Increasing LGBTQ+ resilience on and offcampus: key results
Emily Rank, Christopher Hewitt, and Ketan Shankardass
KEY DEFINITIONS
Resilience planning is a process that communities may take to discuss and implement ways to benefit their neighbourhood such as improving the resilience for LGBTQ+ students around Laurier’s neighbourhood.
Resilience is the ability to adapt in the face of adversity, indicating successful coping.
Resources describe something available in the environment used to increase resilience They can buffer negative impacts of stressors and may be highly individualized to people of unique social positions
Participatory mapping is an approach to resilience planning and involves the creation of maps by local communities through collective knowledge and priorities.
OBJECTIVES
This planning study aims to investigate places within Wilfrid Laurier University’s Waterloo campus neighborhood that elicit stress or support for LGBTQ+ students for the purpose of contributing to a more resilient environment for current and future students
In this study, these objectives were met by: (1) conducting an environmental scan about the resilience of this community at Laurier; (2) reviewing data from research participants about places in the campus neighbourhood; and (3) strategic discussions about improving resilience in Laurier’s neighbourhood
WHY YOU?
Key actors are people or organizations in the community who have a key interest or a position of power on relevant issues
Whether you are a Laurier student, faculty or staff member, organization leader, or a community member of this area; this information is relevant to learning what the community can do to increase our resilience, specifically for LGBTQ+ folks
PLACE REPORT: KEY RESULTS
DEMOGRAPHICS RESULTS
14 LGBTQ+ students at Laurier’s Waterloo campus participated in the study (Table 1)
Table 1. Participant Demographics
66 Place Reports were submitted by participants over a two-week period Participants select places in Laurier’s neighbourhood and rated them on a scale (1-5) vis a vis stress and support experiences at the places The most common rating combination was low stress and high support (258%) (Figure 1)
Figure 1. Cross-tabulation of support and stress ratings per place report (n=66)
QUALITATIVE RESULTS
Places identified by participants reflected a range of uses
Almost 50% the places were education-related
Over 25% of places were food or social-related
Other categories included health, housing, passing by, shopping, and nature
Participants also included reasons for rating the place as either stressful or supportive
Inclusivity and welcomeness was the most prominent theme, noted in over 50% of reports
Crowdedness and loudness were attributed to over 25% of reports
Other categories included education, social, safety/discrimination, health, accessibility, food, and financial
PLACE REPORT: KEY RESULTS
Over 60% of places were located within Laurier’s campus boundaries.
RESILIENCE PLANNING: KEY RESULTS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
EDUCATION-RELATED SPACES
The most identified places were educationrelated, which may reflect what participants mainly spend their time doing while enrolled at Laurier
Students noted school work in general to be stressful, especially in crowded/loud study areas
The University has a role to play in ensuring there are enough quiet study spaces on campus.
HEALTH AND WELLNESS
Participants noted the Wellness Centre as an inclusive space with supportive healthcare professionals
Areas of stress in the centre included lack of accessibility for sexual health services like STI testing and free condoms; high wait times; and difficulty booking appointments
There is a need for more structured healthcare services, which could include an accessible platform for booking appointments, viewing current hours and services, and accessing resources.
SINGLE-STALL WASHROOMS
Gender-segregated washrooms force people to choose between the binary, causing discomfort and confusion
The Athletics Complex was reported to have no easily accessible single-person washrooms and no lockers accessible outside the changerooms Participants noted ‘teasing’ and ‘roughhousing’ specifically in these changerooms.
It is suggested that Laurier expands the equitable washroom project to build genderneutral, single stall washrooms in all facilities with clear postings.
DISCRIMINATORY EVENTS
There were some reports of discriminatory events around and on Laurier’s campus with one key area of interest being residence buildings
There is a need for stronger training activities to communicate community expectations about discriminatory behavior to incoming students The resilience meeting participants stated that Orientation Week (O-week) is a potential event where students could learn about consent and respect for others.
LAURIER’S RAINBOW CENTRE
Social connection and inclusivity were very important reasons to rate a place as supportive (i.e., queer-friendly events and spaces).
It was surprising to note that The Rainbow Centre had only 1 report (which did state the centre was supportive). Potential reasons could be the lack of a stable location, events and marketing, staffing, and funding.
The resilience planning meeting suggested that the Rainbow Centre could act as a primary point of contact for visibility days, reporting discrimination, support systems, social events, and sexual health resources to make these services accessible to LGBTQ+ students.