Social network sites (SNS) were developed during the 90’s and got popularized in the mid 2010’s. SNSs are social platforms, where users can create a profile, add a network of contacts and communicate online. The LGBTQ+ community relies heavily on SNSs for information, exploration of identity, social support and community, but due to their marginalized status, they are more prone to victimization online. Whereas anonymity can protect users from bodily harm, it can’t protect against harassment and hatred, which is why it’s important to emphasize on user-centered design for marginalized communities within HCI. The objective with this study is to define design suggestions for future SNSs, based on the values of LGBTQ+ users. Two focus groups recruited from the local LGBTQ+ community in Berlin, consisting of seven participants in total, gathered in person. The focus groups discussed open ended questions around the topics of: safety, anonymity, accountability, social support and community online, seen from a queer perspective. The results of this study had correlations with prior research within HCI research and paints a picture of the differences between the “digital well- being” norm and the severity of the threats affecting the digital wellbeing of marginalized users. In conclusion, HCI and digital well-being research needs to be elaborated on, in regards to marginalized communities and their benefits and challenges of SNSs use and how that could be incorporated in a value sensitive design approach for future development.

No description available.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC; 2012) reported that intimate partner violence (IPV) affects approximately 4.8 million females and 2.8 million males in their intimate relationships each year. Past research (e.g., Fanslow, Robinson, Crengle, & Perese, 2010; Foshee et al., 1996; Foshee et al., 2009) on IPV solely evaluated prevalence rates and factors within opposite-sex relationships; however, IPV within lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) individuals' relationships exists at equal, if not higher, rates compared to their heterosexual counterparts (Alexander, 2008; McKenry, Serovich, Mason, & Mosak, 2006). Subsequently, a gap in research existed on violence in LGBTQ individuals' samesex relationships and the need existed for further exploration of IPV within same-sex couples (McKenry et al., 2006; Turell, 2000). The purpose of this study was an examination of the relationships among victimization rates (Victimization in Dating Relationships [VDR] and Safe Dates-Psychological Abuse Victimization [SD-PAV]), perpetration rates (Perpetration in Dating Relationships [PDR] and Safe Dates-Psychological Abuse Perpetration [SD-PAP]), and attitudinal acceptance of IPV (Acceptance of Couple Violence [ACV]) among LGBTQ college students. The specific goals of the study were to (a) identify the IPV victimization rates and perpetration rates among LGBTQ college students, and (b) examine the attitudinal acceptance of IPV in LGBTQ college students. The statistical analyses used to examine the four research questions and seven subsequent hypotheses included (a) Multivariate Analysis of Variance (MANOVA) and (b) Multiple Linear Regression (MLR). The results identified that significant mean differences (p < .01; ŋ 2 P = .16) existed between females and males in their reported levels of victimization and perpetration, suggesting a large effect size with biological sex accounting for 16% of the variance across the four victimization and perpetration variables. Specifically, females self-reported higher levels of psychological and emotional victimization compared to males (p < .01; ŋ 2 P = .05), suggesting that females in same-sex relationships reported greater psychological abuse from their female partners. In addition, results identified significant mean differences between males and females in their levels of attitudinal acceptance of IPV (p < .01; ŋ 2 P = .13), suggesting a medium effect size that biological sex accounted for 13% of the variance in attitudinal acceptance of IPV scores. In considering gender expression, results from the study identified that in females and males, those self-identifying with greater amounts of masculinity reported an increased amount of victimization and perpetration (p < .01; ŋ 2 P = .15). The results identified a large effect size in that 15% of the variance in victimization and perpetration rates were accounted for by the interaction of biological sex and gender expression. Furthermore, in females and males, those self-identifying with greater amounts of masculinity reported higher levels of attitudinal acceptance of IPV (p < .01; ŋ 2 P = .12). The results identified a medium effect size in that 12% of the variance in attitudinal acceptance of IPV was accounted for by the interaction of biological sex and gender expression. In regards to a history of childhood abuse and witnessing parental IPV, participants with a history of child abuse and a history of witnessing parental IPV did not differ in their levels of victimization, perpetration, or attitudinal acceptance of IPV from those without a history of childhood abuse and witnessing parental IPV. Finally, variables such as (a) biological sex, (b) gender expression, (c) past childhood abuse, (d) witnessing parental IPV, (e) v VDR, (f) SD-PAV, (g) PDR, and (h) SD-PAP predicted attitudinal acceptance of IPV in this LGBTQ college student sample. The results identified that linear composite of these eight predictor variables predicted 93% (R 2 = .93) of the overall variance in participants' attitudinal acceptance of IPV total score (p < .01). Overall, the results identified that females reported higher levels of psychological victimization meaning that a female LGBTQ college student potentially experiences more risk of becoming a victim in a relationship. In addition, results identified that LGBTQ college students identifying as masculine present a potentially greater risk for both victimization and perpetration in their same-sex relationships. Self-identifying masculine LGBTQ college students reported greater amounts of acceptance of same-sex IPV, which possibly explains the lack of IPV reports from these college students. Finally, the results identified that individual and family-of-origin factors do, in fact, predict LGBTQ college students' levels of attitudinal acceptance of IPV. In other words, an LGBTQ college students' biological sex, gender expression, past childhood experiences, victimization rates, and perpetration rates all relate to the prediction of their attitudes about IPV. Implications for future research included the need to further examine college students engaging either in an opposite-sex or same-sex relationship, exploring the relationships between masculinity and femininity in their reported levels of victimization, perpetration, and attitudinal acceptance of IPV. The need to replicate this study exists in order to ensure inclusiveness of individuals across all sexual orientations and gender identities in college students. In addition, several significant findings from this study further substantiate the need for continued research in the area of same-sex IPV, especially utilizing a sample of LGBTQ college students, to inform (a) clinical assessment in college counseling clinics and community agencies, (b) IPV protocol development, and (c) culturally sensitive, modified intervention based on the current findings.

