Disclaimer: The majority of this information is pulled directly from the sources themselves to remain as factual and unbiased as possible. I ask all readers to approach this information critically, but with an open mind because the point is not to find one party to blame, it is to be educated on the issue from all different angles in order to draw your own conclusions. I encourage you to do your own research as well.
Scholarly Journals
Adolescent Girls' Sexuality: The More it Changes, The More It Stays the Same
by Deborah L. Tolman, San Francisco State University
"At the last half of the twentieth century, not long after adolescence itself was invented, adolescent girls' sexuality was under heavy surveillance, and the root source of plenty of panic. The truth is that very little is known about how sexuality develops in adolescence. We do know that as the female body matures, sex hormones are released. In addition to sexual development, such as the growth of breasts, hips, and hair, it is on average, normative for girls to start to have sexual feelings in early adolescence. The new twist is that, what they are actually supposed to do is to seem to have them - to 'preform' sexual assertiveness, and not so much for their own curiosity or satisfaction, but as especially 'good' objects of others' sexual desire. In other words they incite desire rather than express it" [5].
Good Girls and Bad Girls
"Adolescent girls' sexuality is quite the assortment of contradictions: girls want relationships, boys want sex, but everybody is just hooking up - no strings attached. 'Virgins' can be reborn, but 'sluts' can never shake the moniker that they still get. To be popular, with girls and with boys, girls are told to wear less and less to be more and more sexy, but girls who dress in skimpy clothes look like prostitutes. There is much inequity for girls embedded in this division of teen girls into 'good' and 'bad.' While the media saturates us with the fantasy or fear that deep down, girls are into being like porn stars, they are still as vulnerable as ever to being labeled and scorned for evidencing real sexual feelings and more than ever under pressure to appear, but not to actually be, sex kittens" [5].
Girls' Sexual Desire and the Double Standard
"Even as demands on teenage girls to be sexy have intensified and the sexualization of younger girls is not standard fare, young women's sexual desire is still not considered an anchor of young women's sexuality. In fact, in order to keep boys - who are said to have uncontrollable sexual urges for which they cannot be held accountable - in check, the suppression of girls' sexual desire is required. If girls had or acted on their sexual feelings, the entire system would be in chaos, or so the panic goes. The norms and beliefs that sustain this conception, the construction of what is normal and appropriate male and female sexuality in adolescence, are institutionalized by the double standard. The interplay between these ideas is mutually reconstituting and reinforcing" [5].
What should I take away from this?
The way girls' sexual development in adolescence has been addressed has lead to a disconnect between girls and their sexuality. Right now the focus of sexuality for girls remains on inciting desire in boys, rather than on being comfortable with their own body, emotions, and sexual desires. The concept of 'sexual subjectivity' has been created to challenge the current trend of young girls being thought of as sexual objects. "Being a sexual subject is the opposite of being a sexual object - rather than solely being the target of someone else's desire, a sexual subject has agency, that is, she has her own desire as a compass in actively negotiating her sexuality" [5]. Rather than risk education, adolescents' education should be focused on sexual health and well-being.
by Deborah L. Tolman, San Francisco State University
"At the last half of the twentieth century, not long after adolescence itself was invented, adolescent girls' sexuality was under heavy surveillance, and the root source of plenty of panic. The truth is that very little is known about how sexuality develops in adolescence. We do know that as the female body matures, sex hormones are released. In addition to sexual development, such as the growth of breasts, hips, and hair, it is on average, normative for girls to start to have sexual feelings in early adolescence. The new twist is that, what they are actually supposed to do is to seem to have them - to 'preform' sexual assertiveness, and not so much for their own curiosity or satisfaction, but as especially 'good' objects of others' sexual desire. In other words they incite desire rather than express it" [5].
