This report identified and explored three national models for breaking the cycle of marginalization of LGBT youth in schools. These three models reflect each country’s national history and socio-cultural context, but lessons taken from each model may be valuable for advocates around the world.

Unfortunately, there is no “silver-bullet” solution to addressing this critical public health issue, and more research must be done to evaluate each of the intervention methods discussed in this report so that successful practices may be identified. Nonetheless, the models explored in this report each relied on three levels of intervention to begin addressing the harassment of LGBT youth in schools. These three levels of intervention—data collection and dissemination, civil society mobilization/ advocacy and governmental policy response—provide a road map to begin building national intervention models.

In the United States, where opposition to LGBT activism is perhaps just as strong as the support, the emphasis of efforts remains identity-based. The rich history of identity-based movements in the U.S. (civil, women’s, etc) has provided the LGBT movement with lessons and perhaps readied the waters for social change. Research has driven the movement forward by documenting the impact of marginalization on LGBT youth. Concurrently, civil society has used the data to drive mobilization and advocacy efforts on behalf of and in partnership with LGBT youth. More recently government has begun to respond. States have passed anti-discrimination policies and anti-bullying legislation awaits Senate approval. That these policies include language to protect youth based on their sexual orientation and/or gender identity shows promise. While there is still much to be done to break the cycle of marginalization of LGBT youth in schools in the US, the US model shows promise and is aimed at both interpersonal and structural harassment.

In Germany, where resistance to LGBT activism is relatively less strong, efforts focus more broadly on increasing youth knowledge and comfort with sexuality in general and on an overall interest in German unity. This model is defined by remarkable cooperation between government and civil society. Government standards promote broad, comprehensive sex education in schools. Civil society is funded by government to assist with this education and to provide teacher training. That sex education is integrated into classes such as English, biology, German, literature, etc. is remarkable and normalizing. While there are still challenges, Germany’s model is one that offers many lessons to LGBT youth advocates willing to learn.

In Brazil, where LGBT activism has more recently achieved significant progress in conjunction with efforts to engage a broad spectrum of marginalized communities, efforts rely on a hybrid of pre-existing methods. That is, they mirror a combination of both the unity model of the German response and the identity-based model of the United States. Nonetheless, Brazil’s model is unique and perhaps more planned than those of the United States or Germany. Most notable is that the model is driven by the bold political will of Brazil’s president. Social resistance to these changes remains strong, and the reliance of the government on civil society for implementation of this initiative presents a challenge for areas of the country where LGBT civil society is less developed. But the key component of the Brazilian model—the political will to take action is culture shifting. Contributing components include widespread teacher trainings, in-school support from civil society, youth-focused school evaluations, and a hybrid of state- and privately funded efforts to create schools without homophobia.

Analyses of each of these models render important lessons for advocates:

• Resources are available for countries that are building LGBT movements, as well as for those with movements that are already long established. An international exchange of intervention and research methods, and lessons learned by other movements, should be a critical component of advocacy strategies.
• In countries with progressive sexual policies, as in countries with few resources, research is a critical component of advocacy for LGBT youth and for the valuable and necessary exchange of information across regional and national borders.
• International treaties can be used in advocacy efforts and to justify governmental action in the absence of national or state legislation. These treaties provide valuable language on human rights and can help make the case against LGBT harassment and discrimination.
• Advocacy regarding youth sexuality must take into consideration the impact of campaigns on all youth. In is not enough to assume that advocacy designed to protect gay males is the same as it is for lesbian females, nor is it the same for transgender youth or for LGBT youth of color.
• When faced with obstacles or opposition at the national level, locate local supporters and initiate individual or local research projects and intervention efforts. Once projects are in place, locate the areas and communities that are most in need of assistance, and develop strategies of support so that they can initiate their own data collection and intervention efforts.
• Intervention strategies should not depend on a single source of support. Government support of civil society is of definitive value, but it also fosters dependence and can leave agencies and their interventions insecure during periods of government transition.
• A rights-based model cannot be based on progressive policies alone. A critical and often ignored component of advocacy must include monitoring and evaluating policies to ensure that they are being implemented and are effective.
• Advocates must be wary of reinforcing policies that exclude other social groups, and of the unintentional stigmatizing impact of advocacy campaigns on other communities. Effectively addressing harassment of LGBT youth means working in collaboration with other organizations, particularly those oriented towards other marginalized groups.
• It is critical that advocates develop campaigns that empower LGBT youth so that they are aware of their rights and are able to fight for them themselves.
• Advocacy designed to protect LGBT youth from harassment must incorporate education and empowerment regarding sexual pleasure, sexual exploration and sexual diversity designed for all youth, not just for heterosexual youth but also not just for LGBT youth.
• To be successful, advocacy and subsequent policy and programmatic responses must redress both interpersonal as well as systematic and structural harassment LGBT youth face in school.

