Giving a Voice to the Voiceless

A Qualitative Study of Reducing Marginalization of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Same-Sex Attracted Students at Christian Colleges and Universities

Yuan

• Publisher: Wipf and Stock
• Year: 2016
• eBook ISBN: 9781498289269
• Topic: Education
• Subtopic: Education General

The problem this project addresses is the sense of marginalization experienced by lesbian, gay, bisexual (LGB) and same-sex attracted (SSA) Christian college and university students. Data was collected via an online questionnaire and the study design mixed methods with an emphasis on the qualitative data. The study sample included eighty students/alumni from thirty-two Christian colleges/universities. Generally, respondents felt lonely, hid their sexuality, and reported a negative campus climate. Recommendations from respondents include: institutional policies must be clearer and applied consistently, improve campus climate, and form support groups for LGB and SSA students.

1

Research Problem and Design

There is a great need and even urgency to address the sense of marginalization of lesbian, gay, bisexual (LGB), and same-sex attracted (SSA) students at Christian colleges and universities. Current events necessitate this. In the fall of 2015, the president of the University of Missouri, Tim Wolfe, resigned amid controversy surrounding his perceived failure to address marginalization and institutional oppression of African-American students.1 Student activism at this university received broad national media attention. A graduate student started a hunger strike, university faculty discussed the possibility of a walkout, and the campus football team threatened to go on strike. The events at the University of Missouri became a catalyst for student protests at campuses around the country with some even demanding resignations of other top administrators. There were protests at Princeton University, Occidental College, Georgetown University, Yale University, Claremont McKenna College, Ithaca College, Johns Hopkins University, University of Alabama, Purdue University, and Vanderbilt University.2 The institutional oppression and marginalization addressed at these different protests focused not only on racism and feminism, but also heterosexism. Will Christian colleges and universities be next in the national spotlight due to a perceived lack of response to institutional oppression and marginalization of non-heterosexual students? Most institutions of Christian higher education realize the need to reduce the marginalization of LGB and SSA students, but do not have a resource to help them with the answer. This research was accomplished to be a resource to help Christian colleges and universities find ways in which to reduce marginalization of LGB and SSA students while still holding fast to a traditional view of sexuality.

The impetus for this study began in 2006, when Soulforce visited sixteen Christian colleges and universities to protest their policies against same-sex sexual practice, which they believe these policies lead to the marginalization of LGB and SSA students.3 Mel White, who had been a ghostwriter for Jerry Falwell, Billy Graham, Pat Robertson, and others, came out as a gay man and founded Soulforce, a civil rights and social justice group. The purpose was to “challenge the religious right through relentless nonviolent resistance in order to end the political and religious oppression of LGBTQI people.”4 Although uninvited, some schools did engage the activists, and the conversation on sexuality began and continued at these Christian colleges and universities. In addition, several LGB alumni formed alumni groups and expressed their painful experiences and sense of marginalization while at their respective Christian colleges or universities. Many felt marginalized as if they had no voice. These LGB alumni wanted their college to see the harm caused to them and prevent other LGB students from experiencing the same pain. Their conclusion was to eliminate the institutional policies against same-sex sexual practice.

Many non-Christians believe that an institutional policy against same-sex sexual practice is discriminatory. In 2012, Trinity Western University (TWU), a private Christian liberal arts university in British Columbia, Canada, submitted a proposal to offer a juris doctor program. However, three provinces (Nova Scotia, Ontario, and British Columbia) refused to automatically accredit potential graduates based solely upon TWU’s institutional policy against same-sex sexual practice.5 The university has taken all three provincial law societies to court. As of the beginning of 2016, all three cases were pending appeals and will most likely head to the Supreme Court of Canada for decision.6 In 2014, the president of Gordon College was one of fourteen leaders from religious and civic organizations that signed a letter to President Obama requesting a religious exemption for his “planned executive order addressing federal contractors and LGBT employment policies.”7 Somehow, this letter was released to the public and reposted on national newspaper outlets. As a result, the mayor of Salem, Massachusetts, ended the city’s contract with the college that had allowed the college to manage and maintain the Old Town Hall. The mayor explained that Gordon’s institutional policies against same-sex sexual practice “fly in the face” of the city’s non-discrimination ordinance.8 In addition, Lynn Public Schools severed its ties with the college so that students were no longer allowed to fulfill their degree requirements in social work and education at these public schools.9 Most of these objections stemmed from a misunderstanding of the institutional policies as discriminatory and harmful. Although prohibiting same-sex sexual behavior, these policies did not bar a student for simply being LGB or SSA. And yet, students at Christian colleges and universities do report a sense of marginalization while enrolled at their school.

