With a history rooted in marginalization, it is likely that marginalized members of the LGBTQIA2S+ community do not have positive associations with Toronto’s gayborhood In accordance, Wilson (2021) identifies the decline in queer social spaces, particularly those for women, Trans* and non-binary individuals, not only in The Village but across the city as a whole. The Beaver, located in the City’s West End, was a beloved alternative queer bar which “acted as a sanctuary for folks who didn’t feel like they belonged at other queer spaces in the city” (Hoard, 2020) As a result of the pandemic, The Beaver was forced to close in August of 2020 (Hoard, 2020). The Beaver has joined many other cherished queer spaces; Henhouse, a ‘Queer’ West dive bar closed its doors in 2015 (Watson, 2015) In 2017, The Steady, a restaurant and queer nightclub at Bloor and Dufferin permanently closed (thesteadycafe, 2017) and in 2018, Less Bar, a queer dive bar and music venue on Queen Street West closed its doors after only three months (Rancic, 2018). Despite the

declining number of queer spaces across the city, Wilson (2021) notes the abundance of spaces tailored towards gay men at Church and Wellesley Queer social spaces are not only drivers of social interaction but are often gathering places where women, Trans* and gender non-conforming folks are openly accepted and safe. And on a greater scale, such spaces represent acceptance, safety and security within the neighbourhood. With a large quantity of businesses catering to the socialization of gay men within The Village and spaces for other members of the LGBTQ2S+ community diminishing, it is unlikely that individuals beyond gay, cisgender, white men feel a strong sense of safety or positive connection within The Village

In turn, Nash (2012) notes that homonormative compliance of gay men and lesbian women within The Village has led to commodification of Toronto’s ‘gaybourhood’, inviting consumers beyond LGBTQIA2S+ people to engage in the space and causing social spaces to become more mixed within the Village. For example, the increasing social popularity of the Village with individuals beyond the LGBTQIA2S+ community drastically increased rents for both residential and commercial space (DiMera, 2014), and contributed to the overall gentrification of the neighbourhood (Ghaziani, 2014) Statistics Canada (2020) engaged in a socioeconomic analysis of the LGBTQIA2S+ community which in accordance, indicated that transgender and non-binary populations in Canada are unlikely to have the financial ability to handle unexpected financial stress In addition to the gentrification of The Village, the inability to take financial risks may reduce opportunities for LGBTQ2S+ individuals desire to live in The Village, and result in the need to locate within more affordable, and potentially less desired, areas of the city.

Hess and Bitterman (2021) found that members of the LGBTQAI2S+ community will migrate and relocate when they find safe, inclusive and convenient access to everyday services and amenities. As social acceptance has progressed, and LGBTQIA2S+ individuals became comfortable in areas across the city, LGBTQIA2S+ friendly services and businesses are especially important in identifying safe neighbourhoods (Hess & Bitterman, 2021) Within the context of safety and inclusivity among everyday life, Where do those who identify as TQIA2S+ live in Toronto? And what factors may contribute to the choice of neighbourhood for LGBTQIA2S+ individuals?

1B) GEO-QUEER-PHY IS THE NEW GAYBORHOOD

In the article, The Changing Face of Toronto’s Village (Costa, 2013) states that by the late 1980s, the ‘ queer community’ within the Church-Wellesley area had begun moving outside of The Village. With the knowledge that historically, Trans*, queer & QTBIPOC individuals were

excluded from Toronto’s Church-Wellesley Village, these queer and gender-nonconforming individuals would have existed in locations across the City prior to the gay men and lesbian women that Costa (2013) is likely referring to Today, there are neighbourhoods beyond the Church-Wellesley Village that are widely recognized as locations that queer folks occupy (Costa, 2013; Kinnear, 2019; LaRiviere, 2016). Some areas include Queen “Queer” West, Riverdale, The Beaches and Leslieville, better known as “Lesbianville” (Kinnear, 2019). Similar to the formation of ethnic enclaves, Costa (2013) states that many believe the rise of queer populated locations across the City and long-term,provide the ability to form several gay villages This is supported by Bitterman (2020) and Spring (2021) who agree that as housing locations of the LGBTQIA2S+ community are shifting, other kinds of inclusive or LGBTQ-friendly neighbourhoods are emerging.

Bitterman (2021) performed a visual assessment analyzing the concentration of display and persistence of rainbow flags across nine neighbourhoods in Toronto in order to identify potential emerging LGBTQ+ neighbourhoods or LGBTQ-friendly neighbourhoods. The potential of “rainbow washing”, the use of the rainbow flag by corporations in order to obtain financial gain, is noted, and Bitterman (2021) addresses this by considering the permanence, duration and means of flag display. A steady cumulative increase of flag displays was observed in the Roncesvalles, Parkdale, and Bellwoods/Trinity/West Queen West neighbourhoods; community-oriented neighbourhoods with a higher number of small businesses and residential density, while an unsteady cumulative increase was observed in Queen West, Yonge Street, and the Church Gay Neighborhood, and to a lesser degree, Liberty Village and Fort York; business districts with a higher number of chain businesses and lower residential density (Bitterman, 2021)

Considered “seed communities” by Hess & Bitterman (2021), areas such as Roncesvalles, Parkdale, and Bellwoods/Trinity/West Queen West were identified by Bitterman (2021) as likely to hold pockets of queer settlement which over time, may become districts which focus on minority populations within the LGBTQIA2S+ community besides gay men In addition to Bitterman’s assessment (2021), very little additional research exists, if any, that explores the neighbourhoods in which LGBTQ2s+ individuals live beyond The Church-Wellesley Village. Sources which state neighbourhoods are inhabited by the LGBTQIA2S+ community tend to refer to the LGBTQIA2S+ community as one entity (Kinnear, 2019), or focus on the locations of gay men and lesbians (Tetonio, 2009; Cain 2013; Leong, 2011). The lack of data exploring both the past and present locations of queer and gender-nonconforming individuals has resulted, by omission, in the erasure of queer and gender-nonconforming geographies. Within the current

geographies of queer and gender-nonconforming individuals, where enclaves or clusters formed beyond The Church-Wellesley Village? What themes and patterns emerge within these clusters?

2) STRUCTURES: FAMILY AND RESIDENTIAL

Research exploring structures of community and kinship formations within the LGBTQIA2S+ community has recognized the value of ‘ queer kinship’ or ‘chosen family,’ describing non-biological relationships at all stages of an individual's life (Butler, 2002;Croghan et. al., 2014; Brennan-ing et. al., 2014). Butler (2002) offers “kinship as a set of practices that institutes relationships of various kinds which negotiate the reproduction of life and the demands of death” (p 14-15) It is necessary to note the presence of human dependency that makes up and brings forth the moments of practicing kinship Kinship is not something that can be achieved by a singular person, it requires others. Kinship is characteristically interdependent; there is a reaching out - a ‘being’ for yourself but also a ‘doing’ for others as a process through which care and relationships are established (Tronto,1993)

The 2021 national census has expanded to include a broader range of gender and sexuality demographics, yet the ways in which census families and family households are defined is both dismissive of non-biological ‘chosen family’ and exclusionary towards the LGBTQIA2S+ community In the 2021 Canadian Census, non-family households are defined as an individual living alone or two or more people who live together but do not constitute a census family (Statistics Canada 1, 2022) . Statistics Canada (2022) defines a census family as a couple in a romantic relationship (married or common law, with or without children) or a guardian and child, all of whom must live in the same household Despite two or more person non-census family households being the fastest growing house type in Canada (Statistics Canada, 2021) and cohabitation with members of chosen family being a common household structure (Levin et.al., 2020), non-biological relationships go unrecognized

2A) (RE)DEFINING FAMILY, FROM NUCLEAR TO QUEER

The presence of chosen family and kinship structures have come into question and gained a sense of importance as research has consistently shown that rejection and severance from family is a common experience for LGBTQIA2S+ individuals, meaning that they must look elsewhere for support in survival In searching for other LGBTQIA2S+ individuals to build

relationships and a sense of community with, queer people are not simply looking for communities in likeness, but seek the development of care and support networks both by and for queer individuals Often resulting from necessity and survival, the act of claiming one ’ s sexuality or gender identity often holds the risk of tensoning family ties or severing ties all-together. As such, experiences of youth homelessness and the distancing between child and parent is evident in Canada; the Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corportation (2019) found that rejection of queer youth from the parental household significantly increases the risk of homelessness among LGBTQ2+ youth In 2018, Statistics Canada conducted The Survey of Safety in Private and Public Space (SSPPS), which found that a significantly higher proportion of LGBTQ2+ youth aged 15-24 (35%) were living outside their parents’ homes compared to non-LGBTQ2+ youth (24%). Research identifies that youth are not isolated in these situations; LGBTQIA2S+ aging adults experience similar rejection from biological family and tend to rely on non-traditional supports Croghan et. al. (2014) highlight the role of non-kin individuals or ‘chosen family’ as a significant source of care in LGBT aging as LGBT individuals often lack traditional sources of caregivers. Similarly, Brennan-ing et al (2014) in Social care networks and older LGBT adults: Challenges for the future, find that biological families provided a higher number of negative responses to requests of support from LGBT individuals and as a result, rely on non-traditional kinship supports.

All-together, this suggests that the place of the nuclear family is not safe or accessible for queer youth in need of housing. It is through these ongoing needs of queer individuals for connection and support that we come across the notion of chosen family, a term that we can trace back to the work Families We Choose by anthropologist Kath Weston It is through this foundational work that Weston (1991) describes the central role that close friends played in the lives of sexual minorities who often experienced distancing, rejection, harm or violence from their family of origin in the early 90’s. While the nuclear family primarily functions off of notions of blood and genetics, those in the LGBTQ community who seek familial relations outside of their blood ties must find other ways to connect While overlapping identity is a starting place, it cannot keep people together; in the absence of genetic or legal ties, LGBTQIA2S+ individuals must “count on love, goodwill, trust, and commitment” (Epstein, 2009, p. 10) in any familial arrangements created. These connections and caring relations extend beyond the boundaries of the normative nuclear family, as seen in O’Brien’s work In considering the limitations of the nuclear family structure, O’Brien (2019) seeks to expand the work of care beyond the family and into kinship structures. Care exists in many forms, and O’Brien’s work explores “ care of mutual love and support, care of the labour of raising children and caring for the ill; care of erotic

connection and pleasure; care of aiding each other in fulfilling the cast possibilities of our humanity” exceeding biological ties (O’Brien, 2019)

In recognizing the importance of non-biological kinship among members of the LGBTQIA2S+ community and acknowledging their emergence and reliance on care, What kinds of queer community and kinship formations exist within dwellings in Toronto? What role does care play in these relationships?

2B) EXCLUSIONARY HOUSING & DOMESTIC ZONING

The definition of non-family households in the 2021 Canadian Census is not the first account of dismissing non-biological kinship in relation to residence. In North American Odyssey: Historical Geographies for the Twenty-first Century, Domosh (2014) identifies that the way housing is discussed is exclusionary in itself Identifying homes as “single family”, couple suites as “master bedrooms” and communal spaces as “family” rooms, single room apartments as “bachelor pads” are directly rooted in the heteronormative middle class nuclear family (Domosh, 2014). Harper (2019) poses the question, is the nuclear family home an architectural tool of repression and social control? Architect Pier Vittorio Aureli and scholar Maria Shéhérazade Giudic address this in their article, Familiar Horror: Toward a Critique of Domestic Space, (2016) through which they examine the historic origins of present day housing formations. Aureli and Giudic (2016) note that the existence of widespread modern day nuclear housing is tied to both the family as a unit and the home's role in the economy Through enforcing domesticity and ‘natural’ ways of living, the form of family housing has shaped and confined society’s understanding of family formations and ways of living . Yet paradoxically, the roles held in nuclear families which are widely understood as the ‘natural’ and standard way of living are rooted in the preservation of domestic space, ownership and therefore order of the home (Aureli & Giudic, 2016)

In recognizing the influences of heteronormativity and the nuclear family on housing, consider the context of residential dwellings in Toronto. Vaughan (Housing Divided, 2019) indicates two housing extremes that prevail in Toronto’s current market, increasingly unaffordable and large single-family homes with generally lower quantities of occupants and increasingly unaffordable, small condos with higher quantities of occupants.These housing typologies are on opposite ends of a polarized spectrum which can be attributed to the formation and decades of implicit preservation of the Yellowbelt The term “The Yellowbelt”, was coined by Gil Meslin to describe the area of land identified as ‘Neighborhood’ in the City of Toronto’s Official Plan (2018). Seen in Figure 1, forming a large shaded area on the Land Use

Map are the two main zones that form the Yellowbelt (MapTO, 2017). The zone that constitutes the vast majority of The Yellowbelt, identified by Burda (2019) as approximately 70% of the total land zoned for residential use, is Residential Detached (RD) In Residential Detached areas, the Toronto Zoning By-Law (2013) permits only detached residential housing, more commonly known as ‘single family homes’.

In comparison to the Yellowbelt, older neighborhoods in the city have a variety of housing stock such as duplexes, triplexes, laneway housing, coach houses, loft apartments, basement apartments and so on. These typologies emerged through the growing demands as people moved to the city, most being built prior to 1952 when Toronto’s zoning regulations came into effect (Vaughan, 2019) Yet, many single-family homes in the lower density areas tend to be converted to residential low rise apartment complexes, which generally have between three and four apartment units, or multi tenant homes, whereas individuals have private bedrooms and shared common space (City of Toronto, n a ) These housing typologies have the potential to house individuals at higher densities than currently assumed in areas zoned as Residential Detached. Single family housing within Toronto has been adapted, repurposed and retrofitted in order to accommodate unique dwelling models, yet research on structural formations and

Figure 1 (MapTO, 2020)

inhabitation is sparse. The question then emerges, how has housing been distributed/provided in TO? In what ways has housing been designed and implemented based on family configuration?

2C) QUEER KINSHIP FORMATIONS: FROM A HOUSE TO A HOMO

According to Housing Statistics in Canada (Statistics Canada, 2018), LGBTQIA2S+ households were more likely to be categorized as non census family households (55%) compared to all households (33%). Between 2016 and 2021, the number of non-census-family households in Toronto grew by twice as much (32,520) as the increase in the number of census family households (15,435) (Statistics Canada 7, 2021) As community and kinship formations are not recognized as families within the census, it is likely that the non-census family households are composed of ‘chosen families’. Additionally, at 9.9%, the fastest growing household type across Toronto was two-or more-person non-family households (Statistics Canada 7, 2021) Downtown and Liberty Village held the largest concentration of two-or more-person non-family households Other areas that they can be found include areas throughout the former City of Toronto and near postsecondary campuses such as York University and Humber College (Statistics Canada 7, 2021). Concentrations located near post-secondary institutions are most likely roomates and although may be queer non-traditional kinship formations, there is a high probability of the living arrangement resulting from post-secondary living. Based on the number of non-binary and trans individuals living within Toronto, and the number of non-census family households, the concentrations within the Downtown and former City of Toronto have a higher probability of non-traditional LGBTQIA2S+ living formations, yet there is no research available to confirm this

Non-traditional living formations have the ability to exist in many different forms. In examining chosen family amongst queer and transgender young adults, Levin et al (2020) found that all interview participants were currently or had previously cohabitated with individuals who were part of their chosen families. The same article identified one participant who’s chosen family group was collectively pooling money in order to purchase a home together (Levin et. al., 2020) Despite the lack of history and erasure experienced by QTBIPOC individuals, the Dewson House has been documented and is an important example of community formations and living structures that exist within the intersections of gender, sexuality, culture, ethnicity and chosen family. Located at 101 Dewson Street near Dovercourt and College, the home was owned by Makeda Silvera and Stephanie Martin, a lesbian Jamacian couple, who began Sister Vision Press which published writings by women of colour (Silvera, 2021) The home became a hub for

Toronto queers of colour and additionally housed other Black, Indigenous, and Asian queer folks, some of which began Zami, the first Black lesbian and gay group in Toronto (Silvera, 2021) From the 1980’s to the 1990’s, The Dewson House was not only a home, but a QTBIPOC gathering place for community, chosen family and political activism. With little known history of collective queer housing in Toronto, current inhabitations of space by queer and Trans* communities are largely under researched. In the current state of the City, How have queer individuals inhabited existing dwelling spaces in order to support community and kinship structures? How have community and kinship structures emerged from the residential inhabitation of space?

