Sexual violence is a substantial problem on college campuses, particularly for undergraduate women who consistently report higher rates of nonconsensual sexual contact and sexual harassment during their college careers when compared to the general student population. A wide range of mental and behavioral health concerns are associated with sexual violence, such as depression, posttraumatic stress disorder, problem drinking, and missing school. A notable gap in the current campus sexual violence literature is its exclusion of chronic gender-based slights and invalidations known as gender microaggressions. Gender microaggressions are defined as intentional and unintentional slights, insults, and invalidations based on gender and most frequently targeting women.

Presently, we lack basic information on the types, frequency, location, and impact of gender microaggressions on college campuses. This dearth of information leaves policy makers, administrators, educators, and researchers ill equipped to confront the causes of campus sexual violence. To address these gaps, this project asks the following research questions: (1) What are the types of gender microaggressions experienced by undergraduate women? (2) What are the past year frequencies of gender microaggressions, sexual harassment, and sexual assault for undergraduate women? (3) Where do gender microaggressions, sexual harassment, and sexual assault occur most frequently for undergraduate women? (4) What is the association between gender microaggressions and mental and behavioral health?

Three studies were executed to answer these questions. First, a qualitative focus group study (N = 23) with UCB undergraduate women was conducted and directed content analysis employed to examine gender microaggressions themes. Second, a cross-sectional measure design and validation study (N = 220) was conducted, implementing exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and bivariate correlations to take the first steps in validating a gender microaggressions measure for undergraduate women. Third, a cross-sectional quantitative study (N = 220) was carried out to examine gender microaggressions’ frequency, location, and correlates. This study began by employing chi-square tests and logistic regression to examine differences in microaggressions, sexual harassment, and sexual assault frequency by race and sexual orientation. The study then used descriptive percentages to explore locations where gender microaggressions, sexual harassment and sexual assault occur. Finally, multiple linear and logistic regressions were used to identify relationships between gender microaggressions and mental and behavioral health variables when controlling for sexual harassment and sexual assault.

For Research Question 1, the qualitative study identified four undergraduate gender microaggressions themes: (1) Assumption of Traditional Gender Roles, (2) Presumed Incompetence (3) Environmental Invalidations, and (4) Sexual Objectification. Important developmentally and contextually specific sub-themes emerged, adding nuance and specificity to the taxonomy for undergraduate women. Three sub-themes were noted under Assumption of Traditional Gender Roles: (1) Caretaker/Nurturer, (2) Women Dominated Occupations, and (3) Weak/“Damsel in Distress.” In addition, Male Dominance emerged as a sub-theme of Presumed Incompetence and University/Infrastructure Invalidations emerged as a sub-theme of Environmental Invalidations. The project employed a measure design process and used EFA to identify the measure’s latent factor structure. The Undergraduate Gender Microaggressions Scale (UGMS) emerged with 18-items and four factors. The factors were (a) Presumed Incompetent (Factor 1 – 8 items), being treated like you do not understand or do not have the capacity to make a substantial contribution; (b) Gender Role Stereotypes (Factor 2 – 4 items), being expected to serve as caretaker or take on administrative roles; (3) Male Dominance (Factor 3 – 4 items), experiencing situation in which men are expected to hold power or serve as the point of reference and women are inferior; and (d) Institutional Invalidations (Factor 4 – 2 items).

For Research Question 2, the frequencies of gender microaggressions, sexual harassment, and sexual assault were examined. Gender microaggressions were ubiquitous, with nearly every participant (99.6%) experiencing at least one form of gender microaggressions. The majority of the sample (87.3%) experienced sexual harassment, with sexual assault experienced less frequently (37.7%). When examining difference in frequency across race and sexual orientation, Asian undergraduate women had lower odds of upper quartile gender microaggressions, sexual harassment, and sexual assault scores. No other significant differences were noted by race or sexual orientation.

Research Question 3 was exploratory and examined the locations where gender microaggressions, sexual harassment, and sexual assault occurred on campus. Gender microaggressions were most likely to occur in classrooms and lecture halls, campus grounds, and on social media while sexual harassment was most likely to occur on campus grounds, in classroom and lecture halls and at fraternity and sororities. Sexual assault was a less frequent experience but was most reported in off campus housing and fraternity and sororities.

