The LGBQ Social Climate Matters: Policies, Protests, and Placards and Psychological Well-Being Among LGBQ Emerging Adults

Abstract

Sexual minority youth, including emerging adults, are at risk for negative health outcomes. Minority stress theory posits that heterosexism can contribute to these outcomes among sexual minorities. Researchers have tested this theory with respect to interpersonal heterosexism; however, little attention has been given to macrolevel and environmental forms of heterosexism, especially among lesbian, gay, bisexual, and queer (LGBQ) youth. In this study, we examine the role of objective social climate (LGB state-level policies) and experiential distal and proximal environmental microaggressions on the psychological well-being of LGBQ emerging adults. Furthermore, we examine the role of LGBQ identity salience as a moderating factor on the macro/environmental-heterosexism and well-being relationship. Multivariable linear regression results suggest that living in a state without same-sex marriage laws is associated with greater self-esteem, whereas both distal and proximal environmental microaggressions are risk factors for anxiety and perceived stress. Furthermore, identity salience can ameliorate the effects of distal microaggressions and intensify the effects of proximal microaggressions and same-sex marriage legislation. Implications for practice with sexual minority youth are discussed.

Resilience in LGB Youths: A Systematic Review of Protection Mechanisms

“…At the legislative level, the access to same-sex marriage (variable deduced from the state where the college students lived in the USA) and the protection of LGBT at work did not predict anxiety levels and perceived stress (Woodford et al, 2015b). The access to marriage, however, is a significant predictor of self-esteem and, against expectations, the results indicate that participants who live in states with equalitarian legislation manifest lower self-esteem.…”

“…Almost half of the studies were conducted in the United States of America (Kaysen et al, 2014;Pearson & Wilkinson, 2013;Walker & LongmireAvital, 2013;Woodford et al, 2015a;2015b;, although other geographical origins were also represented: United Kingdom (Rivers & Cowie, 2006), Austria (Ploderl et al, 2010), Canada (Benibgui, 2011), The Netherlands (Baams et al, 2014), Brazil (Dunn et al, 2014) and South Africa (Sandfort et al, 2015). Two studies present data from samples that a part of the participants are the same (Woodford et al, 2015b;. Most studies adopt a cross-sectional design, except for one (Pearson & Wilkinson, 2013), in which the data used were collected with a one-year interval.…”

“…Concerning the specific personal protection mechanisms, three studies focused on aspects related to the LGB identity: identification with the LGB community (Sandfort et al, 2015), LGB pride (Woodford et al, 2014), salience of LGB identity (Woodford et al, 2015b), the use of coping strategies related to the sexual orientation (Kaysen et al, 2014) and the tendency to coming-out or omit one's sexual orientation (Dunn et al, 2014;Sandfort et al, 2015). The identification with the LGB community was neither associated, with nor did it predict, depression and anxiety (Sandfort et al, 2015).…”

“…Having a salient LGBQ identity (medium and high scores) annulled the negative impact of microaggressions from the distal environment but led to greater anxiety in the face of proximal environmental microaggressions (Woodford et al, 2015b). In addition, the salience of the LGBQ identity was positively correlated with self-esteem, despite not being a significant predictor.…”

“…All the contextual protection mechanisms reported in the selected studies are specific to sexual orientation, namely the recognition of the diversity of sexual orientation in the school context (Ploderl at al., 2010), the perceived attitudes of support for LGB people (Woodford et al, 2015a), the equalitarian legislation regarding marriage, the protection of LGBT people on the job (Woodford et al, 2015b). The recognition of the diversity in the sexual orientation in the school context was assessed through different items, such as: the interventions of teachers against homophobia, the presence of colleagues, teachers and other technicians that participants could talk to about sexual orientation, the presence of books or leaflets about homosexuality, or the integration of sexual orientation in the classroom by teachers or by LGB adult speakers.…”