Problem #2: Homophobia
Written By: Amanda EvansMany people question the direction the National Education Association (NEA) has taken since their meeting on February 8th, 2002. In this meeting the NEA approved a new set of recommendations, which suggest schools enforce and adapt policies to improve the atmosphere for lesbian, gay, and bisexual, (LBG) students and teachers. This support for homosexuality in schools especially concerns the board members of a Judeo-Christian Organization, called Citizens for Community Values (CCV). This group uses evidence to imply a link between homosexuals and mental illness. They argue that if schools support homosexuals, then the need for psychiatric care in schools will increase along with the level of risky behavior.
The evidence the CCV uses is very scholarly, however it does not directly support their arguments. If reports that misrepresent evidence are taken seriously, they could prevent schools from amending or enforcing policies that include LBG individuals as normal humans with the equal rights of others. Such an omission would allow other students to harass LBG individuals and possibly make schools liable for the resulting damage. If the reader accepts, or just remains silent in the face of such discriminatory acts and attitudes, you are contributing to the fate of these students who drop out, fail in their studies, engage in life-threatening behaviors and even attempt and complete suicide in far greater numbers than any other group of students. School administrators and teachers need to recognize the large amount of scholarly evidence that supports what NEA recommends. Then they must enforce and clarify existing anti-harassment and anti-discrimination policies so that LBG students and teachers receive equal rights and protection.Evaluating the CCV Argument
The CCV sent out a letter to schools asking them to question groups, which support gay, and lesbian advancement. The twelve-page report sent with the letter attempts to prove that “normalizing homosexual behavior” will have adverse effects on schools. Both the letter and the report are convincing, but the evidence this group uses does not match their argument. Therefore it is important that schools evaluate the evidence this group uses before they make any policy decisions that do not follow what NEA suggests.
The CCV reveals the harms of homosexuality, with two studies. The medical journal Pediatrics reports that homosexuals are more susceptible to various drugs such as, alcohol, marijuana, and cocaine. The other report from the Archives of General Psychiatry relates homosexuals to psychiatric disorders such as, mood disorders, anxiety disorders and depression. Both of these studies connect homosexuality with these harms, but they do not claim or even insinuate that homosexuality is a mental illness. Yet the CCV uses this evidence to insinuate that homosexuality is a mental illness and that school support for homosexuality would increase demands for psychiatric care in schools.
Susan Cochran an epidemiologist, who performed many studies, worries that activists will use scientific studies to make unscientific conclusions. She claims, “These certainly do not show the level of morbidity consistent with models that say homosexuality is inherently pathological. The data simply doesn’t support either pro- or anti- gay arguments on the subject, whether it’s that the inherent biology of homosexuality causes mental illness or social stigma.” Furthermore Susan’s view is consistent with the stance of the American Psychological Association (APA). Homosexuality was removed from their list of mental disorders in December of 1973 and after 30 years of research the APA still supports this decision.
The CCV report shows that Susan Cochran’s possible worries are a real concern. The report uses scientific studies to support an unscientific argument. The report not only misinterprets data, but also totally ignores key facts that might point to a different conclusion; such as homosexuals have a higher risk of harassment.Evaluating NEA Evidence
The NEA task force was assigned to research “the needs and problems confronting GLB&T students and Education Employees.” February 8th, 2002 this task force presented their research in the form of a written report to the board members of NEA. Afterward NEA made the official decision to encourage schools to approve, strengthen, and enforce policies, which prohibit the harassment of Gay Lesbian bisexuals and Trangendered (GLB&T) students. This decision was based on the results of the task force report. Therefore before anyone judges NEA’s response, it is important to evaluate the argument the task force presents and the evidence they use to support it.
The Task Force cites a variety of sources, however most of the sources are survey studies. Self-reported surveys are the best way to establish the harassment and risk factors students experience. The other more scientific sources that record risky behavior and harassment are police reports and medical records. Unfortunately these only represent a tiny portion of the actual harassment and risky behavior that youth experience. Therefore, the surveys NEA cites are necessary in order to accurately judge what the teenagers experience in schools today.
These surveys are effective because they each employ different methods of data collection and this provides a more comprehensive view. Both the Massachusetts’ 1999 Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS) and the Seattle Teen Health Survey are the most reliable surveys the NEA cites. Both surveys were coordinated by the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) which is experienced at implementing surveys of this sort in a scientific and unbiased manner. These anonymous surveys were administered in written format. Afterward the variables were calculated and presented with the results so they could be compared to the entire population. The CDC randomly chose schools to evenly distribute the Massachusetts RBS and question a total of 4,415 both homosexual and straight students. The CDC administered the Seattle Teen Health Survey in the form of a census to surveyed 8,406, straight and homosexual students.
Two other surveys that the Task Force reference are the Human Rights Watch (HRW) and the Gay Lesbian Straight Education Network (GLSEN). Both of these surveys have fewer scientific controls. Individuals who visited GLSENs’ website completed half of GLSEN’s National Climate Survey over the Internet. Unfortunately GLSEN fails to explain how they controlled who, or how many times individuals may have taken the survey. The HRW survey method involved open-ended face-to-face surveys, which lasted about a 45 minutes to an hour. This was a very in depth survey, but because it was conducted orally the results are subject to a higher number of variables.
These methods are more questionable, however because of the way they were performed they were able to provide access to information that other surveys wouldn’t be able to achieve. With the internet the National Climate survey is able to access individuals that might have dropped out of school or that might not already be ‘out.’ HRW’s report “Hatred in the Hallways” is able to provide real life examples and students and teachers, administrators and counselors were also able to reveal their hypothesis on behavior they’ve observed.
Even though all of these studies use different methods they all support the main concept the task force presents. First the NEA establishes that LBG&T students make up a significant amount of the student population. Both the Massachusetts YRBS and the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent health agree LBG&T students make up five to six percent of the entire student population. Then the Task Force presents information that shows these students have higher danger of harassment. The National Climate Survey, the HRW report, and the Seattle YRBS support this claim. They all cite high rates of verbal harassment based on actual or perceived sexual orientation.
Furthermore, the Massachusetts and Seattle YRBS report LBGT students are twice as likely to experience physical or sexual harassment. Both these studies also found that LBGT students were twice as likely to consider suicide and all of the surveys previously listed found that LBG students had skipped school due to feeling unsafe. All of the information and solid evidence in the Task Force report supports the focus of their recommendation. LGB&T students in our schools need “to be educated in a safe and hospitable environment “ They explain this as “an environment in which their physical, mental, and emotional well being is not threatened.”The Harassment Factor
We know that individuals that experience harassment are more likely to have psychiatric disorders and engage in risky behavior. Therefore many of these risk factors that we associate with homosexuality are most likely fueled by the increased level of harassment they endure. This logic supports NEA’s recommendation. If schools decrease the amount of harassment these individuals receive the other problems LBG&T students experience will also decrease.
The list of risky behaviors and psychiatric disorders that relate to sexual harassment are almost identical to the risky behaviors related to homosexuals. Studies upon studies have shown that sexual harassment affects the psychological state of women and lessons their work efficiency. Psychiatrists are known to watch sexual harassment victims for symptoms such as alcohol/drug use, depression, and suicidal tendencies.
Homophobia and sexual harassment are very similar. Homophobic remarks often contain sexually suggestive language. Both of these tactics are used to assert male dominance. In fact, bisexual and lesbian girls rarely distinguish the difference between homophobia and sexual harassment. Males often ask if they can join these girls in sexual acts or worse yet threaten to ‘teach them to be straight.’ Both of these frequent comments are sexual threats.
Sexual harassment also occurs between members of the same sex. This type of harassment is often homophobic in nature. For example two straight males in Massachusetts, filed a case against their straight “supervisor who mimicked performing anal sex on them and used the store intercom to brag about having sex with one of them.” This type of harassment is now illegal since the Supreme Court ruling in 1998. Schools are now officially liable under title IV if they fail to protect students from any form of harassment including same sex sexual harassment.
Unfortunately many schools are failing to protect both LBGT and straight students from most forms of antigay harassment including sexual harassment. The Seattle YRBS reveals that straight students receive nearly an equal amount of antigay harassment as their homosexual peers. The HRW report, students note that teachers’ typical response to antigay harassment is “no response.” If this trend continues schools are going to have a lot of messy lawsuits on their hands. Teachers cannot legitimately think of themselves as fair, as kind, as responsible when they continue to respond with just a smile or a shake of the head.Where Do We Go From Here?
To improve this problem, schools need to follow NEA’s recommendations to clarify discrimination and harassment policies. In order to enforce these policies teachers must attend training seminars so that they can recognize discrimination and harassment and deal with it properly. This solution the APA both supports and practices. In 1998 the APA along with six other school related professional organizations formed the Healthy Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Student Project This program provides school social workers, councilors, and nurses with educational workshops. This program has had good results, which would only improve if schools include teachers in similar seminars. This will educate teachers not to blame the victim or wrongly stereotype individuals. Lastly a statement of the anti-harassment policy needs to be readily available to students.
Bibliography
American Psychological Association. “Health Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual Students Project” began 1998. Accessed: 9 Nov. 2003. <www.apa.org/ed/hlgb/hlgbaboutus.html?CFID=2680163&CFTOKEN=18706498 >
Berger, Kathleen Stassen, & Ross A. Thompson. The Developing Person Through the Life Span. 4th ed. New York: worth Publishers Inc., 1998.
Bijl, Rob V., Theo G. M. Sanford, Ron De Graaf, & Paul Schnabel. “Same Sex Sexual Behavior and Psychiatric Disorders.” Archives of General Psychiatry Vol. 58 No.1 (Jan 2001).
Burress, Phil. Letter to school Superintendents. 14 Oct. 2003. Citizens for Community Values, Cincinnati, Ohio.
Citizens for Community Values. “The Legal Liability Associated with Homosexuality Education in Public Schools.” Cincinnati, Ohio, 2003: 1-12. Accessed 13 Nov. 2003. http://www.ccv.org
DeAngelis, Tori. “New Data on Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Mental Health” Monitor on Psychology v.33 no.2 Feb. 2002. Accessed: 9 Nov. 2003 http://www.apa.org/monitor/feb02/newdata.html?CFID=2680368&CFTOKEN=64684014
DuRant, Robert H., Robert Garofalo, Cameron Wolf, Shri Kessel, & Judith Palfery. “The Association Between Health Risk Behaviors and Sexual Orientation Among a School-Based Sample of Adolescents.” Pediatrics v.101 no. 5 (May 1998) : 895-902.
Fineran, Susan. “Sexual Harassment Between Same-sex Peers: Intersection of Mental Health, Homophobia and Sexual Violence in Schools” Social Work 47 (Jan 2002): 65-74.
Friend, Richard A. “Undoing Homophobia in Schools.” Education Digest v.58 no.6 (Feb. 1993): 62-66.
Gill, Duane L., & Ronald G. Morrow. “Perceptions of Homophobia and Heterosexism in Physical Education.” Research Quarterly for Exercise & Sport 74, no.2 (Jun 2003): 205-214.
Human Rights Watch. “Violence and Discrimination Against Lesbian, Gay Bisexual, and Transgender Students in U.S. Schools” Hatred in the Hallways 2001: 1-201.
Kosciw, Joseph G. “The school Related Experiences of Our Nations Lesbian Gay Bisexual and Transgendered Youth.” The National School Climate Survey. The Gay Lesbian & Straight Education Network 2002: 1-36.
Massachusetts Department of Education. “Massachusetts Youth Risk Behavior Survey” 1999. Accessed: 13 Nov. 2003 http://www.doe.mass.edu/hsss/yrbs99/toc.html
Morales, Armando T., & Sheafor Bradford. Social Work: a Profession of Many Faces. 9th ed. Needham Heights: Allyn & Bacon, 2001.
Munson, Liberty J., “Longitudinal Analysis of Dispositional Influences and Sexual Harassment: Effects on Job and Psychological Outcomes.” Personnel Psychology v.53 no.1 (Spring 2000): 21-46.
National Education Association, (NEA). “NEA Adopts Plan to make Schools Safer” Accessed: 3 Nov. 2003 <http://www.nea.org/nr/nr020208.html>
National Education Association. “Report of the NEA Task Force on Sexual Orientation.” Feb 2002.
Safe Schools Coalition of Washington. “Eighty-Three Thousand Youth: Selected Findings of Eight Population-Based Studies.” May, 1999: 1-29. Accessed: 15 Nov. 2003 http://www.safeschoolscoalition.org