For Research Question 4, gender microaggressions had a significant positive relationship to depression, stress, and posttraumatic stress symptoms when controlling for sexual harassment, sexual assault and relevant demographic variables. Gender microaggressions were also positively related to school avoidance and alcohol use when controlling for sexual harassment, sexual assault, and relevant demographic variables.

This dissertation sought to more clearly operationalize and measure sexual violence and gender discrimination within college communities. The refinement of a context (i.e., college campus) and developmentally specific (i.e., undergraduate) gender microaggressions measure is the first step to understand the role of subtle gender discrimination in both sustaining sexually violent cultures and as antecedents to legally actionable sexual offenses for adolescents and emerging adults. Increasing knowledge of gender microaggressions’ prevalence and location has the potential to elevate awareness among administrators, funders, practitioner, and students. Disrupting gender microaggressive climates holds the possibility of improving undergraduate women’s mental health while also creating more positive environments for women to engage fully with the university resources designed to support their success.

Background: Research on the wellbeing and resilience of LGBTQ+ people including sexual minority women (SMW; whose who identify as women and have a sexual orientation other than heterosexual) is currently of paramount importance given recent challenges spurred by the global COVID-19 pandemic, increased social and political polarization around race, gender, and sexuality, and rising anti-LGBTQ+ rhetoric and policies in the USA. Even prior to these contemporary stressors, SMW have experienced about twice the rates of depression, anxiety, and alcohol use disorder compared to heterosexual women, and there is concern that the pandemic may have exacerbated these disparities. Given SMW’s elevated pre-pandemic health concerns, there is a need to clearly characterize how SMW enact resilience, receive the support needed to stay well, and maintain wellbeing in this rapidly changing, stressful world.

Methods: The present study examines these topics though a series of three inter-related research manuscripts that build on each other. First is a quantitative analysis of the protective nature of resilience against depression, anxiety, and alcohol use disorder in a racially diverse sample of SMW (N=520) reported in a quantitative public health-style analysis. The second examines the relationship between resilience and a key factor underlying it – social support –using intersectional quantitative methods to determine the most protective types of social support and to elucidate potential within-SMW differences by race, sexual orientation, and their intersections. Lastly, these research foci were applied to the current social context using qualitative phenomenological methodology to characterize shifts in social support, and mental and behavioral health for a sub-set of SMW (n=17) at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Results: Higher levels of resilience were associated with lower adjusted odds of depression, anxiety, and alcohol use disorder. SMW who were older and those with higher household income reported the highest levels of resilience. When considering the role of social support in resilience, higher levels of social support were associated with higher levels of resilience, which was consistent across SMW of all demographics. Few within-group differences in this relationship were found by race, sexual orientation, and their intersections. Social support from family, friends, significant others, and especially the LGBTQ+ community were each predictive of greater resilience. Participant interviews shed further light on how changes in social support occurred in at the pandemic’s onset and were at times related to changes in mental and behavioral health.

Implications: This work has implications for social work practice, intervention research, and policy advocacy. Since resilience and social support appear protective against the most common mental and behavioral health concerns in SMW, multi-level interventions that increase access to social support and strengthen resources for resilience are needed, as they have the potential to ameliorate persistent health disparities. This could include individual, couple, family, or group therapy; peer support; and case management tailored to SMW’s specific life experiences and needs. Interventions drawing on social ecological and strengths-based approaches that consider how individual-level outcomes are impacted by broader societal factors like sexism, heterosexism, and racism are needed. Policy advocacy is also needed to ensure that LGBTQ+ community spaces and organizations, which facilitate access to protective LGBTQ+ support, can remain open and financially viable ongoing.

Transgender and nonbinary young people experience some of the highest rates of violence of any group of young people. Violence is associated with a host of health concerns, including depression, anxiety, and suicidality. Gender minority stress theory describes increased risks for mental health concerns when experiencing violence targeting a person’s gender identity. Transgender and nonbinary young people experience high rates of child maltreatment, bullying, physical violence, sexual violence, and polyvictimization. Subsequently, transgender and nonbinary young people experience high rates of depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress, homelessness, lack of access to healthcare, and lack of social support.

While the research literature is clear that transgender and nonbinary young people experience these high rates of violence and poor health outcomes, there are little data on when these disparities emerge in the lives of transgender young people. Research shows that by the time transgender and nonbinary people reach adulthood they have experienced disparities and will likely continue to experience disparities in violence and health as transgender and nonbinary adults, but violence prevention efforts are stymied without a clearer understanding of the developmental timing of violence experienced by trans and nonbinary young people.