The secular community, gay rights activists, and LGB alumni groups assert that the only answer to reduce marginalization of LGB and SSA students at Christian colleges and universities is to do away with the institutional policy against same-sex sexual practice. However, the researcher questioned whether this was the only answer. If Christian colleges and universities abandoned their position on same-sex sexual practice, would LGB students no longer feel marginalized? But if Christian colleges and universities maintained their positions on same-sex sexual practice, would LGB students continue to feel marginalized? The researcher struggled with the limitations of these two options and felt that the answer was more complex than simply the policies. The researcher was uncertain what another option might be. There was no research that focused on reducing marginalization of LGB students at Christian colleges and universities with few options for answers. Therefore, it was decided to seek input from the very ones who feel marginalized, LGB and SSA students, thus giving a voice to the voiceless. This study sought to discover other options for reducing marginalization of LGB and SSA students at Christian colleges and universities without changing policies that directly reflect the school’s biblical foundation and religious identity. Therefore, this is the first study of its kind and hopefully the beginning of more research and attention toward marginalization toward LGB and SSA students and the negative campus climate for these students at Christian colleges and universities.

Some of those who are decision makers and in positions of authority (e.g., trustees, presidents, vice presidents, deans, etc.) may wonder why there is even a need to reduce marginalization of LGB and SSA students. In addition to the biblical reasons that will be laid out in the following chapter, this study showed that many LGB and SSA students had no one to walk with or talk to them as they navigated issues of sexual identity. They struggled all alone, which sometimes resulted in seeking answers off campus from unbelievers, because they felt that there was no one else they could turn to. Although almost all the respondents began with a traditional view of sexuality (TVS), several ended up holding to a progressive view of sexuality (PVS). The researcher wonders how much of this was due to the respondents not sensing the freedom to process their struggles with other Christian friends on campus. It is difficult to share with others about experiencing unwanted same-sex attractions, but struggling alone is a far greater challenge.

God has provided the body of Christ so that Christians do not have to struggle alone in their pursuit of holiness and purity. The ideal context for sanctification to occur is in Christian community, not in isolation. The researcher is convinced that students are best supported if they are able to share their questions, fears, or struggles with trusted others in Christian community. The Enemy’s best weapon is isolation. The best place for students to navigate through issues of sexual identity is in Christian community. As a matter of fact, Christian community should be the safest place in the world. And yet right now, our Christian college and university campuses are not perceived to be a healthy place for LGB and SSA students to be transparent. Trustees, presidents, vice presidents and deans should be proactive in making their campuses a safe and redemptive place for all of their students, including SSA students and students who identify as LGB.

Statement of the Research Problem

The problem this project addressed was the sense of marginalization experienced by LGB and SSA Christian college and university students. In response to this problem, the researcher: (1) carried out a biblical and theological study of issues related to compassion for the marginalized; (2) developed the research instrument, which was a mixed methods questionnaire focusing on the experiences of Christian college or university LGB and SSA students and on recommendations for Christian colleges and universities to become less marginalizing for LGB and SSA students; (3) obtained approval from the Institutional Review Board (IRB) before proceeding with the study; (4) recruited a minimum of thirty LGB or SSA Christian college or university students and alumni to complete the online questionnaire; (5) analyzed and evaluated the data from the online questionnaire; and (6) identified major themes from the data on the experiences of Christian college or university LGB and SSA students and on recommendations for Christian colleges and universities to become less marginalizing for LGB and SSA students.

Delimitations and Assumptions

The research was limited to Christian colleges and universities that held a TVS and had institutional policies prohibiting intimate sexual relations outside marriage between a husband and wife, including same-sex sexual practice. The research was limited to LGB and SSA people who were current students or recent alumni (within the past ten years) of Christian colleges and universities. The research was limited to the participants’ experiences as LGB and SSA students and to their recommendations on how their Christian college or university can improve in helping LGB and SSA students feel less marginalized. This research was limited to how Christian colleges and universities c...

Table of contents

• Acknowledgments
• Chapter 1: Research Problem and Design
• Chapter 2: Biblical Reflection on Compassion for the Marginalized
• Chapter 3: Project Description and Research Methods
• Chapter 4: Presentation and Synthesis of Data
• Chapter 5: Evaluation and Discussion
• Appendix A: Questionnaire
• Appendix B: Informed Consent Form
• Appendix C: Principal Contact Letter
• Appendix D: Potential Participant Letter
• Appendix E: Review of the Related Literature