manukaphoto/iStock
Every student, staff, and faculty member deserves to feel welcomed and safe on campus. So, what does an LGBTQ-friendly campus look like? How does an institution teach awareness and acceptance and respect for all regardless of their identity and orientation? In this month’s interview, Dr. Alison Gash from the University of Oregon discusses her thoughts on these topics and the importance of inclusiveness.
Andrew Hibel, HigherEdJobs: You are an associate professor at the University of Oregon. Please explain your areas of interest and some of the classes you teach.
Alison Gash, Ph.D., Associate Professor, University of Oregon: My research and courses focus primarily on American public policy and public law with a concentration on race, gender, sexuality, and disability. I examine how struggles over equality and inclusion operate in policy arenas like housing, employment, health care, and family rights and the ways in which legal avenues either help or hinder policy gains for disenfranchised communities.
Hibel: You are obviously passionate about civil rights and civil liberties. How has this transferred into your work on campus and in the academic community?
Gash: Before I returned to school to pursue a Ph.D. I worked in Washington, DC as a civil rights advocate. At the time, few cities and states had protections for LGBTQ rights, but law firms like ours were beginning to see a lot of complaints of discrimination based on sexuality in housing and public accommodations. There was little we could do to combat this discrimination because of the limits of the law. When I went back to school I took these experiences with me. I have been lucky enough to study and work at institutions that have supported my commitment to LGBTQ rights — in my scholarship, in the classroom, and as an advocate. I teach courses exclusively about LGBTQ rights in American politics as well as courses in which I examine gender identity and sexuality in the context of broader civil rights and social policy questions. My hope as a teacher is to provide LGBTQ students a space to find their voice while also keeping issues of sexuality and inclusion on all of my students’ radars. In many institutions the study of sexuality or gender identity in politics is marginal at best, despite the clear political and policy upheavals that have targeted the LGBTQ community. I have been fortunate at University of Oregon to have been given ample room to create courses and curriculum that focus on the significant cases, debates, policies, and movements that have shaped LGBTQ rights.
Hibel: As the title of the interview mentions, we’d like to discuss the importance of LGBTQ-friendly campuses. What does an LGBTQ friendly campus mean in terms of students? What about for staff and faculty working on campus?
Gash: I think as with any issue that has the capacity to marginalize or disenfranchise students, it takes more than just rhetoric or platitudes of inclusion to make LGBTQ faculty and students feel welcome (rather than simply tolerated) on campus.
Many schools have developed statements indicating that they do not tolerate sexuality-based hate or that their campus is a “hate-free zone.” Yet, on these campuses LGBTQ faculty, students, and allies still feel marginalized or silenced. The topic of sexuality or gender identity ends up being perceived in some institutions as a “boutique” topic or may be given only incidental attention in research or coursework. Often, sexuality or gender identity are absent from discussions about faculty or student diversity or inclusion. LGBTQ campus members may find it difficult to be open about their sexuality or gender identity for fear of being patronized or alienated. Even when they are trained, service providers such as registrars, counselors, or campus safety officers may fail to support LGBTQ students by either discounting their perspectives or refuting their claims of sexuality or gender identity-based discrimination.
The more that departments focus on sexuality and gender identity as a critical prong of an inclusive campus faculty, the more that LGBTQ students will feel that they have room to be themselves and to avail themselves of the full benefits of a college education. The more that departments invest resources in the study of sexuality and gender identity in research and coursework, the richer the options for both faculty and students and the more productive, relevant, and responsive the intellectual community on campus is to LGBTQ faculty and students. The more proactive a campus is about naming and admonishing the different and specific ways in which campuses can silence and marginalize LGBTQ faculty and students, the more that campus members can be thoughtful in their attempts to legitimize and acknowledge LGBTQ perspectives.
Rhetoric and mission statements are important — but they should be viewed as a starting point. With a strong mission that admonishes hate and privileges safety, schools must then implement real measures that institutionalize these principles.
Hibel: Feeling safe on campus is obviously a feeling to which every student is entitled. Unfortunately, 6 out of 10 students feel unsafe due to their sexual orientation. What are the ramifications of these feelings, emotionally or other?
Gash: Fortunately, a lot has been written on the effects of stigma on different arenas of achievement. Unfortunately, the findings are both clear and devastating. Students carry stigma or the sting of bias wherever they go. Whether it is during a classroom debate, while taking an exam, or while in office hours with a professor, students evaluate their own abilities and worth based on how they believe others view them. Even if they are in a situation where no explicit bias is present students will still operate under the heavy burden of negative stereotypes. And of course, in situations where students are facing bias, harassment, or hostility we know that they suffer emotionally, physically, socially, and academically. Students who are bullied or harassed are more likely to turn to unsafe means of coping with stress, may be more likely to suffer from depression or anxiety, and may have a higher likelihood of suicidal ideation. And in many instances, students will try to distance themselves from the harassing behavior — which will mean prolonged absences from school. We know that these problematic outcomes begin to diminish when there is a strong and positive counter message — one that legitimizes, supports, and values the contributions, capacities, and perspectives of LGBTQ students.
Hibel: What are key points that faculty and campus administrators should instill in the community or take action on in order to make students feel more safe?
