Page 1 of 16

Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal – Vol. 10, No. 3

Publication Date: March 25, 2023

DOI:10.14738/assrj.103.14194.

Oropeza, O., & Harris, V. W. (2023). Protective Factors for Sexual and Gender Minoritized Youth. Advances in Social Sciences

Research Journal, 10(3). 89-104.

Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom

Protective Factors for Sexual and Gender Minoritized Youth

Olivia Oropeza, M.S.

University of Florida

Victor William Harris, Ph.D.

University of Florida

Abstract

Sexual and gender minoritized youth (SGMY) experience disproportionate rates of

negative health and behavioral health outcomes relative to their heterosexual and

cisgendered peers. Ample research has been dedicated to understanding the risk

factors that may contribute to this disparity, however, less is understood regarding

what protective factors may exist for this population. The purpose of this paper is

to identify protective factors’ present throughout multiple levels of SGMY’s ecology

and demonstrate how these protective factors may be important for the promotion

of SGMY’s health and well-being. This paper utilizes multiple theories previously

used to explore SGMY disparities, ultimately applying an adapted ecological

systems framework to organize SGMY protective factors and their impacts.

Application of this theoretical lens is vital to understanding the complex interaction

of factors that influence SGMY development.

Keywords: ecological systems theory; LGBTQ+ youth; protective factors; sexual and

gender minority youth

Diversity of one’s gender identity and sexual orientation is a common human experience and

can be found throughout many cultures (Ross-Reed et al., 2019). Gender Identity can be defined

as a person’s deeply felt and inherent sense of being male, female or an alternative gender

(American Psychological Association, 2015). Individuals whose gender identity and gender

expression align with their assigned sex at birth are considered cisgendered (e.g., a person

assigned male at birth identifying and expressing as a male) and individuals who do not fit into

this category may identify as transgendered, non-binary, non-conforming, or genderqueer

(American Psychological Association, 2015).

Sexual orientation can be defined as a component of one’s identity that includes their sexual

and emotional attraction to certain qualities (American Psychological Association, 2015).

Individuals whose sexual orientation does not maintain heteronormativity include those who

identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, queer, pansexual, asexual, and others (American Psychological

Association, 2015).

There has been a robust amount of research dedicated to adolescents who identify as a sexual

and/or gender minority (SGM) due to the disparities that persist in their health and behavioral

outcomes. Mitigation of these outcomes requires the use of evidence-based methods in order

to understand this social phenomenon comprehensively and to promote the health of SGMY

effectively (Cala & Soriano, 2014). The following section will discuss tested models and theories

Page 2 of 16

90

Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal (ASSRJ) Vol. 10, Issue 3, March-2023

Services for Science and Education – United Kingdom

that provide a justification for the disparities observed in the data for SGMY and serve as a

building block for the development of potential intervention pathways.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Sexual and Gender Minoritized Youth (SGMY) Health Disparities

It is well documented in literature that sexual and gender minorities (SGM) face health

disparities when compared to their heteronormative peers. Regarding sexual and reproductive

health, SGM populations are more likely to become infected with HIV, become diagnosed with

a sexually transmitted disease (STD), or become involved in an unintended pregnancy (Pampati

et al., 2021). They are more likely than their cisgender peers to engage in sexually risky

behaviors such as foregoing contraceptive methods, having multiple romantic partners, and

engaging in sexual situations at a younger age (Johns et al., 2018).

In addition to sexual risk behaviors, SGMY are more likely than their nonsexual minority peers

to engage in behaviors that are associated with the leading causes of death among persons 10-

24 years of age in the United States (Kann et al., 2018). According to the 2019 Youth Risk

Behavior Survey (YRBS) suicide is the second leading cause of death for persons 10-24 years of

age, and SGMY are four times more likely than their nonsexual minority peers to contribute to

this statistic (Underwood et al., 2020). SGMY experience disproportionate rates of depression,

anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and suicidality when compared to their

nonsexual minority peers (Feinstein, 2019). According to national estimates, almost 30% of

SGMY have attempted suicide in the past year as compared with 6% for sexual and gender

majority individuals (Johns et al., 2018). The CDC has also found that up to 63% of SGM students

reported feeling hopeless or sad as compared to 35% of students that did not self-disclose as a

sexual or gender minority (Johns et al., 2018).

