This article investigates how LGBTQ + youth cultivate enduring relationships through the cross-platform ecologies surrounding digital games, arguing that these environments function as affective infrastructures of dwelling. Drawing on qualitative interviews with LGBTQ + participants aged 17–25, the study demonstrates that relationships initiated in multiplayer games deepen as they circulate across Discord, Twitch, voice channels, and private messaging networks. Combining Heidegger's notion of dwelling with Sara Ahmed's theory of affective circulation, the article conceptualizes these relational formations as sticky intimacies: Affectively adhesive ties that emerge through repetitive encounters, shared rituals, and collective rhythms of online co-presence. Findings reveal four interlinked dynamics, existential significance, expressive plasticity, collective spatiality, and negotiated safety, through which participants fashion livable digital environments amid offline precarity, heteronormative surveillance, and identity-based risk. Digital platforms become spaces where visibility can be modulated, emotional breathing room is achievable, and continuity of self is sustained. Rather than treating gaming spaces as inherently protective, the study highlights the labor, moderation practices, and boundary-work that make such ecologies inhabitable. By theorizing cross-platform circulation as an affective-spatial process, this research expands digital games scholarship and offers a nuanced account of how LGBTQ + youth craft durable, meaningful intimacies within increasingly interconnected digital worlds.
AhmedS. (2004). The Cultural Politics of Emotion. Edinburgh University Press.
2.
AhmedS. (2006). Queer Phenomenology: Orientations, Objects, Others. Duke University Press.
3.
AntheunisM. L.ValkenburgP. M.PeterJ. (2012). The quality of online, offline, and mixed-mode friendships among users of a social networking site. Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace, 6(3). Article 6. https://doi.org/10.5817/CP2012-3-6
4.
Arun-PinaC. (2021). Micro-liminal spaces of (mis)gendering. ACME: An International Journal for Critical Geographies.
5.
BacajC.WangK.ZhangA., et al. (2024). Review of current trends in LGBTQ+ youth and social media: Implications for mental health, identity development, and civic engagement. Current Pediatrics Reports, 13, 3.
6.
BaymN. K. (2015). Personal Connections in the Digital Age (2nd ed.). Polity.
7.
Blanco-FernándezV.MorenoJ. A. (2023). Video games were my first safe space”: Queer gaming in the animal crossing new horizons LGBTIQA+ community. Games and Culture, 20(4), 438–458. https://doi.org/10.1177/15554120231205638
8.
BoellstorffT. (2008). Coming Of Age In Second Life: An Anthropologist Explores The Virtually Human. Princeton University Press.
9.
BraunV.ClarkeV. (2020). Can i use TA? Should I not use TA? Comparing reflexive thematic analysis and other pattern-based qualitative analytic approaches. Counselling and Psychotherapy Research, 21(2), 37–47. https://doi.org/10.1002/capr.12360
10.
BraunV.ClarkeV. (2021). One size fits all? What counts as quality practice in (reflexive) thematic analysis?Qualitative Research in Psychology, 18(3), 328–352. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2020.1769238
11.
ByrneD. (2022). A worked example of Braun and Clarke’s approach to reflexive thematic analysis. Quality & Quantity, 56(2), 1391–1412. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-021-01182-y
12.
ColeH.GriffithsM. D. (2007). Social interactions in massively multiplayer online role-playing gamers. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 10(4), 575–583. https://doi.org/10.1089/cpb.2007.9988
13.
CoteA. C. (2020). Gaming Sexism: Gender And Identity In The Era Of Casual Video Games. New York University Press.
14.
CraigS. L.EatonA. D.McInroyL. B.LeungV. W.KrishnanS. (2021). Can social media participation enhance LGBTQ+ youth well-being? Development of the social media benefits scale. Social Media + Society, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305121988931
15.
DucheneautN.YeeN.NickellE.MooreR. J. (2006). “Alone together?” exploring the social dynamics of massively multiplayer online games. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. pp. 407–416. ACM.
16.
DuguayS.BurgessJ.SuzorN. (2018). Queer women’s experiences of patchwork platform governance on tinder, Instagram, and vine. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, 26(2), 237–252. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354856518781530
17.
eSafety Commission. (2023). The digital lives of young LGBTIQ+ people: Tipping the balance.
FinlayL. (2002). Outing” the researcher: The provenance, process, and practice of reflexivity. Qualitative Health Research, 12(4), 531–545. https://doi.org/10.1177/104973202129120052
20.
FreemanG.GuoS.WohnD. Y. (2020). Streaming your identity: Navigating the presentation of gender and sexuality through live streaming. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), 29(6), 795–825. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10606-020-09386-w
21.
FreemanG.WohnD. Y. (2017). Social support in eSports: Building emotional and esteem support from instrumental support interactions in a highly competitive environment. Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 435–441.
22.
FreireP. (2000). Pedagogy Of The Oppressed (30th anniversary ed.). Continuum.
23.
GrayK. L. (2020). Intersectional Tech: Black Users In Digital Gaming. LSU Press.
24.
GrayM. L. (2009a). Out In The Country: Youth, Media, And Queer Visibility In Rural America. New York University Press.
25.
GrayM. L. (2009b). Negotiating identities/queering desires: Coming out online and the remediation of the coming-out story. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14(4), 1162–1189. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2009.01485.x
26.
HalberstamJ. (2005). In a queer time and place: Transgender bodies, subcultural lives. New York University Press.