3) WHEN WORLDS COLLIDE: INTERSECTIONS OF IDENTITY

The disputed ‘decline’ of Toronto’s Church-Wellesley Village has been attributed to the ‘post-gay’ era (Agguire-Livingston, 2011). Identified as the generation(s) of LGBTQIA2S+ individuals who do not place their sexuality or gender at the core of defining one ’ s self (Agguire-Livingston, 2011; Ghaziani, 2014; Kampler & Connell, 2018), Ghaziani (2014) states that as the LGBTQIA2S+ community has become increasingly accepted by society, they have generally chosen to assimilate into the mainstream. Nash (2012) questions the assumption that the declining Village in Toronto is a result of the ‘post-gay’ population, and the understanding of the ‘post-gay’ population as a whole Through analyzing responses to the controversial opinion article, Dawn of a New Gay by Agguire-Livingston, Nash (2012) finds faults within the assumptions surrounding post-gay’s. Contrary to the [article’s] understanding of post-gay values as a generalized, wholistic experience of positive movement beyond gayborhoods and centering one ’ s identity, Nash (2012) suggests that political shifts have led to opportunities for some individuals, primarily those who fall within the homonormative sphere, and exclude others based on social aspects such as race, ethnicity or class. This also includes those who do not conform to homonormativity due to gender identity.

3A) BETWEEN A ROCK AND A HARD PLACE: SEXUAL ORIENTATION & GENDER NON-CONFORMITY

An individual's day-to-day experiences vary immensely based on their position within the LGBTQIA2S+ community (Crawford-Lackey & Springate, 2020). Two elements of an individual's identity have the ability to situate them within the LGBTQIA2S+ community - sexual orientation or gender identity/expression, or both. While noting that sexual orientation and gender identity

are distinct from one another, often individuals who’s gender differs from their sex at birth, or who are gender-nonconforming, also hold a sexual orientation which aligns with the LGBTQIA2S+ community (Statistics Canada 1 2016) Marginalized due to two aspects of identity, gender non-conforming individuals, experience unique gender-based challenges which vary from those who’s gender identity and presentation align with their sex at birth (Jaffray, 2020).

Some individuals who are gender-nonconforming may hold the same gender identity as their sex at birth, but their gender expression or presentation do not conform to gender norms. These individuals commonly experience the same forms of marginalization to those who’s gender identity differs from their sex at birth; gender expression and presentation tend to ‘reveal’ one ’ s queerness, making them identifiable as a member of the LGBTQIA2S+ community (Anderson, 2020). Although gay men and lesbian women are more widely accepted in society, individuals who do not conform to gender norms tend to have a more difficult experiences as society lacks the ability to meet their needs (Jaffray, 2020) Evident in post-war Toronto, the ways in which lesbian women navagated society was highly dependant on gender presentation Adamson (2017) identifies that femmes (feminine of centre lesbians) were able to participate in a “ gay night” and continue to experience a considerable amount of social mobility while butches (masculine of centre lesbians) were unable to conceal their sexual orientation which highly limited their social and economic opportunities

As of November 2021, Statistics Canada has engaged in a gradual public release of fact sheets related to housing in Canada in order to promote a better understanding of housing disparities faced across the country (Statistics Canada 2, 2021) A combination of the indicators above provide context needed to determine if an individual is in core housing need.

The chart below demonstrates the housing indicators produced by Statistics Canada (3, 2021):

● shelter costs

● housing affordability

● household living arrangements

● housing suitability

● condition of dwelling

● tenure status of household

Is housing affordable?

Is housing habitable?

● dwelling satisfaction

● neighbourhood satisfaction

Is housing affordable and habitable? Is housing secure?

Other components of adequate housing (not measured by Statistics Canada)

The fact sheets indicates that gender diverse individuals experience greater marginalization related to housing affordability and habitation in comparison to their cisgender counterparts. In Canada, 57% of gender diverse individuals lived in a dwelling which they owned, compared to 73% of women and 74% of men (Statistics Canada 3, 2021) This is important to consider as it was found that overall, renter occupied households were nearly twice as likely to live in unaffordable housing than owner occupied households (Statistics Canada 3, 2021). In accordance, 25% gender diverse individuals were spending 30% or more of their income on shelter costs, compared to 17% of men and 19% of women (Statistics Canada 3, 2021) When considering the tenure and cost of housing, it is evident that gender diverse individuals are less likely to access affordable housing than cisgender individuals.

In addition to affordability, gender diverse individuals were more likely to live in housing that is considered inhabitable based on the condition and suitability Findings identify gender diverse individuals were more than four times as likely to reside in a dwelling requiring major repairs (29%) than men or women (7%) and were twice as likely (18%) to live in unsuitable housing than men (9%) and almost twice as likely as women (10%) (Statistics Canada 3, 2021) Consistent with identifying that Canada’s gender diverse population was less likely to live in

affordable or habitable housing than the nation’s cisgender populations, 13% of gender diverse individuals in Canada were in core need of housing compared to 8% of men and 10% of women (Statistics Canada 3, 2021)

Housing disparities are one of many examples of gender based challenges experienced by the gender diverse population In response to the SSPPS conducted by Statistics Canada (2018), 65%, or almost two-thirds of Trans* and non-binary individuals stated their mental health was poor or fair, which was five times the amount of cisgender individuals (11%). It was also found that Trans* Canadians were more likely to experience violence, as well as inappropriate behaviours in public, online and at work compared to cisgender Canadians (Statistics Canada 5, 2020) Analyzing statistics, it becomes clear that the safety of gender non-conforming individuals in Canada is less secure than cisgender individuals, and only increases when considering intersections of race or work (Government of Canada, n.a.). Toronto is one example of this, as the city holds has a substantial history of violence and mistreatment of Trans* sex workers.

In May of 1996, three transgender sex workers were murdered on the same night by a one man who gained the title of a “serial Trans-killer” (Reniassance News & Views, 1996). A social worker for Street Outreach Services who has worked with sex workers for 25 years stated that murders were not news, but have been occuring for decades, to which other social workers agreed (Chidle, 1996; Saunders, 1996). The intersection between being Trans* and engaging in sex work appears to hold particular concerns around safety in one ’ s own home as multiple Trans* women who engaged in sex work have been found murdered in their homes in Toronto. Between the years 1987 to 2003, Lisa Black, Lisa Bryant and Cassandra Do were found murdered in their homes, each in brutal and violent manner Concerns around safety in public spaces can influence an individual’s desire to socialize, work or live in certain neighborhoods. However, when an individual's safety is at risk in their own home, their identity is being targeted in a specific way which makes no one neighbourhood safer than another

Examining the the housing disparities and safety concerns, both past and present, of gender-nonconforming individuals in Toronto is vital in recognizing the different ways through which individuals marginalized due to sexual orientation or gender identities experience space and place Bearing this in mind while considering LGBTQIA2S+ individuals who currently live in Toronto, how do themes related to neighbourhood of residence and living formations emerge based on differences between sexual orientations and gender identities and expressions?

3B) TWO’S COMPANY, THREE (OR MORE)’S A CROWD: INTERSECTIONS OF IDENTITY BEYOND GENDER AND SEXUALITY

In the article, Meet Me At The Steps, Idlewild (2016) highlights that exclusion of LGBTQ2S+ individuals based on gender or sexuality is not limited to individuals removed from the LGBTQ2S+ community Marginalization at the root of one's community continues to impact the experiences of individuals. Nash (2016) further reinforces the idea that no one universal LGBTQ2S+ view of opinions, values and needs exists and by assuming a universal view, individual experiences of marginalization are often undermined and excluded. Both Inglewild (2016) and Nash (2012) identify that although sistemic stigma and discrimination are a holistic experience of the LGBTQ2S+ community, the extent, severity and continuation of stigma and discrimination varies based on the how the intersections of ones ’ identity impacts their experiences. Of the three sex workers murdered in their homes between 1987 to 2003, Black was a woman of colour and Do was Vietnamese-Canadian With this context, it is clear that both women experienced intersections of race in addition to the marginalization experienced due to their gender and work. Therefore, elements of identity that impact positionality and contribute to the choice of neighbourhood and housing typologies must be considered within the context of identity beyond gender and sexuality

Further discrimination in housing is present when considering additional intersections of identity. Among other marginalized communities, LGBTQIA2S+ people generally face higher levels of discrimination in housing (CERA, n a ) As individuals with intersecting identities face multiple forms of discrimination and oppression at one time, increased levels of discrimination are experienced (CERA, n.a.). This can include any individual who identifies as part of the LGBTQIA2S+ community due to sexuality and/or gender, and exist within additional marginalized communities such as Black people, Indigenous peoples, newcomers, individuals living on lower incomes, single mothers, young people, seniors, and/or families with children, which all face higher levels of discrimination. Demonstrated through a report by the Toronto YWCA (2020), it was found that Trans* and non-binary individuals, particularly those who identified as Black and Indigenous trans women, are at a higher risk of violence at home which leads to increased vulnerability to unsafe housing and homelessness

