LGBT Bias and Discrimination: Occurrence, Outcomes ..., Lecture notes of Psychology

Download LGBT Bias and Discrimination: Occurrence, Outcomes ... and more Lecture notes Psychology in PDF only on Docsity! LGBT Bias and Discrimination: Occurrence, Outcomes, and the Impact of Policy Change A brief report prepared for the Long Beach City Council by: Kamden K. Strunk, Ph.D. & William C. Takewell, M.Ed. Report reviewed and cosigned by: Marie E. Adkinson, M.Ed., Ann E. Blankenship, Ph.D., Alesha K. Knox, M.Ed., Leslie A. Locke, Ph.D., Georgianna L. Martin, Ph.D., & Lissa D. Stapleton, Ph.D. Research Initiative on Social Justice in Education (RISE) College of Education and Psychology The University of Southern Mississippi August, 2014 Report reviewed by national experts, whose comments appear in appendices: M. V. Lee Badgett, Ph.D. – Distinguished Scholar, The Williams Institute Jackie Blount, Ph.D. – Professor and Senior Associate Dean, The Ohio State University Warren J. Blumenfeld, Ed.D. – Lecturer, University of Massachusetts-Amherst 1 Contents Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................ 2 LGBT Bias and Discrimination: Occurrence, Outcomes, and the Impact of Policy Change ......... 3 Bias and Discrimination against LGBT Individuals ....................................................................... 3 School Bullying of LGBT Individuals ........................................................................................ 3 College and University Bias and Discrimination ........................................................................ 4 Workplace Discrimination .......................................................................................................... 4 Healthcare Discrimination .......................................................................................................... 5 Discrimination and Bias in Public Settings ................................................................................ 5 Bias and Discrimination in Mississippi ...................................................................................... 6 Harmful Impacts of Bias and Discrimination ............................................................................. 7 Policy Change and Associated Outcomes....................................................................................... 7 References ....................................................................................................................................... 9 Appendix A: Comments from M.V. Lee Badgett, Ph.D. .............................................................. 12 Appendix B: Comments from Jackie Blount, Ph.D. ..................................................................... 13 Appendix C: Comments from Warren J. Blumenfeld, Ed.D. ....................................................... 15 4 their sexual orientation and 49.5% because of their gender identity in a recent survey (GLSEN, 2011). That feeling comes from verbal harassment (81.9% reported), physical harassment (38.3% reported), assault (18.3% reported), online/electronic harassment (55.2% reported). Too often, derogatory remarks come from teachers and administrators, with 56.9% of students reporting they heard a homophobic remark or disparaging remark about their gender identity at school (GLSEN, 2011). The school environment is perhaps most dangerous for trans* students who become particular targets for harassment, assault, and disparaging comments in the K-12 environment (McGuire, Anderson, Toomey, & Russell, 2010). In a context that often discourages difference, bias on the grounds of sexual orientation and gender diversity often becomes layered with racial bias and other biases, highlighting the importance of comprehensive strategies toward inclusive diversity (Pritchard, 2013). However, researchers have found that positive home and community supports can have a protective influence for LGBT youth against the harmful effects of bias and discrimination (Espelage, Aragon, Birkett, & Koenig, 2008). College and University Bias and Discrimination The bias and discrimination experienced by LGBT individuals in the K-12 setting does not end on graduation. Those choosing to pursue college degrees find similar environments in the college setting. Students report biased language and acts on the part of other students and faculty at the college level (Rankin, et al., 2010). In many ways, the same patterns that exist in K-12 education spill over into colleges and universities. Even in graduate education, students report experiences with stigmatization and bias (Hylton, 2006). In the college admissions process, LGBT students may be more closely scrutinized and even discriminated against due to difference (Strunk & Bailey, 2014). Furthermore, in these settings, a sense of institutionalized bias exists (Ferfolja, 2007), and even faculty who espouse nondiscrimination as a value tend not to speak up or even actively participate in discrimination and bias (Norris, 1992). Workplace Discrimination Nationally, up to 43% of LGBT individuals have experienced workplace discrimination, with 17% being fired because of their sexual or gender identity, 28% receiving a negative performance evaluation based on LGBT identity status, and 41% experiencing abuse or vandalism based on their LGBT identity (Burns & Krehely, 2011). While these figures are self- reported by LGBT individuals, 30% of straight