Being gay in the teaching profession

pernod_oclock

Hi there. I'm a PGDE student at the moment but something's been on my mind since I've been doing teaching practice. I'm a gay guy - I don't exactly broadcast it but I'm not prepared to lie about it either. I'm not particularly worried about the students - it's none of their business what anyone's private life entails and I'd never explicity tell them anything about myself anyway. But in the staff room, I've been innocently asked about how my private life is getting on, and of course people are constantly talking about their bfs / gfs / wives / husbands, children, etc as one would expect in a workplace. But I'm not so sure I'd get a positive reaction if I'm as honest as the rest of them about myself, especially if it's a religious school.

I'd love to get a load of replies to this thread telling me I'm being ridiculous and how the vast majority of people react fantastically to a gay collegue and that discrimination in getting a job never happens but I wouldn't be too sure. I'm just asking those of you "in the industry" what you think the general consequences of being a gay teacher is. Any thoughts welcome.

Thanks for reading this probably very naive post!

Lockstep

I'm not a teacher so dunno how much value my own experience is, but for what it's worth, I've had a few teachers who were gay and also have a few gay teacher friends in the same boat. They find it grand, although if you're extremely camp it might make things harder, mainly with the students.

Gay teachers had no problems in my school but that's purely anecdotal.

spurious

No problems for me. I'm openly gay in the staffroom as is one male colleague. We also have some out students and a very strong anti-bullying policy and response should anyone try bullying a gay person, staff or student.

We're a VEC school. Personally, I wouldn't like to work in a religious school, especially not with the equality legislation the way it is at the moment.

TheDriver

There should be absolutely no problem but remember all the controversary over Eileen Flynn who was fired in 1982 for being pregnant by a seperated man and basically it found that school ethos etc can be imposed so e.g. Catholic Church against homosexuality in theory could be used (again I could be totally wrong and open to correction but am sure this was quoted in an RTE programme about a month ago). Bad form if it was but I have a feeling there is something there. There is a gay and lesbian section of the TUI for support also.
Fair play to you but I definitely wouldn't do a Dafid from Little Britain on it though.................

pernod_oclock

Thanks for the replies so far, they're giving me a wider picture on things. No, I'm not camp, and I do believe there should be a certain professional persona in place in the classroom at least. It's just certain things come up and I don't feel right just sitting like a dummy or skirting issues while a straight person would be free and open with what they could say.

For example, I was back at my old school for TP. A Protestant one. The 10% pay cut had just been announced and a teacher was asking me my reaction, where I said 90% of a wage is better than 100% of nothing. They said back that I'd care when I have a wife and children. So I just smiled back. In a natural conversation I'd have lightheartedly corrected them that there wouldn't be any but I worried if it got back (with negative effect) to TPTB. I know that's a trivial example but loads of that sort of thing arises naturally when you're working. Or that it wouldn't be a huge problem if I were seen out with another guy behaving quite respectably but obviously together.

It has to be said that although I mightn't agree with religious ethoses in schools, if a job was offered to me anywhere in the country next year, I'd need to take it. I know I've not got the worst subject with Irish but if it came down to it, I'd need to go with any school that would offer me a job.

rainbowtrout

I think it's one of those things that'll you'll just have to play by ear. Some schools you would have no hassle at all, as is spurious' experience and ideally that should be the experience for everyone. Life isn't like that though. In other schools while you might not get hassle directly, it might be 'frowned upon' by staff. Some schools still have a really conservative view. I know one or two gay teachers (both male) one works in a school where many of the staff know and it's no problem, but there are a few that don't know and he would prefer to keep it that way. The other works in a fairly conservative CBS, the brothers are still involved in the running of the school and he is not openly gay in the staffroom. He knows some people have guessed but it's the type of thing that nobody talks about because it hasn't been formally acknowledged.