In Logie & Rwigema’s article “The Normative Idea of Queer is a White Person”: Understanding Perceptions of White Privilege Among Lesbian, Bisexual, and Queer Women of Color in Toronto, Canada (2014) two focus groups were conducted with the goal of

understanding the ways in which white privlidge was experienced among lesbian, bisexual, and queer (LBQ) women of color in Toronto Logie & Rwigema (2014) not only found that these women experienced intersectional stigma based on their race, sexual orientation and gender from both mainstream and LBQ communities, but that white privlidge caused exclusion and erasure of LBQ women of colour. Representations of queerness were predominantly white, which shaped the ways in which women of colour were represented and enforced their exclusion from white LBQ spaces and society (Logie & Rwigema, 2014) Notably, the representation of queerness as white supported the perceived lack of LGBQ peoples which impacted the acceptance of LBQ women of colour in both queer and racialized communities (Logie & Rwigema, 2014). As stated by Richard Fung (1979), “Non-white gay and lesbians face a double-edged sword: the racism of the general society as filtered into the gay community and the sometimes-vicious sexism and homophobia of our own "ethnic" communities ” Although Fung is referring to gays and lesbians specifically, the same experiences apply to individuals of other sexual orientations or gender identities. The additional elements of identity which intersect one ’ s queerness increase the complexity of marginalization

The impacts of white privilege discussed by Logie & Rwigema (2014) are apparent through the residence of Queen West in Toronto. Considered more progressive compared to the village, Queen “Queer” West emerged in the late 1980’s as a hub of arts and culture, in addition to developing a ‘consciousness of black, feminist, gay and lesbian issues’ (Donegan, 1986) Prior to the white, middle-class gentrification of “Queer West”, Parkdale’s history is rooted in community gathering, organizing of QTBIPOC individuals, many of which were working class and low income, who began thinking about disability justice (Piepzna-Samarasinha, 2019)

Within the context of intersectional identities, Nash (2013) examines the perspectives of women and genderqueer individuals who live in the heavily gentrified area. Many individuals rejected The Village due to the population largely being composed of white, gay, cisgender men, yet recognized that their presence in Queer West may be causing similar forms of race and class displacement (Nash, 2013). The same individuals acknowledged the ‘whiteness’ of queer spaces in Queer West, despite the history areas queer history rooted in QTBIPOC individuals (Nash, 2013; Piepzna-Samarasinha, 2019) Not only has the gentrification of Parkdale result in the ongoing displacement of lower class and BIPOC individuals, but the ‘whitening’ of queer culture has led to the erasure of QTBIPOC representation in Queer history (Maynard, 2019).

Queer and Trans* People of colour are often missing from the history of the city “ as a direct result of policing of exclusion, erasure, displacement and dispossession” (Haritaworn, 2019) Haritaworn’s book, Marvellous Grounds: Queer of Colour Histories of Toronto (2019), is a collection which features the art, activism and histories of QTBIPOC individuals who have played a vital role in shaping Toronto’s LGBTQIA2S+ community yet are not present in the mainstream narratives of LGBTQIA2S+ history in Toronto. The single, white, cisgender, middle-class narrative on which the understanding of Toronto’s LGBTQIA2S+ community has been built is insufficient in accounting for the current or future needs of individuals who experience intersections of identity (CITE). In considering the current landscape of the city, what impact do intersecting elements of identity have on an individual's spatial experiences, neighbourhood of residence and community & kinship living formations?

2.3 ALEXANDER WOOD & MOLLY WOOD BUSH: ROOTING THE VILLAGE IN WHITENESS AND COLONIZATION

In the 1820’s, Alexander Wood purchased a piece of land that had similar geographic boundaries to the area now known as the Church-Wellesley Village (Idlewild, 2016) Idlewild (2016) and Brown (2021) state that Wood’s farm was known as Molly Woods Bush, ‘Molly’ being a euphemism for gay men. The name first emerged in 1987 when Xtra! Magazine published an article which renamed their neighbourhood listing as so (Brown, 2021) seen in Figure 2. Where the magazine sourced the name “Molly Wood’s Bush'' is unclear, yet it is considered history regardless (Brown, 2021) This seems to be a constant with regards to Wood

Despite the lack of knowledge surrounding truth of Alexander Wood’s sexuality, the name increased in popularity It became foundational within the work of white, middle-class, cisgender activism during the AIDS crisis and Toronto Bathhouse Raids, and was falsely understood to represent the entire LGBTQIA2S+ community (Brown, 2021). Molly Wood Bush was weaponized; it became a tool which employed knowledges of the past “that required the exclusion of others and contributed to the wider imagination of Toronto’s queer history as white” (Haritaworn et al , 2018) Complicit with settler colonialism and white supremacy, gay and lesbian history defines Alexander Wood as the origin of Toronto’s gay community in order to claim historical ownership of the Church-Wellsely area (Idlewild, 2016).

Due to the shifting of Wood’s truth over time, Alexander Wood is often recognized as the “Founder of Toronto’s modern gay neighbourhood” and known for his “Legacy as a gay landowner” (Idlewild, 2016). In 2005, a statue commemorating Alexander Wood was installed in The Village by the City as “ a testament to the existence of LGBTQ participation in civic life since Toronto’s inception” (Zivo, 2021) The statue became a physical representation of the homonormativity and exclusion The Village’s formation is rooted in

In June of 2021, resulting from the emergence of unmarked graves on the grounds of Canadian Residential Schools and community removal of the Egerton Ryerson statue, information emerged in the mainstream involving Alexander Wood. Word spread branding Wood as the long-time treasure of “The Society for Converting and Civilizing the Indians and Propagating the Gospel among Destitute Settlers in Upper Canada” (Zivo, 2021) which focused on and achieved the development of Residential Schools (Brown, 2021) Responses to the news were mixed; some individuals believed his status rooted in Toronto’s queer history was more

Figure 2 (xtra, 1987)

significant while others pushed for the removal of the statue The Church-Wellesley BIA requested that the statue be taken down and on April 5, 2022, after months of persistence, the BIA removed the statue themselves (Bradley, 2022).

“That particular part of Toronto had been recognized as queer from the day that man bought that property. There are few places in the world that can say we’ve had a queer footprint for over 100 years. That was something that needed to be celebrated.”

“When the BIA published an inaccurate history without consulting Indigenous voices, it nullified Indigenous voices while claiming to speak for them…“It took up space in a way which spoke over residential school survivors and denied their own interpretation of their history.”

(Bradley, 2022)

- Dennis O’Connor, once head of the Church-Wellesley Village BIA and chair of the committee that initiated the statue’s presence (Bradley, 2022)

- Adam Zivo, a journalist who founded LoveisLoveisLove, an LGBTQ arts campaign (Small, 2021)

DATA GATHERING & MAPPING

The research will include information regarding LGBTQIA2S+ community within the City of Toronto, specific focusing on individuals marginalized within the community. For the purpose of the research, those marginalized within the community include Transgender, Queer, Two-Spirit, Non-binary, and identities often grouped in the “+” within the community acronym, individuals who are BIPOC/AAPI or have disabilities Although conforming to homonormativity, lesbians have had a history of exclusion and removal from space as gender presentation within the lesbian community overlaps with the marginalization experienced by transgender individuals, therefore they will be included within the research Although research on white, gay, cisgender males will not be analyzed, it may be included solely for comparative purposes

Research regarding the geographies and living formations of LGBTQIA2S+ individuals beyond The Village is sparse As expanded on in the section titled Data, information that does exist is not accessible for use, or only includes outdated information regarding gay men and lesbian women through the analysis of same-sex couples (Teotonio, 2009; Cain, 2013). In addition to a lack of data exists a lack of research which explores the locations, dwellings and housing formations of queer, Trans* and BIPOC members of the LGBTQIA2S+ communities

In order to assess current LGBTQ2S+ geographies, dwellings and living formations beyond the Church-Wellesley Village in Toronto, primary qualitative & spatial data was utilized. Data was sourced from local posts within a group on Facebook and as collected, information relating to kinship and living structures was coded for thematic analysis. The Data was then normalized and geocoded within ArcGIS to produce a socio-spatial map of LGBTQ2S+ households within Toronto. Information related to the geographic location, dwelling type, identity and kinship of the mapped households was analyzed through a comparative approach to identify location-based themes and patterns

Mapping qualitative and spatial data related to the residence of LGBTQIA2S+ individuals and demographics of individuals who reside there first and foremost provides a preliminary understanding of where LGBTQIA2S+ individuals live in Toronto. Layering maps in order to engage in a comparative analysis creates visual relationships between information, through which themes related to location, dwelling and identity are able to be visually identified. Performing an analysis of themes which emerged through descriptions of living formations

highlight repetition of topics which begins to define the ways through which kinship and residential space mutually engage

The goal of the identified methods is to gather a series of observations in response to the proposed research questions Through the observations, a series of recommendations which have the potential to support and enhance the living methods and formations which exist throughout the queer community.

