In/visibility on campus? Gender and sexuality diversity in tertiary institutions

Abstract

This paper draws on the largest and most comprehensive Australian research to date that explores the campus climate for sexuality and gender diverse (SGD) people at one university. Using a mixed-method approach that incorporated an online survey open to all students and staff (n = 2395), face-to-face in-depth interviews with key stakeholders (n = 16) and an online document analysis, the study explored participants’ perceptions and attitudes to sexuality and gender diversity on campus, experiences of in/exclusion, (un)safe places, visibility in public online documents, and the campus-based services available to support SGD individuals. The findings point to the ongoing exclusion experienced by SGD people across the university. We show how exclusion serves to silence individuals across multiple levels and how this, in turn, limits the visibility of, and redress for, exclusion, impacting on health and well-being. This tension, we posit, can only be addressed safely and holistically through proactive and strategic endeavours on the part of the institution; without which, exclusion will continue to prevail.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Notes

  1. 1.

    Throughout this research, the term sexuality and gender diverse/diversity (SGD) is employed as it is more inclusive of a range of diversities than are other terms/acronyms frequently employed in this research space (e.g. LGBT [lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender]). It should be noted that the authors are aware of the limitations of much of the terminology used and acknowledge that its use may appear to normalise cisgender and heterosexuality, positioning other gender and sexuality subjectivities as abnormal and constructing a false divide. This is not the intention of the authors or this research. Moreover, use of sexuality and gender diverse aligns with the language of cultural and linguistic diversity (CALD) used in Australian policy and practice. The acronym LGBTIQ[A+] (or its variations) is only used when referencing, or alluding to, other research that has used those terms or a variation of them.

  2. 2.

    Cisgender refers to people who identify with their gender assigned at birth.

  3. 3.

    Heterosexism is a system of discrimination and bias based on the assumption that heterosexuality is the only normal sexuality and superior to other forms of sexuality.

  4. 4.

    Heteronormativity refers to a system that normalises heterosexuality as the only natural/normal sexual orientation and assumes that sexual relationships involve people of the opposite sex.

  5. 5.

    Cisnormative, or cisnormativity, refers to the notion that all people are assumed to be cisgender and that this is normal (Logie et al. 2012).

  6. 6.

    For a detailed discussion of this, including the ways in which media fuelled the backlash, see Law (2017).

  7. 7.

    The term ‘exclusion’ in this discussion refers to the various experiences reported by respondents that demonstrate the violence underlying cissexism and heterosexism; it includes institutional (in)action as well as interpersonal micro-aggressions. The research considers all forms of heterosexism and cissexism as exclusion.

  8. 8.

    For a more detailed discussion of the quantitative data collected in this study, please see Ferfolja et al. (2018) and Asquith et al. (2018). In this paper, due to brevity, it is not possible to fully document these results and the quantitative statistical analyses underpinning our arguments in relation to in/visibility.

  9. 9.

    Data cleansing occurred in three stages: First, participants who left the survey before completing the initial demographic and perceived safety on campus questions were removed. This resulted in exclusion of 698 participants. Next, non-serious responses were screened out. Eight respondents were excluded on this basis, as inferred from their responses to text entry questions. For example, when asked to indicate gender, several respondents reported that they identified as ‘attack helicopters’. Finally, surveys were screened for poor-comprehension, resulting in the exclusion of data from four participants.

  10. 10.

    The ALLY network is a group of staff and students who are formally recognised as supportive individuals for LGBTIQ+ staff and students across the university. They undergo LGBTIQ+ training and often have visible markers of support (rainbow badges, postcards etc.) in their workspaces.

  11. 11.

    The Queer Collective is a space for LGBTQ+ people who mostly communicate and organise events online. At this university, the Queer Collective is comprised, in the main, of students.

  12. 12.

    It should be pointed out that the university’s ‘Sexuality and Gender Diversity Strategy 2017–2020’ became publicly available post-data collection and analysis; as a result, a number of strategic implementations carried out after this stage are not included herein.

