Wednesday, November 20, 2013

Sissies, Faggots, Lezzies, and Dykes... by Lugg: An Article Reflection


Article: Sissies, Faggots, Lezzies, and Dykes:  Gender, Sexual Orientation, and a New Politics of Education? By Lugg, Catherine A.
Prior to returning to the classroom I studied “Development”, largely with an international focus.  However, as a math teacher of Title 1 low-income neighborhood schools of Atlanta, GA and Memphis, TN, I pursued my master’s degree with the idea that education is a major development problem for our country.  The more I studied, despite my interest in international issues and working on projects for CARE in Ethiopia on Emergency Famine Response and The Carter Center on mental health care initiatives in Liberia, I have always come back to U.S. education.  Surely, these issues, and a multitude of others, are critical arenas that must be addressed so that marginalized human populations be enabled to lead lives with rights recognition and economic choice.  That said, as I read Lugg’s article,  Sissies, Faggots, Lezzies, and Dykes:  Gender, Sexual Orientation, and a New Politics of Education?, I could not help but feel that my education has, in some ways come, full circle.  The marginalization of queer populations in our public schools is a structural issue effecting, often times negatively, the quality of education received by all stakeholders.
Lugg’s commentary around roles within U.S. education brings to light that since the beginning of this system, gender and sex have dictated who does what.  Within the U.S. education system woman have been restricted from marriage, and administrative roles.  Men have been put on a fast tract to administration and ostracized for remaining classroom teachers simply because of the perceptions involved should they remain in the classroom.  Queer individuals have been kept from teaching/education professions as a result on legal mandates.  Here, one can see there clear interaction between U.S. policy, gender, sexual orientation, and U.S. public education.  Our public education is a forum by which U.S. policy is enforced, and from which political ideas are generated. 
(Please note: gender and sex are separate.  Gender defined by Lugg as “a set of roles and behaviors that individuals are expected to follow as determined by societies and cultural racial, ethnic, and religious groups of what it means to be male and female”.  Sex, however, refers to a “chromosomal” distinction.)
Gender, and its interpretation culturally throughout the history of U.S. political action, has dictated how various populations are treated within schools.  In other words, gender and sexual orientation are structural issues, as mentioned above, which as Lugg puts it, determine “who gets what, when and how”.   Considering social justice and human rights recognition, gender and sexual orientation are not areas to ignore if we are hoping to provide equitable education within our public school systems.
Despite these facts, schools are historically, again, rights violating institutions for faculties and students that are queer.  Over the past years legislation has tended to create a policy paradox where queer student populations are more protected than queer teachers and administrators.  Lugg urges that should we wish to address this, more research is needed.  Additionally as policy is written we must remember that, “the problems confronting queer children are not that they are queer – on the contrary, the American legal foundations for homophobia, heteronormativity, and gender bias generate their problems”.  As we seek to address gender and sexual orientation issues, an essential question we must ask is “are we considering these populations as ‘deviant’, and if so, what implications does such a perception have on policy we create (or do not) create?”
Now, back to development.  There are many interpretations for what “human development” is and means.  For me, this would mean that rural pastoralists of Ethiopia continue to be pastoralists despite a global economy that now interferes with their centuries old practice of living off the land, and doing it well.  Human development means that all students regardless of their individuality, gender, sexual orientation, religion, and what other distinction, are enabled a quality and non-discriminatory education.  Should our cultural views stand in the way of that and permeate into political life, as they do, we have a lot of work to do in the area of shifting historically held beliefs and customs which bar rights and freedoms for millions.

No comments:

Post a Comment