This week’s reading, written by Eleanor Formby, discusses LGBT individuals’ experiences with bullying. The article’s main point of discussion is how society’s view is very close-minded on homophobia, biphobia, and transphobia. This close-mindedness is a result of portraying bullying at the center of the issue when it is due to a fault in the current system. The critical perspective here is that the societal framework and media narratives focus too much on individual cases of bullying rather than addressing the systemic issues that perpetuate such behaviors.
Bullying is characterized by a victim and an individual who is guilty. Victim blaming through the media and anti-bullying campaigns intensify LGBT individuals’ fears about coming out. These individuals are so scared they believe in all circumstances they will be the victim because that is the only thing that is presented to them. This not only is a model to other LGBT individuals but the rest of society. In the reading, it said that 55% of LGB adolescents experience bullying due to homophobia at some point in their lives (Guasp 2012). This statistic underscores the pervasive nature of bullying in the lives of LGBT youth and highlights the urgent need for systemic changes.
There is too much attention on LGBT individuals and bullying rather than dealing with the major fault in the current system. The reading also addressed the ‘It Gets Better’ campaign. Harris and Farrington (2014) disagreed with the campaign because it generalized all LGBT individuals as victims and did not acknowledge the different circumstances that are subjected to everyone. This critique highlights the limitation of broad-stroke approaches to complex social issues, advocating instead for more nuanced and inclusive strategies.
The topic of victim blaming in the reading connects to Robert Merton’s “Self-Fulfilling Prophecy”. This is when one’s expectations influence one’s behavior. The expectations of being a victim when one is LGBT is constructed socially and, thus, influences everyone’s behavior regarding LGBT individuals and homophobia. This theoretical framework explains how societal expectations can perpetuate cycles of victimization and discrimination.
Another issue of concern in the article was how homosexuality compared to heterosexuality was seen as abnormal when presented in the classroom setting. The article had many examples of young adults’ experiences with being taught about homosexuality. Ellis (2007) and Quinin (2002) demonstrated that teachers would always ignore content about homophobia, biphobia, and transphobia since they did not want to bring up the topics concerning sex. By disregarding sex, homosexuality was brought up when talking about bullying. Therefore, bullying and topics about LGBT are linked with victim blaming.
Rasmussen (2006) explained that the curriculum in schools is narrow and socially constructs heterosexuality as ‘normal’ and homosexuality as ‘other’. School curriculum should expand to make LGBT individuals less of a topic of concern and more normalized into the rest of sex education. This calls for a comprehensive review and reform of educational content to promote inclusivity and diversity.
Additionally, educating teachers on how to present this information in a manner that destigmatizes the several different topics of LGBT is crucial. This topic of ignorance of LGBTQ students relates to the article, “The Power of An Inclusive Curriculum in LGBTQ Education” by J.D. Mayo. Mayo discusses how LGBTQ students are ignored in the way that teachers present their messages to the class formally or unintentionally. Formby and Mayo in both their articles bring up how LGBT individuals need to be more included in society and society needs to broaden normalized heterosexuality.
Expanding on this, Judith Butler’s theory of performativity provides a lens to understand how gender and sexuality are constructed through repeated performances, influenced by societal norms. This theory underscores the importance of changing the performative acts that define heterosexuality as the norm and homosexuality as deviant. By altering these performances within educational settings, a more inclusive and accepting environment can be fostered.
Moreover, Michel Foucault’s concept of biopower is relevant here. Foucault’s idea that institutions, including schools, exert control over individuals’ bodies and identities highlights how the education system can enforce normative behaviors and marginalize LGBT identities. Challenging this biopower involves not only changing curricula but also transforming the institutional practices that perpetuate exclusion and discrimination.
The Minority Stress Model by Ilan Meyer also provides valuable insight into the psychological impacts of societal stigma on LGBT individuals. According to this model, the stress caused by discrimination, prejudice, and internalized homophobia can lead to adverse mental health outcomes. Recognizing this, there is a need for supportive school environments that mitigate these stressors through affirmative policies and practices.
Erving Goffman’s theory of stigma further elucidates how negative societal labels can lead to the marginalization of LGBT individuals. Goffman’s work suggests that de-stigmatization requires a shift in societal attitudes and the dismantling of stereotypes. This involves proactive education that fosters empathy, understanding, and acceptance among students and teachers alike.
Social Learning Theory by Albert Bandura can also be applied to understand how behaviors towards LGBT individuals are learned and perpetuated. According to Bandura, people learn from observing others. Therefore, if teachers and peers model inclusive and respectful behaviors, these can be adopted by others, leading to a more inclusive school culture.
Cognitive Behavioral Theory (CBT) suggests that altering negative thought patterns can change behavior. Applying CBT in educational settings could help challenge and change prejudiced attitudes towards LGBT individuals, promoting a more accepting and supportive environment.
Furthermore, Queer Theory challenges the binary understanding of gender and sexuality, advocating for a more fluid and inclusive approach. This theoretical perspective encourages the deconstruction of rigid categories and the recognition of diverse identities, which is essential for creating an inclusive educational environment.
In conclusion, addressing the experiences of LGBT individuals with bullying requires a multi-faceted approach that involves changing societal attitudes, reforming educational curricula, and implementing supportive policies. The theories discussed provide a comprehensive framework for understanding and addressing the systemic issues that contribute to the marginalization of LGBT individuals. By fostering an inclusive environment, society can move towards greater acceptance and equality for all individuals, regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity.