The Discrimination against LGBTQ Students and Teachers

LGBTQ Issues at St. Michaels Secondary School

One of the issues that students and staff members face is how to respond when school administrators and fellow students assume that their sexuality and engages them in “heterosexual talk.” Although the recent legislation changes discourage staff members from discussing sexual orientation topics, a priest, some teachers, and students believe that everyone should be heterosexual. From their viewpoint, non-heterosexual relationships violate God’s commandment. As a result, heteronormativity, also referred to as the assumptions and expectations of heterosexuality and cisnormativity relating to the assumptions that people are cisgender whose physical sex and gender identity are aligned, arise (Logie et al., 2019). The automatic assumption of a person’s gender, sexuality, and sexual practices is a form of discrimination. 

LGBTQ persons feel uncomfortable when school administrators assert that heterosexual relationships are normal, fulfilling, and in line with Biblical teachings. St. Michaels high school’s policies force LGBTQ students and staff members to suppress their identities. It compels them to perform actions acceptable to others, making it impossible for them to be comfortable with their true selves. Students who fail to abide by St. Michaels’ practices and policies are at risk of social sanctions such as punishment and bullying (Berry, 2018). There was a case involving a student stating that it was inappropriate for gays to act like women while lesbians behave like men. As a result, LGBTQ students attempt to hide who they are and pass as cis-gendered or reduce their visible differences. Mostly, “femme” lesbians are considered gender-conforming, and thus, they may receive proper treatment from students and school staff (Logie et al., 2019). Schools that require the staff and students to conform to traditional gender roles may create division between straight and LGBTQ students.

Furthermore, the school denies students and staff members a platform to express their sexual orientation and gender identity. The school’s policy discourages discussions of the exclusion of the LGBTQ community. Some students and staff members feel unsafe and unwelcomed (Palkki & Caldwell, 2018). They consider themselves invisible and believe there is no safety after “coming out.” LGBTQ students in such an environment view teachers as unsupportive since they did not discuss any “taboo” topic (Palkki & Caldwell, 2018). Religion is among the social institutions that stigmatize different sexual orientations and gender identities. Catholic Church’s social conservatism and theological principles reject the recognition of LGBTQ rights (Nie & Price, 2020). For example, the priest mobilized the believers to wage cultural war against LGBTQ students and staff members. In such an environment, LGBTQ students keep their negative experiences a secret and are likely to have a high level of psychological distress (Demissie et al., 2018). Some LGBTQ students may not perform well in their studies due to stress originating from denial to express themselves and the challenges they face in the school.

St. Michaels secondary also encourages bullying toward LGBTQ students. Teachers serve as role models, and when they restrict discussions that support the LGBTQ community, they encourage students to bully their peers who do not conform to traditional gender roles (Palkki & Caldwell, 2018). Currently, most school administrators are indifferent to homophobic slurs. The common homophobic remarks include dyke and faggot (Berry, 2018). Other times, students use the term “gay” negatively. Despite the rising bullying cases, teachers have not addressed them. The lack of antibullying policy and LGBTQ discussions makes it challenging for students to treat transgender learners with respect and dignity. For instance, students are likely to misuse the pronouns when referring to a transgender student. St Michaels’ culture bombards LGBTQ students with derogatory remarks forcing them to endure the prevalence of microaggressions (Berry, 2018). Consequently, LGBTQ students blame themselves for victimization. Teachers and religious leaders who are supposed to support inclusive and violence-free environments and protect students, especially the vulnerable ones, are making students’ lives complicating and unbearable. The bullying perpetrators attempt to challenge, critique, police, and harm LGBTQ students (Berry, 2018). For this reason, some students do not discuss or report bullying experiences, fearing the teachers would worsen the situation or face retaliation from the perpetrators. 

