Background:

Sexuality has long been associated with the private realm (Sedgwick 1990).  Public/private boundaries have ensured policing of ‘what can be said and done in public, what can be done in private but not spoken of in public’ (Berlant 1997, p.60).  These boundaries disproportionately police those who do not conform to the hegemonic norm of heterosexuality (VanEvery and Wallis 2000).  In most schooling contexts, sexuality has been constituted as an ‘uncomfortable’ topic (Youdell 2005).  While much research has addressed homophobia, transphobia and heteronormativity in secondary school contexts (Ages 12-18) across the globe, a much smaller body of research has focused on primary school contexts (Ages 4-12).  Public/private boundaries work in particular ways in primary schools. Individualised discourses of childhood innocence, protection and age-appropriateness are prevalent and serve as a significant barrier and justification for silence and inaction around sexualities (VanEvery and Wallis 2000). These invisible boundaries and silences support heteronormativity, homophobia and transphobia and close down opportunities for education around gender and sexuality diversity (Atkinson and DePalma 2008).  Furthermore, several contexts are complicated by the power of ‘religious freedom’ and religious ideals around sexuality.  This is particularly potent in the Irish context where 96% of Irish primary schools are governed by religious patrons.   

But schools do not operate in a vacuum and changing societal discourses permeate school contexts in a myriad of ways.  In recent years, many neo-liberal and neo-conservative nation states have introduced marriage for same-sex couples.  Since the Netherlands in 2001, fourteen countries and several sub-national jurisdictions have altered civil marriage legislation to include same-sex couples.  In many ways, ‘marriage equality’ has become a symbol of progressive change in relation to sexuality diversity across Europe and beyond.  In May 2015, Ireland became the first country in the world to vote in a constitutional referendum in favour of marriage between same-sex couples.  Alongside this, several governmental initiatives have instigated some changes in direction for Irish schools.  In 2013, the Department of Education and Skills published anti-bullying procedures for primary and second-level schools.  This requires schools to include explicit reference to and document strategies for dealing with homophobic and transphobic bullying.  Teachers union and advocacy groups have produced guidelines for teachers in addressing homophobic and transphobic bullying and, more recently, resource packs for making sexuality diversity visible in primary and secondary school classrooms. 

Purpose and Research Question

Conducted in May and June 2015 during the height of the Marriage Equality campaign and following some policy and resource changes outlined above, this study captured a unique moment in the changing landscape of the relationship between sexuality and schooling.  The overall research question guiding this study was: What are the perspectives of primary school leaders, teachers and parents on gender and sexuality diversity?  This paper provides new insight into the co-existence of discourses of ‘progress’ and ‘innocence’ in primary schools and thus contributes to European and international debates about the politics of sexuality and schooling.

Theoretical Framework

This paper draws upon queer theory in order to grapple with the simultaneously interconnected and detached discourses of ‘innocence’ and ‘progress’.  Elizabeth Freeman (2010) alerts us to the ‘chrononormative’ (chronological/normative) expectations that underpin sexuality.  In the relationship between sexuality and schooling, such chrononormative logics are mobilised to preserve (heteronormative) childhood ‘innocence’ and delay sexual diversity and fluidity.  Through metaphors such as ‘growing sideways’ and ‘backwards birth’ Kathryn Bond Stockton’s (2009) interrupts the linear temporality of the innocent child ‘in waiting’ and imperatives to look to the future.  Drawing upon these queer theories facilitates rich and generative engagement with a unique crucible of discourses of ‘innocence’ and ‘progress’ as they circulate in primary schools.

Atkinson, E. and DePalma, R. (2008) Invisible Boundaries: Addressing Sexualities Equality in Children’s Worlds, Stoke on Trent: Trentham Books. Berlant, L. (1997) The Queen of America Goes to Washington City, Durham: Duke University Press. Bond Stockton, K. The Queer Child: Growing up Sideways in the Twentieth Century, Durham: Duke University Press. Freeman, E. (2010) Time Binds: Queer Temporalities and Queer Histories, Durham: Duke University Press. Jackson, A. Y. and Mazzei, L. A. (2012) Thinking with Theory in Qualitative Research: Viewing Data Across Multiple Perspectives, London: Routledge. Mayo, C. (2013) 'Unsettled Relations: Schools, Gay Marriage and Educating for Sexuality', Educational Theory, 63(5), 543 - 558. VanEvery, J. and Wallis, A. (2000) 'Sexuality in the Primary School', Sexualities, 3(4), 409-423. Youdell, D. (2005) 'Sex-gender-sexuality: how sex, gender and sexuality constellations are constituted in secondary schools', Gender and Education, 17(3), 249-270.