DATA

DATA SOURCE

Locally-sourced information gathered from social media was utilized as primary data for the research analysis as it was the only available information related to current residential geographies of the LGBTQIA2S+ community. The use of secondary data was considered but due to a substantial lack of existing research exploring LGBTQIA2S+ geographies within Toronto, an existing data source was not found

Research regarding the geographies and living formations of LGBTQIA2S+ individuals beyond The Village is sparse. Information that does exist is not accessible for use, or only includes outdated information regarding gay men and lesbian women through the analysis of same-sex couples. When same-sex marriage was legalized in Canada in 2003, the City of Toronto began collecting the date, sex and partial postal code data for married same-sex couples (Teotonio, 2009). This data is limited in that it excludes more individuals than are included; common-law same-sex parters as well as bisexual individuals whom are in a straight relationship, in addition to transgender and gender non-conforming individuals are not accounted for, among others. An article from Global News states that using 2006 national census data, the number of common law and married same-sex couples were mapped by census tract (Cain, 2013) Although the census data is accessible for public use and does include common law couples, the same limitations exist in terms of exclusion by gender identity and certian sexualities as it only identifies same-sex couples. Through extensive research, one article by the National

Post was found which stated, “According to Environics Analytic’s “Gayborhoods” database, 70% of Toronto’s gay men live outside of the village” (Leong, 2011) Attempts to access the data publicly and through Simply Analytics database were unsuccessful When contacted by email, Environics Analytics responded stating, “Unfortunately this dataset is no longer accessible as the amount of changes that have happened since the dataset was discontinued would require a large overhaul to update”.

With the ongoing release of the 2021 census data, Canada has become the first country to provide census data on Trans* and non-binary people and the first to publish data on gender diversity from a national census (Statistics Canada, 2022) Though this data does not provide explicit information pertaining to where or how individuals live, the data exploring gender diversity in tandem with existing research begins to provide otherwise unknown context to Trans* and Queer inhabitation of space and place.

Marriage statistics at the federal level are now able to identify statistics for couples based on sex and gender. In terms of sex, couples have been distinguished as opposite and same-sex couples, and in terms of gender, couples have been categorized as different gender, same gender, trans (with at least one member being Trans*) or non-binary, (with at least one member being non-binary) (Statistics Canada 2, 2022), as seen in Figure 3 When viewing broad age groups and gender for Census Metropolitan Areas, available categories for gender include Cisgender men, Cisgender women, Transgender men, Transgender women, and non-binary persons (Statistics Canada 3, 2022). Information regarding gender diversity status of couples and the type of union is accessable at the Census Metropolitan level, whereas couples are categorized as same-gender (cisgender) with two women, same-gender (cisgender) with two men, transgender, or non-binary (Statistics Canada 3, 2022). When information is presented for smaller levels of geography such as the Census Subdivision, Dissemination Area, or Federal Electoral District levels, gender and sex are no longer explicitley defined Categories that are present when referring to “gender” and not “gender diversity” consist of ‘Men+’ and ‘Women+’ (Statistics Canada 3, 2022). With the two-category gender variable, non-binary individuals gender is defined by grouping them in one of to categories based on sex at birth. Statistics Canada states a two-category gender variable was necessary for confidentiality and to ensure privacy of non-binary individuals (Statistics Canada 3, 2022) Yet, the lack of defined data for sex and gender diversity at smaller levels of geography erases transgender and non-binary individuals by omission.

In order to attain data, informal and local sources of data were explored Data was found and obtained from posts within the Facebook group, ‘Homes for Queers Toronto’. The group was created in 2012 with the goal of aiding LGBTQIT2S++ individuals in searching for and attaining safe homes and/or housemates within Toronto (Homes for Queers Toronto, n a ) All individuals on Facebook are able to search for and request to join the group As of April 19, 2022, just over ten years after the group began, Homes for Queers Toronto (n.a.) has nearly 17,600 members. As the number of members continues to steadily increase, the group functions on four main topics: Offering (a home), Seeking (a home), Making a search party (to look for a home together), and Emergency housing support (urgently seeking accommodation) Members of the group work as a community to ensure all members are able to provide and attain a safe home.

Figure 3 (Statistics Canada 2, 2022)

DATA COLLECTION

Data was first collected in order to analyze Toronto’s LGBTQ2S housing landscape within Professor Victor Perez-Amado’s research project, Aging Together: LGBTQ2S Housing For the purpose of the research project and this research, Data was collected from the topic Offering (a home) as each of these posts provides information about an available residential space within the City, following a template *(see appendix) that outlines details pertaining to the space. Required details include location & type of accommodations, rent cost, accessibility and queer safety, in addition to demographic information, the age, gender, sexuality and ethnicity of individuals that will be sharing the dwelling or are currently living in the dwelling (Homes for Queers Toronto, n.a.). Although some individuals may be leaving the space, the post provides information about LGBTQ2S+ individuals who have recently lived at the identified location

Information from 115 Facebook posts, each corresponding with one available location of residence, was gathered. The posts were published over the span of nearly two years, between June 2020 and April 2022 It is important to note that the collected data does not comprise all posts made within the identified time frame as individuals are encouraged to remove their posts after housing has been filled. Given that one residence may be shared with existing tenants and any provided information about the tenant moving out was gathered for analysis, the data includes a total number of 213 individuals

Available spatial data and respective qualitative data was collected in a spreadsheet organized into three categories that correspond with the research questions; Neighbourhood explores geographies of residence, Housing includes data related to dwelling type and living accommodations and Identity highlights demographics and relationships through living accommodations. Each category was sub-divided as follows:

● Entry Number

● Date Listed

● NEIGHBOURHOOD

○ Location (either identified as the closest intersection or address)

○ Neighbourhood

○ Explanation (of the location for rent or the neighbourhood)

● HOUSING

○ Building Type

○ Floor (identifying the floor on which the unit for rent is located)

○ Number of Bedrooms

○ Accommodations: (type of space for rent such as apartment unit, condo unit, entire house)

○ Shared? (Y/N, identifying whether the space is shared with other individuals)

○ Number of People (If shared, identifies the number of tenants desired + the number individuals currently living in the space)

○ Rent (lists the monthly rent to be paid by the new tenant)

● IDENTITY & KINSHIP

○ Relation (identifies if individuals are noted as partners, siblings, etc.)

○ Gender

○ Pronouns

○ Sexuality

○ Age

○ Ethnicity/Culture/Race

Within the category Identity & Kinship, all data was input verbatim as individuals listed within the Facebook post. An supplemental section entitled ‘Themes’ was utilized to track additional information noted in the post which provided insight on the morals, values and kinship structures that exist and are desired in a new tenant As data was collected, it was coded for thematic analysis within the spreadsheet Themes were analyzed after completing the data collection and prior to mapping the remaining data. Recurring themes will be considered when analyzing the maps produced.

DATA NORMALIZATION

In order to produce maps that accurately represented the collected information, the data was normalized The organization methods used aimed to account for multiple individuals living within one dwelling while ensuring that dwellings were not included more than once on a map. The data was first divided by individual whereas each individual included in the data was represented in their own row. Due to cohabitation, the organization caused duplications of data within the Neighbourhood and Housing categories Each individual/row of data was then given an ID in order to separate the information into two spreadsheets for mapping. ID’s were provided for each row using a number and a letter, each number represented a different dwelling while the letter represented the individuals who lived in the dwelling.

Data was then separated into two spreadsheets titled Dwelling and Demographics. The Dwelling spreadsheet included information from the categories Neighbourhood and Housing, which was used to map dwelling type, accommodations and location data. Within these categories, all rows including the letter ‘A’ remained while the others were removed Given that all other letters represented more than one individual living in the same dwelling, removing all rows but those with ‘A’ ensured that dwellings, with the associated location building information, were not included more than once within the map. No information was included from the Identity & Kinship category

The Demographics spreadsheet included information from the categories Neighbourhood and Identity & Kinship, which was used to map demographic data in relation to dwelling location This spreadsheet included all rows within these categories to account for multiple individuals living within one dwelling. No information was included from the Housing category.