Good Girls and Bad Girls
"Adolescent girls' sexuality is quite the assortment of contradictions: girls want relationships, boys want sex, but everybody is just hooking up - no strings attached. 'Virgins' can be reborn, but 'sluts' can never shake the moniker that they still get. To be popular, with girls and with boys, girls are told to wear less and less to be more and more sexy, but girls who dress in skimpy clothes look like prostitutes. There is much inequity for girls embedded in this division of teen girls into 'good' and 'bad.' While the media saturates us with the fantasy or fear that deep down, girls are into being like porn stars, they are still as vulnerable as ever to being labeled and scorned for evidencing real sexual feelings and more than ever under pressure to appear, but not to actually be, sex kittens" [5].
Girls' Sexual Desire and the Double Standard
"Even as demands on teenage girls to be sexy have intensified and the sexualization of younger girls is not standard fare, young women's sexual desire is still not considered an anchor of young women's sexuality. In fact, in order to keep boys - who are said to have uncontrollable sexual urges for which they cannot be held accountable - in check, the suppression of girls' sexual desire is required. If girls had or acted on their sexual feelings, the entire system would be in chaos, or so the panic goes. The norms and beliefs that sustain this conception, the construction of what is normal and appropriate male and female sexuality in adolescence, are institutionalized by the double standard. The interplay between these ideas is mutually reconstituting and reinforcing" [5].
What should I take away from this?
The way girls' sexual development in adolescence has been addressed has lead to a disconnect between girls and their sexuality. Right now the focus of sexuality for girls remains on inciting desire in boys, rather than on being comfortable with their own body, emotions, and sexual desires. The concept of 'sexual subjectivity' has been created to challenge the current trend of young girls being thought of as sexual objects. "Being a sexual subject is the opposite of being a sexual object - rather than solely being the target of someone else's desire, a sexual subject has agency, that is, she has her own desire as a compass in actively negotiating her sexuality" [5]. Rather than risk education, adolescents' education should be focused on sexual health and well-being.
Schools and the Social Control of Sexuality
by Melinda S. Miceli, University of Hartford, Connecticut
"The question of whether or not schools should teach students about sexuality has been one of heated debate since the early twentieth century. The simple fact remains that schools do teach students countless lessons about sexuality, in a variety of ways, every single day. As social institutions through which every citizen passes, schools have an enormous amount of power to influence the beliefs and values of young people. This article analyzes some of the ways that public schools shape America's sexual culture by looking at their informal and formal curriculum, culture, and their sex education policies" [3].
School Culture and the Social Control of Sexuality
"Schools have considerable social power because they appear to be neutral transmitters of the best and most valuable knowledge. Over the past decade and a half several studies of school culture have included an examination of a hidden sexuality curriculum in schools. These studies have documented that normative heterosexuality is rather explicitly enforced by the culture of most schools. The ways in which students, as well as teachers and administrators, incorporate heterosexual activities, behaviors, and language into the social aspects of the school establish and enforce a culture and ideology in which heterosexuality is exclusively the norm of acceptable behavior, discussion, and even feeling. Social research has documented that, throughout their school years, throughout their primary and secondary school years students are continually socialized into traditional binary gender roles. Central to these lessons, in both the formal and hidden curricula, are instructions about how to be properly masculine or feminine as a means of achieving the desired relationships and displaying one's heterosexuality to others" [3].
Sex Education and the Social Control of Sexuality
"Western societies simultaneously repress and obsess over sexuality. The patterns of what about sex is spoken about and what is silenced is not random, but rather both are part of the weave of power relations and social control. Sex education classes introduce direct and purposeful sexual discourse into the regulated space of the school where it was previously confined to the hidden curriculum. Contemporary conflicts between advocates of abstinence-only and proponents of comprehensive sex education are situated in this long-standing tension between those who feel that the public is best served by limiting children's access to information about sexuality and those groups who feel that public health problems are caused by a lack of such information. Interestingly, surveys on public opinion about sex education constantly find that the majority of Americans support a more comprehensive model. However, despite the opinion polls, the federal government has continued to increase its funding of abstinence-only programs and the religious right as continued to have a loud voice in the discourse of sexuality" [3].
