LGBTQ parents do not “make” our kids LGBTQ, but research has shown we may be more flexible than cisgender, straight parents about kids’ gender socialization. A new study finds, however, that some LGBTQ parents still feel invested in children’s gender conformity, feeling tension between supporting their children and protecting them from external harm.
Regardless of whether a child is cis or trans, “their parents will likely play a large role in their gender development and socialization as well as in their experience navigating shifts in their gender identities over time,” say Maddie T. Logan, Amy Heberle, and Abbie E. Goldberg of Clark University, authors of “‘I want to support her but also want to protect her’: The gendered parenting practices of LGBTQ+ parents” (Children and Youth Services Review, v. 169, 2025).
For the paper, the researchers focused on a subset from a larger study of 540 LGBTQ parents. In the larger group, most parents said they had little to no investment in their child’s conformity to traditional gender norms and were open to their children expressing themselves in gender nonconforming ways. Forty of the parents, however, said they were invested in their child’s gender conformity, and the researchers sought to learn more about how that smaller group described that investment and the types of approaches to gender socialization they followed.
While those 40 parents were concerned about their children’s psychological safety and need for authentic self-expression, the researchers found, they also worried about the risks their children would face if they had nonconforming gender presentations. This was especially true for parents of boys, for whom gender nonconformity was seen as riskier. Such concerns were also often exacerbated for parents whose local communities or extended families were perceived as less supportive, and for parents of children with multiple marginalized identities.
In some cases, parents’ own experiences of stigma, bullying, and trauma led to concerns about what their children might experience. For others, however, their experiences (or those of a partner) exploring their own gender made them more flexible about their children’s gender identities and expressions.
Many parents, though, worried that their children would be at greater external risk for gender nonconformity because they were children of queer parents, and some expressed concern that queerness in their children would reinforce negative stereotypes about queer parents. Even so, “Most parents in this study did not appear to have a strong active desire to force gender conformity on their children; in contrast, many simply seemed to hope that gender conformity would happen on its own and would feel right for their children.” At the same time, many also said they valued their children’s authentic self-expression and would be supportive if their children expressed gender nonconformity.
In general, though, the parents in the study “expressed a practice of restraint in terms of their approach to their child’s gender socialization,” letting the children “lead the way” and not actively encouraging cross-gender activities or expression. This restrained approach, the authors caution, implies “that providing gender conforming clothing and toys is a neutral act and providing nonconforming clothing and toys is an act of parental intrusion.” Although this may be well-intended, they say, it implies that the parents don’t see “socialization into the gender binary as an active, non-neutral process that they themselves are participating in.” This approach also assumes that “children would express [gender nonconforming] desires on their own, should they be relevant—which may not be the case depending on personality differences and comfort levels among children.”
Parents like the ones in this study may benefit from education about how they may be unintentionally reinforcing a gender binary and about “the potential advantages to their children of greater active support for gender diversity,” the authors write. This should ideally be done, however, “with a serious understanding and consideration of the very real risks these parents are navigating in raising their children as queer parents and the very real risks to gender nonconforming people in certain geographic areas.” Furthermore, they say, all parents, LGBTQ+ and not, should be made aware of both the risks when a child’s gender diversity is not actively supported or encouraged, and the positive outcomes when it is affirmed. [See, among other resources, the Family Acceptance Project.]
The researchers do note some limitations of their study, whose participants were largely (though not exclusively) White, upper-middle class, cisgender women. Further research with a more diverse group of participants would be helpful, they note, as would research looking at why these 40 LGBTQ+ parents who were more invested in their children’s gender conformity differ from the larger group of 500 LGBTQ+ parents who said they were less invested.
Nevertheless, the authors assert, “there is no ‘one size fits all’ approach to gender socialization among LGBTQ+ parents,” and it is important that LGBTQ+ parents have resources to understand and support their children’s gender development “while also being met with compassion and understanding regarding the unique risks and tensions they face as parents.”
