Menu
Program Coordinator, Honestly OKC
Director of Data and Strategic Learning, Honestly OKC
Women make up a large portion of the 2SLGBTQ+ community, and 2SLGBTQ+ youth represent approximately 10% of adolescents in the U.S. Most 2SLGBTQ+ people in Oklahoma are under the age of 24.
These young Oklahomans face significant risks of disconnection due to systemic marginalization for their sexual and gender identities. Despite growing societal acceptance, they frequently encounter environments characterized by anti-2SLGBTQ+ language, victimization, and institutional neglect — all of which lead to increase health risks and long-term, adverse effects on their well-being.
Addressing these challenges requires targeted interventions. Protective factors like inclusive school policies, Gay-Straight Alliances, and supportive workplace environments play a crucial role in enhancing 2SLGBTQ+ youth's sense of belonging and overall well-being. These measures, coupled with family acceptance, can mitigate the risks of disconnection and foster supportive and equitable environments for Oklahoma's 2SLGBTQ+ youth.
2SLGBTQ+ (2-Spirit, Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer/Questioning, and additional identities) youth – those aged 24 and younger – represent approximately ten percent of adolescents in the United States. Across the country, girls identifying as lesbian, bisexual, queer and questioning make up a majority of the LGBTQ+ youth population (66%).1Conron, LGBT Youth Population in the United States, The Williams Institute, UCLA, 2020. These youth face significant risks of isolation and disconnection because of systemic marginalization based on their sexual orientation and gender identity. Marginalization, or the treatment of individuals that places them on the periphery in society, is the essence of disconnection and places these young people on the edge in environments where they are supposed to thrive, like school and work. Disconnection is defined here as a young person not enrolled in school or not working, and these two forms of disconnection can limit a young person from gaining the skills and knowledge they need to be independently successful as an adult.2Fernandes-Alcantara et. al., Disconnected Youth, 2011, 7.
Young 2SLGBTQ+ individuals experience “systematic marginalization that impact(s) LGBTQ people due to societal bias and discrimination against their LGBTQ identities.”3DeChants et al., “‘It Kinda Breaks My Heart’: LGBTQ Young Adults’ Responses to Family Rejection,” 2022. This results in limited capacity for them to consider their own health and well-being because they are focused on social and structural survival. While there has been progress in the acceptance of people in the queer community, we continue to live in a heterosexist and cisgenderist society, meaning we normalize antitransgender bias and center heterosexual relationships. Internalized cisgender beliefs contribute to systematic bias and discrimination that exacerbates marginalization faced by sexual and gender minority youth.
Various intersecting systems contribute to the increased risk of isolation and disconnection for 2SLGBTQ+ youth. These young people often encounter hostile school environments characterized by anti-2SLGBTQ+ language, discrimination, and a lack of institutional support. As a result, many students may avoid school or school-related activities, which can lead to heightened health risks and long-term adverse effects on their well-being. When a young person first enters the workforce, workplace environments also present substantial risks. 2SLGBTQ+ youth face discrimination that deters them from seeking employment or causes trauma if they enter the workforce. The lack of comprehensive workplace protections and persistent discrimination contribute to difficulties in maintaining job security and career development.4Sears et. al., Documented Evidence of Employment Discrimination & Its Effects on LGBT People, 2011. Familial rejection represents a critical factor exacerbating disconnection among 2SLGBTQ+ youth. Rejection from family can lead to homelessness, limiting access to education and employment opportunities, and amplifying risks of mental health issues.5Côté et. al., “‘The Least Loved, That’s What I Was’: A Qualitative Analysis of the Pathways to Homelessness by LGBTQ+ Youth,” 2020.
Addressing these challenges requires targeted interventions. Protective factors like inclusive school policies, Gay-Straight Alliances, and supportive workplace environments play a crucial role in enhancing 2SLGBTQ+ youth’s sense of belonging and overall well-being. These factors can foster connectedness, a key determinant of well-being for 2SLGBTQ+ youth. A sense of connectedness empowers students to report victimization and advocate for themselves in hostile environments. Connectedness plays a pivotal role in mitigating the adverse effects of marginalization and serves as a foundation for resilience.6Fernandes et al., “Between Resilience and Agency: A Systematic Review of Protective Factors and Positive Experiences of LGBTQ+ Students,” 2023.