What should I take away from this?
The intensity of these debates over sex education exemplify the great effort put in to regulate sexual discussion, knowledge, and behavior. Furthermore, this article emphasizes the social power schools have to influence children and adolescents' sexual development. Whether or not the lessons being taught to students are explicit or implicit, they exist in great quantity and are only perpetuated by silence on the issue. Although this article focuses on a hegemonic curriculum that oppresses homosexual students, the same concepts can be applied to the suppression of female students' sexuality.
by Melinda S. Miceli, University of Hartford, Connecticut
"The question of whether or not schools should teach students about sexuality has been one of heated debate since the early twentieth century. The simple fact remains that schools do teach students countless lessons about sexuality, in a variety of ways, every single day. As social institutions through which every citizen passes, schools have an enormous amount of power to influence the beliefs and values of young people. This article analyzes some of the ways that public schools shape America's sexual culture by looking at their informal and formal curriculum, culture, and their sex education policies" [3].
School Culture and the Social Control of Sexuality
"Schools have considerable social power because they appear to be neutral transmitters of the best and most valuable knowledge. Over the past decade and a half several studies of school culture have included an examination of a hidden sexuality curriculum in schools. These studies have documented that normative heterosexuality is rather explicitly enforced by the culture of most schools. The ways in which students, as well as teachers and administrators, incorporate heterosexual activities, behaviors, and language into the social aspects of the school establish and enforce a culture and ideology in which heterosexuality is exclusively the norm of acceptable behavior, discussion, and even feeling. Social research has documented that, throughout their school years, throughout their primary and secondary school years students are continually socialized into traditional binary gender roles. Central to these lessons, in both the formal and hidden curricula, are instructions about how to be properly masculine or feminine as a means of achieving the desired relationships and displaying one's heterosexuality to others" [3].
Sex Education and the Social Control of Sexuality
"Western societies simultaneously repress and obsess over sexuality. The patterns of what about sex is spoken about and what is silenced is not random, but rather both are part of the weave of power relations and social control. Sex education classes introduce direct and purposeful sexual discourse into the regulated space of the school where it was previously confined to the hidden curriculum. Contemporary conflicts between advocates of abstinence-only and proponents of comprehensive sex education are situated in this long-standing tension between those who feel that the public is best served by limiting children's access to information about sexuality and those groups who feel that public health problems are caused by a lack of such information. Interestingly, surveys on public opinion about sex education constantly find that the majority of Americans support a more comprehensive model. However, despite the opinion polls, the federal government has continued to increase its funding of abstinence-only programs and the religious right as continued to have a loud voice in the discourse of sexuality" [3].
What should I take away from this?
The intensity of these debates over sex education exemplify the great effort put in to regulate sexual discussion, knowledge, and behavior. Furthermore, this article emphasizes the social power schools have to influence children and adolescents' sexual development. Whether or not the lessons being taught to students are explicit or implicit, they exist in great quantity and are only perpetuated by silence on the issue. Although this article focuses on a hegemonic curriculum that oppresses homosexual students, the same concepts can be applied to the suppression of female students' sexuality.
Undressing the Hidden Curriculum: Sexuality Education and Middle School Literature
by Nicole Klein, Linda Markowitz, Laurel Puchner, Jill Kirsten Anderson
"For adolescents, the salience of sexual identity emerges in middle school. US middle schools, however, are structured in a way that marginalizes topics of sexuality to classes such as health that are perceived as less important than math, science, and Language Arts. This marginalizing and framing of the topic of sexuality means that students will construct their own (mis-)perceived versions of sexuality through interactions with the curriculum in their core classes and elsewhere in schools. Typically, these student-generated versions of sexuality recreate hegemonic constructs of race, ethnicity, class, gender, and sexuality" [1].
