My Kids Are Why I'm Here: Narrating the Experience of Gender and Sexuality Alliance (GSA) Advisors in an Anti-LGBTQ+ Climate

Background and Purpose:

The impact of increasing anti-LGBTQIA+ rhetoric and legislation on LGBTQIA+ young people is receiving growing attention in the literature, but little research addresses the impact of the current climate on adults who provide support to young people. Gender and Sexuality Alliances (GSAs) are clubs that provide support to LGBTQIA+ young people, facilitated by one or more adults. The presence of just one supportive adult in an LGBTQIA+ young person’s life can drastically reduce the rate of attempted suicide. The purpose of this qualitative study is to examine the influence of an anti-LGBTQIA+ climate on the ability of GSA advisors to enact their roles and responsibilities in supporting LGBTQIA+ young people and determine where extra support for advisors may be needed.

Methods:

Twenty-four GSA advisors throughout 8 counties of upstate New York were recruited via email and in person at youth events. To meet inclusion criteria, participants had to be current GSA advisors for at least 2 months and regularly attend GSA meetings. Interviews were conducted in person or via Zoom.

Interviews were recorded and transcribed. Member checking was employed to ensure accuracy. Guided by a queer theoretical framework, advisors’ stories were not categorized into rigid codes but instead codes and themes were allowed to emerge organically. The analytic process centered narrative meaning-making, privileging the fluidity and variation of participant experiences. This analysis revealed several themes that emerged across advisor narratives.

Results:

Advisors’ identities and school roles were two emerging themes that significantly shaped advisors’ capacity to advocate for and support the young people in their GSAs, with queer-identified advisors navigating risks of visibility and targeted discrimination, while ally-identified advisors leveraged their relative privilege to speak up in their schools and communities. Certain school roles, such as librarians, faced compounded challenges due to external political pressures that resulted in book bans and challenges and “groomer” accusations. Advisors’ narrated experiences showed the places where extra support or resources may be needed to help them support the young people in their GSAs.

Conclusions and Implications:

Under the recent surge of anti-LGBTQIA+ legislation and rhetoric, GSA advisors’ specific identities and school roles impact the ways they advocate in their communities and their capacity to support LGBTQIA+ young people. These findings suggest practice recommendations relevant to social work that may help strengthen and support the work of GSA advisors. LGBTQIA+ advocacy organizations, particularly those already providing support to GSAs, can help develop tailored resources and protocols for advisors in particularly vulnerable roles (e.g., librarians, counselors), helping them navigate compounded challenges like censorship and public accusations. School social workers can provide mental health and mindfulness resources specifically targeted toward GSA advisors to mitigate burnout and emotional labor.