Schools are predominantly and actively heteronormative spaces, within this a teacher is an awkward combination of asexual, heterosexuality (Llewellyn, 2022, 2023). As such, historically LGB teachers have struggled with their identity formation particularly around the discordance of private and professional identities (Connell 2015; Neary 2013). However, with recent movements towards LGBT inclusion in aspects of English education policy and practice, recent research has suggested that there are more spaces for LGB teachers, to inhabit an LGB identity within their schools (Llewellyn, 2022, 2023; Brett 2024), although this position is not equally available across schools.

Within this body of research, there is a growing awareness of differences within the LGBT categories (for example Brett, 2024), and some awareness of intersectional identities, however, there is very little acknowledgement of a teachers’ social class and how this may impact decision-making processes, knowledge formation, and identity negotiation. This is important, as teaching in the UK is largely a middle-class profession, both in terms of who constitutes the profession and how the profession is produced. This is prominent within official discourses, where recent governments have sought to ‘make up the middle classes’ with various strategies including, the promotion of a “standard English” (Cushing, 2021). These approaches are in accordance with previous governments, such as New Labour (1997-2008) who worked to re-socialize working-class parents within narratives of middle-class norms (Gewirtz, 2000). However, crucially these strategies are constructed through the appearance of “classlessness” (Reay, 1998), or around ‘appropriate’ aspirations of levelling up. As such, there is largely an invisibility to a teacher’s social class, within schools, educational policy and within public rhetoric.

Arguably, this is a vital discussion at this current time, as some level of equality, diversity and inclusion is expected in English schools. Although, how this is enacted will take on specific forms and practices in each location. Therefore, the impact on ‘working class’ LGBT teachers is potentially precarious.These discussions are also relevant more globally as LGBT people are in a precarious position, where increased rights and laws, sit alongside a rise in populism and ‘anti-woke’ rhetoric.

Specifically, schools are institutions designed to encourage conformity and normalisation (Walshaw 2007). In addition, the English education systems operates under the lens of neoliberalism, hence there is an expectation of the autonomous entrepreneurial individual (Rose, 1999). As such, LGBT inclusion is often actioned by individuals, rather than an organised school response (Llewellyn, 2023).

In relation to sexuality, whilst there is a movement towards treating all people as human beings, neoliberalism’s take on sexuality has been described by Duggan (2003) as “homonormative” and Puar (2017) as “homonational”, where there is a contracted version of liberation for LGBT people. As such, arguably state power encourages a very specific appropriate kind of sexuality, that is presented as a normal, family and a loving relationship. In a societal sense, this can be seen through the premise of equal rights, or the framing of equal love.

Moreover, power operates within locations (Yuval-Davis, 2006), and is a strategy within systems. Where there is power there is also resistance, and individuals have a constrained agency. However, resistance – such as creating a LGB teacher identity within a heteronormative space - does not eradicate norms, but instead creates new sets of norms (Jakobsen, 1998). Furthermore, structures facilitate a ‘network of norms’ (Jakobsen, 1998), which constitutes normativities.

If schools, on the whole, are no longer overtly homophobic, and some levels of LGBT inclusion are supported, the question becomes what are the new normativities that are created, with regards to LGBT, EDI and the professional LGB teacher? And are these supportive of everyone?

This research thus explores the case of a single, gay, male, teacher from a working-class background, who teaches in a secondary school (ages 11 – 18) in the North of England. Through the use of a semi-structured interview, an email exchange, and Foucauldian theory, the article examines John’s discursive constructions of being a teacher in two schools - in relation to his sexuality, and his subsequent teacher identity. It therefore considers how someone fits (or not) within the available (or not) discursive norms of an LGB teacher identity. John’s interview was part of a larger project, where 50 LGBT teachers were interviewed in the summer of 2020. These teachers were recruited via social media advertising, therefore there was a mixture of targeted and snowball sampling, which is commonplace in LGBT research that advocates social justice (Bell, 1997). Participants were asked about their experiences through a range of topics, the interviews were also active (Holstein & Gubrium, 2003) such that the other areas could be led by the participant. John’s interview lasted one hour, 14 minutes. Prior to the interview John had sent an email with an attached Word document entitled ‘Homophobic experiences within my fifteen-year career as a secondary school teacher’. Analysis was conducted through immersion in the data, multiple readings, and a movement between inductive and deductive coding. John’s interview stood out as different to many of the other participants who routinely drew on narratives of progress. Whilst many of the participants had experienced some levels of homophobia, John was unique in routinely experiencing sustained levels of homophobia. Hence, further analysis of John’s interview, and the email document were conducted, in relation to a Foucauldian lens and subsequent discursive framings. In the interview, John describes himself as “a teenage pregnancy product, council estate, domestic violence in the family” – his route into teaching was through college and ‘non-standard’ qualifications. He also positions himself as resilient “I was determined that I wouldn’t go to the scrapheap”. Furthermore, he references the multiple levels of leadership he has held. John describes the two secondary schools he has worked in as within “economically deprived postal codes and low aspiration” within this, he states he has “gone from a wholly white demographic to a non-white demographic. But the homophobia is consistent across the two”. An ethic of care (Christians, 2000) was adhered to throughout the research, with particular regards to John’s wellbeing.