Teaching Sexuality
"Sexuality is a thorny issue in the American political sphere, as is demonstrated by the various sexual-political constructs surrounding such topics as abortion, homosexuality, pornography and heterosexual monogamy. Two themes remain consistent in both the public arena and the schools: (1) sexuality is perceived as a dangerous and uncontrollable force from which innocent youth must be rescued; and (2) sexuality is reduced to biology, a physical system that exists outside the organizing principles of gender, race, and heterosexuality. These two themes inform the way in which the sexuality education curriculum is delivered in many middle schools and junior highs around the country. Upon entering a sexuality education class today, be it one with an abstinence-only or comprehensive sex education program, students would likely learn about three and only three issues: changes at puberty, sexually transmitted diseases, and sexual decision-making. Unfortunately, they will fail to develop any understanding of ways that sexuality is deeply touched by social constructs, such as compulsory heterosexuality or gender- and race-based value judgements" [1].
Deconstructing Messages in Middle School Language Arts Texts
Sexuality as Dangerous: "A clear message in many of the books assigned in middle school is that loving someone can be dangerous, especially for women, and also that being the object of someone else's love can be dangerous. It follows that, no matter how strong and assertive a girl is, because sexuality is dangerous, she still requires boys and men to help protect her. Lastly, according to the books examined, being a Bad Girl is most definitely not an attribute that boys find appealing. The texts provide numerous examples of what is and what is not attractive in women and girls, and many of these examples combine messages about gender and social class that serve to reinforce sexism and classism. Stories of non-heterosexual attraction and relationships are perceived as so dangerous that they are entirely absent from the texts" [1].
Books that support this - The Outsiders, Freak the Mighty, Touching Spirit Bear, The Giver, and The Skin I'm In
Hegemonic Masculinity: "Gives permission for men to engage in explicit sexual acts without reprimand as it is considered their biological nature and right. Others are not granted the same freedoms. In the texts, hegemonic masculinity is most often exhibited through the portrayal of girls and women. Women who transgress their natural place in the sexual hierarchy are punished. Hegemonic masculinity also means that girls and women believe boys' bad behavior is inevitable, and hence acceptable. However there is a fine line between the Bad Girls and the desirable girl. While girls and women should not have their won sexual desires, they must be proactive at making themselves attractive to men. To do so, they must spend considerable time and effort presenting themselves as sexual objects. Lastly, because women define their sexuality in relation to men, even relationships with other women are shaped by the desire to attract men. Girls and women fear losing their relationship status so they must scheme and/or compete with each other for attention from boys and men" [1].
Books that support this - A Year Down Yonder, The Outsiders, Roll Thunder Hear My Cry, True Confessions of Charlotte Doyle, Wrinkle in Time
What should I take away from this?
To deny the social construction of sexuality, is to reaffirm the hidden curriculum and reinforce the dominant paradigm that sexuality is dangerous and that men cannot be held accountable for their sexual acts. Even more it prevents girls from defining their own sexual desire and encourages them to be passive and to measure their sexual worth in terms of how much they excite or please boys. These concepts and ideals can be found in all different schools, grade levels, and subjects because the hidden curriculum permeates the entire educational institution. This is why it is of extreme importance for teachers and students to identify the texts' underlying messages and encourage honest discussions about the social construction of sexuality.
by Nicole Klein, Linda Markowitz, Laurel Puchner, Jill Kirsten Anderson
"For adolescents, the salience of sexual identity emerges in middle school. US middle schools, however, are structured in a way that marginalizes topics of sexuality to classes such as health that are perceived as less important than math, science, and Language Arts. This marginalizing and framing of the topic of sexuality means that students will construct their own (mis-)perceived versions of sexuality through interactions with the curriculum in their core classes and elsewhere in schools. Typically, these student-generated versions of sexuality recreate hegemonic constructs of race, ethnicity, class, gender, and sexuality" [1].
