essay about lgbtq bullying

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• HHS Author Manuscripts

LGBTQ bullying: a qualitative investigation of student and school health professional perspectives

V. a. earnshaw.

a Department of Human Development and Family Sciences, University of Delaware, Newark, DE, USA

D. D. Menino

b Division of General Pediatrics, Boston Children’s Hospital, Boston, MA, USA

J. Perrotti

c Safe Schools Program for LGBTQ Students, Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, Boston, MA, USA

T. N. Barnes

d Center for Research in Education and Social Policy, University of Delaware, Newark, DE, USA

D. L. Humphrey

S. l. reisner.

e Department of Pediatrics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA

f Department of Epidemiology, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA

g The Fenway Institute, Fenway Health, Boston, MA, USA

Notes on contributors

David D. Menino is a Clinical Research Specialist at Boston Children’s Hospital.

Lauren M. Sava is a Clinical Research Specialist at Boston Children’s Hospital.

Jeff Perrotti is the Founding Director of the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education’s Safe Schools Program for LGBTQ Students.

Tia N. Barnes is an Assistant Professor in Human Development and Family Sciences and a Senior Researcher at the Center for Research in Education and Social Policy at the University of Delaware.

Layne D. Humphrey is the Assistant Center Director of the Center for Research in Education and Social Policy at the University of Delaware.

Sari L. Reisner is an Assistant Professor of Pediatrics at Harvard Medical School and of Epidemiology at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, as well as a Research Scientist at The Fenway Institute at Fenway Health.

Researchers and practitioners have recently called for greater involvement of school health professionals (SHPs; e.g., school psychologists, nurses, guidance counselors) in interventions to identify and address bullying of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer/questioning (LGBTQ) students. To inform future interventions, this study explored the perspectives of LGBTQ students and SHPs on LGBTQ bullying and SHPs’ responses to LGBTQ bullying. Five online, asynchronous focus groups were held in 2018 with 28 LGBTQ students and 19 SHPs recruited from Massachusetts, US. Methods were guided by Rapid Qualitative Inquiry. Results revealed a disconnect in perceptions of LGBTQ bullying among LGBTQ students versus SHPs, with LGBTQ students reporting a range of often significant verbal, social, and physical bullying experiences and SHPs reporting minimal awareness of LGBTQ bullying at their schools. Transgender students reported bullying related to their gender identity, including verbal, physical, and sexual harassment, deadnaming (referred to by their birth name), and misgendering (called an incorrect pronoun). LGBTQ students of color reported bullying based on their race/ethnicity and pronounced social isolation. LGBTQ students reported mixed experiences with reporting bullying to SHPs. Intervention efforts are needed to enhance communication between LGBTQ students and SHPs, and to strengthen SHPs’ skills to respond to LGBTQ bullying.

Introduction

Bullying of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer/questioning (LGBTQ) students occurs frequently and is harmful ( Earnshaw et al., 2017 ; Kosciw, Greytak, Zongrone, Clark, & Truong, 2018 ). Bullying involves unwanted aggressive treatment from peers that repeats, or is likely to repeat, over time and occurs within a power context ( Gladden, Vivolo-Kantor, Hamburger, & Lumpkin, 2014 ). For LGBTQ youth, this bullying may be associated with their sexual orientation and/or gender identity (i.e., LGBTQ bullying), as well as other characteristics such as their race/ethnicity ( Kosciw et al., 2018 ). Bullying undermines students’ physical and mental health, and the effects of bullying on health are long-lasting ( Gini & Pozzoli, 2013 ; Juvonen & Graham, 2014 ; The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM), 2016 ; Vaillancourt, Hymel, & McDougall, 2013 ). Moreover, stigma-based bullying, or bullying associated with a socially devalued characteristic such as minority sexual orientation or gender identity, is particularly harmful ( Russell, Sinclair, Poteat, & Koenig, 2012 ).

School health professionals (SHPs) have the potential to play an important role in identifying and supporting LGBTQ students experiencing bullying ( Espelage, 2016 ; Graybill & Proctor, 2016 ). Yet, their perspectives on LGBTQ bullying and their current roles in responding to LGBTQ bullying have been under-examined. Greater understanding of these perspectives can inform interventions to prepare SHPs to respond to LGBTQ bullying. We therefore characterize LGBTQ bullying and SHP responses to LGBTQ bullying from the perspectives of both LGBTQ students and SHPs in the current study. We compare SHP perspectives to those of LGBTQ students to explore the extent to which their points of view on LGBTQ bullying diverge.

LGBTQ bullying

Most LGBTQ students experience some form of bullying. In response to a national survey conducted by the Gay, Lesbian, & Straight Education Network (GLSEN) in 2015, 85% of LGBTQ students reported that they had experienced verbal bullying (i.e., harmful verbal or written communications such as name calling), 88% had experienced social or relational bullying (i.e., behaviors intended to harm relationships and reputations such as gossip), 60% had been sexually harassed (i.e., harassment of a sexual nature such as unwanted touching), and 34.7% had experienced physical bullying (i.e., use of physical force such as hitting) in the past year ( Kosciw et al., 2018 ). Bullying is associated with poor mental health, including symptoms of depression, low self-esteem, and suicidal ideation ( Friedman, Koeske, Silvestre, Korr, & Sites, 2006 ; Russell & Joyner, 2001 ) as well as poor physical health, including negative physical health symptoms (e.g., abdominal pain, headache, skin problems) and high blood pressure ( Fekkes, 2006 ; Gini & Pozzoli, 2013 ; Rosenthal et al., 2015 ).

LGBTQ students are diverse, representing a wide range of sexual orientations, gender identities, races/ethnicities, and other characteristics. Some evidence suggests that transgender students have more negative school experiences than cisgender students (i.e., students whose gender identity aligns with their sex assigned at birth; Kosciw et al., 2018 ). Similar to stigma experienced by transgender adults ( Nadal, Whitman, Davis, Erazo, & Davidoff, 2016 ), bullying of transgender students may involve deadnaming (i.e., using the birth name of a student who has since changed their name) and/or misgendering (i.e., referring to a student with a pronoun or word that does not correctly reflect their gender identity).

Recent work has underscored the importance of adopting an intersectional lens when characterizing bullying experienced by LGBTQ students ( Daley, Solomon, Newman, & Mishna, 2007 ; Dominski, 2016 ; Earnshaw et al., 2017 ). Intersectionality recognizes that individuals live with multiple characteristics and identities, which may represent positions of oppression and/or privilege, that shape their experiences and outcomes ( Cole, 2009 ; Crenshaw et al., 1991 ; Rosenthal, 2016 ). Applied to LGBTQ bullying, an intersectional lens draws attention to how bullying may be experienced differently depending on LGBTQ youth’s intersecting identities. For example, LGBTQ students of color describe experiencing bullying related to both their race/ethnicity and sexual orientation and/or gender identity ( Daley et al., 2007 ). An intersectional lens additionally allows researchers to consider how intersections of identities and characteristics impact access to social capital (e.g., school practices and policies) that influences student outcomes ( Mink, Lindley, & Weinstein, 2014 ). Understanding the nuances of intersectional bullying may enhance the ability of SHPs to identify and support LGBTQ students experiencing bullying.

School health professionals

SHPs, including school psychologists, nurses, social workers, guidance counselors, and adjustment counselors, play key roles in promoting the safety and wellbeing of students. SHPs are well-positioned to lead indicated preventive bullying interventions within schools, which target students who are currently experiencing bullying ( Earnshaw et al., 2018 ; Juvonen & Graham, 2014 ). As examples, SHPs can identify and support students currently experiencing bullying given that supportive relationships with adults at school can buffer students from the negative effects of stigma-based bullying ( Earnshaw et al., 2014 ). SHPs can also help LGBTQ students develop de-escalation techniques and other social-emotional skills that may help them respond to bullying.

Researchers and practitioners have recently called for greater involvement of SHPs in addressing LGBTQ bullying ( Earnshaw et al., 2017 ; Espelage, 2016 ; Graybill & Proctor, 2016 ). Yet, SHPs have been under-utilized within stigma-based bullying interventions to date, including LGBTQ bullying interventions. A recent systematic review identified only one stigma-based bullying intervention that involved SHPs ( Earnshaw et al., 2018 ). This intervention targeted students with disabilities, and showed some promise in reducing experiences of bullying among students and improving their self-concept ( Vessey & O’Neill, 2011 ). Greater understanding of SHPs’ perspectives on LGBTQ bullying, including the extent to which they are aware of LGBTQ students’ experiences of bullying, as well as their current involvement in addressing LGBTQ bullying can inform future efforts to involve SHPs in LGBTQ bullying interventions.

Current study

The current study was conducted to inform future intervention efforts to involve SHPs in identifying and supporting LGBTQ students who have been bullied. The specific goals were to characterize and compare the perspectives of LGBTQ students and SHPs on: (1) experiences of LGBTQ bullying, and (2) SHP responses to LGBTQ bullying. SHPs may need to address the unique needs of transgender students and LGBTQ students of color given that these students experience elevated rates of bullying in comparison to White LGBQ students ( Kosciw et al., 2018 ). The current study therefore additionally adopted an intersectional lens and sought to identify unique aspects of bullying experienced by transgender students and LGBTQ students of color.

Procedures and participants

Between January and April 2018, qualitative data were collected as part of a formative assessment to inform the development of an intervention to increase the capacity of SHPs to address LGBTQ bullying. Study procedures were guided by Rapid Qualitative Inquiry ( Beebe, 2014 ), which is closely derived from and often referred to as Rapid Assessment Process ( Beebe, 2001 , 2014 ; McMullen et al., 2011 ; Sabone et al., 2007 ) and is an intensive methodology for collecting, analyzing, and interpreting qualitative data to quickly develop a preliminary understanding of a situation. Rapid Qualitative Inquiry takes principles from ethnography but is targeted to reduce lengthiness of field work-analysis-translation ( Beebe, 2014 ). Rapid Qualitative Inquiry includes three foundational concepts. First, it aims to develop an insider’s perspective on an issue. The current study aimed to develop the perspectives of LGBTQ students and SHPs on the issue of LGBTQ bullying in schools. Second, Rapid Qualitative Inquiry relies on triangulation of data by incorporating data from multiple sources. The current study included data from both LGBTQ students and SHPs. Two focus groups with students were initially planned, including one with LGBTQ students broadly and one including transgender students specifically. Due to underrepresentation of students of color in these focus groups, an additional group was conducted comprised of LGBTQ students of color. Two focus groups were also conducted with SHPs. Third, data analysis is conducted iteratively (described below) and is team-based. The current study involved a team of individuals with diverse expertise and perspectives, including experts in psychology, public health, education, and counseling. Additionally, the team worked closely with a youth and community advisory board that included LGBTQ youth and SHPs who were compensated for their time.

