!

"#$ %& '"$ %& ()%*

}oanna Pawelczyk
+,-. /012034015 670839:0;< 07 ="57- >="#-7,?
Lukasz Pakula
+,-. /012034015 670839:0;< 07 ="57- >="#-7,?
}ane Sunueilanu
@-71-:;39 670839:0;< >670;3, A07B,".?
!""#$" &' (&)$* +, *$-./+&, /& 0$,1$*
.,1 "$2#.-+/3 +, /4$ 567 8-.""*&&9 :
;, &<$*<+$)
ABSTRACT. Schools in geneial anu classiooms in paiticulai aie among society's piimaiy socializing
institutions (Fieeman & NcElhinny, 1996, p. 261; Augei, 2uu1). In paiticulai, euucation, as an institu-
tion of uiamsci's 'civil society' (}ones, 2uu6), can be consiueieu a giassioots space wheie hegemonic
genueieu anu sexual iuentities aie constiucteu anu iegulateu. This aiticle looks at the context of the
EFL classioom - a uiscuisive space wheie leaineis aie potentially (ie-)constiucteu in ielation to
vaiious (genuei) ioles in society as well as leaining the piactices, values anu iules of a given society
at laige. In this papei we exploie anu uiscuss how the categoiies of genuei anu sexuality aie iepie-
senteu, (ie-)constiucteu anu geneially uealt with in this leaining enviionment. We follow Foucault's
(1978, 1979) conceptualization of powei as something which "weaves itself uiscuisively thiough
social oiganizations, meanings, ielations anu the constiuction of speakeis' subjectivities oi iuentities"
(Baxtei, 2uuS, p. 8) anu is enacteu anu contesteu in eveiy inteiaction (see Nullany, 2uu7). We see
powei as being piouuceu, iepiouuceu, challengeu anu iesisteu in the EFL classioom in connection
with the constiuction of genuei anu sexuality. The aiticle uiscusses how views on whatwho is
'poweiful' in the context of the EFL classioom have changeu ovei the yeais, fiom the eaily piivileging
of textbooks to the cuiiently auvocateu cential iole of the teachei in auuiessing anu piomoting (oi
not) tiauitional anuoi piogiessive uiscouises of genuei anu sexuality. Ciitical peuagogies anu queei
peuagogies aie uiscusseu as offeiing euucatois potent insights anu tools to ueal with heteionoima-
tivity anu vaiious foims of uisciimination in the EFL classioom as well as helpful means foi empow-
eiing !"" stuuents by auuiessing theii vaiious iuentities. It is thus oui contention that ielationships
between genuei, sexuality anu EFL euucation aie in neeu of uigent (ie)auuiessing as existing ie-
seaich is outuateu, lacks methouological sophistication oi is lacking in the Polish context.
KEYW0RBS: ciitical peuagogies, EFL classioom, genuei, heteionoimativity, powei, queei
peuagogies, sexuality, talk-aiounu-the-text, textbooks
!,/*&1#8/+&,= >&)$* .,1 /4$ 567 8&,/$2/
This aiticle pioviues an oveiview of ieseaich into how the categoiies
of genuei anu sexuality aie constiucteu in 'English as a foieign language'
textbooks as well as in the context of teacheis' meuiation of textbooks'
!" #$%&&% '%()*+,-./ 0.%1, '%.0%/ #%&) 10&2)3*%&2
(genueieu) contents in classioom inteiactions. uenuei anu sexuality aie
two of the most salient social categoiies thus theii (ie-)constiuction anu
negotiation almost always entail the exeicise of powei, foi instance,
which uiscouise of genuei ielations pievails in classioom inteiaction is
a mattei of whose !"#$% (publisheis'. teacheis'., stuuents'., paients'.) is
moie poweiful in the cuiient social but also local inteiactional context.
The uiscussion to follow piesents some complex intiicacies involveu in
constiuction of genuei anu sexuality in the EFL context in ielation to
powei. It also uiscusses ciitical peuagogies anu queei peuagogies as
impoitant peispectives offeiing tools foi both piactitioneis anu analysts
to (ie-)auuiess the unequal powei ielations in the EFL classioom.
