Gay-Straight Alliances and Student Activism in Ontario Public Secular and Catholic High Schools

306 Pages·2017·1.79 MB·English

WWeesstteerrnn UUnniivveerrssiittyy
SScchhoollaarrsshhiipp@@WWeesstteerrnn
Electronic Thesis and Dissertation Repository
3-29-2018 2:15 PM
GGaayy--SSttrraaiigghhtt AAlllliiaanncceess aanndd SSttuuddeenntt AAccttiivviissmm iinn OOnnttaarriioo PPuubblliicc
SSeeccuullaarr aanndd CCaatthhoolliicc HHiigghh SScchhoooollss
Alicia A. Lapointe, The University of Western Ontario
Supervisor: Martino, Wayne J., The University of Western Ontario
A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Doctor of Philosophy degree
in Education
© Alicia A. Lapointe 2018
Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/etd
Part of the Other Education Commons
RReeccoommmmeennddeedd CCiittaattiioonn
Lapointe, Alicia A., "Gay-Straight Alliances and Student Activism in Ontario Public Secular and Catholic
High Schools" (2018). Electronic Thesis and Dissertation Repository. 5248.
https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/etd/5248
This Dissertation/Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarship@Western. It has been accepted
for inclusion in Electronic Thesis and Dissertation Repository by an authorized administrator of
Scholarship@Western. For more information, please contact [email protected].
Abstract

This study provides an in-depth examination of the educative and activist function of GSAs in two
public secular and two public Catholic Ontario secondary schools. Queer theory, as elaborated by
Foucault (1978), Sedgwick (1990/2008), Butler (1990, 1993a/b/c), Warner (1991), and Britzman
(1995), provides a foundation for critiquing the heteronormative underpinnings of schooling, and
the trans-informed insights of Namaste (2000), Stryker (2006), Serano (2007/2016, 2013),
Malatino (2015), and Connell (2009) offers a lens to scrutinize cisnormative infrastructure,
pedagogy, and practice as they pertain to the role and educative function of GSAs in selected
Ontario schools. To generate knowledge on the particularities of the four GSAs (Patton, 2002), a
multi-sited case study approach was undertaken (Patton, 2002; Stake, 2005). Data were gathered
by completing semi-structured interviews with 14 youth and five educators across the school sites,
observing and participating in GSA meetings, collecting semi-structured diaries from 13 youth,
and analyzing club-related visual materials - all of which were made sense of by employing queer
and trans-informed theoretical perspectives. There was a concerted effort to speak with trans and
gender diverse GSA members in order to (de)subjugate their embodied knowledges and
understandings (Stryker, 2006), authorize their voices (Cook-Sather, 2002, 2006), and document
their agency in schooling by way of their club-inspired education and activism (see Elliott, 2015,
Schindel, 2005, 2008). Three prominent themes emerged within the data: 1: each GSA was a
student-driven democratizing space that enabled youth to explore and circulate anti-
hetero/cisnormative discourses (Fraser, 1990); 2) all GSAs served as a proxy in the absence of an
ongoing systemic commitment to queer and trans-informed education; and 3) pastoral care and its
regulatory moral authority within Catholic education impeded GSA development and functioning
(Martino, 2014). The implications of the study are outlined in terms of the need for systemic
support for anti-heteronormative and anti-cisnormative education so that the burden and
responsibility for this education does not just fall on the shoulders of GSA members and gender
and sexual minority youth in particular.