References

  1. Asquith, N.L. (2014). A governance of denial: hate crime in Australia and New Zealand (pp. 174-90). In N. Hall et al. (eds), Routledge international handbook on hate crime. London: Routledge.

  2. Asquith, N., Ferfolja, T., Brady, B., & Hanckel, B. (2018). Diversity and Safety on Campus @ Western: heterosexism and cissexism in higher education. International Review of Victimology, 25(3), 320–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Australian Human Rights Commission. (2017a). National report on sexual assault and sexual harassment at Australian universities. Author: Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Australian Human Rights Commission (2017b). Sexual orientation, gender identity 7 intersex status discrimination. Information sheet. https://www.humanrights.gov.au/sites/default/files/Information%20sheet%20on%20new%20protections%20in%20the%20Sex%20Discrimination%20Act%20-%20FINAL.pdf. Accessed 13 November 2018.

  5. Baams, L., Grossman, A., & Russell, S. T. (2015). Minority stress and mechanisms of risk for depression and suicidal ideation among lesbian, gay and bisexual youth. Developmental Psychology, 51(5), 688–696.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Ball, S., Hoskins, K., Maguire, M., & Braun, A. (2011). Disciplinary texts: a policy analysis of national and local behaviour policies. Critical Studies in Education, 52(1), 1–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Bilimoria, D., & Stewart, A. J. (2009). “Don’t ask, don’t tell”: the academic climate for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender faculty in science and engineering. NWSA Journal, 21(2), 85–103.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Birkett, M., Espelage, D. L., & Koenig, B. (2009). LGB and questioning students in schools: the moderating effects of homophobic bullying and school climate on negative outcomes. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 38(7), 989–1000. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-008-9389-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Brooks, A. K., & Edwards, K. (2009). Allies in the workplace: including LGBT in HRD. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 11(1), 136–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Coulter, R. W. S., & Rankin, S. R. (2017). College sexual assault and campus climate for sexual- and gender-minority undergraduate students. Journal of Interpersonal Violence. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260517696870 (15March 2017).

  11. Coulter, R. W. S., Mair, C., Miller, E., Blosnich, J. R., Matthews, D. D., & McCauley, H. L. (2017). Prevalence of past-year sexual assault victimization among undergraduate students: exploring differences by and intersections of gender identity, sexual identity, and race/ethnicity. Prevention Science, 18(6), 726–736.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Cumming-Potvin, W., & Martino, W. (2014). Teaching about queer families: surveillance, censorship, and the schooling of sexualities. Teaching Education, 25(3), 309–333. https://doi.org/10.1080/10476210.2014.889672.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Dau, D., & Strauss, P. (2016). The experience of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and trans students at the University of Western Australia: research report 2016. Crawley: Equity and Diversity, The University of Western Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Dugan, J. P., Kusel, M. L., & Simounet, D. M. (2012). Transgender college students: an exploratory study of perceptions, engagement, and educational outcomes. Journal of College Student Development, 53(5), 719–736.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Ellis, S. J. (2009). Diversity and inclusivity at university: a survey of the experiences of lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans (LGBT) students in the UK. Higher Education, 57(6), 723–739.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Evans, N. J., & Broido, E. M. (2002). The experiences of lesbian and bisexual women in college residence halls: implications for addressing homophobia and heterosexism. In E. P. Cramer (Ed.), Addressing homophobia and heterosexism on college campuses (pp. 29–42). Binghamton, NY: Harrington Park Press.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Federal Register of Legislation (n.d.). Marriage Act 1961. Retrieved from https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2018C00441

  18. Ferfolja, T. (2013). Students as policy actors: the TDSB Equity Foundation Statement and Commitments to Equity Policy. Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy, 149.

