Internationally, research has shown Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender/gender diverse, and Queer (LGBTQ+) people experience multifaceted challenges within school contexts. However, there is only a small emergent body of research on how LGBTQ+ community members might also experience positive, joyful, or euphoric experiences in these same spaces. Using euphoria and minority stress models, this article aims to consider whether schools themselves can be supportive and protective environments for LGBTQ+ people, how features of the school environment and school community might enable experiences of LGBTQ+ -related euphoria, and how euphoric experiences may be similar for students, staff and parents, and cisgender and gender diverse (GD) members of the LGBTQ+ community.
Methods
The study employed elements of grounded theory to analyse survey responses of LGBTQ+ students (n = 706), school staff (n = 107), and parents (n = 57). The survey data was collected online from 2021 to 2022 and explored LGBTQ+ community members’ experiences in, and perceptions of, Australian schools.
Results
Euphoria was predominantly related to school social contexts (such as supportive social climates), followed by school practices (such as LGBTQ+ representation), and internal experiences (such as pride). These events were shared by students, staff, and parents similarly. Euphoric events were shared by cisgender and GD participants, although gender-affirming social contexts and school practices were valued particularly by GD students, parents, and staff.
Conclusions
Schools can act as supportive contexts for LGBTQ+ students, staff, and parents in terms of social characteristics and school practices using mostly similar methods. Implications for policy development include school-wide interventions that include and reflect all LGBTQ+ people in all education-based roles, via school curricula and activities, public education, and awareness-raising endeavours.
Policy Implications
Implications for policy development include school-wide interventions that include and reflect all LGBTQ+ people in all education-based roles, via school curricula and activities, public education and awareness-raising endeavours.
Notes
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Introduction
Gender euphoria is an emotional state gaining increasing attention in research, social media, and community groups for people who identify as Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender/gender diverse, and Queer (LGBTQAustin et al., 2022; Beischel et al., 2021). Euphoria research and euphoria social media movements have largely developed to challenge dominant deficit framings of LGBTQ+ people’s identities and offer insight into positive experiences and events drawn from identifying as LGBTQ+ (Beischel et al., 2021). In psychological disciplines, euphoria is seen as a positive emotional reaction to an event, such as winning a prize or receiving good news, that is physiologically and cognitively similar to feelings of extreme happiness, satisfaction, joy, glee, love, and invulnerability (Matsumoto, 2009). Extending on this notion, gender euphoria is broadly understood as a positive emotional response to internal experiences or social events which affirm and support one’s gender identity or sexual orientation (Beischel et al., 2021), similar to research exploring the phenomenon of transgender joy (Camminga & Lubinsky, 2022; Shuster & Westbrook, 2022). Yet, little research has explored potential euphoric experiences within shared contexts such as schools, or how these may relate to both sexual orientation and gender identity similarly.
Identified experiences contributing to feelings of gender euphoria in adult transgender and gender-diverse LGBTQ+ community members include internal experiences such as pride and gender expression through appearance (including clothing, body hair, bodily characteristics) (Beischel et al., 2021; Benestad, 2010), and social events where correct gender, pronouns, and names are recognised by others (Beischel et al., 2021; Benestad, 2010). Euphoric experiences are shared by all gender identities (Beischel et al., 2021) and can be facilitated or restricted by the specific social contexts within which they occur (Austin et al., 2022; Bukkakis, 2020). Exploring euphoric experiences in school settings is particularly important to inform policy development and research targeted towards creating school environments where students, staff, and parents of diverse gender identities and sexual orientations can thrive rather than merely survive (Formby, 2015; Horton, 2020; Wang & Degol, 2016).
Advertisement
To date, psychological, sociological, and educational research mostly explore schools as challenging contexts for LGBTQ+ identities (Formby, 2015; Horton, 2020; Johns et al., 2019; Meyer, 2015; Shuster & Westbrook, 2022; Ullman, 2018). While this has led to important policy and legislative changes, health disparities are still prevalent (Meyer, 2016) and researchers have argued for more studies to explore ways schools can act as supportive settings for LGBTQ+ identities (Johns et al., 2019). Exploring “euphoric-inducing” events in school settings may help in answering how schools can be supportive from the perspective of the LGBTQ+ community (Johns et al., 2019). Drawing on minority stress models, such exploration is also expected to help in expanding current understandings of how and why euphoria acts as a protective feature for LGBTQ+ people in different social roles (Meyer, 2015).
The aim of the current study was to explore LGBTQ+ peoples’ experiences of euphoria in school contexts. The study was survey-based and included the perspective of students, staff, and parents. We broadened the definition of euphoria to comfort, happiness, or satisfaction around one’s identification as an LGBTQ+ community member, rather than focussing only on euphoria related to gender. In line with minority stress research (Johns et al., 2019; Meyer, 2015, 2016) and sociological research exploring positive experiences in trans communities (Shuster & Westbrook, 2022), we intentionally designed the study in a way that allowed for comparison of experiences across different members of the school community (students, parents, staff), cisgender participants (those whose gender aligns with their sex assigned at birth), and gender diverse participants (GD; those whose gender does not align with their sex assigned at birth): thus highlighting potential shared and unique sources of euphoria in school contexts for LGBTQ+ communities generally and gender diverse community members specifically.
Euphoria Related to Diverse Gender Identities and LGBTQ+ Communities
Gender euphoria research broadly relates to positive emotions about one’s gender identity or sexual orientation. Such euphoria can be induced from internal or external sources (Bradford et al., 2021). Internal sources of euphoria can be based on identity-relevant activities, like expressing gender through appearance or clothes (Austin et al., 2022), on alignment of bodily characteristics with one’s gender identity, including body hair or sex characteristics (Bradford et al., 2021), and on internal experiences like pride that are felt in relation to one’s own gender identity or sexual orientation (Beischel et al., 2021). Social sources of euphoria typically include affirmations of an individual’s identities by others including teachers, friends, and the broader school community (Austin et al., 2022; Beischel et al., 2021; Benestad, 2010; Chen et al., 2016). Social euphoria-inducing events can include correct gendering by others (or verbal and nonverbal patterns of communication from others that imply one is seen as one’s gender), correct use of individual’s pronouns and names, or membership in communities that validate identities (Austin et al., 2022; Beischel et al., 2021).
