Complex Dynamics: Disability, Assistive Technology, and the LGBTQIA+ Community Center Experience in the United States
Kirk Andrew Crawford, Katta Spiel, Foad Hamidi · 2023 · Proceedings of the 25th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (ASSETS 2023) · doi:10.1145/3597638.3608401
Summary
This paper explores the experiences of LGBTQIA+ individuals with disabilities in community centers in the United States, focusing on the role of assistive technology (AT) in these spaces. The researchers conducted 11 semi-structured interviews (60-90 minutes each, conducted virtually between November 2022 and January 2023) with participants who identified as both LGBTQIA+ and having disabilities. The study was guided by three research questions: how individuals navigate intersecting identities in community centers, how social connections impact AT use, and how community center norms and structures influence AT use. Participants were recruited through collaboration with LGBTQIA+ community centers and social media platforms, and represented diverse backgrounds — 9 of 11 identified as African-American/Black, with disabilities including vision, hearing, mobility, cognitive, and self-care difficulties. The study draws on the concept of self-determination as foundational to LGBTQIA+ identity and a relational model of disability, viewing both identities as multifaceted and context-dependent. Data was analyzed using Braun and Clarke's constructivist thematic analysis approach, with the research team explicitly addressing positionality and reflexivity throughout the process.
Key findings
Four major themes emerged from the analysis. First, participants viewed LGBTQIA+ community centers as sanctuaries for self-expression and surrogate families, providing safe havens from discrimination — though this sense of safety did not always extend to those relying on AT. Second, social stigma surrounding disability actively discouraged AT use in these spaces; participants reported deliberately not using devices like hearing aids to avoid standing out or drawing unwanted attention, even when this meant missing activities or struggling to communicate. One participant (P8) stated they did not want to use AT because "people already stare enough." Third, social connections proved crucial in overcoming barriers to AT access — friends served as vital support systems, sometimes substituting for AT entirely by helping participants hear, navigate, or communicate. The financial barrier to AT was significant, with participants unable to afford devices and relying on friends or family instead. Fourth, newcomers with disabilities faced particular challenges fitting into established social circles and navigating center norms, requiring time to build the relationships necessary for accessing support. The study also found that AT was not always well-suited to community center activities (e.g., hearing aids not being waterproof for swimming), highlighting design gaps.
Relevance
This research makes an important contribution to accessibility by centering intersectionality — demonstrating that the experience of disability and AT use cannot be understood in isolation from other aspects of identity including sexual orientation, gender identity, and race. For AT designers and developers, the findings highlight that devices are used in social contexts where stigma, belonging, and identity management profoundly influence whether people choose to use their technology at all. The study challenges the assumption that providing AT automatically solves access barriers, showing that social dynamics can be equally or more powerful in determining participation. The recommendations for designing more inclusive and affordable AT, fostering interdependence through community-building, and promoting collaboration between LGBTQIA+ community centers and disability organizations provide actionable guidance for both technology designers and community organizers. The paper also raises important questions about the visibility and aesthetics of AT in social settings where users are already navigating multiple marginalized identities.
Tags: assistive technology · intersectionality · LGBTQIA+ · disability identity · stigma · community spaces · qualitative research · interdependence