Eye rolling or eye opening? A look at heteronormativity in primary schools

I was recently told, after delivering a session on LGBTQ+ inclusion to governors, that one of the attendees had ‘rolled their eyes’ when I began to talk about heteronormativity in schools.

This eye rolling incident is, sadly, well within the realm of my experience. Although I was frustrated to hear about it, I wasn’t surprised. For some people, using terms like ‘heteronormativity’ to describe school experience is ‘woke’ and over the top.

The reality is that every LGBTQ+ stakeholder within a school community – child or young person, member of staff, visitor, parent or carer - is on the receiving end of constant heteronormative messaging. This isn’t because schools are not complying with their Public Sector Equality Duty or because they’re not focused on being inclusive. It’s because the world is set up to portray ‘usual’ as heterosexual.

The Oxford dictionary defines heteronormativity as: “denoting or relating to a world view that promotes heterosexuality as the normal or preferred sexual orientation.”

Heteronormativity abounds and, in primary schools, where I have spent most of my career, it permeates every aspect of school life. It’s in the images on our walls, it’s in the things we say and in what we do. Put simply, there’s an unspoken acceptance that it is ‘the norm’. It confirms for us that heterosexual relationships dominate the human experience. It also reminds us of the relationship between heterosexuality and gender inequity for women and girls through history. We see this every day, where gendered language, stereotyping and imbalanced expectations still dominate our lived experience in the wider world. We like to think we work hard to challenge this in our schools…but are we doing enough?

The schools I work with are determined to do what they can to make sure they are inclusive to all sexualities, identities and genders. They are also shocked to realise the many ways (often unspoken, tacitly accepted) in which their shared practice is heteronormative and their language gendered. I’m sorry to say that it’s a bigger problem in primary, around younger children, where it often goes unchallenged.

What can heteronormativity look like in schools?

Environments

·      Most images of families show mums and dads. This can be on ‘welcome’ posters or in books and images on display.

·      We find ‘corporate’ cartoon images depicting (stereotypical) boy, girl, boy, girl, boy, girl in school reception areas, in libraries, on displays, in classrooms, in school halls and in play areas.

·      Books and literature may have been through rigorous scrutiny to ensure (rightly) representation of race, disability, age etc., but have not been evaluated in terms of how representative they are of different types of families or identities. (To test this, walk into a couple of primary classrooms and pick up 10 random books from the book corner. You’ll see what I mean.)

Systems and Policies

·      In primary schools we have a habit of assuming (unless told otherwise) that a child has heterosexual parent(s) and that our children will end up in heterosexual relationships.

·      We include ‘mother / father’ on application forms and permission slips.

·      The words ‘Mr & Mrs’ are on the tips of our tongues when referring to families.

·      We make assumptions that ‘the mum’ will do most of the child care and will collect and care for sick children.

·      Our school uniform policies state gendered expectations for girls and boys, even down to shoe styles.

·      Our staff dress code does the same.

·      We appoint a Head Girl and a Head Boy at the start of the school year.

·      Our staff list on the school website denotes marital status first - Mrs, Miss, Mr - and we have the same on classroom doors.

Communication and Language

·      We welcome our children with “Good morning, boys and girls” and our staff, or parents and carers, with “ladies and gentlemen”.

·      The phrase, “Tell / give this to / show / ask your mum and dad” rolls off the tongue  for most class teachers, admin and support staff and for heads in assembly.

·      Staff address girls as ‘darling’, ‘princess’, ‘sweetie’, and boys as ‘mate’, ‘mister’, ‘dude’.

·      Staff describe non-conformity to gender stereotypes as ‘soft’, ‘limp’, ‘sissyish’, ‘aggressive’, ‘tomboyish’, ‘over-confident’

·      We hear our leaders addressed as ‘Headmaster’ and ‘Headmistress’, we address our male staff as ‘Sir’ and our female staff as ‘Miss’.

·      We hear adults calling for ‘a couple of strong boys’ for certain tasks around school.

Practice and Culture

·      We line our classes up in boys’ and girls’ lines, or in a boy, girl, boy, girl formation.

·      We seat them on their carpet ladybird places or at tables in the same way.

·      We separate and organise children by gender for the most random of reasons and activities.

·      We organise role play, construction and crafts with different genders in mind, albeit subconsciously. (If you think this would never happen in your school, talk to the staff who set up for wet play or lunchtime activities.) 

·      We appoint class names of famous scientists, authors, sports people or musicians where the majority are male (and straight).

·      The staff culture feels fixed, exclusive, cliquey and difficult to break into.

·      Staff regale each other with stories of boys’ nights out and girls’ nights in, and enjoy casual banter about women’s work, boys’ toys, manly jobs, girly girls.

·      Staff congratulate themselves on the way they have always done things.

Why does this matter? It matters because of the need for us all to feel we belong in the places where we, or our loved ones, spend a good deal of time. Marian Wright Edelman coined the phrase, ‘You can’t be what you can’t see’, and this matters if you rarely see yourself (child or adult) or your family represented in your school. Representation is validation.

It matters because subliminal messages such as those received (through unthinking words, gendered phrases and activities defined by gender) by girls and women, or by those for whom gender is not fixed or for whom gender causes anguish, can be damaging and self-fulfilling over time.

I have deliberately not set out here what the alternatives for the above examples could be. They make a great starting point for whole staff thinking about how to be inclusive - and they’re guaranteed to provoke some contentious, yet very worthwhile, discussion. 

It is important in our schools to do the hard work required, challenge heteronormativity in all its guises and ask the following questions when evaluating our systems, practice, culture and language:

·      Might a child with same-sex parents feel quietly excluded in our school? 

·      How about a child who has lost a parent, or a child who is care-experienced?

·      Will a parent in a same-sex relationship or in no relationship feel welcome here?

·      Have we set expectations for removing assumptions in all interactions with families?

·      Is our staff culture such that a member of staff, whatever their sexual orientation or identity, can be their authentic self at work?

·      Is our language - and therefore, are our expectations - truly gender-inclusive?

·      Is our inclusive approach understood by all groups of staff in their varying roles across school?

And finally, to the eye-rolling governor, I suggest you take the opportunity to be part of this process. It might just help you open your eyes to the experience of others and take action. ‘Woke’ works.

Gerlinde Achenbach FCCT is a DEIB consultant and executive leadership coach. Find her at www.gaedschools.uk, at Bluesky on @gaed.bsky.social and on LinkedIn as herself.