The frequency, intensity, and duration of euphoria are highly individual and can range from never experiencing euphoria related to one’s gender identity or sexual orientation, to high-intensity, short-duration experiences such as the first time being gendered correctly or perceived as the correct gender by others, to low-intensity long duration positive views of one’s LGBTQ+ identity over time (Beischel et al., 2021). Euphoric experiences are noted to take place in contexts that are deemed safe spaces (Austin et al., 2022) and free of expectations about ways genders are expressed (Beischel et al., 2021; Bukkakis, 2020). Further exploration of euphoria related to comfort or happiness in one’s gender identity or sexual orientation in schools may be needed as little research has explored potential institutional contexts as “euphoric-inducing” spaces (Austin et al., 2022; Bukkakis, 2020) despite the mention of schools and educators as potential sources of euphoria (Austin et al., 2022; Beischel et al., 2021; Benestad, 2010). For example, Austin et al. (2022) noted students experiencing euphoria in university contexts, Beischel et al. (2021) noted participants hearing the term gender euphoria used by educators and teachers, and Benestad’s (2010) guide to achieving euphoria for GD people highlights school communities, teachers, and peers as important potential sources of gender affirmation. Researchers have similarly noted the importance of identifying potential sources of euphoric states to inform professional practice, social policy, and psychological theory (Austin et al., 2022; Beischel et al., 2021; Benestad, 2010; Bradford et al., 2021; Bukkakis, 2020; Chen et al., 2016).
Advertisement
Positive (De-stressing) Minority Psychology
Health research has consistently found LGBTQ+ people as more likely than their heterosexual cisgender counterparts to experience poor well-being (Meyer, 2003), with higher rates of suicide, greater psychological distress, and more risky drug use (Choukas-Bradley & Thoma, 2022). The minority stress model attempts to explain these discrepancies by exploring the influence of stressors and protective factors on health outcomes in LGBTQ+ communities (Galupo et al., 2020; Hendricks & Testa, 2012; Meyer, 2003, 2015).
Within the minority stress model, stressors are challenges experienced uniquely by minority groups that elicit a stress response and impact on well-being. Thus, while a range of stressors may be common across the school community, such as exams for students or workload for teachers, minority stressors are those experienced over and above these common experiences. Such stress can be experienced from social sources and internal experiences. Identified social stressors that influence well-being and are disproportionately experienced by LGBTQ+ people include challenging experiences of discrimination, victimisation, and negative societal views toward LGBTQ+ people (Meyer, 2003, 2016). Internal stressors include internalised social messages of homophobia/transphobia, expectations of discrimination from others, and concealment of sexuality or gender identity (Meyer, 2015).
Yet not all LGBTQ+ youth experience negative health or well-being outcomes from participation in schools (Formby, 2015). Interestingly, the finding that some LGBTQ+ people may not only survive but thrive in school contexts highlights the potential influence of other factors in school contexts other than stress (Formby, 2015; Horton, 2020). According to the minority stress model, stressors may be alleviated (or de-stressed) by protective resources available to the individual (Meyer, 2015). Thus, individuals with sufficient protective resources are at less risk of experiencing negative health outcomes even when faced with minority stress. Similar to stressors, protective sources that promote well-being include both internal and social sources. Internal protective sources that promote well-being include individual characteristics like pride in identity, healthy behaviours, and positive beliefs (de Lira & de Morais, 2018; Meyer, 2015). Social protective sources are supportive social resources including affirming friends/family, role models, membership with the LGBTQ+ community, and social policies (de Lira & de Morais, 2018; Meyer, 2015). Together, these sources of protection are theorised to act as sources of support that aid in overcoming minority stressors (such as discrimination) and are associated with positive health and well-being outcomes.
While few studies to date have explored protective supports in minority stress (de Lira & de Morais, 2018; Meyer, 2015) or educational (Johns et al., 2019) research, results are promising and are a core focus of positive strength-based psychology (Vaughan & Rodriguez, 2014) in exploring how schools and institutions may promote healthy development. Of the research available, internal protective sources (e.g. pride and healthy behaviour) are the most explored. Such resources are shown to decrease the adverse effects of stress in LGBTQ+ individuals’ lives and are incorporated into individual-oriented help services such as therapy and psycho-educational interventions (de Lira & de Morais, 2018). Research exploring social or school protective factors is important for informing the development of community-wide interventions and other protective policy initiatives (de Lira & de Morais, 2018; Meyer, 2015).
Psychological and educational researchers have offered similar recommendations for future research to explore the potential of schools and public services to act as supportive contexts for LGBTQ+ people. Recommendations include (1) a general shift in research to explore health and well-being promoting resources experienced by LGBTQ+ community members (Johns et al., 2019; Meyer, 2015), (2) exploring schools as a potential supportive context that can endorse health and wellbeing (Formby, 2015; Horton, 2020; Johns et al., 2019; Ullman, 2018), and (3) exploring school settings from the perspective of LGBTQ+ community members (Johns et al., 2019; Mann & Jones, 2022).
Exploring euphoric-inducing events may be a particularly useful method to address the limitations of existing minority stress research, particularly when viewing euphoria as an informal measure of well-being. Recent Australian research shows schools can be supportive contexts for students (Ullman, 2021, 2022), parents (Mann & Jones, 2022), and staff (Ullman & Smith, 2018) alike. Large-scale quant (bivariate/multivariate) analyses highlighted the fact that positive outcomes are achieved for LGBTQ+ students when school climates are enhanced through specific LGBTQ+ formal and informal inclusions and supports (Ullman, 2021, 2022). Bi-directional relations were uncovered; negative climates lead to poorer well-being but also positive climates lead to positive well-being. Similarly, qualitative studies have found Australian schools can be supportive contexts LGBTQ+ staff (Ullman & Smith, 2018), and family supports for LGBTQ+ parents (Mann & Jones, 2022). Thus, there could be nuances in LGBTQ+ inclusion across different roles of educational engagement (parents, students, staff).
Further, transgender and gender-diverse people’s inclusion can also have key considerations differing to those of diverse sexualities. For example, research exploring LGBTQ+ student perceptions of school safety note between 40% (Hill et al., 2021b) and 50% (Jones et al., 2022) of students do not consider their school as unsafe contexts. Although cisgender students are more likely to view schools as safe contexts compared to gender-diverse participants (Hill et al., 2021b), educational contexts are also one of the dominant settings in which gender-diverse individuals feel their gender identity is accepted (Hill et al., 2021a). Schools can act as sites of affirmation for LGBTQ+ identities generally such as openly identifying as LGBTQ+, celebrations of LGBTQ+ identities (such as International Day Against Homophobia, Biphobia, Intersex discrimination, and Transphobia—IDAHOBIT), and attending school dances with same-gendered partners. Schools can also act as sites of gender affirmation including access to bathrooms and changing rooms, use of correct name or pronouns, and wearing clothing that match an individuals’ gender identity (Hill et al., 2021b). It may thus be possible that schools may act as supportive or euphoric contexts, but research has yet to explore these possibilities on a larger scale across school community members and diverse gender identities. When used within a minority stress lens, euphoria may thus aid in highlighting school practices and features that bolster a sense of health and wellbeing for students, staff, and parents.
