Identity formation and self construction are inherently cultural phenomena. Although it may seem that human psychology--e.g., basic traits, tendencies, "characteristics," or even the definition of self--are universal and ahistorical, this essentialist view is quite erroneous and needs to be recognized and avoided. The task of studying one's "backyard" may erroneously be perceived as a methodological flaw. This may be even "worse" in the case of a queer researcher because one's sexual orientation is still widely accepted to be part of "behind-closed-doors" information. According to norms prevalent in the academic community, one's sexual identity should not intrude onto one's professional life. When scholars are heterosexual, their sexual orientation is unquestioningly transparent and needs not be mentioned at all. Being a heterosexual is so self-understood that it is never spelled out. As gay and lesbian researchers, they are required to neutralize their "otherness." But, in light of arguments, it is necessary not only to "come out" in the field and in their reports, but to acknowledge the benefits of queer researchers studying their younger peers.