The interviewing process was extraordinarily insightful and fruitful to our team as they provided the point of view of people from the community (5), expert educators in gender and sexuality (2), and prominent activists working in this space. The interviews were semi-structured and helped broaden our horizons regarding the things lacking from literature and ideas that we could not have conceived ourselves. We coded the data obtained from the interviews that we took into three significant categories: UI/ UX practices, Full Stack and Data practices, and finally, Industrywide practices. 

 

UI/ UX practices consist of recommendations and suggestions that UX researchers, Interface designers, Graphic designers, and people employed in roles of similar capacity can adhere to deliver products and services through apps and websites that are socially inclusive towards people of all genders and sexual orientations. It is vital that none of the elements present on web UI should reinforce traditional gender roles, this means that text, imagery, and all forms of media displayed should not have content that strengthens gender roles: what a particular gender is expected to do, their duties, their nature, etc. These elements must also not focus on gender binaries but rather be as gender-neutral as possible. All defaults of the website must be questioned and scrutinised under a gender and sexual orientation inclusionary lens. Assumptions based on gender and sexuality must not be made about the content, the user and website behaviour. Hence, the platform must be as customisable as possible, such as asking for pronouns and not assuming them and keeping gender as an open field. An option to not select any pronoun must also be provided. If a person chooses not to disclose their pronouns, gender-neutral pronouns like they/ them must be utilised. 

 

A vital aspect that often goes overlooked is privacy; only the personal data required for the website’s functioning must be extracted from the user. The platform must ensure the last amount of data collection, retention and pervasiveness and maximum security. The website’s hierarchy should not provide a preference of one gender or sexual orientation over the other but instead should have a logic behind the hierarchal decisions or randomness or a system(alphabetical, descending etc.). Another essential factor is representation; there should be maximum visibility of elements that depict people belonging to different genders and sexual orientations. These platforms must also self disclose their position and the fact that they are safe spaces. This disclosure can be practised through text, nudges, graphical elements or even website colours. Finally, the UI must also be sensitive to the target audience’s sensibilities and morals. The UI should inform rather than offend, in-depth research about target users must be carried out, and thus all decisions about UI elements, animations, etc., must be consciously taken.

 

The practices mentioned above can empower the LGBTQIA+ community and hence should be recognised by the developers designing the websites. A good starting point for the developers would be understanding and introspecting on some of the most common issues seen on the web that enforce the binary and endanger the community to exploitation and open to exclusion. Some of these include:

• Compulsory to mention the last name

• Having separate sections for men and women rather than an “all” section.

• Unnecessarily asking for sex and gender information on websites without providing any info on their use.

• Not having an option to select sections for all genders and identities on online dating apps.

• Using backend algorithms that are unconsciously biased towards non-binary hence exhibiting carelessness and unaccountability on their part.

• Not respecting their user’s data and hence trust by not ensuring utmost privacy and data security on their part.

 

Furthermore, industries and businesses are competitive. Any retail or customer service aims to provide an experience the customer wishes to have. Although, companies fail to provide an inclusive experience to everyone and engage in malpractice towards specific communities.

 

During pride month, we observe many companies use rainbow colours and show support or convince users that they are showing support. This concept is called rainbow washing, where businesses or conglomerates use pride colours for advertising themselves as queer allies; in reality, their industry practices might indicate otherwise. It creates a significant cause of concern because peoples’ life struggles are being used for PR purposes.

 

Moreover, there is a lack of representation in the industry, which causes more harm than good. It is imperative to involve the user in any design process and further evaluate the solution with the user whether it works for them or not. It is surprising how industry-led campaigns and mass media events often forget about involving the queer community, leading to biased opinions and uninformed audiences. The primary stakeholders, i.e., the queer community, try to engage with such issues actively and be willing to participate. However, it is difficult to approach such situations because there is generally no feedback mechanism. 

 

There needs to be a feedback loop and openness towards constructive feedback from the industry side. Inclusivity is intersectional, and, to indeed be inclusive, industries need to be queer and trans affirmative. They need to celebrate identities and bodies, allow virtue signalling and create a safe environment on the inside first. They could follow basic courtesies such as asking for and acknowledging pronouns, using ungendered terms, seeking active feedback and suggestions. There needs to be more participation from the community, and harmful practices such as the usage of biased algorithms and benefiting from the struggles of the marginalised would need to be addressed.