LGBT Life in UK Higher Education: an ethnography of staff-student working relations

在世纪的英国，LGBT（女同性恋、男同性恋、双性恋、跨性别者）社区经历了许多影响日常生活的立法变化（2003年《地方政府法》、2013年《婚姻（同性伴侣）法》）。随着法律接受度的提高，人们假设LGBT人群的社会和职业生活也得到了改善，特别是在被视为进步的空间，如高等教育机构及其直接周边地区。我曾是苏塞克斯大学和金史密斯学院的LGBT志愿者，参与社区建设、政策制定和福利工作，这两所大学都以吸引LGBT学生而闻名。然而，志愿者和大学工作人员之间的关系往往以我们的沮丧为特征--这让我们感到沮丧的是--缺乏与大学管理层的学生倡议的互动，特别是当我们积极努力去接触大学的时候。这给学生志愿者留下了大量的日常工作，他们往往缺乏适当的培训或时间来做这件事。我将进行人种学研究，以探索高等教育机构在多大程度上宣传自己对LGBT友好，他们如何在自己的行为和政策中培养这一点，以及如何在大学工作人员和学生志愿者之间分配这方面的工作。我的目标是从批判性地理解新自由主义劳动分工对边缘化群体的影响（Rottenberg，2015; Ahmed，2004），并将其与大学和LGBT学生之间的工作关系的原始研究相结合。这项研究将概述哪些行动方针有利于大学和志愿者之间的工作关系，特别是在学生期望达到一定程度的LGBT友好的机构。高等教育机构的宣传材料在多大程度上使用LGBT友好作为营销工具？2.英国高等教育机构采取了哪些措施来加强其组织结构中的LGBT友好性？3. LGBT志愿者如何体验他们的教育机构对LGBT友好工作的支持（或缺乏支持）？4.这些发现对高等教育中LGBT友好的未来政策制定和实践有什么建议？研究目的：1.通过分析宣传材料和潜在LGBT学生期望之间的联系，本研究将有助于围绕教育营销及其对LGBT人群的影响的学术研究.通过对大学政策效应的探讨，本研究将为有效的、实质性的政策制定方法提供新的视角.通过分析高校工作人员与LGBT志愿者互动的成功与不足，本研究将深入了解高校工作人员与志愿者之间日常行为的实际变化，以优化工作关系。

In 21st century Britain, LGBT (lesbian, gay, bi, trans)communities have seen many legislative changes impactingday-to-day life (Local Government Act 2003, Marriage(Same-sex Couples) Act 2013). With an increased legalacceptance has come an assumption that social andprofessional aspects of life too have improved for LGBTpeople, particularly in spaces that are seen as progressive,like Higher Education (HE) institutions and their directlysurrounding areas. I have been an LGBT volunteer involvedwith community-building, policymaking, and wellbeing atSussex University and Goldsmiths College, both institutionswhich have a reputation for attracting LGBT students.However, relations between volunteers and university staffwere often characterized by our frustration at - what seemedto us - the lack of interaction with student initiatives fromuniversity management, especially when we made an activeeffort to reach out to the university. This left a lot of day-today work to student volunteers, who often lacked the trainingor time to do this properly.I will conduct ethnographic research to explore the extent towhich HE institutions promote themselves as LGBT-friendly,how they cultivate this in their own conduct and policy, andhow the work towards this is divided between paid universitystaff and student volunteers. I aim to work from a criticalunderstanding of the impact of neoliberal labour divisions onmarginalized groups (Rottenberg, 2015; Ahmed, 2004), andcombine this with original research on the working relationsbetween universities and LGBT students. This research willoutline which courses of action are beneficial to conductingworking relationships between universities and volunteers,particularly at institutions where students arrive expecting acertain level of LGBT-friendlinessResearch questions:1. To what extent does promotional material for HigherEducation institutions use LGBT-friendliness as a marketingtool?2. What measures do British institutions of Higher Educationput in place to enhance LGBT-friendliness within theirorganizational structures?3. How do LGBT volunteers experience the support (or lackthereof) from their institution of education with regards toworking towards LGBT-friendliness?4. What do these findings suggest for the future ofpolicymaking and practice around LGBT-friendliness in HigherEducation?Research objectives:1. Through analyzing the links between promotional materialand prospective LGBT student expectations, this study willcontribute to scholarship around the marketing of education,and its effects on LGBT people.2. By discussing the effects of university policy, this study willcontribute new insights into methodologies of efficient andmaterially relevant policymaking.3. By analyzing successes and shortcomings in interactionsbetween university staff and LGBT volunteers, this study willgive insight into practical changes that can be made ineveryday conduct between university staff and volunteers, tooptimize working relations.