Does representation of LGBQ+ people hurt children?

March 30, 2026

In recent years, lawmakers have pushed a wave of policies banning LGBQ+* materials and discussion, falsely claiming that children are safer if they never see or hear about queer people. This has led to state policies prohibiting the mention of gay relationships or identities in schools, banning books that depict queer relationships, and forbidding Gender and Sexuality Alliance (GSA) clubs.¹

However, these policies aren’t grounded in evidence, and they don’t make schools or children safer. In fact, decades of research show the opposite; censoring LGBQ+ material increases harm to young people while inclusive environments benefit the whole community.^{2 3 4} Unfortunately, lawmakers have not integrated this research into decisions about all states’ curricula and policies. Instead, many state policies banning LGBQ-inclusive material are rooted more in fear and moral discomfort than in data.

Including research in policymaking is important for all public health and safety laws, but especially when these laws affect the development of young people. Currently, the prioritization of morality over data has led to increased danger, exclusion, and rejection for queer people and their communities throughout the country.

Does censoring LGBQ+ material in schools keep children safe?

No, censoring LGBQ+ material in school increases risk for queer children. In fact, inclusive material has positive impacts for both queer and straight, cisgender students.^{5 6 7}

The last 5 years have seen a significant rise in proposed laws banning all things LGBQ+ from any visibility in schools. That includes prohibiting children from mentioning if they have queer parents, removing LGBQ+ inclusive groups at school, regulating course curricula that mention sexual behavior or gender, and banning books that depict non-heterosexual romance.^{8 9 10} Over the last two decades, students report queer-inclusive depictions in their classroom have decreased, and nearly 15% report hearing negative depictions of LGBTQ+ identities or experiences.¹¹ Recent data suggest that 4 in 5 queer youth ages 13 to 17 feel unsafe in school, with approximately one third of these students skipping school at least once a month as a result.¹² Gender nonconforming and queer students of color report higher levels of victimization.¹³

These bans are generally sold to school boards and legislatures as being about protecting parents’ rights, protecting children from being influenced or “recruited” by queer teachers, and ensuring students are not exposed to age-inappropriate material.^{14 15} However, lawmakers have not pointed to any specific examples in which these incidents have occurred.¹⁶

Instead of keeping children safe, these laws pose several risks to children, families, and communities. First, by banning the mention of LGBQ+ relationships or families, it sends the message to children with queer parents or relatives that their families are less valid than those of their peers. Secondly, these laws remove important sexual health material, especially pertaining to the queer community, which leaves them without factual and accessible health information needed to make safe choices. And thirdly, these laws prevent schools from being inclusive environments, which have continuously proven to be an important site of support and safety for LGBQ+ students and their peers.¹⁷

In fact, LGBQ-related resources have been identified as a priority initiative for improving the mental and physical well-being of queer kids.¹⁸ Schools with LGBQ+ inclusive policies or programs lead to diminished rates of suicide and increased rates of graduation for LGBQ+ students.¹⁹ School-supported extracurriculars that highlight the queer experience have also been impactful. When schools have GSA clubs, the positive impacts are plentiful; straight, cisgender educators feel more empowered to support students,²⁰ and queer kids have higher GPAs, experience a greater sense of belonging,²¹ increased sense of safety and less bullying,²² more general feelings of hopefulness.²³ Inclusive schools also show decreased suicidal thoughts and actions for queer kids and male straight kids.²⁴ However, since the initial onslaught of these bills, many of these programs have been removed.²⁵

Is seeing LGBQ+ people represented in schools and media dangerous for children?

No, seeing LGBQ+ people represented is not dangerous. Instead, this representation often has positive impacts on queer youth, families, and their communities.

There are several reasons that people believe exposure to LGBQ+ content is harmful for children, including the fear that learning about this content could influence young people to become queer, moral or religious objections to LGBQ+ identities, and/or beliefs that gender or sexuality are inappropriate content for children to learn about.²⁶ However, research does not support these concerns and instead suggests that lack of exposure can be harmful to both individuals and communities.

