LGBTQ+ Youth Rourc | Lbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgenr Health | CDC

Contents:

• HOW DO YOU KNOW IF YOU’RE GAY, STRAIGHT, OR SOMETHG BETWEEN?
• LBIAN, GAY AND BISEXUAL GEN Z MEMBERS REPORT HIGHER ANXIETY, SADNS THAN PEERS: GALLUP
• WILLGNS TO REMA FRIENDS AND ATTEND SCHOOL WH LBIAN AND GAY PEERS: RELATNAL EXPRSNS OF PREJUDICE AMONG HETEROSEXUAL YOUTH
• UGUAY – MOST GAY IENDLY NATN SOUTH AMERI
• CHIGO YOUTH THEATRE FIR GAY TEACHER THEN LI
• PERCEIVED ATTUS OF FAY AND PEERS TOWARD SAME-SEX MARRIAGE AS A DISTAL SEXUAL MORY STRSOR FOR GAY AND BISEXUAL MEN TAIWAN
• HETEROSEXUAL ADOLCENTS’ AND YOUNG ADULTS’ BELIEFS AND ATTUS ABOUT HOMOSEXUALY AND GAY AND LBIAN PEERS
• STEP FORWARD INTO PAST FOR BRISH GAY COUPL: COATS OF ARMS
• STUNTS TAKE A SILENT STAND FOR GAY PEERS
• HIV AND ALL GAY AND BISEXUAL MEN
• GAY TEENS HAVE HIGHER PREGNANCY RAT THAN THEIR STRAIGHT PEERS
• ON LIVG AND DYG AS A GAY PERSON THE ARMENIAN CHURCH

HOW DO YOU KNOW IF YOU’RE GAY, STRAIGHT, OR SOMETHG BETWEEN?

Given the factors, tergroup ntact may functn very differently adolcence than do we know ltle about the role of tergroup ntact on adolcents’ sexual prejudice, rearch on sexual prejudice adolcence provis evince that factors such as age, genr, and school climate are related to attus and beliefs about homosexualy durg this velopmental perd (Horn 2006; Horn and Szalacha 2009; Horn et al. That is, an adolcent’s unrstandg of sexual prejudice volv issu such as fairns and human welfare, issu related to societal norms, relig nventns and stereotyp, as well as an dividual’s unrstandg of sex and sexualy as a private and personal aspect of one’s dividuals ordate and apply the different dimensns of their social knowledge is directly related to their attus and beliefs regardg homosexualy and the treatment of gay and lbian peers (Horn 2006; Horn and Nucci 2003; Horn et al.

LBIAN, GAY AND BISEXUAL GEN Z MEMBERS REPORT HIGHER ANXIETY, SADNS THAN PEERS: GALLUP

(2008) provi evince that adolcents’ relig and societal knowledge about homosexualy, as well as their stereotyp, relate more directly to their attus about the acceptabily of homosexualy, whereas adolcents’ unrstandg of fairns and harm relate more directly to their cisns regardg the acceptabily of excludg or teasg gay and lbian peers.

WILLGNS TO REMA FRIENDS AND ATTEND SCHOOL WH LBIAN AND GAY PEERS: RELATNAL EXPRSNS OF PREJUDICE AMONG HETEROSEXUAL YOUTH

Send, given Allport’s (1954) hypothis that sual levels of ntact would crease stereotyp and prejudicial behavr, we expected that adolcents wh more sual levels of ntact would be ls fortable teractg wh gay and lbian peers, more likely to rate homosexualy as wrong, and more likely to endorse excln and teasg as legimate. Bee timate tergroup ntact creas judgments regardg faiary wh and siary to out-group members (McGlothl and Killen 2005; Pettigrew and Tropp 2006) and leads to creased learng about the out-group (Pettigrew and Tropp 2006), however, we expected that adolcents reportg that they had a gay or lbian iend would report higher levels of fort teractg wh gay and lbian peers, would be ls likely to judge homosexualy as wrong, and would be more likely to judge excln and teasg LG peers as wrong than those adolcents reportg more sual levels of ntact.

