Throughout history the Canadian education system has been utilized as a means to instil societal values and reproduce cultural norms. Researchers have referred to this phenomenon as the hidden curriculum (Jay, 2003). This hidden curriculum serves to secure the privilege of the dominant culture while subsequently marginalizing minority individuals. Normative discourses of gender and sexuality are promoted to students through the process of socialization. The process of constructing lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer/questioning (LGBTQ) individuals as deviating from the heterosexual norm is referred to as heteronormativity. Furthermore, the implication that heterosexual orientations and relationships are normal and superior to those with same-sex attraction is defined as heterosexism (Smith, 2004). Heteronormativity, heterosexism, negative attitudes and prejudice against LGBTQ individuals are prevailing issues within the Canadian education system (Wells, 2011). The reproduction of dominant gender and sexuality discourses and negative attitudes towards LGBTQ individuals within Canadian secondary schools has adverse effects on the experiences of sexual minority and gender variant youth. The adoption of LGBTQ inclusive student groups in secondary schools aims to increase LGBTQ visibility and improve outcomes for sexual minority and gender variant students. The presence of heteronormative and heterosexist discourses in Canadian schools, although pervasive, has gone unquestioned.
…show more content…
The perpetuation of heteronormativity in educational institutions silences, excludes, and erases sexual minority and gender variant students and faculty (Macintosh, 2007). There are several avenues through which schools reinforce the status of heterosexuality as being normal and natural. This occurs mainly through the process of gender socialization and the construction of minority sexual orientations as inferior (Walton, 2004). Ways in which heterosexuality is validated in education include placing the focus of sex education classes on pregnancy and straight sexual mechanics; pervasive discourse on heterosexual teenage relationships; the feature of heterosexual relationships in media images, fictional stories and textbook representations; and the heterosexual dominance of school events such as school dances and proms (Walton, 2004). An example of the exclusion of LGBTQ individuals from school learning materials is the Surrey Book Ban of 1997. James Chamberlain, an educator in British Columbia, introduced three books featuring same-sex families to his classroom that were subsequently prohibited from classroom use by the Surrey School District (Smith, 2004). This ban prompted members of the school community and an author of one of the books to propose a Charter challenge to the British Columbia Supreme Court stating that this ban was unconstitutional. This challenge was accepted in 1998 on the basis that this ban …show more content…
There has been a growing general concern about school safety and the bullying of students that has resulted in important political openings. However, the political, institutional, cultural and social pressures that reproduce dominant gender and sexuality discourses sustain caution among educators—even those who believe that change is crucial (Rayside, 2014). As a result safe schools policies, public discussions and anti-bullying programs have continuously excluded the issue of homophobia (Walton, 2004). Bullying typically refers to a relation of power between one or more individuals over another with repetitive attacks that are intended to harm (Walton, 2004). However, the power of heteronormativity has largely been ignored. LGBTQ students are subject to accusations of deviance, stigmatization, social invisibility, and marginalization while discussion on these subjects is taboo and often prohibited (Walton, 2004). Students who do not conform to dominant constructions of gender and sexuality are subject to a pervasive threat of
The perpetuation of heteronormativity in educational institutions silences, excludes, and erases sexual minority and gender variant students and faculty (Macintosh, 2007). There are several avenues through which schools reinforce the status of heterosexuality as being normal and natural. This occurs mainly through the process of gender socialization and the construction of minority sexual orientations as inferior (Walton, 2004). Ways in which heterosexuality is validated in education include placing the focus of sex education classes on pregnancy and straight sexual mechanics; pervasive discourse on heterosexual teenage relationships; the feature of heterosexual relationships in media images, fictional stories and textbook representations; and the heterosexual dominance of school events such as school dances and proms (Walton, 2004). An example of the exclusion of LGBTQ individuals from school learning materials is the Surrey Book Ban of 1997. James Chamberlain, an educator in British Columbia, introduced three books featuring same-sex families to his classroom that were subsequently prohibited from classroom use by the Surrey School District (Smith, 2004). This ban prompted members of the school community and an author of one of the books to propose a Charter challenge to the British Columbia Supreme Court stating that this ban was unconstitutional. This challenge was accepted in 1998 on the basis that this ban …show more content…
There has been a growing general concern about school safety and the bullying of students that has resulted in important political openings. However, the political, institutional, cultural and social pressures that reproduce dominant gender and sexuality discourses sustain caution among educators—even those who believe that change is crucial (Rayside, 2014). As a result safe schools policies, public discussions and anti-bullying programs have continuously excluded the issue of homophobia (Walton, 2004). Bullying typically refers to a relation of power between one or more individuals over another with repetitive attacks that are intended to harm (Walton, 2004). However, the power of heteronormativity has largely been ignored. LGBTQ students are subject to accusations of deviance, stigmatization, social invisibility, and marginalization while discussion on these subjects is taboo and often prohibited (Walton, 2004). Students who do not conform to dominant constructions of gender and sexuality are subject to a pervasive threat of