Public pedagogies of homophobia and the Australian religious exemptions.
In this post, we want to outline the why. That is, why we are framing our project through the lens of the religious exemptions. The religious exemptions are a study in duality: they are both fascinating in the power that they hold and horrible in the complete lack of care for human rights. Coming out of our research is this idea of the ‘public pedagogies of homophobia’ and the broader social impact being observed currently. Here, we outline the concept of public pedagogies and the nature of the religious exemptions.
Image taken by Ted Eytan. Pride March.
Public pedagogy and its uses
Public pedagogy refers to the ways ideologies are transmitted in public spaces, through institutions, cultural texts, and social practices. It includes the messages that individuals and groups absorb about power, identity, and belonging from both formal and informal sources. In this context, schools are not just sites of formal education but also powerful agents in the public dissemination of social values and norms.
A consideration of the concepts of public pedagogy and socialization together may help to develop a sense of the potential distinctiveness of public pedagogy as a tool for analysis. Conventionally defined, socialization refers to the transmission of social norms, which in any society are passed in some way from one generation to the next (Durkheim, 1956; Giddens & Sutton, 2009; Bales & Parsons, 1956). Public pedagogy is the expression of pedagogy writ large deployed by Hickey-Moody, Savage and Windle (2010) and used by Windle (2008) and Sandlin, Schultz and Burdick (2010) in ways that work with, build upon and critically engage its extensive lineage in the work of Giroux (1999, 2000, 2001a, 2001b, 2001c,2004a, 2004b, 2004c, 2005, 2006). Giroux’s development of the term public pedagogy is based on his foundational view that culture can and does operate in pedagogical ways.
The concept of socialization, unlike public pedagogy, conventionally focuses on the adaptation of the individual to society through a developmental sequence of experiences: primary, secondary and tertiary socialisation (see Giddens & Sutton, 2009). The context of adaptation, at least in foundational versions, is typically that of apparently stable social systems (Bales & Parsons, 1956). Public pedagogy, by contrast, often takes movements, developments and conflicts in society (such as transformations in the globalizing media and capitalism) as a starting point. A sophisticated notion of pedagogy does not assume a simple movement of norms from society to individual. Instead, norms can be examined as they are developed and contested.
What are the religious exemptions?
Religious exemptions to discrimination laws allow faith-based schools in Australia to exclude or disadvantage LGBTQ+ students and staff based on religious beliefs. Such policies, whether explicitly enacted or implicitly tolerated, operate as a form of public pedagogy by reinforcing particular values and behaviors within the broader social context. Discrimination on the basis of sexuality and gender identity, (re)produces the unstated norms of mainstream Christianity within the legal concept of ‘lawful religious belief’. As Thornton and Luker (2009) explained, the abstract nature of ‘lawful religious belief’ remains broadly undefined and as a result, is assumed to only be applicable to mainstream Christian religions, whilst ‘Othered’ religious faiths are assumed to be ‘unlawful’.
Regardless, discrimination is justifiable and even considered righteous because it is done so in ‘good faith’, that is, it’s (discrimination) is for the protection of religious faiths, as to not insult the adherents of that religion (Ciaffaglione, 2023). When we consider section 38, paragraph 3 of the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth.), an explicit articulation and permission is given to religious educational institutions to discriminate against their students based on sexuality and gender identity (Ciaffaglione, 2023). Pivoting to staff of religious schools, section 38 paragraph 1 exempts religious schools from employee protection rights, and instead codifies the lawfulness of a teacher or staff member to be discriminated against in ‘good faith’.
These exemptions teach and normalize the following messages:
By legally permitting discriminatory practices, these laws validate the idea that heterosexuality and cisgender identities are normative and superior. This not only marginalizes LGBTQ+ identities but also teaches students, staff, and the broader community that these identities are less worthy of protection or respect.
