Australian schools meet the issues and challenges surrounding gender in a myriad of

diverse ways. Students who identify as a ‘gender diverse’ face challenges of equity and

access throughout their schooling, and it is important for schools to admit these challenges

and try to rectify them in the student's best interests. ‘Gender diverse’ is defined as

individuals “whose gender identity is at odds with their biological sex.” as opposed to

‘cisgender’ individuals who are “a person who identifies with their birth assigned sex e.g.

ciswoman, cisman.” (Transgender Victoria, 2013). Cisgendered individuals are the

predominant gender group, and thus most educational policies are written with this gender

stereotype in mind (Meyer, 2010, p. 6). Cissexism is a product of the dominant discourse, it is

the assumption that everyone is cisgendered until proven otherwise (Minus18, 2015,p.35).

The dominant gender discourse - this cissexism - is what creates issues of equity and access

for students who are not cisgendered, who are instead gender diverse. It is important to

acknowledge that there are policies in place for gender diverse students, but that the

implementation and accordance with these policies is often up to individual schools or

teachers.

Adolescence and secondary schooling are a time when students are undergoing rapid

biological and social changes and bullying can often occur during these years, especially to

students who do not fit within the dominant discourse (Brown & Meyer, 2009, p.5-6 ). It is

important for classroom cohesion as well as student morale and well-being to try and mitigate

the use of marginalising or discriminatory language, and to try and provide places safe from

bullying behaviour. The NSW Teachers Federation declared in 2011 that “All teachers have a

professional, moral, and legal obligation to intervene in discrimination and harassment based

on sexual/gender orientation.” (p.2). This is a common theme within educational policy

relating to sexuality and gender diverse students, the idea that these students are at a higher

risk of being harassed or marginalised and that teachers should step in to reprimand the

instigators of this harassment. However policy does not always dictate reality, and as Hillier

and Jones noted “Victoria had the highest percentage of GLBTIQ students who perceived

themselves as protected by policies (29.79%), followed by NSW (26.53%).” (2012, p. 441)

the implication here being that one-third of gender diverse students feel safe while two thirds

do not, and that this is the best case scenario across Australia. Clearly these policies do not

protect the majority of gender diverse students, and there is possibly a problem with policy

implementation being shown here. The ideal is that teachers encourage students to use

inclusive language and not marginalise anyone, but this ideal only holds when it is actively

being promoted (Brown & Meyer, 2009, p.16-17). A continued implementation of policies

designed to protect gender diverse students and to discourage harassment would help with

GD student’s feelings of safety and acceptance within the school community, and would also

help discourage physical and emotional bullying of minority students.

Teachers play an important role in encouraging equity and discouraging bullying

within their classrooms and in the playground, and they often lead by example on what is

acceptable behaviour towards marginalised students. Ideally this means that teachers are

following inclusive policies and upholding the ideals of equity and access for all students, but

this is not always so. Ullman (2014, p. 438) said that “Teachers were described [by the

research papers subjects] as architects of school gender climate through their reluctance to

acknowledge same-sex attraction and gender fluidity during classroom lessons...their failure

to challenge normative gender stereotypes and their active contribution to the notion that

instructional activities can be gendered.” These particular students were all from NSW
schools and were all recent graduates or current students, and each student in the study

reported feeling their issues were ignored by their teachers.. Obviously for these students, the

teachers were not looking after their best interests when avoiding the topic of gender diversity

or promoting gendered activities. It is important for teachers to uphold positive ideals for

student and their own behaviour, like those expressed by the Melbourne Declaration on

Educational Goals for Young Australians, which said in goal one that all schools should

“Provide all students with access to high-quality schooling that is free from discrimination

based on gender…” (2008, p.7). Unfortunately as following these goals is ultimately up to the

individual, while some may comply with the goals others may not, or may be swayed by the

dominant discourse and not comprehend the need for these goals in education.