In combination with experiencing a disproportionate number of internalized issues, additional

research has found that SGMY are more likely to have engaged in drug or alcohol use before

their last sexual interaction, and they are at a higher risk for substance use and lifelong

substance abuse due to their sexual identity or orientation (Johns et al., 2018). One meta- analysis found that SGMY have up to 190% higher odds of abusing drugs and alcohol and are

up to five times more likely to face life-time substance use issues than their heteronormative

peers (Johns et al., 2018).

Extensive research has discovered that SGMY face grim outcomes in comparison to their peers.

SGMY are struggling more than other populations to avoid risk-taking behaviors and

experience increased negative mental and physical health consequences. Researchers have

proposed multiple theories as to why this phenomenon occurs.

Rejection Sensitivity Model

One theory as to why sexual and gender minority (SGM) populations experience additional

negative health consequences is the theory of rejection sensitivity, which posits that SGM

individuals face increased exposure and sensitivity to rejection from their family, peers,

schools, and communities (Feinstein, 2019). Surveys conducted by the Trevor Project found

that SGMY feel under supported by their environment and this rejection is linked to their poor

health and behavioral outcomes (2021). One report found that only 1 in 3 SGMY reported their

home to be affirming of their sexual identity and many felt compelled to not self-disclose in

Page 3 of 16

91

Oropeza, O., & Harris, V. W. (2023). Protective Factors for Sexual and Gender Minoritized Youth. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal,

10(3). 89-104.

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.14738/assrj.103.14194

anticipation of rejection (Madireddy & Madireddy, 2022). In line with rejection in the home, the

Trevor Project also found that 68.7% of surveyed SGMY reported experiencing verbal

harassment due to their sexual or gender identity (Trevor Project, 2021). Additionally, 59.1%

felt unsafe at school, and 90% felt uncomfortable disclosing their sexual or gender identity with

health professionals (Trevor Project, 2021). This increased experience and perception of

rejection for SGMY translates to a high-risk situation when considering self-disclosure about

their sexual or gender minority identity.

One study found that disclosing one’s sexual orientation can be associated with increased well- being, reduced stress, and better relationships; however, SGMY often do not get to reap these

benefits due to the rejection they receive from their social environments (Charbonnier et al.,

2018). Avoidance of disclosing one’s identity and fear of facing discrimination because of it, is

strongly associated with negative psychological and physical health outcomes for SGMY

(Charbonnier et al., 2018).

The rejection sensitivity (RS) model conceptualizes a framework for understanding how

sensitivity to perceived rejection from external sources can translate to internal distress for

sexual minority individuals. SGM individuals develop RS as a self-defense mechanism against

social threat and rejection; however, they may experience a self-fulfilling prophecy by

maladaptively behaving out of fear and anxiety (Feinstein, 2019). SGMY may also experience or

expect rejection of their identity in multiple contexts of their lives from their friends, family, the

media, politics, etc. The RS model helps to explain how these experiences may influence SGM

population’s health outcome disparities (Baams et al., 2019).

Sexual Minority Stress Theory

In conjunction with the RS model, sexual minority stress theory strives to understand why

sexual and gender minority (SGM) individuals experience decreased levels of well-being by

identifying the specific stressors they may face due to their minority status. Minority stress

includes the stigma-related experiences SGM groups experience such as family/peer rejection,

violence victimization, social isolation, discrimination, and identity concealment (Pachankis et

al., 2022). Sexual minority stress theory was developed by Winn Kelly Brooks in 1981 and

posits that sexual minority groups are at an increased risk of experiencing negative health

outcomes due to the extreme and unique stress they face from lack of social and cultural

acceptance (Rich et al., 2020). These unique minority stressors are embedded in all levels of a

SGM individual’s ecology (Marraccini et al., 2022). Minority stress theory has inspired 40 years

of sexual minority research and is widely acknowledged as the most plausible explanation

underlying SGM populations’ mental health disparities (Pachankis et al., 2022).

Resilience Theory

Resilience has been defined as the “processes undertaken to avoid, successfully cope with, and

overcome the negative health consequences and trajectories attributed to risk factors, like

social adversity, trauma, tragedy, threats, and other major sources of stress” (Meanley et al.,

2022, p2). In other words, resiliency can be conceptualized as one’s ability to “get back up” after

“taking a hit.” Resilience theory focuses on understanding and promoting factors that are

considered protective for individuals against negative outcomes. Resilience theory places an

emphasis on the strengths present at different levels of an individual’s ecology. It stands in