By examining John’s construction of sexuality, and his professional teacher identity, I demonstrate how the position of the LGB teacher found in recent literature (Llewellyn, 2022, 2023) largely centres around a homonormative middle class LGBT identity, and that this may be discordant for John. I do this by drawing on John’s construction of his students, his school, sexuality, and his role. Whilst John’s own positioning shares commonalities to the neoliberal teacher of previous research (Llewellyn, 2022, 2023), such that he claims responsibility for practices in school, it is different in that whilst John is aware of his individual rights, to some extent he is encompassed by the view that sexuality is problematic, and this is a problem he needs to fix. This is demonstrated through his concern around how he is sexualised, and his awareness that this may be read as ‘his fault’. Beyond this, there is no place in schools for pride or celebration of sexuality or for staff or children to exhibit sexuality. Furthermore, in contrast to literature where the LGBT professional identity is present, there is a clearer separation between children and adults/ teachers. This is compounded by John’s school, who whilst being reactive to homophobia, advocate John’s role in determining punishments. As such, John is always the responsible neoliberal teacher, and thus why he feels he is “fighting against homophobia constantly, but not actually having any impact.” It is important to note here the level of constant homophobia experienced by John, one student even taunts - “I’d hate to be gay, wouldn’t you? I’d kill myself!” Therefore, why, John states “I can no longer be a secondary school teacher, cos I’m openly gay”. As such, I suggest the LGBT professional identity may not be as available to a single, gay, male teacher from a working-class background.

Bell, D. (1997). Sex lives and audiotape: Geography, sexuality and undergraduate dissertations. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 21(3), 411–417. Brett, A. (2024). Under the spotlight: exploring the challenges and opportunities of being a visible LGBT+ teacher. Sex Education, 24(1), 61-75. Connell, C. (2015). School’s Out: Gay and Lesbian Teachers in the Classroom. University of California Press Christians, Clifford G. 2000. "Ethics and politics in qualitative research." In Handbook of qualitative research 2, edited by Norman Denzin and Yvonna Lincoln, 133-155. Sage Cushing, I. (2021). ‘Say it like the Queen’: the standard language ideology and language policy making in English primary schools. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 34(3), 321-336. Duggan, L. (2003). The twilight of equality? Neoliberalism, cultural politics, and the attack on democracy. Beacon Press. Gewirtz, S. (2001). Cloning the Blairs: New Labour's programme for the re-socialization of working-class parents. Journal of Education Policy, 16(4), 365-378. Holstein, J., & Gubrium, J. F. (2003). Active interviewing. In J. Holstein & J. F. Gubrium (Eds.), Postmodern Interviewing (pp. 67-80). Sage Jakobsen, J. R. (1998). Queer is? Queer does? Normativity and the problem of resistance. GLQ: A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies, 4(4), 511-536. Llewellyn, A. (2022). Bursting the ‘childhood bubble’: reframing discourses of LGBTQ+ teachers and their students. Sport, Education and Society, 1-14. Llewellyn, A. (2023). “Because I live it.”: LGB teacher identities, as professional, personal, and political. Frontiers in Education. 8, 1-12 Neary, A. (2013). Lesbian and Gay Teachers’ Experiences of ‘Coming Out’ in Irish Schools. British Journal of Sociology of Education. 34(4), 583-602. Puar, J. K. (2017). Terrorist assemblages: Homonationalism in queer times. Duke University Press. Reay, D. (1998). Rethinking social class: Qualitative perspectives on class and gender. Sociology, 32(2), 259-275. Rose, N. (1999). Governing the soul (2nd ed.). Free Association Books. Walshaw, M. (2007). Working with Foucault in education. Sense Publishing. Yuval-Davis, N. (2006) Belonging and the politics of belonging. Patterns of Prejudice, 40(3), 197-214