Participants were recruited from LGBTQ and SHP organizations and networks in Massachusetts, as well as from the personal and professional networks of individuals on the youth and community advisory board. Individuals who were interested in participating contacted a member of the study team who screened them for eligibility by phone. Students were eligible to participate if they were between the ages of 13 and 24, identified as LGBTQ, and currently attended, or had attended, middle and/or high school in Massachusetts. Individuals who were former students were eligible up to age 24 given evidence that the effects of bullying last into young adulthood ( Russell, Ryan, Toomey, Diaz, & Sanchez, 2011 ). SHPs were eligible to participate in the study if they were age 18 or older, and currently served Massachusetts students in a school health-related capacity. All participants were required to speak English and have reliable internet access in order to be eligible to participate. Verbal consent was obtained via an initial phone conversation during which research staff reviewed he consent document and asked if the individual wanted to consent on the phone at that time or wait and decide, after which they were sent a PDF of the consent document. Obtaining parental consent to participate in a research study may discourage participation among LGBTQ youth who have not disclosed their sexual orientation and/or gender identity to their parents, thereby introducing sampling bias, or pose a risk to LGBTQ youth whose parents are not accepting of their LGBTQ identities ( Meezan & Martin, 2009 ). Therefore, a waiver of parental permission was obtained for students under the age of 18 years. Participants received a $50 gift card for their time. All procedures received institutional review board approval.

In total, 88 individuals expressed interest in the study and 55 enrolled (62.5%), including 34 LGBTQ students and 21 SHPs enrolled in the study. Several participants did not engage in the study (e.g., they did not respond to online prompts), and were therefore trimmed from the analytic sample. The final sample included 28 LGBTQ students and 19 SHPs, with participants representing most counties in Massachusetts and over half being outside the Boston area. Participants completed a brief online survey that included socio-demographic information; one LGBTQ student did not complete the survey. Participant characteristics are included in Table 1 .

Descriptive characteristics of study participants ( N = 46).

Notes: + One LGBTQ student who participated in the focus groups did not complete the socio-demographic survey (28 LGBQ students participated in focus groups, 27 had survey data).

Focus group protocols

Online, asynchronous focus groups were conducted. Online focus groups are recommended for research about sensitive topics with stigmatized, rare, and/or geographically dispersed populations ( Reisner et al., 2018 ). Asynchronous online focus groups operate like bulletin boards, wherein questions are periodically posted by researchers and participants can log on at times convenient for them to respond. Similar to an in-person focus group, participants are able to both respond directly to the researchers’ questions as well as read and respond to other participants’ posts. Participants do not need to be online simultaneously to chat in real time. In the current study, online focus groups lasted for four days and questions were posted in the mornings and evenings. Two members of the research team facilitated the groups by posting questions, probing, and monitoring discussion throughout the day. The platform was left open for an additional 1–2 days for final comments. Anonymity of participants was protected in several ways. First, participants were given a unique identification number that was the only identifier displayed in relation to their online responses. Second, no pictures or icons were displayed. Third, participants were asked not to disclose any potentially identifying information, including their name or the school where they attended or worked.

Examples of questions relevant to the current analyses that were posed to LGBTQ students included: “Please tell us about a time you or another LGBTQ student were bullied. What happened?” and “In regards to the experiences of bullying you described, did any adult at school intervene or try to stop the bullying? If so, what happened? What was the adult’s role at school?” Students were also asked “What specific issues have you noticed transgender students at your school facing?” and “What issues, if any, do you see non-White LGBTQ students facing at your school?” These questions were tailored to the perspectives of SHPs, with examples including: “Tell us about a time in which you witnessed a LGBTQ student being bullied. If you personally didn’t witness such an event, please describe any experience your colleagues may have had, if possible” and “Thinking back to your experience intervening in the bullying of a LGBTQ student, do you think you handled the situation effectively? Why or why not?” SHPs were also specifically asked about transgender students, including “What specific issues have you noticed transgender students at your school facing?” and LGBTQ students of color, including “What specific issues, if any, do you see non-White LGBTQ students facing at your school?” Probes were asked to clarify participant responses. Examples of probes include: “What do you mean by (component of participant response)?” “Can you talk a bit more about (component of participant response)?” “Can you provide an example?” How did you feel about (component of participant response)?”

Data analyses

Data analyses were also guided by Rapid Qualitative Inquiry ( Beebe, 2014 ), and were thus iterative and team-based. Each focus group yielded a transcript ranging from 131–204 pages in length, with size 17.5 font for prompts and 14.5 font for responses and single-spacing (for a total of 494 pages of transcript from the three youth focus groups and 318 pages of transcripts from the two SHP focus groups). Immediately following each focus group, initial findings were summarized and preliminary findings were identified by two members of the research team. These initial findings informed memos and data displays (e.g., charts organized by theme) which were shared with the full team. The team met to draw conclusions from each focus group. The team focused on reaching consensus around conclusions, and making contrasts and comparisons between participant groups. The study procedures and conclusions were refined with each additional focus group and as data analyses progressed. As a trustworthiness check, results were then shared with the youth and community advisory board to verify the conclusions drawn by the team. By following these analytic techniques, an understanding of experiences of and SHP responses to LGBTQ bullying from the perspectives of LGBTQ students and SHPs was developed.

Experiences of LGBTQ bullying

LGBTQ students and SHPs reported on several types of bullying experienced by LGBTQ students. Below, LGBTQ bullying is described from the perspectives of White LGBQ students, transgender students, LGBTQ students of color, and SHPs. The perspectives of three transgender students of color are included in both the transgender students and LGBTQ students of color sections, depending on content of the data (e.g., quotes describing bullying related to gender identity are included in the transgender students paragraph). Taken together, the majority of LGBTQ students reported witnessing and/or experiencing bullying (82%, n = 23) whereas over half of SHPs (68%, n = 13) reported never having witnessed bullying.

White LGBQ students

White LGBQ students primarily described experiencing and/or witnessing verbal bullying, including being called names and hearing offensive jokes. For example, one student stated that “I was called the f-slur many times, as well as told that I should be killed or ‘converted.’ I was too scared to tell anyone, even my parents, because I was not out yet” (White, pansexual female). Some physical bullying was also reported by White LGBQ students. One student witnessed physical bullying of another LGBQ student, stating “I knew someone who was physically pushed around frequently by the same kid. That bullying was relentless and the victim of that bullying did not come to school some days because of the harassment” (White, mostly gay male). Students were also aware of instances of cyberbullying on a range of chat and other social media platforms. The student who witnessed physical bullying also reported that “I knew someone who was harassed in an online group chat and told to kill themselves.”

Transgender students

Transgender students also described being called names and hearing offensive jokes. In contrast to LGBQ students, however, bullying reported by transgender students was characterized by more explicit targeting of their gender identity, and more extreme physical assault. Many transgender students highlighted being deadnamed and misgendered as common forms of verbal bullying. One student reported that another student “started using my dead name and the wrong pronouns and telling everyone that was my name and that I was really a girl” (White, bisexual transgender male). Another student reported that “I have seen consistent misgendering (some malicious, some just ignorance) of non-passing rans folks or those who use neopronouns [gender-neutral pronouns]” (race unidentified, heterosexual transgender male). Students transitioning from male to female were particularly vulnerable to physical sexual assault. One student noted that they had been “sexually assaulted (since I started growing breast buds, I’ve had multiple people grab me and feel me up)” and that “when I wear a skirt… students try to lift it/pull it down. I am groped weekly” (White, mostly lesbian transgender female). Physical bullying occurred in bathrooms. One student described being “kicked out of both bathrooms. I had a kid try to hit me once for trying to use the bathroom. I’ve been suspended for my own safety” (White, mostly gay transgender male).

LGBTQ students of color

LGBTQ students of color reported experiences of bullying associated with their race and/or ethnicity in addition to, or sometimes instead of, their sexual orientation and/or gender identity. These experiences also included name calling and offensive jokes. One student described experiencing race-and weight-based verbal bullying, stating: “I was not bullied for being LGBTQ … I was, however, bullied for being fat and for being dark skinned. I was called things like Oreo or African booty scratcher and people would make fun of me” (Black/African-American, bisexual transgender male). LGBTQ students of color experienced social isolation, and reported having a difficult time finding accepting friends. One noted that “I feel like White LGBTQ students have an easier time being accepted, while I have to deal with racism, queerphobia, and transphobia” (Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander and White, queer, gender non-conforming student). This student further remarked that “I, in school, was outcasted for being visibly trans and queer. In a school of almost two thousand people, I had no friends, no one to sit with, no one to hang out with.”

In contrast to the experiences of bullying reported by students, which were described as frequent and sometimes severe, over half of SHPs reported that they had not witnessed LGBTQ bullying at their schools. They noted that there have been “no instances at my school that I am aware of” (school nurse), “I have not been directly involved in any bullying [situations]” (guidance counselor), and “I have not witnessed nor been involved directly with any type of incident” (social worker). One SHP was aware of anti-gay language at their school, but did not label this as bullying. They stated:

I can’t think of a time when I witnessed or heard of a LGBTQ student being bullied. I do know that students talk about microaggressions, such as stating things are “gay”, as someone mentioned earlier and have talked about how these comments impact them over time. This might not be “bullying” per se… (school psychologist)

Despite not personally witnessing bullying, some SHPs were aware that LGBTQ students experienced bullying at school. One noted that “I have also known students to face bullying, teasing, targeting, and general unkindness from students” (school psychologist).

SHPs’ discussion of the intersectional nature of LGBTQ bullying was limited. They recognized that transgender students experienced bullying in bathrooms, although their reports on bullying in bathrooms were less extreme than those from transgender students. For example, one SHP noted that “some other students would leave the bathroom or make comments when this (transgender) student was there” (guidance counselor). SHPs did not report that transgender students experienced sexual harassment or intentional deadnaming and/or misgendering, or that LGBTQ students of color experienced bullying based on their race or ethnicity.

Responses to LGBTQ bullying

Students and SHPs characterized the ways in which SHPs responded to LGBTQ bullying. Responses from White LGBQ students, transgender students, and LGBTQ students of color were largely similar and so have been reported in aggregate.

Students reported that SHPs often do not personally witness LGBTQ bullying. One student stated that SHPs may be unaware of LGBTQ bullying because “school health professionals are not in regular contact with groups of students, where these jokes get made” (White, mostly gay male). When students reached out to SHPs for help with bullying, they received a range of responses. Students reported that SHPs were sometimes not helpful. One student reported an unsupportive interaction where the SHP questioned their sexual orientation and did not address the incident of bullying. This student stated that “when I went to guidance, they just asked if I was sure that I was bisexual and said they couldn’t do anything because I had no evidence like texts or comments” (Latina, bisexual female). Other students reported that SHPs were well-intentioned, but lacked the skills or knowledge to address LGBTQ bullying. One student noted that “the guidance counselor is a very kind lady, I just think she is clueless when it comes to these issues, and almost feels as if she can’t touch the issues or do anything about them” (White, queer transgender male).

