The LGBT+ Campus Climate Survey

The LGBT+ Campus Climate Survey

In 2013 a small group of researchers were generously provided funding by the Equality and Diversity group at the University of Surrey to conduct the first ever LGBT+ (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Trans) Campus Climate research here at Surrey.

The research was the first in the country to consider both students and staff experiences of LGBT+ life at University. It also used a unique approach by not only asking both LGBT+ staff and students their experiences, but also asking people in significant positions at the University how they felt LGBT+ people accessed services.

Using this approach, Prof. Peter Hegarty, Dr Andrew King, Katherine Hubbard and Sebastian Bartos collected data from a whole range of people at the University with the aim to gauge what life is like for LGBT+ people on campus.

The following represents a summary version of the report developed by the researchers.

The LGBT+ community at Surrey

From the survey of LGBT+ staff and students we had undergraduates, postgraduates, academic staff and non-academic staff all represented in the responses. Of those who filled out the survey 41 were women, 38 were men and 4 were gender queer, of these people 72 said this was the gender they were assigned at birth and 11 said it was not. In total there were 44 lesbian or gay people, 28 bisexual people, 6 straight people, 2 asexual people and 3 people responded that they did not know their sexuality. The majority of respondents were White, with only 12 respondents being mixed race, Asian, Black and South Asian. Again, the vast majority of respondents were non-religious, 13 were Christian, 3 were Buddhist, and 1 was Pagan, no respondents were Muslim, Hindu, Confucian or Jewish. Most of the respondents did not say they had a disability and 11 said they did (including dyslexia, dyspraxia and ‘other’).

In addition we also asked the ‘key informants’, those with significant positions at the University, whether they were familiar with LGBT+ staff and students. In total, 92% said they knew lesbian staff and 58% said they knew lesbian students; 83% said they knew gay staff and 67% knew gay student; 17% knew bisexual staff and students; and 25% knew trans staff and 42% knew trans students. 17% also reported knowing staff and students who are not located within the LGBT acronym but represent other gender and sexuality groups. LGBT+ people therefore make up a significant part of the staff and student population here at Surrey and there was no key informant who knew no LGBT+ people.

Key findings

Having conducted analysis on the LGBT+ staff and student survey as well as the responses from key informants we uncovered the following key findings:

1. Overall diversity and equality is valued at Surrey. An ethos of inclusion is often promoted and explicit forms of prejudice or discrimination are rare. Many respondents viewed Surrey as an environment which supported equal treatment of everyone and somewhere they felt ‘at home’. There was a great deal of support of LGBT+ specific events from the respondents. Events which fostered a sense of community and allowed LGBT+ people to meet other LGBT+ people were considered very positive. Several people requested that there were more events which occurred throughout the year and there was the suggestion that events become more diverse. For example, some were critical that many activities surrounded drinking activities.

1. There is a culture of heteronormativity (the assumption that everyone is heterosexual unless they state otherwise) and cisgenderism (the assumption everyone identifies with the gender they were assigned at birth) at Surrey. This was noted by both LGBT+ staff, students and key informants, and often a lack of ‘training’ of ‘LGBT knowledge’ was evidenced for this. Such visibility problems and assumptions which are often applied to groups of people with little thought and can have profound impact on LGBT+ individuals. Also although reports of physical violence and discrimination were very low, many LGBT routinely reported hearing homophobic and biphobic language. The use of ‘gay’ being used in a derogatory way or people shouting at couples on campus were reportes. Indeed, though the excuse of ‘banter’ or joking was commonly cited, the impact was harmful to LGBT+ individuals. And such language only reinforces the heteronormative and cisgenderist culture of Surrey.

1. Several participants noted how Universities are often places where people develop identities and understandings about their gender and sexuality. The University’s institutional mission regarding education fit well with the aims of creating an inclusive environment for everyone. Several LGBT+ respondents also said how their identities and experiences have allowed them to understand other forms of oppression and difference.