Teaching Sexuality
"Sexuality is a thorny issue in the American political sphere, as is demonstrated by the various sexual-political constructs surrounding such topics as abortion, homosexuality, pornography and heterosexual monogamy. Two themes remain consistent in both the public arena and the schools: (1) sexuality is perceived as a dangerous and uncontrollable force from which innocent youth must be rescued; and (2) sexuality is reduced to biology, a physical system that exists outside the organizing principles of gender, race, and heterosexuality. These two themes inform the way in which the sexuality education curriculum is delivered in many middle schools and junior highs around the country. Upon entering a sexuality education class today, be it one with an abstinence-only or comprehensive sex education program, students would likely learn about three and only three issues: changes at puberty, sexually transmitted diseases, and sexual decision-making. Unfortunately, they will fail to develop any understanding of ways that sexuality is deeply touched by social constructs, such as compulsory heterosexuality or gender- and race-based value judgements" [1].
Deconstructing Messages in Middle School Language Arts Texts
Sexuality as Dangerous: "A clear message in many of the books assigned in middle school is that loving someone can be dangerous, especially for women, and also that being the object of someone else's love can be dangerous. It follows that, no matter how strong and assertive a girl is, because sexuality is dangerous, she still requires boys and men to help protect her. Lastly, according to the books examined, being a Bad Girl is most definitely not an attribute that boys find appealing. The texts provide numerous examples of what is and what is not attractive in women and girls, and many of these examples combine messages about gender and social class that serve to reinforce sexism and classism. Stories of non-heterosexual attraction and relationships are perceived as so dangerous that they are entirely absent from the texts" [1].
Books that support this - The Outsiders, Freak the Mighty, Touching Spirit Bear, The Giver, and The Skin I'm In
Hegemonic Masculinity: "Gives permission for men to engage in explicit sexual acts without reprimand as it is considered their biological nature and right. Others are not granted the same freedoms. In the texts, hegemonic masculinity is most often exhibited through the portrayal of girls and women. Women who transgress their natural place in the sexual hierarchy are punished. Hegemonic masculinity also means that girls and women believe boys' bad behavior is inevitable, and hence acceptable. However there is a fine line between the Bad Girls and the desirable girl. While girls and women should not have their won sexual desires, they must be proactive at making themselves attractive to men. To do so, they must spend considerable time and effort presenting themselves as sexual objects. Lastly, because women define their sexuality in relation to men, even relationships with other women are shaped by the desire to attract men. Girls and women fear losing their relationship status so they must scheme and/or compete with each other for attention from boys and men" [1].
Books that support this - A Year Down Yonder, The Outsiders, Roll Thunder Hear My Cry, True Confessions of Charlotte Doyle, Wrinkle in Time
What should I take away from this?
To deny the social construction of sexuality, is to reaffirm the hidden curriculum and reinforce the dominant paradigm that sexuality is dangerous and that men cannot be held accountable for their sexual acts. Even more it prevents girls from defining their own sexual desire and encourages them to be passive and to measure their sexual worth in terms of how much they excite or please boys. These concepts and ideals can be found in all different schools, grade levels, and subjects because the hidden curriculum permeates the entire educational institution. This is why it is of extreme importance for teachers and students to identify the texts' underlying messages and encourage honest discussions about the social construction of sexuality.