Moreover, St. Michaels secondary discourages the formation of LGBTQ student groups. Currently, there is no alliance between LGBTQ and straight students. As a result, the LGBTQ students cannot have an established network, create a system that would protect them from bullying and homophobic remarks, and discuss their unique experiences (Baams et al., 2020). The lack of an effective support system pushes LGBTQ students to adopt maladaptive stress-coping mechanisms. St. Michaels secondary is likely to have high incidences of suicidal ideation, truancy, and substance abuse (Baams et al., 2020). Some students may believe that these behaviors will enable them to overcome psychological distress. Other students may have multiple casual sexual partners (Baams et al., 2020). St. Michael secondary discourages students from seeking support and validation; they may seek strangers who appreciate them. These self-destructive behaviors may result in low academic performance. Besides, LGBTQ students may not engage in extracurricular activities since they anticipate rejection (Baams et al., 2020). The result is negative physical health outcomes. Most LGBTQ students may not defend themselves or challenge their oppressors since the school administrators would not support their arguments. Eventually, they will develop antisocial behaviors and be viewed as a threat to St. Michaels’ community. 

Another is the neglect of LGBTQ themes in the school curriculum. St. Michaels’ school administrators reinforce traditional gender roles by providing literature that contains heterosexual characters and concealing the authors’ sexuality. Students experiment with their identities in school (Blackburn, 2021). When they cannot find literature that contains characters who share their identities and sexual orientation, they may have a problem expressing themselves. Non-inclusive literature and curriculum propagate traditional gender roles; it separates girls and boys and assigns them activities based on their gender. For example, boys may be encouraged to play soccer since it is masculine, while girls may enroll in cooking classes. St. Michaels secondary has literature that creates untrue and incomplete stereotypes (Batchelor et al., 2018). The problem with this approach is that it restricts the students from thinking freely and critically. Lack of inclusive literature denies students to learn about their implicit biases and overcome them. As a result, they bully LGBTQ students since no one supports their lifestyles, including the books that give them information about their surroundings. 

Besides, literature shapes the way students perceive themselves. LGBTQ students may attempt to mimic the characters’ behaviors to avoid victimization. However, this approach denies them an opportunity to express themselves (Blackburn, 2021). Forcing a person to conform to a given gender identity may exacerbate stress and depression. Such students cannot interact well with their peers since they have to keep monitoring their behaviors (Blackburn, 2021). For example, a gay student may want to act too masculine and pretend to like girls to receive appreciation from his friends. Similarly, lesbian students may dress and behave feminine to avoid being bullied. Most characters in non-inclusive literature present the idea that happy and successful relationships involve love between a man and woman. They present the idea that a man provides while a woman supports her husband. This notion makes it impossible for LGBTQ students to be free. For instance, transgender students may not know how to behave around their peers since they may believe they are breaking the “gender law.” LGBTQ students in non-inclusive environments view themselves as outcasts.

Leaders’ and Leadership Roles in Addressing LGBTQ Issues in School

Transformative leadership is based on inclusion, social justice, excellence, and equity, guiding how educational leaders should have addressed discrimination against LGBTQ students. It calls for school administrators to transform the entire education system (Shields & Hesbol, 2020). The transformative leadership style assesses inequitable practices and provides opportunities for individual achievement through living with others. For this reason, St. Michaels’ school administrators should have supported social justice by encouraging LGBTQ students to express their views and frustrations so that other students and teachers can learn from them (Shields & Hesbol, 2020). Teachers should have presented the LGBTQ students’ opinions to the school board and demanded a curriculum change. They should suggest the introduction of inclusive literature books that do not perpetuate gender stereotypes. Transformative leadership urges people to undertake a revolution that supports justice and democracy (Shields & Hesbol, 2020). For the LGBQ students to have improved learning experiences, there should be pictures of happy and successful LGBTQ alumni. Consequently, they will believe in themselves and feel welcomed to St. Michaels.