SHPs reported that they responded to LGBTQ bullying in a variety of ways. SHPs directly addressed students perpetrating LGBTQ bullying. They noted that “I have always done my best to stop these comments as soon as I’ve heard them” (school nurse) and “I stressed the importance of not continuing with this behavior and spreading rumors. I talked about being more sensitive and tolerant of others and their differences, having more empathy and compassion” (guidance counselor). SHPs also reported providing emotional support to LGBTQ students who had been bullied. Some provided support immediately following incidents of bullying, including one SHP who reported that they had “consoled a first grader when she was told by an older student that she couldn’t use the girl’s bathroom because she is a boy. I felt terrible … I empathized that it probably didn’t make her feel good when another student called her a boy” (school nurse). Others provided ongoing support to students experiencing bullying. One noted that LGBTQ students “are in counseling with me weekly so I am always checking in on how they are doing” (social worker).

The current study provides insights into the experiences of LGBTQ bullying and SHPs’ responses to LGBTQ bullying from the perspectives of LGBTQ students and SHPs. Results reveal a possible disconnect in perceptions of LGBTQ bullying among LGBTQ students versus SHPs. LGBTQ students reported a range of often significant bullying experiences that were associated with their sexual orientation and gender identity as well as their race/ethnicity. In contrast, over half of SHPs reported not being aware of LGBTQ bullying at their school. Verbal bullying, including name calling and verbal harassment, was the most commonly reported form of bullying reported by LGBTQ students. Some SHPs also observed name calling and negative comments directed toward LGBTQ students. Transgender students reported a unique form of verbal bullying, deadnaming and misgendering, from both other students and adults at school. This form of harassment is also reported by transgender adults ( Nadal et al., 2016 ), and serves to invalidate individuals’ gender identity ( McLemore, 2015 ). LGBTQ students of color reported verbal bullying based on their race/ethnicity, including racial slurs, in addition to bullying related to their sexual orientation and gender identity. SHPs did not report observing intentional deadnaming and misgendering of transgender students, or race-based bullying of LGBTQ students of color. Transgender students reported the most pronounced physical bullying, which sometimes occurred in bathrooms and/or took the form of sexual assault (e.g., groping). SHPs were aware that transgender students were at risk of bullying in bathrooms, but did not report that transgender students were sexually harassed. LGBTQ students of color reported social bullying, including social ostracism and isolation. SHPs did not comment on social isolation of LGBTQ students of color.

The perspectives of LGBTQ students and SHPs on LGBTQ bullying may differ for several reasons. First, both students and SHPs reported that SHPs are often not physically present when the bullying takes place. Bullying typically occurs in classrooms, hallways, and bathrooms whereas SHPs may spend much of their time in offices. Second, many LGBTQ students often do not report bullying to adults, including SHPs. They may fear reporting because they have not yet disclosed their sexual orientation and/or gender identity to their parents, and therefore do not want the school to call home about LGBTQ bullying. They may also not report because they lack confidence that SHPs will helpfully resolve the issue. Third, LGBTQ bullying, similar to LGBTQ discrimination, may be changing over time from overt treatment, such as physical harassment, to more subtle treatment, such as deadnaming and misgendering ( Nadal et al., 2016 ). SHPs may be less likely to label this more subtle treatment as bullying. And finally, the students and SHPs interviewed in this study may not be aware of the extent to which SHPs are responding to LGBTQ bullying incidents. For example, students may be unaware when SHPs address bullying among students who perpetrate bullying due to privacy regulations.

Students reported having mixed experiences with reporting LGBTQ bullying to SHPs. Some students observed that SHPs ignored or refused to address LGBTQ bullying (e.g., due to no evidence of bullying). Other students felt that SHPs lacked knowledge and skills to support LGBTQ students experiencing bullying. SHPs characterized their responses to LGBTQ bullying more positively, reporting that they had responded to LGBTQ bullying in a variety of ways. They cited examples of addressing perpetrators of LGBTQ bullying and supporting LGBTQ students who had been bullied.

Strengths, limitations, and future directions

The perspectives of SHPs on LGBTQ bullying have been under-studied in the literature to date. The current study addresses this gap to inform future bullying interventions involving SHPs. Methodology and analysis strategies were guided by Rapid Qualitative Inquiry ( Beebe, 2014 ), which is recommended when seeking to develop a preliminary understanding of an understudied phenomenon to inform intervention development. Analyses were conducted by a team of experts with diverse backgrounds and were informed by a youth and community advisory board that included LGBTQ youth and SHPs. The use of online focus groups enabled the inclusion of a geographically diverse sample comprised of participants from urban, suburban, and rural communities throughout Massachusetts, as well as historically marginalized populations ( Reisner et al., 2018 ). Given that participants can respond anonymously, online focus groups may yield more honest answers regarding sensitive topics such as bullying than in-person focus groups.

Several limitations of the current study may be addressed with future work. Results of this Rapid Qualitative Inquiry study yielded preliminary insight into a disconnect in perceptions of LGBTQ bullying among LGBTQ students and SHPs. More in-depth research methodologies, including individual interviews, can continue to clarify this disconnect and why it exists. Asynchronous online focus groups lack nonverbal information, such as facial expressions and vocal cues, which may limit interpretability or even lead to misunderstandings. In-person qualitative interviews and focus groups may therefore yield additional insight. Additionally, quantitative research methodologies comparing the perceptions of LGBTQ students and SHPs can establish the magnitude of this disconnect. LGBTQ students and SHPs in the current study were from different schools. Future research should include LGBTQ students and SHPs from the same school to better compare the perspectives of students and SHPs in the same context.

Future work may also address issues of generalizability to the diverse populations of LGBTQ students and SHPs, as well as diverse geographic regions where LGBTQ bullying persists. Participants were recruited from LGBTQ and SHP organizations and networks as well as from the personal and professional networks of individuals on the youth and community advisory board. It is therefore possible that participants may have had a greater interest in this topic, or greater willingness to talk about their experiences of bullying, than others. Future work in this area should employ recruitment methods that may yield more representative samples. Some LGBTQ identities and experiences were underrepresented in the student sample, and therefore results may not generalize to all LGBTQ students. For example, our sample included only one young transgender woman. Transgender women may be particularly at risk of some forms of more extreme bullying, such as sexual harassment due to intersecting transphobia and misogyny, and therefore more research is needed to better capture their experiences of LGBTQ bullying. Moreover, LGBTQ students may experience bullying based on other characteristics, including disability, weight, and religion. More research is needed with diverse samples of LGBTQ students to further understand intersectional experiences of bullying. Similarly, the SHPs included in the current sample were homogeneous in regard to race/ethnicity, gender, and sexual orientation. Although this may reflect the population of SHPs, which predominately identify as White and women ( Willgerodt, Brock, & Maughan, 2018 ), it is possible that SHPs from more diverse backgrounds, including LGBTQ SHPs and SHPs of color, have different perspectives on LGBTQ bullying. Future research with diverse samples of SHPs is needed to continue to understand SHP perspectives on LGBTQ bullying. Also needed are studies in other geographic regions. According to GLSEN’s 2017 National School Climate Survey ( Kosciw et al., 2018 ), LGBTQ students in the Northeast and West report lower rates of LGBTQ bullying than LGBTQ students in the South and Midwest regions of the United States. These students also report greater access to LGBTQ-related resources at school, and are more likely to live in states with enumerated anti-bullying laws and policies protecting students from LGBTQ bullying. It is critical to examine the perspectives of LGBTQ students and SHPs living in other states, especially in places where LGBTQ bullying may be more pronounced.

Conclusions and implications

Recent researchers and practitioners have called for greater involvement of SHPs in LGBTQ bullying interventions ( Earnshaw et al., 2017 ; Espelage, 2016 ; Graybill & Proctor, 2016 ). In particular, SHPs have potential to play a powerful role in indicated preventive bullying interventions by identifying and supporting LGBTQ students experiencing bullying. The current study identifies two potential barriers to SHPs’ involvement in such LGBTQ bullying interventions, including: (1) lack of awareness of LGBTQ bullying among SHPs, and (2) lack of knowledge and skills to guide SHPs in their response to LGBTQ bullying. Interventions that enhance communication between LGBTQ students and SHPs may help to improve awareness of LGBTQ bullying among SHPs. Given LGBTQ students’ concerns regarding confidentiality surrounding their sexual orientations and gender identities, it is critical that such communication be confidential, safe, and supportive. Additionally, interventions that enhance knowledge of LGBTQ students’ experiences and needs as well as skills to interact with LGBTQ students may strengthen SHPs’ abilities to serve this vulnerable population. Clear policies that delineate how SHPs should respond to LGBTQ bullying may reduce ambiguity and variability in SHP responses.

There are existing resources that may inform these intervention efforts and aid SHPs in their current efforts to support LGBTQ youth. StopBullying.gov (2019) contains resources to help adults identify bullying and initiate conversations surrounding bullying. SHPs may consider using a combination of direct (e.g., Have you been bullied by other student?) and indirect (e.g., Have you had any problems accessing restrooms?) questions to assess whether youth have experienced bullying ( Earnshaw, Bogart, Poteat, Reisner, & Schuster, 2016 ). Additionally, the American Medical Association offers educational resources for healthcare professionals about the health needs of LGBTQ individuals ( Understanding LGBTQ health issues, 2019 ), and GLSEN offers professional development resources for educators about the unique needs of LGBTQ students (Read, watch, collaborate: GLSEN PD for educators, n.d.). With greater support, guidance, and training, SHPs are poised to become an effective resource for LGBTQ students experiencing bullying.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to acknowledge and thank the youth and community advisory board for their contributions and collaboration on this study (alphabetical): Landon Callahan, Sonya Epstein, Opal Hines-Fisher, Lee Hoegler, Kira Houston, Karen Jarvis-Vance, Ken Rufo, and Rothsaida Sylviance.

This work was conducted with support from Harvard Catalyst & The Harvard Clinical and Translational Science Center (National Center for Research Resources and the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, National Institutes of Health Award UL1 TR001102) and financial contributions from Harvard University and its affiliated academic healthcare centers. VAE’s contributions were further supported by the National Institute on Drug Abuse (K01 DA042881). Funders were not involved in the study design; collection, analysis, or interpretation of the data; write up of the report; or decision to submit the article for publication. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of Harvard Catalyst, Harvard University and its affiliated academic healthcare centers, or the National Institutes of Health.

Disclosure statement

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interests. They alone are responsible for the content and writing of the paper.

Supplemental data for this article is available online at https://doi.org/10.1080/19361653.2019.1653808 .