This investigation examined the impact of an eight-week group counseling intervention on lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ+) older adolescents’ (aged 18-20) levels of hopefulness, coping skills, and suicidality. An experimental, randomized-controlledtrial research design was employed to identify differences between the intervention group and waitlist control group participants’ hopefulness, coping skills, and suicidality scores. In addition, the relationship between the LGBTQ+ participants’ outcome variables (hopefulness, coping skills, and suicidality) scores was examined. Furthermore, the impact of group therapeutic factors experienced by the LGBTQ+ participants in intervention group for the variables of hopefulness, coping skills, and suicidality was examined. Key findings included a significant interaction between time and group placement, indicating that the intervention group participants experienced significant improvements on measures of hopefulness, coping behaviors, and suicidality when compared to participants in the waitlist control group. In addition, hope was demonstrated to be a strong and significant predictor of suicidality. Furthermore, it was found that group therapeutic factors had a positive effect on intervention group participants’ Adaptive Coping scores, but did not have an effect on Hopefulness, Maladaptive Coping, or Suicidality as hypothesized. Lastly, there was no significant differences between the demographic variables perceptions of parental/guardian support, perceptions of peer support, gender identity, or ethnicity on their hopefulness, coping behaviors, or suicidality. There was, however, a significant difference between bisexual’s and lesbian’s post-test scores on Suicidality, with bisexuals scoring significantly lower. No other significant differences were observed between sexual orientation and the other key constructs.

Individuals with a minority sexual identity, such as lesbians, gay men, and bisexuals (LGB) face increased risk for stigmatization surrounding their sexual identities and subsequent psychological distress. Sexual minorities of color (SMOC) face the same difficulties faced by White sexual minorities, often compounded with stigma and discrimination linked to their racial/ethnic identities. However, because SMOC remain underrepresented in research on LGB issues, empirically-driven knowledge about these groups is lacking, even among outcomes where noted disparities exist, such as depression. Emerging adulthood may be a particularly important period for understanding effects of intersectional identities and discrimination among SMOC, who often navigate identity-related milestones and experiences independently for the first time within this developmental period. This study examined the relationships between discrimination based upon racial/ethnic and sexual intersecting identities and depression symptoms among emerging adults, as well as ways that group identity factors (ethnic identity, sexual identity, conflicts in identity allegiances) moderated this relationship. Findings indicated that experience of intersectional discrimination was strongly, positively related to depression symptoms. Ethnic identity negatively related to depression independently, but not in the regression model accounting for other variables. Identity factors were not found to statistically significantly moderate the relationship between discrimination and depression symptoms. Discussion centers on potential mechanisms involved in the relationship between intersectional discrimination and depression, and future avenues to expand work with SMOC.

