Methods: To inform LGBTQ+-affirming prevention efforts that take a bystander approach, we conducted qualitative interviews with 29 LGBTQ+ survivors to learn about their experiences of SRV and anti-queer discrimination to (1) describe opportunities for bystander intervention before, during, and after SRV occurs and (2) inform an adaptation of the Bringing in the Bystander® College Prevention Program for LGBTQ+ students. Participants were ages 19-30; 75% people of color; about half (48%) transgender, nonbinary, or gender nonconforming; and all participants identified as queer, lesbian, gay, bisexual, or asexual. Participants were interviewed by one of two interviewers who are both queer and trans identified and who have relevant experience with SRV prevention. We utilized an adaptation of Banyard and colleagues’ (2019) Bystander Action Coil theoretical framework (Queering the Bystander Action Coil Framework) and analyzed the interviews using a reflexive thematic content analysis approach (Braun & Clarke, 2021)
Results: These interviews yielded eight major themes. Participants had both difficulty recognizing what happened to them as SRV and felt that others were unable to recognize what was happening as harmful, which impacted intervention efforts. Participants also reflected on how “this was all new to me” in that they were new to their LGBTQ+ identities and communities and lacked reference points for what happened to them. A group of participants also pointed to bisexual erasure’s impact on their ability to seek support. Several participants additionally shared that “queer community was key” to accessing help, support, and healing. Many participants also shared that, when seeking formal support, resources were exhibited as “intersectionality in name only.” This kept multiply minoritized survivors from getting holistic help. Participants additionally shared that “my identity is distracting” and that systems were “not built for us.” They reflected on how they were stymied from getting formal and peer support by having to educate others about their identities and needs beyond the SRV itself.
Conclusions: This study helps elucidate some of the ways that bystander intervention, particularly within queer communities, has positively impacted LGBTQ+ SRV survivors, as well as the challenges these students face when seeking support. Future research should examine how effective bystander programs are for LGBTQ+ college students (Kirk-Provencher et al., 2021). Bystander intervention programs should incorporate scenarios relevant to LGBTQ+ students’ experiences.