Childhood Predictors of Perceived Structural Stigma in Queer Adults

Background: Queer individuals exist in a state of contention and politicization in the US due to their contravening nature against traditionalist concepts of heteronormativity and cisnormativity. With more than 650 anti-LGBTQ+ bills being filed in state legislatures in 2023 alone, the oppression of queer individuals has become a byproduct of partisan politics in the US. Influences on the individual perceptions of structural stigma in queer adults in the US has yet to be examined. This study aims to close this gap by examining the relationship between exposure to pro- and anti-queer environmental factors during childhood and perceptions of structural stigma in queer adults. Methods: A cross-sectional national diverse sample of 500 self-identifying queer adults (ages 18-70) were recruited and completed an online survey in 2020. Data were collected on perceptions of structural stigma (LGB Multidimensional Stigma Inventory – Structural Stigma Subscale), homophobic messaging received during childhood (Attitudes Towards Lesbians and Gay Men Scale-Revised 5-Item Version), and sociodemographic information (i.e., religion raised in, region raised in, rate of religious attendance, familial political ideology during childhood, number of queer people known during childhood, age, sex assigned at birth, gender identity, sexual orientation, race, education level, socioeconomic status, and disability status). A multivariate regression model was run to predict the direction and rate at which environmental factors during childhood impact the development of perceived structural stigma in adulthood. Results: The multivariate regression model was deemed to be a good fit for the data (F(34, 463) = 5.30, p<.001), explaining 24% of variance in perceptions of structural stigma. The model found homophobic messaging from media (b=.36, RSE=.10, p<.001) and school (b=.36,RSE=.08, p<.001) to be statistically significant predictors for perceptions of structural stigma in queer adults. Further, the model predicted sexual orientations of bisexual, pansexual, or bi/pan+ (b=-.65, RSE=.14, p<.001) as statistically significant predictors for levels of perception of structural stigma in queer adults, compared to those who self-identify as gay or lesbian. Further, the model found familial political ideology during childhood (b=-.07, RSE=.03, p<.01) to be a statistically significant predictor for perceptions of structural stigma against queer people. Implications: The significance of homophobic messaging from media and school as predictors for higher perceptions of structural stigma indicates that perceptions are likely influenced by exposure to anti-queer structural systems. As individuals who grew up in more conservative families are likely to perceive lower levels structural stigma in the US than those who grew up in more progressive families, the case could be made that anti-queer sentiment is viewed at the community level rather than the political. As such, these results suggest that socio-political approaches to addressing structural stigma against queer identities would benefit from not focusing on single political issues but rather focus on challenging and changing social perceptions and opinions of queer identities. Further research is required to better understand the vectors through which perceptions of structural stigma are developed by queer adults.