Ecological Antecedents of LGBQ College Students Experiencing Sexual Orientation Microaggressions and Various Types of Homophobic Discrimination

Purpose: Research investigating homophobic discrimination has mostly focused on targeted physical aggression, verbal threats, and other forms of blatant discrimination, yet contemporary homophobia tends to be expressed through subtle forms of discrimination, for example insults, invalidations, and rejection, which may be unintentional but still harmful (Nadal et al., 2010). Though blatant homophobia occurs, subtle homophobia is more prevalent, including on college campuses (Rankin et al., 2010).

Little is known about the antecedents of various forms of homophobia, especially among LGBQ college students. We examine the ecological (Bronfenbrenner, 1977) antecedents of various types of homophobia experienced by LGBQ college students.

Method: A national sample of 580 self-identified, cisgender, LGBQ college students was extracted from the 2013 National Study of LGBTQ Student Success. Data were collected through an anonymous online survey. Dependent variables included interpersonal microaggressions, avoidance from peers, verbal attacks, and physical attacks. Independent variables included socio-demographic (gender, race, atypical gender expression, sexual identity), microsystem (overall student support, LGBTQ student support, social support from friends), mesosystem (instructor relations), and macrosystem (environmental microaggressions) variables. All scales, including the dependent variables, demonstrated acceptable or higher internal consistency (range .756–.965). Models were estimated using hierarchical regression analyses.

Results: Atypical gender expression (β=.055, p=.048), social support (β=-.055, p=.047), instructor relations (β=-.068, p=.021), and environmental microaggressions (β=.751, p<.001) were significantly associated with interpersonal microaggressions. Socio-demographic variables explained 1.6% of the variance, microsystem variables added 6.3%, the mesosystem variable added 2.4%, and the macrosystem variable added 51.9%.

Atypical gender expression (β=.098, p=.010), bi-/pansexual (β=-.281, p=.026), overall LGBTQ student support (β=-.376, p=.001), and environmental microaggressions (β=.463, p<.001) were significantly related to avoidance from peers. Socio-demographic variables explained 1.7% of the variance, the microsystem variables contributed an additional 8.2%, the mesosystem explained an additional 1.2%; and the macrosystem variable added 19.7%.

Atypical gender expression (β=.115, p=.002), race (β=-.172, p=.037), bi-pansexual (β=-.241, p=.047), queer (β=-.333, p=.028), overall student support (β=.420, p=.023), overall LGBTQ student support (β=-.215, p=.039), instructor relations (β=-.097, p=.013), and environmental microaggressions (β=.538, p<.001) were predictive of verbal attacks. Socio-demographic variables explained 2.3% of the variance, the microsystem variables added 4.4%, the mesosystem explained an additional 2.4%, and the macrosystem added 26.6%.

Atypical gender expression (β=.094, p=.027), overall LGBTQ students support (β=-.369, p=.002), instructor relations (β=-.097, p=.039), and environmental microaggressions (β=.219, p<.001) were significantly associated with physical attacks. The socio-demographic variables explained 2.0%, microsystem variables contributed an additional 5.1%, the mesosystem added 1.4%, and the macrosystem contributed an additional 4.4%.

Implications: The results highlight the shared and unique nature of various types of subtle and blatant experiential homophobia on college campuses, and direct policymakers and practitioners to address various ecological antecedents to protect and support LGBQ students. Given the influence of environmental microaggressions, interventions tackling systemic homophobia are especially important.