‘Sod ‘em, sod ‘em like there's no Gomorrah’: comparing sexualities education for teachers, doctors and clergy in the UK

Abstract

In the context of changes in UK public discourse concerning sexualities over the last decade, this paper compares education in the field of sexualities equality, enquiring how teachers, doctors and clergy are being prepared for their professional lives. Data from a qualitative study using questionnaires and semi-structured interviews are analysed to reveal that although in many outward respects teaching and medicine reflect recent legislative and cultural changes and the church does not, in more subtle ways these three professions share a common theme of disjunction between policy and practice. There is also some evidence that certain subsections of these professions offer differential degrees of welcome to gay and lesbian individuals. Behind this empirical study lies the theoretical question of the way in which historically these professions have enmeshed together to structure a dominant heteronormativity. Evidence from this research points to some loosening of these historic ties.

Keywords:

• sexualities
• heteronormativity
• teacher education
• medical education
• ministerial training

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank all those who participated in this study, whether by interview, on-line questionnaire or by paper response, and the reviewers who provided some useful pointers for improvement. The original research was funded by the British Academy under award SG-54146.

Notes

^1. All the ordinands who participated in this study were preparing for ministry in the Church of England. Although subsequent comments and conclusions refer specifically to the Church of England and Anglican Communion, they do, arguably, reflect the wider position of the Christian churches.

^2. A similar development occurred in research undertaken in two primary schools in Bristol. When objections to sexualities education in Muslim-majority schools became more intense and emotions were running high, the temptation by individuals and public bodies was to avoid complexity and fall back on the comfort of binary oppositions. A queer analysis resisted the temptation to draw simple conclusions, aware of the ease with which valorised pairs contribute to inequity, for example between those of different faiths, between those of faith and LGBT people, and between secular positions and deeply held religious views (Nixon 2008b).