Gash: As I said above, it takes more than anti-hate statements. Sexuality and gender identity need to be front and center in any discussion of inclusion on campus. Administrators should take efforts to make sure that students feel and see inclusion rather than just read it in a statement or hear it in a speech during orientation. Administrators should encourage courses that focus on LGBTQ issues, invite speakers whose work examines LGBTQ life, create living environments that provide safe spaces for LGBTQ students, and encourage faculty to signal that they are allies to LGBTQ students.
Hibel: Transgender students and the topic of gender neutral bathrooms on campus have been in the news more recently. You have written articles regarding this topic. What takeaways do you want to share regarding the issue of gender neutral bathrooms?
Gash: Transgender students face obstacles that cisgender students do not. Among them are barriers to using bathrooms — not just a bathroom that matches their identified gender, but any bathroom. Transgender students face significant administrative obstacles when they attempt to use a bathroom that accommodates their identified gender and are often ostracized by students and parents when they attempt to advocate for their safety. They also face harassment and physical threats in their attempts to use public bathrooms on campus, even bathrooms that correlate with their biological gender. In other words, bathroom violence is a constant threat to transgender students regardless of which bathroom they use. This hostility is especially heightened when a campus or community provides a platform for bias to flourish, either by supporting efforts to constrain transgender rights or by failing to address ongoing harassment.
The consequences of this hostility are significant, ranging from physiological issues such as kidney disease (caused by delayed bathroom use) or substance abuse to psychological effects (increased anxiety and depression). Some studies suggest that students who have experienced these kinds of hostilities are significantly more likely to have attempted suicide. To manage these hostilities transgender students must be strategic. Some schedule their classes so that they can easily go home for bathroom breaks or specifically scout out bathrooms where they are less likely to encounter opposition. Others simply wait until classes are finished, which can cause significant physiological distress. Imagine having to think about these issues while also managing the day to day stresses of college?
There is also one more important factor to address. In many cities, people have argued that gender-neutral bathrooms pose a risk to women’s safety. In many debates, transgender individuals and advocates have been defeated by opposition efforts that pitch women’s rights against transgender rights. The fact is that in the debate over transgender bathrooms the risk is born by transgender individuals. There are no known statistics that indicate that cisgender women are at risk when transfemale and cisfemale students use the same bathroom. Transgender students, on the contrary, are statistically far more likely to suffer significant physical and psychological abuse. Furthermore, the push by transgender advocates to have more single-use bathrooms clearly provides increased (rather than decreased) protection for women.
Hibel: Single use bathrooms on your campus have become all gender. Do you think this will become the standard on college campuses? Why or why not?
Gash: I hope so. Under directives issued by President Obama, many schools had taken steps to increase the number of gender-neutral bathrooms, both by modifying existing single-use bathrooms to gender-neutral bathrooms and by earmarking new construction projects to include a certain number of gender neutral facilities. We do not yet know what the new administration will require of schools or what kind of guidance they will provide. My hope is that the kinds of debates, discussions, and guidance launched during the Obama administration by transgender rights advocates will give colleges and universities insight into the need for transgender accommodations. Certainly, the demand for accommodations created over the last three years by students, advocates, and allies will not diminish. If anything it will increase with the possibility of a rollback in rights.
Hibel: Going further than just gender neutral restrooms, what else can campuses do in terms of housing, support services, inclusive polices, or programming for the LGBTQ community to strengthen the “friendly campus” philosophy?
Gash: Inclusion can’t be quarantined to specific moments or spaces on campus. If an LGBTQ student does not feel safe in their home, in class, or in other campus spaces then they will not feel “welcomed” regardless of the “hate free zone” rhetoric advanced by administrators. That said, there is no cookie cutter approach to what makes these environments safe. A lot of it requires administrators to engage in ongoing discussions with LGBTQ students — to identify what the gaps in support might be on their campus and how best to fill these gaps — or with faculty about initiatives to promote collaborative or community-building spaces for LGBTQ faculty (many of whom are the only LGBTQ faculty in their departments).
And of course, any real discussion of inclusion and equality can’t silo the question of LGBTQ equality from other struggles for inclusion. LGBTQ students of color experience some of the most extreme versions of bias and hostility and need to have their specific experiences validated and addressed rather than sidelined as they often are in conversations that fail to acknowledge the multiple identities that shape student experiences. More broadly, any discussion of inclusion or equality necessarily requires that colleges and universities facilitate opportunities for students to work across multiple identities and issues.
Hibel: What professional advice do you have for someone who wants to make a difference on campus working with the LGBTQ community?
Gash: Professors can make a really big difference just by signaling that they are an ally to LGBTQ students. Many professors can accomplish this by indicating their support in syllabus language on inclusion or by posting a flyer on or near their office door outlining their commitment to inclusion. Professors can also reference examples in class concerning LGBTQ students and take efforts to identify the gender pronouns that individual students wish to use. Just these efforts alone can mean all the difference for students looking to have their perspectives validated. Beyond “safe spaces,” faculty or graduate students can organize conferences that include or feature discussions of LGBTQ issues or highlight the work of LGBTQ faculty.