Resisting the mainstreaming of LGBT equalities in Canadian and British Schools: Sex education and trans school friends
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is well established that schools are not neutral sites for gender and sexualities, shaping (often heteronormative) school spaces. This paper augments examinations of the implementation of inclusive school curricula by exploring heteroactivist opposition to lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans (LGBT) equalities in Canadian and British schools. It examines resistances to institution of a revised and updated Health and Physical Education curriculum in Ontario schools in Canada, and in the UK, the use of the Rowe family’s opposition to the presence of trans children in their own child’s classroom. This paper shows that once-invisible heternormativities are now being challenged through LGBT curricula and support for trans students. This creates classrooms as pivotal, geographical, social and political spaces that operate at the juncture of the public/private spaces of the home, public spaces of the neighbourhood and the imagined space of the nation and nation-building citizenship. Oppositional ideologies can no longer be understood through the labels of ‘anti-gay’, ‘homophobic’ or ‘transphobic’, and these oppositions go beyond ‘anti-gender’, such that the term heteroactivism names the activisms and ideologies that seeks to reassert the superiority of monogamous, binary cis-gendered, coupled marriages as best for children and for society. These ideologies are inherently geographical, drawing both on local and individual circumstances, but also transcending national boundaries. We highlight three dominant heteroactivist themes, namely, parental rights, interactions between state/schools/home and gender ideologies. This offers insights into how new sexual and gender rights are contested and resisted in new ways to consider the political, legal and social implications of heteroactivist strategies in schools.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.048 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".