On the other hand the principal of a school in a neighbouring town is gay and she is in a relationship with one of the other teachers from her school. That's common knowledge in schools all over the county not just in her locality. It really just depends on the school you end up in. They're all different.

dory

This was the main reason I dropped out of a teacher course in 2003. I'm still glad I did, I wasn't ready myself and would have probably freaked out if one of the students said anything. I went back teaching at the beginning of this year and it was fine. Wasn't out to my students but would never deny it either. I think a role model for the new generation can only be a good thing. And my colleagues were great so I never had a fear there.
I think it depends on your own situation though.

DubArk

I think half the battle is, that you're confident about who you are. I’m not a teacher myself but I am gay and the same applies in most work places, as long as you're professional, there should be no problems. I have a number of gay male and female friends who are teaching.

Best of luck.

freire

As above. And as with most things in this job it's a judgement call. Your call. I personally keep my outside of school life totally separate, from students, and to a large extent staff. I'm sure some think me an oddball but you know it's my life, my private til I want to tell you life.

Having said all that, I'm sure in the majority of schools it shouldn't/wouldn't be an issue.

looksee

I am also in a VEC FE school and I know there are a couple of gay people on the staff, though I don't know who they are. Even if they were open about it I don't think it would be a problem. There are all sorts of reasons why people might not want to talk about their private/home life, there are a lot of people on the staff that I do not know their marital status.

bernadeli

me personally i wouldnt care about you or anyone been gay cause thats why were all different.if your mates dont like the fact that your gay well i dont think there the kinda frends you need..some people are better looking than others, some are coloured some are not, some are tall, some not, some are gay, some are not..it doesnt make a difference whatsoever..i bet everyone who reads your post knows someone thats gay& i bet they'll say at the start it was weired but now they dont see then as been different..its just a few unfortunate fools that cant seen to get there heads round it but then again they probably all failed in school or social society so need someone to feel embarrased or ashamed about themselves for them to feel better..hope this helps

starre

Honestly, there are a lot of idiots out there, just like in any job. I'd love to tell you it's nothing to worry about.

I've worked in schools where teachers have been disrespectful to members of staff who were gay, "unmarried mothers" (exact words used), foreign, and who weren't catholic. I've lost work because of religion.

Suss out the general vibe of the staffroom when you go in.

spurious

Apart from the idiots which you have everywhere, there is section 37 which effectively means it's OK for your school's management to discriminate against you if you don't fit in. THAT is the problem.

starre

spurious wrote: »

Apart from the idiots which you have everywhere, there is section 37 which effectively means it's OK for your school's management to discriminate against you if you don't fit in. THAT is the problem.

+1

I was told off for telling a group of kids there was nothing wrong with being gay. This was a catholic school. I hadn't mentioned the church or gone on any anti-catholic rant. It was in the context of the civil rights movement. But it was seen as a threat to the catholic ethos of the school. This school had gay members on staff, but it was treated as an open secret and they never mentioned partners.

I also have worked in schools where it isn't an issue in the staffroom.

TheDriver

spurious wrote: »

Apart from the idiots which you have everywhere, there is section 37 which effectively means it's OK for your school's management to discriminate against you if you don't fit in. THAT is the problem.

Thats what I was thinking of, Eileen Flynn brought up an awful lot of backward ideas still in existence.....

pernod_oclock

Thanks for all the replies, they're very helpful indeed.

I think half the battle is, that you're confident about who you are. I’m not a teacher myself but I am gay and the same applies in most work places, as long as you're professional, there should be no problems.

I have to say I'm as comfortable with myself as I think one could be, in any circumstances. I've no hang-ups in that regards and I completely agree with you about professionalism...having seen some utter lack of it while at school myself, I swore I'd be as professional as possible if I ever did become a teacher.

As above. And as with most things in this job it's a judgement call. Your call. I personally keep my outside of school life totally separate, from students, and to a large extent staff. I'm sure some think me an oddball but you know it's my life, my private til I want to tell you life.

