Objective: Several studies (Chung, 2019; Hsiu & Zhou, 2016; Shih, 2005; Yeh, 2009; Yuan, 2014) have reported that Taiwanese lesbian and gay teachers do not often consider “coming out,” that is, disclosing their sexual orientation, at school due to unpredictable risks, such as stigmatization or loss of their jobs or teaching qualifications due to complaints from parents. Chao et al. (2008) reported that LGBQ teachers may disguise themselves, indirectly or openly come out at work, or separate their professional and personal lives. Although previous studies have presented reasons and strategies for LGBQ teachers not coming out, few studies investigated the intersections of LGBQ identities and career practices, including in teaching practices and decisions regarding whether to come out at work. This study investigated LGBQ teachers’ decision-making process and their experiences of coming out or not coming out to their colleagues and students in the workplace. This study also examined the intersections of LGBQ identity development and career practices among LGBQ teachers. Method: We interviewed five LGBQ educators (3 biologically female and 2 biologically male teachers; one of whom identified as lesbian, one as questioning, one as bisexual, and two as Tongzhi, a gender-neutral term for a sexual minority in the Chinese language) working at different educational levels (one at an elementary school, three at middle schools of different levels, and one teaching in a 4-year university course) and learned why and how they intentionally chose to disclose or not to disclose their LGBQ identities in the workplace and how those experiences affected their teaching work. A narrative paradigm was used to investigate how the teachers’ LGBQ identities, personal beliefs, and professional and educational values intertwined and how their LGBQ identities influenced their professional situations and career development. Results: We collected the participants’ accounts of their LGBQ identities and identity development process, their teaching philosophies and experiences, the attitudes toward LGB issues they have encountered in their workplaces, and how they presented themselves to students and colleagues in their workplaces. One participant experienced discrimination from his supervisor when in teaching practicum, which almost caused him to lose his teaching qualification. Another participant reported her experience of being sexually harassed by a male faculty member, which later led to obstacles in the tenure process. Others reported hearing discriminatory language against LGBQ individuals, or they worried that their school principals would yield to conservative parents and not support them at work, which led them to protect themselves by presenting themselves as heterosexual allies at work. All the participants incorporated gender equity perspectives and materials in their teaching and services. Although only the participant teaching at the university was openly out to her students, two more participants reported that they had privately come out to their LGBQ students to support them, indicating that despite the risks of negative outcomes at work, some LGBQ teachers are willing to reveal their “real identity” for their students rather than for themselves. This study proposes a model to investigate the intersectionality of teacher (professional) identity and LGBQ (private) identity in school and social contexts. In this model, Taiwanese LGBQ teachers consider conservative educational environments and potential protests from parents to be obstacles to coming out at schools. However, they are more willing to come out to more effectively provide learning support to LGBQ students and to build a closer relationship with such students based on their shared stigmatized identity. The model also considerably accounts for temporal factors because identity development and social contexts are time-dependent. LGBQ teachers at different stages in the LGBQ identity development process tend to make different decisions because of the impact of society on individual and collective perspectives. For example, Taiwan Constitutional Interpretation no. 748, which is known as the first same-sex marriage case, was announced in May 2017 and was passed and put into effect in 2019. From 2017 to 2019, Taiwanese society experienced enormous pressure from both proponents and opponents of same-sex marriage. LGBQ individuals may choose to expend the energy required to be “out and proud” or to hide and suppress their identity depending on their psychological strength or changes in family and social support that come with societal progress and personal identity development. The sociopolitical environment has changed drastically since the implementation of the Act for Interpretation 748, and the resulting societal changes have considerably affected educational systems and individuals involved in them. Discussion: The results of the present study indicate that Taiwanese LGBQ teachers, as sexual minorities, experience difficulties in finding a safe space in the field of education, which is dominated by heterosexualism. Although none of the participants experienced real job loss, we might interpret their worries not as internalized homophobia but as existential anxiety regarding social survival, especially because social death has serious outcomes in collectivistic and relation-oriented Taiwanese society. Regardless of the risks and lack of personal advantages associated with coming out, Taiwanese LGBQ teachers are still willing to come out for their students’ benefit. The intention and motivation of the actions of the teachers in the present study differ considerably from those reported in North American studies (Nielsen & Alderson, 2014), in which LGBQ faculty reported coming out for their own needs of being genuine or true to their personal identities. We believe that the intention of Taiwanese LGBQ teachers in coming out is based on the culturally informed principles of altruism and compassion. The most important implication of the study is that LGBQ teachers’ minority identities and life experiences strongly affect their career development and teaching; that is, the ability of LGBQ teachers to put their educational philosophies and strategies into practice and contribute at work depends on the how safe they feel in their work environment. Therefore, ensuring that school systems are accepting of gender- and sexual minorities is crucial not only for maintaining the optimal educational environment for students to achieve their goals but also for establishing a culturally sensitive and open work environment for teachers to exhibit their best teaching performance. The results of this study can elucidate the intersections between LGBQ teachers’ professional identities, development, and practices and their LGBQ identities; identity development; and lifestyles and the implications of these intersections. Discussions of intersectional identities and the effect of such identities on teaching practices are not regularly incorporated into teacher training in Taiwan, and more research on intersectional identities must be incorporated into teacher education and professional development. Education is a career of life influencing life; therefore, promoting awareness of how identities are shaped by life experiences among future teachers is crucial. Furthermore, LGBQ identities and issues related to coming out in different career fields must be thoroughly investigated in the future to raise awareness of homophobia and sexual prejudice and to reduce the oppression of sexual and gender minorities.