2SLGBTQ+ youth are at risk for disconnection in school settings because the environment is unwelcoming, with limited protective measures in place for them. According to GLSEN’s (Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network) 2021 National School Climate Survey, almost two thirds of LGBTQ students who were harassed at school did not report the incident because they assumed the adult staff would not do anything to address the situation, and of those who did report, over 60% were neglected. Young people who are bullied because of their sexual orientation or gender identity avoid school, and young people who avoid school have higher risks of experiencing health concerns.7Hafeez et. al., “Health Care Disparities Among Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Youth: A Literature Review,” 2017. According to Kosciw, Clark, and Menard,8Kosciw et. al., “The 2019 National School Climate Survey: The Experiences of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Youth in Our Nation’s Schools,” 2022. schools nationwide are hostile environments for the overwhelming majority of 2SLGBTQ+ students, who routinely hear anti-2SLGBTQ+ language and experience victimization and discrimination. Consequently, many 2SLGBTQ+ students avoid school activities or miss school entirely. Consistently missing school can disrupt an individual’s preparation for adult life and may also impact the broader community by limiting the contributions of fully prepared young adults.
The issue extends beyond peer-to-peer discrimination. School personnel and policies can stifle a young person’s gender-affirming choices. According to the 2021 National School Climate Survey from GLSEN, a majority of 2SLGBTQ+ young people (58.9%) experience institutional discrimination. School-wide, rule-based discrimination, such as restrictive policies related to students changing their names and pronouns, further isolates these students.9Kosciw et. al., “The 2019 National School Climate Survey: The Experiences of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Youth in Our Nation’s Schools,” 2022. This type of antagonistic learning environment could cause a 2SLGBTQ+-identifying young person to focus less on school and their well-being and lowers their sense of belonging in their school. A sense of belonging can combat disconnection in social settings as it encourages engagement in school-based activities.
2SLGBTQ+ youth face a heightened risk of disconnection in the workplace due to the prevalence of discrimination against queer individuals. Young people may be particularly vulnerable to this type of discrimination as they enter the workforce for the first time, often without adequate resources or experience to address it. Like the institutional issues in schools, there are often limited workplace regulations protecting 2SLGBTQ+ people, even though there are federal laws that prohibit discrimination at work.10U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, “Employees & Job Applicants,” 2024. “Widespread and continuing employment discrimination against LGBT people has been documented in court cases, state and local administrative complaints, complaints to community-based organizations, academic journals, newspapers, books, and other media.”11Sears et. al., Documented Evidence of Employment Discrimination & Its Effects on LGBT People, 2011. When young people in the 2SLGBTQ+ community encounter discrimination or bias in the workforce, it can lead to feelings of alienation, lower job satisfaction, and limited career advancement opportunities.
Additionally, 2SLGBTQ+ youth may be disconnected from employment altogether as they face unique difficulties procuring a job. Specifically, transgender individuals have added stressors given that they may have to consider where they are in their transition journey and how that could affect them throughout the hiring process or if transitioning is a safe option while employed.12Goldberg et. al., “‘I Want to Be Safe…And I Also Want a Job’: Career Considerations and Decision-Making Among Transgender Graduate Students,” 2021. Barriers to securing employment may lead some 2SLGBTQ+ youth to engage in sex work as a survival strategy.13Abramovich et.al., “2SLGBTQ+ Youth, Violence, and Homelessness,” 2018. Young people in the queer community have to consider if a formal work environment is safe before beginning that role, and yet may also be forced into unregulated, informal work environments due to discrimination. This workforce disconnection can result in deep trauma that could impact every facet of a young person’s life. Simultaneously, employment can offer 2SLGBTQ+ youth a sense of autonomy and financial stability, both valuable for combatting the negative effects of social and familial disconnection.
For 2SLGBTQ+ youth, the risk of disconnection frequently starts with rejection at home. While workplace discrimination, peer harassment, and a lack of institutional protections are significant challenges, family rejection can be even more detrimental. This disconnection at home often spills into other areas of life, undermining a young person’s ability to feel a sense of belonging at school or work.
Living in a hostile home environment may make it difficult for youth to secure or maintain employment. In a qualitative study on LGBTQ young adults’ experiences of family rejection, participants described how their families restricted their access to essential resources, such as technology.14DeChants et. al., “‘It Kinda Breaks My Heart’: LGBTQ Young Adults’ Responses to Family Rejection,” 2022. In today’s world, technology is crucial for social connection among peers, and workplace communication like scheduling with employers. When queer youth are raised in environments where their autonomy is constantly undermined, they may develop a distorted relationship with authority. As one youth described, “I also perceive attempts to exert control as something inherently dangerous to my well-being. Those are thoughts I must challenge in my life now.”15DeChants et. al., “‘It Kinda Breaks My Heart’: LGBTQ Young Adults’ Responses to Family Rejection,” 2022. This struggle to reconcile authority with personal safety can carry over into school and work settings, affecting how they relate to supervisors and other authority figures.
