The Influence of Individual- and Family-Level Factors on Family Homo/Transnegative Microaggressions

Background and Purpose: Both ambient and direct homo/transnegative microaggressions are common for sexual and gender minority youth (SGMY) in schools. The extant literature suggests that homo/transnegative microaggressions are associated with mental and behavioral health problems; however, little is known about rates of homo/transnegative microaggressions within family systems. Furthermore, there is a dearth of information on individual- and family-level factors associated with this minority stressor. Utilizing a national sample of SGMY (N= 1,179), this study (1) identifies rates of ambient and direct family-level homo/transnegative microaggressions and (2) examines the individual- (sexual orientation, gender identity, race, mental health) and family-level (adversity, maltreatment, religiosity) factors associated with family homo/transnegative microaggressions.

Methods: The study employed an internet-based quota sample of SGMY. Eligibility criteria were: non-heterosexual and/or non-cisgender identity, 14-19 y/o, U.S. residence, enrolled in middle/high school, and English literate. The study utilized a cross-sectional, quantitative design. A measure for family-level homo/trans microaggressions was developed for the study, with high-levels of microaggressions assessed as falling above the median. Preexisting measures were used to assess mental health. Family adversity was measured through assessing adverse events (e.g., divorce, death). Maltreatment was measured using the Juvenile Victimization Questionnaire. Religiosity was assessed with three questions on the importance of religion to parents and extended family. Descriptive analysis identified rates of direct and ambient homo/transnegative microaggressions by sexual orientation and gender identity. Bivariate logistic regression was used to identify any significant differences in these rates. Multiple linear regression was used to identify individual- and family-level factors associated with direct and ambient homo/transnegative microaggressions.

Results: For sexual orientation, 81% of questioning participants reported high-levels of direct negativity, followed by 73% “other” (asexual, straight), 72% pansexual, 67% queer, 56% bisexual, 52% gay, and 50% lesbian. For gender identity, 73% of genderqueer participants reported high-levels of direct negativity, followed by 67% transgender, 55% female, and 50% male. Compared to gay participants, pansexual, questioning, and “other” had significantly higher odds of reporting high-levels of direct negativity, while transgender and genderqueer reported higher odds compared to males. Significant differences in ambient negativity were also found by sexual orientation and gender identity. Multiple regression identified the following significant individual factors of ambient negativity: age (β=.40, p<.01) and PTSD (β=.26, p<.01). At the family level, child maltreatment (β=1.01, p<.01), religiosity (β=.99, p<.01), and adversity (β=.07, p<.01) were significant predictors of ambient negativity. In regards to direct negativity, PTSD (β=.51, p<.01), child maltreatment (β=1.70, p<.01) and religiosity (β=.86, p<.01) were significant predictors, with significant mean differences also found across sexual orientation and gender identity.

Conclusions and Implications: This study’s central findings are (a) youth who identify as non-cisgender and questioning may be more likely to experience homo/transnegativity than cisgender and gay youth and (b) higher rates of PTSD, family-level religiosity, and child maltreatment are associated with higher-levels of ambient and direct homo/transnegativity. The study also identified age and family adversity as possible risk factors for ambient homo/transnegativity. Findings suggest that family- and individual-level factors may be important intervention points in nurturing supportive climates for SGMY.