Religious and sexual orientation intersections in education and media: A Canadian perspective

Abstract

This article will examine and challenge the ways in which religious and sexually diverse identities are constructed as oppositional and further regulated as such within policy and legislation. Although focused on Canada, this discussion has international resonance where religion and sexual orientation debates and education policies are also a central focus of controversy. Within these rigid identity assumptions, reinforced through public and legal discourses, is the repeated notion that there is an inherent conflict or competition between religious identities and sexual identities. This assumed ‘clash’ often requires individuals to repress aspects of their identities, not as a result of an internal struggle, but as a response to external social norms.

Young men who have sex with men's use of social and sexual media and sex-risk associations: cross-sectional, online survey across four countries

“…This could be a further opportunity for research to explore the feasibility of online interventions in partnership with school curriculums, certainly around the areas of knowledge improvement and reduced risk behaviours but also the culture that may inhibit positive behaviours. Although caution is warranted given the limitations of untargeted sex and relationships education,20 and educators being able, whether through supportive curriculum, policies and training, to deliver sexual orientation and gender identity topics—as the Ontario, Canada experience revealed can be challenging 21…”

Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual teachers’ negotiations of civil partnership and schools: ambivalent attachments to religion and secularism

“…Reflecting broader societal discourses, there have been significant tensions between religion and sexuality in schools (Shipley, 2014). Debates about sexuality education at school embody these tensions.…”

Religious Queer People Beyond Identity Conflict: Lessons from Orthodox LGBT Jews in Israel

“…Sociology teaches us that background is inescapable: People do not negotiate identities in a vacuum. Ambivalence and fluidity make sense for sexual minorities in conservative religious communities that associate homosexuality with sin and deviance, an immoral “lifestyle choice.” As Shipley (2014) notes, the assumed clash is often not a product of an internal struggle but a response to external social norms. Thus contextualized, ambivalence ceases to seem an aberration, a separate outcome category in the great drama of identity conflict, or a failure to achieve a stable outcome.…”

“…Context matters in other ways. Residing in a pluralistic society is a protective measure, while political culture receptive to homophobic or transphobic religious ethic is associated with conflict and dissonance (Barton 2012; Coley 2018; Kugle 2013; Shipley 2014; Woodell, Kayzak, and Compton 2015). Izienicki (2017) demonstrates how environments shape religious identities: Gay Poles residing in a hostile Catholic religious environment in Poland rejected the church, while those residing in the United States were more likely to retain a Catholic identity.…”