Queering Institutions?: Sexual Identity in Public Education in a Canadian Context

Heather Shipley
{"title":"Queering Institutions?: Sexual Identity in Public Education in a Canadian Context","authors":"Heather Shipley","doi":"10.5406/FEMTEACHER.23.3.0196","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In April 2010, a series of proposed changes to the Ontario sex education curriculum for publicly-funded institutions within the province was announced. Within three days of that announcement, then premier of Ontario, Dalton McGuinty, put a hold on the proposed changes, stating that consideration of the multicultural and religiously diverse needs of the population was required before any changes were to go into effect (“McGuinty”). Since then, the Accepting Schools Act (regarding policies of nondiscrimination in publicly funded schools) has been introduced and hotly debated across the province, and a slightly revised curriculum was implemented in 2010 (to a lesser extent than originally proposed). I use the curriculum debate as an entryway to think about whether it is possible to queer public institutions, specifically asking whether we are capable of queering publicly funded education. Although much contemporary identity theory, and queer theory in particular, pushes boundaries of identity conformity and offers nuanced and complex pictures of the ways people live out their gendered and sexual identities, the gap between this cutting-edge research and the lived reality (here for youth) is demonstrated by ongoing negative responses to sexual or gender diversity. I argue that the consternation sexual and gender diversity elicits when introduced into sex education curriculum is a reflection of the resistance to destabilizing sexual identity within the institution of education. Incorporating Elizabeth Grosz’s theory of becoming and Brenda Cossman’s work on sexual citizenship, sexual identity destabilization within public education is critical because youth are in the process of becoming sexual citizens; and yet it is the space of becoming and of being in progress that elicits moral panic and resistance to this destabilization. Although identity theory and queer theory continue to push boundaries and ask challenging questions about what “normal” is and how “the normal” is continually redefined, there is still a large gap between these theoretical insights and the lived experience of identity difference. Surveys among youth in Canada, for example, regarding the experience of Queering Institutions?: Sexual Identity in Public Education in a Canadian Context","PeriodicalId":287450,"journal":{"name":"Feminist Teacher","volume":"29 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-01-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Feminist Teacher","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5406/FEMTEACHER.23.3.0196","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

In April 2010, a series of proposed changes to the Ontario sex education curriculum for publicly-funded institutions within the province was announced. Within three days of that announcement, then premier of Ontario, Dalton McGuinty, put a hold on the proposed changes, stating that consideration of the multicultural and religiously diverse needs of the population was required before any changes were to go into effect (“McGuinty”). Since then, the Accepting Schools Act (regarding policies of nondiscrimination in publicly funded schools) has been introduced and hotly debated across the province, and a slightly revised curriculum was implemented in 2010 (to a lesser extent than originally proposed). I use the curriculum debate as an entryway to think about whether it is possible to queer public institutions, specifically asking whether we are capable of queering publicly funded education. Although much contemporary identity theory, and queer theory in particular, pushes boundaries of identity conformity and offers nuanced and complex pictures of the ways people live out their gendered and sexual identities, the gap between this cutting-edge research and the lived reality (here for youth) is demonstrated by ongoing negative responses to sexual or gender diversity. I argue that the consternation sexual and gender diversity elicits when introduced into sex education curriculum is a reflection of the resistance to destabilizing sexual identity within the institution of education. Incorporating Elizabeth Grosz’s theory of becoming and Brenda Cossman’s work on sexual citizenship, sexual identity destabilization within public education is critical because youth are in the process of becoming sexual citizens; and yet it is the space of becoming and of being in progress that elicits moral panic and resistance to this destabilization. Although identity theory and queer theory continue to push boundaries and ask challenging questions about what “normal” is and how “the normal” is continually redefined, there is still a large gap between these theoretical insights and the lived experience of identity difference. Surveys among youth in Canada, for example, regarding the experience of Queering Institutions?: Sexual Identity in Public Education in a Canadian Context
酷儿的机构?:加拿大公共教育中的性别认同
2010年4月,安大略省公布了一系列针对省内公立机构的性教育课程改革提案。公告发布后不到三天,时任安大略省省长的道尔顿·麦坚迪(Dalton McGuinty)就搁置了拟议中的改革,他表示,在任何改革生效之前,都需要考虑到人口的多元文化和宗教多样性需求(“麦坚迪”)。从那时起,《接受学校法案》(acceptance Schools Act)(关于公立学校的非歧视政策)在全省范围内被引入并引发了激烈的争论,2010年,一份略有修改的课程被实施(程度比最初提议的要小)。我以课程辩论为切入点,思考是否有可能让公共机构变得酷儿,特别是问我们是否有能力让公共资助的教育变得酷儿。尽管许多当代身份理论,尤其是酷儿理论,突破了身份一致性的界限,并提供了人们如何活出自己的性别和性身份的微妙而复杂的图景,但这种前沿研究与生活现实(这里是针对年轻人的)之间的差距,体现在对性或性别多样性的持续负面反应上。我认为,性和性别多样性在引入性教育课程时引发的恐慌,反映了教育机构内部对不稳定的性别认同的抵制。结合Elizabeth Grosz的成为理论和Brenda Cossman关于性公民的工作,公共教育中的性身份不稳定是至关重要的,因为年轻人正处于成为性公民的过程中;然而,正是“成为”和“在进步”的空间引发了道德恐慌和对这种不稳定的抵制。尽管身份理论和酷儿理论不断突破界限,并提出了关于什么是“正常”以及如何不断重新定义“正常”的挑战性问题,但这些理论见解与身份差异的生活经验之间仍然存在很大差距。例如,对加拿大青年的调查,关于酷儿机构的经验?:加拿大公共教育中的性别认同
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信