The Present Study
Research Questions
Given the lack of research exploring schools as positive contexts for LGBTQ+ community members, the present study aimed to explore how and why LGBTQ+ community members experience euphoria in school contexts. In keeping with recommendations in minority stress (Johns et al., 2019; Meyer, 2015, 2016) and gender euphoria research (Beischel et al., 2021; Bukkakis, 2020), our focus was on identifying sources of well-being shared by the LGBTQ+ community generally and specifically valued by the gender diverse community. We explore euphoric experiences in multiple ages, roles within schools (e.g. students, parents, and school staff), and gender identities. Therefore, this study asked:
1.
What events in schools are associated with feelings of euphoria for LGBTQ+ community members?
2.
Are euphoric-inducing events similarly shared by students, staff, and parents, and do they occur in similar or different ways across cisgender and gender-diverse identities within the LGBTQ+ community?
Method
This article was conducted toward a PhD thesis by the lead author and supported by the supervising researchers. The study adopted a qualitative approach to explore the euphoric experiences of LGBTQ+ -identifying school staff, parents, and students in Australian schools. Young people currently in other educational institutions were also able to take the survey, reflecting on their school experiences, with results differentiating between contexts where relevant. The data were drawn from one question exploring euphoric experiences and other demographic questions in a larger survey of LGBTQ+ students’, parents’, and school staff experiences in schools. This also included consideration of school climate, supports, violence, and academic and health outcomes not reported here. The specific focus on euphoria was informed by strength-based psychology frameworks which stress the need for qualitative studies to identify health-promoting characteristics of social organisations, which can inform the development of inclusive policy and practice (Vaughan & Rodriguez, 2014). Although survey methodology has previously been critiqued as a “qualitatively light” method of gathering data, relative to other methods (Creswell, 2018), they may nonetheless provide appropriate depth when participants are personally engaged with the topic (Charmaz, 2014). In addition, online surveys are particularly valuable in marginalised community research, offering protections for participant privacy and ability to access data from dispersed marginal social groups (UNESCO, 2016). Given the benefit that surveys provide in terms of scale, the use of an online survey was therefore seen as an appropriate first pass at gathering large-scale representative themes related to euphoric experiences in schools.
Participants were recruited between August 2021 and May 2022 via paid and unpaid advertising on Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, and websites/mailing lists of supportive organisations including Twenty10, Minus18, Rainbow Families, and Maths Association NSW. The surveys were hosted on LimeSurvey, took around 20 min to complete, and were approved by the ethical committee board of Macquarie University (52,021,946,530,107). Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants in the study.
The survey included questions about demographic characteristics of participants and schools including age, gender orientation, sexual orientation, location, school type, and role within schools (parent, school staff, or student). Participants were asked ‘Have you ever felt happy or comfortable (euphoric) about your LGBTQ+ identity in your school?’. In a sample of 1967 students, 212 staff, and 198 parents, 38.4% of students, 60% of staff, and 33.7% of parents indicated ‘yes’ to having experienced happiness or comfort about their LGBTQ+ identity in school, with the remainder indicating ‘no or unsure’. Responses indicating ‘yes’ were offered an open-ended question directing participants to: ‘Please tell us a time when you felt particularly euphoric (happy or comfortable) about your LGBTQ+ identity in your/your child’s school. This could be based on things others have said or done, on a particular achievement or event, or on individual factors relating to you. Please be specific and give details’. Of the 756 students, 127 staff and 67 parents indicated a ‘yes’ response; 6% of students, 16% of staff, and 15% of parents did not respond to the item or offered illegible responses. Participant responses were cleaned of malicious responders and illegible responses and were reported using pseudonyms.
Participants
Participants’ demographics are supplied in Table 1. Overall, there were higher numbers of students (n = 706) compared to staff (n = 107) and parent (n = 57) participants. Among the staff and parent groups, there were also higher numbers of cisgender participants compared to gender-diverse participants. Within the student cohort, however, there was a higher number of gender-diverse participants compared to cisgender participants.
Table 1
Demographic characteristics of students, staff, and parents in schools
Participant roles in schools
Students (n = 708)
n (%)
Staff (n = 107)
n (%)
Parent (n = 57)
n (%)
Age (years)
14
200 (29%)
*
*
15
211 (30%)
*
*
16
150 (21%)
*
*
17
120 (17%)
*
*
18–25
27 (3%)
8 (7%)
1 (2%)
26–35
*
35 (33%)
2 (3%)
36–45
*
34 (32%)
30 (53%)
46–55
*
23 (21%)
19 (33%)
56–65
*
5 (5%)
4 (7%)
66 +
*
2 (2%)
1 (2%)
Sexual orientation
Asexual
54 (8%)
*
*
Bisexual/pansexual
334 (47%)
24 (23%)
8 (14%)
Gay or lesbian
170 (24%)
79 (74%)
38 (67%)
Heterosexual
12 (2%)
1 (1%)
4 (7%)
Another answer
118 (17%)
2 (2%)
7 (12%)
Don’t know
20 (2%)
*
*
Gender identity
Cisgender Male
45 (6%)
35 (33%)
*
Cisgender Female
239 (34%)
56 (52%)
38 (67%)
Transgender male–female
5 (1%)
5 (5%)
7 (12%)
Transgender female-male
56 (8%)
1 (1%)
6 (10%)
Non-binary or another gender (genderqueer, fluid, no label, etc.)