Information was then formatted for uniformity within each of the categories in order to be geocoded within ArcGIS Pro Where information was unavailable, the data was formatted as ‘unspecified’ if needed to be visible in GIS and ‘NA’ if it was not necessary to include in analysis. Further, the ‘Themes’ section within the Identity & Kinship category was used for thematic analysis prior to mapping, therefore it was not needed for mapping and was not included in the data to be geocoded Sections normalized and included for geocoding are indicated below:

● NEIGHBOURHOOD

● Section not included for mapping is ‘Explanation’ This section was used to identify the location and building type of the available space.

○ Location: Intersection wording was altered to list all intersections as ‘street name and suffix abbreviation & street name and suffix abbreviation”. Building address remained unchanged.

○ Neighbourhood: Neighbourhoods were included for posts which listed them Those that were not mentioned in posts were left as n/a and were generated through geocoding.

○ City: The city for all posts was listed as ‘Toronto, ON’ and was included for the purpose of geocoding.

● HOUSING

● One section was not included in the mapping; ‘Floor’. This section aided in identifying the accommodations/ types of space for rent

○ Building Type: Building types were categorized as house, mixed-use, mid-rise, apartment and condo based on information from the ‘Explanation’ and ‘Floors’ sections

○ Number of Bedrooms: Numbers identified the number of bedrooms within the unit for rent. This section did not need to be normalized.

○ Accommodations: Types of space for rent were categorized as apartment, house, and condo unit. This section identifies the specific space within the building type that is available to inhabit

○ Shared: Y or N was used to indicate whether the space for inhabitation was to be shared with other individuals. This section did not need to be normalized.

○ Number of People: The collected number of desired tenants and number of individuals currently living in the space were added together. Numbers indicate the number of people sharing the accommodations.

○ Rent: Lists the monthly rent to be paid by the new tenant. If accommodations are shared, this number does not represent the total amount of rent aid for the spaceThis section did not need to be normalized

● IDENTITY & KINSHIP

● One section was not included in mapping; ‘Gender”. The information from this section was divided into two new sections, ‘G CisOrNot’ and ‘G_BrokenDown’.

○ G CisOrNot: Gender was most broadly categorized as cisgender, TGNC (Trans/Gender Nonconforming), and undisclosed. This information was gathered from the section ‘Gender’ from the data collection spreadsheet.

○ G BrokenDown: The categories within the section “G CisOrNot’ were more specifically identified as cis, cis woman, cis man, trans, queer, two-spirit, non-binary or other GNC. Placed within ‘other GNC’ were individuals whose self-identified gender was specific and did not fit within the other categories The section ‘G BrokenDown’ was then used to form five additional categories which explore the specific ways in which individuals categorized as ‘trans’, ‘non-binary’, ‘trans & non-binary’ ‘ queer ’ , or ‘other GNC’ self-identified within the Facebook post. The categories and a list of ways individuals within the categories identified are listed below:

■ G Trans: Individuals self-identified as trans, trans woman, trans man, trans femme, trans masc

■ G NB: Individuals self-identified as non-binary, non-binary (AMAB), non-binary (AFAB), non-binary male expressing-femme feeling

■ G Trans&NB: Individuals self-identified as trans non-binary, trans non-binary (trans-fem), trans non-binary (trans masc)

■ G Queer: Individuals self-identified as queer, queer femme, queer femme/futch, queer/woman

■ G Other: Individuals self-identified as genderqueer, genderqueer man, genderqueer/trans, femme mostly cis but gender-y, gender diverse,

genderfluid (some cis privlidge), female/masc-of-centre, queer femme, non-conforming female, woman/person, genderfluid-transfeminine,

○ Pronouns: Pronouns were listed as identified in the Facebook posts. Individuals who identified a preference for certain pronouns but stated any pronouns can be used had the preferred pronouns listed, followed by ‘ or any ’ to indicate others can be used Other than this addition, the section did not need to be normalized

○ Sexuality: Sexualities were categorized as straight, gay, lesbian, bisexual, pansexual, queer, other Placed within ‘other’ were individuals whose sexuality was specific and did not fit within the other categories, or listed multiple of the identified categories. The section ‘S Other’ was added which specifies the sexualities for individuals categorized as ‘other’ in the section ‘Sexuality’.

■ S Other: Individuals included in the category ‘other’ identified their sexualities as LGBTQ+, asexual lesbian, asexual queer, queer bisexual, queer LGBTQ

○ Age: Some individuals provided exact age and other provided a generalization. Therefore, age was grouped into the categories as identified below: Child ≤ 17

late teens 18-19

20’s 20-29, not further specified early 20’s 20-23

mid- 20’s 24-26

late 20’s 27-29

30’s 30-39, not further specified

early 30’s 30-33

mid- 30’s 34-36

late 30’s 37-39

50+ 50+

undisclosed not listed

○ Ethnicity/Culture/Race

○ The Facebook page includes a template to ensure posts include consistent information. Within the guide, individuals must provide information about themselves including information about them and their self-identity (see appendix) Many individuals provided information about their ethnicity, race and/or culture Not enough data was provided to analyze ethnicity, race or culture as individual sections, therefore any information within this scope was included in the section ‘EthnicityRaceCulture’ Identities were categorized in this section most broadly, based on the way individuals identified themselves The broad categories within ‘EthnicityRaceCulture’ compose eight additional sections. These sections provide the specific ways that individuals identified themselves within the Facebook posts. The wording of categories within ‘EthnicityRaceCulture’ is derived from the ways in which individuals self-identified and was not

○ EthnicityRaceCulture: Identities were categorized mostly broadly as Asian, South Asian, BIPOC, Black, Brown, Latinx, Middle Eastern, Indigenous, Jewish, white

○ The categories derived from ‘EthnicityRaceCulture’ and the way individuals within the categories self-identified are listed below:

■ E Asian/SouthAsian: Asian, South Asian, Filipinx, Pakistani, Korean, Chinese, Filipinx & Chinese, Mixed Asian Caribbean background, mixed white South Asian,

■ E BIPOCUnspecified: BIPOC, POC, Muslim POC, mixed (unspecified)

■ E Black: Black, Black Jewish, Black Caribbean, Black/mixed African, Afro-Caribbean, Caribbean

■ E Brown: Brown

■ E Latinx: Latinx, Latino, white Latina, white Latino

■ E MiddleEastern: Middle Eastern

■ E Jewish/WhiteJewish: Jewish, white Jewish, white Jewish settler

■ E Indigenous: Indigenous, Ojibway-Finnish, Native Metis

MAPS

In order to perform an analysis of the collected qualitative data, visualization through the use of corresponding spatial data was required. Rucks-Ahidiana and Bierbaum (2017) explore the potential of leveraging spatial data within qualitative analysis in order to examine patterns and trends They state, “this comes in the form of maps as tools for identifying patterns between the area of study and its surrounding areas, and the triangulation of spatial and qualitative data sources to analyze qualitative data by its spatial characteristics'' (Rucks-Ahidiana & Bierbaum, 2017). Both the ‘Dwellings’ spreadsheet and ‘Demographics’ spreadsheet were imported into ArcGIS Pro through the process of geocoding. The ‘Neighbourhood’ information included within each spreadsheet provided the spatial data, listed as Location, Neighbourhood and City, needed to geographically locate all collected data on the map. Ten sections from the data were mapped, which includes Location, Neighbourhood, Building Type, Accommodations, Number of people, Rent, Age, Gender, and Sexuality. Data from each section was first separated into its own layer and graphic representation of each was chosen based on the most effective way to visualize the data Maps were then overlaid in order to take a comparative approach to analysis

COMPARATIVE (OVERLAY) APPROACH

Individual maps created within ArcGIS Pro were overlaid to compare emerging patterns and identify socio-spatial connections between layers of data. Layers of data were made visible two at a time in order to identify the overlays to be included in the final data The maps layered with one another include those listed below:

● Rent & Number of people

● Building Type & Accommodations

● Gender & Sexuality

● Ethnicity/Culture/Race & Gender

● Ethnicity/Culture/Race & Sexuality

The location and neighbourhood data is not included in the list of overlaid maps as it is consistently present throughout all maps Maps were chosen to be overlaid with one another based on the combination of layers which visually demonstrated information in the most efficient and effective way. Each overlaid map was then visually analyzed for emerging patterns, groupings or themes. Themes related to morals, values and kinship structures that were identified through thematic analysis as data was collected were considered when visually analyzing the map overlays

LIMITATIONS & ASSUMPTIONS

- Due to the limited sources examining the residential locations of the LGBTQ2S+ Toronto, data was collected from one source. This may not account for or accurately represent individuals of all demographics in the LGBTQIA2S+ community or the LGBTQIA2S+ community of Toronto

- The collected data does not include all posts made between January 2020 to April 2022 as individuals are encouraged to remove their posts after housing has been filled.

