Tiffany Jones
Professor Sociology of Education, Macquarie School of Education Director Research and Innovation. UNESCO Consultant, ARC College of Experts and former DECRA Fellow & Linkage team member - LGBTIQ+ education/ health/ policy. BCA Macquarie University, BEd (Hons 1, University Medal) Griffith University, PhD Latrobe University.
less
InterestsView All (27)
Uploads
Books by Tiffany Jones
Edited by Sam Elkin, Yves Rees and Tiffany Jones, this special midyear 2021 edition includes contributions by:
Bron Richardson, Jordie Slonim, Jamie James, Kait Fenwick, Sav Zwickl, Damien W. Riggs, Carla A. Pfeffer, Ruth Pearce, Sally Hines, Francis Ray White, Ruth Dahl, Samuel Luke Beatty, Tazz Hislop, Adele Aria, Raewyn Connell, Brooke Murray, Lucy Nicholas, Clair Brianz, Purity, Geoff Allshorn, Mel Romero, Bryson Charles, good judy, Stacey Stokes, Teague Leigh, Anastasia Le, Ruq, Alex Lee, Ryan Gustafsson, Blair Archbold, Kathy Mansfield, G. Jae Curmi, Noah Silvereye, Cat Cotsell, Erin Riley, Kai Ash, Kin Francis, Guy James Whitworth, Reid Marginalia, Stevie Lane, Susan Lardner & Jessica Ward, Tiarn, CB Mako, Nat Hollis, Rowan Richardson, Jaxson Wearing, Nate McCarthy, Theo Dunne, Elwin Schok, Maddox Gifford, Sam Elkin, Yves Rees, and Tiffany Jones.
‘… Sam Elkin and Yves Rees from the Spilling the T Collective bring a special trans and gender diverse community focus, with essays, poetry, polemic, memoir, fiction, and imagery that explores and celebrates gender diversity … trans creatives bring an acute understanding of how embodied subjects construct and perform gendered selves – an understanding that, though sometimes born of pain and trauma, and sometimes met in joyful euphoria – creates memorable art … foregrounding nuances often eluding the cis gaze …’
Available now from bookshops and online.
Multicultural Council (AGMC) and the Victorian Government on recovery support needs of survivors of LGBTQA+ change and suppression (conversion) practices. This study investigated survivors’ experiences
of recovery through interviews with survivors and with mental health practitioners. It is the first such study internationally to include
research with mental health practitioners and has a significantly more diverse cohort of survivor participants than previous studies.
Based on a comparative study from 2018, this book explores four different approaches to education according to 2,500 Australians’ experiences of them, on a range of topics. It shows that whilst the critical approach has strong research-based support across the board, sometimes a liberal, conservative or post-modern approach may have some merit for certain outcomes. This is a book about challenging our biases and calling on ourselves to aim higher for education, than what our own pre-conceived ideas might allow.
What and who is valued in education, and the social roles and identity messages learned, differ wildly from school to school. Education is most impacted by the orientation of education dominant in that context – whether conservative, liberal, critical or post-modern. These terms are often used with little practical data on the real-life schooling they entail. Who learns what in which approach? Who learns best with which approach, on which topic and why? This book provides this previously missing information. It offers holistic, detailed descriptions of conservative, liberal, critical and post-modern approaches to education broadly. It provides statistics and stories from real students on how the four approaches work practically in schools in relation to: age, gender, sexuality, social class, race, news-media, popular culture and technology. Chapters offer background information to the four perspectives, data from student participants, tutorial questions and activities, and suggestions for further reading.
Peter Waples-Crowe, Tiffany Jones, Sam Elkin, Indiah Money, Jude Munro, Firdhan Aria Wijaya, Steph Amir, Mel Simpson, Jean Taylor, Andrew McNamara, Jodie Hare, Frank Bonnici, Guy James Whitworth, Alison Thorne, Rodney Croome, Ian Seal, Edwina Shaw, Erin Riley, Derek Ho, Gina Ward, James May, Ayman Barbaresco, Blair Archbold, Yannick Thoraval, Baburam Poudel, Yulius Hendri Wijaya, Marcus O’Donnell, Hannah Gillard, Max Hayward, Rob Wallis, Henry von Doussa, Leila Lois, John Bartlett, Mark Anthony Cayanan, Bron Bateman, Cat Cotsell, Jennifer Power, Adele Aria, Michele Saint-Yves, Gemma Rose, Zachary DB Smith, Shivani Preston, Heath John Ramsay, Penn O’Brien, Stephanie Russell, Jan Prior, Andy Murdoch, Suz Mawer, Zachary Pryor, Peter Mitchell, Sharryn Ryan, Charlotte Allingham, Neika Lehman, Isabella Whāwhai Waru, Caleb Thaiday.
Release
Bent Street 4.2 will be Zoom launched at Adelaide Feast – details very soon.
ISBN: (ebook) 978-0-6487469-4-2
Cover Art—Jake Alexander Cruz.
Acknowledgment—3 ... Contents—4
Foreword—Tiffany Jones, Gordon Thompson—5
Introduction—Jennifer Power, Henry von Doussa, Timothy W. Jones—7
INTERVIEWS
Intimacy and Unexpected Technologies—Suzanne Fraser—12 Intimacy,
Technology and Emojis—Amanda Gesselman—17 Digital Intimacy,
Gender and Sexuality—Jamie Hakim—21
ESSAYS
My Queer Sex Bot—Jennifer Power—29
A Public Feeling—Marcus O’Donnell—41
Digital Intimacy: An End to the Tyranny of Distance—Gary Dowsett—53
Intimacy in Online Spaces for Bi+ People—Emiel Maliepaard—62
Out in the Outer Worlds—Nessie Smith—70
D/s in the Everyday—Rainicorn—81
Life, But Not As We Know It—Geoff Allshorn—89
Viral Lesbians—Tiffany Jones—101
FIRST PERSON
Not so Distant—Dennis Altman—115
Body in Retrograde—Samuel Luke Beatty—121
Architecture at Night—Michelle Dicinoski—130
Tiny Essential Victories—Guy James Whitworth—137
Dark POMO—Jean Taylor—142
Pro-Po: Policing Productivity in the Midst of Pandemic—Jake Cruz—155
Loose Threads—Max Hayward—159
Overhead—Elijah El Kahale—162
POETRY
Couch scene—Cat Cotsell—166
About Me—Georgia Banks—167
Touch—Tina Healy—172
Offline—Casey Scanlon—174
King Root—Brigitte Lewis—176
asleep in my arms—Rob Wallis—179
FICTION
A Box of Unused Masks—Holly Zwalf—181
Nick’s Story Mode—Ava Redman—184
Patchouli—Heath John Ramsay—188
• Questions to capture data on the sexual orientation or gender identity of students.
• Questions to capture data on school violence that is specifically based on SOGIE.
The Brief also gives guidance on:
• The challenges in collecting data on school violence based on SOGIE
• Identifying and fulfilling indicators on school violence based on SOGIE
The audience for this Technical Brief is: monitoring and evaluation specialists who manage institutional surveys at the international or national level (including school-based and population-based studies); policy-makers in the education sector; and researchers who investigate school violence, including against young lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) people and students who are perceived as gender non-conforming.
Dr Tiffany Jones, Macquarie University Department of Educational Studies, Australia, conducted a literature review and produced an initial draft. Christophe Cornu and Yongfeng Liu (Section of Health and Education, Division for Inclusion, Peace and Sustainable Development, Education Sector, UNESCO) developed the final version of this paper. Sarah Middleton-Lee edited the document.
Special thanks are due to Manos Antoninis (UNESCO Global Education Monitoring Report Team), Laura Kann (formerly with CDC), Lisette Kuyper (The Netherlands Institute for Social Research), Eunice Den Hoedt and Camilo Garcia (formerly UNESCO Section of Health and Education), who reviewed and commented on the initial draft paper; as well as Terryann Clark and Theresa Fleming (University of Auckland, New Zealand), who provided technical inputs.
The Victorian Department of Health and Human Services recognises the expertise and experiences of people with intersex variations and their families, and the leading efforts of medical, ethical and legal professions involved in the health care of people with intersex variations in Victoria.
The department would like to thank all of those who contributed their time and expertise to the development of this and related resources and acknowledge the contribution of Australian and Victorian intersex human rights advocates to the development of improved understanding and practice locally and internationally. In particular, the department thanks those involved in the 2016 project overseen by Gay and Lesbian Health Victoria (GLHV), including project leads Associate Professor Tiffany Jones (La Trobe University and the University of New England) and William Leonard (Director GLHV), strategic advisors Anna Brown and Lee Carnie (Human Rights Law Centre) and research assistants Renee Zborowski and Joe Latham. The 2016 project also benefitted from the input of a range of stakeholders, including members of the Department of Health and Human Services 2016–2017 Intersex Expert Advisory Group (IEAG), clinicians, researchers and other health and education experts. Thanks also to participants of the further consultations undertaken in 2017. This information and resource paper, and the suite of related materials, were revised and updated by Jason Rostant Consulting. They benefitted from extensive input from members of the Department of Health and Human Services 2017–2018 IEAG, human rights advocates, members of the Inter-Departmental Project Reference Group, and clinicians. Thanks to all contributors, not all of whom are named, including Ro Allen, Tony Briffa, Dr Meg Brodie, Anna Brown, Paul Byrne-Moroney, Lee Carnie, Andrea Kapteinis, Dr Ruth McNair, Kristiina Siiankoski, Trace Williams, Sarah-Jane Miles, Michele O’Connell and Dr Agli Zavros-Orr.
Exploring four key areas - mental health, physical health, sexual health and social health - the book sets out exactly what professionals need to know in relation to these areas and how to support trans youth in these circumstances. Providing clarity on a range of topics, this is the perfect overview for practitioners, as well as a useful text for students and researchers.
See: https://www.palgrave.com/gp/book/9783030242046#aboutBook
This edition contains essays, art, research, poetry, stories, installations, graphic stories and more! Themes are of this year (2019) and include Indigenous Queer studies, identity and visibility; religious themes in law, politics and conversion therapy; climate change; Trump; Hong Kong; feminisms; gender transitions; lovers and exes, parents, heroes from Gentleman Jack and Kate McKinnon to Randy Rainbow and Todrick Hall and much more...
Contributors: Peter Waples-Crowe, Tiffany Jones, Stephanie Amir, Mel Simpson, Andrew Farrell, Ashley Sievwright, Bee Cruse, Jamie James, Jodie Hare, Jean Taylor, Hannah Buttsworth, Maude Davey, Ayman Kaake, Stevie Lane, Guy James Whitworth, Ashley Hardcastle, Samuel Luke Beatty, Mandy Henningham, Clare Monagle, Timothy W Jones, Jennifer Power, Alison Thorne, Ryan Storr, Frank Bonnici, Lisa Farrell, Trent Mann, Jason Li, Jake Cruz, Geoff Allshorn, Terry Jaensch, Ashley Williams, Michelle Bishop, Samuel Luke Beatty, Xavier, Anna Leah D. Luna-Raven, Jocelyn Deane, Reese Downing, Stuart Barnes, Adele Tan, Gordon Thompson, Cat Cotsell, Henry von Doussa, Gavriil Aleksandrs, Lionel Wright, Kim Leutwyler, John Bartlett …plus our stunning photography and art models from Nova Gina (cover) to Faustina Agolley and many others!
Bent Street 2 covers aspects of 2018, including the afterglow of the passing into law of same-sex marriage; the ongoing struggle for rights and recognition; reflections on the past; as well as presenting the queer imagination as it follows its own lights, digressions, yearnings, and strange associations.
Guy James Whitworth, Steve RE Pereira, Jamie James, Quinn Eades, Brigitte Lewis, Jeff Herd, Adrienne Kisner, Marcus O'Donnell, Jennifer Power, Henry Von Doussa, Dean Smith, Alison Thorne, Rebecca Ryall, Craig Middleton, Nikki Sullivan, Maria Pallotta-Chiarolli, Dennis Altman, Janet Rice, Geoff Allshorn, Martin Roberts, Roz Bellamy, Mandy Henningham, Tiffany Jones, Michael Bernard Kelly, Aurea Kochanowski, René Bennett, Peter Mitchell, Tina Healy, Madison Griffiths, Andy Murdoch, Holly Zwalf, Lian Low, James May, Jean Taylor, Adrienne Kisner
ISBN: (paperback) 9781925283167 | ISBN: (ebook) 9781925283174
Publication date: December 2017
Contributors
JOEL CREASEY
JILL JONES
GUY JAMES WHITWORTH
GENINE HOOK
TINA HEALY
APRIL WHITE
JEAN TAYLOR
ASHLEY SIEVWRIGHT
MANDY HENNINGHAM
TIFFANY JONES
DENNIS ALTMAN
STEVE R. E. PEREIRA
RENEE BENNETT
SIMON COPLAND
MARY LOU RASMUSSEN
QUINN EADES
ERROL BRAY
BLAIR ARCHBOLD
NIKKI SULLIVAN
CRAIG MIDDLETON
DANIEL MARSHALL
NADIA BAILEY
DOUG POLLARD
SALLY CONNING
BRIGITTE LEWIS
DANIEL WITTHAUS
MIRA SCHLOSBERG
CHRISTOPHER BRYANT
MICHAEL BERNARD KELLY
JESS JONES
RODNEY CROOME
...available from today at real world book shops like Hares and Hyenas, or online via Amazon, Barnes & Noble, and the Book Depository.
Global human rights legislation protects all people against discrimination and violence in education, irrespective of sex, sexual orientation or gender identity and expression. Homophobic and transphobic violence in schools has been framed by officials as the basis of an international public health crises. UNESCO has particularly targeted homophobic and transphobic bullying in schools in recent years, supporting global and Asia-Pacific research, advocacy and programming. Viet Nam has committed to global and Asia-Pacific efforts to lessen gender-based violence. This includes sexual orientation, gender identity and expression (SOGIE)-related violence in schools.