337 (48%)
8 (7%)
5 (9%)
Prefer not to answer or Undeclared
26 (3%)
2 (2%)
1 (2%)
School type
Government or public
455 (65%)
89 (83%)
38 (67%)
Non-religious private or independent
42 (6%)
3 (3%)
7 (12%)
Religious private or independent
194 (27%)
14 (13%)
12 (21%)
Other*
17 (2%)
1 (1%)
*
Education sector
Pre-school (early child care)
*
3 (3%)
3 (5%)
Primary school (prep-year 6)
*
33 (31%)
33 (58%)
High school (years 7–12)
691 (98%)
65 (61%)
20 (35%)
Higher education (TAFE-Uni)
5 (1%)
1 (1%)
1 (2%)
Other**
12 (1%)
5 (4%)
*
Rurality
Regional or remote
119 (17%)
76 (71%)
22 (38%)
Urban/suburban/city
488 (69%)
30 (28%)
35 (62%)
Did not specify
101 (14%)
1 (1%)
*
Born in Australia
Yes
632 (89%)
77 (72%)
37 (65%)
No
74 (10%)
13 (12%)
14 (25%)
Did not specify
2 (1%)
17 (16%)
6 (10%)
Speak another language than English at home
Yes
106 (15%)
8 (7%)
5 (9%)
No
602 (85%)
82 (77%)
46 (80%)
Did not specify
*
17 (16%)
6 (11%)
Disability
Yes
145 (20%)
12 (11%)
4 (7%)
No
563 (80%)
78 (73%)
47 (82%)
Did not specify
*
17 (16%)
6 (11%)
Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander
Yes
21 (3%)
2 (2%)
2 (3%)
No
687 (97%)
88 (82%)
49 (86%)
Did not specify
*
17 (16%)
6 (11%)
*Other school types included special needs schools and combinations of independent/public, and public/religious schools; **Other education sectors included no longer attending schools, or alternative methods to completing schooling (e.g. online)
Data Analysis
As research exploring euphoric experiences of LGBTQ+ school members is still growing, grounded theory (Charmaz, 1996, 2014) was deemed an appropriate inductive method for exploring experiences of euphoria. This is due to its focus on explaining processes and actions in understudied areas of research and potential to revise and rethink psychological theories and methods (Charmaz, 1996). The research team included individuals with various sexual orientations, gender identities, and disciplinary backgrounds including sociology, psychology, and education.
Data analysis was conducted in three phases by the researchers using NVivo 20 computer software as an organisational tool. The first phase involved line-by-line coding and memo writing to explore and explain possible euphoric-inducing events within the data while staying close to participant responses (Charmaz, 1996). Initial codes and memo writing of the first 20 respondents from students, parents, and school staff was completed by the PhD student and cross-checked with the supervision team to ensure consensus on initial identified themes. This generally related to commonly shared events within school contexts such as friendships and relationships, memberships with LGBTQ+ communities, and inclusion of LGBTQ+ identities in school practices.
The second phase involved focussed and axial coding where initial codes were subsumed within broader categories that were consistent with initial codes. This led to the identification of common events and sources that were associated with euphoric experiences in participants, such as instances where gender identity was acknowledged by others (e.g. correct pronoun use) and school events (e.g. inclusion of LGBTQ+ celebratory days such as International Day Against Homophobia, Biphobia, Intersex discrimination, and Transphobia—IDAHOBIT). The third phase involved collaboration with the research team to subsume identified euphoric-inducing events into broader themes that spoke to data from all 3 subgroups, that is euphoria derived from internal, social, and school sources. The developed framework was also disaggregated based on gender identity (cisgender vs. gender diverse) using NVIVO matrix coding queries to explore possible sources of euphoria unique or shared across participants. Given the line-by-line and segment-by-segment approach to data analysis, participants could potentially offer a variety of sources within responses. Thus, the reporting of themes was limited to the number of individual participants mentioning the source, rather than the number of mentions of sources drawn from the data. This was used as a measure to highlight potentially shared or unique sources of support by gender identity (cisgender vs. GD). Percentages were calculated for each theme and subtheme based on the number of participants mentioning each euphoric-inducing event.
Results
Three broad sources of euphoric events were identified within participant responses, including internal, social, and school sources. Identified broad sources of euphoria and specific euphoric events are discussed with figures highlighting comparisons between roles and gender diversities (cisgender vs. gender diverse).
Sources of Euphoria in Schools
Three broad sources of school euphoria were identified with participant responses. In order of dominance, sources identified are (1) social supports, (2) school practices, and (3) internal experiences. Social supports highlight social euphoric-inducing events in school settings, such as school climates. School practices highlight euphoric-inducing events provided by schools, such as LGBTQ+-inclusive teaching practices, and internal experiences highlight euphoric-inducing individual experiences, such as self-pride. Figure 1 highlights a comparison between these broad sources of euphoria by school role. Generally, students, school staff, and parents all mentioned social and school sources of euphoria more commonly than internal experiences. Social supports were particularly important for LGBTQ+ students, being represented twice as often as school practices and more than seven times as often as internal experiences.
Fig. 1
Sources of euphoria mentioned by students, staff, and parents
×
The broad sources of euphoria were also mentioned at similar rates by cisgender and GD participants (Fig. 2). Consistent with roles, all students, cisgender staff, and cisgender parents mentioned supportive and affirming events with others as the most common source of euphoria, followed by school practices and internal experiences. Although GD staff and parents mentioned school practices, followed by social supports and internal states. Although these figures highlight similarities in broad sources of euphoria, we also identified gender-specific euphoric events at the social, school, and internal levels which warrant further discussion. These are explored below.
Fig. 2
Sources of euphoric experiences by role (student, staff, parent) and gender identity—cisgender (CIS) vs. gender diverse (GD)
×
Euphoric Inducing Social Supports
Euphoric experiences in social contexts highlight supportive interpersonal characteristics in schools. Common euphoric-inducing social aspects of schools included supportive social climates, the LGBTQ+ community, and gender affirmation.
Social Climate
Supportive social climates were the most mentioned source of social euphoria in school settings. This theme included social events where an individual’s gender identity or sexual orientation is informally supported by others in the school community. For students, supportive social climates referred to social events where friends, peers, teachers, school staff, and general school climates were supportive of gender identities or sexual orientations. Student responses typically included supportive responses when disclosing sexual orientation or gender identity to others (friends/teachers/peers), school staff addressing instances of bullying, and equal treatment by others in schools. Notably, the level of support observed by LGBTQ+ students ranged in intensity, with some students highlighting social groups that celebrated gender and sexual orientation diversity and others highlighting the implicit support present when others treated their gender identity or sexual orientation as ‘normal’ or a ‘non-issue’.
‘Being in a group of mates and feeling like a regular person’ (Abraham, Gay, CIS male, 15 years, Religious Private School).
For school staff, supportive social climates referred to instances where students, parents of students, colleagues, school leadership, and school environments were supportive of diverse sexual orientations and gender identities. The most common euphoric-inducing social event identified was supportive or non-negative responses when coming out to school leadership, colleagues, and students. Further identified euphoric events included supportive school community members addressing homophobic/transphobic events, celebrations of family formations, and affirmative changes in legislation with colleagues. A noted number of school staff clarified disclosure was conditional to school staff and colleagues.
‘Perhaps I am just grateful that nothing has changed since I came out (quietly). And it has been accepted’ (Paityn, lesbian CIS female, 46–55 years, Public School).
For parents, supportive others included school staff, other parents, and school communities generally that provided equal treatment and non-discriminatory experiences based on family formations, sexual orientations, or gender identities for parents and children. Notably, the level of support offered by schools varied from being treated as a non-issue or welcomed as part of diversity within the school community.