1. For a number of reasons some areas of campus were considered safer than others for LGBT+ people. Perhaps unsurprisingly areas which were considered safe were those which were explicitly LGBT+ friendly including LGBT events. Tease, the LGBT club night at Rubix, was regularly mentioned as a safe place as was people’s individual offices. Places which were not considered safe were often the same geographical locations but at different times, for example, Rubix (on non-Tease nights), after dark or badly lit areas of campus and where people had most likely been drinking alcohol. These findings suggested that LGBT+ students do not enjoy equal access to certain activities at Surrey, for example, Tease was deemed safe but a couple of homophobic occurrences were cited as reasons to be concerned about leaving the club night. In fact, an overarching finding which ran through many responses from LGBT+ staff and students was that they did not engage with the University as much as they could due to an anticipation of experiencing prejudice. Some participants said they felt safest behind closed doors on campus and a few referenced how they would never consider holding their partners hand on campus for fear of it being received negatively.

1. While many respondents and key informants referred to specific LGBT+ events and groups on campus there remained an absence of awareness about the ‘B’ and the ‘T’ in the acronym. Several respondents noted the lack of attention paid to bisexual and trans people and issues on campus. In the survey incidences of biphobic and transphobic language was evidenced and some participants made it clear that this was also evidenced within the LGBT+ society on campus. Indeed our key informants were much less likely to know bisexual and trans members of staff and students than lesbian and gay staff and students.

1. Finally, throughout responses to both parts of the study, there was a call from many participants for leadership in relation to LGBT+ initiatives on campus. Many key informants and staff members (both academic and non-academic) felt uncertain about where and who they could turn to in the event of an LGBT issue arising while at work. Many people called for more visible and stronger support from senior management and again called for diverse events and activities to engage all LGBT+ people at Surrey.

Recommendations for change

There is a need for the University to visibly signal that LGBT+ staff and students are valued part of campus life. The University should indicate how it would like to know of any homophobic, biphobic and transphobic events and follow these up with committed support from senior management.

There is a need for staff training for those who would like to move forward with initiatives but are unsure of how to do so. This can include training on being aware of heteronormative and cisgenderist cultures and knowing who to go to in the event of not being certain how to best deal with a situation.

Specific attention is needed in relation to the intersections of LGBT+ communities and faith communities. Only a small minority of our respondents reported being religious, in fact several people shared concerns regarding other people’s reactions to their sexuality in relation to differing religious and cultural beliefs.

Tease was considered a central event for LGBT+ people at Surrey and so should be maintained and made more secure. It may be necessary for some areas of the University to recognise the importance of the event and assist in developing the security and accessibility of the event.

LGBT+ events at Surrey should be supported and promoted at the University. Events should be more regular and diverse in order to welcome a wider more diverse range of people and to encourage LGBT+ community on campus.

The students Union, as well as other areas of the University, should develop more all gender toilets to further accommodate and welcome trans people on campus. There should be more awareness regarding all gender toilets already on campus and members of the University should be made aware of the policy which states: ‘All Staff and Students will have access to all necessary facilities of the gender with which they identify. Asking a person to use disabled facilities is an unacceptable way of administering a service to the specific needs of a trans person.’

The University should celebrate excellent work on LGBT+ issues on campus. This could be as part of the excellence agenda in teaching, learning and research. Profiling LGBT+ role models on the website would actively communicate how LGBT+ people and research are valued here at Surrey.

Steps to be taken to consult further with LGBT+ communities on campus. At present the campus climate suggests LGBT+ people on campus are not supportive of efforts to monitor people’s sexuality (as recommended by Stonewall). This report indicates that such an effort would generate fear and non-responsiveness of the very community it is trying to represent. Therefore in order to do this at a later date further active engagement by the University is necessary.

Who to contact

If you would like any more information about the LGBT+ campus climate project please email the researchers:

Peter Hegarty

Andrew King

Katherine Hubbard

Sebastian

Or if you have any comments, concerns, complaints or questions about LGBT+ issues on campus you can also contact the following people.

Angie Cousins – Head of Equality and Diversity

Peter Brinkley – Head of Security

Diane Watt – Chair of the LGBT Equality Group

Phil Powrie – LGBT champion

Resources:

Stonewall Scotland LGBT Communications guide:

Stonewall Workplace guides: