SOGI statements and LGBT+ student care in Christian schools

Author(s):  
Julia Smith

This article discusses a sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) statement widely used in Christian schools in light of its expressed commitment to treating all persons with compassion, love, kindness, respect, and dignity. I argue that this commitment is undermined by other parts of the statement which fail to address, and even exacerbate, the harms LGBT+ students experience in schools. I suggest revisions to the SOGI statement and a range of practices that would improve LGBT+ student safety and support in Christian schools that hold a traditional view of marriage.

Education ◽  
2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey M. Poirier ◽  
Allison Mattheis ◽  
Deborah Temkin

This review synthesizes recent literature and research on students in K–12 schools who are attracted to the same gender (lesbian, gay), attracted to people of the same or other genders (bisexual), or identify as a gender different than the one they were assigned at birth (transgender). Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) young people have historically experienced vulnerability in schools because of challenges such as invisibility in school curricula; peer and staff rejection, harassment, and violence; and ill-equipped school professionals who lack the competence and will to effectively address bias and foster inclusive school environments. Foundational research in the field examines this vulnerability to document the experiences and needs of this population—and to draw attention to gaps in school policy, practice, and outcomes for LGBT students. Research examining vulnerabilities and challenges for this population is also prominent in the early 21st century because many of these concerns persist. At the same time, more recent research on LGBT youth in schools is attending to these young people’s positive assets and their resilience, including their abilities to effectively navigate conflict and stress and adapt to different situations. Throughout this article, “LGBT” is used as an umbrella acronym. Although the rich diversity of sexual orientation and gender identity and expression, such as students who are queer, genderqueer, or questioning their sexual orientation or gender identity is important, this article aims to provide a working vocabulary to address this population of youth discussed here. This article also aligns its terminology with the content of articles. In other words, if an article examines only transgender students, then the full LGBT acronym is not used when writing about that article. Research on LGBT youth in schools is substantial, given the growth of research studying related issues during the late 20th and early 21st centuries. This expanding research on LGBT youth in schools has spanned topics beyond their school experiences to include myriad issues such as their identity development within the school context; school-based policies, practices, and supports such as inclusive nondiscrimination policies; teacher practices that foster welcoming and inclusive school settings, and the benefits of safe spaces and targeted supports for LGBT students; and how school administrator and teacher preparation programs can lead to better school practice and outcomes for LGBT students. Other areas of research on LGBT youth in schools continue to emerge as the field’s understanding about diverse sexual orientation and gender identities expands, and as there is more attention given to the complexity of identity and expression including intersectionality (e.g., youth in schools who are LGBT and of color, or LGBT and immigrants).


2021 ◽  
pp. 095624782110193
Author(s):  
Vanesa Castán Broto

All over the world, people suffer violence and discrimination because of their sexual orientation and gender identity. Queer theory has linked the politics of identity and sexuality with radical democracy experiments to decolonize development. Queering participatory planning can improve the wellbeing of vulnerable sectors of the population, while also enhancing their political representation and participation. However, to date, there has been limited engagement with the politics of sexuality and identity in participatory planning. This paper identifies three barriers that prevent the integration of queer concerns. First, queer issues are approached as isolated and distinct, separated from general matters for discussion in participatory processes. Second, heteronormative assumptions have shaped two fields that inform participatory planning practices: development studies and urban planning. Third, concrete, practical problems (from safety concerns to developing shared vocabularies) make it difficult to raise questions of identity and sexuality in public discussions. An engagement with queer thought has potential to renew participatory planning.


Field Methods ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 357-370 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philip S. Brenner ◽  
Justine Bulgar-Medina

Many social identities (e.g., race, ethnicity) are measured using mark-all-that-apply (MATA) questions because they allow survey respondents to account for the multiple, nonexclusive ways in which they identify themselves. We test the use of MATA measures of sexual orientation and gender identity and compare them with forced choice (FC), an alternative format using a series of yes-or-no questions. Respondents, including an oversample of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and queer (LGBQ) individuals, participated in a 2 × 3 factorial survey experiment. For the first factor, we hypothesize that respondents randomly assigned to FC will report a higher count of identities than those assigned to MATA. For the second factor, we hypothesize that increased topic salience will help LGBQ respondents in particular to overcome poor question design. Findings suggest that MATA and FC measure comparably when question writing best practices are followed, but topic salience can yield higher data quality when poorly formatted questions are used.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document