Biased by design
Barriers to queer inclusion in the design field
This is the second in a multi-part series on LGBTQ+ inclusion in design. Check out the first article on why LGBTQ+ inclusion in design matters, and the next on how to build an inclusive workplace.
Representation isn’t equality
The field of design is incredibly queer. LGBTQ+ people are represented in design in much higher percentages than in the general population. Yet that representation is not equal at all levels of seniority or compensation.
This may be partly why LGBTQ+ designers express less satisfaction and sense of job security; but it’s not the full story. Queer designers must also contend with anti-LGBTQ+ bias—even in our reputedly progressive field.
For the design field to reach its full potential, it must correct the bias facing designers from marginalized communities, which will require big changes across individual design organizations.
Design is (still) a job
The experiences of LGBTQ+ people in design can’t be separated from the larger workplace issues facing our community.
In the United States, there is no federal law that explicitly protects LGBTQ+ people in the workplace. Almost half of American LGBTQ+ people live in states with no guarantees against being fired for their sexual orientation or gender identity.
Bias doesn’t have to be so overt to be harmful. Even subtle bias can negatively impact LGBTQ+ employees’ happiness, productivity, and how engaged they are at work.
Navigating bias as a queer designer
In design, LGBTQ+ people must navigate issues of bias largely invisible to their peers, from the moment they are considering sending in a job application throughout the day-to-day duties of their role.
Consider large tech companies that donate to anti-LGBTQ+ politicians as part of their regulatory lobbying strategy. Some have executives who publicly support those politicians and their causes. Others have policies that allow hate speech and other content on their platforms that harm LGBTQ+ people — often while censoring LGBTQ+ content at the same time.
It’s nice that designers in tech can march with their company’s queer employee resource group at Pride, but the Monday after, they’re going to have to launch Trump’s homepage ad buyout of their product.
It’s not just tech. Designers in client-services may find teams they feel safe with but end up staffed on accounts where the client is a company engaged in those same practices. They may be paired with partners from the client side that display their own, personal bigotry. They may feel pressured to change their gender presentation or personality to avoid upsetting client relationships.
Design organizations must be thoughtful about who they choose to work with and transparent about how they make those choices. Designers shouldn’t be asked to work for clients or on projects that harm their community.
Design organizations must be thoughtful about who they choose to work with and transparent about how they make those choices.
Bias can also seep into the way even the most progressive design teams work. Small design decisions can also exclude LGBTQ+ people and alienate.
- Forms that present gender as a required field with two radio buttons.
- Icons representing family with silhouettes of a man, woman, and infant.
- Valentine’s day emails promoting “gifts for him” that will wind up in the inboxes of lesbian customers.
Homogenous teams may not see the problem or write off affected users as edge cases outside the target market. It often falls on LGBTQ+ designers to point out these exclusionary design choices because their teammates lack the perspective to recognize them.
Don’t fall into the empathy trap
Designers pride themselves on empathy, but the limits of our empathy lie at the boundaries of our lived experiences. We can and should see past those boundaries through research, engaging with people outside our usual circle, listening, and receiving feedback. But we should never conflate our powers of imagination with someone else’s reality.
This is the empathy trap, and it’s dangerous for design teams. They are so convinced of their own good intentions and powers of empathy they can’t accept their work could have negative impact. (This is also why many traditional anti-bias trainings backfire. Attendees feel the training has inoculated them against bias and stop examining their actions.)
Designers pride themselves on empathy, but the limits of our empathy lie at the boundaries of our lived experiences…We should never conflate our powers of imagination with someone else’s reality.
Having diverse teams can complement your empathy with first-hand knowledge. This is a huge value LGBTQ+ designers can bring to teams.
Many of the queer designers I’ve met feel advocating for marginalized users is one of the most important skills they can bring to their work. However, being the lone advocate for marginalized users is exhausting work and risky business.
Unless your culture ensures individuals are heard and supported when they speak up, designers will fear the potential damage to their professional relationships and potential advancement— especially if you live in one of those states where your queer employees lack the reassurance of even the most basic legal protections.
Inclusive design must be the team’s shared responsibility. Otherwise, it becomes extra labor and added anxiety designers from minoritized communities feel compelled to shoulder alone instead of what it should be — a minimum standard of good design for everyone.
Want learn more about LGBTQ+ diversity and inclusion? This post is inspired by content that was edited from the below InVision article for length. Check it out!
Also, shout out to Mike Monteiro who is a supporter of this community and whose book Ruined by Design inspired the post titles in this series.
