Sexuality education as political theology: pathways to non-violence

Heyes, Joshua M.

doi:10.1080/14681811.2020.1843012

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This appeal to theology and religion as a basis for engaging in educational work that is affirming of sexual and gender diversity has echoes in the scholarship of Kamrudin (2018), Nadar and van Klinken (2018), Seedat (2018) and Yip (2018), all of whom have reflected on the possibilities of integrating LGBTQ+ religious perspectives and traditions in the context of higher and adult/community‐based religious education settings. Herriot and Callaghan (2019), Henry (2018, 2020, 2021, 2022), Burke (2021) and Davis (2021) have similarly pointed to the queer and trans‐inclusive resources available to (sex) education from within particular theological and religious traditions, while Heyes (2022) has offered broader reflections on the synergies between sexuality education and various conceits of political theology. Finally, Mirvis (2018) has pointed to the growth in inclusive guidance on sexuality education for Orthodox Jewish schools, while others like Blum (2010) have emphasised how the internal diversity of Islam allows for more spacious, less antagonistic, approaches to sexuality to emerge.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sexuality education and religion: From dialogue to conversation

Henry

Heyes

2022

Journal of Philosophy of Education

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The relationship between sexuality education and religion is often framed antagonistically, especially when it comes to tensions between the teaching of sexuality education and the priorities of some religious communities. In this paper, we argue that this antagonism can be structured as much by the prevalent forms of engagement that display it (dialogue and debate), as it is by the antagonism between contrasting ethical systems. While we acknowledge the importance of debate and dialogue in the public sphere, we contend that appeals to these discursive forms in schools and classrooms can limit possibilities for rethinking engagements across sexuality education and religion. This is because of the tendency within certain manifestations of dialogue (for example, dialogical models connected to liberal political projects) to err on the side of predictability, rationality and abstraction. To address some of these limits, we draw on the recent turn to conversation in educational thinking. We think through the significance of conversation in offering a mode of engagement for students, teachers and school communities that is conditioned by the dispossession of the self and is attuned to the unpredictable, affective and contextual landscapes of shared encounters. We conclude with some thoughts on the practical implications of conversation for rethinking the role of the sexuality education teacher, practices of parental consultation and processes of policy enactment in schools.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sexuality education and religion: From dialogue to conversation

Henry

Heyes

2022

Journal of Philosophy of Education

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Dissenting from heteronormativity: growing sideways in religious education

Henry

2022

j. relig. educ.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Tensions across religious and LGBTQ concerns have played out in education for some time. In this paper, I make efforts to respond productively to this context by theorising what it might mean for young people in religious schools to dissent from the heteronormativity of religion in religious education (RE). To do this, I survey perspectives across Jewish, Christian, and Muslim accounts of education to claim that there is precedent for dissenting from heteronormativity in religious school settings more generally given these accounts’ resistance to a uniform conception of religious identities and traditions, coupled with their sensitivity to pluralism and difference as enriching features of religious communities and experiences. The value of these accounts notwithstanding, I move to identifying two limiting dimensions to some of these perspectives for theorising dissent, namely: (1) an assumed commonality of religious identity in religious school settings, however internally diverse; and (2) an inordinately propositional and disembodied account of religious encounters. With the specific curricular context of RE in mind, I suggest that dissent from heteronormativity can (perhaps more helpfully) be understood as a mode of ethical agency that: (1) attends to that which exceeds identity in people’s encounters with religion; and (2) builds on the embodied, material, and affective dynamics of encountering religion in the RE classroom. Put differently, I understand dissent as a mode of ‘growing sideways’ in RE, where young people encounter alternatives to the limits of heteronormativity within the context of the present.

show abstract

Sexuality education as political theology: pathways to non-violence

Cited by 2 publications

References 46 publications

Sexuality education and religion: From dialogue to conversation

Sexuality education and religion: From dialogue to conversation

Dissenting from heteronormativity: growing sideways in religious education

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About