As a master’s student in a Work, Organizational, and Personnel Psychology (WOP-P) program, I’m invested in how organizations can create safer and more inclusive environments for LGBTQ+ people. Many organizations have jumped on the diversity, inclusion, and equality (DEI) wagon, claiming to have policies that promote inclusive work environments, especially as these relate to queer folks. But what are these and how are they safeguarding the well-being of these communities? What impact do they really have and what else can be done? These are questions I’ve asked since I entered my master’s program. In keeping with my tradition of yearly Pride-themed blog entries, I share some of my thoughts on these questions, some research, and discuss how comprehensive sexuality education (CSE) might be the unexpected key to creating healthier and safer working environments for queer people in the future.
In 2022, the International Labour Organization (ILO) published its learning guide on including LGBTQI+ persons in the workplace. Within it, several references are included that reveal numbers of LGBTQI+ persons around the world who feel unsafe, bullied, or discriminated against within the workplace. The guide also mentions evidence of a correlation between workplace bullying and negative mental health outcomes which subsequently results in the loss of both human and financial capital. Unfortunately, the economic costs of discrimination are the most cited argument for inclusion, as if well-being and the right to safe working environments are insufficient. Another interesting highlight from the Caribbean Policy Research Institute (CAPRI) is that discriminatory practices and anti-gay laws cost the workforce $11 billion and make sexual/gender minority groups three times more vulnerable to psychosocial disabilities.
Finally, the guide dedicates three chapters that propose solutions for creating a more inclusive workplace through partnerships, within the government sector and within organizations and businesses. Within organizations and businesses in particular, the main recommendations are as follows: Inclusive policies and organizational cultures, inclusive language, leadership, and visible inclusivity, preventing and addressing harassment, recognizing and accommodating diversity in gender identity or gender expression, and workplace adjustments. In a study that utilized a sample of over 900 participants in Switzerland, the majority (75 percent) believed that LGBTQI+ policies were effective (LLoren & Parini, 2016). The study found that these policies reduced bullying and harassment but did not necessarily improve psychological health outcomes. More than this, only 5 percent of participants believed these policies were communicated internally, supportive language did not reduce derogatory language in the workplace, lesbian and bisexual women were more likely to feel stigmatized compared to gay and bisexual men, and 25 percent of the sample did not believe that LGBTQI+ policies were effective. When prodded further about this, the most commonly held belief was that these policies were rhetorical and without any real impact. This questions whether some organizations are as inclusive as they portray themselves to be since the presence of DEI policies fails to guarantee meaningful inclusion. This does not mean that these policies are not important or completely ineffective, rather they are more effective when the organizational culture aligns with them. Creating change in organizational culture can be a challenging and gradual task. If I have learned one thing in my master's, it is that this can be an extensive and meticulous process requiring expert-level intervention, monitoring, and evaluation. But it is here that I offer a broader and unlikely solution.
The International Technical Guidance on Sexuality Education (ITGSE) offers the following definition of CSE:“Comprehensive sexuality education (CSE) is a curriculum-based process of teaching and learning about the cognitive, emotional, physical and social aspects of sexuality. It aims to equip children and young people with knowledge, skills, attitudes and values that will empower them to: realize their health, well-being and dignity; develop respectful social and sexual relationships; consider how their choices affect their own well-being and that of others; and, understand and ensure the protection of their rights throughout their lives” (UNESCO, UNAIDS Secretariat, UNFPA, UNICEF, UN Women, & WHO, 2018, p. 16).
One of the key concepts from the ITGSE is learning about gender. This is covered under three topics: (1) the social construction of gender and gender norms, (2) gender equality, stereotypes and bias, and (3) bias and gender-based violence. What’s more is that this section teaches youth about different gender identities and sexual orientations, as well as how homophobia and transphobia can harm people. It is also meant to help young people to identify and dismantle these. Adolescents must be exposed to this type of education since this is also a time when harmful gender attitudes are more likely to be solidified (Kågesten et al., 2016). The Federal Centre for Health Education and UNFPA also provide evidence that supports the argument for CSE as a critical entry point for violence prevention including school-related gender-based violence (SRGBV) (2020). SRGBV also includes physical, sexual, and psychological violence and bullying directed at LGBTQI+ students. Despite this, many governments are reluctant to introduce more comprehensive sexuality education. In the case of Trinidad and Tobago, the most commonly cited barrier is the 1960 Concordat, a document of agreement between the state and denominational school boards. The proposal to introduce CSE is objected to due to the belief that this infringes upon religious rights and freedom under the document. For this reason, there needs to be more meaningful and open discussion between the state, religious leaders, and CSOs.
Yet, this could be a crucial point for violence prevention in the country, especially given the high rates of reported gender-based violence. More than this, Trinidad and Tobago is one of the countries in the world where there continues to be a lack of legal protection for the rights of LGBTQI+ persons. This is why organizations such as the Coalition Advocating for Inclusion of Sexual Orientation (CAISO) have called for the amendment of the Equal Opportunity Act to include protections for LGBTQI+ and have created projects such as their Model LGBTQI+ Workplace Policy and training. In this way, Trinidad and Tobago is behind compared to other countries but imagine the impact that these types of amendments and policies could have combined with the implementation of CSE.
This year for Pride, I was lucky enough to witness Barcelona’s march with the main theme of LGBTQI+ Education and a powerful one, given the rise in far-right policies across the globe (Catalan News, 2024). Activists in Barcelona are advocating for safer spaces in schools through more inclusive curriculums, teacher diversity training, and the activation of LGBTQI aggression support protocols. Imagine the impact that could be achieved through these kinds of CSE initiatives. Not only would we create safe spaces for LGBTQI+ youth but also a generation of compassionate workers who respect the human rights of their co-workers.
Comments