CATEGORIES

- The sub-category entitled Ethnicity/Culture/Race was grouped into one category despite listing three elements of identity The template provided to guide individuals in posting their space for rent requests the age, gender, sexuality and ethnicity of individuals that will be sharing the dwelling or are currently living in the dwelling. Rather than providing only ethnicity, individuals provided a range of related respoRent was most commonly listed as the rent to be paid by the incoming individual rather than the total rent for the unit For posts that listed the total rent, it was made consistent by dividing the total rent by the number of individuals living in the unit in order to obtain an estimate of the cost of rent for the incoming individual.nses; some provided only information related to ethnicity, culture or race, while others provided information for two or three of the elements As a result, there was not enough information for any of the three elements to effectively exist on its own in the data. Therefore, responses related to ethnicity, culture and race were grouped into one sub-category.

- Majority of posts did not provide the address of the residence and instead provided an intersection close to the building. These intersections were not identified as the closest main intersection or closest intersection, therefore accuracy is limited due to lack of detail provided

- A number of posts included the cost of rent for the unit as a whole and did not specify the rent to be paid by the new tenant. In order to provide consistency within the data, the total rent was divided by the number of individuals occupying the space to achieve an estimate of rent paid by the new tenant

- The average age range of individuals was found to be between 20-40, therefore further research is needed to understand the needs of older/senior individuals within the LGBTQIA2S+ community.

- Individuals who identified as queer and did not further specify a gender and/or a sexuality were listed as queer within the unspecified category (either gender or sexuality) If the individual did not specify a gender and sexuality beyond queer, sexuality was listed as queer and gender was listed as unspecified.

- Within the category Identity & Kinship, all data was input verbatim as individuals listed within the Facebook post As gender and sexuality are continuously shifting and changing, many LGBTQIA2S+ individuals engage in broader, less structured ways of defining their sexual orientation or gender identities, therefore a wide range of identities exist within the data which may overlap for individuals in unconventional ways (i.e. gender identity is identified as non-binary but sexuality is identified as lesbian).

3.0 THEMATIC ANALYSIS

In order to understand the types of and building of kinship, in addition to the value placed on kinship within LGBTQ2S+ households, a thematic analysis was conducted as data was collected. Through reading the section ‘about us ’ provided within each Facebook post, key quotes related to kinship and care were identified Quotes were then briefly summarized and matched with a potential theme. As recurring themes emerged, households were assigned themes, and analyzed for new and recurring themes. This data was also collected in conjunction with Professor Victor Perez-Amado’s research project, Aging Together: LGBTQ2S Housing.

Desired kinship structures varied by household. Some individuals identified a desire for no more than friendly interactions, while others desired to actively engage in and build chosen family Of the households which desired interaction, the terms ‘communal’ (17A, 50A, 101A), ‘community’(31A, 67A) ‘chosen family’ (89A) or simply just ‘family’(72A), ‘friendship’(8A, 17A, 20A) and ‘relationship’(26A, 63A) were often utilized to describe the desired roommate relations. It was also common for individuals to state their desire to ‘build a home together’ (65A, 94A). Notable descriptions of relationship formations include ’found family’ (89A) ‘Queer Family of Choice’ (66A), ‘ queer legacy house’ (98A) and ‘the next Pussycat Dolls’(56A)

Frequently, individuals identified wanting to live with people who shared elements of identity with them, for example, some individuals desired living with other Trans* or non-binary individuals, women (33A, 58A, 72A), or other QPOC/QTBIPOC folks (95A, 96A) A few posts stated they did not feel comfortable living with cisgender, gay men (30A). It was also common for people to have previously lived with individuals with similar identities to them; commonly mentioned was previously living with individuals who identified as queer or non-binary/Trans* (9A, 12A, 20A, 25A) The desire to live with individuals who share similarities has the potential to form a basis of commonality on which a relationship can be built

Sharing food and eating together was one of the most frequently mentioned forms of kinship building Activities included hosting friends for dinner (31A), socializing over food and drink (32A, 35A, ), baking and cooking group meals with one another (51A, 82A), sharing food and resources (82A, 113A), among various others. As identified by a study by Levin et. al. (2020), many individuals form chosen families through the act of sharing meals. As stated in the study, “ gathering around food served as a foundation for establishing consistent, nourishing rituals While meals were often discussed as practices for celebrating chosen family, feeding each other was also described as a form of mental and physical health care ” Levin et. al. (2020). Other notable forms of kinship building included sharing chores (26A, 35A, 44A, 56A, 58A) which was an important element in building mutual trust and respect, ‘hanging out’ (34A, 35A, 58A, 73A) which casually initiated the desire for roommates to spend time together

A range of additional themes connected to kinship were identified. As identified within the study conducted by Levin et al (2020), ‘ “ Care” amongst chosen family members is largely based outside of and beyond formal medical institutions Rather, by default, care originates from informal, self-created and self-maintained networks.” The creative care through cohabitation was made evident through the additional themes. Safety and support were broader themes yet often mentioned in terms of identifying one ’ s space as currently being and wanting to keep it a safe and supportive space for all individuals This was described further through explanations of acceptance and support were placed at the forefront of many individual’s values through themes such as mental health positivity, anti-racist or BIPOC, and queer/Trans* friendly households. Non judgemental, sex and kink positive, sex worker positive, body positive, anti-oppresive and intersectionality were mentioned by various individuals when describing the core, non-negotiable values of their household.

Figure 4: A word map representing top recurring themes within the data

4.0 MAPPING MAP 1: LOCATION & ID: INDIVIDUALS

The map depicts the residential locations of LGBTQIA2S+ individuals in the City of Toronto Each dot represents one person and is assigned an ID, consisting of a number and letter The number represents one residence where LGBTQIA2S+ individuals reside and each letter represents one individuals’ living within the residence.

It is evident that LGBTQIA2S+ individuals are located on the North and East ends of the city, as well as West near The Beaches and Leslieville areas, but were primarily located in the area of Old Toronto, generally to the West of University Avenue. Within Old Toronto, clusters of individuals begin to emerge The largest clusters have formed within the areas of Dovercourt Village - Little Portugal and Kensington Market - Trinity Bellwoods, with other smaller clusters scattered in the surrounding areas. A group of individuals live within the Church-Wellesley Village, but the number of individuals is small compared to other locations within the city.

MAP 2: LOCATION & ID: RESIDENCE

The map depicts the locations at which LGBTQIA2S+ individuals reside within the City of Toronto. Each dot represents one residence and is assigned an ID, consisting of a number and letter. Every number indicates one residence where LGBTQIA2S+ individuals live and the corresponding letter indicates one room available for rent in the residence

Compared to the previous map which provided the location information for individuals, the locations of residence are more space, which indicates that individuals tend to live in groups rather than alone Within and adjacent to The Village, the opposite is occurring - there is a similar number of dwellings as there is to individuals. Therefore, these individuals live in pairs or alone rather than with three or more people. It is also evident that a smaller cluster of LGBTQIA2S+ homes exist on the West end of College Street, between Ossington and Dundas.

MAP 3: TYPE OF BUILDING

The map depicts the building typologies of LGBTQIA2S+ homes in the City of Toronto. A large portion of the residences’ identified are located within houses. Apartment buildings were the second most inhabited building, housing 13 dwellings, which nearly doubled that of both mixed-use and mid-rise building types Despite there only being 13 dwellings which resided in apartment buildings, 7 were located within and adjacent to The Village, in addition to one mixed-use building and one house within the adjacent area. Only two dwellings were located in condos.

