No abstract

No abstract

Background: Transgender and gender diverse (TGD) people encounter a range of minority stressors (e.g., harassment, victimization, misgendering) that impact many areas of life. Much of the empirical literature on gender minority stress has utilized frameworks that were developed with a focus on sexual orientation and were often limited to cisgender sexual minorities (lesbian, gay, bisexual, and other non-heterosexual individuals), leaving questions about how well existing models fit the experiences of TGD people. Aims: To expand understandings of gender minority stress, we conducted a daily diary study where participants detailed the types of stressors they encountered on a daily basis for 56 days. Methods: There were 181 TGD participants recruited into the study (M age = 25.6 years; SD = 5.6), with 167 retained in the daily surveys from which these analyses were conducted. Results:The written responses revealed a variety of stressors, some of which are novel to the literature. Many participants reported instances of non-affirmation, such as misgendering, as well as vicarious stress when learning of oppressive experiences impacting other TGD people and seeing negative media portrayals of the lives of TGD individuals. Participants also reported bodily vigilance when being on alert for how others were perceiving their gender. Other stressors included rejection, political oppression, physical violence, uneasiness from others, and the enforcement of gender binarism. Discussion: These findings highlight gaps in the existing understandings of marginalization for TGD people that must be addressed to ensure that frameworks include and center the experiences of gender minorities. Marginalization stressMinority stress theory was originally proposed to help explain the mental health disparities that

Objective The integrated motivational–volitional model of suicide proposes that feelings of entrapment play a key role in the development of suicidal ideation. The model also posits a set of motivational moderators which either facilitate or hinder the development of suicidal thinking when entrapment is present. These motivational moderators include factors such as attitudes, future goals, thwarted belongingness, and social support. Two previously studied protective factors against suicide, reasons for living and life meaning, have received support in suicidology and might serve as motivational moderators in this model. Methods The current cross‐sectional study included college students (N=195) oversampled for recent suicidal ideation who took a series of self‐report questionnaires online. Results Our findings demonstrated that both reasons for living and life meaning are protective against the relation between entrapment and suicidal ideation, especially when presence of life meaning and reasons for living of high. Search for life meaning was found demonstrated a less protective relation with SI severity, particularly when reasons for living were low. Conclusion Both motivational moderators demonstrated protective relationships with suicidal ideation and may be relevant to suicide prevention strategies. Limitations and future directions are discussed.