Gender diverse students are not inherently more at risk for mental health problems,

bullying, or harassment, but the dominant cissexist discourse does not protect gender diverse

students the same way it protects cisgendered students. The experiences of bullying,

marginalisation, and of being an outcast and not fitting in do not contribute to good mental

health or a positive view of schooling and education (Ullman, 2015, p.18). Ullman goes on to

argue that students who experience this targeted harassment often have “lowered levels of

social and academic investment in school.” (2015, p.18), Brown and Meyer (2009, p.27) and

Anderson, Borkoles, O’Sullivan, Polman & Symons (2014, p.3) agree with this. According to

Ullmans 2015 study, 46% of students surveyed reported hearing transphobic language at least

once or twice per week (p. 21) the number jumping to 92% of those surveyed having heard it

once or twice a month. It is understandable that GD students do not enjoy school then, when

92% of them hear transphobic and marginalising language at least once a month. The

prevalence of transphobic and gender diverse discriminatory language is concerning, as this

implies that equity and anti-bullying policies are not as comprehensive or enforced as would

be expected. Likewise it is concerning to find that according to the surveyed students teachers

who heard the marginalising language frequently always intervened positively just 4% of the

time, while 35% of the time a teacher who overheard discriminatory language never

intervened (Ullman, 2015, p. 22). These statistics speak to an ingrained problem within

schools; marginalised students are frequently subjected to discriminatory language without

recourse from teachers, and this disconnects GD students from their education.

“Anti-discrimination and other relevant legislation at state, territory, federal and international

levels should inform educational programs and services (Gender Equity Taskforce 1996,p.9).

The legislation, policy, and recommendations are all there to protect GD students, and while

some teachers do look out for these minority students many do not.

One particular area of equity and especially access problems for gender diverse

students in in physical development, health, and physical education classes. A student in a

2014 study of the experiences of GD students in PE class said “I don’t do PE anymore

because I’m scared of going to the girls change room. I also don’t want to drink any water to

prevent me from going toilet in the girl’s toilet.” (Anderson, et, al., p. 36). This particular

student was a female-to male transgendered individual who was 15, and clearly

uncomfortable with the facilities available to them at school. Other students in Anderson

et.al.’s research had similar problems, as did students in Ullman’s 2014 and 2015 studies.

There are questions of ‘fairness’ when gender diverse students play sport, “...that male to

female transexual atheletes are likely to have muscular strength advantage since they ‘have

been under the influence of hormones under their former gender during puberty’ (IOC,

2004).” (Sykes, 2006, p.8). A similar train of thought is followed by some PE teachers, that
gender diverse students might have an unfair advantage in sport (Anderson, et. al, 2014,

p.34). This contributes to GD students feelings of isolation and dislike of PE classes, and is

another contributing factor to GD students disconnect from education and the school

enviroment. Minus18’s “OMG I’m Trans” 2015 pamphlet has a subsection on using

gendered facilities like change rooms and toilets in schools (p.9), as well as how gender

diverse students can be comfortable in school uniforms (p.22). Minus18’s pamphlet is helpful

for gender diverse and questioning students, but it is a reflection of students peers and

teachers explicit or implicit discrimination that the pamphlet is needed for issues like

bathrooms at all. PDHPE is a subject that is supposed to teach students about being healthy

physically and mentally and how the body works; so more targeted policies need to be

implemented to help gender diverse students within this class specifically, as PE seems to be

a class they face discrimination, harassment, and bullying in more frequently than others.

While there are many policies and materials that mention gender diverse students,

there is a clear lack of gender diverse specific material available to Australian teachers.

Brown and Meyer note this lack of resources “Harassment for gender nonconformity is under

researched but important to understand… research has demonstrated that more rigid

adherence to traditional sex roles correlates with more negative attitudes and violence.”(2009,

p. 22). Many of the anti-bullying policies and programs for equity include homosexual

students. While there is no question that lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) students also need

access to equity programs and anti-discriminatory policies, there are very few that do not

lump transgendered and intersex (T and I) students into the mix. LGBTI is an acronym that

covers marginalised groups, but these groups are different. LGB refer to sexualities, while the

T and I are to do with gender, so it is not necessarily accurate to group them together in all
policy instances. Intersectionality is an important issue as some LGB students may also

identify as gender diverse, transgender, or intersex, but this does not mean that all LGB or TI

students relate to the others. The Australian Human Rights Commission document on

‘Violence, Harassment and Bullying and the LGBTI Communities’ from 2011 is a prime

example of the lack of distinction. The document says that “Violence, harassment and

bullying can each have a negative impact on the right of all people to have equal access to

education. ...the right to education applies without discrimination on the basis of sexual

orientation and gender identity.” (p.3). Both are important minority groups to protect, but

there is little distinction made between them for policy purposes. Targeted policies are more

specific, and can more thoroughly deal with the broader picture and minutia of gender diverse

students needs.