Firstly, research continues to show that being gay or bisexual is not a choice but rather inherent from birth. Studies continue to show there is a range of innate, unchangeable factors that contribute to one’s sexuality.^{27 28 29 30 31 32}

While it is important for parents to have a say over how their children are raised, a family’s religion or moral code will not impact whether a child is queer or not. However, raising a child to believe that who they are is bad or wrong leads to feelings of shame, low self-worth, and a lack of safety.^{33 34}

Exposure to and acceptance of queer identities can actually positively impact young LGBQ+ individuals into adulthood, including their mental and physical health.³⁵ Lesbian, gay, and bisexual young adults whose families and caregivers rejected their identities experienced higher rates of suicide, illegal drug use, incidents of unprotected sex,³⁶ and homelessness.³⁷

Lastly, the argument that information about sexual orientation is not age-appropriate for school children is often rooted in exaggerated or biased misunderstandings of LGBQ+-inclusive material, seemingly believing all inclusive material is overtly sexual.³⁸ However, the child’s maturity and age should absolutely be considered when determining the safety of different LGBQ+ materials, just as they are for other similarly complex content areas, such as personal hygiene or safety. Tailoring lessons based on age is not the same as banning such material altogether. For example, no one would say a 1st grader shouldn’t learn about safety; they might be taught to hold an adult’s hand crossing the street or not to talk to strangers, but they would not be exposed to overly complicated or scary information about safe practices. The same is true when it comes to LGBQ+ materials. For example, kindergarten-aged children already talk about relationships within the family structure, including mommies and daddies. As such, a story about a family with two dads or two moms would therefore be age-appropriate, easy to digest for the child, and LGBQ+ inclusive. Unfortunately, storybooks with queer characters are being banned from school libraries across the country.³⁹

Not only does research suggest that age-appropriate LGBQ+ material is safe, but the data also shows that exposure to such content can promote stronger communities, increased open-mindedness, and positive feelings towards queer people and other minority groups.^{40 41} In schools, LGBQ-inclusive curriculum is associated with overall safer environments in the school setting, including lower levels of bullying and increased feelings of safety for all students.⁴²

Policy Recommendations

• Protect inclusive curriculum mandates. Currently, only 7 states require LGBQ-inclusive material in schools, and 12 states have bans⁴³ on queer material despite research showing that inclusive, age-appropriate curricula reduce bullying, improve open-mindedness, and decrease poor mental health and educational outcomes for queer students.
• Prioritize evidence-based child safety laws. Laws should utilize proven protections like anti-bullying programs and mental health supports to ensure the safety of children and communities. Currently, many LGBQ-related policies are driven by moral preference or opinion instead of science.

References

1. Sawchuck, 2022. What’s Driving the Push to Restrict Schools on LGBTQ Issues? EdWeek. https://www.edweek.org/leadership/whats-driving-the-push-to-restrict-schools-on-lgbtq-issues/2022/04

2. Saewyc EM, Konishi C, Rose HA, Homma Y. School-Based Strategies to Reduce Suicidal Ideation, Suicide Attempts, and Discrimination among Sexual Minority and Heterosexual Adolescents in Western Canada. Int J Child Youth Family Stud. 2014;5(1):89-112. doi:10.18357/ijcyfs.saewyce.512014

3. Lindsay, S. (2021), The Transferability of Out-Group Contact: Does Knowing a Member of the LGBT Community Improve Feelings Toward Racial Minorities, Muslims, and Immigrants?. Social Science Quarterly, 102: 737-754. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.12939

4. Marshall, 2024. Creating a Safe and Affirming School Environment for LGBTQ+ Youth in the Era of “Don’t Say Gay” Laws and More. Council of Parent Attorneys and Advocates. https://www.copaa.org/blogpost/895540/502949/Creating-a-Safe-and-Affirming-School-Environment-for-LGBTQ-Youth-in-the-Era-of-Don-t-Say-Gay-Laws-and-More

5. Russell ST, Bishop MD, Saba VC, James I, Ioverno S. Promoting School Safety for LGBTQ and All Students. Policy Insights Behav Brain Sci. 2021;8(2):160-166. doi:10.1177/23727322211031938

6. Saewyc EM, Konishi C, Rose HA, Homma Y. School-Based Strategies to Reduce Suicidal Ideation, Suicide Attempts, and Discrimination among Sexual Minority and Heterosexual Adolescents in Western Canada. Int J Child Youth Family Stud. 2014;5(1):89-112. doi:10.18357/ijcyfs.saewyce.512014

7. Hawkins, 2025. “Even in States Where You’re Supposed to ‘Say Gay,’ Fear Often Outweighs the Law” The 74 https://www.the74million.org/article/even-in-states-where-youre-supposed-to-say-gay-fear-often-outweighs-the-law/

8. GLAAD, 2023 . GLAAD Media Guide: State Legislation About LGBTQ People. Retrieved January 7, 2026 from https://glaad.org/reference/state-legislation/

9. Choi, A. (2024, January 3). Record number of anti-LGBTQ bills were introduced in 2023. CNN. https://www.cnn.com/politics/anti-lgbtq-plus-state-bill-rights-dg