  19. Ferfolja, T., & Hopkins, L. (2013). The complexities of workplace experience for lesbian and gay teachers. Critical Studies in Education, 54(3), 311–324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Ferfolja, T., & Stavrou, E. (2015). Workplace experiences of Australian lesbian and gay teachers: findings from a national survey. Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy, 173, 113–138.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Ferfolja, T. & Ullman, J. (2014). Opportunity lost and (re) written out: LGBTI content in Australia’s ‘new’ national health and physical education curriculum. In S. Gannon & W. Sawyer (Eds). Contemporary issues of equity in education (pp. 69-87). Newcastle upon Tyne, UK: Cambridge scholars publishing.

  22. Ferfolja, T. & Ullman, J. (2020). Parent perceptions of GSD-related content inclusions in school education: voices from Australia. In H. Sauntson et al. (Eds). Schools as Queer Transformative Spaces: Global Narratives on Genders and Sexualities in Schools.

  23. Ferfolja T, Asquith N, Brady B, Hanckel B, (2018). Diversity and Safety on Campus @ Western, NSW: Western Sydney University.

  24. Forbes-Mewett, H., & McCulloch, J. (2016). International students and gender-based violence. Violence Against Women, 22(3), 344–365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Foucault, M. (1978). The will to knowledge. The history of sexuality. Volume 1: an introduction. (R. Hurley, Trans.). New York: Vintage Books.

  26. Green, J., & Thorogood, N. (2014). Qualitative methods for health research (3rd ed.). London: SAGE Publications Ltd..

    Google Scholar 

  27. Griffin, P. (1991). Identity management strategies among lesbian and gay educators. Qualitative Studies in Education, 4(3), 189–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Griner, S.B., Vamos, C.A., Thompson, E.L., Logan, R., Vázquez-Otero, C., & Daley, E.M. (2017). The intersection of gender identity and violence: victimization experienced by transgender college students. Journal of Interpersonal Violence. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260517723743.

  29. Hanckel, B., & Morris, A. (2014). Finding community and contesting heteronormativity: queer young people’s engagement in an Australian online community. Journal of Youth Studies, 17(7), 872–886.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Harris, J. C., & Linder, C. (Eds.). (2017). Intersections of identity and sexual violence on campus. Centering minoritized students’ experiences. Virginia: Stylus Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Hillier, L., Jones, T., Monagle, M., Overton, N., Gahan, L., Blackman, J., & Mitchell, A. (2010). Writing themselves in 3 (WTi3): the third national study on the sexual health and wellbeing of same sex attracted and gender questioning young people. Melbourne: Australian Research Centre in Sex, Health and Society, La Trobe University.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Hong, J. S., Woodford, M. R., Long, L. D., & Renn, K. A. (2016). Ecological covariates of subtle and blatant heterosexist discrimination among LGBQ college students. Journal of Youth Adolescence, 45(1), 117–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Iganski, P. (2001). Hate crimes hurt more. American Behavioral Scientist, 45(4), 626–638.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Jayakumar, U. M. (2009). The invisible rainbow in diversity: factors influencing sexual prejudice among college students. Journal of Homosexuality, 56(5), 675–700.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Keuroghlian, A. S., Shtasel, D., & Bassuk, E. L. (2014). Out on the street: a public health and policy agenda for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender youth who are homeless. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 84(1), 66–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Law, B. (2017). Moral panic 101: equality, acceptance and the safe schools scandal. Quarterly Essay, 67, 1–81.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Logie, C.H., James, L., Tharao, W., & Loutfy, M. R. (2012). “We don’t exist”: a qualitative study of marginalization experienced by HIV-positive lesbian, bisexual, queer and transgender women in Toronto, Canada. Journal of the International AIDS Society, 15(2), Journal of the International AIDS Society, March, 2012, Vol.15(2).

  38. Noelle, M. (2002). The ripple effect of the Matthew Shepard Murder: impact on the assumptive worlds of members of the targeted group. American Behavioral Scientist, 46(1), 27–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Perry, B., & Alvi, S. (2012). “We are all vulnerable”: the interrorem effects of hate crimes. International Review of Victimology, 18(1), 57–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Robards, B, Churchill, B, Vivienne, S, Hanckel, B & Byron, P (2018). Twenty years of “cyberqueer”: the enduring significance of the internet for young LGBTIQ+ people. In P Aggleton, R cover, D Leahy, D Marshall & ML Rasmussen (eds), Youth and sexual citizenship (pp. 151-167). London:Routledge.