‘It didn’t seem to be an issue, I felt that I was treated the same way a heterosexual parent would have been treated by staff and other parents‘ (Gracelyn, lesbian CIS female, 36–45 years, religious private school).
LGBTQ+ Community
The next identified social event eliciting feelings of euphoria related to the presence of other LGBTQ+ identifying parents, school staff, and students within school communities. Student responses identified various LGBTQ+ community sources of euphoria including peers, friends, other students, and school staff. Students also highlighted specific features of LGBTQ+ school community members conducive to euphoric experiences including communities that share understandings and experiences of diverse sexual orientations and gender identities, environments that are safe and welcoming, and access to LGBTQ+ student and staff role models.
‘The presence of LGBTQ+ students and staff (particularly staff) has provided a safe space on which I can be myself. I find that in particular, being around LGBTQ+ teachers has meant that I have positive LGBTQ+ role models’ (Presley, bisexual non-binary person 17 years, religious private school).
School staff responses identified students, colleagues, and school leadership who identified as LGBTQ+ as features of euphoric events with the school community. Staff euphoric events highlighted other LGBTQ+ leadership and staff as particularly important in creating safe workplaces, sharing community understandings, and access to professional role modelling. Staff also mentioned specific events where LGBTQ+ students were able to express themselves freely as conducive to euphoria. In response to role modelling, for example, Gaven said:
‘Having a supervisor that was LGBTQ+ to guide and lead me through how to navigate a school. They just seemed more relatable’ (Gaven, gay CIS male, 26–35 years, Public School).
Parents similarly mentioned the presence of other parents and school staff who identified as LGBTQ+ as school features related to experiences of euphoria. The presence of LGBTQ+ school staff was mentioned by parents particularly frequently and was related to perceptions of school safety and inclusivity.
‘Several staff at my child’s school have made their sexuality and or gender diversity known to parents, staff and students, making both my child and me feel safe and welcomed’ (Cara, bisexual CIS female, 36–45 years, Public School).
Correct Gendering
The final identified social source of euphoria was correct gendering. This theme was similar for parents, students, and school staff and denoted instances where friends, colleagues, teachers, and students used the correct name and pronoun for GD individuals. For students, important sources of correct gendering included friends, peers, and teachers. For cisgender students, this also included instances where significant others’ gender identity was accepted by others. A number of students mentioned being correctly gendered by teachers as a particularly euphoric experience as it meant they were recognised by an authority figure.
‘I told my drama teacher I was trans over email and the next lesson she immediately started referring to me as my chosen name and was super supportive. It felt amazing to be addressed by someone of authority as who I believe I am’ (Walker, bisexual trans male, 15 years, Public School).
Similarly, for parents, euphoric feelings from correct gendering emerged when school staff correctly gendered themselves and family members.
‘I went to school interviews and my partner wasn't misgendered’ (Anastasia, Lesbian CIS female, 36–45 years, non-religious private school).
Finally, for school staff, euphoric states were encouraged when both colleagues and students used correct names, pronouns, and gendered titles.
‘When students and staff correct each other on my pronouns or title (I use Mx)’ (Jaren, bisexual non-binary person, 26–35 years, Public School).
Social Sources of Euphoria: Comparisons Between Students, Staff, Parent and Gender Identities
A comparison of social events contributing to euphoria by role (student, staff, and parent) and gender identity is included in Fig. 3. Specific features of schools conducive to euphoric feelings for students, school staff, and parents include school communities accepting and supportive of diverse sexual orientations and gender identities, school communities that include members of the LGBTQ+ community, and the use of gender affirming practices (correct gendering) in school contexts. These features of school contexts were also similarly valued by cisgender and GD members of the school community.
Fig. 3
Euphoric inducing social supports by role (student, staff, parent) and gender identity—cisgender (CIS) vs. gender diverse (GD)
×
Euphoric Inducing School Practices
School practices were the second identified broad source of euphoria. This broad theme included school practices and strategies as sources of euphoria. Identified school practices include LGBTQ+ representation, inclusive teaching practices and gender affirmative strategies.
LGBTQ+ Representation
LGBTQ+ representation was the dominant source of euphoria from school practices for students. Generally, this theme referred to LGBTQ+ related school events and resources, including the provision of Gay Straight Alliances/Gender Sexuality Alliances (GSAs) or student diversity clubs and LGBTQ+ awareness celebratory days like IDAHOBIT and Pride Month (a month of celebrating LGBTQ+ identity). For students, school-sanctioned LGBTQ+ representations were protective because they enabled one to find or create LGBTQ+ communities, elicited feelings of visibility and safety in school contexts, and were a noted support deemed valuable by both ‘out’ and ‘closeted’ individuals.
‘During the event, Wear It Purple Day, my school put in a lot of effort, like cupcakes, stalls, decorations, and even a flash mob by the dance class. It made me feel comfortable and proud, even though I am still in the closet’ (Veronica, Pansexual CIS Female, 17yrs, Public School).
Similarly, school staff mentioned LGBTQ+ related school events including awareness days (IDAHOBIT, Wear It Purple Day – WIPD a day people wear purple in schools to show solidarity with LGBTQ+ youth, Pride Month), and GSAs as euphoric-inducing features of school contexts. Responses mentioning awareness days and GSAs tended to highlight celebrations of sexual orientation and gender diversity in schools as particularly important events in celebrating sexual orientation and gender diversity in students, creating supportive resources for LGBTQ+ students, and personal experiences of visibility and supportive school contexts.
‘My school did a special pride day and allowed the students to wear rainbow colours to show support of LGBTQ+ students. This made me incredibly happy and I was moved emotionally’ (Sophie, Bisexual CIS Female, 26-35yrs, Public School).
For parents, LGBTQ+ representation was similarly seen as euphoric-inducing features of schools and were related to celebrations of diverse family formations, personal acknowledgement, and perceptions of school inclusivity for themselves and their families.
‘My child’s school walked in the pride parade giving support to the same sex families and queer students, and generally is a very inclusive school in all areas’ (Sloane, Lesbian CIS Female, 46-55yrs, Religious Private School).
LGBTQ+-inclusive Practices
Inclusive practices referred to experiences of euphoria drawn from school practices and procedures inclusive of LGBTQ+ identities. For students, this referred to events where LGBTQ+ identities were included and discussed in lessons plans and social contexts. Student responses indicated these events were related to feelings of safety and inclusivity in schools and teachers.
‘One time in class, we were naming this stuffed animal for philosophy (to throw around and take turns with), and once we decided a name, the teacher asked what the toys pronouns were (now the toy uses he/they), and it made me pretty sure if I was to ever tell the teacher my pronouns it would be ok’ (Alpha, Bisexual Non-Binary Person, 14yrs, Public School).