10. ACLU, 2025. Retrieved January 7, 2026 from Mapping Attacks on LGBTQ Rights in U.S. State Legislatures in 2025

11. Hawkins, 2025. “Even in States Where You’re Supposed to ‘Say Gay,’ Fear Often Outweighs the Law” The 74 https://www.the74million.org/article/even-in-states-where-youre-supposed-to-say-gay-fear-often-outweighs-the-law/

12. IBID

13. IBID

14. Sawchuck, 2022. What’s Driving the Push to Restrict Schools on LGBTQ Issues? EdWeek. https://www.edweek.org/leadership/whats-driving-the-push-to-restrict-schools-on-lgbtq-issues/2022/04

15. Hawkins, 2025. “Even in States Where You’re Supposed to ‘Say Gay,’ Fear Often Outweighs the Law” The 74 https://www.the74million.org/article/even-in-states-where-youre-supposed-to-say-gay-fear-often-outweighs-the-law/

16. Sawchuck, 2022. What’s Driving the Push to Restrict Schools on LGBTQ Issues? EdWeek. https://www.edweek.org/leadership/whats-driving-the-push-to-restrict-schools-on-lgbtq-issues/2022/04

17. Marshall, 2024. Creating a Safe and Affirming School Environment for LGBTQ+ Youth in the Era of “Don’t Say Gay” Laws and More. Council of Parent Attorneys and Advocates. https://www.copaa.org/blogpost/895540/502949/Creating-a-Safe-and-Affirming-School-Environment-for-LGBTQ-Youth-in-the-Era-of-Don-t-Say-Gay-Laws-and-More

18. Russell ST, Bishop MD, Saba VC, James I, Ioverno S. Promoting School Safety for LGBTQ and All Students. Policy Insights Behav Brain Sci. 2021;8(2):160-166. doi:10.1177/23727322211031938

19. Marshall, 2024. Creating a Safe and Affirming School Environment for LGBTQ+ Youth in the Era of “Don’t Say Gay” Laws and More. Council of Parent Attorneys and Advocates. https://www.copaa.org/blogpost/895540/502949/Creating-a-Safe-and-Affirming-School-Environment-for-LGBTQ-Youth-in-the-Era-of-Don-t-Say-Gay-Laws-and-More

20. Hawkins, 2025. “Even in States Where You’re Supposed to ‘Say Gay,’ Fear Often Outweighs the Law” The 74 https://www.the74million.org/article/even-in-states-where-youre-supposed-to-say-gay-fear-often-outweighs-the-law/

21. Toomey RB, Russell ST. Gay-Straight Alliances, Social Justice Involvement, and School Victimization of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Queer Youth: Implications for School Well-Being and Plans to Vote. Youth Soc. 2013;45(4):500-522. doi:10.1177/0044118X11422546

22. Ioverno S, Belser AB, Baiocco R, Grossman AH, Russell ST. The Protective Role of Gay-Straight Alliances for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Questioning Students: A Prospective Analysis. Psychol Sex Orientat Gend Divers. 2016;3(4):397-406. doi:10.1037/sgd0000193

23. Poteat VP, Calzo JP, Yoshikawa H, et al. Greater Engagement in Gender-Sexuality Alliances (GSAs) and GSA Characteristics Predict Youth Empowerment and Reduced Mental Health Concerns. Child Dev. 2020;91(5):1509-1528. doi:10.1111/cdev.13345

24. Saewyc EM, Konishi C, Rose HA, Homma Y. School-Based Strategies to Reduce Suicidal Ideation, Suicide Attempts, and Discrimination among Sexual Minority and Heterosexual Adolescents in Western Canada. Int J Child Youth Family Stud. 2014;5(1):89-112. doi:10.18357/ijcyfs.saewyce.512014

25. Marshall, 2024. Creating a Safe and Affirming School Environment for LGBTQ+ Youth in the Era of “Don’t Say Gay” Laws and More. Council of Parent Attorneys and Advocates. https://www.copaa.org/blogpost/895540/502949/Creating-a-Safe-and-Affirming-School-Environment-for-LGBTQ-Youth-in-the-Era-of-Don-t-Say-Gay-Laws-and-More

26. Harris, R., Kambouri, M., Wilson-Daily, A. E., & Copsey-Blake, M. (2025). ‘We fear the repercussions from parents’: primary school parents and teachers’ perspectives on the inclusion of LGBTQ+ issues in the English primary school curriculum. Sex Education, 25(4), 546–563. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681811.2024.2361062