I agree that one shouldn't be shouting all one's business from the rooftops in any work environment and students don't even come into this equation - it is simply none of their business.

I've worked in schools where teachers have been disrespectful to members of staff who were gay, "unmarried mothers" (exact words used), foreign, and who weren't catholic. I've lost work because of religion[...]Suss out the general vibe of the staffroom when you go in.

As a few people have advised, I think playing it by ear is the best way of starting out anyway. The religion aspect you mentioned is another worry, me being a (very very very unpracticing) Presbyterian - but as Pearse would have said, I'm a mad Irishman and love teaching it so far (go figure!).

Apart from the idiots which you have everywhere, there is section 37 which effectively means it's OK for your school's management to discriminate against you if you don't fit in. THAT is the problem.

I think this is where the pressing issue is, indeed. Didn't know such a clause existed until you mentioned it. Madness in this day and age. Especially where temporary contracts are the order of the day, it's one extra obstacle to finding a secure place of employment for anyone who doesn't "conform" for any reason to a principal or management's ideal.

pernod_oclock

starre wrote: »

+1

I was told off for telling a group of kids there was nothing wrong with being gay. This was a catholic school. I hadn't mentioned the church or gone on any anti-catholic rant. It was in the context of the civil rights movement. But it was seen as a threat to the catholic ethos of the school. This school had gay members on staff, but it was treated as an open secret and they never mentioned partners.

I also have worked in schools where it isn't an issue in the staffroom.

Very interesting post. I've often wondered what happens in religious schools if a student has an issue that doesn't sit well within the school's ethos. Can they honestly be given effective, unjudgemental, unbiased support in that context? And those gay staff members were grand not to mention partners if that was the prevailing nature of the staffroom in general - nothing wrong with privacy - but it would be very un-grand if it was because of any fear that it could be detrimental to them and their positions as opposed to their straight counterparts mentioning partners.

gaeilgegrinds1

Was at a dinner tonight with my fiance and our friends, as it happens he has two gay men on his team at work. We began talking about this and they agreed any of their teacher friends seem to have it tougher. I remember when I was on tp one of the lads with me in the school was gay and a comment was made by a senior member of staff that he'd never be taken on in a religious school. He was an amazing teacher but two years later went to England. He'd had a situation where a comment was made about his personal life and he just felt it was one more obstacle he could do without. He often says the staffroom was the only place he felt different. We have one teacher on our staff is a lesbian and she keeps it very much to herself, was passed over for a permanent post a few years back as she said she was seen as not having a family etc. and not needing it. I think it's an outrage but not likely to hugely change as most people keep their cards to their chest on this one and therefore don't get much support from others when things go wrong. Fingers crossed it will improve.

gaeilgegrinds1

Just on what Starre said there, I was doing an essay recently on discrimination as Gaeilge and we watched the Scannal programme on Eileen Flynn. I said something along the lines that it was a scandal and was trying to get the students to think of it in modern day terms. One queried could it happen to a gay teacher and I said I didn't know but that it shouldn't. An older member of staff, third from the top (just announced retirement!) had them after me and took me aside afterwards. Made a comment about me not exactly being an ideal rolemodel (I'm not married and due my second baby, for the record this was what I wanted, I'm not some silly girl who accidently got pregnant and hangs my head in shame) and asked me to stick to the syllabus. Given the strength she has in the school I'll take it for now, sad but oh so bloody true. Making my blood boil thinking of it!

pernod_oclock

After reading your posts, gaeilgegrinds1, I'm as unimpressed as you sound!

I said something along the lines that it was a scandal and was trying to get the students to think of it in modern day terms. One queried could it happen to a gay teacher and I said I didn't know but that it shouldn't. An older member of staff, third from the top (just announced retirement!) had them after me and took me aside afterwards. Made a comment about me not exactly being an ideal rolemodel (I'm not married and due my second baby, for the record this was what I wanted, I'm not some silly girl who accidently got pregnant and hangs my head in shame) and asked me to stick to the syllabus.