• Beebe J (2001). Rapid assessment practice: An introduction . New York, NY: AltaMira Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Beebe J (2014). Rapid qualitative inquiry: A field guide to team-based assessment (2nd ed.). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield. [ Google Scholar ]
• Cole ER (2009). Intersectionality and research in psychology . The American Psychologist , 64 ( 3 ), 170–180. doi: 10.1037/a0014564 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Crenshaw K, Creer J, Cheung E, Rimonte N, Smith F, Banks T, … Monaghan H (1991). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color . Stanford Law Review , 43 ( 6 ), 1241–1299. doi: 10.2307/1229039 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Daley A, Solomon S, Newman PA, & Mishna F (2007). Traversing the margins: Intersectionalities in the bullying of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender youth . Journal of Gay & Lesbian Social Services , 19 ( 3–4 ), 9–29. doi: 10.1080/10538720802161474 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Dominski EH (2016). Intersectional bullying, LGBT youth and the construction of power . International Journal of Educational and Pedagogical Sciences , 20 ( 9 ), 3265–3269. [ Google Scholar ]
• Earnshaw VA, Bogart LM, Poteat VP, Reisner SL, & Schuster MA (2016). Bullying among lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender youth . Pediatric Clinics of North America , 63 ( 6 ), 999–1010. doi: 10.1016/j.pcl.2016.07.004 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Earnshaw VA, Reisner SL, Juvonen J, Hatzenbuehler ML, Perrotti J, & Schuster MA (2017). LGBTQ bullying: Translating research to action in pediatrics . Pediatrics , 140 ( 4 ), e20170432. doi: 10.1542/peds.2017-0432 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Earnshaw VA, Reisner SL, Menino DD, Poteat VP, Bogart LM, Barnes TN, & Schuster MA (2018). Stigma-based bullying interventions: A systematic review . Developmental Review , 48 , 178. doi: 10.1016/j.dr.2018.02.001 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Earnshaw VA, Rosenthal L, Carroll-Scott A, Peters SM, McCaslin C, & Ickovics JR (2014). Teacher involvement as a protective factor from the association between race-based bullying and smoking initiation . Social Psychology of Education , 17 ( 2 ), 197. doi: 10.1007/s11218-014-9250-1 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Espelage DL (2016). Sexual orientation and gender identity in schools: A call for more research in school psychology-no more excuses . Journal of School Psychology , 54 , 5–8. doi: 10.1016/j.jsp.2015.11.002 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fekkes M (2006). Do bullied children get ill, or do ill children get bullied? A prospective cohort study on the relationship between bullying and health-related symptoms . Pediatrics , 117 ( 5 ), 1568–1574. doi: 10.1542/peds.2005-0187 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Friedman MS, Koeske GF, Silvestre AJ, Korr WS, & Sites EW (2006). The impact of gender-role nonconforming behavior, bullying, and social support on suicidality among gay male youth . Journal of Adolescent Health , 38 ( 5 ), 621–623. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2005.04.014 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gini G, & Pozzoli T (2013). Bullied children and psychosomatic problems: A meta-analysis . Pediatrics , 132 ( 4 ), 720–729. doi: 10.1542/peds.2013-0614 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gladden RM, Vivolo-Kantor AM, Hamburger ME, & Lumpkin CD (2014). Bullying surveillance among youths: Uniform definitions for public health and recommended data elements, version 1.0 . Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/bullying-definitions-final-a.pdf [ Google Scholar ]
• Graybill EC, & Proctor SL (2016). Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender youth: Limited representation in school support personnel journals . Journal of School Psychology , 54 , 9–16. doi: 10.1016/j.jsp.2015.11.001 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Juvonen J, & Graham S (2014). Bullying in schools: The power of bullies and the plight of victims . Annual Review of Psychology , 65 , 159–185. doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-010213-115030 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kosciw JG, Greytak EA, Zongrone AD, Clark CM, & Truong NL (2018). The 2017 National School Climate Survey: The experiences of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer youth in our nation’s schools . New York, NY: GLSEN. [ Google Scholar ]
• McLemore KA (2015). Experiences with misgendering: Identity misclassification of transgender spectrum individuals . Self and Identity , 14 ( 1 ), 51–74. doi: 10.1080/15298868.2014.950691 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• McMullen CK, Ash J, Sittig D, Bunce A, Guappone K, Dykstra R, … Wright A (2011). Rapid assessment of clinical information systems in the healthcare setting: An efficient method for time-pressed evaluation . Methods of Information in Medicine , 1 ( 3 ), 233–245. doi: 10.1016/j.dcn.2011.01.002 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Meezan W, & Martin JL (Eds.). (2009). Handbook of research with lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender populations (1st ed.). New York, NY: Routledge. [ Google Scholar ]
• Mink MD, Lindley LL, & Weinstein AA (2014). Stress, stigma, and sexual minority status: The intersectional ecology model of LGBTQ health . Journal of Gay & Lesbian Social Services , 26 ( 4 ), 502–521. doi: 10.1080/10538720.2014.953660 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Nadal KL, Whitman CN, Davis LS, Erazo T, & Davidoff KC (2016). Microaggressions toward lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and genderqueer people: A review of the literature . The Journal of Sex Research , 53 ( 4–5 ), 488–508. doi: 10.1080/00224499.2016.1142495 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM). (2016). Preventing bullying through science, policy, and practice . Washington, DC: National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23482 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Read, watch, collaborate: GLSEN PD for educators. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.glsen.org/educate/professional-development
• Reisner SL, Randazzo RK, White Hughto JM, Peitzmeier S, DuBois LZ, Pardee DJ, … Potter J (2018). Sensitive health topics with underserved patient populations: Methodological considerations for online focus group discussions . Qualitative Health Research , 28 ( 10 ), 1658–1673. doi: 10.1177/1049732317705355 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rosenthal L (2016). Incorporating intersectionality into psychology: An opportunity to promote social justice and equity . American Psychologist , 71 ( 6 ), 474–485. doi: 10.1037/a0040323 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rosenthal L, Earnshaw VA, Carroll-Scott A, Henderson KE, Peters SM, McCaslin C, & Ickovics JR (2015). Weight- and race-based bullying: Health associations among urban adolescents . Journal of Health Psychology , 20 ( 4 ), 401–412. doi: 10.1177/1359105313502567 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Russell ST, & Joyner K (2001). Adolescent sexual orientation and suicide risk: Evidence from a national study . American Journal of Public Health , 91 ( 8 ), 1276–1281. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.91.8.1276 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Russell ST, Ryan C, Toomey RB, Diaz RM, & Sanchez J (2011). Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender adolescent school victimization: Implications for young adult health and adjustment . Journal of School Health , 81 ( 5 ), 223–230. doi: 10.1111/j.1746-1561.2011.00583.x [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Russell ST, Sinclair KO, Poteat VP, & Koenig BW (2012). Adolescent health and harassment based on discriminatory bias . American Journal of Public Health , 102 ( 3 ), 493–495. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2011.300430 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sabone M, Ntsayagae E, Brown MS, Seboni NM, Mogobe KD, & Sebego M (2007). Perceptions of undergraduate students not participating in HIV/AIDS prevention activities in Botswana . International Nursing Review , 54 ( 4 ), 332–338. doi: 10.1111/j.1466-7657.2007.00544.x [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• StopBullying.gov . (2019). Retrieved from https://www.stopbullying.gov
• Understanding LGBTQ health issues. (2019). Retrieved from https://www.ama-assn.org/delivering-care/population-care/understanding-lgbtq-health-issues
• Vaillancourt T, Hymel S, & McDougall P (2013). The biological underpinnings of peer victimization: Understanding why and how the effects of bullying can last a lifetime . Theory into Practice , 52 ( 4 ), 241–248. doi: 10.1080/00405841.2013.829726 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Vessey JA, & O’Neill KM (2011). Helping students with disabilities better address teasing and bullying situations: A MASNRN study . The Journal of School Nursing , 27 ( 2 ), 139–148. doi: 10.1177/1059840510386490 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Willgerodt MA, Brock DM, & Maughan ED (2018). Public school nursing practice in the United States . Journal of School Nursing , 34 ( 3 ), 232–244. doi: 10.1177/1059840517752456 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

Key Factors Related to LGBTQ Bullying

Learning more about our values will help us proactively prevent bullying..

Posted June 8, 2023 | Reviewed by Vanessa Lancaster

• How to Handle Bullying
• Find counselling to support kids or teens
• In 1999, nearly 51 percent of LGB teens reported being depressed. The figure has not changed.
• One of the most significant ways we can prevent bullying is to help youth connect to their values.
• Children need to understand that their identity should not be a cause for bullying.

Once, while teaching a social-emotional learning (SEL) class, one of the youths I worked with told me how badly he was bullied during high school. I was shocked because he was such an outgoing and gregarious young man.

When I expressed my disbelief, he said, “Why is that so surprising? I’m a little gay boy.” Even though he was 22 and came from a completely different generation from me, it was still the rule, not an exception: LGBTQ+ youth get bullied. Also, his language and referring to himself as “a little gay boy” was almost as if he subconsciously blamed the reason for getting bullied on himself.

As parents and caregivers, we must continue to reinforce at home that, no matter what, a child is never the cause of getting bullied. Nothing about an individual needs to change in order to prevent bullying . That’s like saying a person who dresses a certain way is responsible for being harassed. The bully and the reasons they choose to bully are what needs to change. Creating a new narrative and shifting the focus will prevent shame from continuing to be the subconscious self-talk of bullied youth.

Each of us is familiar with bullying. We’ve either been bullied ourselves, or it has indirectly touched our lives. For LGBTQ+ youth, the numbers are consistently higher. Institutional, cultural, familial, and interpersonal discriminatory beliefs are the root causes of violence toward LGBTQ+ individuals. There are many intersectionalities related to these types of discrimination , but the key factors related to LGBTQ+ bullying are sexism, racism, classism, misogyny, toxic masculinity, queerphobia, heteronormativity , and shame.

What LGBTQ+ bullying boils down to is fear . And fear can manifest itself in many ways. What drives bullying is usually related, but not limited to lack, unhappiness, insecurity, disempowerment, no feeling of purpose, hurt, anger , blame, peer pressure , group dynamics, rite of passage, need to fit in, and power dynamics.

Ultimately, LGBTQ+ bullying looks like fear + misguided beliefs = LGBTQ+ bullying .

One of the principles of non-violent communication is that we always operate from our values. At any given moment, our actions reflect our values. One of the most significant ways we can prevent bullying is to help youth consciously connect to their values. Only when we know our values can we know when we aren’t connected to them.

Proactive Prevention

A few years ago, I remember talking to my six-year-old niece. She told me how two of her friends had come by earlier in the day.

I said, “Oh, how fun. Did they come over to play?”

She replied, “No, they came over to say sorry for pulling my hair.”

Surprised, I asked my niece, “What did you say after they apologized?”

She immediately said, “I accept your apology!”

I had to laugh at how cute she was. Then I asked where she learned such a mature response. She told me it was something they learned at school, so I asked her to give me an example of how it’s taught.

