The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.

Contemporary heterosexism includes both overt and subtle discrimination. Minority stress theory posits that heterosexism puts sexual minorities at risk for psychological distress and other negative outcomes. Research, however, tends to focus only on 1 form at a time, with minimal attention being given to subtle heterosexism. Further, little is known about the connection between minority stressors and underlying psychological mechanisms that might shape mental health outcomes. Among a convenience sample of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and queer (LGBQ) college students (n = 299), we investigated the role of blatant victimization and LGBQ microaggressions, both together and separately, on psychological distress and the mediating role of self-acceptance. We conducted structural equation modeling to examine hypothesized relationships. Heterosexism was measured as blatant victimization, interpersonal microaggressions, and environmental microaggressions. Self-acceptance included self-esteem and internalized LGBTQ pride. Anxiety and perceived stress comprised the psychological distress factor. Our results suggest that students with greater atypical gender expression experience, greater overall heterosexism and victimization, and younger students experience more overall heterosexism, and undergraduates report more victimization. Microaggressions, particularly environmental microaggressions, are more influential on overall heterosexism than blatant victimization. Overall heterosexism and microaggressions demonstrated main effects with self-acceptance and distress, whereas victimization did not. Self-acceptance mediated the path from discrimination to distress for both overall heterosexism and microaggressions. Our findings advance minority stress theory research by providing a nuanced understanding of the nature of contemporary discrimination and its consequences, as well as illuminating the important role self-acceptance plays as a mediator in the discrimination-psychological distress relationship.

A heterosexist campus climate can increase risk for mental health problems for sexual minority students; however, the relationship between campus climate for sexual minorities and academic outcomes remains understudied. Using a sample of sexual minority respondents extracted from a campus climate survey conducted at a large university in the Midwest, we examine relationships between multiple dimensions of psychological and experiential campus climate for sexual minorities with academic integration (academic disengagement, grade-point average [GPA]) and social integration (institutional satisfaction, acceptance on campus). We also investigate the protective role of engagement with informal academic and peer-group systems. Findings suggest campus climate affects sexual minority students' integration. In multivariate analyses, perceptions of whether lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) people could be open about their sexual identity was positively associated with acceptance on campus; personal heterosexist harassment was positively associated with academic disengagement and negatively with GPA. Students' informal academic integration (instructor relations) and informal social integration (LGB friends) demonstrated influential main effects but did not moderate any of the climate-outcome relationships. Researchers should further explore the relationships between climate and academic outcomes among sexual minority students, both collectively and among specific sub-groups, and address the role of other protective factors.

Research indicates that lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and questioning (LGBTQϩ) college students face a hostile campus climate. Despite the hostile campus climate, many LGBTQϩ students persist. Understanding what helps students persist is important to student affairs professionals as they develop data-driven interventions to improve the experiences and outcomes among LGBTQϩ college students. Drawing on 60 interviews conducted as a part of the mixed-methods National Study of LGBTQ Student Success, using an organizational perspective, this qualitative investigation explores the ways in which LGBTQϩ college students draw support from policies, programs, and services. We find that LGBTQϩ resource centers and student organizations are important sources of support for this population. LGBTQϩ college students indicated that policies, including nondiscrimination policies, serve important symbolic functions. Finally, we find that LGBTQϩ students describe the campus climate in positive, neutral, and negative terms. We offer implications for practice, including the continued need for LGBTQϩ services, the ability for students to self-organize, the importance of affirming policies, and the importance of supportive college environments. We also describe implications for future research.

Purpose Transgender and gender diverse (TGD) patients face significant hurdles in accessing affirming, knowledgeable care. Lack of provider knowledge presents a substantial barrier to both primary and transition‐related care and may deter patients from seeking health care. Little is known about factors that affect provider knowledge or whether exposure to TGD health content during training is associated with improved knowledge among providers. Using the TGD Healthcare Knowledge Scale, this study aimed to determine whether prior education on TGD health predicts clinicians’ current knowledge regarding health care for TGD patients. Methods An online survey examining exposure to TGD content and knowledge of TGD health care was distributed to all primary care providers in an integrated health care system in the Midwestern United States. Multivariable linear regression was used to predict provider knowledge, controlling for demographics, transphobia and other potential confounders. Results The response rate was 57.3% (n = 223). The mean knowledge score was 7.41 (SD = 1.31) on a 10‐point scale. Almost half (48.4%, n = 108) had no formal education on TGD health care, yet half (49.7%, n = 111) of providers reported previously caring for at least one transgender patient. In regression analysis, provider knowledge of TGD health care was associated with transphobia (β = −0.377, 95% CI = −0.559 to −0.194, p < 0.001), but not with hours of formal education (β = −0.027, 95% CI = −0.077 to 0.023, p = 0.292) or informal education (β = −0.012, 95% CI = −0.033 to 0.009, p = 0.259). Conclusions Increasing hours of education related to TGD health care may not be sufficient to improve providers’ competence in care for TGD individuals. Transphobia may be a barrier to learning that needs to be addressed. Broader efforts to address transphobia in society in general, and in medical education in particular, may be required to improve the quality of medical care for TGD patients.