First of all, I thought it was part of our remit as teachers to not just follow the syllabus but cover the wider curriculum, to prepare the students for life. You were just trying to get the students to think laterally about an issue that they are guaranteed to encounter in their lives, not just trying to get them some marks in the aiste. The senior teacher (probably leaving to save money on their pension) will be no loss to the teaching profession and the school-going population if that's their narrow-minded, quip-laden style. It's easy to sit up high casting judgements in the safe tower of "traditionalness", which can cover up a multitude of sins. And what of this recent push for honesty and transparency in wider society, is it not applicable here? It's especially unpalatable when we consider that this is a school, a learning environment we're talking about...children learn by example, and they also naturally detest hypocrisy. Noone needs to air their washing publicly but we most definitely need to be teaching young people about the world out there in an honest way, not skirting issues to make life easy for schools.

We have one teacher on our staff is a lesbian and she keeps it very much to herself, was passed over for a permanent post a few years back as she said she was seen as not having a family etc. and not needing it. I think it's an outrage but not likely to hugely change as most people keep their cards to their chest on this one and therefore don't get much support from others when things go wrong.

I'd be loath to push the whole issue as a gay rights one, more a "teachers' rights" one. This woman has as much a right to a permanent job as anyone else if she can do her job, and more of a right if she's the best for that job. The idea that one's personal life having more of an influence on job prospects than teaching ability is, frankly, mind-boggling. Any system that supports it needs to take a good hard look at itself. Again, I know these situations are probably the execptions but the idea they can come up at all in the cases of hard-working, enthusiastic gay, unmarried-mother, non-white, non-Catholic or etc teachers cannot be defended.

crucamim

TheDriver wrote: »

There should be absolutely no problem but remember all the controversary over Eileen Flynn who was fired in 1982 for being pregnant by a seperated man and basically it found that school ethos etc can be imposed so e.g. Catholic Church against homosexuality in theory could be used (again I could be totally wrong and open to correction but am sure this was quoted in an RTE programme about a month ago). Bad form if it was but I have a feeling there is something there. There is a gay and lesbian section of the TUI for support also.
Fair play to you but I definitely wouldn't do a Dafid from Little Britain on it though.................

Eileen Flynn was not sacked because of her private life. She was sacked because of her public life - i.e. her domestic arrangements were public knowledge in the small town of New Ross. A point made by the judge, Declan Costello, who presided over her appeal to the High Court.

A Catholic school has a right to remain a Catholic school. If it has, on its staff, a teacher whose personal life is, to public knowledge, at odds with a core principle of Catholicism, it has ceased to be a Catholic school. The central function of a Catholic school is to educate students in a Catholic atmosphere. How could Eileen Flynn's presence on the staff contribute to a Catholic atmosphere? Would anyone question the right of a Jewish school to sack a teacher who had been outed as a Nazi?

Eileen Flynn was not sacked until the mothers of many of the girls she was teaching forced the hand of the nuns. They threatened to withdraw their daughters from that school. Why should the nuns allow their school to be destroyed - not to mention facing legal action from parents who had sent their daughers to a school in the legitimitate belief that it was a Catholic school? Not to mention other teachers in that school losing their jobs due to a fallen enrollment. The rights of an employee do not exist in isolation from the rights of his/her employer and from the rights of customers - or from the rights of colleagues.

Glenn Hoddle was sacked from his job as manager of the English football team - for public conduct prejudicial to the interests of his employer i.e. saying that disabled people were disabled because they were being punished for what they had done in an earlier life.

Tommy Doherty was sacked as manager of Manchester United for having an affair with the wife of Laurie Brown, the physiotherapist at the club. When the club tried to retain his services, the wives of the players stirred up a rebellion and, rather than see their team broken up, the club sacked Doherty. An employer has a right to sack an employee in order to protect the business.

A personal life is private only so long as it remains private. I advise the Gay teacher who has posted on this thread to keep his personal life private. Discretion is the greater part of valour. Do not set out looking for trouble. In this life, one usually encounters more than enough hurdles without seeking to attract or provoke more.

spurious

crucamim wrote: »

Eileen Flynn was not sacked because of her private life. She was sacked because of her public life - i.e. her domestic arrangements were public knowledge in the small town of New Ross. A point made by the judge, Declan Costello, who presided over her appeal to the High Court.

A Catholic school has a right to remain a Catholic school. If it has, on its staff, a teacher whose personal life is, to public knowledge, at odds with a core principle of Catholicism, it has ceased to be a Catholic school. The central function of a Catholic school is to educate students in a Catholic atmosphere. How could Eileen Flynn's presence on the staff contribute to a Catholic atmosphere? Would anyone question the right of a Jewish school to sack a teacher who had been outed as a Nazi?

Eileen Flynn was not sacked until the mothers of many of the girls she was teaching forced the hand of the nuns. They threatened to withdraw their daughters from that school. Why should the nuns allow their school to be destroyed - not to mention facing legal action from parents who had sent their daughers to a school in the legitimitate belief that it was a Catholic school? Not to mention other teachers in that school losing their jobs due to a fallen enrollment. The rights of an employee do not exist in isolation from the rights of his/her employer and from the rights of customers - or from the rights of colleagues.

Glenn Hoddle was sacked from his job as manager of the English football team - for public conduct prejudicial to the interests of his employer i.e. saying that disabled people were disabled because they were being punished for what they had done in an earlier life.

Tommy Doherty was sacked as manager of Manchester United for having an affair with the wife of Laurie Brown, the physiotherapist at the club. When the club tried to retain his services, the wives of the players stirred up a rebellion and, rather than see their team broken up, the club sacked Doherty. An employer has a right to sack an employee in order to protect the business.

A personal life is private only so long as it remains private. I advise the Gay teacher who has posted on this thread to keep his personal life private. Discretion is the greater part of valour. Do not set out looking for trouble. In this life, one usually encounters more than enough hurdles without seeking to attract or provoke more.

Good God (so to speak) - in the 21st century, people think like this?

baalthor

crucamim wrote: »

Would anyone question the right of a Jewish school to sack a teacher who had been outed as a Nazi?

Or a Nazi school to sack a Jewish teacher ??

gaeilgegrinds1

Spurious people do. After years of trying for a baby and giving up I became pregnant unexpectedly. My new school was amazingly supportive. However...the principal in my old school arrived at the house one day to, 'congratulate,' me and brought a mass card and said she'd been praying for the baby. Right...I'm religious in that I attend mass most of the time and my partner and I have quite a lot of beliefs. Is it not also about how you treat people? I escorted her out of my home and asked her not to return. Her final words were that she was glad I was not longer employed in her school if only because the shame would be terrible. So yes...it is rife!

spurious

The proper and full separation of Church and State cannot come quick enough.
As a priority, get them out of primary schools, where the nonsense begins.

seriouslysweet

We've a gay French teacher, he's openly gay but two of the lads refuse to attend his class. Isn't the discrimination against the teacher? In fairness though, why he made an issue of it is beyond me really. Totally archaeic mindset by the two lads though.

spurious

That's entirely a school discipline issue, nothing to do with the teacher being gay.

Two students are refusing to attend their scheduled classes, end of story - and that is how the school should deal with it.

Parents in, drag out signed code of conduct (including mentions of attending classes and following teachers' instructions), there you go, no arguments, you either signed it or you didn't - follow the rules or goodbye. Next!

crucamim

spurious wrote: »

The proper and full separation of Church and State cannot come quick enough.
As a priority, get them out of primary schools, where the nonsense begins.

Leave that to the parents of children to decide. Some parents do not want their children educated in a school controlled by a church. Such parents should not send their children to a school owned by a church.

