Last year around this time (almost to the day, in fact) I found myself writing about the curious case of one Kayla Lemieux, a school teacher out of Oakville, Ontario. Ms. Lemieux made international headlines by her rather unique choice of self expression, which consisted, among other habits, of wearing a large pair of prosthetic breasts while teaching woodshop.
I won’t spend much time rehashing the details of that particular incident here, but suffice it to say that the issue struck me as symbolic of the conundrum currently facing public education. At the time I wrote: “As much as public education may strive to be inclusive and welcoming there is an increasing pushback against that mantra from those who believe that inclusivity can simply go too far…a national showdown on educational policy and gender identity may be just around the corner.”
I believe I can say with some confidence that when it comes to the predicted showdown, Canada, as a nation, has come fully around the bend. Indeed, over the past few months, the debate around gender expression and its place in our schools has never been very far from the headlines.
As a starting point, New Brunswick’s conservative government was recently spotlighted for its review of policy 713; an education policy developed in 2020 to “create a safe, welcoming learning environment for students of all sexual orientations and gender identities.” At issue was wording in that policy that allowed students to choose which pronoun they used at school.
Premier Blaine Higgs argued that his MLAs were hearing from “many” parents concerned about the policy, and proposed a change in language. Although a freedom of information request could find no evidence of any parental complaints being filed, the policy was changed, and now students under the age of sixteen must have parental permission before schools can use preferred pronouns. That decision is being challenged in court.
A similar battle is unfolding in Saskatchewan, where the provincial government has created a pronoun use policy that mirrors New Brunswick’s. There, a recent court decision overturned the policy, finding that Premier Scott Moe’s claims of “wide consultation” on the issue were essentially a fabrication. In the ruling, Justice Michael Megaw wrote that he could find no evidence of consultation with parents, teachers, students or experts on the issue.
Premier Moe is currently looking to invoke the notwithstanding clause to get his way on that one.
Then there was the “1 Million March 4 Children” which took place this past September 20th. In that moment, people took to the streets to loudly protest what they saw as the “indoctrination” of their children into “gender ideology” by schools. They were met by counter-protestors who attempted, just as loudly, to point out that “gender ideology” is not actually a thing and that education does not equate with indoctrination.
It was that particularly ugly moment in Canadian history that solidified this issue as part of an upcoming national political confrontation. Commenting about the march, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau stated “We strongly condemn this hate and its manifestations, and we stand united in support of 2SLGBTQI+ Canadians across the country — you are valid and you are valued,”.
In response, opposition leader Pierre Poilievre accused Trudeau of being divisive and of demonizing concerned parents. He commented “Parents should be the final authority on the values and lessons that are taught to children. Trudeau should butt out and let parents raise their kids.”
With all due respect, it’s not quite that simple.
One of the major driving forces behind the march was a group called “Hands off our kids!” whose website declares a desire to protect children “from gender ideology teachings, sexual indoctrination and exposure to explicit sexual content” in schools. They also claim to be pushing back against what they consider “thought control”.
The group also claims to be supportive of an inclusive society, which seems at odds with not only its mission statement, but also with its affiliations. These include a conservative Christian organization who wants to “transform our country to better reflect Biblical principles” and at least one group that asks “Are gay people born that way?” (According to the site, no, they are not.)
Another group heavily involved in promoting the march was Action4Canada. That group is currently running a number of campaigns, including calling for the re-criminalization of cannabis, promoting “climate change realism” and filing a lawsuit against the federal government around COVID 19 restrictions. They also boldly use the phrase “Make Canada Great Again!” to encapsulate what they are trying to accomplish.
More to the point, members of that organization have disrupted school board meetings to protest sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) education, and have actively promoted letter writing campaigns and petition signings to apply pressure on both the governments of New Brunswick and Saskatchewan in regards to the aforementioned policy changes.
The extent to which those actions impacted decision makers is, of course, impossible to determine. However, the characterization of these organizations as simply “a group of concerned parents” seems a bit of a misnomer, to say the least, and may, indeed, only serve to provide validation to their more radical elements.
Ultimately, as a public school teacher, I do try my very best to be inclusive of all kids, regardless of how they align themselves. Really, the needs today’s classrooms are so complex that a child’s use of a particular pronoun or a name that’s not written on my attendance sheet is often a long, long way down on my list of concerns.
But as this battle turns increasingly political, it is ultimately the kids who are suffering. There are young people in my classroom right now who, on September 20th of this year, watched mobs of angry protestors march through Canada’s streets, their Canada, angrily chanting that they have no right to feel safe and supported at school.
That’s ugly, no matter how you frame it.
For a very long time, school was not a particularly inclusive place. Whether it was through a systemic relegation of certain students to a particular classroom or a particular water fountain, our schools have, historically at least, primarily reflected the worldview of the ruling majority.
As traditionally silenced groups have found their voices, that reflection has changed. When Canada looks into its metaphorical mirror now, the image staring back at us is purposefully complex. Indeed, it is our ongoing, if often clumsy, attempts to stitch everyone into our mosaic (as opposed to absorbing them into a melting pot) that is one of our greatest defining features.
That does not make our country “Great again”.
That makes our country “Great, still”.
And for my money, it’s that type of messy, sloppy, often impossible-to-achieve ideology that should be at the heart of every single one of our educational policy decisions.
Originally published in The Chronicle Herald in edited form, October 6th, 2023.
frostededucation
Mosaic, not melting pot when it comes to gender and classrooms.
