This project examines LGBTQ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, and queer) student groups on college campuses across Rhode Island. Much of the research I have come across focuses on the more clinical aspects of queer college students’ lives, like mental health and transition, and doesn’t examine the intersections of being queer and a student of color. I would like to focus on the sense of belonging and social lives of queer and trans students of color in college and how this varies across different types of colleges (for example, private vs. public). By focusing on queer and trans Black, Indigenous, and other students of color, this project will use a qualitative survey to explore a collective sense of belonging based on student experiences. The use of a closed qualitative survey aligns with my project because it intends to focus on the perspectives of students’, their personal experiences, and how connected they feel within larger LGBTQ student groups. My survey will be asking demographics questions and will try to recruit QTBIPOC students ranging from ages 18-40 throughout the semester. All survey responses will be kept anonymous and confidential, and survey responders will be informed of this before they begin the survey. The experiences and inner worlds of queer and trans BIPOC college students are under-researched, and this may contribute to understanding the experiences of QTBIPOC students, assisting in peer support, and community building.

Since the Queer Rights Movement entered mainstream consciousness after the 1969 Stonewall Riots, interested scholars have pondered the shape of a Queer literary canon. The consensus across disciplines is that a Queer canon is, at best, messy and at worst, non-existent. While legal censures of non-normative bodies and identities have been addressed within various fields, the impact of such legislation on the formation of a Queer canon remains underexplored. This paper uses generic rhetorical criticism to investigate two pieces of gender-policing legislation and evaluate how recursive laws and policies have interacted to shape – or remove– the Queer canon over time. Findings indicate that traditional canon formation mechanisms become interrupted through historicisms, identity politics, and prejudice – all of which result in the suppression of Queer literary production and dissemination. Queer canon has been deliberately eradicated and barred from participation in traditional canon formation processes. Future work positioning Queer canon as a rhetorical genre may allow scholars to articulate a recovery process in which a Queer canon is rendered truly possible, despite the contemporary continuation of eradication efforts.