The rights of secularists do not exist in isolation from the rights of the devout. The rights of teachers do not exist in isolation from the rights of the parents whose children they teach. Nor do the rights of teachers exist in isolation from the rights of the owners of the school. Nor do the rights of one teacher exist in isolation from the rights of colleagues.

Some of the posters are truly the product of a society which puts great stress on rights and none on duties.

crucamim

spurious wrote: »

Apart from the idiots which you have everywhere, there is section 37 which effectively means it's OK for your school's management to discriminate against you if you don't fit in. THAT is the problem.

What is wrong with that? Schools do not exist to provide teachers with employment. There primary function is to provide a service for parents. Parents have a right to be selective as to who as power over their children.

In Northern Ireland it is not only Church owned schools which have the right to discriminate. State schools have a right to discriminate against Catholics. If you were teaching in a State school in a Presbyterian area of Co Antrim and you married a Papist, would you be allowed to keep your job - or your life? And in England, if you were teaching in a mainly Muslim State school in Birmingham and you took part in a BNP march through Birmingham, would you be allowed to remain a teacher in that school?

When one takes this question away from the issue of teacher rights and considers the rights of all those likely to be affected by that teacher, the issue starts to get complicated, very complicated. Teachers tend to be in no doubt - their rights must come before all else. The population in general tend to see things differently. Why are teachers so arrogant?

desertcircus

crucamim wrote: »

Leave that to the parents of children to decide. Some parents do not want their children educated in a school controlled by a church. Such parents should not send their children to a school owned by a church.

The rights of secularists do not exist in isolation from the rights of the devout. The rights of teachers do not exist in isolation from the rights of the parents whose children they teach. Nor do the rights of teachers exist in isolation from the rights of the owners of the school. Nor do the rights of one teacher exist in isolation from the rights of colleagues.

Some of the posters are truly the product of a society which puts great stress on rights and none on duties.

And how many schools are there in Ireland which are available to parents who are uncomfortable with sending their kids to a church-run school?

The rule should be very simple: any claim that LGBT students or teachers are inferior or undesirable should be punished quickly and severely, and any school which refuses to adhere to that should be taken over by the State and its ethos changed to a nondenominational one.

Incidentally: your choice of analogy is telling, and repulsive. A Jewish school would be morally right to sack an avowed Nazi because the Nazi in question believes every member of the faculty and student body should be exterminated. Thinking the two cases are even vaguely comparable is warped.

desertcircus

crucamim wrote: »

What is wrong with that? Schools do not exist to provide teachers with employment. There primary function is to provide a service for parents. Parents have a right to be selective as to who as power over their children.

In Northern Ireland it is not only Church owned schools which have the right to discriminate. State schools have a right to discriminate against Catholics. If you were teaching in a State school in a Presbyterian area of Co Antrim and you married a Papist, would you be allowed to keep your job - or your life? And in England, if you were teaching in a mainly Muslim State school in Birmingham and you took part in a BNP march through Birmingham, would you be allowed to remain a teacher in that school?

When one takes this question away from the issue of teacher rights and considers the rights of all those likely to be affected by that teacher, the issue starts to get complicated, very complicated. Teachers tend to be in no doubt - their rights must come before all else. The population in general tend to see things differently. Why are teachers so arrogant?

NO. The primary function of a school is to provide education and a suitable environment for the children enrolled there. If the school fails to teach the children that it's wrong to treat gay peers as inferior or morally flawed, then the school is failing in its role.

As for your analogies: you seem to be keeping with the offensive comparators. BNP members want to throw out anyone who isn't white English Protestant; you can't do your job as a teacher for children who fall outside that if you think the kids in front of you don't deserve to be in the country, much less get an education. And the question of Northern Ireland is telling; the decision to allow religious segregation in Northern schools is one of the worst ones ever made by a British government.

And how will a student be affected by having a gay teacher? Stop tiptoeing around the edges and spit it out. What makes you think a teacher's sexuality has any impact on their ability to teach?