  41. Robinson, K. H., Bansel, P., Denson, N., Ovenden, G., & Davies, C. (2014). Growing up queer: issues facing young Australians who are gender variant and sexuality diverse. Melbourne: Young and Well Cooperative Research Centre.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Sanlo, R., & Espinoza, L. (2012). Risk and retention: are LGBTQ students staying in your community college? Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 36(7), 475–481.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Schmitz, R. M., & Tyler, K. A. (2017). LGBTQ+ young adults on the street and on campus: identity as a product of social context. Journal of Homosexuality. https://doi.org/10.1080/00918369.2017.1314162 (12 April).

  44. Shannon, B., & Smith, S. (2017). Dogma before diversity: the contradictory rhetoric of controversy and diversity in the politicisation of Australian queer-affirming learning materials. Sex Education, 17(3), 242–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Shiko, G. (2016). Extending the progressive tradition to poor countries: the role of universities and colleges. Higher Learning Research Communications, 6(2), 101–114.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Sian, K. (2019). Extent of institutional racism in British universities revealed through hidden stories. The conversation. Retrieved from https://theconversation.com/extent-of-institutional-racism-in-british-universities-revealed-through-hidden-stories-118097

  47. Tetreault, P. A., Fette, R., Meidlinger, P. C., & Hope, D. (2013). Perceptions of campus climate by sexual minorities. Journal of Homosexuality, 60(7), 947–964.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Ullman, J. (2015). Free to be?: exploring the schooling experiences of Australia’s sexuality and gender diverse secondary school students. Centre for Educational Research: School of Education, Western Sydney University, Penrith.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Waling, A., & Roffee, J. A. (2016). Rethinking microaggressions and anti-social behaviour against LGBTIQ+ youth. Safer Communities, 15(4), 190–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Waling, A., & Roffee, J. A. (2017). Knowing, performing and holding queerness: LGBTIQ+ student experiences in Australian tertiary education. Sex Education, 17(3), 302–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Waling, A. & Roffee, J.A. (2018). Supporting LGBTIQ+ students in higher education in Australia: diversity, inclusion and visibility. Health education. Available at https://www.researchgate.net/publication/322976430_Supporting_LGBTIQ_students_in_higher_education_in_Australia_Diversity_Inclusion_and_Visibilityhttps://doi.org/10.1177/0017896918762233.

  52. Warner, M. (1993). Introduction. In M. Warner (Ed). Fear of a queer planet: queer politics and social theory (pp. vii-xxxi). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

  53. Winsor, B. (2017). A definitive timeline of LGBT+ rights in Australia. https://www.sbs.com.au/topics/sexuality/agenda/article/2016/08/12/definitive-timeline-lgbt-rights-australia. Accessed 6 November 2018.

  54. Woodford, M., & Kulick, A. (2015). Academic and social integration on campus among sexual minority students: the impacts of psychological and experiential campus climate. American Journal of Community Psychology, 55(1), 13–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Woodford, M. R., Howell, M. L., Kulick, A., & Silverschanz, P. (2013). “That’s so gay”: heterosexual male undergraduates and the perception of sexual orientation microaggressions on campus. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 28(2), 416–435.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge and thank the many research participants who made this study possible.

Funding

This study was majorly financed by the Office of People and Advancement at Western Sydney University. Financial and material support were also provided by the School of Social Science and Psychology and the School of Education.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tania Ferfolja.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ferfolja, T., Asquith, N., Hanckel, B. et al. In/visibility on campus? Gender and sexuality diversity in tertiary institutions. High Educ 80, 933–947 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-020-00526-1

Download citation

Keywords

  • Gender
  • Sexuality
  • University
  • Discrimination
  • LGBT+
  • Australia