Furthermore, transformative leadership theory relies on redistributing power. It pays special attention to minority groups, such as the LGBTQ community, despite background and religious affiliation (Shields & Hesbol, 2020). Transformative leadership is based on a sincere commitment to effecting just reforms. Effective leadership begins with a genuine willingness to examine one’s beliefs, attitudes, and social structures that offer the privilege to some members and simultaneously limit minority groups from successful participation (Zook, 2017). Therefore, St. Michaels’ school administrators will learn about their implicit biases and resolve them to ensure that LGBTQ students and staff members have the power to express themselves and take part in the decision-making process. The LGBTQ community should be allowed to contribute ideas that would transform the St. Michaels’ curriculum. More importantly, the school administrators should strive to create, safe, supportive, and inclusive environment for all students (Zook, 2017). They need to explore the hidden aspects of values and policies that exclude the LGBTQ students and uncover, dismantle, and replace them with new democratic ideas and behaviors. . For example, they can suggest stringent nondiscrimination and antibullying policies that protect the LGBTQ students’ and teachers’ constitittional rights. The Constitution offers equal protection of freedom of speech and expression to everyone in the school community, including students (Zook, 2017). St. Michaels’ school administrators may be subjected to legal actions if they are unwilling to address LGBTQ discrimination, harassment, and bullying. Transformative leadership requires school leaders to aspire to maximum professional and legal obligations. For this reason, they should respect LGBTQ students’ opinions and treat them with respect and dignity. 

According to transformative leadership theory, school administrators should build connections with students. After uncovering the undemocratic beliefs, attitudes, and systems that perpetuate the victimization and marginalization of LGBTQ students, school leaders should deconstruct them and rebuild intellectual frames that enhance inclusion and respect for all (Zook, 2017). This approach entails involving the LGBTQ and straight staff members in open and honest conversations about their knowledge and stand on sexuality and gender identity. It is a step to raise democracy, equity, and social justice issues and build foundations for a shared vision of a progressive learning environment (Zook, 2017). From the case study, one of the teachers felt uncomfortable expressing her gender identity. Most teachers lack real-world familiarity with LGBTQ experience, and some of them are willing to learn about LGBTQ issues, such as terminologies and historical accounts (Zook, 2017). St. Michaels secondary needs to hold meetings that the LGBTQ leaders will regulate to allow teachers to uncover their prejudices and biases and develop new perspectives that will enable them to address the LGBTQ students’ needs. Educating teachers about the anti-LGBTQ microaggressions and the serious impact on students’ physical, emotional, and academic wellbeing may motivate educators to offer better support to LGBTQ students (Zook, 2017). A school climate should make LGBTQ students feel appreciated; survival is not a desirable educational outcome.

Transformative leadership asserts that education can enhance collective good and global interconnectedness. School leaders should understand that recognizing an equitable and just education system improves students’ confidence and competence (Zook, 2017). Also, it allows students to participate in the social, political, and economic welfare of the society, and hence, they contribute towards development projects. A transformative leader understands that societal loss occurs once a person’s potential is minimized (Zook, 2017). School educators should focus on creating a socially just education system. For example, they can teach the students to understand their place in society and correct injustice whenever they encounter it. St. Michaels’ school administrators should enlighten the students about their surroundings and make them better citizens by guiding them on taking proactive actions for equity, justice, and human rights. They need to construct an inclusive curriculum that respects and appreciates the “community of difference.” Teachers should make LGBTQ students understand that the universe values them for their differences and contribution to multiculturalism. 

Also, educational leaders should focus on the emancipation of outdated ideas. Transformative leaders disprove the hetero/cisnormative hegemonic attitudes that propagate hostile climates for LGBTQ students by introducing positive LGBTQ experiences, historical perspectives, and fulfilling futures in the official curriculum (Zook, 2017). This strategy enables students to realize that sexual orientation and gender identity are socially constructed concepts that can incorporate diverse viewpoints. Decentering the hetero/cisnormativity redistributes the hegemonic power of conformity and restores a democratic balance that supports non-oppressive ideas. School-wide perception of available and supportive staff members decreases bullying and harassment and increases LGBTQ students’ sense of belonging (Zook, 2017). Also, the school leaders can address the failure of the state laws to address bullying in schools and protect LGBTQ students adequately. They can actively participate in political discussions that highlight the gap in current state laws, address the prevalent discriminatory school policies, and ensure the supportive staff is visible and available to every student. 