MAP 4: TYPE OF DWELLING WITHIN BUILDING

The map depicts the type of unit within the building that LGBTQIA2S+ individuals rent. The three dwelling typologies include an apartment unit, a condo unit, or an entire house. Apartments were by far the most common type of dwelling Scattered between apartments are houses, which are primarily located between Queen Street West, Roncesvalles Avenue, St Clair Street West and Bathurst Street. Of the two major clusters, the dwelling types located at Dovercourt - Little Portugal consisted of a few houses, while the dwellings at Kensington Market - Trinity Bellwoods were solely apartments Of all dwellings, only one was a condo unit

The nformat on was col ected from the Facebook group Homes for Queers Toronto, and was posted n the group between June 2020 and Apr l 2022

The informat on was col ected from the Facebook group Homes for Queers Toronto and was posted n the group between June 2020 and Apr l 2022

MAP 5: NUMBER OF PEOPLE PER DWELLING

The map depicts the number of people who live together in one dwelling and share communal spaces, such as the kitchen or living room. A higher number of dwellings are shared between 3 and 4 people, while groups of 5 and 6, as well as living alone, are much less common. The cluster located at Dovercourt Village - Little Portugal was composed of 3 and 4 person dwellings, with a slightly higher number of 3 person households The Kensington Market - Trinity Bellwoods cluster included 2 person, 3 person, 4 person and one 5 person household(s), with a slightly higher proportion of 4 person dwellings than any other type. Dwellings inhabited by pairs are scattered throughout the city, and the only existing cluster of two person households is located within and adjacent to The Village, whereas all dwellings except for one in the adjacent area consist of 2 people.

MAP 6: RENT

The map depicts the approximate monthly rent paid per person in each dwelling. The two major clusters of residences have a similar range of rents below $1000 per person, with some dwellings on the lower end of rent per person Rents beginning around $1500 per person and higher dot the periphery of the central city, but do not exist south of Dupont, between Yonge Street and the train tracks on the West side of the city despite there being desirable neighbourhoods within these bounds. Based on the information found within this map, it seems the rent paid per person for LGBTQIA2S+ individuals within the city does not depend highly on location

The nformat on was col ected from the Facebook group Homes for Queers Toronto, and was posted n the group between June 2020 and Apr l 2022

The informat on was col ected from the Facebook group Homes for Queers Toronto and was posted n the group between June 2020 and Apr l 2022

MAP 7:GENDER IDENTITY

The map depicts the gender identity of each person living within the identified dwellings. The map of the city as a whole indicates a higher number of Trans*/ Gender non-conforming (TGNC) individuals live in the city’s outer suburbs than cisgender individuals. Seen in The Beaches - Leslieville, all individuals but one identified as TGNC In examining the inner city, both cisgender and TGNC individuals can be seen scattered throughout with more cisgender individuals living on the periphery of the city centre. More TGNC also seem to cluster in small groups, which are likely living with one another, than cisgender individuals. It is important to note that of the individuals living within and adjacent to the Church-Wellesley Village, the majority are cisgender

MAP 8: SEXUAL ORIENTATION

The map depicts the sexual orientation of each person living within the identified dwellings. A high number of individuals across the city as a whole identified as queer. Queer individuals seem to frequently emerge in small clusters, likely living live in groups with one another Within the main clusters, majority of the sexual identities known were queer, in addition to a few within the Kensington Market - Trinity Bellwoods area who identified their sexual orientation as ‘other’, two who identified as straight and one who identified as a lesbian. (straight individuals were included if they were mentioned as being queer due to gender identity or were living in a household with LGBTQIA2S+ individuals) Few queer individuals lived within or adjacent to The Village compared to other neighbourhoods. Other than a few individuals who identified as queer, mostly adjacent to The Village, the Village consisted of individuals who identified as gay, lesbian or bisexual

The nformat on was col ected from the Facebook group Homes for Queers Toronto, and was posted n the group between June 2020 and Apr l 2022

The informat on was col ected from the Facebook group Homes for Queers Toronto and was posted n the group between June 2020 and Apr l 2022

MAP 9: ETHNICITY / CULTURE / RACE

The terms used to describe ethnicity, culture or race are primarily overarching terms which are used to group a variety of more specific identities. The terms BIPOC, Black and Brown were only used as categories for individuals who identified themselves using those terms.

The map depicts the ethnicity/culture/race specified by each individual who resides within the dwellings discussed. Of the disclosed ethnicities/cultures, a range are scattered across the city as a whole A number of small clusters with three to five people - likely individuals who live with one another, exist across the inner city and consist of multiple ethnicities/cultures At the Dovercourt Village - Little Portugal cluster, one group consists of 3 individuals; Latinx, Asian and white. North of this cluster, located at Dufferin St and Dupont St, is a cluster of 5 individuals which consists of two who are Black, two who are Latinx and one who is white. Most of these clusters exist north and south of Dovercourt Village, between St Clair West and Queen Street West In comparison, of the disclosed ethnicities/cultures of the Kensington - Trinity Bellwoods cluster, individuals were primarily white and Jewish, which existed in addition to a few BIPOC and one Asian individual. It is important to note that The Village and adjacent areas had a diverse population in terms of ethnicity/culture

MAP 10: RENT & NUMBER OF PEOPLE PER DWELLING

The map depicts the approximate monthly rent paid per person in each dwelling, overlaid with the number of people who live together in one dwelling It was found that generally, a higher number of individuals per household reduced the cost of rent per person All instances of rent costing $1500 or more were entire apartments for rent for individual living, rather than shared living situations. In these cases, rent was nearly double that of individuals who lived with others Most cases of folks living in groups of three or more reduced the cost of rent per person below $1000, often closer to the $700 to $800 range Noted is one household which consists of six inhabitants, each paying approximately $600 in rent.

MAP 11: TYPE OF BUILDING & DWELLING WITHIN BUILDING

The map depicts the building typologies of LGBTQIA2S+ homes within Toronto, overlaid with the type of unit inhabited in each building. It should be noted that a large portion of the homes are apartment units that are located within a house These are often residential homes which have been converted into a low-rise apartment building with three to four units or one unit per floor. In addition, a number of individuals, as previously stated, have rented entire homes. When considering this map within the context of the number of individuals per dwelling, it is evident that the instances of houses being rented as a whole tend to be groups of four to six people living together

MAP 12: SEXUALITY & GENDER

The map depicts the sexual orientation and gender identities of LGBTQIA2S+ individuals living within the identified dwellings Visible is the large quantity of individuals, both cisgender and TGNC, who identified more broadly as queer rather than a more specific sexuality such as bisexual or pansexual. In addition, individuals in small clusters, who likely resided with one another, seemed to reside with other individuals who shared the same sexual orientation or gender identity as them It should be noted that all individuals who identified as straight also identified as cisgender and are therefore not members of the LGBTQIA2S+ community. These individuals were then included because they live with members of the LGBTQIA2S+ community.

The nformat on was col ected from the Facebook group Homes for Queers Toronto, and was posted n the group between June 2020 and Apr l 2022

The informat on was col ected from the Facebook group Homes for Queers Toronto and was posted n the group between June 2020 and Apr l 2022

MAP 13: SEXUALITY & ETHNICITY/RACE/CULTURE

The map depicts the sexual orientation and ethnicity/race/culture of LGBTQIA2S+ individuals living within the identified dwellings. In considering the lesbian and gay identifying communities included within the research, the number of individuals who were also white was much higher for individuals who identified as lesbians than those who identified as gay Of the individuals who identified as gay and disclosed their ethnicity/culture, only one was white while all others consisted of individuals who identified as Black, BIPOC, South Asian and Latinx. In comparison, of the individuals who identified as a lesbian and disclosed their ethnicity/culture, two identified as South Asian and all others were white In addition, similar to the map including both gender identity and sexual orientation, individuals seemed to reside with people who shared at either the same sexual orientation or ethnicity/culture. This was primarily true for the same sexual orientation as multiple clusters of varying ethnicities/cultures have been identified.

MAP 14: GENDER & ETHNICITY/RACE/CULTURE

The map depicts the gender identities and ethnicity/race/culture of LGBTQIA2S+ individuals living within the identified dwellings. Considering ethnicities/cultures, almost all individuals who identified as Middle Eastern, Brown and Indigenous individuals identified as TGNC A higher number of individuals who identified as Black and Latinx identified as TGNC than cisgender. Asian, South Asian and white individuals did not identify, in significant numbers, as either TGNC or cisgender. In addition, similar to the map including both gender identity and sexual orientation, individuals seemed to reside with people who shared at either the same gender identity or ethnicity/culture Folks primarily chose to live with individuals of the same gender identity and a mix of ethnicities/cultures