Last year around this time (almost to the day, in fact) I found myself writing about the curious case of one Kayla Lemieux, a school teacher out of Oakville, Ontario. Ms. Lemieux made international headlines by her rather unique choice of self expression, which consisted, among other habits, of wearing a large pair of prosthetic breasts while teaching woodshop.
I won’t spend much time rehashing the details of that particular incident here, but suffice it to say that the issue struck me as symbolic of the conundrum currently facing public education. At the time I wrote: “As much as public education may strive to be inclusive and welcoming there is an increasing pushback against that mantra from those who believe that inclusivity can simply go too far…a national showdown on educational policy and gender identity may be just around the corner.”
I believe I can say with some confidence that when it comes to the predicted showdown, Canada, as a nation, has come fully around the bend. Indeed, over the past few months, the debate around gender expression and its place in our schools has never been very far from the headlines.
As a starting point, New Brunswick’s conservative government was recently spotlighted for its review of policy 713; an education policy developed in 2020 to “create a safe, welcoming learning environment for students of all sexual orientations and gender identities.” At issue was wording in that policy that allowed students to choose which pronoun they used at school.
Premier Blaine Higgs argued that his MLAs were hearing from “many” parents concerned about the policy, and proposed a change in language. Although a freedom of information request could find no evidence of any parental complaints being filed, the policy was changed, and now students under the age of sixteen must have parental permission before schools can use preferred pronouns. That decision is being challenged in court.
A similar battle is unfolding in Saskatchewan, where the provincial government has created a pronoun use policy that mirrors New Brunswick’s. There, a recent court decision overturned the policy, finding that Premier Scott Moe’s claims of “wide consultation” on the issue were essentially a fabrication. In the ruling, Justice Michael Megaw wrote that he could find no evidence of consultation with parents, teachers, students or experts on the issue.
Premier Moe is currently looking to invoke the notwithstanding clause to get his way on that one.
Then there was the “1 Million March 4 Children” which took place this past September 20th. In that moment, people took to the streets to loudly protest what they saw as the “indoctrination” of their children into “gender ideology” by schools. They were met by counter-protestors who attempted, just as loudly, to point out that “gender ideology” is not actually a thing and that education does not equate with indoctrination.
It was that particularly ugly moment in Canadian history that solidified this issue as part of an upcoming national political confrontation. Commenting about the march, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau stated “We strongly condemn this hate and its manifestations, and we stand united in support of 2SLGBTQI+ Canadians across the country — you are valid and you are valued,”.
In response, opposition leader Pierre Poilievre accused Trudeau of being divisive and of demonizing concerned parents. He commented “Parents should be the final authority on the values and lessons that are taught to children. Trudeau should butt out and let parents raise their kids.”
With all due respect, it’s not quite that simple.
One of the major driving forces behind the march was a group called “Hands off our kids!” whose website declares a desire to protect children “from gender ideology teachings, sexual indoctrination and exposure to explicit sexual content” in schools. They also claim to be pushing back against what they consider “thought control”.
The group also claims to be supportive of an inclusive society, which seems at odds with not only its mission statement, but also with its affiliations. These include a conservative Christian organization who wants to “transform our country to better reflect Biblical principles” and at least one group that asks “Are gay people born that way?” (According to the site, no, they are not.)
Another group heavily involved in promoting the march was Action4Canada. That group is currently running a number of campaigns, including calling for the re-criminalization of cannabis, promoting “climate change realism” and filing a lawsuit against the federal government around COVID 19 restrictions. They also boldly use the phrase “Make Canada Great Again!” to encapsulate what they are trying to accomplish.
More to the point, members of that organization have disrupted school board meetings to protest sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) education, and have actively promoted letter writing campaigns and petition signings to apply pressure on both the governments of New Brunswick and Saskatchewan in regards to the aforementioned policy changes.
The extent to which those actions impacted decision makers is, of course, impossible to determine. However, the characterization of these organizations as simply “a group of concerned parents” seems a bit of a misnomer, to say the least, and may, indeed, only serve to provide validation to their more radical elements.
Ultimately, as a public school teacher, I do try my very best to be inclusive of all kids, regardless of how they align themselves. Really, the needs today’s classrooms are so complex that a child’s use of a particular pronoun or a name that’s not written on my attendance sheet is often a long, long way down on my list of concerns.
But as this battle turns increasingly political, it is ultimately the kids who are suffering. There are young people in my classroom right now who, on September 20th of this year, watched mobs of angry protestors march through Canada’s streets, their Canada, angrily chanting that they have no right to feel safe and supported at school.
That’s ugly, no matter how you frame it.
For a very long time, school was not a particularly inclusive place. Whether it was through a systemic relegation of certain students to a particular classroom or a particular water fountain, our schools have, historically at least, primarily reflected the worldview of the ruling majority.
As traditionally silenced groups have found their voices, that reflection has changed. When Canada looks into its metaphorical mirror now, the image staring back at us is purposefully complex. Indeed, it is our ongoing, if often clumsy, attempts to stitch everyone into our mosaic (as opposed to absorbing them into a melting pot) that is one of our greatest defining features.
That does not make our country “Great again”.
That makes our country “Great, still”.
And for my money, it’s that type of messy, sloppy, often impossible-to-achieve ideology that should be at the heart of every single one of our educational policy decisions.
Originally published in The Chronicle Herald in edited form, October 6th, 2023.
Leave a comment
Filed under Education Policy, Educational commentary, Nova Scotia Education Policy, Public education
Tagged as gender education, quality education, SOGI