Furthermore, the school educators should have the moral courage to address homophobia among staff members and religious leaders. Currently, teachers at St. Michaels face intense pressure from the Catholic Church leaders who have strong opinions about sexual orientation and gender identity. Instead of being silent, teachers should incorporate transformative leadership principles and challenge homophobia and heteronormativity (Zook, 2017). For instance, the school principal should censor any teacher who relies on religious perspectives to portray homosexuality negatively. However, this approach may encounter significant criticism from some teachers and church leaders. They may argue that censoring homophobic staff members may be a form of “reverse cultural discrimination” (Zook, 2017). On the contrary, religious believers cannot be considered oppressed since homosexuality is a sin based on powerful heterosexist norms. The transformative leader challenges oppressive voices and points out their harmful nature (Zook, 2017). School leaders should not be afraid to state they support the inclusion of the LGBTQ community into the curriculum. They should discourage the priests from insisting that heterosexual relationships are fulfilling. A transformative leadership style entails educating people with conservative opinions to respect other people’s beliefs. Besides, the Biblical teachings insist Christians should love each other despite their differences. Also, school leaders can allow the priests to be part of discussions that highlight LGBTQ issues. LGBTQ students are likely to mimic their teachers’ behaviors; they will overcome the fear and distrust of students who are different from them (Zook, 2017). As a result, St. Michaels secondary will uphold respect, recognition, and acceptance of the LGBTQ community. 

A Practical Strategy

A practical strategy to address these issues will be introducing Gay-Straight Alliances (GSAs) into the curriculum. GSAs are a safe space for students since they raise awareness about LGBTQ issues in school (Levesque, 2019). Regardless of their gender or sexual orientation, any student may join the movement and share their ideas without being ridiculed. GSAs offer counseling and support services. Many students who have enrolled in GSAs feel empowered to address LGBTQ issues in society (Levesque, 2019). Some heterosexual students are displeased with the way their LGBTQ peers are treated at St. Michaels. As such, the educators should encourage them to join GSAs to support their friends and promote social justice (Levesque, 2019). Students who can advocate for their needs have improved health and academic outcomes. Peer support is considered a primary source of emotional and support for LGBTQ students (Johns et al., 2019). Students in GSAs are unlikely to hear homophobic slurs and feel safe. GSAs serve as catalysts for positive change, student civic engagement, and inclusiveness (Baams et al., 2019). Investment in GSAs enables students to be motivated and develop feelings of self-efficacy. Young people who have been in GSAs for a long time learn leadership skills that enable them to participate in civic action (Poteat et al., 2018). For this reason, St. Michaels will benefit from introducing GSAs into the curriculum. LGBTQ students will learn how to convince the government and school leaders to implement strict antibullying policies. 

GSAs can also support female students in addressing sexuality and gender identity issues. Young women who cross the gender boundaries by playing sports, such as rugby, are often misidentified as lesbians (Levesque, 2019). Such students attempt to prove their sexual orientation by performing traditional gender roles. Straight female students avoid being classified as lesbians by distancing themselves from students who have been labeled as queer, lesbian, or bisexual (Levesque, 2019). Such practices marginalize lesbian students. The GSAs will provide a platform for women to unite without the fear of misclassification. Besides, GSAs enable LGBTQ students to explain their “coming out” stories and the rejection they faced from family members (Levesque, 2019). As a result, straight students will learn about their heterosexual privileges, sympathize with their peers, and advocate for LGBTQ students’ needs. 

Teachers will also learn about the LGBTQ experiences from the GSAs. A school’s primary purpose is to educate and protect students (Sadowski, 2017). However, very few teachers understand LGBTQ issues. Teacher education should incorporate a gender-complex viewpoint that questions how gender operates, and the oppression students and teachers face based on their gender expressions and identity (Kearns et al., 2017). GSAs encourage such discussions since they allow teachers to learn from the LGBTQ students’ experiences. Consequently, teachers will learn how to defend LGBTQ students who have been victimized. Educators offer vital knowledge, and they need to prove to students that they do not favor or discriminate against any student. The only way they can achieve this goal is by being an ally to LGBTQ students and joining GSAs.