She said, “Well if one student is mean to another student, our teacher will bring us together and ask them to apologize . The apology isn’t complete until the other person says, ‘I accept your apology.’” Then, in the most matter-of-fact way and in her cute six-year-old voice, she said, “I don’t know why we don’t do that at home. Home is just the same as school, so I don’t understand why it’s not something we do at home.”

I had to pause with what she said because it was true. What I learned teaching social-emotional learning for six years is how important it is for parents to reinforce at-home concepts our students learned in class.

Most children of marginalized groups, including LGBTQ+ youth, have received some form of shameful message about their identity . Especially if their identity isn’t spoken about or affirmed by an adult when they are young. The more we engage in open and honest conversations with children at home, the more we can proactively prevent bullying and shame–including some of their most harmful effects , like addiction , suicide , and depression .

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) published a study in The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) in 2019 that shows the suicide rate in the United States among 15-24-year-olds has increased to its highest point since 2000, with a recent increase, especially in males 15-19 years old. Not long after, US News and World Report released a study published in JAMA Pediatrics showing while depression rates for heterosexual teens have dropped since 1999, the rate for LGB teens hasn’t dropped. Depression rates for LGB teens have remained the same (the study didn’t include results from transgender youth).

According to the study, each year between 1999 and 2017, roughly 33,500 teens were surveyed on their struggles with sustained bouts of depressed moods, such as sadness and hopelessness. Among the teens who identified as straight, about 3 in 10 reported being depressed for two weeks in a row or more in 1999. By 2017, the number dropped five percentage points. For sexual -minority teens, the numbers were much worse. In 1999, approximately 51 percent of LGB teens reported being depressed. And nearly 20 years later, the figure hasn’t changed. Caitlin Ryan, director of the Family Acceptance Project at San Francisco State University, says that while images of LGB people have become more positive over the past 20 years, “there is an enormous gap between need and reality when it comes to social services for LGBT youth.”

Caitlin talks about the importance of getting families and more social services involved to support youth. She says,

Kids are coming out earlier, and parents are much more aware of sexual orientation and gender identification than ever. That’s great. But that means we now have to step up and fill a huge and continuously growing need for more and more child development and family support to help these kids.

Ultimately, having systems in place at home, in schools, and on playgrounds will help us empower youth and prevent LGBTQ+ bullying.

“The answer to the bullying problem,” says Brené Brown, “starts with this question: Do we have the courage to be the adults that our children need us to be? ”

If you or someone you love is contemplating suicide, seek help immediately. For help 24/7, dial 988 for the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline, or reach out to the Crisis Text Line by texting TALK to 741741. T o find a therapist, visit the Psychology Today Therapy Directory .

“National Survey on LGBTQ Youth Mental Health,” The Trevor Project , 2019, https://www.thetrevorproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/The-Trevor-… .

Oren Miron, MA et al., “Suicide Rates Among Adolescents and Young Adults in the United States, 2000-2017,” JAMA , June 18, 2019, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2019.5054 .

Alan Mozes, “Depression Rates Not Budging for Lesbian and Gay Teens,” US News & World Report , October 22, 2019, https://www.usnews.com/news/health-news/articles/2019-10-22/depression-… .

Chris Tompkins is a Registered Associate Marriage and Family Therapist, life coach, TEDx speaker, and author of the best-selling book, Raising LGBTQ Allies: A Parent's Guide to Changing the Messages from the Playground .

• Find a Therapist
• Find a Treatment Center
• Find a Support Group
• International
• New Zealand
• South Africa
• Switzerland
• Asperger's
• Bipolar Disorder
• Chronic Pain
• Eating Disorders
• Passive Aggression
• Personality
• Goal Setting
• Positive Psychology
• Stopping Smoking
• Low Sexual Desire
• Relationships
• Child Development
• Therapy Center NEW
• Diagnosis Dictionary
• Types of Therapy

Understanding what emotional intelligence looks like and the steps needed to improve it could light a path to a more emotionally adept world.

• Coronavirus Disease 2019
• Affective Forecasting
• Neuroscience

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

LGBT bullying in school: a troubling relational story

Communication Education

Related Papers

Jessica Ringrose

In this talk I outline my positions related to research on bullying for the World Anti-bullying Forum 2017, Stockholm #WABF2017. I argue 'bullying' and 'cyberbullying' are concepts that are overused and perhaps reaching the end of their ability to explain or address the complexity of conflict and violence in institutional settings or online in our digitally mediated world. New terminology is needed to enable the reduction of gender, sexual, race-related (and other forms of) violence. Effective strategies to improve the (e)safety and well-being of young people in schools must consider student's backgrounds and protected identities and rights. The terms violence, technologically facilitated violence, harassment, abuse, hate-speech, conflict, sexism, racism, homophobia (and others) all offer useful tools to expand our vocabulary and analysis as we work to tackle aggression and violence in schools.

Jaana Juvonen

Ellyn Rose Paderan

Bullying is a pervasive problem affecting school-age children. Reviewing the latest findings on bullying perpetration and victimization, we highlight the social dominance function of bullying; the inflated self-views of bullies, and the effects of their behaviors on victims. Illuminating the plight of the victim, we review evidence on the cyclical processes between the risk factors and consequences of victimization and the mechanisms that can account for elevated emotional distress and health problems. Placing bullying in context, we consider the unique features of electronic communication that give rise to cyber bullying and the specific characteristics of schools that affect the rates and consequences of victimization. We then offer a critique of the main intervention approaches designed to reduce school bullying and its harmful effects. Finally, we discuss future directions that underscore the need to consider victimization a social stigma, conduct longitudinal research on protective factors, identify school context factors that shape the experience of victimization, and take a more nuanced approach to school-based interventions.

Annual Review of Psychology

Bullying is a pervasive problem affecting school-age children. Reviewing the latest findings on bullying perpetration and victimization, we highlight the social dominance function of bullying, the inflated self-views of bullies, and the effects of their behaviors on victims. Illuminating the plight of the victim, we review evidence on the cyclical processes between the risk factors and consequences of victimization and the mechanisms that can account for elevated emotional distress and health problems. Placing bullying in context, we consider the unique features of electronic communication that give rise to cyberbullying and the specific characteristics of schools that affect the rates and consequences of victimization. We then offer a critique of the main intervention approaches designed to reduce school bullying and its harmful effects. Finally, we discuss future directions that underscore the need to consider victimization a social stigma, conduct longitudinal research on protective factors, identify school context factors that shape the experience of victimization, and take a more nuanced approach to school-based interventions.

White Paper

Valerie L Marsh

Although the bully-victim conflict is an age-old scenario, researchers only began studying it in school settings 45 years ago. The most agreed upon definition of bullying includes three criteria: 1) intentionality (desire or goal of inflicting harm, intimidation, and/or humiliation), 2) some repetitiveness, and most importantly, 3) a power imbalance between the socially or physically more prominent bully and the more vulnerable victim. The power differential can manifest among a variety of factors, such as physical dominance, self- confidence, peer group status, etc. Conversely, conflict between equals is not considered bullying, but rather, general aggression. Another, more recent concept that has emerged in the field of bullying research is the category of “bully-victims,” a smaller subset of youth who both perpetrate and experience bullying. The forms bullying can take include: direct aggression (e.g., name calling, hitting, belittling someone in front of others) or indirect, relational aggression (e.g., spreading rumors, exclusion from the group, hurting another’s reputation). Often occurring in school contexts, which has expanded in recent years to include cyberbullying in the virtual worlds of digital and social media, bullying takes place throughout the school years, from elementary to high school and has likewise been studied across the grades. And since bullying is a familiar, if not intimate, school experience for most people, it is sometimes easy or tempting to accept it as a rite of passage or a typical childhood experience, rather than a problem that needs to be addressed. As Olweus (2013) explains, “being bullied by peers represents a serious violation of the fundamental rights of the child or youth exposed” (p. 770). It is with this understanding of bullying – as a violation of basic human rights – that this two-part brief explores the phenomenon (history, prevalence, risk factors, and consequences) in Part I and reviews research- based interventions in Part II.

Encyclopedia of Social Work Online

Jonathan B Singer

Bullying is the most common form of violence in schools and has been shown to disrupt the emotional and social development of both the targets and the perpetrators of bullying (Raskauskas & Stoltz, 2007). Bullying can be physical, verbal, relational, and direct or indirect. There are well-established age and sex trends (Olweus, 1993; Smith, Madsen, & Moody, 1999). There has been considerable research on bullying-prevention programs and scholarship on best-practice guidelines for school social workers (Dupper, 2013). An emerging concern is with the use of electronic and Internet devices in bullying, referred to as “cyberbullying.” In this article we define bullying and cyberbullying; discuss risk factors associated with being a bully, a victim, and a bully-victim; describe prevention and intervention programs; and discuss emerging trends in both bullying and cyberbullying.

The Wiley Handbook of Group Processes in Children and Adolescents

Dr. Robyn Cooper

Journal of Gay & Lesbian Social Services

Faye Mishna , Peter A Newman

Shelley Hymel

RELATED PAPERS

Paediatrics & Child Health

Yossef Nasser

SSRN Electronic Journal

Vern R. Walker

2017 IEEE 5th Portuguese Meeting on Bioengineering (ENBENG)

Luís Serrador

Journal of Stress Physiology & Biochemistry

Marcio Vieira de Souza

Debates do NER

Léa Freitas Perez

Jurnal Ekonomi dan Bisnis

roos andadari

Environmental Earth Sciences

Jurnal Ilmu Perpustakaan

Siti Maziyah

Juan Daniel Díez González

Ayesha Nayyab

Revista De Economia Institucional

Mauricio Hernandez Rubio

E3S Web of Conferences

Gianluca Carraro

Journal of Difference Equations and Applications

mustafa avcı

AIMS Mathematics

Doug Dokken

Annales de Bretagne et des pays de l'Ouest

Edouard Ebel

Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/Hemostasis

Nermin Gözükırmızı

Mutiara Sagita

Avances en Ciencias …

Gosmyr Torres

Journal of Food Science

hany ibrahim

Open Forum Infectious Diseases

Kelly Reyna

办UofT毕业证书多伦多大学毕业证成绩单 QQ微信1989 88881

Turkish Journal of Pathology

Pinar Firat

2006 IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory

Daniel Marco

Journal of Microscopy

Dominique Barchiesi

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

Essay about Bullying in LGBTQ Students

In the past ten years an overwhelming amount of students have come out to say that they are some form of LGBTQ. According to the center of disease control roughly 1.3 million high school students identify as LGBTQ. These students face turmoil and outright discrimination in school. The widely used acronym stands for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender etc. While repetitive bullying has occasionally lead to self mutilation or suicide, bullying in LGBTQ teens make both of these occurrences significantly more frequent. Due to the overwhelming amount of harassment targeted towards LGBTQ students there have been a number of laws placed into order to protect these student, however these laws even when in effect are not always followed by school officials.

Anti-LGBTQ harassment is one of the more damaging threats these students face in our public schools. Due to the overwhelming amount of harassment there have been multiple laws put in place. For instance under the U.S Constitution, public schools are required to to address harassment against LGBTQ students the same way they would address any other harassment. Equal protection of the law regardless of gender, race, sexuality or disability is guaranteed by the fifth and fourteenth amendments. This prohibits taking bullying or harrassment including an LGBTQ person anyless serious. In addition title nine protects students in schools that receive financial assistance from discrimination based on sex. This also protects students from sexual harassment and discrimination for failing to conform to gender stereotypes.

Every year the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN) produces a climate survey of LGBTQ high school students in the United States. This survey includes statistics on harassment, safety, gender identity and sexuality. As well as students access to a Gay-Straight-Alliance, supportive staff and curriculum resources. Schools nationwide are known to be a distressing place for LGBTQ students. The data provided by GLSEN was produced through a seven month online survey. To insure representation of all minority youths they made special efforts to notify groups and organizations that work with transgender youth, youth of color, and youth in rural communities as well as other minorities.This sample included 23,001 students ranging from 13 to 21 years old. Roughly 67.5% of students were caucasian, 34.1% cis-gender female and 41.6% either gay or lesbian. Schools nationwide are known to be a distressing place for LGBTQ students.This survey helped many schools find ways to better the enviroment for their LGBTQ students.

On overwhelming amount of LGBTQ students stated that they feel unsafe in school due to either their sexual orientation, gender expression or gender identity. Due to the amount of saftey concerns for LGBTQ students over one-third of students stated they had missed at least one day of school due to feeling unsafe at school. 59.5% of LGBTQ teens stated they felt unsafe or unwelcome due to their sexual orientation and 44.6% said they felt that way due to their gender expression. Over a tench of these students stated they missed four or more days in the past month.These students said they felt threatened most in bathrooms (42.7%), Locker rooms (40.6%), and P.E. classes (39.3). The environment of a high school is a major part of a students education due to them spending the majority of their day in the same atmosphere. A majority of the reasons for lack of safety for LGBTQ students is due to the language used in school. 98.5 percent of students stated that they heard “gay” used in a negative way at school while 91.8% of them reported feeling distress due to the language. Teachers remarks make a big influence of students even when it is not seen. 56.6% of students reported hearing homophobic remarks from a teacher while 71% said they heard negative remarks about gender expression from a teacher or other school staff.

Bullying or many typed has been a problem in high school since they were first founded. But how much does someone’s sexual orientation or gender change that? More than 80% of LGBTQ students have experienced harassment or assault in school. Sexual orientation and gender expression are the most common reasons LGBTQ students were harassed or assaulted in school according to the GLSEN climate report. Bullying is not just verbal, nearly half of the students reported being physically harassed at school because they are part of the LGBTQ community while over half of LGBTQ students have been sexually harassed at school in the past year. Harassment doesn’t always end when a student leaves the school. Often bullying continues online. 48.7% of LGBTQ students have reported being bullied electronically in the past year either through texting, social media or email. The most common way to end bullying is to simply report it to an authority figure. How ever the majority of LGBTQ students who were assaulted or harassed at school did not report these incidents. When asked why they did not report the issue, the majority of students stated that it was because they feared that the situation would get worse due to ineffective interventions. After reporting the incidence 60% of students stated that the staff took no action in regards to the victimization. 21.4% of staff even told the student being harassed to change their behavior by “acting less gay” or dressing differently. These are inattaquit ways of handling these serious situations and can cause a great amount of stress for students.

Negative language surrounding a students identity can negatively affect a students self esteem and way they see themselves. In GLSEN’s climate report survey that asked students multiple questions about the amount of times they heard negative statements surounding LGBTQ students such as; “that’s so gay”, “fag”, “dyke” or “no homo”. 70% of students reported hearing these comments often or frequently in high schools all of the united states. Over 40% of students reported hearing students say “that’s so homo” frequently in school while 36.8% hears other homophobic remarks such as “faggot” ot “dyke” said frequently. Often when students use the term gay negatively they do not mean someone who likes the same gender, they mean something that is stupid or annoying. After hearing gay used in a negative manner 91.8% of students stated that they were in some form of distress. Negative comments are not just about one’s sexuality but also could be involving someone’s gender expression. Society often imposes norms for what is considered an appropriate expression of gender. Those who do not fit the gender binary or do not express their gender for what is seen to be “normal” are often a target for bullying and violence. 98.8% of students involved with the survey dont my GLSEN stated that at some point in the past year they have heard negative comments about gender expression in school.. When asked about comments made of gender expression 92.2% of LGBTQ students have heard comments about someone not acting masculine enough while 87.1% of students have heard comments surrounding not being feminine enough. The pressure to fit the gender binary is already overwhelming for our non gender conforming teens but it is only being made worse by the intolerance and negativity or others.

Discrimination in schools is such a large issue that there have been multiple laws put in place to help protect LGBTQ students from discrimintation. The most common form of discrimination presented in the GLSEN climate survey is the act or restricting LGBTQ expression. 32% of LGBTQ students stated that hey have been punished for displaying affection such as kissing, hugging, or holding hands to someone of the same sex. Other predominant acts of stifling LGBT expression in high schools is the restriction of LGBTQ involved clothing, LGBTQ discussions and writing or presentation topics involving LGBTQ issues. While this is not directly related to harassment of teens. Stifling of one’s expression is a large issue that often is one of the main causes of harassment because when a student is not allowed to truly express themselves, other students see that unlike heterosexual relationships this is not seen as “normal” and thus something that should be made fun of. One student in the survey stated, “When I tried to make one of my open ended projects LGBTQ related, the teacher told me that it was inappropriate and forced me to restart the project.” During these studys GLSEN found that LGBTQ students were half as likely to participate in extracurricular activities than their non-LGBTQ peers.

One large struggle of LGBTQ students (specifically transgender or non gender conforming students) is the separation in schools based on sex. The separation of girls and boys reinforces toxic gender roles and causes a significant amount of distress for trans and non gender conforming students. The separation depending on gender provides no option for non binary students often making them feel hopeless and alone. 48.6% of students stated that their homecoming courts (kings and queens) are separated by gender. Not only does this strictly enforce heteronormativity but it also leaves non gender conforming and transgender people feeling as though they are not accepted. Often schools also enforce dress codes based on gender, for instance it is frequently required for girls to wear dresses to prom or dances. This is an issue for transgender students who may not be out in school that may cause them to skip these dances all together due to the requirements. 31.1% of students stated that even their graduation attire is gendered with boys wearing one color and girls wearing another. The separation of gender in schools not only hard the students who do not identify with their birth gender but also gives the aggressors more reason to victemize the LGBTQ students due to their predominant sensitivity to the subject. Often when LGBTQ students are struggling it is hard to help them, instead it is best to show all students from the beginning that there are resources for them to use rather than helping them after they come out, are harrassed, or are already struggling. Less than half of the students in the GLSEN climate survey reported being able to find books including information on LGBTQ-related topics or LGBTQ history in their school library. LGBTQ representation in clasrooms is important for both the LGBTQ students and those who lack knowledge of the topic and perhaps could be the antagonizer. 64.8% of students stated that there had been no representation of LGBTQ youth in their classrooms during the past year while 15.3% said there had been repressentation of LGBTQ topics in a negarive view. Having a teacher, staff member or guidance counselor to be able to talk to is a large help to LGBTQ youth who may be struggling. 96.6% of students stated that they could identify at least one staff member in their school who they could turn to in time of need while 61% said they would identify six or more.

LGBTQ students who ar victemized often find it hard to continue attending school. LGBTQ students who are harassed and assaulted are found to have significantly lower grade point averages. 3.8% of LGBTQ students stated that they either do not plan to graduate or are unsure if they will graduate. 834 students in this survey stated they did not plan to finish high school due to mental health concerns while 539 said it was because of hostile school environments. One student in the survey stated, “I’m moving out of state so I can begin to transition from female to male. If I can get accepted to a college I would like to become a teacher but I’ve had no guidance and I’m not sure what I need or how to achieve anything”.

Bullying is a large issue all over the world. However LGBTQ students are an easy target as they are often already considered abnormal. This a large issue in the world because of the suicide rate of teenagers, specifically LGBTQ students. There are multiple organizations that work with LGBTQ youth to better their life. For instance GLSEN, one of the larger organizations, works with schools to provide gay-straight-alliances and help LGBTQ youth with nessesities such as housing, food and support. The Trevor project is also a widely known organization moseley known for their work with suicidal LGBTQ youth. The Trevor Project takes volunteers to run a 24/7 emergancy hotline for LGBTQ people in trouble. They help people who might be suicidal, or just struggling.

For my activism project I want to do something in my community. I want to start a small event to raise money for LGBTQ organisations in Maine. An annual event that brings awareness to the increasing amounts of suicides involving LGBTQ youth. The money will be donated to the Gay Lesbian Straight Education Network to help other students not feel so alone.  

Bullying of LGBTQ Students in American Schools Essay

Article summary.

The chosen article focuses on the issue of bullying of LGBTQ students in American schools and its legal repercussions. The author shows that students who are openly gay or bi, as well as those who are suspected of being gay or bi, are subjected to verbal and physical harassment in American schools (Foxhoven, 2012). Bullying has significant repercussions for individuals’ psychological health and well-being, making this issue important. Still, according to Foxhoven (2012), school authorities often fail to take adequate action to stop anti-LGBTQ harassment and assaults, and courts also refuse from interfering. Hence, comprehensive policies to target the bullying of LBGTQ students in schools are required.

Anti-homosexuality is a significant problem in the contemporary world, and many people suffer from it. According to Gerber (2014), about 80 countries still criminalized homosexuality in 2014, thus restricting personal rights and freedoms. In countries where homosexuality is not criminalized, persons from the LGBTQ community still face discrimination and harassment. For example, Foxhoven (2012) reports that many school students who are openly gay or suspected of being gay are harassed verbally and physically. Bullying can damage people both physically and mentally, thus impacting gay people’s quality of life.

Workplace discrimination is also persistent, and it affects the range of career opportunities available to LGBTQ persons. TIlesik (2011) found that applicants who appeared to be gay were less likely to be considered for a job. This trend was particularly prominent among employers who highlighted the importance of traditionally masculine traits and qualities (Tilesik, 2011). Overall, the discrimination faced by people from the LGBTQ community has a substantial influence on their lives, and it is essential to address this problem to protect the rights of LGBTQ people.

Foxhoven, J. (2012). In search of federal remedies for LGBTQ students who are victims of assault and harassment in school. Buffalo Journal of Gender, Law and Social Policy, 21 (1), 45-77.

Gerber, P. (2014). Living a life of crime: The ongoing criminalisation of homosexuality within the Commonwealth. Alternative Law Journal, 39 (2), 78-83.