The dominant discourse of cisgendered students impacts the minority gender diverse

students adversely in their education and connection with their school. Many students are

bullied and harassed or discriminated against by their peers, and some students get this

behaviour implicitly from their teachers and other school administrators who do not prevent

this marginalisation. There are state and federal policies dating back over twenty years that

are designed to minimise and eradicate this kind of behaviour, but cissexism is well

entrenched in Australian schools. Some teachers go out of their way to reprimand students

who harass gender diverse students, but many ignore it (Anderson et.al. 2014, p. 32-33) and

some encourage it (Ullman, 2014, p.437-439). It is important for the protection of gender

minorities to be a contributing factor to teachers discussions around gender identity,

cissexism promotes the dominant discourse and disenfranchises gender diverse students

within the classroom and wider community.

 References:

Anderson, M. B., Borkoles, E., O’Sullivan, G., Polman, R. C. J., & Symons, C. (2014, March

14). ​The Impact of Homophobic Bullying during Sport and Physical Education

Participation on Same-Sex-Attracted and Gender- Diverse Young Australians’

Depression and Anxiety Levels. Retrieved from

http://eprints.bournemouth.ac.uk/22294/1/Equal%20Play%20Final%20Report.pdf

Australian Education Ministers. (2008, December). ​Melbourne Declaration on Educational

Goals for Young Australians. Retrieved August 12, 2016, from Education Services

Australia, ​http://www.curriculum.edu.au/verve/_resources/National_Declaration_

on_the_Educat​ional_Goals_for_Young_Australians.pdf

Australian Human Rights Commission. (2011). ​Violence, Harassment and Bullying and the

LGBTI Communities. Retrieved August 12, 2016, from Violence, Harassment and

Bullying, https://bullying.humanrights.gov.au/sites/default/files/content/pdf/bullying

/VHB_LGBTI.pdf

Brown, L. M., & Meyer, E. J. (2009). ​Gender, bullying, and harassment: Strategies to end

sexism and homophobia in schools. New York: Teachers’ College Press.

Hillier, L., & Jones, T. M. (2012). Sexuality education school policy for Australian GLBTIQ

students. ​Sex Education, ​12(4), 437–454. doi:10.1080/14681811.2012.677211

Meyer, E. J. (2010). ​Gender and sexual diversity in schools: An introduction. Dordrecht:

 Springer-Verlag.

Minus18. (2015). ​OMG I’m Trans. Retrieved August 12, 2016, from

https://minus18.org.au/omgit/omgit-web.pdf

NSW Teachers Federation. (2011). ​Decision of the 2011 Annual Conference: Gender,

Sexuality and Identity. Retrieved August 12, 2016, from

https://www.nswtf.org.au/files/gender_sexuality_and_identity_policy_0.pdf

Sykes, H. (2006). Transsexual and Transgender Policies in Sport. ​Women in Sport and

Physical Activity Journal, ​15(1), 3–13.

The Gender Equity Taskforce, & Youth Affairs (1997). ​Gender equity: A framework for

Australian schools / prepared by the gender equity Taskforce for ministerial council

for employment, education, training and youth affairs. Canberra: Published by

Publications and Public Communication for Dept. of Education and Training and

Children’s, Youth and Family Bureau.

Transgender Victoria. (2013). ​Definitions. Retrieved August 12, 2016, from Transgender

Victoria, http://www.transgendervictoria.com/about/definitions

Ullman, J. (2014). Ladylike/butch, sporty/dapper: Exploring “gender climate” with

Australian LGBTQ students using stage–environment fit theory. ​Sex Education,

14(4), 430–443. doi:10.1080/14681811.2014.919912

Ullman, J.(2015). Free to Be?: Exploring the schooling experiences of Australia’s sexuality

and gender diverse secondary school students. Centre for Educational Research,

School of Education, Western Sydney University, Penrith.