27.
HamiltonW. A.GarretsonO.KerneA. (2014). Streaming on twitch: Fostering participatory communities of play. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. pp. 1315–1324. Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/2556288.2557048
ItoM., et al. (2010). Hanging Out, Messing Around, And Geeking Out: Kids Living And Learning With New Media. MIT Press.
31.
KosciwJ. G.ClarkC. M.TruongN. L.ZongroneA. D. (2020). The 2019 National School Climate Survey: The experiences of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer youth in our nation’s schools. GLSEN. https://www.glsen.org/research/2019-national-school-climate-survey
32.
MaletskaM. (2024). Queer gender identities and videogames: A literature review. Eludamos: Journal for Computer Game Culture, 15(1), 125–150. https://doi.org/10.7557/23.7432
McInroyL. B.CraigS. L. (2020). “It's like a safe haven fantasy world”: Online fandom communities and the identity development activities of sexual and gender minority youth. Psychology of Popular Media, 9(2), 236–246. https://doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000234
35.
McKennaK. Y. A.BarghJ. A. (1998). Coming out in the age of the internet: Identity demarginalization through virtual group participation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75(3), 681–694. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.75.3.681
36.
McKennaK. Y. A.GreenA. S.GleasonM. E. J. (2002). Relationship formation on the internet: What’s the big attraction?Journal of Social Issues, 58(1), 9–31. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-4560.00246
37.
McPhailD.LorwayR.ChevrierC. (2022). Safe spaces that matter: Material semiotics, affective bodies and queer readings of clinical spaces in Winnipeg, Canada. SSM—Qualitative Research in Health, 2, 100126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssmqr.2022.100126
38.
MorganH. (2020). The role of the avatar in gaming for trans and gender diverse young people. Journal of Gaming & Virtual Worlds, 17(22), 8617.
39.
MunnellyP. (2025). Serving face, not body: Experiencing drag queens on Twitch. M/C Journal, 28(5). https://doi.org/10.5204/mcj.3208
40.
O’BrienR. T.GagnonK. W.EganJ. E.CoulterR. W. S. (2022). Gaming preferences and motivations among bullied sexual and gender minority youth: An interview study. Games for Health Journal, 11(2), 79–84. https://doi.org/10.1089/g4 h.2021.0059
41.
OswinN. (2008). Critical geographies and the uses of sexuality: Deconstructing queer space. Progress in Human Geography, 32(1), 89–103. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132507085213
42.
ParkerI. (2005). Qualitative Psychology: Introducing Radical Research. Open University Press.
43.
PearceC. (2009). Communities Of Play: Emergent Cultures In Multiplayer Games And Virtual Worlds. MIT Press.
44.
PinkS. (2016). Digital Ethnography: Principles and Practice. Sage.
45.
PrzybylskiA. K.RigbyC. S.RyanR. M. (2010). A motivational model of video game engagement. Review of General Psychology, 14(2), 154–166. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019440
46.
RubergB.ShawA. (Eds). (2017). Queer Game Studies. Univ Of Minnesota Press.
RyanR. M.RigbyC. S.PrzybylskiA. K. (2006). The motivational pull of video games: A self-determination theory approach. Motivation and Emotion, 30(4), 344–360. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-006-9051-8
49.
ScottJ. G.LimM. H.GrahamA. L.CalearA. L. (2024). Young adults’ perceptions of their online versus offline interactions with close friends. Computers in Human Behavior Reports, 14, 100230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbr.2024.100399
50.
ShawA. (2012). Talking to gaymers: Questioning identity, community and media representation. Westminster Papers in Communication and Culture, 9(1), 67–89.
51.
ShawA. (2014). Gaming At The Edge: Sexuality And Gender At The Margins of Gamer Culture. University of Minnesota Press.
52.
ShengJ.KairamS. R. (2020). From virtual strangers to IRL friends: Relationship development in livestreaming communities on twitch. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 4(CSCW2), 1–34. https://doi.org/10.1145/3415165
53.
SteinkuehlerC.WilliamsD. (2006). Where everybody knows your (screen) name: Online games as “third places”. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11(4), 885–909. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00300.x
54.
StraussP.MorganH.Wright ToussaintD.LinA.WinterS.PerryY. (2019). Trans and gender diverse young people’s attitudes towards game-based digital mental health interventions: A qualitative investigation. Internet Interventions, 18, 100280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.invent.2019.100280
TaylorT. L. (2006). Play Between Worlds: Exploring Online Game Culture. MIT Press.
57.
ToddJ. J. D. (2024). Exploring young trans people’s everyday experiences of ‘out-of-place’ in everyday spaces in the UK. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 49(2), e12662. https://doi.org/10.1111/tran.12662
58.
TracyS. J. (2019). Qualitative Research Methods: Collecting Evidence, Crafting Analysis, Communicating Impact. Wiley.
59.
TyackA.WyethP. (2017). Exploring relatedness in single-player video game play. In Proceedings of CHI PLAY 2017. pp. 123–133. ACM.
60.
WhitehouseK.HitchensM.MatthewsN. (2023). Trans* and gender diverse players: Avatars and gender-alignment. Entertainment Computing, 47, 100584. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.entcom.2023.100584
61.
WohnD. Y. (2019). Volunteer moderators in twitch micro communities: How they get involved, the roles they play, and the emotional labor they experience. In CHI ‘19: Proceedings of the 2019 ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 1–13. Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300390