employees also report witnessing discrimination and harassment against their LGBT coworkers (Burns & Krehely, 2011). Not only are these 5 workplace harassment incidents unfortunate in their own right, but can also negatively affect companies. Workers who report harassment and discrimination are less productive, more distracted, more fatigued at work, more likely to experience health issues, and more likely to search for a new job – all of which costs businesses money (Mallory, Herman, & Badgett, 2011). Healthcare Discrimination Healthcare and medical stigma remains a concern for LGBT individuals, especially in the U.S. South. LGBT people report experiencing bias and discrimination from healthcare providers related to their sexual identities and gender identities (Campbell, 2013). Over one third of LGBT individuals report experiencing bias or discrimination from a healthcare provider, and about a third also report they do not discuss their sexual identity with their healthcare provider, resulting in a further medical risk factor (Richards, 2012). This discrimination and bias also extends into mental health services where gaps exist in mental health treatment seeking and mental health outcomes between LGBT individuals and their straight counterparts (Burgess, Lee, Tran, & van Ryn, 2007). In fact, researchers have suggested a link between the health disparities noted in LGBT populations and the stigma they experience from healthcare providers (Lim, Brown, & Sung Min, 2014). Among those living in the U.S. South, disclosure rates were particularly low among those living in rural settings, suggesting the particular concerns of LGBT individuals living in smaller towns and rural settings in the South (Austin, 2013). Discrimination and Bias in Public Settings LGBT individuals also experience ongoing discrimination and bias in public settings, whether on the street, in a theater, at a restaurant, or during the utilization of government services. This tends to be particularly true for trans* individuals, who experience ongoing subtle discrimination known as microaggressions. These may take the form of subtle transphobic language, inappropriate references to the body of a trans* individual, and implied physical threats, among others (Nadal, Skolnik, & Wong, 2012). Although trans* individuals report higher exposure to these forms of discrimination and bias, all LGBT individuals are susceptible to these subtle and not-so-subtle ongoing forms of discrimination in public spaces. LGBT individuals are subject to verbal harassment, threats of violence, and actual physical violence. This creates an environment that can become psychologically and emotionally damaging for individuals who identify as LGBT, particularly in smaller towns and rural settings. External bias can also become internalized, leading to psychological problems of lowered self-esteem, 6 depression, social isolation, somatic problems, suicidal ideation, attempts, and completion (Prinstein et al., 2001; Rigby 2003). LGBT individuals report ongoing experiences with bias, discrimination, and harassment. In one survey, 37% of LGBT individuals reported experiencing public harassment during the previous 6 months (Huebner, Rebchook, & Kegeles, 2004). That is, once LGBT individuals leave the environment of schools and colleges, they continue to experience bias and discrimination – it simply moves into the sphere of the public. In fact, LGBT individuals often report accounts of being denied service, turned away from establishments, or provided a lower quality of service than others on account of their sexual orientation or gender identity. However, perhaps one of the most destructive forms of discrimination and bias comes from public officials and public servants. In the United States, LGBT individuals still find themselves subject to arrest and police harassment due to their sexual or gender identity. As recently as last year in Louisiana, individuals were arrested for consensual same-sex relationships, despite court orders barring the practice (Gregory, 2013, July; and the Supreme Court decision, Lawrence v. Texas, 2003). Trans* individuals are regularly arrested in urban areas on suspicion of intent to engage in solicitation (Strangio, 2014, April). LGBT individuals are targeted for selective police action around morals ordinances, through raids of LGBT gatherings and establishments, and pride demonstrations (Amnesty International, 2005). The end result is a disruption of many of the places deemed ‘safe’ by LGBT individuals that previously provided a degree of stability and shelter against public discrimination and bias. Such police actions many not be officially sanctioned in all cases, and official policies favoring diversity and inclusion can make a difference in the level of such disruptive and potentially abusive police actions (Amnesty International, 2005). Bias and Discrimination in Mississippi In Mississippi alone, 54% of those living in rural settings and 37% of those living in more urban settings report having experienced workplace harassment (HRC, 2014). About 42% report experiencing bullying in high school related to being LGBT-identified, with about one in three reporting experiencing harassment on at least a weekly basis. About 25% have experienced harassment from a public servant such as a police officer. For LGBT Mississippians, bias and discrimination appear to be real and pervasive components of their experience in the state. 