Gender-sexuality Alliances Research Articles

Depression, Anxiety, and Interest in Mental Health Resources in School-Based Gender-Sexuality Alliances: Implications for Sexual and Gender Minority Youth Health Promotion.

Schools can be a setting to address mental health needs of sexual and gender minority (SGM) youth. Gender-Sexuality Alliances (GSAs), as extracurricular support groups, provide an existing structure that could be leveraged to reach SGM youth and deliver services. Nevertheless, limited data indicate the prevalence of depression and anxiety among GSA members, how often GSAs discuss mental health, or their receptivity to resources. Participants in the current study were 580 youth (Mage = 15.59; 79% sexual minority, 57% cisgender female; 68% White) and 58 advisors in 38 GSAs purposively sampled across Massachusetts. Youth completed established measures of depression and anxiety; advisors reported how frequently their GSAs discussed mental health; and both reported their interest in mental health materials. Among youth, 70.1% scored above the threshold indicating probable mild depression, and 34.4% scored above the threshold suggesting concerning anxiety. Adjusted odds ratios indicated that the odds of depression and anxiety were higher for SGM members relative to heterosexual and cisgender members, particularly among youth reporting SGM identities that have been underrepresented. GSAs discussed mental health with some frequency over the school year. Youth and advisors expressed strong interest in resources. Findings support the case for developing selective and indicated school-based prevention programming for youth in GSAs to address their mental health needs.

College aspirations, gender sexuality alliances, and teacher support among diverse LGBTQ youth

ABSTRACT Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer/questioning (LGBTQ) youth report hostile school climates and sexuality-based harassment, but scholarship has not clearly documented how these climates might be associated with college aspirations among this population. Given college has become a common aspiration for many high school youths, we sought to explore subgroup differences in college aspirations among LGBTQ youth, and whether or not LGBTQ-specific community factors, such as Gender Sexuality Alliances (GSA) presence and teacher support, were related to college aspirations. To do this, we analysed a large sample (N = 11,327, Mage = 15.57) of LGBTQ youth from across the United States. We compared college aspirations across subgroups of youth via bivariate and multivariable logistic regression models to explore how school factors (i.e., presence of GSAs and LGBTQ-specific teacher supportiveness) were associated with college aspirations among LGBTQ youth. We found that transgender youth were less likely to aspire to go to college compared to cisgender counterparts. Additionally, more common sexual minority subgroups (e.g., gay/lesbian) were less likely to aspire to go to college compared to their counterparts with more emergent identity labels (e.g., asexual, queer). The presence of GSAs and higher reports of LGBTQ-supportive teachers were associated with increased odds of aspiring to go to college across all LGBTQ youth in our sample. These findings have implications for how schools and teachers prepare sexual and gender minorities for college. The findings imply that LGBTQ populations should not be treated as monolithic in their college readiness, preparation, and aspirations.

Development of youth advocacy and sociopolitical efficacy as dimensions of critical consciousness within gender-sexuality alliances.

Attention to youth advocacy and sociopolitical efficacy has been evident in developmental research on critical consciousness, yet this literature has given little attention to sexual and gender minority (SGM) youth or issues, or to the interplay between these dimensions of critical consciousness over time. We addressed these limitations within the context of gender-sexuality alliances (GSAs). Among 366 youth members (Mage = 15.53 years) in 38 GSAs across Massachusetts who completed surveys at the beginning and end of the school year, multilevel models indicated that youth who reported more active engagement in GSAs at the beginning of the school year reported greater advocacy throughout the year and greater sociopolitical efficacy at the year's end (adjusting for baseline advocacy and efficacy). There was a significant indirect association between greater GSA engagement and greater sociopolitical efficacy at the year's end through reported advocacy done over the school year. Furthermore, group-level contextual effects indicated that youth in GSAs with a more youth-led orientation reported doing less advocacy but reported greater sociopolitical efficacy at the year's end than youth in GSAs with less of a youth-led orientation. Finally, advocacy and sociopolitical efficacy were reciprocally associated with one another: Greater initial efficacy was associated with greater advocacy over the school year, and advocacy was associated with greater efficacy at the year's end. These findings extend the critical consciousness literature and carry implications for how GSAs and similar groups could support SGM youth and their allies in resisting oppression. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Corrigendum to “Extracurricular Settings as a Space to Address Sociopolitical Crises: The Case of Discussing Immigration in Gender-Sexuality Alliances Following the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election”

Corrigendum to “Extracurricular Settings as a Space to Address Sociopolitical Crises: The Case of Discussing Immigration in Gender-Sexuality Alliances Following the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election”

Bias-Based Bullying and School Adjustment among Sexual and Gender Minority Adolescents: The Role of Gay-Straight Alliances.

