As LGBTQIA+ individuals navigate society's expectations, they must constantly negotiate between their personal identities and societal norms. The way institutions treat them can be both empowering and disempowering, depending on how they are viewed.
Some institutions may support the community while others might have discriminatory policies that make life difficult for those who identify as queer. This paper will explore how LGBT youth philosophically assess the ethical legitimacy of institutional practices affecting sexual and gender minorities.
One way to examine this issue is through the lens of moral philosophy. Moral philosophy considers what makes an action right or wrong, good or bad, and whether it aligns with universal principles such as justice and equality. It looks at why people do what they do and how society responds to those actions. In the context of LGBTQIA+ rights, morality often involves determining whether certain behaviors should be allowed, forbidden, or punished.
Many argue that same-sex marriage is immoral because it violates natural law. Natural Law Theory holds that humans should follow divine principles created by God. Since marriage has traditionally been defined as a union between one man and one woman, allowing same-sex couples to marry would go against nature. On the other hand, some believe that love should not be restricted based on sex or gender identity; instead, we should celebrate all forms of relationship. Therefore, LGBTQIA+ people may view marriage laws as unethical if they exclude nontraditional partnerships.
Another ethical consideration relates to employment discrimination. Discrimination in hiring decisions can lead to injustice when qualified individuals are denied job opportunities due to their sexual orientation or gender identity. Employers may argue that hiring someone who identifies outside of traditional norms could create tension among coworkers, but LGBTQIA+ youth may see this practice as unfair and unjust. They might also point out that discrimination leads to poverty, which further exacerbates social inequality.
Some institutions take active steps towards inclusion and acceptance.
Colleges like Harvard University have implemented policies designed explicitly for transgender students and faculty members. These initiatives aim to make campus life more accessible and equitable for those who identify differently from cisgender norms. This approach aligns with Utilitarianism theory's focus on maximizing pleasure while minimizing pain. By providing resources such as housing accommodations, bathrooms, and healthcare benefits, these schools prioritize the well-being of LGBTQIA+ communities over abstract principles.
LGBTQIA+ individuals must consider various moral philosophies when assessing institutional practices affecting them. While some may argue against certain behaviors, others promote inclusivity and equality. Institutions like Harvard show how an institution's commitment to justice can positively impact its community members. Still, there is much work to be done before all societal institutions support queer people equally.
In what ways do LGBT youth philosophically assess the ethical legitimacy of institutional practices affecting sexual and gender minorities?
The conceptualization and evaluation of institutional practices that affect sexual and gender minorities is a complex issue that often involves multiple factors beyond just the physical manifestation of an individual's identity. In recent years, there has been growing attention paid to the effects of these systems on the lives of LGBT youth, who may face unique challenges due to their marginalized position within society.