Gender Nonconforming Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Youth:

1
Gender Nonconforming Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and
Transgender Youth Victimization and Young Adult
Well-Being Russell Toomey, Caitlin Ryan,
Stephen T. Russell
BACKGROUND HYPOTHESES
SAMPLE METHODS
CONCLUSIONS IMPLICATIONS

• Gender nonconforming youth are at risk for
  comprised psychosocial health, such as depression
  and anxiety (Yunger, Carver, Perry, 2004), and
  victimization (Grossman DAugelli, 2006).
• Gender nonconforming youth are victimized at
  school more than any other context (e.g., home or
  community DAugelli et al., 2006). The more
  young people present as gender nonconforming, the
  more likely they will be victimized or abused at
  school (Grossman, DAugelli, Howell, Hubbard,
  2005).
• Within the category of gender nonconforming
  youth, transgender young people are perhaps most
  at risk for experiencing victimization at school.
  Sausa (2005) found that 96 of transgender
  participants experienced physical harassment and
  83 experienced verbal harassment at school.
  Furthermore, transgender youth are at increased
  risk for dropping out of school, running away
  from home, and becoming homeless (Grossman
  DAugelli, 2006).
• Framework
• Meyers (1995, 2003) minority stress model posits
  that lesbian, gay, and bisexual individuals are
  at increased risk for mental health distress
  because of their stigmatized sexual identities.
  Combined with general life stressors, unique
  minority stress can plausibly cause poor mental
  health adjustment.
• Hypotheses
• (1) Greater levels of gender nonconformity during
  adolescence are associated with more instances of
  victimization specific to perceptions of LGBT
  status.
• (2) Biological sex moderates the effects of
  gender nonconformity on LGBT victimization, such
  that gender nonconforming males experience more
  victimization than gender nonconforming females.
• (3) Experience of LGBT victimization during
  adolescence mediates the direct effect of gender
  nonconformity on young adult psychosocial
  outcomes, such that victimization becomes the
  salient predictor of young adult psychosocial
  outcomes (lower life satisfaction and higher
  levels of depression).

Family Acceptance Project Participants 245 LGBT
Young Adults 21-25 years old (Mean
22.8) Ethnicity 51.4 Latino 48.6 White,
Non-Latino Gender 46.5 Male, 44.9 Female,
8.6 Transgender Measures Adolescent Gender
Nonconformity On a scale from 1-9, where 1 is
extremely feminine and 9 is extremely masculine,
how would you describe yourself when you were a
teenager (age 13-19)? Mean 4.44
(1.80) Adolescent LGBT-Related Victimization Sum
of 10 items (a .91) Sample item During my
middle or high school years, I was pushed,
shoved, slapped, hit, or kicked by someone who
wasnt just kidding around. How often did this
occur because people knew or assumed you were
LGBT? (0 never, 3 many times Mean 5.33,
SD 4.91) Young Adult Depression CES-D
(Radloff, 1977), 20 items (a .94 M 12.41, SD
8.24) Young Adult Life Satisfaction 8 items (a
.75) Sample item At the present time, how
satisfied are you with your living situation? (1
very dissatisfied, 4 very satisfied M
22.78, SD 4.19)

• Gender Nonconformity
• Gender nonconformity predicts higher levels of
  LGBT-related adolescent victimization. Not taking
  victimization into account, adolescent gender
  nonconformity predicts negative young-adult
  well-being
• LGBT-Related Victimization
• LGBT-related victimization is associated with
  compromised young adult well-being.
  Victimization fully mediates the association
  between adolescent gender nonconformity and young
  adult well-being
• Implications
• Similar to recent research on LGBT student safety
  (Kosciw Diaz, 2006 OShaughnessy, Russell,
  Heck, Calhoun, Laub, 2004 Perrotti
  Westheimer, 2001 Sausa, 2005), we recommend that
  schools implement policies and procedures to
  prevent harassment due to LGBT status and gender
  identity
• Implementation of anti-harassment policies that
  prohibit harassment because of gender
  nonconformity, as well as LGBT status.
• Provide education and information about gender
  identity and other LGBT issues to students,
  administrators, staff, and teachers.
• Provide a place for a support or social group
  for gender nonconforming and LGBT students, such
  as gay-straight alliance clubs.
• Examine the physical structure of their schools
  to find new opportunities to create safe
  environments for gender nonconforming and LGBT
  students.

Figure 1 Hypothesized model with standardized
estimates.
FINDINGS
Biological Sex as Moderator Males (M 0)
experienced more LGBT school victimization than
females (M -.61 d-.66). Results showed no
moderation by biological sex. Males and females
were combined in subsequent analyses because the
variance/covariance structure could be
constrained to be equal. LGBT Victimization as
Mediator (See Figure 1) Excellent model fit
?2(df88) 137.66 RMSEA .05 (.03.06) NNFI
.97 CFI .98 Gender nonconformity ?
Victimization ? Depression Sobels Test z
2.76, p 39.72 Gender nonconformity ? Victimization ?
Life Satisfaction Sobels Test z -2.31, p