27. Alagha M, Antoun F, Bacha C, El Nabbout T, El Khoury NB. Biological, genetic, neurological and environmental influences on homosexuality-a narrative review. Front Behav Neurosci. 2025;19:1574713. Published 2025 Sep 23. doi:10.3389/fnbeh.2025.1574713

28. Hu SH, Li HM, Yu H, et al. Discovery of new genetic loci for male sexual orientation in Han population. Cell Discov. 2021 Oct 31;7(1):103. doi: 10.1038/s41421-021-00341-7. Erratum in: Cell Discov. 2021 Nov 30;7(1):115. doi: 10.1038/s41421-021-00351-5. PMID: 34719679; PMCID: PMC8558329.

29. Kendler KS, Thornton LM, Gilman SE, Kessler RC. Sexual orientation in a U.S. national sample of twin and nontwin sibling pairs. Am J Psychiatry. 2000 Nov;157(11):1843-6. doi: 10.1176/appi.ajp.157.11.1843. PMID: 11058483.

30. Cook, Christopher C. H. 2021. “The Causes of Human Sexual Orientation.” Theology & Sexuality 27 (1): 1–19. doi:10.1080/13558358.2020.1818541.

31. Rinaldi A. I was born this way: New research confirms that a mix of prenatal factors and genetic differences could explain human sexual orientation: New research confirms that a mix of prenatal factors and genetic differences could explain human sexual orientation. EMBO Rep. 2022;23(6):e55290. doi:10.15252/embr.202255290

32. Roselli CE. Neurobiology of gender identity and sexual orientation. J Neuroendocrinol. 2018;30(7):e12562. doi:10.1111/jne.12562

33. Ryan, C., Huebner, D., Diaz, R. M., & Sanchez, J. (2009). Family rejection as a predictor of negative health outcomes in white and latino lesbian, gay, and bisexual young adults. PEDIATRICS, 123(1), 346–352. https://publications.aap.org/pediatrics/article-abstract/123/1/346/71912/Family-Rejection-as-a-Predictor-of-Negative-Health

34. Newcomb ME, LaSala MC, Bouris A, et al. The Influence of Families on LGBTQ Youth Health: A Call to Action for Innovation in Research and Intervention Development. LGBT Health. 2019;6(4):139-145. doi:10.1089/lgbt.2018.0157

35. Ryan, C., Huebner, D., Diaz, R. M., & Sanchez, J. (2009). Family rejection as a predictor of negative health outcomes in white and latino lesbian, gay, and bisexual young adults. PEDIATRICS, 123(1), 346–352. https://publications.aap.org/pediatrics/article-abstract/123/1/346/71912/Family-Rejection-as-a-Predictor-of-Negative-Health

36. IBID

37. Newcomb ME, LaSala MC, Bouris A, et al. The Influence of Families on LGBTQ Youth Health: A Call to Action for Innovation in Research and Intervention Development. LGBT Health. 2019;6(4):139-145. doi:10.1089/lgbt.2018.0157

38. Ball, C. A. (2026, January 27). “Harmful to Children” Claims and the Targeting of LGBTQ Speech After Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton | Yale Law Journal. Yale Law Journal. https://yalelawjournal.org/supreme-court-collection/harmful-to-children-claims-and-the-targeting-of-lgbtq-speech-after-free-speech-coalition-v-paxton

39. IBID

40. Lindsay, S. (2021), The Transferability of Out-Group Contact: Does Knowing a Member of the LGBT Community Improve Feelings Toward Racial Minorities, Muslims, and Immigrants?. Social Science Quarterly, 102: 737-754. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.12939

41. DellaPosta, D. (2018). Gay Acquaintanceship and Attitudes toward Homosexuality: A Conservative Test. Socius: Sociological Research for a Dynamic World, 4. https://doi.org/10.1177/2378023118798959 (Original work published 2018)

42. Snapp, S. D., McGuire, J. K., Sinclair, K. O., Gabrion, K., & Russell, S. T. (2015). LGBTQ-inclusive curricula: why supportive curricula matter. Sex Education, 15(6), 580–596. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681811.2015.1042573

43. Movement Advancement Project. [2026]. “Equality Maps: LGBTQ Curricular Laws.” https://www.mapresearch.org/equality_maps/curricular_laws. Data as of February 25, 2026

 

 

 

Download PDF

*You may have noticed this article excludes the “T” from LGBTQ+.” This is intentional. Gender and sexual orientation are different. This article focuses on sexual orientation. For more information about gender identity please see our Fact Checked section on myths regarding the transgender and gender nonconforming community.