The Sexual Citizenship beyond a Homophobic Panorama: What (im)possibilities of Social Justice in Schools?
Author(s):
Conference:
ECER 2014
Format:
Paper

Session Information

07 SES 08 A, Gender Identities and Education

Paper Session

Time:
2014-09-04
09:00-10:30
Room:
B004 Anfiteatro
Chair:
Francesca Gobbo

Contribution

Although educational studies have a long past in denouncing asymmetrical relations of access to resources, rights and full equality within the school, the truth is that the non-heterosexual young boys hardly are conceptualized as valid educational subjects or object of inclusive practices, appearing only in Psychology as victims (Rasmussen et al, 2004). The arrival of the multi/intercultural discussions in portuguese education did not contemplated sexual diversity and school education has been lived a cultural tension with the theme of (homo)sexual identity and orientation (Britzman, 1995), even nowadays it's possible to watch some micro-projects that express civic concerns against homophobic bullying (“It Gets Better”; “Inclusion”).

The reinvidication of LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) people for equal rights, as an expression of "sexual citizenship" (Lees, 2000) against a past of social injustice, has acquired, worlwide and in late decades, high visibility in media. In the educational field, although sex education in Portugal includes sexual orientation as a non-discriminatory criterion, cases of homophobic violence in schools tend, nationally (Pereira, 2009) and internationally (Pascoe, 2007), to persist. Internationally UNESCO report, entity connected to European Union – an ambiguous context of advances and simultaneous deficits around LGBT rights – elucidates that 70% of young european students (gay or not) affirm to be victims of this type of bullying. The European LGBT survey, elaborated by European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (2013), suggests that educational policies against bullying in all european countries must be stimulated in future.

The bullying, particularly the homophobic one, profoundly affects young students who does not fit in gender and/or sexual norms, in the perception of themselves as "human beings" and a wide understanding of “ways of living that count as «life»” (Butler, 2011: xxiv), even as their educational relations – engagement, achievement, commitment and opportunities of success –  and make them fall into gradual processes of disaffection and early school leaving (Caldas et al, 2012). The (homophobic) bullying does not only compromises the fundamental basic and human right to education as it also makes the public school respond as a democratic and safe place from violence, its historical equalitarian project of social justice and inclusion and the possibilities of citizenship that allows gay young people to be recognized as equal citizens.

This article is inspired by a survey conducted in a Master Research (Santos, 2013). I was interessed in tracing the expressions of homophobia in school panorama and the juvenile maneuvers to resist to it. I argued that homophobia is constitutive of masculinity discourses of school that tend to valorize heterosexuality as a capital. The survey also revealed a lack of educational discussion on the topic of homosexuality in curriculum and pedagogies and that "often silence people with different sexual orientations." (Santos, Fonseca & Araújo, 2012: 42). Nevertheless, the construction of sense of belonging to the cultures and gay communities (associations, coffee shops and bars) seems to be a young conciliatory prosecution with social (in)justice. The margins can represent here some possibilities for openness and social change (hooks, 1990).

Method

This is a study situated in an emerging paradigm, theoretically grounded by Sociology of Education and Youth and feminist and queer poststructuralist perspectives. Feminism and queer theory has alerted that science should have a intersectionality approach of discrimination against a certain kind of essencialism victimist that surrounds the good intentions of the Saviour Science (Spivak, 1998). In that sense, “social injustice” is multidimensional and people are simultaneously oppressors and oppressed according to their standpoints. We choose qualitative methodologies where the listening to the voices in direct discourse, without intermediaries or generalization’s concerns, would be indispensable, not to subscribe them linearly but to embark on a polyphonic debate, highlighting the intergroup tensions. Since we seek "the gathering of data through direct verbal interaction between individuals." (Cohen, Manion & Morrison, 2007: 351), we opted for semi-structured in-depth interviews that enabled a possibility of narrative extension. However, for a gradual confidence due to issues of potential sensitivity, we chose an ethnographic approach configured into small urban encounters and characterized by writing of field notes and participant observation (Silva, 2004). Seven subjects between 17-24 years old were chosen and 25 field notes were written. After data collection we interpreted and proceeded to content analysis. The content analysis has showed the framing of two particular aspects: a) a school panorama of homophobic bullying and b) particular ways of resisting to it and to face up their own sexual citizenship (young maneuvers). There were ethical concerns about anonymity, confidentiality, informed consent and protection from harm.