Conceptual Framework
SOGIE diversity has been strongly established in the histories of many nations. Recognition of diverse gender expressions has been perhaps more prevalent in the Asia-Pacific region with Samoa’s ‘fa’afafines’ and Thailand’s ‘kathoey’ afforded particular cultural and social roles. Many Asian nations only became less tolerant of diverse SOGIE in their populations after Western influences in the 1800s. SOGIE-related school violence, also called homophobic and transphobic violence, is based on gender stereotypes, roles and norms. It can include verbal, psychosocial, physical and sexual violence.
Literature Review
While diverse legal and cultural contexts around SOGIE have likely impacted data collection on SOGIE-related school violence in Asia-Pacific, research suggests it is highly prevalent. Research shows SOGIE-related school violence – more frequent in schools without policy protection for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (abbreviated to LGBT in this report as in the broader literature) students – has negative impacts on students’ education and wellbeing. The literature review highlighted some noteworthy work in countries including Australia, China, Japan, New Zealand, Republic of Korea and Thailand, among others. The literature review also underscored a gap in the research and emphasised a strong need for national research on the extent, nature, impacts and supports around SOGIE-related school violence in Viet Nam.
Methodology
Research was conducted on the nature and extent of SOGIE-related school violence in schools in North, Central and South Viet Nam as part of a wider study on school-related gender-based violence. Issues of consent and privacy for participants were carefully considered. Stakeholders were enabled to freely discuss the sensitive topic of SOGIE-related school violence due to the support of Ministry of Education and Training (MOET). The research was aided by a range of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (abbreviated to LGBT in this report as in the broader literature) community organizations, departmental and school contacts, and local and international research experts. The study applied an emancipatory methodology aiming to achieve social justice goals. Mixed methods of in-person and online surveys, focus group discussions and in-depth interviews were used to collect data from four distinct groups of participants. These included a general sampling of school students, LGBT students, school staff (including administrators and teachers) and parents.
Findings
Evidence from the 3,698 survey participants, 280 Focus-Group Discussion (FGD) participants and 85 In-Depth Interviews (IDIs) with students (including LGBT students), school staff and parents showed many school stakeholders were influenced by constructions of LGBT people as diseased or problematic. LGBT students presented stronger awareness of SOGIE-related school violence than other groups, most particularly verbal violence and its negative long-term effects. SOGIE-related school violence was high in Viet Nam; 71% of LGBT students reported having been physically abused and 72.2% reported having been verbally abused. Some LGBT students revealed that they had experienced situations in which schools staff were perpetrators of violence. LGBT youth experienced clear negative academic and wellbeing outcomes, ranging from lowered grades and school drop-out, to depression and suicidal ideation. Almost a quarter of LGBT students who had experienced violence had also experienced suicidal ideation and 14.9% attempted to engage in self-harm or suicide. Gay, bisexual and gender non-conforming male and male-to-female transgender (GBT) students faced highly significant increases in risk for all kinds of violence compared to lesbian, bisexual and gender non-conforming female and female-to-male transgender (LBT) students. This appeared to be influenced by factors including perpetrator motivations of punishing ‘feminine’ expressions on male bodies, and increased respect for ‘masculine’ expressions on female bodies – within the context of a Confucian culture that broadly privileges masculinity. LGBT students were notably less confident in their schools’ efforts to prevent violence than other students in the FGDs and IDIs. The surveyed LGBT students who had experienced violence were more likely to report that they sought assistance from friends and less likely to seek help from staff than other students who had experienced violence. Research findings suggest an imperative need to raise awareness and capacity of school administrators and teachers with regard to SOGIE-related school violence to empower them to act as agent of change in making schools safer places for LGBT students.
Discussion & Recommendations
Curriculum developers and policy-makers need to actively redress the gaps in the knowledge of all education stakeholder groups on SOGIE and LGBT through clear education resources revision and distinct guidelines. Schools need to roll-out both educational interventions and practical support features (uniform flexibility and unisex toilets) in holistic efforts to create safe and supportive environments for LGBT students. Further studies could trial various SOGIE-related school violence interventions in schools.
Global human rights legislation protects all people against discrimination and violence in education, irrespective of their sex, sexual orientation or gender identity and expression. Viet Nam has committed to a range of global conventions to end school-related gender-based violence (SRGBV). Putting these commitments into practice requires first recognising the fact that schools can be sites of violence, and considering the nature of SRGBV in practice so that it can be prevented and its impacts mediated. This report sits within broader efforts by the Government of Viet Nam and in particular the Ministry of
Education and Training (MOET) to recognise, and respond to, SRGBV in schools in Viet Nam. It represents one practical research-based step amongst many in Viet Nam’s response to SRGBV.
Conceptual Framework
A range of sociologists have variously defined school-related gender-based violence (SRGBV). In this report, SRGBV is conceptualised as based on gender and sexuality stereotypes, roles and norms. Any learner, irrespective of their sexual orientation or whether they are female, male, transgender or intersex, may be affected. SRGBV is understood in this report to include, for example, physical, verbal,
sexual, social and technology-related violence. SRGBV can occur in a range of settings in and around schools, ranging from in school bathrooms to virtual locations via a range of technology. It can also
occur beyond the boundaries of the school itself.
Literature Review
Despite under-reporting, research literature suggests SRGBV is widespread globally and in the Asia-Pacific region. Research shows SRGBV can have long-term impacts on a child’s education, and mental
and physical wellbeing. The literature review highlighted some noteworthy work in the region, but also showed there was a strong need for national research on the extent, nature, impacts and supports around SRGBV in Viet Nam. Research objectives for the study emerging from the literature included goals of exploring the awareness levels and attitudes of key education stakeholder groups about SRGBV, the nature and scale of SRGBV (including homophobic and transphobic violence), contributing factors, impacts and prevention/support measures in schools.
Methodology
An investigation was undertaken into the nature and extent of SRGBV in schools in North, Central and South Viet Nam. Ethical issues were carefully planned including informed consent and privacy for participants. The commitment and support of MOET was essential to enabling stakeholders to freely discuss the sensitive topic of SRGBV. A range of local and international research experts, departmental and school contacts, and community organizations aided the project. The study applied an emancipatory methodology aiming to achieve social justice goals. Mixed methods of in-person and online surveys, focus group discussions and in-depth interviews were used to collect data from four distinct groups of participants. These included general school students, lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (abbreviated to LGBT in this report as in the broader literature) students, school staff (including administrators and teachers) and parents.
Findings
Key findings from the evidence provided by the 3,698 survey participants, 280 participants in Focus Group Discussions (FGD) and 85 In-Depth Interviews (IDIs) with students, school staff and parents:
• Awareness of SRGBV: There was limited awareness of all stakeholders of SRGBV, with most primarily considering actions that cause physical injury and overlooking other forms such as sexual harassment, or psychosocial violence such as ostracism. Parents and teachers were comparatively more aware of, and concerned about, technology-related violence than students. LGBT students demonstrated stronger awareness of the negative long-term effects of verbal and psychosocial violence than other groups. A portion of both students and parents still accepted teachers’ methods of maintaining discipline in schools through such behaviours as hitting and scolding. Parents were often particularly unaware of school responsibilities to help prevent SRGBV off-campus, while some same-sex attracted and gender non conforming youth did not understand that the discrimination they were experiencing was a form of violence.
