You seem to have methodological concerns on how the research was conducted that lead you to declare it "meaningless". Can you share your concerns and the process you went through to come to this conclusion? My analysis shows that this is a trustworthy and transparent piece of research.
The article that was linked to makes a clear statement about the Margin of Error (MoE) for the Virginia element of this study. The MoE takes the 234 respondent sample size into account and indicates the statistical chance of a number being wrong:
The 2009 GLSEN survey features responses from 7,261 lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender students, ages 13-21, from all 50 states and Washington, D.C. Of those, 234 students are from Virginia. The margin of error for Virginia-based findings is 7 percent.
Coming to a Margin of Error calculation is a well established science
. The seven percent margin of error means that the percentages quoted in the article may be off by only +/-7% of the number in question. Let's take the numbers in the article:
Among the conclusions drawn by the survey: 85 percent of gay students regularly heard homophobic remarks; 37 percent were physically harassed due to their sexual orientation; and 21 percent were physically assaulted.
This means that assuming the maximum margin of error in both directions the 85 percent of gay students who regularly heard homophobic remarks could be as low as 78% or as high as 92%, that the 37 percent who were physically harassed due to their sexual orientation could be as low as 30% and as high as 44%, and that the 21 percent who were physically assaulted could be as low as 14% or as high as 28%. It's most probable that the true number is very close to the actual number reported. Any way you read them, these number are far from meaningless.
The stated purpose of the study
is to understand the experience of gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender youth in school (see highlighted below) so it seems entirely appropriate and reasonable that they would recruit them as their target respondents rather than kids who aren't gay lesbian, bixexual or transgender. GLSEN has been around for 20 years and...:
For 10 of those years, GLSEN has been documenting the school experiences of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) youth: the prevalence of anti-LGBT language and victimization, the effect that these experiences have on LGBT studentsí achievement and the utility of interventions to both lessen the negative effects of a hostile climate and promote a positive educational experience. In 1999, GLSEN identified the need for national data on the experiences of LGBT students and launched the first National School Climate Survey (NSCS). At the time, the school experiences of LGBT youth were under-documented and nearly absent from national studies on adolescents. The NSCS remains one of the few studies to examine the school experiences of LGB students nationally and is the only national study to include transgender students. The results of the survey have been vital to GLSENís understanding of the issues that LGBT students face, thereby informing our ongoing work to ensure safe and affirming schools for all.
Based on my review, this appears to be a long running and well respected study with a sound methodology and which is widely cited in the broader scientific literature. I'm interested in hearing the reasons you dismiss it so completely.
There are plenty of studies that look at bullying in school age children
that find the bullying of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender kids and people perceived to be lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender in the broader school age population. There are also plenty of studies that show kids are bullied because of race.
So far all you've done is make an assertion with no data or analysis to support it. If you have a *scientific* argument to make, please make it so it can be part of the discussion.