Keywords:
activism; Catholic; case study; cisnormativity; counterpublic; Gay-Straight Alliance (GSA);
gender, sexual, and romantic minority (GSRM); heteronormativity; Ontario; proxy; queer and
trans-informed education; secular

ii
Acknowledgments

This dissertation would not have been possible without the unwavering guidance and
support of my supervisor, Dr. Wayne Martino, the most kind and thoughtful person I have ever
met. Thank you for believing in me and for encouraging me to persist, develop, and grow in ways
that I did not know were possible. You have been so generous with your time, advice, and
feedback, to which I am incredibly grateful for. There are not enough words to describe how
inspiring and motivating you are! Many thanks to my committee member, Dr. Susan Knabe, for
providing a thorough review of the draft dissertation. Your feedback was tremendously valuable,
not only in terms of strengthening the thesis, but with helping me prepare for the defense. To my
examiners, Dr. Pam Bishop, Dr. Jason Brown, Dr. Andre Grace, and Dr. Chris Roulston, thank
you so much for the thought-provoking conversation. You were all so kind and interested in how
my study relates to broader systemic issues.
Thank you, Jenny, for your patience and support when this PhD ride was off the tracks,
and for celebrating with me when my journey was much smoother. Hopefully, I can do the same
for you! Thank you for taking the time to create all the lovely images for my PowerPoint
presentations.
To each Gay-Straight Alliance member and advisor, thank you for inviting me into your
club, and for taking the time to speak with me and voice your thoughts and experiences. Your
insights and stories have impacted me greatly, and I will emphasize these learnings wherever life
takes me.
Thank you to the many professors and staff members who have made my time at the
Faculty of Education enriching and memorable.
iii
Table of Contents

Abstract…………………………………………………………………………………..... i
Key Words………………………………………………………………………………… ii
Acknowledgments………………………………………………..……………………….. iii
Table of Contents……………………………………………………………...…………... iv
List of Figures……………………………………………………………………………... ix
List of Appendices………………………………………………………………................ ix
List of Abbreviations……………………………………………………………………… x

Chapter 1: Introduction to the Study and Theoretical Positioning…………………... 1
Research Questions............................................................................................................... 2
Research Purposes………………………………………………………………………… 2
GSRM Students’ Experiences at School..…………………………………………………. 3
Background to Gay-Straight Alliance (GSA) Development………………………………. 4
National, Provincial, and Educational Policies and Legislation for Gender and Sexual
Minorities in Canada…………………………………………………………………......... 6
GSAs as Subaltern Counterpublics………………………………………………………... 13
Theoretical Frameworks....................................................................................................... 14
Queer Theoretical Frameworks…………………………………………………………… 15
Foucauldian Informed Understandings of Power and Sexuality……………………….. 16
The production of the homosexual subject………………………………………….. 16
Heteronormative learning environments…………………………………………… 20
Sedgwick’s Queerly Informed Understandings of Sexuality…………………………… 24
iv
The Significance of Butler’s ‘Heterosexual Matrix’ and the Materialization of Bodies... 29
Warner’s Theorization of Heteronormativity………………………………………….. 39
Britzman and Queer Pedagogy…………………………………………………………. 42
Queer Theory’s Limits: The Need for Trans-Informed Theorization…………………...... 44
Trans Theory………………………………………………………………………………. 48
Namaste and the Issue of Trans Erasure………………………………………………... 49
Stryker and the Question of Trans Embodiment………………………………………... 51
Serano’s Articulation of Cis Terminology……………………………………………... 53
Malatino and Trans Informed Pedagogical Insights……………………………………. 58
Conclusion………………………………………………………………………………… 60
Overview of Dissertation………………………………………………………………….. 61

Chapter 2: Literature Review…………………………………………………………... 64
Hetero/cisnormative Curricula……………..……………………………………………… 65
In(queer)ies within Catholic Education…………………………………………………… 67
Gay-Straight Alliances: Benefits and Resistance………………………………………..... 70
Gay-Straight Alliances: Education and Activism…………………………………………. 72
Gay-Straight Alliance Development in Religious Postsecondary Schools……………….. 80
GSA Functioning in Publicly-Funded Canadian Catholic High Schools…………………. 82
Conclusion………………………………………………………………………………… 83

Chapter 3: Methodology and Methods…………………………………………………. 85
The Relevance of Qualitative Methodology for this Study……………………………….. 85
v
Queer and Trans-Informed Ethics……………………………………………………... 87
Research Design…………………………………………………………………………... 88
Case Study……………………………………………………………………………... 88
Recruitment……………………………………………………………………………….. 91
Informed Consent……………………………………………………………………… 92
Ongoing Consent………………………………………………………………………. 94
School Sites……………………………………………………………………………….. 94
Participants………………………………………………………………………………... 99
Data Sources………………………………………………………………………………. 100
Semi-Structured Interviews………………………...………………………………….. 101
Participant Observation………………………………………………………………... 103
Semi-Structured Diaries………………………………...……………………………… 105
Visual Materials and Documents.……………………………………………………… 107
Data Storage………………………………………………………………………………. 107
Analysis of Data…………………………………………………………………………... 108
The Use of Theory…………………………………………....………………………... 108
Constructing the Case Study……………………………..……………………….......... 109
Developing Site Records…………………………………......………………………... 110
Analysis………………………………………………………………………………... 110
Conclusion………………………………………………………………………………… 112

Chapter 4: Results - Publicly-Funded Secular Schools ……………………….……..... 114
Village High……………………………………………………………………………….. 115
vi
The GSA as a Counter-Hegemonic Site……………………………………………….. 115
Queer and Trans-Informed Conversations and Learning…………………………... 116
Anti-Hetero/Cisnormative School-Wide Initiatives………………………………… 136
Lobbying for an all gender washroom…………………………………………… 156
Trans-informed education as a result of student activism………………………….. 164
Sunset High………………………………………………………………………………... 173
Compelled to Educate School Community Members…………………………………. 174
Leadership Expectations……………………………………………………………….. 176
Opposition to GSA Events……………………………………………………………... 179
Professional Development Session with Educators…………………………………….. 181
Conclusion………………………………………………………………………………… 185

Chapter 5: Results – Publicly-Funded Catholic Schools………………………………. 188
Blessed Sacrament………………………………………………………………………… 188
The Function of a Catholic School GSA………………………………………………. 189
Problematizing the Pedagogy of the Panel Presentation…………………………… 191
Organizing Around the ‘Other’: Negating Systemic Issues………………………... 200
Reinforcing Heteronormative Hegemony and Erasing Trans Experiences……….... 205
Enacting Catholicity: Vetting GSA’s Educative Content……………………………… 213
Holy Names……………………………………………………………………………….. 224
Club Formation at Holy Names………………………………………………………... 224
Catholic Conditioning: Crafting the GSA’s Image………………………………… 226
Institutional Barriers to the GSA’s Educative Work…………………………………... 235
vii
The GSA’s Limited School-Wide Reach……………………………………………… 239
Queer and Trans-Informed Conversations and Learning Within GSA Meetings……... 245
Conclusion………………………………………………………………………………… 249

Chapter 7: Conclusion………………………………..…………………..……………… 250
My Own Investment in the Study…………………………………………………………. 252
Religious Freedom: A Guise for Religious Bigotry………………………………………. 255
Transforming Teaching Practices: Preservice and In-Service Training…………………... 258
Looking Forward: Future Studies…………………………………………………………. 260

References…………………………………………………………………………………. 262
Curriculum Vitae………………………………………………………………………….. 291

viii
List of Figures

Figure 1: Ellen Page……………………………………………………………………... 214
Figure 2: Wanda Sykes………………………………………………………………….. 214
Figure 3: Ellen DeGeneres ……………………………………………………………… 215
Figure 4: Pope Francis…………………………………………………………………… 215
Figure 5: Wanda Sykes………………………………………………………………….. 216

List of Appendices

Appendix A: Summary of Participants………………………………………………….. 278
Appendix B. Letters of Information and Consent Forms………………………………... 280
Appendix C. Ethics Approval Form.…………………………………………………….. 288
Appendix D. Interview Questions……………………………………………………….. 289

ix