American Equality

Does America’s reputation for being a land of opportunity hold up for every people group? While it is apparent that the United States has failed to live up to its stated ideals, the proportion of people allowed to succeed has expanded over time. From the emancipation of slaves in 1863 to the women’s expansion of rights in 1920, or from the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to the allowance of homosexuality in 2003—and further, the sanctioning of homosexual marriage in 2015—the circle of inclusivity has ever widened as time has passed. However, not every group given equality under the law has thrived. Homosexuals have done increasingly well in the last two decades. While they do report a higher level of suicidal attempts when compared to the general population—63.18 per 100,000 and 14.04 per 100,000, respectively—they average a 10% higher rate of income than the general population.

Conversely, individuals identifying as transgender, queer, intersex, or asexual are at a significantly greater risk of suicide—roughly 41% have reported at least one suicide attempt. Additionally, they average nearly 33% lower pay than the rest of the population. Given the various changes in status across the years, why are the outcomes of these two groups so disparate? Given the rapid increase in the prevalence of individuals identifying under the 2SLGBTQIA+ spectrum, a multiplicity of underlying factors likely contributes to these differences.

Evidence of homosexuality is seen throughout all human history. However, homosexuals have been hard-pressed to find themselves accepted in their societies. As the prevalence of warfare subsided, and resources became more abundant in Western societies, we began to question once again which people deserved a seat at the societal table. The 1960s and 1970s could be viewed as a battle of the gods over the human conscience. What is man’s relationship to his brother? When, if ever, is it justifiable to go to war? What should the people do when they see power being exercised corruptly? What standards of behavior should be deemed acceptable? What business does the government have in restricting consenting individuals from love? These questions burned in the forefront of our minds throughout the decades. Eventually, the laws of the land on many issues changed. Arguably the most iconic of the changes was the acceptance of gays and lesbians’ right to live and let live when they were no longer considered criminals for homosexual behavior in 2003. However, it was not until their marital union was sanctioned in 2015 that many gays and lesbians saw themselves as entirely accepted.

Over the last two decades, gays and lesbians have begun to thrive economically and educationally. The mean income for a couple with a bachelor’s degree is $97,000. Homosexuals with the same education level have a mean income of $107,000 per annum. Given the relatively recent change in the laws surrounding homosexuality, it is impressive that homosexual men have surpassed the success of straight men—typically argued to be a reason for the persistence of the gender pay gap. Not only are homosexuals allowed to marry, the increased availability of surrogacy and parental planning has opened the door for many gay couples to have children.

Not all members of non-traditional sexual identities find themselves thriving. Presently, individuals that identify as two-spirited, transgender, queer, intersex, or asexual have an increased likelihood of suicide attempts and average nearly 66 cents on the dollar compared to the general population despite having a similar level of education.

The prevalence of individuals identifying somewhere on the 2SLGBTQIA+ spectrum has rapidly increased over the last five years. Nearly 20% of Generation Z individuals identify somewhere on the 2SLGBTQIA+ spectrum. When asked why so many people are now identifying as part of this community, many argue that just as many people have always existed, they simply hid who they were. Such individuals often posit that the increase in identification is due to greater social acceptance and overall understanding of non-traditional individuals. These explanations do not appear likely.

If increased safety and comfortability were a predictor of non-traditional sexual identification, we should expect the same pattern to have shown up when the restrictions against homosexuality were lifted. Data on the prevalence of homosexuality reveals that approximately 3–6% of the population tends to be homosexual. How much did these statistics change when laws became more friendly towards them? There has been an increase in sexual exploration among younger individuals. However, the overall proportion of individuals who found themselves homosexual has remained the same. So, what can explain the vast increase in individual identification of the 2SLGBTQIA+ community? And, given the increased societal push to accept members outside of the average, what can explain such poor outcomes for those individuals? Many have posited that the disparities in mental health and financial well-being are due to bigotry, transphobia, and general xenophobia throughout the American population. However, if the claims that said individuals have always existed were valid, and if the reason these individuals are killing themselves at an unprecedented rate is because of bigotry, shouldn’t we find a plethora of suicides throughout history connected with the suppression of sexual identity? There is no evidence that this is the case. So, what is going on?

In the essay, The Coddling of the American Mind, the authors posited that the rise of anxiety among youth coincided with the release of smartphones and a societal emphasis on safety at all costs. As individuals from Generation Z entered the university, faculty complied with their demand for safety and began offering more resources for mental health. Additionally, students were allowed to withdraw from classes if they found themselves triggered—something that reminded them of a past traumatic event. As this continued, a demand for forewarnings of potential traumatic materials came. Such alerts were labeled as trigger warnings.

Given the vast differences in success between gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and the two-spirited, transgender, queer, intersex, and asexual individuals, it is likely that something other than a lack of acceptance is the reason for the disparities. I would argue that the underlying conditions of anxiety, poor mental health, a poor sense of community, excessive smartphone use, and an environment that emphasizes the importance of safety at all costs are primary drivers for the disparities. While everyone deserves protection under the law—in fact, it is a precondition for any society to be considered good—it seems unlikely that greater acceptance is the solution for reducing these issues. Given that individuals that are homosexual are not as likely to be clinically depressed as others on the 2STQIA+ spectrum, I would argue that this is a reason they can assimilate well and succeed in American society. Individuals suffering from such mental health issues should seek cognitive behavioral therapy, and society should focus on strengthening those individuals so they can stand up when adversity beckons.

—GCF, July 25, 2023