Further, the extant literature on childhood and adolescent gender development suggests there are gendered differences in experiences of violence and health, but ongoing and historical approaches to child and adolescent development have perpetuated and reinforced scientific paradigms that explicitly frame transgender identity as pathological and non-normative, fundamentally excluding transgender and nonbinary children and adolescents from a scientific understanding of their development. This disregard has led to a dearth of data on the lived experiences of transgender and nonbinary children and adolescents, limiting any efforts toward improving their health and wellbeing.

In order to address these gaps, this study asks the following questions: 1) How do transgender and nonbinary young people experience gender development during childhood, adolescence, and young adulthood? 2) What types of violence and sources of violence target transgender and nonbinary young people during childhood, adolescence, and young adulthood? 3) How does the social ecology, including social institutions and the agents of those institutions, interact with gender development or violence for transgender and nonbinary young people during childhood, adolescence, and young adulthood; and how do these social-ecological interactions contribute to risk or protective factors for violence, health, and safety?

This qualitative study used a life history timeline (LHT) approach to collect lifecourse data on the experiences of violence and gender development during childhood, adolescence, and young adulthood with a geographically diverse sample of transgender and nonbinary young adults (N = 22; ages = 18-29 y/o). Qualitative, life history interviews were conducted on Zoom, using Zoom’s whiteboard function to construct the life history timeline. The transcripts were coded using an abductive constructivist grounded theory method to identify codes that emerged during the grounded theory coding process and a priori codes based on study aims and existing literature on gender identity and violence (Timmermans & Tavory, 2012). The domains included in the lifecourse interview were: landmarks (e.g., birthdays, academic milestones, prominent life transitions), gender development (e.g., gender awareness, gender identity, coming out, gender performance), violence (e.g., general polyvictimization domains), and social ecological features (e.g., cultural and political climate, family, peers, community features). A total of 22 transgender and nonbinary young people ages 18-29 were interviewed for the study. Abductive constructivist grounded theory analysis revealed key themes to answer the research questions.

Participants described gender development occurring in three stages: childhood, adolescence, and young adulthood. The gender development that took place during these stages was different for trans binary participants compared with nonbinary participants. For the most part, trans binary participants understood and expressed their authentic gender during childhood, sometimes coming out explicitly to their families. Nonbinary participants did not feel a strong alignment with gender during childhood. During adolescence, trans binary participants took steps to more fully live in their authentic gender, even when those steps were to prepare for independence and adulthood. Nonbinary participants explored their gender during this time, which often coincided with exploring their sexual identity. During young adulthood, trans binary participants enacted steps to fully live in their authentic gender. Nonbinary participants identified with their authentic gender, usually after connecting with trans community and discovering the language of a nonbinary gender.

Violence described by participants was primarily perpetrated by parents and other adult authority figures. Violence was predominantly motivated by gender role enforcement, in which perpetrators acted violently in order to correct, control, or punish gender performance that did not align with binary gender expectations. Anticipatory violence was described as violence that acted in anticipation, usually paired with gender role enforcement, of future forms of violence; such as enacting gender role enforcement in order to prevent future violence from bullies or other perpetrators who would act violently against gender role violations. A transmorphology of violence was revealed by participants, articulating a process by which the violence targeting transgender and nonbinary people changes over time in response to transitions on the part of young people (e.g., trans women experiencing increasing rates of misogynistic environmental sexual harassment as they transitioned more visibly into performing feminine gender). Social connections and affirmation were highlighted as the primary sources of information and safety for transgender and nonbinary youth during adolescence and young adulthood.

This study articulates the gender development processes, experiences of violence, and social-environmental interactions for transgender and nonbinary young people during childhood, adolescence, and young adulthood. The refinement of the developmental timing of gender and violence along with the understanding of how gender role enforcement operates across their development provides further background for violence prevention efforts. Binary gender assumptions that are socialized onto young people from birth hold valence in how children are expected to behave, and enforcing sex-deterministic binary gender onto children, especially transgender children, can have enormous implications for their experiences of violence and mental, physical, and social health. By providing gender-affirming care and social support, we can improve safety and prevent future violence against transgender and nonbinary young people.