Expected Outcomes

School is a homophobic institution where the homophobic insult is very common. The insult is constitutive of masculinity discourses and produce an abject identity which nobody can identify to. That means that bullying affects every boy took strategically as gay and desumanize that ones who effectively are gay (Pascoe, 2007). The school still produces a sensation of heterosexuality that marginalize the opportunity for homosexual livings. As if that were not enough, the hard core of school institutions do not take homophobia as a serious problem not in curriculum not in pedagogic actions and teachers have a great taboo in approaching homosexuality issue in classroom as it has been demonstrated in scientific literature (Louro, 1997; Epstein & Johnson, 1998). However, beyond that homophobic panorama that make impossible the full exercise of citizenship, young boys present different senses for their particular citizenship. Using Max Weber’s idea of ideal types (Weber, 2005), we defined four types of (homos)sexual citizenships: a) pretending citizenships (Leandro and Manuel): working class young boys that reproduce gender norms against those gays/bissexuals that doesn't follow the hegemonic masculinity (“the foolish queens”); b) citizenships of respectability (Francisco and Rodrigo): young boys from middle classes with strong connections to LGBT activism which their engagement depends mainly on their economic resources; c) subaltern (or precarious) citizenships (Fábio): young boys who are the traditional victims of the homophobic physical aggressions telling stories of educational disaffection and social injustice and d) reclaimed (subversive or queer) citizenships (André): young boys passing their time in gay coffee shops and bars who tell oppositional discourses against schools and its heteronormativity through gay cultural expression (imagined violences). An aesthetic camp of the parodic queerness is a strategy to resist to compulsory heteromasculinity of a (still) deeply homophobic and social unjust society.

References

BRITZMAN, Deborah (1995). “What Is This Thing Called Love?”, In Taboo: The Journal of Culture and Education, nº 1, pp. 65-93. BUTLER, Judith (2011). “Introduction.”, In Bodies That Matter. On the discursive limits of “sex”. New York: Routledge, pp. xi-xxx. CALDAS, José; FONSECA, Laura; ALMEIDA, Sofia & ALMEIDA, Lígia (2012). “Escuela y Diversidad Sexual – ¿Que Realidad?”, In Educação em Revista, Belo Horizonte, v. 28, nº. 03, pp. 143-158. COHEN, Louis; MANION, Lawrence & MORISSON, Keith (2007). Research Methods in Education. London & New York: Routledge. EPSTEIN, Debbie & JOHNSON, Richard (1998). Schooling Sexualities. Buckingham: Open University Press. EUROPEAN UNION AGENCY FOR FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS (2013). EU LGBT survey: European Union lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender survey – Results at a glance. Available online at: http://fra.europa.eu/en/publication/ 2013/eu-lgbt-survey-european-union-lesbian-gay-bisexual-and-transgender-survey-results. hooks, bell (1990). “Choosing the Margin as a Space of Radical Openness.”, In Yearnings: Race, Gender and Cultural Politics, MA: South End Press, pp. 203-209. LEES, Sue (2000). “Sexuality and citizenship education.”, In Madeleine Arnot & Jo-Anne Dillabough (Eds.), Challenging democracy: International perspectives on gender, education and citizenship. London/New York: Routledge/Falmer, pp. 259-277. LOURO, Guacira Lopes (1997). Gênero, Sexualidade e Educação. Uma perspetiva pós-estruturalista. Petrópolis, RJ: Editora Vozes. PASCOE, Cheri Jo (2007). Dude, you’re a fag: masculinity and sexuality in high school. California: University of California Press. PEREIRA, Maria do Mar (2009). “Fazendo género na escola: uma análise performativa da negociação do género entre jovens.”, In ex æquo, n.º 20, pp. 113-127. RASMUSSEN, Mary Louise; ROFES, Eric & TALBURT, Susan (Eds.) (2004). Youth and Sexualities. Pleasure, Subversion, and Insubordination in and out of Schools. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. SANTOS, Hugo (2013). Um Desvio na Corrente que(er)stionando as Margens. Percursos escolares e culturas juvenis de rapazes não-heterossexuais. Tese de Mestrado: FPCEUP. SANTOS, Sofia Almeida; FONSECA, Laura & ARAÚJO, Helena Costa (2012). “Sex Education and the Views of Young People on Gender and Sexuality in Portuguese Schools.”, In Educação, Sociedade & Culturas, nº. 35, pp. 29-44. SILVA, Sofia Marques da (2004). “Doubts and Intrigues in Ethnographic Research.”, In European Educational Research Journal, vol. 3, nº. 3, pp. 566 -582. SPIVAK, Gayatri Chakravorty (1988). “Can the Subaltern Speak?”, In Cary Nelson & Larry Grossberg (Eds.), Marxism and the Interpretation of Culture. Basingstoke: Macmillan Education, pp. 271-313. UNESCO (2012). Review of Homophobic Bullying in Educational Institutions. Paris: UNESCO. WEBER, Max (2005). The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. New York: Routledge.

Author Information

Hugo Santos (presenting / submitting)
Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences of Oporto University
Ciências da Educação
Águas Santas, Maia
University of Porto
Faculty of Psychology and Education; CIIE
Porto
Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences of Oporto University, Portugal

Update Modus of this Database

The current conference programme can be browsed in the conference management system (conftool) and, closer to the conference, in the conference app.
This database will be updated with the conference data after ECER. 

Search the ECER Programme

  • Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
  • Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
  • Search for authors and in the respective field.
  • For planning your conference attendance, please use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference and the conference agenda provided in conftool.
  • If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.