When rejection from family becomes severe, the consequences can extend beyond emotional disconnection and develop into physical crisis like housing instability. Discriminatory households are a catalyst for 2SLGBTQ+ youth to face homelessness, which is a common consequence for these youth.16Côté et. al., “‘The Least Loved, That’s What I Was’: A Qualitative Analysis of the Pathways to Homelessness by LGBTQ+ Youth,” 2020. A young person who identifies as 2SLGBTQ+ may be forced out of the house or must determine if their living environment is a risk to their safety and well-being. When a young person is forced out of their home due to family rejection, they are more likely to disengage from school and extracurricular activities that could otherwise foster a sense of connection. Without an address, safe place to sleep, or easy access to vital technology, they may also be limited in their ability to find and maintain employment.
The risk factors mentioned above are linked to various inequities among 2SLGBTQ+ youth. If a queer young person is less likely to attend school because of the allowance of discrimination, they may be less likely to graduate high school or attend higher education.
LGBTQ high school students express greater ambitions to pursue higher education than their peers, with over 90 percent planning to attend college and about 40 percent intending to earn a graduate degree.17Kosciw et. al., 2014 However, LGBTQ students who experience high levels of harassment and victimization in school report lower GPAs compared to their less victimized peers, highlighting the negative impact of school victimization on academic performance.18Kosciw et. al., 2014 This can impact their ability to get into college and earn scholarships.
A young 2SLGBTQ+ person who is not accepted at home or at work is more likely to experience negative mental health outcomes like lower levels of self-acceptance and higher levels of distress in their own body. This could lead to “increased arguments and conflict, abuse and neglect, silence and avoidance, control and isolation, and revoking housing.”19DeChants et. al., “‘It Kinda Breaks My Heart’: LGBTQ Young Adults’ Responses to Family Rejection,” 2022. With the majority of unhoused youth identifying with the 2SLGBTQ+ community, we can assume these risk factors are faced unequally by 2SLGBTQ+ youth.
The gaps in social connectedness and well-being interventions for 2SLGBTQ+ youth include a lack of institutional protections for these young people as well as missed educational opportunities for youth-serving adults they could connect with.20García et. al., “Social Isolation and Connectedness as Determinants of Well-Being: Global Evidence Mapping Focused on LGBTQ Youth,” 2019. If we can address these gaps and create safe spaces for 2SLGBTQ+ youth to thrive, we can keep these young people from experiencing disconnection.
According to the GLSEN’s National School Climate Survey Executive Summary, protective factors inside the schools can include:
These protective factors had a positive impact on the LGBTQ+ identifying students by increasing their feelings of connectedness, improving their attendance, and empowering them to report victimization. Additionally, these protective factors had a positive impact on other students’ behavior, with LGBTQ+ students reporting hearing less discriminatory language and experiencing less victimization.21Kosciw et. al., 2014.
A major benefit of reducing disconnection is healthier, happier young people who engage in their community and see value in their existence. The presence of trusted adults – whether that be at home, in the workplace, or in school – can improve outcomes for 2SLGBTQ+ youth with mental health concerns, specifically reducing the risk of suicide. “Youth with at least one accepting adult were significantly less likely to report a suicide attempt.”22Johns et. al., Research Brief: Accepting Adults Reduce Suicide Attempts Among LGBTQ Youth, 2019. Identity acceptance from adult authoritative figures, such as teachers, employers, and parents can have a protective influence on 2SLGBTQ+ youth. Acceptance in practice can look like using someone’s preferred name/pronouns or advocating for strictly enforced anti-discrimination policies at work. This kind of social support can have a powerful impact on a queer person’s self-esteem, feelings of safety, and general well-being.
Program Coordinator at Honestly OKC
Lillian Bocquin has a Masters in Public Health from the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. She is a Fellow with the Bloomberg American Health Initiative and currently serves as the Program Coordinator for Honestly Youth Sexual Health in Oklahoma City.
Director of Data and Strategic Learning at Honestly OKC
Amy Jenkins has a Master of Public Health from the George Washington University Milken Institute School of Public Health. She currently serves as the Director of Data and Strategic Learning for Honestly: Youth Sexual Health in Oklahoma City.
Abramovich, Alex, EGALE Canada, and Homeless Hub. “2SLGBTQ+ Youth, Violence, and Homelessness.” Learning Network 24, 2018. https://www.gbvlearningnetwork.ca/our-work/issuebased_newsletters/issue-24/Issue_24.pdf.
Conron, Kerith J. LGBT Youth Population in the United States. Los Angeles: The Williams Institute, UCLA, 2020.
