Dismantling Ableism Survey: Experiences of those Identifying with Systemically Marginalized Sexualities

Introduction

The Dismantling Ableism: Institutional Action and Accountability survey (DAS) was administered in November-December 2023 to University of Manitoba students, faculty, and staff who self-identified as disabled or as having chronic health conditions.1,2 

Disability is not a singular experience, nor are disabled people a homogeneous group. People encounter different barriers and forms of ableism. Moreover, two people with similar impairments will also experience disability differently as personality, circumstance, privilege, and intersectional identities contribute toward their complex identity. 

“Experiences of inequities are particular to the type of chronic health issues [or] disability. When paired with intersectional issues such as race, class, etc., these inequities become more pervasive.” 

This results report is one in a series highlighting student, staff, and faculty experiences of ableism and inaccessibility at UM. It is intended to diversify understandings of ableism in academia through the presentation of disaggregated results that indicate differences among those who may share one or more broad socio-demographic characteristics such as Indigenous, racialized, or disability identities, gender, or sexuality.3 We emphasize disaggregated data to acknowledge intersectional marginalization to decenter Whiteness, colonialism, patriarchy, heteronormativity, and cisnormativity within anti-ableism action. 

Comparing the experiences of intersectionally marginalized groups is not intended to set these groups in competition with one another or to focus only on barriers and the ways in which they are “disadvantaged”, rather than their agency and vast array of achievements and skills. Rather, disaggregated analysis emphasizes experiences and voices that are often overlooked to pinpoint the concrete actions that will have the most widespread positive impacts on the entire UM community.

Language

The DAS used identity-first language (disabled persons) rather than person-first language (persons with disabilities) to acknowledge the disabling effect of social, environmental, and institutional barriers which hinder disabled individuals’ full participation in society, including university life.4

Similarly, the survey also used the term “chronic health conditions”, broadly defined as any condition, including mental health conditions, that is continuing or that occurs again and again over a long period of time, which in interaction with various barriers, may hinder full and effective participation in society on an equal basis with others.5

Positionality

Researchers bring their experiences, identities, and biases to their work. The DAS team members identify with various systemically marginalized identities, including disability and chronic health-related identities. These lived experiences are assets, but we recognize that our personal intersections of privilege also influence our work. Our commitment to research quality includes an openness to concerns and criticisms. Please feel free to send feedback on the DAS results to the Office of Equity Transformation at Equity@umanitoba.ca.

Footnotes

1. The survey was funded by the Robbins-Ollivier Award for Excellence in Equity.
2. The final sample size for the DAS, after data cleaning, is 544.
3. For example, do those who identify with cognitive disabilities feel more or less safe at UM than those identifying with physical or sensory disabilities? Do those who identify as disabled and as either bisexual or pansexual encounter more ableist microaggressions than their heterosexual counterparts?
4. Language choices were explained in the survey introduction; nevertheless, the DAS project team respects that members of disability and chronic health communities have diverse language preferences, including person with a disability, chronically ill, and episodic disability, for example. The team is grateful for all of the feedback we received regarding language and it will inform our work going forward.
5. Adapted from Bernell, S., & Howard, S. W. (2016). Use your words carefully: What is a chronic disease? Frontiers in Public Health, 4, 159. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2016.00159 and the United Nations.

Report content

This summary explores the intersection of sexualities and experiences of ableism. We strive to highlight the experiences of two groups: bisexual or pansexual respondents, and respondents identifying with additional minoritized sexualities. 

Methodological note

The sexualities question on the DAS invited respondents to select all the sexualities that apply to them. To conduct statistical comparisons, the sexualities variable was recoded into three categories – heterosexual, bisexual or pansexual, and additional minoritized sexualities. Overall, 23% of the DAS sample identifies as bisexual or pansexual, which enabled us to make bisexual or pansexual its own category for statistical comparison. Accordingly, for the purpose of this report, “additional minoritized sexualities” refers specifically to respondents who identify with non-bisexual or pansexual minoritized identities such as gay, lesbian, queer, Two Spirit, and asexual, etc. 

This artificial re-grouping does not necessarily mean respondents only selected a sexuality corresponding with the category of the same name. It is possible that respondents who selected an “additional minoritized sexualities” (e.g., queer) also selected another sexuality, such as bisexual, for example6.

Accordingly, respondents in the additional minoritized sexualities group identify with at least one non-bisexual or pansexual minoritized sexuality. Because some overlap between the three categories remains, the statistical results should only be considered one piece of evidence describing differences in the experiences of heterosexual, bisexual or pansexual, and additional minoritized sexuality respondents. 

Footnotes

6. Because the variable has a "select all that apply" format, the possibility cannot be fully ruled out.

Sexualities

The DAS sample is characterized by considerable sexual diversity, particularly amongst students.

  • 23% of the sample identifies as bisexual or pansexual (30% of students, 19% of staff, and 11% of faculty)
  • 14% identifies as queer (17% of students, 11% of staff, and 14% of faculty)
  • 8% identifies as asexual (9% of students and 6% of faculty and staff)
  • 4% identifies as lesbian
  • 3% identifies as gay
  • Respondents specified many additional diverse sexualities, but low case counts prohibit more detailed reporting
  • 51% identifies as heterosexual (42% of students, 58% of staff, and 64% of faculty)

Descriptives and intersecting marginalized identities

Most bisexual or pansexual respondents in the DAS sample: 

  • Are aged 25-44 (59%) 
  • Identify as having chronic health condition(s) (63%) 
  • Identify with cognitive disabilities and chronic health conditions (62%), significantly more than heterosexual respondents7 (36%) 
  • Indicate their disabilities or chronic health conditions are sometimes noticeable to others (53%) 
  • Are more likely to identify with non-woman and non-man genders than heterosexual respondents8 
  • Participate in work or studies at UM mostly or fully in-person (about 53%) in contrast to a mix of both in-person and remote (about 33%), and mostly or fully remote (13%) 

Most respondents identifying with additional minoritized sexualities in the DAS sample: 

  • Are aged 25-44 (45%) 
  • Identify as having chronic health condition(s) (53%) 
  • Identify with cognitive disabilities and chronic health conditions (61%), significantly more than heterosexual respondents9 (36%) 
  • Indicate their disabilities or chronic health conditions are sometimes noticeable to others (53%) 
  • Are more likely to identify with non-woman and non-man genders than heterosexual respondents10

Footnotes

7. X2 (4, 496) = 32, p =<.001, V = 0.18
8. X2 (4, 503) = 127.6, p =<.001, V = 0.36 
9. X2 (4, 496) = 32, p =<.001, V = 0.18
10. X2 (4, 503) = 127.6, p =<.001, V = 0.36

Experiences at UM

Compared to heterosexual respondents, bisexual, pansexual, and additional marginalized sexuality respondents: 

  • Are less satisfied with their level of current participation at UM11
  • Perceive UM to be less engaged with efforts to dismantle ableism12
  • More often experience institutional barriers (e.g., getting to campus, getting around campus, and accessing appropriate work or study spaces)13 
  • Perceive their primary campus to be less safe for themselves (personally)14
  • Perceive their primary campus to be less safe for disabled people in general15 
  • Perceive more additional costs associated with disability and chronic health identities (report they do more unpaid labour, specifically)16 
  • Experience more in-person ableist microaggressions17 
  • Experience more in-person exclusion, incivility, and harassment18 
  • Report more emotional exhaustion19

Footnotes

11. F (2, 504) = 10.1, p =<.001, η2 = 0.04
12. F (2, 481) = 7.5, p =<.001, η2 = 0.03
13. F (2, 493) = 7.1, p =<.001, η2 = 0.03
14. F (2, 493) = 7.1, p =<.001, η2 = 0.03
15. F (2, 465) = 11.7, p =<.001, η2 = 0.05
16. X2 (4, 478) = 33.8, p =<.001, V = 0.19
17. F (2, 482) = 6.0, p =<.01, η2 = 0.02
18. F (2, 481) = 7.1, p =<.001, η = 0.03
19. F (2, 505) = 6.5, p =<.01, η2 = 0.03

Dismantling Ableism Survey (DAS) Keep reading

Download the full Dismantling Ableism Survey report (PDF)