Adolescents identifying as sexual and/or gender minorities face many challenges at school due to stigma-based peer harassment. This study examined the extent to which sexual and gender minority adolescents experience bias-based bullying across a range of stigmatized identities and attributes, as well as the potential of gay-straight alliances (GSAs, also referred to as gender-sexuality alliances) to reduce simultaneously multiple forms of bias-based bullying, and in turn support school adjustment. Using a United States sample of diverse sexual and gender minority adolescents (N = 17,112; Mage = 15.57, SDage = 1.27), multiple mediation analyses indicated lower levels of multiple forms of bias-based bullying (based on body weight, gender, religion, disability, gender typicality, sexuality) at schools with versus without GSAs, and in turn higher perceived school safety, as well as higher grades and reduced school suspension (due to less weight- and sexuality-based bullying). The findings shed light on the broad-reaching stigma-reduction potential of GSAs.

Membership experiences in gender-sexuality alliances (GSAs) predict increased hope and attenuate the effects of victimization

We examined whether students' experiences in their Gender-Sexuality Alliances (GSAs) over the school year predicted positive development or thriving in the form of higher relative levels of hope at the end of the school year and whether GSA experiences also promoted resilience by attenuating the link between victimization and lower relative levels of hope among 366 student members of 38 GSAs (Mage = 15.53 years; 85% sexual minority; 55% cisgender female; 72% White). Our findings indicated that, when considered one at a time, students' perceptions of receiving more social-emotional support, receiving more information and resources, and undertaking more advocacy in their GSA throughout the school year predicted higher relative levels of hope at the end of that school year (adjusted for students' initial hope at the beginning of the year). When considering all three GSA-based experiences concurrently, receiving more information and resources in their GSA had a unique predictive association with hope and it reduced the extent to which reported experiences of victimization at school predicted diminished hope at the end of the year. There was a similar, though statistically non-significant, moderating trend for advocacy.

Greater Engagement in Gender-Sexuality Alliances (GSAs) and GSA Characteristics Predict Youth Empowerment and Reduced Mental Health Concerns.

Extracurricular groups can promote healthy development, yet the literature has given limited attention to indirect associations between extracurricular involvement and mental health or to sexual and gender minority youth. Among 580 youth (Mage =15.59, range=10-20years) and adult advisors in 38 Gender-Sexuality Alliances (GSAs), multilevel structural equation models showed that greater engagement in GSAs over the school year predicted increased perceived peer validation, self-efficacy to promote social justice, and hope (baseline adjusted). Through increased hope, greater engagement indirectly predicted reduced depressive and anxiety symptoms at the year's end (baseline adjusted). GSAs whose members had more mental health discussions and more meetings reported reduced mental health concerns. Findings suggest how groups addressing issues of equity and justice improve members' health.

Extracurricular Settings as a Space to Address Sociopolitical Crises: The Case of Discussing Immigration in Gender-Sexuality Alliances Following the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election.

School-based extracurricular settings could promote dialogue on sociopolitical crises. We considered immigration discussions within Gender-Sexuality Alliances (GSAs), which address multiple systems of oppression. Among 361 youth and 58 advisors in 38 GSAs (19 in 2016-2017/Year 1; 19 in 2017-2018/Year 2), youth in Year 1 reported increased discussions from baseline throughout the remaining school year; differences were non-significant in Year 2. In both years, youth reporting greater self-efficacy to promote social justice, and GSAs with advisors reporting greater self-efficacy to address culture, race, and immigration discussed immigration more over the year (adjusting for baseline). In interviews, 38 youth described circumstances promoting or inhibiting discussions: demographic representation, open climates, critical reflection, fear or consequences of misspeaking, discomfort, agenda restrictions, and advisor roles.