Côté, Patrick, and Martin Blais. “‘The Least Loved, That’s What I Was’: A Qualitative Analysis of the Pathways to Homelessness by LGBTQ+ Youth.” Journal of Gay & Lesbian Social Services 33, no. 2 (2020): 137–56. https://doi.org/10.1080/10538720.2020.1850388.
DeChants, Jonah P., Jama Shelton, Yolanda Anyon, and Kimberly Bender. “‘It Kinda Breaks My Heart’: LGBTQ Young Adults’ Responses to Family Rejection.” Family Relations 71, no. 3 (2022): 968–86. https://doi.org/10.1111/fare.12638.
Fernandes, Tatiana, Bárbara Alves, and João Gato. “Between Resilience and Agency: A Systematic Review of Protective Factors and Positive Experiences of LGBTQ+ Students.” Healthcare 11, no. 14 (2023): 2098. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare11142098.
Fernandes-Alcantara, Adrienne L., and Tom Gabe. Disconnected Youth: A Look at 16- to 24-Year-Olds Who Are Not Working or in School. Report. Congressional Research Service, 2011. https://www.everycrsreport.com/files/20111216_R40535_3d06274a8c8fe8b8111070cba88f01b1f68ee793.pdf.
García, Jonathan, Nathaniel Vargas, Jesse L. Clark, Mauricio M. Álvarez, Damon Nelons, and Richard Parker. “Social Isolation and Connectedness as Determinants of Well-Being: Global Evidence Mapping Focused on LGBTQ Youth.” Global Public Health 15, no. 4 (2019): 497–519. https://doi.org/10.1080/17441692.2019.1682028.
Goldberg, Abbie E., Eri Matsuno, and Genny Beemyn. “‘I Want to Be Safe…And I Also Want a Job’: Career Considerations and Decision-Making Among Transgender Graduate Students.” The Counseling Psychologist 49, no. 8 (2021): 1147–87. https://doi.org/10.1177/00110000211037671.
Hafeez, Hudaisa, Muhammad Zeshan, Muhammad A. Tahir, Nusrat Jahan, and Sadiq Naveed. “Health Care Disparities Among Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Youth: A Literature Review.” Cureus 9, no. 4 (2017): e1184. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.1184.
Johns, Michelle M., Jr., Laura Kann, Ilan H. Meyer, Constance Goodenow, Lisa Szalacha, and Kimberly Westheimer. “The Trevor Project Research Brief: Accepting Adults Reduce Suicide Attempts Among LGBTQ Youth.” The Trevor Project, 2019. https://www.thetrevorproject.org/wpcontent/uploads/2019/06/Trevor-Project-Accepting-Adult-Research-Brief_June-2019.pdf.
Kosciw, Joseph G., Caitlin M. Clark, Nhan L. Truong, and Adrian D. Zongrone. The 2019 National School Climate Survey: The Experiences of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Youth in Our Nation’s Schools. New York: GLSEN, 2020. https://www.glsen.org/research/2019-national-school-climate-survey.
Kosciw, Joseph G., Emily A. Greytak, Neal A. Palmer, and Madelyn J. Boesen. The 2013 National School Climate Survey: The Experiences of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Youth in Our Nation’s Schools. New York: Gay, Lesbian & Straight Education Network, 2014.
Mendelson, Tamar, Kristen Mmari, Robert W. Blum, Richard F. Catalano, and Claire D. Brindis. “Opportunity Youth: Insights and Opportunities for a Public Health Approach to Reengage Disconnected Teenagers and Young Adults.” Public Health Reports 133, no. 1 (2018): 54S–64S. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033354918799344.
Sears, Brad, and Christy Mallory. Documented Evidence of Employment Discrimination & Its Effects on LGBT People. Los Angeles: The Williams Institute, 2011. https://escholarship.org/content/qt03m1g5sg/qt03m1g5sg.pdf?t=mccaje.
U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. “Employees & Job Applicants.” Accessed November 20, 2024. https://www.eeoc.gov/employees-job-applicants.
Wagaman, M. Alex. “Changing Ourselves, Changing the World: Assessing the Value of Participatory Action Research as an Empowerment-Based Research and Service Approach with LGBTQ Young People.” Child & Youth Services 36, no. 2 (2015): 124–49. https://doi.org/10.1080/0145935x.2014.1001064.
Frozen Potential A book review of Conceiving Christian America: Embryo Adoption and Read More
2SLGBTQ+ Youth in Oklahoma at Risk for Disconnection Abstract Women make up Read More
Heartache in the Heartland Maternal Mortality and Limited Access to Doula Care Read More