From the perspective of LGBTQ+ school staff, euphoric inducing LGBTQ+-inclusive practices referred to professional and personal pride in creating LGBTQ+-inclusive lessons for students, working in schools that offer professional development in sexual orientation and gender diversity, and acting as a formal source of support or role model for LGBTQ+ students. When asked about euphoric experiences in schools, for example, Kourtney responded:
‘Having students who are LGBTIQ open up and discuss their identity with me. I have had students discuss their gender identity with me, come out to me as bisexual, as non-binary and as genderqueer’ (Kourtney, Lesbian Non-Binary Person, 36-45yrs, Public School).
For parents, euphoric-inducing practices referred to events where school staff collaboratively adapted practices to be inclusive of diverse families.
‘When it was recognised that my daughter would need access to buy two Mother’s Day gifts when the rule was ‘strictly one gift per student’ (Finis, Gay Non-Binary Person, 46-55yrs, Non-religious Private School).
Gender Affirmative Practices
Gender affirmation was the third-most dominant euphoric-inducing school practice mentioned by students and parents, referring to instances where school strategies affirmed gender identities. Interestingly, this theme was not mentioned by staff: a finding which may reflect staff having different experiences with the school as service providers, as opposed to service consumers. For students, gender affirmation referred to instances where schools and teachers acknowledged gender identities in formal ways including use of correct names in assessments and attendance, choice in uniforms, and bathroom access.
‘They changed a bathroom for me’ (Cyril, Bisexual Non-Binary Person, 17yrs, Public School).
For LGBTQ+ parents, gender affirmation included instances where schools affirmed their commitment to gender diversity via school communications. For those whose children were gender diverse, it also included affirmation for their children via enrolment forms.
‘The school agreed to change my child's name on Compass (a [Customer Relations Management tool] schools use) without a stat dec or a birth certificate and list their gender as non-binary’ (Capri, Queer CIS Female, 36-45yrs, Public School).
School Sources of Euphoria: Comparisons Between Roles (Student, Staff, Parent) and Gender Identities
A breakdown of the euphoric-inducing school practices by participant gender identity is highlighted in Fig. 4. The figure shows that LGBTQ+ representation and LGBTQ+-inclusive practices are school sources of euphoria for students, staff, and parents of all gender identities. Although gender affirmative practice was most notably a potential source of euphoria for GD students and parents, it was also mentioned as a source of support for cisgender parents of GD children.
Fig. 4
Euphoric inducing school practices by role (student, staff, parent) and gender identity—cisgender (CIS) vs. gender diverse (GD)
×
Euphoric Inducing Internal Experiences
Internal experiences referred to experiences of euphoria that were derived from internal states and individual characteristics and behaviours, rather than from external sources. The three most common internal experiences eliciting euphoria included: 1) sense of pride, 2) knowledge that one had created change in schools (advocacy), and 3) personal appearance.
Pride
Sense of pride related to positive feelings about one’s sexual orientation and gender identity. For students, this referred to enduring states of comfort or security within one’s gender identity or sexual orientation, and sense of pride when disclosing to others.
‘I’ve never really said it in conversation before … but it felt so good to be able to feel comfortable enough with myself to actually say it out loud’ (Dakota, Lesbian Non-Binary Person, 16yrs, Religious Private School).
For school staff, sense of pride referred to enduring positive beliefs about one’s sexual orientation or gender identity. Some staff also indicated sexual orientations and gender diversity as identity characteristics not defining or applicable within work contexts.
‘I feel comfortable and, in the most part, don’t conceal my sexuality, but I don’t let it define me either. I, like my heterosexual colleagues, just get on with my work’ (Barrett, Gay CIS Male, 56-65yrs, Public School).
For parents, self-pride included enduring personal comfort or satisfaction in one’s sexual orientation or gender identity, and role modelling pride to children.
‘I set a positive example for my child by not allowing school to affect me negatively’ (Carter, Gay Trans Male, 36-45yrs, Public School).
Advocacy
Advocacy was the second dominant internal source of euphoria and referred to instances where students and parents created changes in school contexts. For students, this included amendments to school practices such as gendered language, introduction of GSAs into school contexts, and acting as LGBTQ+ role models.
‘I helped implement gender neutral language into the school for the first time. The use of the language instead of the gendered language made me feel affirmed and less anxious about going to class’ (Gerry, Questioning Non-Binary Person, 16rs, Religious Private School).
Similarly, parents found euphoria in creating changes to school practices including educating teachers about family diversity during family centric days (e.g. Mother’s Day) and the introduction of LGBTQ+ awareness days in schools.
‘I joined the school board in order to improve visibility for LGBTIQA+ students in the school, this led to the school running its first ever Wear it Purple day in 2021. I felt proud that I could advocate for that’ (Abigail, Bisexual CIS Female, 36-45yrs, Public School).
Appearance
Appearance was the third euphoric-inducing internal experience. This included instances and events where individuals experienced euphoria from expression of gender and was mentioned by students and staff. For students, euphoria was gained through clothing or bodily appearance, or being correctly gendered from others based on appearance.
‘When I expressed my masculine and feminine side through my outfit. I felt trendy and powerful’ (Adrianna, CIS female, 15 years, Public School).
Similarly, one staff member noted expressing gender through appearance as a euphoric-inducing event in the workplace.
‘Being accepted wearing dresses/skirts as a transgender female (no student or colleague has openly questioned it or pointed it out)’ (Julianna, straight trans female, 18–25 years, Public School).
Internal Sources of Euphoria: Comparisons Between Students, Staff, Parents, and Gender Identities
A comparison of internal experiences contributing to euphoria by role and gender identity is included in Fig. 5. Internal experiences were the least mentioned source of euphoria by students, teachers, and parents, with a sense of pride the most commonly shared source across gender identities. Students and parents similarly highlighted individual achievements in improving school inclusivity as euphoric-inducing events and was expressed similarly by cisgender and GD students. Finally, euphoria drawn from appearance was predominantly mentioned by CIS students and GD staff.
Fig. 5
Euphoric inducing internal experiences by role (student, staff, parent) and gender identity—cisgender (CIS) vs. gender diverse (GD)
×
Unexplored Features of Euphoria
Participant responses included features of schools conducive to feelings of euphoria outside of the identified themes within this study. This included student popularity, the prevalence of representation of people who identify as LGBTQ+ in local and school communities, and general school cultures affirmative of LGBTQ+ identities. Responses indicated euphoric emotions could only be experienced in specific interpersonal contexts such as among friends, only some teachers, and among other LGBTQ+ community members. Responses also indicated euphoria could be experienced simultaneously with challenging events and negative emotions including unsupportive home contexts and discrimination from others. Future studies are needed to explore further contextual features of euphoric experiences in schools to inform policy development. Additionally, several respondents indicated a lack of understanding of the term euphoria as referring to happy or comfortable emotions. Further research is needed to explore the Australian understanding of euphoria.