UGUAY – MOST GAY IENDLY NATN SOUTH AMERI

Conversely, we expected that those adolcents reportg that they had a lbian or gay iend would be ls likely to utilize rmatnal assumptns and stereotyp and would be more likely to utilize moral reasong (such as fairns and dividual rights) jtifyg their judgments about the acceptabily of homosexualy and about excludg and teasg a lbian or gay person.

The eleven choic were then llapsed to four nceptual tegori based on social gnive doma theory: moral jtifitn (fairns, human equaly, belongg, relig human equaly), nventnal jtifitn (affirms norms, negat norms, God’s law), personal jtifitn (personal choice) and rmatnal assumptns (unnatural, h on, thk gay). Jtifitns for Attus about HomosexualyIn regard to the reasons why participants felt that homosexualy was wrong or not wrong, we predicted that dividuals reportg that they had a lbian or gay iend would e signifintly fewer stereotyp and rmatnal assumptns to jtify their judgments than those reportg other levels of ntact and stead would e more moral reasong (dividual rights).

CHIGO YOUTH THEATRE FIR GAY TEACHER THEN LI

Follow-up tts of the type of jtifitn by attu judgment teractn revealed that adolcents who rated homosexualy as wrong ed relig opposn, rmatnal assumptns and stereotyp as jtifitns more often than those who viewed homosexualy as ntral or all right and were ls likely to e blogil/geic or human/dividual rights jtifitns (see Table 3). It uld be, however, that due to the creased salience of sexualy and sexual inty adolcence, the likelihood that adolcents may be enunterg LG peers for the first time, and the fact that homosexualy is a highly stigmatized inty that the type of tergroup ntact is particularly important durg this velopmental perd.

Longudal rearch on adolcents’ social gnive velopment, peer relatnships, and sexual prejudice would provi a better unrstandg of the dynamic procs related to adolcents’ attus and judgments about and behavrs toward their LG of Contact, Age, and Genr Related Differenc Adolcents’ Social Reasong about Homosexualy and The Treatment of Lbian and Gay PeersIn addn to providg evince that timate tergroup ntact is related to adolcents’ attus about homosexualy and their judgments regardg the treatment of LG peers, this study provis evince that the level of ntact is also related to the type of social reasong adolcents apply to their attus and judgments. This study also extends this work by suggtg that iendships between lbian or gay and heterosexual dividuals provi adolcents wh experienc related to formg ls biased and more tolerant attus toward LG addn to ntact related differenc adolcents’ reasong about excln and teasg, the study also provis evince for genr related differenc. Given that girls were also more likely to report havg a lbian or gay iend, uld also be the se that the experience of beg iends wh someone om the out-group is related to how adolcents’ nstct meang about the typ of tergroup relatn to adolcents’ judgments regardg their attus about the acceptabily of homosexualy, one of the most proment fdgs pertaed to differenc the typ of reasong ed among adolcents who reported they believed was wrong to be gay, those who reported was neher right nor wrong, and those who reported was right.

Addnal rearch is need to better untangle the relatnships amongst tergroup ntact, dividuals’ judgments regardg the acceptabily of homosexualy and their reasong about the we did not fd a relatnship between tergroup ntact and the type of judgment relatn to adolcents’ reasong, we did fd a relatnship amongst the level of ntact, genr, and age relatn to the typ of reasong adolcents ed to jtify their judgments regardg the acceptabily of homosexualy.

PERCEIVED ATTUS OF FAY AND PEERS TOWARD SAME-SEX MARRIAGE AS A DISTAL SEXUAL MORY STRSOR FOR GAY AND BISEXUAL MEN TAIWAN

The rults are important that they extend the rearch on tergroup ntact and provi some prelimary evince that the experience of havg a lbian or gay iend is related to the ways which adolcents nstct an unrstandg of homosexualy, pecially as related to their e of rmatnal assumptns regardg LG people. Given the plex set of relatnships amongst ntact, age, genr, and adolcents’ reasong about the acceptabily of homosexualy, however, more rearch needs to be nducted to fully unrstand how the experience of havg a lbian or gay iend is related to the ways which adolcents nstct an unrstandg of homosexualy and the addnal factors that may fluence this. If you assume that a person is gay or straight based on their current relatnship, work to reame your unrstandg that the people that relatnship uld be of any genr or sexual people for their word if they share a multisexual inty wh and uplift the bisexual people your you see or hear an example of biphobia or bi-erasure, addrs by sharg that bisexualy is real and valid, as well as rourc to learn more about bi inti.