This article contains the findings of a content analysis on transgender-related scholarship in four counseling and counseling psychology journals from 2007 to 2020. A total of 94 publications were coded for analysis, and results from this analysis indicate an increase in the literature pertaining to transgender people and issues, though limitations still exist. Trends in the research are discussed, as well as gaps in the understanding of transgender communities in the counseling literature.

LGBTQ individuals have many risk factors and have difficulty navigating going through school because of all the social issues. This study is an autoethnography that looks into the perceived protective factors of a gay male educator. I was challenged to change my dissertation to share my story of being a teacher and dealing with many different risk factors. My committee introduced me to autoethnography and shortly after, I was speaking with a student when the topic of the “It Gets Better” campaign came up. The student said to me, “Prove it.” My dissertation has been a living document with many changes. However, this is my truth of having to navigate being an educator in a small town and being gay. While risk factors are always present for LGBTQ individuals, the focus here is on the positive. The underlying explorations involve going back into the closet for my job, reflections, support systems, and how/why my life is perceived to be better.

This thesis draws on queer theory, media representation, intersectionality and news values to conduct a combined queerfeminist visual and critical discourse analysis examining how representation of same-sex attraction and queer relationships in British teen television—and the media’s reaction to them—has changed between 1994 and 2019.  The queerfeminist visual analysis compares two scenes featuring same-sex attraction between male teenagers in two TV shows: Byker Grove (1989-2006), which featured a chaste but angrily rejected kiss in 1994 and Sex Education (2019-2023), which featured an unseen but implicitly enjoyed blow job in 2019. The Byker Grove scene was the first gay kiss on British children’s television. Sex Education has been praised for its diverse LGBTQ+ cast and storylines. Two series are thus valuable bookends for this quarter-century-spanning but limited comparative study. Supported by a brief content analysis of national and local press coverage of Byker Grove from 1994 and online coverage of Sex Education on the selected newspapers’ websites, the queerfeminist critical discourse analysis compares four news items reporting on each TV show in contrasting British newspapers: populist “red top” The Sun and liberal “quality” paper The Guardian.  The combined study finds that 1) there are visual similarities in the framing of each scene but significant differences in narratives and messaging, especially when decoded by different audiences, and 2) the social discourse has shifted significantly from one of outright opposition to invisibilisation on the political right and from silence to praise on the left.  The thesis fills a gap in queer television studies scholarship that has mostly overlooked British teen/children’s television in favour of American TV shows and makes recommendations for further research, particularly in the fields of audience studies and social sexual script theory with a focus on LGBTQ+ teen and adult viewers.

Given the tendency of Populist Radical Right (PRR) parties to form anti-LGBTQ+ claims, this thesis aims to understand how a PRR party operating in a context characterized by progressive values relates to LGBTQ+ topics in their political messages on social media. A single case study of the Sweden Democrats (SD) – an example of a PRR party operating in such a context – was conducted. Idea analysis, which included the concepts of homonationalism and heteroactivism, was performed on 44 posts published during the year following the 2022 election on the social media platform X by politicians representing the SD in the national parliament. The results show that the SD pursued a homonationalist discourse in that they advocated LGBTQ+ rights to oppose Islam in general and Muslim integration in Sweden in particular. However, when the SD solely focused on the Swedish domestic context, LGBTQ+ rights were not promoted, but rather heteronormativity was favored above non-normative relationships, gender identities, and gender expressions. Thus, the results suggest that the SD took part in heteroactivism. Moreover, while the SD avoided outspoken homophobic statements, transphobic ideas were evident. Hence, the SD adapted to the Swedish context by performing a balancing act where they weighed the expression of heteronormative ideals against the potential loss of acceptance from a public supporting LGBTQ+ rights. Altogether, these results contribute to research on PRR parties operating in contexts characterized by progressive values as well as research on the SD concerning LGBTQ+ topics.

Supervisors and counselor educators who identify as LGBTQ+ may face uncertainty in whether or not to disclose sexual or gender identity in professional settings. This presentation will provide a review of current literature and initiate discussion regarding the experiences of LGBTQ+ counselor educators and supervisors, as well as factors that impact decision-making processes to disclose or not disclose marginalized identities within a position of relative power and privilege as supervisors or educators.