9 References Amnesty International (2005). Stonewalled: Police abuse and misconduct against lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people in the U.S. Retrieved from http://www.streetwiseandsafe.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/StonewalledAI.pdf Aragon, S. R., Poteat, V. P., Espelage, D. L., & Koenig, B. W. (2014). The influence of peer victimization on educational outcomes for LGBTQ and non-LGBTQ high school students. Journal of LGBT Youth, 11(1), 1-19. Austin, E. L. (2013). Sexual orientation disclosure to health care providers among urban and non-urban Southern lesbians. Women and Health, 53(1), 41-55. Badgett, M. V. L. (2007). “Discrimination based on sexual orientation: A review of the economics literature and beyond.” In M. V. L. Badgett and J. Frank (Eds.), Sexual Orientation Discrimination. New York, NY: Routledge. Badgett, M. V., Lau, H., Sears, B., & Ho, D. (2007). Bias in the workplace: Consistent evidence of sexual orientation and gender identity discrimination. The Williams Institute. Retrieved from http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/Badgett-Sears- Lau-Ho-Bias-in-the-Workplace-Jun-2007.pdf Bauermeister, J. A., Meanley, S., Hickok, A., Pingel., E., Van Hemer, W., & Loveluck, J. (2014). Sexuality-related work discrimination and its association with the health of sexual minority emerging and young adult men in the Detroit metro area. Sexuality Research and Social Policy, 11(1), 1-10. Burgess, D., Lee, R., Tran, A., & van Ryn, M. (2007). Effects of perceived discrimination on mental health services utilization among gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender persons. Journal of LGBT Health Research, 3(4), 1-14. Burns, C., & Krehely, J. (2011). Gay and transgender people face high rates of workplace discrimination and harassment: Data demonstrate need for federal law. Center for American Progress. Retrieved from http://cdn.americanprogress.org/wp- content/uploads/issues/2011/06/pdf/workplace_discrimination.pdf Campbell, S. (2013). Sexual health needs and the LGBT community. Nursing Standard, 27(32), 35-38. Cook, A., & Glass, C. (2008). The impact of LGBT policies on ethnic/racial and gender diversity among business school faculty. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 1(3), 193-199. Doyle, D. M., & Molix, L. (2014). Perceived discrimination and well-being in gay men: The protective role of behavioural identification. Psychology and Sexuality, 5(2), 117-130. Espelage, D. L., Aragon, S. R., Birkett, M., & Koenig, B. W. (2008). Homophobic teasing, psychological outcomes, and sexual orientation among high school students: What influence do parents and schools have? School psychology review, 37(2), 202-216. Ferfolja, T. (2007). Schooling cultures: Institutionalizing heteronormativity and heterosexism. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 11(2), 147-162. GLSEN (2011). The 2011 school climate survey: The experiences of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender youth in our nation’s schools. Report of the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED535177.pdf Gregory, S. (2013, July). Louisiana sodomy sting: How invalidated sex laws still lead to arrests. Time. Retrieved from http://nation.time.com/2013/07/31/louisiana-sodomy-sting-how- invalidated-sex-laws-still-lead-to-arrests/ Hatzenbuehler, M. L. (2011). The social environment and suicide attempts in lesbian, gay, and bisexual youth. Pediatrics, 127(5), 896-903. 10 Huebner, D. M., Rebchook, G. M., & Kegeles, S. M. (2004). Experiences of harassment, discrimination, and physical violence among young gay and bisexual men. American Journal of Public Health, 94(7), 1200-1203. Human Rights Campaign (2014). This is our home. Report on 2014 survey of LGBT Mississippians. Retrieved from http://hrc-assets.s3-website-us-east- 1.amazonaws.com//files/assets/resources/HRC_ProjectOneAmerica_MS.pdf Hylton, M. E. (2006). Queer in southern MSW programs: Lesbian and bisexual women discuss stigma management. The Journal of Social Psychology, 146(5), 611-628. Irwin, J. A., & Austin, E. L. (2013). Suicide ideation and suicide attempts among white Southern lesbians. Journal of Gay and Lesbian Mental Health, 17(1), 4-20. Klawitter, M. (2011). Multilevel analysis of the effects of antidiscrimination policies on earnings by social orientation. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 30(2), 334-358. Kosciw, J. G., Palmer, N. A., Kull, R. M., & Greytak, E. A. (2013). The effect of negative school climate on academic outcomes for LGBT youth and the role of in-school supports. Journal of School Violence, 12(1), 45-63. Lim, F., Brown, D. V., & Sung Min, J. K. (2014). Addressing health care disparities in the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender population: A review of best practices. American Journal of Nursing, 114(6), 24-35. Mallory, C., Herman, J., & Badgett, M.V. L. (2011). Employment discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people in Oklahoma. The Williams Institute. Retrieved from http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/Mallory-Herman-Badgett- OK-Emp-Discrim-Jan-2011.pdf Mays, V. M., & Cochran, S. D. (2001). Mental health correlates of perceived discrimination among lesbian, gay, and bisexual adults in the United States. American Journal of Public Health, 91(11), 1896-1876. McGuire, J.K., Anderson, C. R., Toomey, R. B., & Russell, S. T. (2010). School climate for transgender youth: A mixed method investigation of student experiences and school reponses. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 10,1175-1188. Morman, M., Schrodt, P., & Tornes, M. J. (2013). Self-disclosure mediates the effects of gender orientation and homophobia on the relationship quality of male same-sex friendships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 30(5), 582-605. Nadal, K. L., Skolnik, A., & Wong, Y. (2012). Interpersonal and systemic microaggressions: Psychological impacts on transgender individuals and communities. Journal of LGBT Issues in Counseling, 6(1), 55-82. Norris, W. P. (1992). Liberal attitudes and homophobic acts: The paradoxes of homosexual experience in a liberal institution. Journal of Homosexuality, 22(3-4), 81-87. O’Byrne, P., & Watts, J. (2014). Include, differentiate, and manage: Gay male youth, stigma, and healthcare utilization. Nursing Inquiry, 21(1), 20-29. Prinstein, M. J., Boergers, J., & Vernberg, E. M. (2001). Overt and relational aggression in adolescents: Social-psychological functioning of aggressors and victims. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 30, 477-489 Pritchard, E. D. (2013). For colored kids who committed suicide, our outrage isn’t enough. Queer youth of color, bullying, and the discursive limits of identity and safety. Harvard Educational Review, 83(2), 320-345. Rankin, S., Weber, G., Blumenfeld, W., & Frazer, S. (2010). State of higher education for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people. Charlotte, NC: Campus Pride. 11 Rigby, K. (2003). New perspectives on bullying. London: Jessica Kingsley. Riggle, E. D. B., Rostosky, S. S., & Horne, S., (2010). Does it matter where you live? Nondiscrimination laws and the experiences of LGB residents. Sex Research and Social Policy, 7, 168-175. Richards, S. (2012). Gay and bisexual men ‘neglected’ by primary health services. Practical Nurse, 42(8), 7. Russell, S. T., Ryan, C., Toomey, R. B., Diaz, R. M., 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. Stop Street Harassment (2014). Unsafe and harassed in public spaces: A national street harassment report. Retrieved from http://www.stopstreetharassment.org/wp- content/uploads/2012/08/2014-National-SSH-Street-Harassment-Report.pdf Strangio, C. (2014, April). Arrested for walking while trans: An interview with Monica Jones. ACLU Blog of Rights. Retrieved from https://www.aclu.org/blog/lgbt-rights-criminal- law-reform-hiv-aids-reproductive-freedom-womens-rights/arrested-walking Strunk, K. K., & Bailey, L. E. (2014). The difference one word makes: Imagining sexual orientation in graduate school application essays. Manuscript submitted for publication. Swank, E., Frost, D. M., & Fahs, B. (2012). Rural location and exposure to minority stress among sexual minorities in the United States. Psychology and Sexuality, 3(2), 226-243. Tejeda, M. J. (2006). Nondiscrimination policies and sexual identity disclosure: Do they make a difference in employee outcomes? Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 18(1), 45-59. Tilcsik, A. (2011). Pride and prejudice: Employment discrimination against openly gay men in the United States. American Journal of Sociology, 117, 586-626. Varjas, K., Mahan, W. C., Meyers, J., Birckbichler, L., Lopp, G., & Dew, B. J. (2006). Assessing school climate among sexual minority high school students. Journal of LGBT Issues in Counseling, 1(3), 49-74. 14 Strunk and Takewell have faithfully encapsulated this larger body of research with attendant policy implications. Furthermore, they have shown particular relevance of this work to many parts of the South, especially including Mississippi and the Gulf Coast. These authors delineate many of the costs to LGBT persons who continue to face unchallenged harassment and discrimination. What many policy studies and recent legal precedents suggest, though, is that those costs extend to larger communities who face higher collective health care costs and lower productivity, for example. And as states, regions, and the federal government pivot toward making nandiscrimination policies and laws the norm, thase municipalities that fail to address systematic discrimination and harassment against LGBT persons may become marginalized as businesses, other organizations, and tourists, for example, choose to spend their money elsewhere. In short, Strunk and Takewell accurately depict the current social and policy climate where as officials learn about the implications of discrimination and harassment against LGBT persons, they often seek to mitigate the problems that result. And over time officials will face added pressure to do so to avoid fiscal and/or legal costs.  15 Appendix C: Comments from Warren J. Blumenfeld, Ed.D. Dr. Blumenfeld’s comments were offered in a format difficult to directly copy into this document. Therefore, quotes are provided: “Overall I think [the report] is very well written and comprehensive… LGBT people still routinely face discrimination in employment, housing, public accommodations, insurance, and many other aspects of our lives. In addition, within those states that do not provide marriage equality for same-sex couples, we are deprived of the over 1,300 state and national benefits that are accorded to legally-married different-sex partners. Transgender people suffer from high murder rates. Our history is not being told in the schools.”