HETEROSEXUAL ADOLCENTS’ AND YOUNG ADULTS’ BELIEFS AND ATTUS ABOUT HOMOSEXUALY AND GAY AND LBIAN PEERS

Suici is the send leadg e of ath among young people aged 10 to 24 (Hegaard, Curt, & Warner, 2018) — and lbian, gay, bisexual, transgenr, queer, and qutng (LGBTQ) youth are at signifintly creased youth are more than four tim as likely to attempt suici than their peers (Johns et al., 2019; Johns et al., 2020) Trevor Project timat that more than 1. While many heterosexual stunts might not engage physil aggrsn agast gay and lbian youth, their preference to attend schools whout gay and lbian youth reprents a more subtle exprsn of prejudice that would likely foster a negative school climate where sexual mory youth feel unwele and unsupported. IntroductnRecent rearch on the velopment of peer harassment and discrimatn, dit that wh the onset of puberty, harassment and discrimatn that is related to sexualy be much more prevalent and is often directed at same-sex peers (AAUW, 2001; Bochenek and Brown, 2001; Craig et al., 2001; Gay et al., 2001).

Addnally, rearch wh adolcents on homophobia and anti-gay prejudice suggt that anti-gay attus are place by early adolcence (Baker and Fishbe, 1998; Manl and Shakhaft, 2000) and that dividuals who hold nventnal beliefs about genr rol are more likely to be prejudiced and ls likely to beiend a gay or lbian person (Marsigl, 1993).

STEP FORWARD INTO PAST FOR BRISH GAY COUPL: COATS OF ARMS

Current study and hypothHeterosexual male and female tenth- and twelfth-gra adolcents were asked to evaluate the acceptabily of same-sex heterosexual or homosexual peers varyg terms of their nformy to social norms regardg genr exprsn (genr nformg or genr non-nformg forms of mannerisms and appearance or activy).

No hypoth were ma, for example regardg whether male adolcents would rate a genr nventn nformg gay peer more acceptable than a genr nventn non-nformg straight work (Killen et al., 2002a) has dited that there is an age-related tenncy to employ nventnal reasong (social harmony, group norms) to jtify social excln, and that the e of such jtifitns tends to peak middle adolcence (Horn, 2003), and to cle thereafter. ” The percentage of stunts our sample who intify as gay, lbian, or bisexual was siar to those found others studi which dite that three to five percent of high school stunts report eher same-sex attractns or self-intify as gay, lbian, or bisexual (for a review of this lerature, see Cianctto and Cahill, 2003).

STUNTS TAKE A SILENT STAND FOR GAY PEERS

Adolcents’ ratgs of the different targets were analyzed g a 2 (Gra: tenth, twelfth) X 2 (Genr: male, female) X 6 (Target: straight, genr nformg; gay, genr nformg; straight, genr appearance non-nformg; gay, genr appearance non-nformg; straight, genr activy non-nformg; gay, genr activy non-nformg) repeated measur analysis of variance tt (ANOVA). The importance of attendg to the pennt ntributn of adolcent attus about sexual orientatn, and their ncepts of genr nventn was highlighted by the fdg that gay male targets who were genr-nformg were rated as more acceptable than straight male targets who vlated genr norms regardg appearance and mannerisms. The rults also suggt that norms regardg the exprsn of genr may be more salient than sexual orientatn per se dividuals’ perceptns of and attus toward their peers, and provis addnal empiril support for the ia that homophobia and heterosexism also clu elements of sexism and are harmful to all stunts regardls of their sexual orientatn (Kimmel and Maher, 2003; Pharr, 1992; Rsell, 2003; Ste, 1995).

