Trigger warning: death by suicide, queer-phobia and negativity
Recently, a 10th standard student at DPS Faridabad ended his life after suffering abuse by higher authorities and classmates because of his sexuality. As I was going through the news, I recalled my years in school; bullying by teachers was the norm.
My English teacher during matriculation used to mock boys by calling them chhakka, maichiya (a derogatory Odia word for transgenders) etc. even for a minor “feminine” trait. The whole class used to burst out in laughter. The cacophony of that laughter cemented queer-phobia and created a hostile environment for queer students in class. Such instances destroy inclusive education.
Schools and teachers enable bullying by reinforcing rigid gender stereotypes. Young boys are one of the most vulnerable age groups as social norms expect them to “act manly”.
There is a forcible reiteration of phrases like “boys don’t cry”, or “don’t act like a girl” etc. Boys are made to sit in-between girls as a form of punishment.
Sex Education MUST Include Gender And Sexuality
Shaming boys at even the slightest deviation from established “normal” behaviour leads to their mental health being hampered. The casual attitude of teachers dealing with homophobia often emboldens a fringe group of students who become bullies.
The striking down of the archaic law criminalising same-sex activity back in 2018 might have ended the legal ramifications the community faces, but the acutely ingrained patriarchy within hetero-normative educational institutions, continues to fail teenagers in providing them with inclusive spaces to assert their individualities.
A proper sex education curriculum aimed at the inclusion of gender and sexuality, must replace the contemporary one. There is a need for an all-encompassing sex education in schools.
A general conversation about sex education unfurls the stigma glued to it. Most do not receive it. Some who are fortunate are the recipients of biological info-terms with no emphasis on gender diversity and sexuality.
Teenagers Turn To The Internet And Porn
In contemporary times, we have confined sex education to merely understanding socio-biological definitions. This sets up a parochial view for teenagers, limiting their interpretation of sexuality. Interestingly, my 10th standard biology teacher believed that the unit titled “reproduction in humans” was unnecessary to teach in class.
Rudimentary sex education must start from the primary level. At the primary level, the design must include a curriculum explaining safe physical touch, and the meaning of consent, for protecting the most vulnerable group (children) against sexual predators.
Teenagers must receive a comprehensive sex-ed aiding their understanding of bodily changes and sexual curiosity. The utmost emphasis must be on educating juveniles, who have a high propensity to turn to the Internet in hunt of sex education.
This hunt, often in the online space, leads to exposure to porn, which inadvertently results in poor sex education. Porn, an industrial product, shouldn’t become the primary ladder which youngsters climb to update their notions on gender, sexuality and sexual intimacy.
The historic “Navtej Singh Johar” judgment which led to an amendment to Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, that decriminalised queer sex between consenting adults, was a landmark triumph for the LGBTQIA+ community in India.
However, indenting the hetero-normative fabric of our conservative society remains a Herculean hurdle yet to be overcome.
Withdrawal Of The Manual On Inclusion Of Trans Students
Parents and teachers must aim to deconstruct hegemonic hetero-normative structures, to enable proper communication with students experiencing societal exclusion.
In 2021, The NCERT (National Council for Education Research and Training) released a ground-breaking manual, aimed at sensitising teachers about their trans and gender-nonconforming students. However, the NCERT withdrew it within seven days after the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) alleged that it was traumatising children in the name of gender inclusivity.
The decision to roll back the manual highlights India’s fragile public sphere. It demonstrates the incapability of government institutions, to assert a more gender-inclusive and diverse stand, even after almost eight years of since the NALSA judgement was passed.
The idea of a sovereign state acknowledging queer marriages seems chimeric for now. What is imperative is to sensitise a generation of young individuals (students) and teachers, who can create queer-affirming safe spaces.
The land of the “Kamasutra” needs to engage in public discourse about gender and sexuality, addressing inclusive sex education, now more than ever.
Educational institutions must not become a place emanating hatred for sexual orientation. The government must acknowledge the fact that inclusive sex education is an essential commodity in desperate need of a free marketplace.