APPLYING A GENERAL STRAIN THEORY FRAMEWORK TO UNDERSTAND SCHOOL WEAPON CARRYING AMONG LGBQ AND HETEROSEXUAL YOUTH

• Date: 01 November 2017
• Published date: 01 November 2017
• Author: MEREDITH G. F. WORTHEN,DEEANNA M. BUTTON
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9125.12151

APPLYING A GENERAL STRAIN THEORY

FRAMEWORK TO UNDERSTAND SCHOOL WEAPON

CARRYING AMONG LGBQ AND HETEROSEXUAL

YOUTH∗

DEEANNA M. BUTTON1and MEREDITH G. F. WORTHEN2

1School for Social and Behavioral Sciences Criminal Justice Program, Stockton

University

2Department of Sociology, University of Oklahoma

KEYWORDS: LGBQ, lesbian, gay, bisexual, school weapon carrying, social support,

social isolation, victimization, general strain theory, school violence

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and questioning (LGBQ) youth are at a higher risk for

school victimization, social isolation, and school weapon carrying compared with their

heterosexual peers, yet few studies have been conducted to investigate their experiences.

By using a general strain theory (GST) framework, data from the Youth Risk Behav-

ior Survey (YRBS) statewide probability sample of Delaware heterosexual (n=7,688)

and LGBQ (n=484) youth in grades 9–12 show that there are both similarities and

differences in the factors associated with school weapon carrying among LGBQ and

heterosexual youth. LGBQ and heterosexual youth’s weapon carrying is related to

school victimization, but social support does not moderate the relationship between

school victimization and school weapon carrying as suggested by GST. Furthermore,

being male is significantly related to heterosexual youth’s weapon carrying, but sex is

not related to weapon carrying among LGBQ youth. Overall, the results highlight a

need to reconceptualize GST to help center the experiences of LGBQ youth, a his-

torically marginalized group, within mainstream criminological literature. Theoretical

and policy implications are discussed.

Although school-based violence has declined over the past several decades, it re-

mains an ongoing and serious concern. In 2014, there were more than 850,000 nonfa-

tal victimizations among 12–18-year-olds at school, equating to a rate of 33 victimiza-

tions for every 1,000 students, and during that same year, 65 percent of public schools

reported at least one violent incident on their campuses (Zhang, Musu-Gillette, and

Oudekerk, 2016). Scholars have explored many aspects of school-based violence, includ-

ing victim and perpetrator experiences and the various causes and consequences of school

based-violence. One area of interest that has received ongoing attention is the use of

weapon carrying on school property (Brennan and Moore, 2009). Consistent with overall

∗The authors would like to acknowledge Henry and Gwyneth. The data used in this study were

provided with the permission of the Center for Drug and Alcohol Studies at the University of

Delaware. The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the authors.

Direct correspondence to Meredith G. F. Worthen, Department of Sociology, University of

Oklahoma, 780 Van Vleet Oval, KH 331 Norman, OK 73019 (e-mail: mgfworthen@ou.edu).

C2017 American Society of Criminology doi: 10.1111/1745-9125.12151

CRIMINOLOGY Volume 55 Number 4 806–832 2017 806

GST FOR LGBQ YOUTH’S SCHOOL WEAPON CARRYING 807

school-based violence trends, the percentage of students carrying weapons at school has

declined over recent years. Nevertheless, the percentage of students who report school-

based violence involving weapons is still arguably high. Recent evidence suggests that

nearly 1 in 5 (18 percent) youth carry a weapon and 5 percent report having carried a

weapon on school property in the past 30 days. In addition, approximately 7 percent

of students in grades 9–12 report being threatened or injured with a weapon on school

property (Zhang, Musu-Gillette, and Oudekerk, 2016; see also Kann et al., 2014).

These numbers are significantly higher for youth who identify as lesbian, gay, bisex-

ual, and questioning (LGBQ). LGBQ youth carry weapons to school at rates three to six

times higher than those for heterosexual youth (e.g., Gayles and Garofalo, 2012; Olsen

et al., 2014; Walls, Kane, and Wisneski, 2009). Despite these findings, most researchers

neglect to examine how being LGBQ may relate to weapon carrying on school prop-

erty. This oversight is especially significant because school weapon-carrying practices are

closely related to feeling vulnerable, threatened, or targeted (Simon, Dent, and Suss-

man, 1997) and these experiences are particularly common among LGBQ youth in U.S.

schools [Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN), 2016; Kosciw et al.,

2014].

In the current study, we examine how sexual identity, school victimization, social sup-

port, and school weapon carrying are interrelated. We use data from the Youth Risk

Behavior Survey (YRBS), a statewide probability sample of Delaware heterosexual (n=

7,633) and LGBQ (n=484) youth in grades 9–12 collected in 2003, 2005, and 2007, to

employ a general strain theory (GST) framework (Agnew, 1992; Button and Worthen,

2014). With a GST framework, we can theoretically contextualize LGBQ youth’s expe-

riences with school-based violence, both as victims of violence and as potential school

weapon carriers. This approach allows for an examination of the processes that LGBQ

youth may use to cope with negative life experiences through school weapon carrying,

rather than narrowly focusing on their victimization and weapon carrying as problematic,

isolated incidences. It also helps challenge previous conceptions of LGBQ youth as de-

viant others (Woods, 2014) by theoretically accounting for and explaining higher rates of

negative outcomes.

In addition, we approach a second, larger goal. We attempt to help bring LGBQ people

into criminological research by using a mainstream criminological theory to understand

the role of sexual identity in explaining crime and delinquency better. Sexual identity is

often overlooked as an area of inquiry in the field of criminology (Woods, 2014), particu-

larly in research in which mainstream criminological theories are used. Mainstream crim-

inological theories are often criticized for their untested assertions of theoretical general-

izability (Button, 2015; Iovanni and Miller, 2008) because they have not been adequately

applied to diverse populations or marginalized groups. This can partially be attributed to a

lack of data on LGBQ youth’s experiences with crime; nevertheless, it is also because be-

fore the 1980s, a substantial amount of the criminological literature was focused on deter-

mining whether “homosexuality” was a type of deviance (Woods, 2014). In essence, when

LGBQ experiences have been included in mainstream criminological research, those who

are LGBQ have historically been misidentified as being inherently problematic, deviant,

and sometimes criminal.

By assessing the ability of GST to account for LGBQ youths’ interrelated experi-

ences of victimization and negative outcomes, we familiarize the criminological audi-

ence with research on LGBQ youth distinctly couched in criminological studies and