Tilcsik, A. (2011). Pride and prejudice: Employment discrimination against openly gay men in the United States. American Journal of Sociology, 117 (2), 586-626.

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2024, March 24). Bullying of LGBTQ Students in American Schools. https://ivypanda.com/essays/bullying-of-lgbtq-students-in-american-schools/

"Bullying of LGBTQ Students in American Schools." IvyPanda , 24 Mar. 2024, ivypanda.com/essays/bullying-of-lgbtq-students-in-american-schools/.

IvyPanda . (2024) 'Bullying of LGBTQ Students in American Schools'. 24 March.

IvyPanda . 2024. "Bullying of LGBTQ Students in American Schools." March 24, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/bullying-of-lgbtq-students-in-american-schools/.

1. IvyPanda . "Bullying of LGBTQ Students in American Schools." March 24, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/bullying-of-lgbtq-students-in-american-schools/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Bullying of LGBTQ Students in American Schools." March 24, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/bullying-of-lgbtq-students-in-american-schools/.

• Discriminative Anti-LGBTQ (Queer) Laws in Russia
• Gerber Product Company moral ethical issues
• Netflix and Its Understanding of Target Market
• A Perfect World - Film Analysis
• Karl Marx on Social Classes in a Letter to John Mayer
• Defining Characteristic of LGBTQ Community
• “Deaf Children’s Understanding”, “Research on Bi-Bi Instruction”, and “Research on Bi-Bi Instruction” Analysis
• Discussion of the Issue of Criminalization
• Suicide Risk in the LGBTQ Community
• LGBTQ+ Families: Discrimination and Challenges
• Male Victims of Intimate Partner Violence
• The Development of Transferred Aggression Expression Among Battered Women
• The #MeToo Movement and the Fight Against Sexual Violence
• The Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Violent Behavior
• Family and Domestic Violence: Enhancing Protective Factors

An official website of the United States government

Here’s how you know

Official websites use .gov

A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS

A lock ( ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

LGBTQI+ Youth

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex, nonbinary or otherwise gender non-conforming  (LGBTQI+) youth and those perceived as LGBTQI+ are at an increased risk of being bullied. Results from the  2021 Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS)  show that, nationwide, more U.S. high school students who self-identify as lesbian, gay, or bisexual (LGB) report having been bullied on school property (23%) and cyberbullied (27%) in the past year than their straight peers (7% and 13%, respectively). The study also showed that more LGB students (14%) than straight students (7%) reported not going to school because of safety concerns. Students who had any sexual contacts with those of the same sex also reported being bullied on school property (32%), being cyberbullied (37%), and not going to school because of safety concerns (18%).

Gaps in the data

Historically, YRBS and other studies have gathered data on lesbian, gay, and bisexual youth but have not included questions about transgender, non-binary, gender non-conforming, intersex, or queer youth. As that changes and data becomes available, this content will be updated to include information regarding these youth.

Additionally, LGBTQI+ youth are diverse and have other social identities, (e.g., religion, race/ethnicity) that may compound their experiences with bullying and harassment.

Bullying puts all youth at increased risk for depression, suicidal ideation, misuse of drugs and alcohol, experiencing sexual violence, engaging in unsafe sex practices, and can affect academics as well. For LGBTQI+ youth, that risk is even higher.

There are important and unique considerations for strategies to prevent and address bullying of LGBTQI+ youth. While some strategies are specifically for LGBTQI+ youth, most, if adopted by schools and communities, make environments safer for all students.

Create a Safe Environment for LGBTQI+ Youth

It is important to  build a safe environment  for all LGBTQI+ youth.  Parents, schools, and communities can all play a role in preventing bullying and helping LGBTQI+ youth feel physically and emotionally safe.

• Encourage respect for all students.
• Prohibit bullying, harassment, and violence against all students.
• Conduct social-emotional learning activities in school to foster peer-relationships and help students develop empathy.
• Identify "safe spaces," such as counselors' offices or designated classrooms, where LGBTQI+ youth can receive support from administrators, teachers, or other school staff.
• Encourage student-led and student-organized school clubs that promote a safe, welcoming, and accepting school environment (e.g., gay-straight alliances or gender and sexuality alliances). Schools must allow these clubs or groups if they have other "non-curricular" clubs or groups. Learn more about the  right to form a GSA under the Equal Access Act .
• Ensure that health curricula or educational materials include HIV, other STD/STI, and pregnancy prevention information that is relevant to LGBTQI+ youth.
• Use inclusive language and avoid making assumptions. The words we use can make help people feel acknowledged and create a sense of belonging. For example, using "y'all" when referring to a group conveys gender equality rather than using "guys." Use gender-neutral pronouns like "they" or "them" instead of "he/she" or "him/her." You can also use words like "parent" instead of "mother" and "father."
• Use students' chosen names and pronouns .
• Train school staff on how to create safe and supportive school environments for all students, including LGBTQI+ youth.
• Facilitate access to community-based providers who have experience providing health services, including medical, counseling, social, and psychological services, and HIV/STI testing for LGBTQI+ youth.

Find more resources for educators and parents

Federal Civil Rights Laws, Sexual Orientation, and Gender identity

On January 20, 2021, the President signed an Executive Order on Preventing and Combating Discrimination on the Basis of Gender Identity and Sexual Orientation which sets out the Administration's policy that  "[a]ll persons should receive equal treatment under the law, no matter their gender identity or sexual orientation."

• The U.S. Department of Justice issued a memo clarifying that the prohibition on discrimination "on the basis of sex" in Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (Title IX) includes discrimination on the basis of gender identity and sexual orientation.
• The U.S. Department of Education also confirmed that it will enforce Title IX protections against discrimination on the basis of sex, including sexual orientation and gender identity.

Read more about  federal civil rights laws .

What to do if you have faced discrimination

Students who believe they have faced discrimination at school based on sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, or because they do not conform with sex stereotypes, or for another reason may  file a complaint  with the U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights (OCR) or  submit a report  with the Department of Justice's Civil Rights Division.

LGBTQ bullying: a qualitative investigation of student and school health professional perspectives

Affiliations.

• 1 Department of Human Development and Family Sciences, University of Delaware, Newark, DE, USA.
• 2 Division of General Pediatrics, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
• 3 Safe Schools Program for LGBTQ Students, Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, Boston, MA, USA.
• 4 Center for Research in Education and Social Policy, University of Delaware, Newark, DE, USA.
• 5 Department of Pediatrics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
• 6 Department of Epidemiology, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA.
• 7 The Fenway Institute, Fenway Health, Boston, MA, USA.
• PMID: 33224407
• PMCID: PMC7678806
• DOI: 10.1080/19361653.2019.1653808

Researchers and practitioners have recently called for greater involvement of school health professionals (SHPs; e.g., school psychologists, nurses, guidance counselors) in interventions to identify and address bullying of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer/questioning (LGBTQ) students. To inform future interventions, this study explored the perspectives of LGBTQ students and SHPs on LGBTQ bullying and SHPs' responses to LGBTQ bullying. Five online, asynchronous focus groups were held in 2018 with 28 LGBTQ students and 19 SHPs recruited from Massachusetts, US. Methods were guided by Rapid Qualitative Inquiry. Results revealed a disconnect in perceptions of LGBTQ bullying among LGBTQ students versus SHPs, with LGBTQ students reporting a range of often significant verbal, social, and physical bullying experiences and SHPs reporting minimal awareness of LGBTQ bullying at their schools. Transgender students reported bullying related to their gender identity, including verbal, physical, and sexual harassment, deadnaming (referred to by their birth name), and misgendering (called an incorrect pronoun). LGBTQ students of color reported bullying based on their race/ethnicity and pronounced social isolation. LGBTQ students reported mixed experiences with reporting bullying to SHPs. Intervention efforts are needed to enhance communication between LGBTQ students and SHPs, and to strengthen SHPs' skills to respond to LGBTQ bullying.

Keywords: Bullying; LGBTQ; intervention development; qualitative; school health professionals.

Grants and funding

• K01 DA042881/DA/NIDA NIH HHS/United States
• UL1 TR001102/TR/NCATS NIH HHS/United States

Sexual assault, harassment, bullying: Trans students say they're targeted at school

Willow Andring, a 14-year-old transgender high school freshman, said she faces regular harassment at her school, Armstrong Junior-Senior High School in Kittanning, about 45 minutes northeast of Pittsburgh. 

A classmate yelled at her to get out of the girl’s restroom, and she’s been called both racist and homophobic slurs, she said.

In late October, that harassment escalated, and she was left with a concussion after another student attacked and beat her in an incident that was caught on camera and shared on social media.

Willow said she was nervous to return to school after that. “I’ve been sort of just hanging with my friends and trying to stay safe but also still have fun at school and learn,” she said.

Police are investigating the incident, and the Armstrong School District issued a statement last month vowing to punish the student who attacked Willow.

“The administration and the school board are well aware of this incident and the video tape that is circulating,” Todd Luke, president of the Armstrong School Board, said in the statement. “We are 100% behind Willow and, as a board, we are listening to the community.”

Heather Andring, Willow’s mother, said the student who attacked her daughter returned to school for a few days after the incident but hasn't been seen at school by Willow recently. Andring said school administrators told her that they couldn't share information related to disciplinary action because of student privacy laws.

Luke has not responded to a request for additional comment.

Willow is one of many transgender students who have faced repeated harassment and violence at school this year. At least a dozen news articles — from California to Florida — specifically mentioned trans students being harassed or attacked, some of them in bathrooms. 

I think that we, as both a community and a school, need to reflect on what’s happened, but take action and really try and create a better culture of just basic respect for other people.

Heather Andring

Advocates say it’s hard to tell whether trans students have faced more harassment and bullying at school this year or whether the stories are just getting more attention from local news outlets. Regardless, they and the parents of trans students who have experienced violence say that schools aren’t doing enough to address the problem, and the students themselves say they feel unsafe.

“I really want the school to take ownership of what happened,” Andring said, adding that she thinks there’s a larger cultural problem at the school that officials aren’t taking seriously enough. She pointed to an incident at a hockey game in October where a group of Armstrong students chanted derogatory remarks at a female goalie. “I think that we, as both a community and a school, need to reflect on what’s happened, but take action and really try and create a better culture of just basic respect for other people.”

‘An unsafe and unhealthy environment’

Advocates say that many students have reported facing more harassment and violence at school recently, but particularly LGBTQ students.

One advocate, a.t. furuya, senior youth programs manager at GLSEN, a national nonprofit that advocates for LGBTQ students, said multiple school districts have reported an increase in sexual and physical assaults. That uptick, said furuya, who uses gender-neutral pronouns and spells their name with all lowercase letters, doesn't appear to be specific to transgender students, but it’s likely that they are experiencing it as well because they already face disproportionate violence and harassment.

A national survey of LGBTQ students published in 2020 by GLSEN found that 69 percent of respondents reported experiencing verbal harassment at school based on their sexual orientation, 57 percent based on their gender expression or outward appearance, and 54 percent based on their gender identity.