Research Supporting the New Perspective
Challenging Sexism? Gender and Ethnicity in the Secondary School (2009)
by Elisabet Öhrn
"This article discusses understandings of girls confronting sexism in a Swedish multi-ethnic urban school. The empirical study includes school observations, conversations and formal group interviews with 15-16-year-old pupils from seven classes in four schools. Pupils themselves consider their social and ethnic family background to matter to their position and situation in school, and contemporary research shows that gender takes on different meanings for different social groups." [4]
Classmates on Gendered Conflict
"The 'immigrant' girls varied in their perception of boys' views of gender. Some believed certain boys actually considered women to be inferior, whereas others thought they were just teasing or provoking their female classmates by saying so. The latter understanding was also voiced by some 'Swedish' girls who considered the 'immigrant' girls' reactions to be sometimes exaggerated. While playing down their classmates' criticism, the 'Swedish' girls nevertheless demonstrated their own vulnerability to boys' opinions. They spoke especially about being subjected to name-calling and rumors about promiscuity. These were typically not referred to as sexist practices although there were occasions when the girls indicated their understanding that these were indeed gendered. However, these understandings appeared to not be linked to those of the 'immigrant' girls. The 'Swedish' girls neither joined in the discussion on gender nor came together to challenge discriminatory practices." [4]
Teachers on Gendered Conflict
"It is not unusual for teachers to express appreciation of girls for being motivated, well-organized, and independent, because it accords with a kind of accepted school femininity. Girls who are quiet and 'ladylike' match an 'appropriate kind of femininity,' which is classed and different from 'loudness and naughtiness [that] are automatically positioned as unladylike, and so immediately and by default, working class.' Also girls' protests in school are likely to be met with acceptance if they do not violate school rules or challenge teacher authority.
Derogatory comments from boys were occasionally heard during lessons, in which case teachers usually - but not always - intervened to support the girls. Pupils agreed that some teachers were likely to step in and address issues of gender in class and they generally agreed on which teachers were likely to do so. These were both men and women teaching a range of subjects, so it seems to be that teachers' individual stances that made a difference." [4]
What should I take away from this?
One important point to take away from this study is that teachers are a "crucial resource for enabling pupils to influence processes and relations in the school"[4]. It touches on how important it is for teachers to intervene on gender issues and support girls against sexism in the classroom, but how these tendencies greatly differ from school to school and even from teacher to teacher. Furthermore, this article exemplifies how sexism in schools is experienced across cultures and across socio-economic statuses.
by Elisabet Öhrn
"This article discusses understandings of girls confronting sexism in a Swedish multi-ethnic urban school. The empirical study includes school observations, conversations and formal group interviews with 15-16-year-old pupils from seven classes in four schools. Pupils themselves consider their social and ethnic family background to matter to their position and situation in school, and contemporary research shows that gender takes on different meanings for different social groups." [4]
Classmates on Gendered Conflict
"The 'immigrant' girls varied in their perception of boys' views of gender. Some believed certain boys actually considered women to be inferior, whereas others thought they were just teasing or provoking their female classmates by saying so. The latter understanding was also voiced by some 'Swedish' girls who considered the 'immigrant' girls' reactions to be sometimes exaggerated. While playing down their classmates' criticism, the 'Swedish' girls nevertheless demonstrated their own vulnerability to boys' opinions. They spoke especially about being subjected to name-calling and rumors about promiscuity. These were typically not referred to as sexist practices although there were occasions when the girls indicated their understanding that these were indeed gendered. However, these understandings appeared to not be linked to those of the 'immigrant' girls. The 'Swedish' girls neither joined in the discussion on gender nor came together to challenge discriminatory practices." [4]
Teachers on Gendered Conflict
"It is not unusual for teachers to express appreciation of girls for being motivated, well-organized, and independent, because it accords with a kind of accepted school femininity. Girls who are quiet and 'ladylike' match an 'appropriate kind of femininity,' which is classed and different from 'loudness and naughtiness [that] are automatically positioned as unladylike, and so immediately and by default, working class.' Also girls' protests in school are likely to be met with acceptance if they do not violate school rules or challenge teacher authority.
Derogatory comments from boys were occasionally heard during lessons, in which case teachers usually - but not always - intervened to support the girls. Pupils agreed that some teachers were likely to step in and address issues of gender in class and they generally agreed on which teachers were likely to do so. These were both men and women teaching a range of subjects, so it seems to be that teachers' individual stances that made a difference." [4]
What should I take away from this?
One important point to take away from this study is that teachers are a "crucial resource for enabling pupils to influence processes and relations in the school"[4]. It touches on how important it is for teachers to intervene on gender issues and support girls against sexism in the classroom, but how these tendencies greatly differ from school to school and even from teacher to teacher. Furthermore, this article exemplifies how sexism in schools is experienced across cultures and across socio-economic statuses.
