Bullyg of Lbian and Gay Youth: A Qualative Invtigatn | The Brish Journal of Social Work | Oxford Amic

Contents:

• GAY BULLYG, GAY BULLI AND DEALG WH GAY BASHG
• 2 DADS SAY TEACHERS AT A NEW YORK SCHOOL BLAMED THEIR GAY SON FOR THE 'HORRIFIC' HOMOPHOBIC BULLYG HE ENDURED AND NOW THEY ARE SUG FOR 'JTICE'
• ACTIVISTS NMN VLENCE AGAST LGBTQ MUNY ST. VCENT, WHERE GAY SEX IS ILLEGAL
• FIFTH GAY TEEN SUICI THREE WEEKS SPARKS DEBATE
• WHAT IS THE IMPACT OF BULLYG ON LBIAN, GAY, AND BISEXUAL STUNTS?
• DEALG WH GAY STUNTS, BULLYG VERY DIFFERENT WAYS
• CHILDREN OF GAY PARENTS BULLIED: WOULD YOU INTERVENE?
• TEACHERS’ PERCEPTNS OF BULLYG OF LBIAN, GAY, BISEXUAL, TRANSGENR, AND QUTNG (LGBTQ) STUNTS A SOUTHWTERN PENNSYLVANIA SAMPLE

GAY BULLYG, GAY BULLI AND DEALG WH GAY BASHG

Dpe acknowledgment that societal attus such as homophobia foster bullyg (Clarke and Kiseli, 1997), the preponrance of bullyg rearch neher addrs nor acknowledg sexual orientatn as a possible factor (Poteat and Espelage, 2005).

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). Non-disclosure of peer victimizatn is likely to be particularly problematic among lbian and gay youth, who often hate to seek support generally om school profsnals (Telljohann and Price, 1993), many of whom harbour tolerant attus toward lbian and gay persons (Fontae, 1998). Further, sexual mory youth may not seek support om their parents, who may be potentially available, out of fear that seekg support will lead to further victimizatn (Hunter, 1990; Williams et al., 2005) this study, we addrs gaps the lerature on peer victimizatn of youth who are lbian and gay.

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.

2 DADS SAY TEACHERS AT A NEW YORK SCHOOL BLAMED THEIR GAY SON FOR THE 'HORRIFIC' HOMOPHOBIC BULLYG HE ENDURED AND NOW THEY ARE SUG FOR 'JTICE'

Informants provid servic to lbian and gay youth, om age fifteen to twenty-four, var settgs, and occupied diverse rol, cludg: a sendary school teacher and universy-based social worker, youth peer unsellors and advot, and muny-based social service support workers and advot. Qutns foced on the key rmants' views and knowledge regardg bullyg of lbian and gay youth, cludg prevalence, s, perpetrators and effects of bullyg, factors that foster or migate bullyg, and strategi and rourc for lbian and gay youth. Bullyg of lbian and gay youth was also reported to occur settgs that are voted to amelratg lbian and gay youths' victimizatn and are th assumed to be ‘safe’, such as peer-facilated anti-homophobia workshops and wh queer muni.

ACTIVISTS NMN VLENCE AGAST LGBTQ MUNY ST. VCENT, WHERE GAY SEX IS ILLEGAL

For example, a rponnt mented that ‘our muny is as racist and sexist and homophobic as any other muny and 's a big mistake to jt assume that bee we're all queer, we all unrstand discrimatn and racism and all the other issu'. Instutnal factors tnal settgs that ntributed to bullyg of lbian and gay youth prise aquate trag for tors, social service provirs and other adults workg wh youth, a lack of equy-based polici clive of sexual orientatn and failure to hold staff and stunts acuntable unr existg equy-based polici. ’ Instutnal-level factors emerged as creatg a climate that is eher hostile or supportive, and which strongly fluenc the attus and behavurs of staff, stunts and the experienc of lbian and the other hand, stutnal factors ernment and social policy were intified as migatg lbian and gay bullyg.

This, turn, may ntribute to a more acceptg climate for lbian and gay youth, which bullyg may be ls apt to media were viewed as powerful stutns that shape attus toward lbian and gay youth and both foster as well as migate lbian and gay bullyg. 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’. Another observed that ‘'s hard enough to feel different, but to then be terrorized bee of and to have no one to turn to for support’ effects of lbian and gay bullyg reported by rponnts clud ternalized homophobia, substance abe, suici attempts, and homelsns.

FIFTH GAY TEEN SUICI THREE WEEKS SPARKS DEBATE

Rponnts intified ternalized homophobia among victimized youth as a legacy of homophobic bullyg, which they attributed to victimizatn and years of hearg ments, begng elementary school, such as ‘That's so gay’ or ‘You're such a fag’. A rponnt explaed suicidaly among some lbian and gay youth as a functn of feelg isolated multiple spher of life, cludg fay, school and peer group: ‘I gus people turn to suici bee they feel, “when I go home I'm isolated om my whole fay, when I go to school and wh my peers 's the same way. All rponnts exprsed ncern that lbian and gay bullyg is not aquately addrsed and intified three ma barriers to addrsg bullyg: nial, dilutn and fear of, rponnts referred to nial of the existence of queer youth; nsequently, bullyg of lbian and gay youth remas unacknowledged.

WHAT IS THE IMPACT OF BULLYG ON LBIAN, GAY, AND BISEXUAL STUNTS?

Rponnts scribed exampl of homophobic bullyg by peers: ‘How do you know you're gay … you jt haven't been wh the right woman yet; that's all you need'; and ‘I'm gog to teach you that you're not a dyke’, said by a male to a lbian youth. Consequently, policy level rpons are often untargeted and effective for lbian and gay of reprisal emerged as a third barrier to addrsg bullyg, not only among some lbian and gay youth, but also among adults and thori.

In this vtigatn of the perspectiv of profsnals and youth peer advot, bullyg of lbian and gay youth emerged as pervasive, occurrg across the entire social elogy of youths' liv, and often the absence of adult terventn. Pervasive and severe forms of bullyg motivated by tolerance towards others based on actual or perceived membership a particular group, known as bias-based bullyg, both reflects and ntribut to a toxic environment, which fosters lbian and gay victimizatn (Ryan and Rivers, 2003). 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.

DEALG WH GAY STUNTS, BULLYG VERY DIFFERENT WAYS

The double-edged nature of the g-out procs may be one key ponent to unrstandg the experienc of lbian and gay youth and to providg support and, while bullyg is generally unrreported, rearchers, policy makers, and tors are creasgly acknowledgg the pervasivens of bullyg and takg actn to tervene.

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. Individual perpetrators and a culture of acceptance of victimizatn of lbian and gay youth are effect supported by a system that do not acknowledge their existence and enabl and even fosters stigmatizatn and vlence agast them. 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.

CHILDREN OF GAY PARENTS BULLIED: WOULD YOU INTERVENE?

A disurse of ‘nversn bullyg’, whereby lbian and gay youth are subjected to ongog even if subtle harassment that suggts that they ‘change’ their sexual orientatn or bee ‘normal’, appears to be unique to bullyg of lbian and gay youth.

Unrlyg the ntent of some aggrsn agast lbian and gay youth is the narrative of nformg to heteronormative practic, although such ‘nversn’ has been pletely discreded by the Amerin Psychiatric Associatn sce 1973 (Amerin Psychiatric Associatn, 2006; Kg, 2003). The pervasivens of homophobic imag and disurse the media, and discrimatn agast lbian and gay persons polici and laws, place lbian and gay youth at higher risk for problems due to ternalizatn of stigma and tolerance (Hetrick and Mart, 1987; Hunter and Schaecher, 1987).

TEACHERS’ PERCEPTNS OF BULLYG OF LBIAN, GAY, BISEXUAL, TRANSGENR, AND QUTNG (LGBTQ) STUNTS A SOUTHWTERN PENNSYLVANIA SAMPLE

Recent scholarship also highlights the agency of lbian and gay youth unrstandg and navigatg uniendly environments and their efforts to rist domant homophobic and heterosexist disurs (Hillier and Harrison, 2004; Oswald, 2002). 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. Hence, the damage that the behavurs n e may be overlooked (Roberts and Morotti, 2000) fdg that merely lotg lbian and gay victimizatn wh the bric of generic bullyg may dilute s serns is supported by lerature on ‘bias-based bullyg’.

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. Further rearch is need to specify the barriers that are siar to other bullyg suatns and those that are unique to lbian and gay prent fdgs suggt that is val to addrs bullyg of lbian and gay youth through a systems elogil amework.

E-mappg (Hartman and Laird, 1983) of lbian and gay youths' life spac may reveal many spher of vulnerabily to victimizatn and very few domas which they feel supported, loved and cherished as whole people who are lbian or gay. 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.