• Experience of SRGBV: More than half (51.9%) of all students reported having experienced at least one kind of violent behaviours in the last 6 months. LGBT students (particularly more ‘feminine’ same sex attracted males or gender non-conforming/transgender youth) were at particularly high risk of victimisation and exposure to all kinds of violence – 71% of LGBT students had been physically abused, 72.2% verbally abused. Additionally, male students experienced higher rates of all forms of violence (except for being a target of gossip) than females. Incidents of all forms of SRGBV were more prevalent among lower secondary students than upper secondary students.
• Motivations behind SRGBV: Stereotypes and prejudices (against femininity, gender non-conformity and perceived ‘weakness’) were seen to motivate SRGBV. Parents and teachers also mentioned the physio-psychological characteristics of puberty, hormones and identity-establishment among peers as coming into play. Social marginalisation by wealth status, ethnicity, language, or location (e.g. rural areas) were also mentioned by teachers, administrators and parents, and the possibility of the intersections of perceived difference compounding ostracism.
• Impact of SRGBV: Victims of SRGBV were more likely to experience reduced academic performance and participation, and have symptoms of negative psychological wellbeing including depression, thoughts or attempts of self-harm or suicide. While these negative impacts were found in victimised students of all categories, this was more pronounced among LGBT victims. The hindered learning opportunities often further impacted and isolated the affected students who failed to meet the expectations of both their schools and families.
• Students’ response to SRGBV: Roughly one-third of student victims of SRGBV reported seeking assistance from adults; however a portion also expressed a lack of confidence in adults’ capacity to solve the problem. Student bystanders who witnessed SRGBV most often took three main options, namely: informing school staff, trying to intervene, and doing nothing. The frequency of all three options was relatively similar, although the proportion of LGBT students who would “do nothing” was higher than that of non-LGBT male and female students. Fear was a powerful determinant for inaction; the students who did nothing in response to SRGBV mainly said that they were scared of getting involved, of revenge being taken upon them, or perhaps becoming bullied themselves.
• Prevention programmes and response interventions: There are vast differences between school staff’s and students’ assessments of SRGBV prevention/response mechanisms in school, with 95.4% of the teachers/school administrators and only 14.6% of students affirming measures in place. Some schools had concrete structural measures to prevent violence from occurring, including camera surveillance systems and counselling rooms; however these measures were not widespread,
seemed to be in their early days, and still of limited effect. Limited resources were identified, and their effectiveness limited without holistic plans to address SRGBV.
Discussion & Recommendations
Curriculum developers and policy-makers need to actively redress the gaps in SRGBV knowledge and process skills of all of the different education stakeholders through clear education resources revision and policy development offering distinct guidelines in a number of areas. Schools need to address SRGBV directly through innovative education techniques and engagement with related campaigns on SRGBV and LGBT themes to create safe and supportive learning environments. Staff training, clear regulation codes and processes, specific counselling provisions and uniform code flexibility, and community partnerships are also recommended. Further research may be needed to overcome some of the gaps in this study including representation of more provinces, longitudinal work, and investigation into what works to reform perpetrators and build resilience among groups at high risk of marginalisation.
Edited by Sam Elkin, Yves Rees and Tiffany Jones, this special midyear 2021 edition includes contributions by:
Bron Richardson, Jordie Slonim, Jamie James, Kait Fenwick, Sav Zwickl, Damien W. Riggs, Carla A. Pfeffer, Ruth Pearce, Sally Hines, Francis Ray White, Ruth Dahl, Samuel Luke Beatty, Tazz Hislop, Adele Aria, Raewyn Connell, Brooke Murray, Lucy Nicholas, Clair Brianz, Purity, Geoff Allshorn, Mel Romero, Bryson Charles, good judy, Stacey Stokes, Teague Leigh, Anastasia Le, Ruq, Alex Lee, Ryan Gustafsson, Blair Archbold, Kathy Mansfield, G. Jae Curmi, Noah Silvereye, Cat Cotsell, Erin Riley, Kai Ash, Kin Francis, Guy James Whitworth, Reid Marginalia, Stevie Lane, Susan Lardner & Jessica Ward, Tiarn, CB Mako, Nat Hollis, Rowan Richardson, Jaxson Wearing, Nate McCarthy, Theo Dunne, Elwin Schok, Maddox Gifford, Sam Elkin, Yves Rees, and Tiffany Jones.
‘… Sam Elkin and Yves Rees from the Spilling the T Collective bring a special trans and gender diverse community focus, with essays, poetry, polemic, memoir, fiction, and imagery that explores and celebrates gender diversity … trans creatives bring an acute understanding of how embodied subjects construct and perform gendered selves – an understanding that, though sometimes born of pain and trauma, and sometimes met in joyful euphoria – creates memorable art … foregrounding nuances often eluding the cis gaze …’
Available now from bookshops and online.
Multicultural Council (AGMC) and the Victorian Government on recovery support needs of survivors of LGBTQA+ change and suppression (conversion) practices. This study investigated survivors’ experiences
of recovery through interviews with survivors and with mental health practitioners. It is the first such study internationally to include
research with mental health practitioners and has a significantly more diverse cohort of survivor participants than previous studies.
Based on a comparative study from 2018, this book explores four different approaches to education according to 2,500 Australians’ experiences of them, on a range of topics. It shows that whilst the critical approach has strong research-based support across the board, sometimes a liberal, conservative or post-modern approach may have some merit for certain outcomes. This is a book about challenging our biases and calling on ourselves to aim higher for education, than what our own pre-conceived ideas might allow.
What and who is valued in education, and the social roles and identity messages learned, differ wildly from school to school. Education is most impacted by the orientation of education dominant in that context – whether conservative, liberal, critical or post-modern. These terms are often used with little practical data on the real-life schooling they entail. Who learns what in which approach? Who learns best with which approach, on which topic and why? This book provides this previously missing information. It offers holistic, detailed descriptions of conservative, liberal, critical and post-modern approaches to education broadly. It provides statistics and stories from real students on how the four approaches work practically in schools in relation to: age, gender, sexuality, social class, race, news-media, popular culture and technology. Chapters offer background information to the four perspectives, data from student participants, tutorial questions and activities, and suggestions for further reading.
Peter Waples-Crowe, Tiffany Jones, Sam Elkin, Indiah Money, Jude Munro, Firdhan Aria Wijaya, Steph Amir, Mel Simpson, Jean Taylor, Andrew McNamara, Jodie Hare, Frank Bonnici, Guy James Whitworth, Alison Thorne, Rodney Croome, Ian Seal, Edwina Shaw, Erin Riley, Derek Ho, Gina Ward, James May, Ayman Barbaresco, Blair Archbold, Yannick Thoraval, Baburam Poudel, Yulius Hendri Wijaya, Marcus O’Donnell, Hannah Gillard, Max Hayward, Rob Wallis, Henry von Doussa, Leila Lois, John Bartlett, Mark Anthony Cayanan, Bron Bateman, Cat Cotsell, Jennifer Power, Adele Aria, Michele Saint-Yves, Gemma Rose, Zachary DB Smith, Shivani Preston, Heath John Ramsay, Penn O’Brien, Stephanie Russell, Jan Prior, Andy Murdoch, Suz Mawer, Zachary Pryor, Peter Mitchell, Sharryn Ryan, Charlotte Allingham, Neika Lehman, Isabella Whāwhai Waru, Caleb Thaiday.
Release
Bent Street 4.2 will be Zoom launched at Adelaide Feast – details very soon.
ISBN: (ebook) 978-0-6487469-4-2
Cover Art—Jake Alexander Cruz.
Acknowledgment—3 ... Contents—4
Foreword—Tiffany Jones, Gordon Thompson—5
Introduction—Jennifer Power, Henry von Doussa, Timothy W. Jones—7
INTERVIEWS
Intimacy and Unexpected Technologies—Suzanne Fraser—12 Intimacy,
Technology and Emojis—Amanda Gesselman—17 Digital Intimacy,
Gender and Sexuality—Jamie Hakim—21
ESSAYS
My Queer Sex Bot—Jennifer Power—29
A Public Feeling—Marcus O’Donnell—41
Digital Intimacy: An End to the Tyranny of Distance—Gary Dowsett—53
Intimacy in Online Spaces for Bi+ People—Emiel Maliepaard—62
Out in the Outer Worlds—Nessie Smith—70
D/s in the Everyday—Rainicorn—81
Life, But Not As We Know It—Geoff Allshorn—89
Viral Lesbians—Tiffany Jones—101
FIRST PERSON
Not so Distant—Dennis Altman—115
Body in Retrograde—Samuel Luke Beatty—121
Architecture at Night—Michelle Dicinoski—130
Tiny Essential Victories—Guy James Whitworth—137
Dark POMO—Jean Taylor—142
Pro-Po: Policing Productivity in the Midst of Pandemic—Jake Cruz—155
Loose Threads—Max Hayward—159
Overhead—Elijah El Kahale—162
POETRY
Couch scene—Cat Cotsell—166
About Me—Georgia Banks—167
Touch—Tina Healy—172
Offline—Casey Scanlon—174
King Root—Brigitte Lewis—176
asleep in my arms—Rob Wallis—179
FICTION
A Box of Unused Masks—Holly Zwalf—181
Nick’s Story Mode—Ava Redman—184
Patchouli—Heath John Ramsay—188
• Questions to capture data on the sexual orientation or gender identity of students.
• Questions to capture data on school violence that is specifically based on SOGIE.
The Brief also gives guidance on:
• The challenges in collecting data on school violence based on SOGIE
• Identifying and fulfilling indicators on school violence based on SOGIE
The audience for this Technical Brief is: monitoring and evaluation specialists who manage institutional surveys at the international or national level (including school-based and population-based studies); policy-makers in the education sector; and researchers who investigate school violence, including against young lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) people and students who are perceived as gender non-conforming.
Dr Tiffany Jones, Macquarie University Department of Educational Studies, Australia, conducted a literature review and produced an initial draft. Christophe Cornu and Yongfeng Liu (Section of Health and Education, Division for Inclusion, Peace and Sustainable Development, Education Sector, UNESCO) developed the final version of this paper. Sarah Middleton-Lee edited the document.
Special thanks are due to Manos Antoninis (UNESCO Global Education Monitoring Report Team), Laura Kann (formerly with CDC), Lisette Kuyper (The Netherlands Institute for Social Research), Eunice Den Hoedt and Camilo Garcia (formerly UNESCO Section of Health and Education), who reviewed and commented on the initial draft paper; as well as Terryann Clark and Theresa Fleming (University of Auckland, New Zealand), who provided technical inputs.
The Victorian Department of Health and Human Services recognises the expertise and experiences of people with intersex variations and their families, and the leading efforts of medical, ethical and legal professions involved in the health care of people with intersex variations in Victoria.
The department would like to thank all of those who contributed their time and expertise to the development of this and related resources and acknowledge the contribution of Australian and Victorian intersex human rights advocates to the development of improved understanding and practice locally and internationally. In particular, the department thanks those involved in the 2016 project overseen by Gay and Lesbian Health Victoria (GLHV), including project leads Associate Professor Tiffany Jones (La Trobe University and the University of New England) and William Leonard (Director GLHV), strategic advisors Anna Brown and Lee Carnie (Human Rights Law Centre) and research assistants Renee Zborowski and Joe Latham. The 2016 project also benefitted from the input of a range of stakeholders, including members of the Department of Health and Human Services 2016–2017 Intersex Expert Advisory Group (IEAG), clinicians, researchers and other health and education experts. Thanks also to participants of the further consultations undertaken in 2017. This information and resource paper, and the suite of related materials, were revised and updated by Jason Rostant Consulting. They benefitted from extensive input from members of the Department of Health and Human Services 2017–2018 IEAG, human rights advocates, members of the Inter-Departmental Project Reference Group, and clinicians. Thanks to all contributors, not all of whom are named, including Ro Allen, Tony Briffa, Dr Meg Brodie, Anna Brown, Paul Byrne-Moroney, Lee Carnie, Andrea Kapteinis, Dr Ruth McNair, Kristiina Siiankoski, Trace Williams, Sarah-Jane Miles, Michele O’Connell and Dr Agli Zavros-Orr.
Exploring four key areas - mental health, physical health, sexual health and social health - the book sets out exactly what professionals need to know in relation to these areas and how to support trans youth in these circumstances. Providing clarity on a range of topics, this is the perfect overview for practitioners, as well as a useful text for students and researchers.
See: https://www.palgrave.com/gp/book/9783030242046#aboutBook
This edition contains essays, art, research, poetry, stories, installations, graphic stories and more! Themes are of this year (2019) and include Indigenous Queer studies, identity and visibility; religious themes in law, politics and conversion therapy; climate change; Trump; Hong Kong; feminisms; gender transitions; lovers and exes, parents, heroes from Gentleman Jack and Kate McKinnon to Randy Rainbow and Todrick Hall and much more...
Contributors: Peter Waples-Crowe, Tiffany Jones, Stephanie Amir, Mel Simpson, Andrew Farrell, Ashley Sievwright, Bee Cruse, Jamie James, Jodie Hare, Jean Taylor, Hannah Buttsworth, Maude Davey, Ayman Kaake, Stevie Lane, Guy James Whitworth, Ashley Hardcastle, Samuel Luke Beatty, Mandy Henningham, Clare Monagle, Timothy W Jones, Jennifer Power, Alison Thorne, Ryan Storr, Frank Bonnici, Lisa Farrell, Trent Mann, Jason Li, Jake Cruz, Geoff Allshorn, Terry Jaensch, Ashley Williams, Michelle Bishop, Samuel Luke Beatty, Xavier, Anna Leah D. Luna-Raven, Jocelyn Deane, Reese Downing, Stuart Barnes, Adele Tan, Gordon Thompson, Cat Cotsell, Henry von Doussa, Gavriil Aleksandrs, Lionel Wright, Kim Leutwyler, John Bartlett …plus our stunning photography and art models from Nova Gina (cover) to Faustina Agolley and many others!
Bent Street 2 covers aspects of 2018, including the afterglow of the passing into law of same-sex marriage; the ongoing struggle for rights and recognition; reflections on the past; as well as presenting the queer imagination as it follows its own lights, digressions, yearnings, and strange associations.
Guy James Whitworth, Steve RE Pereira, Jamie James, Quinn Eades, Brigitte Lewis, Jeff Herd, Adrienne Kisner, Marcus O'Donnell, Jennifer Power, Henry Von Doussa, Dean Smith, Alison Thorne, Rebecca Ryall, Craig Middleton, Nikki Sullivan, Maria Pallotta-Chiarolli, Dennis Altman, Janet Rice, Geoff Allshorn, Martin Roberts, Roz Bellamy, Mandy Henningham, Tiffany Jones, Michael Bernard Kelly, Aurea Kochanowski, René Bennett, Peter Mitchell, Tina Healy, Madison Griffiths, Andy Murdoch, Holly Zwalf, Lian Low, James May, Jean Taylor, Adrienne Kisner
ISBN: (paperback) 9781925283167 | ISBN: (ebook) 9781925283174
Publication date: December 2017
Contributors
JOEL CREASEY
JILL JONES
GUY JAMES WHITWORTH
GENINE HOOK
TINA HEALY
APRIL WHITE
JEAN TAYLOR
ASHLEY SIEVWRIGHT
MANDY HENNINGHAM
TIFFANY JONES
DENNIS ALTMAN
STEVE R. E. PEREIRA
RENEE BENNETT
SIMON COPLAND
MARY LOU RASMUSSEN
QUINN EADES
ERROL BRAY
BLAIR ARCHBOLD
NIKKI SULLIVAN
CRAIG MIDDLETON
DANIEL MARSHALL
NADIA BAILEY
DOUG POLLARD
SALLY CONNING
BRIGITTE LEWIS
DANIEL WITTHAUS
MIRA SCHLOSBERG
CHRISTOPHER BRYANT
MICHAEL BERNARD KELLY
JESS JONES
RODNEY CROOME
...available from today at real world book shops like Hares and Hyenas, or online via Amazon, Barnes & Noble, and the Book Depository.
Global human rights legislation protects all people against discrimination and violence in education, irrespective of sex, sexual orientation or gender identity and expression. Homophobic and transphobic violence in schools has been framed by officials as the basis of an international public health crises. UNESCO has particularly targeted homophobic and transphobic bullying in schools in recent years, supporting global and Asia-Pacific research, advocacy and programming. Viet Nam has committed to global and Asia-Pacific efforts to lessen gender-based violence. This includes sexual orientation, gender identity and expression (SOGIE)-related violence in schools.
Conceptual Framework
SOGIE diversity has been strongly established in the histories of many nations. Recognition of diverse gender expressions has been perhaps more prevalent in the Asia-Pacific region with Samoa’s ‘fa’afafines’ and Thailand’s ‘kathoey’ afforded particular cultural and social roles. Many Asian nations only became less tolerant of diverse SOGIE in their populations after Western influences in the 1800s. SOGIE-related school violence, also called homophobic and transphobic violence, is based on gender stereotypes, roles and norms. It can include verbal, psychosocial, physical and sexual violence.
Literature Review
While diverse legal and cultural contexts around SOGIE have likely impacted data collection on SOGIE-related school violence in Asia-Pacific, research suggests it is highly prevalent. Research shows SOGIE-related school violence – more frequent in schools without policy protection for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (abbreviated to LGBT in this report as in the broader literature) students – has negative impacts on students’ education and wellbeing. The literature review highlighted some noteworthy work in countries including Australia, China, Japan, New Zealand, Republic of Korea and Thailand, among others. The literature review also underscored a gap in the research and emphasised a strong need for national research on the extent, nature, impacts and supports around SOGIE-related school violence in Viet Nam.
Methodology
Research was conducted on the nature and extent of SOGIE-related school violence in schools in North, Central and South Viet Nam as part of a wider study on school-related gender-based violence. Issues of consent and privacy for participants were carefully considered. Stakeholders were enabled to freely discuss the sensitive topic of SOGIE-related school violence due to the support of Ministry of Education and Training (MOET). The research was aided by a range of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (abbreviated to LGBT in this report as in the broader literature) community organizations, departmental and school contacts, and local and international research experts. The study applied an emancipatory methodology aiming to achieve social justice goals. Mixed methods of in-person and online surveys, focus group discussions and in-depth interviews were used to collect data from four distinct groups of participants. These included a general sampling of school students, LGBT students, school staff (including administrators and teachers) and parents.
Findings
Evidence from the 3,698 survey participants, 280 Focus-Group Discussion (FGD) participants and 85 In-Depth Interviews (IDIs) with students (including LGBT students), school staff and parents showed many school stakeholders were influenced by constructions of LGBT people as diseased or problematic. LGBT students presented stronger awareness of SOGIE-related school violence than other groups, most particularly verbal violence and its negative long-term effects. SOGIE-related school violence was high in Viet Nam; 71% of LGBT students reported having been physically abused and 72.2% reported having been verbally abused. Some LGBT students revealed that they had experienced situations in which schools staff were perpetrators of violence. LGBT youth experienced clear negative academic and wellbeing outcomes, ranging from lowered grades and school drop-out, to depression and suicidal ideation. Almost a quarter of LGBT students who had experienced violence had also experienced suicidal ideation and 14.9% attempted to engage in self-harm or suicide. Gay, bisexual and gender non-conforming male and male-to-female transgender (GBT) students faced highly significant increases in risk for all kinds of violence compared to lesbian, bisexual and gender non-conforming female and female-to-male transgender (LBT) students. This appeared to be influenced by factors including perpetrator motivations of punishing ‘feminine’ expressions on male bodies, and increased respect for ‘masculine’ expressions on female bodies – within the context of a Confucian culture that broadly privileges masculinity. LGBT students were notably less confident in their schools’ efforts to prevent violence than other students in the FGDs and IDIs. The surveyed LGBT students who had experienced violence were more likely to report that they sought assistance from friends and less likely to seek help from staff than other students who had experienced violence. Research findings suggest an imperative need to raise awareness and capacity of school administrators and teachers with regard to SOGIE-related school violence to empower them to act as agent of change in making schools safer places for LGBT students.
Discussion & Recommendations
Curriculum developers and policy-makers need to actively redress the gaps in the knowledge of all education stakeholder groups on SOGIE and LGBT through clear education resources revision and distinct guidelines. Schools need to roll-out both educational interventions and practical support features (uniform flexibility and unisex toilets) in holistic efforts to create safe and supportive environments for LGBT students. Further studies could trial various SOGIE-related school violence interventions in schools.
Global human rights legislation protects all people against discrimination and violence in education, irrespective of their sex, sexual orientation or gender identity and expression. Viet Nam has committed to a range of global conventions to end school-related gender-based violence (SRGBV). Putting these commitments into practice requires first recognising the fact that schools can be sites of violence, and considering the nature of SRGBV in practice so that it can be prevented and its impacts mediated. This report sits within broader efforts by the Government of Viet Nam and in particular the Ministry of
Education and Training (MOET) to recognise, and respond to, SRGBV in schools in Viet Nam. It represents one practical research-based step amongst many in Viet Nam’s response to SRGBV.
Conceptual Framework
A range of sociologists have variously defined school-related gender-based violence (SRGBV). In this report, SRGBV is conceptualised as based on gender and sexuality stereotypes, roles and norms. Any learner, irrespective of their sexual orientation or whether they are female, male, transgender or intersex, may be affected. SRGBV is understood in this report to include, for example, physical, verbal,
sexual, social and technology-related violence. SRGBV can occur in a range of settings in and around schools, ranging from in school bathrooms to virtual locations via a range of technology. It can also
occur beyond the boundaries of the school itself.
Literature Review
Despite under-reporting, research literature suggests SRGBV is widespread globally and in the Asia-Pacific region. Research shows SRGBV can have long-term impacts on a child’s education, and mental
and physical wellbeing. The literature review highlighted some noteworthy work in the region, but also showed there was a strong need for national research on the extent, nature, impacts and supports around SRGBV in Viet Nam. Research objectives for the study emerging from the literature included goals of exploring the awareness levels and attitudes of key education stakeholder groups about SRGBV, the nature and scale of SRGBV (including homophobic and transphobic violence), contributing factors, impacts and prevention/support measures in schools.
Methodology
An investigation was undertaken into the nature and extent of SRGBV in schools in North, Central and South Viet Nam. Ethical issues were carefully planned including informed consent and privacy for participants. The commitment and support of MOET was essential to enabling stakeholders to freely discuss the sensitive topic of SRGBV. A range of local and international research experts, departmental and school contacts, and community organizations aided the project. The study applied an emancipatory methodology aiming to achieve social justice goals. Mixed methods of in-person and online surveys, focus group discussions and in-depth interviews were used to collect data from four distinct groups of participants. These included general school students, lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (abbreviated to LGBT in this report as in the broader literature) students, school staff (including administrators and teachers) and parents.
Findings
Key findings from the evidence provided by the 3,698 survey participants, 280 participants in Focus Group Discussions (FGD) and 85 In-Depth Interviews (IDIs) with students, school staff and parents:
• Awareness of SRGBV: There was limited awareness of all stakeholders of SRGBV, with most primarily considering actions that cause physical injury and overlooking other forms such as sexual harassment, or psychosocial violence such as ostracism. Parents and teachers were comparatively more aware of, and concerned about, technology-related violence than students. LGBT students demonstrated stronger awareness of the negative long-term effects of verbal and psychosocial violence than other groups. A portion of both students and parents still accepted teachers’ methods of maintaining discipline in schools through such behaviours as hitting and scolding. Parents were often particularly unaware of school responsibilities to help prevent SRGBV off-campus, while some same-sex attracted and gender non conforming youth did not understand that the discrimination they were experiencing was a form of violence.
• Experience of SRGBV: More than half (51.9%) of all students reported having experienced at least one kind of violent behaviours in the last 6 months. LGBT students (particularly more ‘feminine’ same sex attracted males or gender non-conforming/transgender youth) were at particularly high risk of victimisation and exposure to all kinds of violence – 71% of LGBT students had been physically abused, 72.2% verbally abused. Additionally, male students experienced higher rates of all forms of violence (except for being a target of gossip) than females. Incidents of all forms of SRGBV were more prevalent among lower secondary students than upper secondary students.
• Motivations behind SRGBV: Stereotypes and prejudices (against femininity, gender non-conformity and perceived ‘weakness’) were seen to motivate SRGBV. Parents and teachers also mentioned the physio-psychological characteristics of puberty, hormones and identity-establishment among peers as coming into play. Social marginalisation by wealth status, ethnicity, language, or location (e.g. rural areas) were also mentioned by teachers, administrators and parents, and the possibility of the intersections of perceived difference compounding ostracism.
• Impact of SRGBV: Victims of SRGBV were more likely to experience reduced academic performance and participation, and have symptoms of negative psychological wellbeing including depression, thoughts or attempts of self-harm or suicide. While these negative impacts were found in victimised students of all categories, this was more pronounced among LGBT victims. The hindered learning opportunities often further impacted and isolated the affected students who failed to meet the expectations of both their schools and families.
• Students’ response to SRGBV: Roughly one-third of student victims of SRGBV reported seeking assistance from adults; however a portion also expressed a lack of confidence in adults’ capacity to solve the problem. Student bystanders who witnessed SRGBV most often took three main options, namely: informing school staff, trying to intervene, and doing nothing. The frequency of all three options was relatively similar, although the proportion of LGBT students who would “do nothing” was higher than that of non-LGBT male and female students. Fear was a powerful determinant for inaction; the students who did nothing in response to SRGBV mainly said that they were scared of getting involved, of revenge being taken upon them, or perhaps becoming bullied themselves.
• Prevention programmes and response interventions: There are vast differences between school staff’s and students’ assessments of SRGBV prevention/response mechanisms in school, with 95.4% of the teachers/school administrators and only 14.6% of students affirming measures in place. Some schools had concrete structural measures to prevent violence from occurring, including camera surveillance systems and counselling rooms; however these measures were not widespread,
seemed to be in their early days, and still of limited effect. Limited resources were identified, and their effectiveness limited without holistic plans to address SRGBV.
Discussion & Recommendations
Curriculum developers and policy-makers need to actively redress the gaps in SRGBV knowledge and process skills of all of the different education stakeholders through clear education resources revision and policy development offering distinct guidelines in a number of areas. Schools need to address SRGBV directly through innovative education techniques and engagement with related campaigns on SRGBV and LGBT themes to create safe and supportive learning environments. Staff training, clear regulation codes and processes, specific counselling provisions and uniform code flexibility, and community partnerships are also recommended. Further research may be needed to overcome some of the gaps in this study including representation of more provinces, longitudinal work, and investigation into what works to reform perpetrators and build resilience among groups at high risk of marginalisation.
Methods: A Critical Discourse Analysis of 1054 US anti-LGBTIQ+ state-level bill submissions from 1 Jan 2018 to 31 December 2023, compared 2023 trends to previous data.
Results: The co-ordinated neofascist mobilisation behind US hyper-productivity and erratic contradictory justifcations of anti-LGBTIQ+bills expanded exponentially, emphasising less resisted campaigns. Initially smaller bills targeted political weak spots: transgender youth in primary schools, bathrooms and politically enabling Republican-governed states. Increasingly bills expanded in number, frequency, size, and punitive reach against LGBTIQ+and other citizens’ rights, in wider contexts (higher education, public and Democrat-governed spaces). By 2023, bill strategies used hypocritical and hypothetical anti-LGBTIQ+logics; replicated federally to thwart democratic and economic structures.
Conclusions: Anti-fascist, Queer and critical socialist theories explained the 2023 bills’ increase as building upon past partisan mobilisation on wedge transgender state election issues; towards neofascist diminishment of increasingly wider-ranging and higher-level US democratic structures, rights protections, and economic functioning. Policy attacks on vulnerable social groups’ rights — particularly trans youth — can signal ‘early stages’ within neo-fascist strong-man state-identity creation supporting democratic structure diminishments.
Policy Implications: Multi-level multi-cultural pluralist democratic institutions and support structures with inter-reinforced rights recognition expansions should be required by and should protect the rights of all citizens.
Methods: The study employed elements of grounded theory to analyse survey responses of LGBTQ+ students (n=706), school staff (n=107), and parents (n=57). The survey data was collected online from 2021 to 2022 and explored LGBTQ+ community members’ experiences in, and perceptions of, Australian schools.
Results: Euphoria was predominantly related to school social contexts (such as supportive social climates), followed by school practices (such as LGBTQ+ representation), and internal experiences (such as pride). These events were shared by students, staff, and parents similarly. Euphoric events were shared by cisgender and GD participants, although gender-affirming social contexts and school practices were valued particularly by GD students, parents, and staff.
Conclusions: Schools can act as supportive contexts for LGBTQ+ students, staff, and parents in terms of social characteristics and school practices using mostly similar methods.
Policy Implications: Implications for policy development include school-wide interventions that include and reflect all LGBTQ+ people in all education-based roles, via school curricula and activities, public education and awareness-raising
endeavours.
The United Nations called member states to better support the education rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersex, queer and asexual (LGBTIQA +) people in recent years. However, Australian policy debates about schools’ ‘religious freedom’ and exemptions around gender and sexuality discrimination continue.
Methods
This article explores 1293 LGBTIQA + students’ experiences around religious freedom, gender, and sexuality by school type using data from the 2022 ‘Gender and Sexuality Expression in Schools’ survey. To understand correlations for students’ religious vs. non-religious educational institution types, basic descriptive and correlative statistical analyses were undertaken for quantitative data in SPSS and Excel including chi-square tests, alongside Leximancer-supported thematic analyses of qualitative responses.
Results
Attending religious schools was associated with (1) increased anti-LGBTIQA + and religious freedom-restricting policies, messages, and practices; (2) increased sexual orientation and gender identity and expression change efforts (SOGI- ECE) messages and practices; and (3) increased negative consequences and feelings. In religious education sites, professionals — especially teachers/educators — were more likely to spread anti-LGBTIQA + messaging at class/group and school-wide levels especially around ‘sinning’; however, professional codes appeared deterrents for school psychologists. In government schools, students more often unofficially spread anti-LGBTIQA + messaging around ‘brokenness’ or ‘social harmfulness’, mostly one-on-one.
Conclusions
The article shows the value of anti-discrimination laws and professional codes in reducing official problematic practices, for those contexts and professionals they applied to.
Policy Implications
Removal of exemptions for religious education institutions in anti-discrimination laws, revisions of education policies, and clearer protections for LGBTIQA + people in educators’ professional codes are recommended.
On Conversion Practices
• The submission establishes conversion practices as being grounded in a blend of messages and pseudo-scientific assertions (often labelled as ‘conversion ideology’) that suggest people can and should change or suppress diverse sexual orientation and gender identity and expression. Exposure to elements of this ideology and its component messages and assertions often occurs in early years and increases through-out childhood, adolescence, and/or adulthood, with their communication usually becoming increasingly directive. Indeed, these messages and assertions are most often the core conceptual content addressed in conversion practices themselves. Conversion practices therefore stem from complex formative experiences, and social and institutional dynamics.
• Internalisation of conversion ideology messages, combined with community dynamics and the fear of rejection or shame, complicate participants’ ability to give free informed consent to conversion practices; with ‘consent’ often obtained by deception or misinformation and only given after a substantial period of time absorbing conversion ideology. Conversion practices sometimes do not appear obviously ‘coercive’ in the conventional sense of the word because of the contextual and spiritual nature of key pressures, causing external observers to frequently fail to understand the deeper long-term dynamics present around participants/victims.
• Conversion practices typically occur in religious/ pastoral care, healthcare, human services and disability support provision, education, family and community (including minority culture) settings. The rejection, homophobia and transphobia of such settings create false hope conversion practices will relieve or substantially reduce risk of rejection; instead, they create failure and rejection cycles. In formal service settings, conversion practices also constitute a substantive breach of ethical standards and duty of care.
• Research shows conversion practices involve diffuse perpetrators and often cause substantial long-term harm to participants/victims/survivors that are overwhelmingly psychological rather than other forms of harm such as physical assault. Harms include deep ongoing shame, depression, anxiety, inhibited development of self-concept, poor educational and employment outcomes, suicidality, problems maintaining relationships, sexual functioning issues, and complex trauma – appearing anytime from shortly after exposure to decades later.
• Recent Australian research demonstrates that conversion practices and the dissemination of conversion ideology continue to persist in New South Wales, with significant effort employed by proponents to frame and re-frame conversion practices and ideology in ways that will make them difficult to detect for less informed observers. Australian research and advocacy has been world-leading in its ability to crisply define conversion ideology and practices in ways that provide a clear and reliable lens for under-standing how they work.
On Banning Conversion Practices
• While there remain many survivor/victims and ongoing participants in the community, a substantial volume experience conversion practices from a diverse range of diffuse actors and agents and particularly those they overwhelmingly wish to avoid subjecting to formal punishments. Therefore, a legislative approach that centres offences that require attaching responsibility for harm to a single perpetrator or body corporate in conventional criminal proceedings would not reflect the substantial volume of survivor experiences recorded and analysed in Australian research.
• The NSW ban model should draw on concepts from other legislative interventions including the survivor-led gold standard model adopted by the Victorian and Aotearoa/New Zealand governments and others aiming at symbolic, preventative and inclusive goals. It should aim at transformation and community education across relevant industry sectors and communities including guidance and scenario information to combat a likely range of misinformation and disinformation, and misunderstandings. The ban should centre the role of government in attaining outcomes and avoid approaches that merely view conversion practices as an outworking of discrimination, and any approach that places the burden of attaining jus-tice or legal outcomes on the agency of survivors.
• Having a plan and resourcing for supporting survivors of conversion practices would be a much-needed innovation, and provider and professional training could cover a range of evidence-based ideals.
On the NSW Conversion Practices Ban Questions
• Table 2 of this submission answers the key consultation questions. It addresses the legislative, criminal, regulatory, civil and administrative, and non-legislative aspects of the proposal for NSW ban modelling; emphasising ways of manifesting a recommended transformative approach and offering sample text ideas.
Conclusion: On Drafting a Ban & Ban-Plan
• The submission overall emphasises multiple strong and diverse reasons to continue the progress of the NSW Government’s banning of conversion practices; from the high prevalence of conversion practices to the harms they cause, and the importance of the bi-partisan election promise to stop them.