Discussion
Students, staff, and parents highlighted similar events and features of schools that can contribute to feelings of euphoria for the LGBTQ+ community generally, and the gender-diverse community specifically. In order of dominance, these sources of euphoria included social contexts, school practices, and internal experiences (e.g. appearance and pride). This research has important implications for LGBTQ+ peoples’ health and well-being in school settings: highlighting various ways the school can promote healthy development (Vaughan & Rodriguez, 2014) and act as a supportive context (Johns et al., 2019) for an often-marginalised minority group. To support LGBTQ+ people to thrive, schools should pay particular attention to the social climate as it relates to LGBTQ+ people and issues, include LGBTQ+ -related curricula and activities that reflect LGBTQ+ identities, and promote gender-affirmative social and school practices that acknowledge the correct gender identity of gender diverse LGBTQ+ community members.
The findings of the current research with LGBTQ+ school communities are consistent with minority stress models, identifying social contexts, supportive practices, and individual states as sources of resilience or support (de Lira & de Morais, 2018; Johns et al., 2019; Meyer, 2003, 2015). They also mirror euphoria research with LGBTQ+ people in various settings, showing that sources of euphoria often include social contexts (Austin et al., 2022; Beischel et al., 2021), specific environmental characteristics (Austin et al., 2022; Benestad, 2010; Bukkakis, 2020), and individual mental states (Austin et al., 2022; Beischel et al., 2021). This finding adds to euphoria research with adults (e.g. Austin et al., 2022; Beischel et al., 2021; Bukkakis, 2020) by highlighting how sources of euphoria are similarly shared by all LGBTQ+ community members of all ages. From a minority stress model perspective, this also adds to research in highlighting supportive aspects of schools shared by multiple roles (i.e. student, staff, and parent) and intergenerational perspectives of supportive organisational characteristics (Meyer, 2016). There were noted similarities and differences in euphoric-inducing events drawn from school practices and internal experiences for the LGBTQ+ community generally and gender-diverse community specifically.
Euphoria derived from social contexts was the dominant and most uniformly shared source of euphoria for students, staff, and parents of all gender identities. Common features of euphoric-inducing social contexts included supportive social climates, LGBTQ+ community membership, and gender affirmation. Supportive social climates referred to school community members (students, school staff, parents, and local communities) that were affirming of diverse sexual orientations and gender identities, particularly the ability to be out and accepted within schools and was valued by all gender identities. However, the degree of support the participants experienced from others ranged from the absence of backlash to disclosure, the positive response of others to experiences of discrimination, to celebrations of LGBTQ+ diversity such as marriage and the legalisation of same-sex marriage in 2017. The fact these relatively mundane phenomena cause euphoria could suggest participants’ low expectations of support or acceptance, or indeed expectations of rejection from others (Meyer, 2003). These findings reflect minority stress literature (de Lira & de Morais, 2018; Meyer, 2015), and euphoria research highlighting affirming communities as a potentially shared source of euphoria across gender identities and sexual orientations (Beischel et al., 2021).
Student, staff, and parent responses of all gender identities similarly highlighted LGBTQ+ community membership as eliciting feelings of safety, and important in sharing values or beliefs around sexual orientation and gender diversity generally. Staff and student responses similarly highlighted representation (and outness) of LGBTQ+ students as important in perceptions of inclusive school contexts and LGBTQ+ staff as important sources of role modelling. This finding is similar to euphoria research highlighting LGBTQ+ communities as a particularly important source of support (Beischel et al., 2021; Benestad, 2010). The findings of out LGBTQ+ students in schools add weight to Meyer’s (2016) argument that social attitudes and legal protections have led to intergenerational changes where youth may no longer experience historical stressors such as identity management and highlights LGBTQ+ communities continue to be an important source of support for LGBTQ+ youth, despite the growing diversity of sexual orientations and gender identities (Meyer, 2016).
Correct gendering in schools referred to students’ and staff’s correct use of correct name, pronoun, and gender referents and was valued by all roles and gender identities. Responses from GD participants typically included events where their actual gender identity was affirmed by others, while cisgender responses often also referenced the correct gendering of family members, students, friends, and partners. This finding aligns with and extends the findings of existing research highlighting gender affirmation as important to GD adults (Austin et al., 2022; Benestad, 2010), while also highlighting its importance to cisgender participants as signs of school inclusivity.
Euphoric-inducing school practices included official activities provided by schools supportive of LGBTQ+ people. Identified school practices included LGBTQ+ representation, inclusive curriculums, and gender affirmative practices and were valued by all roles similarly. LGBTQ+ representation highlighted school spaces and events inclusive of LGBTQ+ identities including GSAs, student diversity clubs, awareness-raising campaigns (e.g. IDAHOBIT), and community celebrations (e.g. Mardi Gras—an LGBTQ+ protest parade). Similar to GSA research (Johns et al., 2019), LGBTQ+ representation was particularly important in raising awareness, visibility, perceived safety, and recognition of LGBTQ+ identities generally. For staff and students, LGBTQ+ representation was also seen as a euphoric experience for closeted identities, which may act as a vicarious support in school contexts and may not require ‘out identities’ to derive some benefit, as argued by previous research (Meyer, 2016). Although, LGBTQ+ representation was not mentioned by GD parents. This may be reflective of the small number of responses of GD parents in the sample, further research is needed to explore LGBTQ+ representation in GD parents specifically.
Inclusive curricula referred to teaching practices inclusive of diverse sexual orientations and gender identities and were mentioned by students, staff, and parents of all gender identities. This finding is similar to existing research with LGBTQ+ students (Johns et al., 2019) and parents (Mann & Jones, 2022), highlighting the importance of school curriculum in creating inclusive school contexts. Although, inclusive curriculum was mentioned in diverse ways such as students referring to inclusive sex education and lessons, staff referring to professional development, role modelling, and inclusive curriculum development, and parents referring to inclusive family-centric learning activities such as Mother’s Day and Father’s Day. Shared features of inclusive practices by students, staff, and parents included collaborative and supportive relationships between schools, teachers, and classroom content appropriately adapted to be LGBTQ+ inclusive. Responses also highlighted similar perceived benefits of inclusive curriculum to previous research in raising awareness, visibility, knowledge, perceptions of school climate, and encouraging inclusive dialogue (Johns et al., 2019; Mann & Jones, 2022). Although, inclusive curricula were a particularly dominant euphoric-inducing school practice for GD and cisgender staff and parent participants. This may be reflective of valuing more professional content provided by schools, compared to socially supportive curricula tailored more specifically for students.
Gender affirmative practices referred to official school practices affirmative of names, pronouns, and gendered titles in official practices such as the role, communications, assignments, uniforms, bathroom access, enrolment, and others, and was endorsed by GD students, GD parents, and cisgender parents. This finding is similar to previous euphoria research (Austin et al., 2022; Beischel et al., 2021) and school guides (Chen et al., 2016) arguing the need for schools to be inclusive and respectful of diverse gender identities. However, the lack of dominance of this theme in this sample, when compared to previous research, is an interesting finding and may reflect a relatively low rate of provision of gender affirmative practices provided by schools in Australia. Future research is needed to explore the rate of provision of gender-affirmative practices in Australian schools.
Internal experiences were the final broad source of euphoria and referred to individual behaviours, experiences, or internal states that were not drawn from social or school characteristics. Identified internal experiences included pride, advocacy and appearance, similar to supportive sources identified in minority stress (de Lira & de Morais, 2018; Meyer, 2015) and euphoria research (Austin et al., 2022; Beischel et al., 2021). For cisgender and GD students, cisgender staff and cisgender and GD parents’ pride was drawn from internal beliefs or contentment in one’s gender identity or sexual orientation which was not influenced by others. Advocacy was mentioned by cisgender and GD students and cisgender parents and related to feelings of happiness or satisfaction in creating changes in school contexts to be more inclusive of LGBTQ+ identities, while appearance was mentioned by cisgender students, GD students, and GD staff and related to instances where respondents felt elated in their physical appearance in school contexts such as clothing, uniforms, and binders.
It is interesting to note the lack of dominance of this theme when compared to previous euphoria research (Austin et al., 2022; Beischel et al., 2021) finding internal positive states derived from appearance and pride being a major theme throughout euphoria research. The discrepant findings in this study may be explained in part by questioning participants about euphoric experiences specifically in school contexts, which are largely social institutions. However, the predominance of external sources of euphoria from specific aspects of schools in this sample (such as social supports and school practices) highlights various features under the control of schools that endorse feelings of health, well-being, and positivity in identifying as an LGBTQ+ community member. In line with previous recommendations in euphoria research (Austin et al., 2022; Beischel et al., 2021; Benestad, 2010; Bradford et al., 2021; Chen et al., 2016), these findings offer important implications for schools and school leadership in strategies that promote LGBTQ+ positivity.
Policy Implications
Overall, the current study offers several practical implications and strategies for developing school contexts that endorse positive emotions and a sense of well-being related to LGBTQ+ and gender-diverse community membership for students, staff, and parents. In particular, the study highlights the importance of school-wide training, professional development, and inclusive school policies which are endorsed or co-developed by diverse LGBTQ+ school community members. Given the dominance of social sources of euphoria for students, staff, and parents, and the potential for social sources of euphoria to be derived from all members of school communities, inclusive school-wide policy and training should focus on raising awareness and normalisation of LGBTQ+ people generally. These strategies should include discussions of sexual orientation diversity and social affirmations of diverse gender identities. Practical school strategies endorsed by students, staff, and parents of diverse gender identities similarly include the representation of LGBTQ+ identities in school curriculums and activities. These include the celebration of LGBTQ+ -related awareness days such as IDAHOBIT and GSAs as official school-sanctioned spaces representative of LGBTQ+ identities. Additionally, school-wide approaches should include LGBTQ+ -related curriculums relevant to student, staff, and parent identities including inclusive sex education and LGBTQ+-inclusive lessons for students, activities and lessons inclusive of LGBTQ+ parents and their families, and schools that facilitate professional development and space for staff to develop and implement LGBTQ+-inclusive curriculums.
Limitations
While the study offered valuable insights into the sources of euphoria for LGBTQ+ students, staff, and parents in school contexts, there were several limitations inherent in the study. First, the study utilised snowballing and convenience sampling to recruit participants. Although this enabled a large number of responses to be collected, caution must be taken when extending these findings to the LGBTQ+ community generally. It is possible, for example, that those who are members of specific LGBTQ+ social media groups are more likely to experience euphoria than other LGBTQ+ community members. Additionally, some themes may appear relatively small in some school community roles (e.g. GD parents) when compared to student roles. Such findings are not asserted for transferability, but to note the reported experiences of these participants within broader trends. Secondly, we note that concepts of euphoria are contested and may be understood differently by different participants. Indeed, several participants questioned the wording and use of gender euphoria. This may reflect differences in understanding of the term euphoria based on age and use of social media. Future research may expand on well-being in schools through the use of a different language understood by all school community members and gender identities. Third, the study used survey methodology to explore experiences of euphoria within schools, which may limit the depth of responses that some participants provide and remove the opportunity for prompting. While survey methodology has a cost in terms of depth, it also enabled a breadth of responses that is not always possible via other methodologies. This breadth was valuable in providing insight into the perceptions of LGBTQ+ people with a variety of gender identities and school roles. To pair breadth and depth, we recommend future research expand on this study by exploring euphoric experiences within schools via in-depth interviews. Further research should also consider exploring unexplored aspects of euphoric events in schools such as student popularity, and quantitative analyses of the potential for euphoric experiences and school practices to buffer or protect the influence of discriminatory experiences on health and wellbeing.
Conclusion
Schools can be challenging contexts for the LGBTQ+ community, with little research exploring how schools can act as supportive and affirming contexts. Our study highlights various ways schools can act as supportive contexts by exploring events and experiences in school environments that promote feelings of euphoria specifically related to identifying as an LGBTQ+ or gender-diverse community member. Participant responses highlighted various strategies that schools can adopt to encourage wellbeing in the LGBTQ+ community including supportive social contexts, gender-affirming practices, and LGBTQ+ -related curriculums or activities. Based on these findings, schools and policy makers should look to develop school-wide LGBTQ+-inclusive policies, practices, and interpersonal contexts to reform schools from challenging to supportive and affirming school environments. Future research should consider interdisciplinary research including in-depth interviews around youth euphorias in schools, especially for trans and gender-diverse LGBTQ+ community members.
Declarations
Ethics Approval
The questionnaire and methodology for this study were approved by the Human Research Ethics Committee of Macquarie University (Ethics approval number: 52021946530107).
Consent to Participate
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants in the study.
Consent for Publication
Informed consent to publish was obtained from all individual participants in the study.
Competing Interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
