Troubling Vulnerability: Designing with LGBT Young People's Ambivalence Towards Hate Crime Reporting
Authors
HCI is increasingly working with ‘vulnerable’ people, yet there is a danger that the label of vulnerability can alienate and stigmatize the people such work aims to support. We report our study investigating the application of interaction design to increase rates of hate crime reporting amongst Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender young people. During design-led workshops, participants expressed ambivalence towards reporting. While recognizing their exposure to hate crime, they simultaneously rejected being identified as victim as implied in the act of reporting. We used visual communication design to depict the young people’s ambivalent identities and contribute insights into how these fail and succeed to account for the intersectional, fluid and emergent nature of LGBT identities through the design research process. We argue that by producing ambiguously designed texts alongside conventional outcomes, we ‘trouble’ our design research narratives as a tactic to disrupt static and reductive understandings of vulnerability within HCI.
Research Questions / Practical Problems
Question signals indexed for this paper.
- 75%
Nice Guys, Virgins, and Incels: Gender in Remixing and Sharing Memes at Hackathons
CHI '22· Gender & Race Issues in HCI +2
- 75%
Online Dating as Context to Design Sexual Consent Technology with Women and LGBTQ+ Stakeholders
CHI '23· Inclusive Design +2
- 75%
Embracing Gender Diversity: Designing an Adaptive Pleasure Object for a Changing Body
CHI '25· Inclusive Design +2
- 75%
Speculative Blackness: Considering Afrofuturism in the Creation of Inclusive Speculative Design Probes
DIS '21· Gender & Race Issues in HCI +2
- 75%
Flourishing in the Everyday: Moving Beyond Damage-Centered Design in HCI for BIPOC Communities
DIS '23· Inclusive Design +2
- 60%
Designing Trans Technology: Defining Challenges and Envisioning Community-Centered Solutions
CHI '20· Gender & Race Issues in HCI +2
Based on Jaccard similarity of research subtopics & professions (≥60%)