The overall increase in assaults, furuya said, may be partially due to the fact that students have been remote for so long, leaving them without the accountability provided by the rules on a school campus and without awareness campaigns on the effects of bullying. 

It’s important for school staffers who hear of or notice an increase in violence or bullying to “come together to address this immediately, because we also know that bullying and harassment has long-term effects on young people,” furuya said, including poor mental health and an increased risk of suicide. 

One trans student in Wisconsin said that the harassment he and his friends have faced this year “has been unlike any other year I’ve been there,” and that it’s taking an emotional toll.

N., who asked to go by his first initial only because of safety concerns, is a 17-year-old senior at Arrowhead High School in Hartland, about 25 miles west of Milwaukee. He said that about two months ago, he was in the men's bathroom when someone came in and said in what he described as a threatening voice, “We got a t----- in here. I don’t know how I feel about that,” using an anti-trans slur.

He said he couldn’t provide a more precise time for when it happened, “because big incidents like that happen to me every week.”

He couldn’t identify the student by his voice, and there aren’t cameras in the bathrooms, but he said the school told him they would check the cameras outside of the bathrooms. He said he still hasn't received an update. 

Laura Myrah, superintendent of Arrowhead Union High School District, said the high school has “a large number of proactive and reactive practices in place to promote empathy, equality and appropriate behavior within our school.” 

“Arrowhead High School and our surrounding community, like most schools and communities, have room to grow when it comes to acceptance for all, eliminating bullying and discriminatory actions, etc.,” she said. “In addition to our school’s proactive policies and practices, every single case of harassing or bullying behavior that is brought to the attention of school counselors or administration is promptly investigated and addressed. Our Arrowhead Team strives for every student to be academically and socially/emotionally comfortable, confident and successful in their school.”

The district is also one of many across the country where transgender students have in some form been the subject of debate. School boards have increasingly weighed in on trans students’ rights to use the bathrooms that align with their gender identity as opposed to their assigned sexes at birth. Teachers have also faced scrutiny — and in some cases quit or lost their jobs — for displaying Pride flags or instituting other LGBTQ-inclusive policies. 

Nearly 30 states this year have also considered bills that would ban transgender athletes from playing on school sports teams that align with their gender identity, and governors in 10 states have signed such bills into law, according to the Movement Advancement Project, a nonprofit think tank.

N. said those kinds of debates have also made the climate at Arrowhead more hostile. He pointed to Arrowhead School Board member Amy Hemmer objecting to trans boys using the boys' bathroom at a school board meeting on Oct. 20.

“One of the things I wanted to address is bathrooms,” she said, about three hours and 40 minutes into the meeting. “We’re all kind of aware of a situation that happened, and since that time, I’ve heard from other parents about boys who have a girl who thinks she’s a boy walk in on them while they’re urinating.”

N. said he believes Hemmer was talking about him when she described a “girl who thinks she’s a boy.”

“I felt attacked and dehumanized by numerous things she said and so have my friends,” he added. “This has caused harassment to increase and our confidence to decrease. It’s getting to the point where students are trying to skip school or transfer to get away from it.”

During the October school board meeting, Hemmer said the rights of cisgender boys at the school were being ignored, and questioned whether transgender students should use separate, gender-neutral bathrooms. She also said that a parent told her that some teachers at Arrowhead provided a survey at the start of the school year that allowed students to provide their pronouns.

“I don’t believe our teachers should be promoting gender fluidity or whatever it is,” she said, adding that she thinks it’s one thing if a student wants to talk to a teacher one-on-one about their pronouns, but “to blanket everyone and kind of make it seem like it’s normal, I don’t agree with that, and I don’t think that’s what should be happening in our school.” 

N. said Hemmer’s rhetoric and the verbal harassment he and other LGBTQ students are facing at school are fostering "an unsafe and unhealthy environment."

When asked about N.'s comments, Hemmer said "no one is being 'dehumanized' as far as I know." 

"We have a situation at our school where some boys do not feel comfortable about a girl (trans) coming in and seeing their privates," she said in an email to NBC News. "We are looking into other options like barriers around urinals, more unisex bathrooms, etc. As for the pronouns, we are fine with such as long as those who don’t agree have a voice and don’t have to comply."

She added that trans students do have a bigger issue with bullying and harassment "and we need to do more to address such," she said. "We have learned a lot in a short period of time, and I do believe the bathroom issue was a catalyst."

A 'lack of understanding'

Some trans students and their parents said that, even in situations where schools are generally supportive, school staff struggle with adequately addressing targeted harassment and violence. 

Rissa Biesenthal said her 14-year-old, Lucas, was sexually assaulted in the boys’ bathroom at Berlin High School in Wisconsin last month. Lucas told WGBA-TV, an NBC affiliate in Green Bay, that a group of boys surrounded him in the bathroom and forced him to pull his pants down and pull his shirt up. The Berlin Police Department conducted an investigation and determined that no assault had occurred. 

“After multiple interviews and examining the associated evidence of the alleged assault, our investigation discovered no physical assault or attack against the alleged victim took place,” the department said in a statement to WGBA. Police added that a recording may have been taken of the victim while in a bathroom stall and asked anyone with information about the possible recording to contact them.

But Biesenthal isn’t satisfied with the police investigation, describing it as “a joke.” She said that the incident has had a negative effect on her child’s mental health and that the family is considering suing the school district.

“Prior to this, Lucas had depression and other mental health issues that we’ve been trying to address, and it kind of seems like it’s making things worse,” she said, referring to the alleged assault.

Lucas told WGBA that he was uncomfortable and scared following the incident.

“I didn’t really want to walk around the hallways after that,” he said. “I tried to ignore it, but it was hard. I finally spoke up to my friends about it, and now everybody knows about it.”

Nicholas Biesenthal, Lucas’ father, said he doesn’t understand how an assault could happen when the school required Lucas to have supervised bathroom breaks because he is transgender. 

A group of high school students who were frustrated with the Berlin Area School District’s response staged a walkout last month in support of Lucas.

At the time, School District Superintendent Carl Cartwright said the district “is committed to the success of all students in a safe learning environment and we take such allegations seriously.” He added that the district is conducting its own investigation, and that as a result it is unable to provide additional details.

In an email to NBC News, Cartwright said the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act prohibits the district from sharing student records, including whether the students who allegedly assaulted Lucas have faced repercussions at school.

What I see with trans students in schools is that adults immediately feel like, ‘Well, you don’t know who you really are, so I’m going to make those decisions for you.’ And that’s super invalidating.

a.t. furuya, GLSEN

The district provided another statement on Nov. 10 at a public school board meeting, in which it stated that it has made "significant progress" with a new code of student conduct, as well as policies for nondiscrimination and gender-affirming inclusive practices.

The district said it would take appropriate action and share its findings with the students involved in the investigation, their parents and anyone else who "needs to know" or is legally entitled to the information. "When individuals are found in violation of school board policy or the BASD Code of Student Conduct, they are held accountable for their actions," the statement said.

If the district doesn’t already have an inclusive curriculum and policies that lay out the consequences for harassment and violence, furuya said it should develop them and ensure that staff, parents, guardians and students are all aware of them. 

They said a lack of policies, or a policy that mandates that a trans student have supervised bathroom breaks, “comes back to lack of education for adults on what it means to be trans or queer … and I think that lack of understanding is what’s harming young people.”

“For a student who’s trans to have an educator standing outside of the bathroom when they use it is humiliating,” furuya said, adding that if educators think something is wrong or that the student feels unsafe they should have conversations with them about what would make them feel safer rather than assuming that they know best.

“What I see with trans students in schools is that adults immediately feel like, ‘Well, you don’t know who you really are, so I’m going to make those decisions for you,’” furuya said. “And that’s super invalidating.”

Follow  NBC Out  on  Twitter ,  Facebook  &  Instagram

Jo Yurcaba is a reporter for NBC Out.

LGBT Network gives youths a night to make noise against bullying, hate speech by smashing a wall

Teens spray paint a cinder block wall during the LGBT Network Night of Noise event in Hauppauge on Friday Credit: Barry Sloan

Jace Hunt, 11, of Bay Shore, took his turn with a can of spray paint to write hateful speech or names he had been called on a cinder block wall Friday night at the LGBT Network Hauppauge Center.

He spray painted the word “Hate.”

An hour later, he smashed the wall with a sledgehammer.

The shattering was part of the LGBT Network “Day of Silence/Night of Noise,” which gives LGBT youth a way to push back against bullying and the names or phrases they’ve been called in school or by other teens.

“It’s really cool for people like me to be here, in a place to be ourselves,” Jace said. “No one can judge me because we all share things in common. It’s nice we can express how we feel. Anyone who said they hate me to my face, I don’t care anymore because I can be myself.”

Friday night’s event is part of the annual Day of Silence to commemorate bullying and isolation LGBTQ students face. Traditionally, students practice silence before expressing themselves at night.

“This is a lifeline to kids to combat bullying and it’s something powerful for themselves, knowing they can break it and bullying doesn’t have to break them,” LGBT Network CEO Robert Vitelli said.

Before Jace took his swing at the wall, his mother said she brought him to the event to help him feel more accepted.

“As a parent, we’re always looking for resources for our children and a place to feel safe and be heard,” Angela Pharr said. “It’s heartbreaking to know the statistics and knowing he is being bullied. It feels good knowing he has people in his community who can understand what he’s going through.”

Vitelli noted the Day of Silence had waned in recent years because LGBTQ issues had become more widely known and the LGBTQ community had spoken up against prejudice.

Nine of 10 teens experienced bullying or anti-LGBTQ discrimination on a regular basis, Vitelli said. Teens can often drop out of school due to bullying and 20% to 30% of teens attempted suicide, Vitelli said. About 40% of teens may turn to drugs or alcohol to cope with bullying, he said.

“Kids want to speak out and that’s the power of the Night of Noise. They should speak up and say that’s not OK,” Vitelli said. “This helps introduce a positive coping mechanism for kids to speak up and have a positive outlet.”

Among the messages written on the cinder block wall, several teens wrote gay slurs and other hate speech, along with common homophobic tropes like, “It’s just a phase,” and “I’ll change your mind.”

After sundown, the group of more than 30 teens took turns swinging the sledgehammer to chip away at the hate speech used to demean them.

Austin Groverman, 13, of Lake Grove, came to Friday night’s event with her father to celebrate acceptance in the LGBTQ community and push back against bullying.

“People may say things about me behind my back, but it’s still hurtful,” she said. “We’re part of a group that doesn’t hurt anyone and it’s hurtful when you haven’t done anything wrong.”

Get the latest updates on how education is changing in your district.

By clicking Sign up, you agree to our privacy policy .

John Asbury is a breaking news and general assignment reporter. He has been with Newsday since 2014 and previously worked at The Press-Enterprise in Riverside, California.

Most Popular

Latest videos.