The existence of these exemptions signals to society that discrimination against LGBTQ+ individuals is acceptable under certain circumstances, particularly when justified by religious doctrine. This public messaging shapes societal attitudes and behaviors beyond the school setting, embedding discriminatory norms in the public consciousness.
These exemptions communicate that LGBTQ+ individuals are not entitled to the same rights and protections as their peers. This undermines principles of equal citizenship and conveys that their inclusion is conditional and negotiable. For LGBTQ+ students, these policies function as a lived pedagogy of exclusion. They learn that their identities are incompatible with the values of their educational institutions, which can lead to feelings of alienation, self-censorship, and reduced mental well-being.
Pedagogical consequences beyond schools
The lessons of homophobia taught by these exemptions extend into the broader public sphere. They: Normalize the idea that religious belief can and should take precedence over anti-discrimination principles. Contribute to a cultural environment where homophobia is not only tolerated but institutionalized. Shape public debates about the balance between religious freedom and LGBTQ+ rights, often privileging the former at the expense of the latter.
By embedding discrimination into legal frameworks and institutional practices, religious exemptions to discrimination laws in Australian schools operate as a public pedagogy of homophobia. They perpetuate exclusionary norms and values, shaping societal attitudes in ways that marginalize LGBTQ+ individuals. Recognizing this dynamic is essential for fostering more inclusive and equitable public pedagogies in schools and beyond.
- Professor Anna Hickey-Moody and Dr Alexandra Ciaffaglione
December, 2024
References
Bales, R.F., & Parsons, T. (1956). Family: Socialization and Interaction Process (1st ed.). Routledge.
Ciaffaglione, A. (2023). LGBQ Teacher Identities in Australian Catholic School Workplaces. Thesis.
Durkheim, E. (1956). Education and Sociology. Free Press.
Giddens, A., & Sutton, P.W. (2009). Sociology (6th ed.). Polity.
Giroux, H.A. (1999). Cultural studies as public pedagogy making the pedagogical more political. Encyclopaedia of Philosophy of Education. Retreived 15 May,2005, from http://www.vusst.hr/ ENCYCLOPAEDIA/main.htm
(2000). Postmodern education and disposable youth. Revolutionary pedagogies: Cultural politics, instituting education and discourse of theory (P.Trifonas Ed.). Routledge.
(2001a). The mouse that roared: Disney and the end of innocence. Rowman & Littlefield.
(2001b). Public spaces, private lives: Beyond the culture of cynicism. Rowman & Littlefield.
(2001c). Theory and resistance in education: towards a pedagogy for the opposition
(Rev. and expanded ed.). Bergin & Garvey.
(2003). Neoliberalism and the disappearance of the social in Ghost World. Third Text, 17(2), 151–161.
(2004a). The terror of neoliberalism: Authoritarianism and the eclipse of democracy. Paradigm.
(2004b). Cultural studies and the politics of public pedagogy: Making the political more pedagogical. Parallax, 10(2), 73–89.
(2004c). Cultural studies, public pedagogy and the responsibility of intellectuals.
Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies, 1(1), 59–79.
(2005). Against the new authoritarianism: Politics after Abu Ghraib. Arbeiter Ring.
(2006). Beyond the spectacle of terrorism: Global uncertainty and the challenges of the new media. Paradigm Publishers.
Hickey-Moody, A., Savage, G. C., & Windle, J. (2010). Pedagogy writ large: Public, popular and cultural pedagogies in motion. Critical Studies in Education, 51(3), 227-236.
Sandlin, J., Schultz, B., & Burdick, S. (2010). Handbook of public pedagogy: Education and learning beyond schooling. Routledge.
Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth.). Available from https://www.legislation.gov.au/C2004A02868/2018-12-09/text
Thornton, M. & Luker T. (2009). The spectral ground: Religious belief discrimination. Macquarie Law Journal, 9, 71-92.
Windle, J. (2008). In remembrance of things past? Strategies of public pedagogy for urban renovation. Review of Education, Pedagogy and Cultural Studies, 30(5), 377–398.