The Gay, Lesbian & Straight Education Network (GLSEN) is an organization dedicated to creating safe environments for students in the queer community. Recently, GLSEN released a new study about the effects of homophobia in kindergarten through 6th grade students. This paper, entitled “Playgrounds and Prejudice: Elementary School Climate in the United States,” is the first study to ever look into homophobia at such a young age. This paper brings attention to an issue that may have been previously overlooked; and has the potential to stop homophobia in classrooms.
Executive director of GLSEN, Eliza Byard, finds this study important because “School climate and victimization can affect students’ educational outcomes and personal development at every grade level” (GLSEN). In elementary school, one would not expect children to have any conception of sexuality, let alone the differences in sexual preference. According to the GLSEN study, the main form of “homophobia” with elementary students involves gender non-conformity. Up to ten percent 3rd-6th grade students admit to not conforming to traditional gender roles (GLSEN). Most of these students avoid going to school because they do not feel comfortable in their educational environment. A survey of teachers shows that only 34% of elementary educators “engaged in efforts to create a safe and supportive classroom environment for gender nonconforming students” (GLSEN). Children at this age are just beginning to get to know and understand themselves; so, it is extremely unfortunate for any child to feel uncomfortable in a place where they spend such a large portion of their day.
An obvious question would be, “Why do gender nonconforming children feel unwelcome in the classroom environment?” Many would be surprised to discover that children, even at this young of an age, are capable of bullying. The most common forms of bullying are name-calling and language bias such as “That’s gay!” or “You’re a fag!” (GLSEN). It really is no wonder that these children don’t feel like they are in a safe space. Some people blame this homophobic behavior on the way a child is taught about family diversity. According to the study, most children have been informed that “there are many different kinds of families,” but very few are taught, “some families have two dads or two moms” (GLSEN). In fact, many are taught the complete opposite. In today’s society, there is an idea of compulsory heterosexuality, by which people believe “that women are ‘innately sexually oriented’ toward men,” or that “the lesbian [or gay] choice is simply an acting-out of bitterness toward men” (Rich). This opinion is actually very current in society, and it is what many children are raised to believe. So, of course, a child might be confused if they come across this situation with another child’s family, before being taught about the LGBTQ community; and it is this confusion that often leads to bullying, or other homophobic behaviors.
The problem now becomes how the elementary school system can help to end the homophobia. Many schools enforce a zero tolerance policy for any bullying and/or hate crimes. However, some individuals argue that “The zero tolerance approach has taken over the good senses of the educational and legislative establishments,” because plastering anti-bullying posters around a school campus is not going to stop the harassment, which at root is a “psychological concept” (Stein, p.30). Through GLSEN’s study, it was confirmed that even though a majority of elementary educators feel “obligated to ensure a safe learning environment for gender nonconforming students,” most do not feel comfortable discussing the concept of being gay with their students. So, how will the teasing ever cease if the children fail to be educated? It is also important to keep in mind that name-calling in kindergarten could turn into full on hate crimes in high school. GLSEN’s investigation on homophobia in elementary school is certainly eye opening, but what matters most is what society choses to do with this evidence. Children spend an average of 35 hours at school each week; they should be able to feel comfortable in their learning environment.
Link:
Bibliography:
"GLSEN Releases Groundbreaking Study of Bias, Bullying and Homophobia in Grades K-6." Gay, Lesbian & Straight Education Network. Ed. Andy Marra. 18 Jan. 2012. Web. 25 Jan. 2012.
Rich, Adrienne. "Compulsory Heterosexuality and Lesbian Existence." Print. In Powers of Desire: The Politics of Sexuality. By Ann Sniton and Sharon Thompson. New York, 1983. Print.
Stein, Nan. "Bullying, Harassment and Violence Among Students." Print. Rpt. in The Radical Teacher: Teaching Beyond "Tolerance" University of Illinois, 2007. 30-35. Print.
While I feel the topic you are addressing in this post is very significant and needs to be addressed immediately, it is still a bit unclear to me how the researchers from GLSEN are defining "gender non-conformity" and what basis they are using to determine that these 10% of 3rd-6th graders qualify as non-conforming. How deep does that category go? Is it solely for children who do not see themselves as male or female or does this go on to include tomboys or boys who don't like sports? I'm just curious as to where the line is drawn in the decision of who is counted in these surveys. One point of yours that I really agree with is your reference to Stein and the point of "zero tolerance" policies. I think the reason these sort of policies don't really work overall is because these kinds of policies group all bullying together rather than addressing the underlying issue of why the bullying is occurring. As Stein puts it, "sometimes egregious behaviors are framed as bullying when in fact they may constitute illegal sexual or gender harassment or even hazing or assault." (Stein p.31) Although no forms of bullying should be allowed to continue, it is important that acts of sexual or gender violence be dealt with separately because these kinds of problems require different techniques to resolve than one would use for a normal bullying situation.
ReplyDeleteStein, Nan. "Bullying, Harassment and Violence Among Students." Print. Rpt. in The Radical Teacher: Teaching Beyond "Tolerance" University of Illinois, 2007. 30-35. Print.
Homophobia among today’s youth is indeed causing feelings of unrest among the LGBTQ community as well as their allies. This oppression is supposed to have begun in the home of a child, and then expands into the classroom. In this comment, I would like to analyze Barbara Smith’s “Homophobia: Why Bring it Up?” and address how homophobia in elementary schools is leading to several misconceptions and destructive attitudes among the adults of the LGBTQ community.
ReplyDeleteBarbara Smith writes about her life as an active Black feminist, “committed to struggling against racial, sexual, heterosexual, and class oppression.” But in her work, the main focus is on homophobia, which she describes as usually being the “last oppression to be mentioned, the last to be taken seriously, and therefore the last to go” (99). With bullying starting at such a young age, tolerance for LGBTQ individuals rapidly decreases, quickly establishing a hierarchy. White heterosexual males typically end up being the bullies. And, these are the children that will someday soon make up our police force, our government, and our system of health care professionals.
With that in mind, it is important to remember Smith’s article in which she describes a brutal and unnecessary police attack on a gay bar back in 1982. The police rushed into the bar, harassed and beat several of the patrons, vandalized, and emptied the cash register. Why? They “were inspired by three cherished tenets of our society: racism, classism, and homophobia” (100). So the question becomes how society prevents such hatred in the future. The answer? Education. Starting in schools, it is time to end casual homosexual jokes and putdowns as well as bullying, and teach acceptance.
Bibiliography
Smith, Barbara. “Homophobia: Why Bring It Up?” 99-100. Boston: Cobahee River Collective, 1977.
Print.