HIV AND ALL GAY AND BISEXUAL MEN

Th, signg programs to rce prejudice directed at gay and lbian stunts, attentn should be paid not only to variatns sexualy, but also to issu related to social ctoms and nventns associated wh genr reports of the school climate for gay and lbian youth report that between 60–95% of such youth have experienced some kd of harassment or vlence school and that there are few terventns by teachers, school staff, or other stunts the suatns (GLSEN, 1999, 2001; Bochenek and Brown, 2001; Rsell et al., 2001). Neverthels, vtigatns foced on life experienc of lbian, gay and bisexual youth suggt that up to 84 per cent report verbal harassment (Poteat and Espelage, 2005), a quarter report physil harassment (Elze, 2003; Pilkgton and D'Augelli, 1995), and up to 70 per cent experience problems school due to prejudice and discrimatn based on sexual orientatn (Remafedi, 1987; Saewyc et al., 2007; Telljohann and Price, 1993). Selectn creria clud expertise on lbian and gay youth and the cln of men and women occupyg diverse profsnal rol across var the purpose of the study, ‘youth’ was fed as dividuals aged between fifteen and twenty-four years (Statistics Canada, 2006), although bullyg of lbian and gay youth begs well before the age of fifteen and ntu after the age of twenty-four.

Tolerance for vlence as perpetuated by the media, as well as ‘pervasive’ heteronormative imag of ‘the perfect fay’, were seen to endorse bullyg, whereas the creasg cln of lbian and gay characters televisn programmg was unrstood as a migatg factor, which has ‘done a lot terms of makg more acceptable for people to vary a ltle b wh sexual orientatn’. However, several characteristics of bullyg that victimiz lbian and gay youth appear to be, whereas tradnal bullyg and bullyg of lbian and gay youth are both strongly evint schools, ndns that foster the bullyg of lbian and gay youth appear across their entire social elogy, cludg peers, siblgs, parents, teachers, relig thori, and ach, as well as social polici, laws, stutns and the media.

GAY TEENS HAVE HIGHER PREGNANCY RAT THAN THEIR STRAIGHT PEERS

Merely cludg ‘bias-based’ bullyg wh the overall tegory of bullyg nceals the unrlyg motivatns and th rc the signifince of the particular bias and s enactment (Greene, 2006; Ste, 2003), while a culture that glorifi vlence ntribut to all bullyg, lbian and gay youth are specifilly victimized by homophobia the media and social stutns. This powerful stutnal ntext, based on entrenched sexual prejudice—for example, schools, sports, relig stutns, and shelters—and enshred laws and social polici that exclu, negate or discrimate on the basis of sexual orientatn, is a ccial factor that may renr victimizatn of lbian and gay youth, the pervasive sexual prejudice embedd many relig stutns may hold a distct place the bullyg experienc of lbian and gay youth. Addrsg ‘ternalized homophobia’ merely as a psychologil phenomenon risks further victimizg lbian and gay youth (Newman, 1998, 2002)—as if they rema the foc of ‘treatment’ or terventn—whereas the ln's share of change should be implemented fai, schools, relig stutns, social polici and laws to bat sexual prejudice and to provi lbian- and gay-affirmative and supportive environments for all fact, the ma barriers to addrsg bullyg of lbian and gay youth, intified this study as nial, dilutn and fear of reprisal, fd parallels to regnized barriers the lerature on ‘tradnal’ bullyg.

ON LIVG AND DYG AS A GAY PERSON THE ARMENIAN CHURCH

However, the se of lbian and gay youth, this barrier appears to extend to adults as barriers to addrsg bullyg of lbian and gay youth, therefore, are analogo to intified barriers to addrsg ‘tradnal’ bullyg, whereas others rrpond to barriers that apply to motivatnal bullyg that targets particular populatns, and some appear unique to lbian and gay youth—such as lackg any safe space or person to whom to self-disclose or to turn for help, and the entrenchment and even acceptance of sexual prejudice social polici, laws and stutns. Approach that tend to operate on one level, particularly those targetg dividual-level dynamics of lbian and gay bullyg, not only may be effective, but actually risk ntributg to the problem; lbian and gay youth might bee intified as the loc of the problem rather than fai, schools, sportg events, plac of worship and other key social and muny stutns, as well as laws and social polici that ignore or exclu lbian and gay youth om their exploratory rearch supports fdgs that terventns mt be tailored to particular populatns and social and stutnal ntexts.