Youth

1. Locate supportive peers and organize with them to promote diversity in your school.
2. Educate yourself about other forms of harassment and reach out to youth who experience them.
3. Reach out to teachers and administrators by letting them know how they can best support you.
4. If comprehensive, sex positive sexual education is not commonplace in your school, advocate for adoption of this approach in the curriculum.
5. Know your rights and advocate for them in your school, and with local and national governments.
6. If policies exist in your school and government that are meant to ensure your rights, ask how these policies are monitored and evaluated.

Teachers

1. Educate yourself. Reach out to LGBT youth in your school and ask what you can do to help.
2. If no research exists, work with youth to initiate research, or locate researchers in your area.
3. Incorporate discussion of sexual diversity into coursework. If you encounter or fear retribution, seek support from local, national or international networks.
4. Find ways to promote the education of colleagues about sexual diversity and issues of harassment.
5. Intervene immediately in bullying or harassment.
6. Push for school and government policy changes that promote rights, respect and responsibility of all youth, including LGBT youth. If policies exist demand that they be monitored and evaluated.

Administrators

1. Educate yourself. Reach out to LGBT youth in your school and ask what you can do to help.
2. Be sure all faculty and staff are educated on issues of sexual diversity as well as harassment and suicide prevention.
3. Provide teachers with in-service training to effectively intervene in bullying and harassment.
4. Ensure that research is being done to assess prejudice in your school. If financial resources are a problem, reach out to external organizations or interested students and faculty members.
5. Set standards of rights, respect and responsibility in your school with regards to education about sexual and reproductive health.
6. Ensure that resources exist for youth who experience harassment in your school.
7. Engage district and with government representatives to promote policies of rights, respect and responsibility.

Researchers

1. Reach out to LGBT youth and incorporate them in your research as much as possible.
2. Collaborate with researchers in other regions to ensure data is comparable across regions.
3. Initiate qualitative research to understand the dynamic of harassment in schools.
4. Based on the qualitative research, initiate quantitative research that measures harassment based on multiple forms of oppression.
5. Initiate evaluative research to be sure that existing policies and programs are effective.
6. Share research with civil society and policy makers and researchers in other regions.

Civil Society

1. Reach out to policy makers, educators, LGBT youth and youth who experience other forms of discrimination and incorporate them into your programming and advocacy efforts.
2. Educate yourself about programs that exist in other regions, and use resources and lessons learned to shape your own programs and advocacy efforts.
3. Organize efforts that support youth who experience harassment, but also efforts that address systematic forms of discrimination.
4. Do not rely only on private or public funding sources. Much can be done with very little funding, but it is also important to acquire both sources of funding.
5. Initiate research on harassment and monitor and evaluate all program and policy interventions.
6. Advocate for local, national and international policy.

Policy Makers

1. Partner with a diverse group of youth, educators and civil society to identify and actualize necessary policies.
2. Ensure adequate funding supports political initiatives to respond to the harassment of LGBT youth in schools.
3. Commission research to inform policy making that effectively combats harassment of LGBT youth, and that evaluates and monitors existing policies.
4. Advocate for local, national and international policies that promote comprehensive, sex-positive sex education in schools and that are based on rights, respect and responsibility of youth with regards to their reproductive and sexual health.
5. Look to other national models and international organizations and treaties for ideas and warnings when defining policies.
6. Be sure that policies do not incorporate LGBT experiences while excluding other groups.