Besides, rural environments are hostile to the LGBTQ community. It may be challenging for teachers and students to find an association outside school that may support their views (Johns et al., 2019). More importantly, parents and religious leaders are likely to perpetuate homophobic comments. The best approach is to have GSAs full of intellects who can initiate open and in-depth discussions. Also, GSAs will teach LGBTQ students how to confront their abusers and highlight the discriminatory practices in the learning environment. Participating in GSAs guides students on how to challenge religious practices without offending leaders. As a result, they will initiate changes that can transform the rural community and benefit every member. 

References

Baams, L., Pollitt, A. M., Laub, C., & Russell, S. T. (2020). Characteristics of schools with and without Gay-Straight Alliances. Applied Developmental Science , 24 (4), 354-359. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888691.2018.1510778

Batchelor, K. E., Ramos, M., & Neiswander, S. (2018). Opening doors: Teaching LGBTQ-themed young adult literature for an inclusive curriculum. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues, and Ideas , 91 (1), 29-36. https://doi.org/10.1080/00098655.2017.1366183

Berry, K. (2018). LGBT bullying in school: A troubling relational story. Communication Education , 67 (4), 502-513. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634523.2018.1506137

Blackburn, M. V. (2021). Pedagogy and pleasure: Trans and gender transgressive students in an LGBTQ-themed literature class. Pedagogy, Culture & Society , 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681366.2021.1912161

Demissie, Z., Rasberry, C. N., Steiner, R. J., Brener, N., & McManus, T. (2018). Trends in secondary schools’ practices to support lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and questioning students, 2008–2014. American Journal of Public Health , 108 (4), 557-564. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2017.304296

Johns, M. M., Poteat, V. P., Horn, S. S., & Kosciw, J. (2019). Strengthening our schools to promote resilience and health among LGBTQ youth: Emerging evidence and research priorities from The State of LGBTQ Youth Health and Wellbeing Symposium. LGBT Health , 6 (4), 146-155. https://doi.org/10.1089/lgbt.2018.0109

Kearns, L. L., Mitton-Kükner, J., & Tompkins, J. (2017). Transphobia and cisgender privilege: Pre-service teachers recognizing and challenging gender rigidity in schools. Canadian Journal of Education , 40 (1), 1-27. https://www.jstor.org/stable/90002337?seq=1

Levesque, A. (2019). “I’ve always wanted a gay family member!”: Straight ally girls and gender inequality in a high school Gay-Straight Alliance. Qualitative Sociology , 42 (2), 205-225. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11133-019-9411-9

Logie, C. H., Lys, C. L., Dias, L., Schott, N., Zouboules, M. R., MacNeill, N., & Mackay, K. (2019). “Automatic assumption of your gender, sexuality and sexual practices is also discrimination”: Exploring sexual healthcare experiences and recommendations among sexually and gender diverse persons in Arctic Canada. Health & social care in the community , 27 (5), 1204-1213. https://doi.org/10.1111/hsc.12757

Nie, F., & Price, A. (2020). Is safe space safe? Being gay and college faculty across religious, moral communities. Journal of Beliefs & Values , 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1080/13617672.2020.1816398

Palkki, Joshua, and Paul Caldwell. “We are often invisible”: A survey on safe space for LGBTQ students in secondary school choral programs." Research Studies in Music Education 40.1 (2018): 28-49. https://doi.org/10.1177/1321103X17734973

Poteat, V. P., Calzo, J. P., & Yoshikawa, H. (2018). Gay-Straight Alliance involvement and youths' participation in civic engagement, advocacy, and awareness-raising. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology , 56 , 13-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2018.01.001

Sadowski, M. (2017). More than a safe space: How schools can enable LGBTQ students to Thrive. American Educator , 40 (4), 4.

Shields, C. M., & Hesbol, K. A. (2020). Transformative leadership approaches to inclusion, equity, and social justice. Journal of School Leadership , 30 (1), 3-22. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052684619873343

Zook, T. (2017). Promising pedagogy: Advancing the educational experience of queer students through transformative leadership. Journal of Homosexuality , 64 (13), 1755-1777. https://doi.org/10.1080/00918369.2016.1267462