Legislatn bars ‘workplace digny’ for gay teachers

INTO ngrs: Some school patrons believe gay teachers are ‘trsilly disorred’ * lgbt teachers ireland *

A new group the Irish Natnal Teachers' Organisatn (INTO) is givg gay, lbian, bisexual and transgenred teachers a… * lgbt teachers ireland *

INTO spokperson said many gay teachers “sred” they n be fired bee of their sexual orientatn. * lgbt teachers ireland *

Ireland’s equaly legislatn is a “barrier to digny the workplace” for gay and lbian natnal school teachers. * lgbt teachers ireland *

In negotiatg their everyday liv schools Ireland, lbian, gay, bisexual and transgenr (LGBT) teachers experience ep inty nflicts and stggl wh school culture that volve ntuo selfcensorship and emotnal vtment (Neary 2012; Gowran 2004). Given the ep silenc that have surround LGBT sexuali Irish schools, iativ that have raised awarens among tn partners, school lears and guidance unsellors about the importance of explic mentng of homophobic bullyg and sexual orientatn school polici (GLEN 2012) and the recent actn plan for tacklg homophobic bullyg have been wele progrs (Department of Edutn and Skills 2013). However, is clear that a gap exists between policy and s implementatn schools where teachers’ stggl wh normative and cultural practic are evince of the workg of heteronormativy Irish schools. In this paper, I will prent an overview of rearch wh LGBT primary and send-level teachers Ireland and highlight some central issu and plexi relatn to the nference theme School ’Ethos’ and LGBT sexuali. Introductn This paper addrs three central them drawn om a review of the rearch on LGBT teachers Ireland and rais qutns for further exploratn. This is not tend to be a systematic review of all rearch related to the liv of lbian, gay, bisexual and transgenr (LGBT) teachers Ireland. Rather, the exploratn of three central them serv as a startg pot for explorg the plexy of LGBT teachers’ everyday liv. Methods and Foc A small body of rearch exists on LGBT teachers Ireland (Gowran 2004; Lillis 2009; Sheils 2012; Neary 2013). The fact that none of the participants any of this rearch intify as transgenr is illtrative of the ep, multifaceted layers of silence that surround transgenr inti the Irish tn system. This paper proceeds wh the acronym 'LGBT’ while beg gnisant that there is a necsy for -pth rearch on the experienc of transgenr teachers and stunts the Irish ntext. Gowran’s rearch ed qualative, semi-stctured terviews wh 2 primary school and 5 send-level LGBT teachers to explore ‘the general climate of schools relatn to lbian and gay issu, the level of safety to be ‘out’4 schools; how teachers manage their lbian or gay inty relatn to their role as teacher; participants’ own experienc as lbian or gay tors’ (Gowran 2004, p.42). Lillis’s rearch was wh primary school teachers who were members of the Irish Natnal Teachers’ Organisatn (INTO) LGBT Teachers’ Group. 6 -pth terviews wh the teachers sought to ‘explore the specificy of heteronormative valu and attus the primary school ntext; to exame how LGBT primary school teachers negotiate their sexual orientatn wh lleagu and to exame the strategi employed by the LGB Teacher to rist heteronormativy wh the school settg’ (Lillis 2009, p.12). Sheils’s rearch drew on 9 qualative terviews wh primary school teachers who intified as lbian or gay and 171 qutnnair sent to primary schools around Ireland to explore the impact of Sectn 37.1 of the Employment Equaly Act (an “ethos” exemptn) on the personal and profsnal liv of primary school teachers, particularly lbian, gay and bisexual teachers (Sheils 2012). In my own rearch (Neary 2013), I nducted -pth qualative terviews wh 8 teachers who intified as lbian or gay (5 primary and 3 send-level) to explore teachers’ experienc of “g out” Irish schools. This paper will also draw on my current rearch wh 15 (7 primary and 8 send-level teachers). Over a 15 month perd, ial pth terviews wh each teacher, diary and retrospective reflectns and semi-stctured follow-up terviews explore how teachers negotiate their personal and profsnal iti Irish schools while planng/enterg to a civil partnership (CP). What follows is prentatn and discsn of three central them across this rearch: 1. Beg a Teacher, 2. Constant Emotnal Work, 3. School Ethos 1. Beg a Teacher The teachg profsn is unique bee teachers are products of the schoolg system and therefore subject to the same cultural bias of that system (Gowran 2004). LGBT teachers have embodied the unfortable relatnship between sexualy and schoolg, makg the negotiatn of a teacher inty a plex one. Many LGBT teachers see the teachg profsn as a ‘closet’ that provoked ‘stiflg’ feelgs bee of the plexi associated wh disclosg an intifitn wh a sexual inty other than heterosexual (Neary 2013, p.589). Feelgs such as the s alongsi the fact that teachers have ‘played the game’ of tn and have been succsful at bee they are ‘endowed wh the hab that impli knowledge and regnn of the immanent laws of the field’ (Bourdi 1993, 72). And so, on one hand, LGBT teachers have the pal required to negotiate the field of tn but on the other hand, they nnot aquately prent a plete rrponnce wh what is valued by schools: heterosexualy. In this way, their ‘hab is displaced; a fish out of water (Bourdi and Wacquant 1989, 43). This nflict is borne out the followg quote om one of the teachers Lillis’s rearch: ‘The teacher has such a role the life of the child and you obvly are gog to have to be perfect. And that’s the role of a teacher and [beg lbian or gay] totally ms everythg up’ ('Aoife' ced Lillis 2009, p.24). Much recent rearch the soclogy of tn nfirms schoolg systems as havg ‘privaizatn tennci [that] have unrcut the ia of tn as a llective and public good and tablished as a saleable mody and an asset to be peted over by self-terted dividuals’ (Youll 2011, p.13). Teachers, as part of this petive environment, feel prsure to ply wh the ‘bs-as-ual’ of tn but are aware that the lite negotiatn of the profsnal/personal boundary relatn to their sexualy always lurkg the background is the ia that ‘you jt need one parent to pla...’ (Sarah VEC School Teacher). The followg sectn provis a glimpse to the nstant emotnal work of LGBT teachers their school environments. 2. Constant Emotnal Work There is much evince other ntexts to show that LGBT teachers labour over the nstctn of an acceptable teacher inty their school ntexts (Griff 1992; Harbeck 1992; Khayatt 1992; Ferfolja 2007; Rudoe 2010). Aligned wh the ternatnal ntext, the rearch reviewed here highlights several factors that are ditive of the plexy of this negotiatn the Irish ntext. The Public/Private Boundary Many teachers, orr to succsfully negotiate the private/public boundary, have valued privacy as a mechanism of protectn and some see this privacy as an issue of appropriatens (Neary 2013). However, many teachers note that the ncept of privacy n also be a cloak that vers the more subtle negotiatns of inty: I thk people don’t realise, they thk your private life is your private life, and that nobody shar their private life really at work, and they don’t realise how much they really do share. Like, I know whether my lleagu are married or not, often although not always, whether they’re gog out wh someone or not. If they are they ually feel ee to have that partner, or lover, or whatever, e and llect them or drop them off. And they get all kds of ltle approvals. ('Sheila' ced Gowran 2004, p.45) Here, Sheila pots to the myriad of ways that heterosexual teachers subtly and unnscly lean on their heterosexual personal liv as pal their school environment. Bourdi’s ncept of ‘symbolic vlence’ helps to unrstand the subtleti of the negotiatns. ‘Concealg the power relatns which are the basis of s force’ (Bourdi and Passeron 1977, 4) ensur that the privilege of heterosexual teachers is legimated and mataed. Risk Evaluatn Many teachers are nsc of the potential negative reactns of others if they disclose: ‘It is an effort bee I thk you always have to al wh someone’s reactn, where ’s so much easier not to bother wh that’ ('Mairéad ced Neary 2013, p.592). Some teachers bear the rult of entrenched ials of appropriatens around sexualy: ‘I'm not gog to put anybody’s face’ (Eimear, Catholic Primary School) while other teachers have reflected that this kd of sentiment is an “ternalised homophobia” which ‘leads to the projectn of our own negative thoughts and feelgs about our sexualy onto other dividuals’ (Lillis 2009, p.53). There are other fears that teachers experience that lour and shape their approach to school life. One of the is the very potent fear of the misnceptn of gay male sexualy as beg somehow related to paedophilia. Some teachers adm that they are ‘credibly ut’ (Simon, Primary School Prcipal) or that “a child will say that they are the victim of some sort of abe om me – that’s my biggt fear and I don’t know how the school, the system would back me’ ('Orla' ced Gowran 2004, p.49). The ncept of the ‘superteacher’ (Rasmsen 2006) is rroborated the rearch I am currently nductg wh LGBT teachers who are havg a civil partnership. LGBT teachers work extremely hard to ‘pensate’ for their ‘alternative’ sexual inty an effort to prevent potential risk. Teachers attempt to have a ‘strong enough prence’ (Steve Primary School Teacher) so that they n “create a scenar where people won’t ms wh boundari bee of the sexualy thg bei * lgbt teachers ireland *

The everyday experience of many young Irish lbian, gay and bisexual people is not so cheerful spe recent natnal velopments * lgbt teachers ireland *

* lgbt teachers ireland *