School Culture and the Well-Being of Same-Sex-Attracted Youth

Abstract

This study assesses how variations in heteronormative culture in high schools affect the well-being of same-sex-attracted youth. The authors focus on the stigmatization of same-sex attraction (rather than identity or behavior) to better understand how heteronormativity may marginalize a wide range of youth. Specifically, the authors use data from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health to examine how variation across schools in football participation, religious attendance, and urban locale affects same-sex-attracted adolescents' depressive symptoms, self-esteem, fighting, and academic failure. The results suggest that though same-sex-attracted youth are at greater risk for decreased well-being, these youth are at higher risk in nonurban schools and in schools where football and religion have a larger presence. Results vary for boys and girls: The urban locale of a school has a larger impact for boys, while school religiosity has a greater impact for girls.

Cohort Effect on the Coming Out Experiences of Bisexual Men

“…Research on sexual minorities in Anglo-American cultures has shown that their lives have often been defined by social marginalisation (Herek, 2004), living within societies that privilege heterosexuality (Wilkinson and Pearson, 2009). Sexual minorities have also been denied equality under the law (McGhee, 2002).…”

Stigmatization associated with growing up in a lesbian-parented family: What do adolescents experience and how do they deal with it?

“…When interpreting this finding, we should keep in mind that the NLLFS adolescents most often reported negative experiences that happened at school. This is not surprising, since classmates play central roles in the lives of developing adolescents (Harris, 1995;Wilkinson & Pearson, 2009). With regard to the school context, Ray and Gregory (2001) found that offspring in lesbianheaded families were bullied more often in elementary school than in high school.…”

From Contagious to Resilient and Beyond: A Periodization of Four Decades of Educational Research on LGBTQ Issues

“…These studies are a sampling of the myriad survey studies from the last decade that have found correlations between the prevalence of interpersonal discrimination and the negative experiences of LGBTQ youth (Advocates for Children, Inc., 2005;Espelage et al, 2008;Gruber & Fineran, 2008;Morrison & L'Heureux, 2001;Murdock & Bolch, 2005;Poteat et al, 2009;Russell, Seif, & Truong, 2001;Sandfort et al, 2010;Walls et al, 2010;Wilkinson & Pearson, 2009). All of the studies that employ this frame identify the problem facing…”

“…While most of these survey studies employed quantitative research methods (Birkett, Espelage, & Koenig, 2009;Espelage, Aragon, Birkett, & Koenig, 2008;Gruber & Fineran, 2008;Murdock & Bolch, 2005;Poteat, Espelage, & Koenig, 2009;Sandfort, Bos, Collier, & Metselaar, 2010;Walls, Kane, & Wisneski, 2010;Wilkinson & Pearson, 2009), a few employed qualitative methods (Adelman & Woods, 2006). Prior to 2010, qualitative studies that did not rely on surveys as the primary data source were less prevalent in the field overall, and most focused on the individual experiences or beliefs of educators (Dessel, 2010;McCabe & Rubinson, 2008;Payne & Smith, 2010;Tooms, 2007;Zach, 2010), while a smaller segment of studies focused on the experiences of LGBTQ youth (Davidson, 2009;Lee, 2002;Russell, Muraco, Subramaniam, & Laub, 2009;Savin-Williams, 2005).…”

“…A few sampled studies examined LGBTQ related issues in education using an organizational perspective (Fetner & Kush, 2008;Goodenow, Szalacha, & Westheimer, 2006;Wilkinson & Pearson, 2009) or a legal lens (Biegel, 2010;Dennis & Harlow, 1986). However, these studies are the exception to the rule of individual-centered analyses.…”