The School of Hard Knocks: Nonverbal Sexism in the Classroom (1985)
by M. LaFrance
"Research in nonverbal communication has clearly demonstrated that one cannot not communicate. Through the subtle application of touch, expression, eye contact, vocal tone, space, and gesture, teachers convey an array of messages about students' place in the classroom and in life whether they intend to or not. Recent evidence suggests that educational experience for women is characterized by a number of subtle, ubiquitous, and prevailing patterns by which, 'women are either singled out or ignored because of their sex.' A number of which deserve mention." [2]
What should I take away from this?
The important points to be taken from this article are that female students, as a group, are treated differently from male students and have been going back generations. This article is meant to inform educators of the messages female students learn through their, intentional or unintentional, nonverbal communication in the classrooms. Although this article is dated, it speaks to the power teachers have to influence students' feelings about themselves and their behavior at every grade level. It also acknowledges how embedded these sexist practices are in educational institutions.
by M. LaFrance
"Research in nonverbal communication has clearly demonstrated that one cannot not communicate. Through the subtle application of touch, expression, eye contact, vocal tone, space, and gesture, teachers convey an array of messages about students' place in the classroom and in life whether they intend to or not. Recent evidence suggests that educational experience for women is characterized by a number of subtle, ubiquitous, and prevailing patterns by which, 'women are either singled out or ignored because of their sex.' A number of which deserve mention." [2]
- Sex differences in classroom participation: Although societal stereotypes characterize women as more talkative, research both inside and outside the classroom shows something quite different. In most encounters between women and men, the men do the talking and the women do the listening. In mixed-sex college classrooms, even the brightest women students often remain silent. Indeed, it has come to be taken for granted by many faculty and students alike that men will usually dominate in college classrooms and many researchers have confirmed that women students are less likely to be verbally assertive in coeducational settings." [2]
- Sex bias in teachers' speech: "One of the more subtle ways teachers contribute to female invisibility in classrooms is by reliance on the generic 'he' to refer to both men and women. Theoretically, the generic 'he' includes females as well as males but recent studies show its exclusionary properties. Stericker (1981) had male and female undergraduates read six job descriptions referring to the job holder wither as he, he or she, or they. Following each description, subjects indicated their interest in the job and estimated how difficult the job would be to get for categories of people varying by race, ethnicity, sex, age, and handicap. Results showed that the generic use of the masculine pronoun significantly reduced the estimated chances of a woman getting the job." [2]
What should I take away from this?
The important points to be taken from this article are that female students, as a group, are treated differently from male students and have been going back generations. This article is meant to inform educators of the messages female students learn through their, intentional or unintentional, nonverbal communication in the classrooms. Although this article is dated, it speaks to the power teachers have to influence students' feelings about themselves and their behavior at every grade level. It also acknowledges how embedded these sexist practices are in educational institutions.
References
- Klein, N., & Markowitz, L. (2011). Chapter 19: Undressing the Hidden Curriculum - Sexuality Education and Middle School Literature. In The Sexuality Curriculum and Youth Culture (pp. 288-302). New York, NY: Peter Lang Publishing.
- LaFrance, M. (1985). The school of hard knocks: Nonverbal sexism in the classroom. Theory Into Practice, 24(1), 40-44. doi:10.1080/00405848509543144.
- Miceli, M. (2011). Chapter 62: Schools and the social control of sexuality. In Introducing the new sexuality studies (2nd ed.). Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.
- Öhrn, E. (2009). Challenging sexism? Gender and ethnicity in the secondary school. Scandinavian Journal Of Educational Research, 53(6), 579-590. doi:10.1080/00313830903302091.
- Tolman, D. (2011). Chapters 23: Adolescent girls’ sexuality: The more it changes the more it stays the same. In Introducing the new sexuality studies (2nd ed.). Abingdon, Oxon: Routled