Kate Marston and Eleanor Formby examine how LGBT-targeted bullying is dealt with in schools and the limitations and problems that come from mainstream methods. LGBT-targeted bullying is roughly defined as continued harassment of a person based on their sexuality or gender identity. Ranging from minor homophobic language to outright violence against LGBT students, the effects of bullying can be serious: “consequences can include self-harm, suicidal ideation and depression, decreased school attendance and engagement, and lower academic attainment” (Marston, 2015). In recent years, LGBT concerns, such as bullying, have gained enough attention that most schools and districts are actively aware of destructive behaviors caused by homophobia and have regulations to try to prevent bullying and sometimes promote awareness. However, many of the mainstream methods of preventing homophobic and transphobic bullying only focus on some of the concerns faced by LGBT students while ignoring or dismissing others.
The common approach to dealing with LGBT bullying is to treat it as an ‘individualised’ incident: a prejudiced bully harasses a victim, the teacher identifies the bully and punishes them (Marston, 2015). Marston and Formby find this bully prevention method to oversimplify the problem. The reason LGBT targeted bullying exists is due to LGBT being seen as an inferior other, a concept Marston calls heterosexism. Heterosexuality and conforming gender identity to sex are seen as the norm and good, where homosexuality and transgender people are generally seen as inferior or as having a problematic condition that requires a solution. Instead of treating incidents as individual and isolated, Formby recommends promoting class awareness and discussion to address the full issue.
Teachers can sometimes be part of the problem. Marston notes how “no homo promo” government legislation forbids teachers from promoting LGBT identities, which can make what teachers are allowed to do about LGBT bullying confusing at best. A lack of education leaves teachers unconfident with how to act around LGBT students, finding their issues too complex to deal with (Formby, 2015). LGBT students find intervention to be highly inconsistent as LGBT issues frequently go unaddressed. “Schools have for too long been tasked with promoting tolerance without having the time or space to talk about what is to be tolerated” (Marston, 2015). Teachers know that bullying exists but do not always know what it looks like or what to do about it.
The image of the LGBT student inadvertently promoted in schools is of primary concern. In what Marston calls ‘pathologising,’ LGBT students are portrayed only as victims. Statistics frequently classify the LGBT community as a whole and announce how frequently people are abused, bullied, and attempt suicide or self-harm. Not all LGBT people require help; not all LGBT students get bullied; bullying of LGBTs is not inevitable (Formby, 2015). This victim portrayal further classifies LGBT students as an inferior other to heterosexual cisgender people. “The persistent focus on negative outcomes for lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans young people also overlooks the fact that these young people have agency” (Marston, 2015). Especially for newer generations, the victim-like depiction of LGBT people becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.