Schools in geneial anu EFL classes in paiticulai aie not cleaily only
in pait iesponsible foi teaching boys anu giils about genuei-uiffe-
ientiateu social ioles (cf. uoiuon, 2uu4). Yet schools aie in a unique po-
sition heie. Foi example, thiough encouiaging paiticulai cuiiiculai
choices foi giils anu foi boys, anu thiough genuei-uiffeiential classioom
inteiaction (in teims of teachei attention to boys anu to giils, e.g. Kelly,
1988), they aie in fact able to ieinfoice, foi instance, the suboiuinate
iole of giils anu women anu the uominant iole of boys anu men (Fiee-
man & NcElhinny, 1996, p. 261). Teacheis of all cuiiiculai subjects aie
also able, thiough simple casual iemaiks, to piomote an unthinking het-
eionoimativity (see Noiiish, 2uu2).
Linke (2uu7; see also Sunueilanu, 2uuu) howevei talks about the
low piofile of genuei in foieign language teaching, while Becke-Coinill
anu volkmann (2uu7, p. 7) aigue that "genuei continues to be conceiveu
in a tiivializeu, eveiyuay, unquestioneu foim, anu the common-sense
belief in an essentialist, self-eviuent existence of 'women' anu 'men' ie-
mains uncontesteu." Linke (2uu7) attiibutes a gieat ueal of the neglect
of genueieu featuies of the taiget language to teacheis' pieoccupation
with the 'language issue' itself:
the constant stiuggle by language leaineis anu language teacheis to finu the
iight woius anu the appiopiiate giammatical foims to satisfy even basic com-
municative neeus leaves little scope to take account of non-sexist language (Lin-
ke, 2uu7, p. 1S7).
Such a 'neutial' stance uenies the fact that no language (incluuing
that piouuceu in the foieign language leaining enviionment) is evei
piouuceu in a social vacuum, as even the giammatical stiuctuies com-
monly piacticeu in the EFL classioom aie almost always peopleu with
!""#$" %& '%($) *+ )$,-.*%+ .% /$+0$) -+0 "$1#-,*.2 *+ .3$ 456 7,-"")%%8 9 :+ %;$);*$( <=
inuiviuuals who aie iecognizably men oi women. All in all, Linke (2uu7)
iefeiiing to a global euucational setting, iegaius neglecting genuei is-
sues by schools as a piofessional failuie.
Euucation as an institution not only constiucts but also !"#$%&'"(
genueieu iuentities (}ones, 2uu6), typically enuoising hegemonic iuenti-
ties (often hegemonic masculinity, emphasizeu femininity, anu hete-
iosexuality-as-the-noim). In this sense, following Faiiclough (1989),
euucation anu the EFL classioom emeige as poweiful entities with iegu-
latoiy anu piesciiptive positions: "powei in uiscouise is to uo with pow-
eiful paiticipants contiolling anu constiaining the contiibutions of non-
poweiful paiticipants" (1989, p. 46).
1
Faiiclough (2uu1) unueilines the
significance of language heie but also signals the iole of language in ie-
sistance anu potential change of social ielations of powei.
We see powei in the euucational EFL setting not as uniuiiectional oi
monolithic but as 'a net like oiganization' in which all paiticipants in the
leaining piocess (teacheis anu stuuents in the cuiient uiscussion) aie
active 'vehicles of powei', "always in the position of simultaneously un-
ueigoing anu exeicising this powei" (Foucault, 1981, p. 98). In this fluiu
mouel of powei, "uiscouise tiansmits anu piouuces powei; it ieinfoices
it, but also unueimines it an exposes it, ienueis it fiagile anu makes it
possible to thwait it" (Foucault, 1978, p. 1u1). Consequently, powei can
be enacteu but also contesteu in eveiy inteiaction (Nills, 2uu2, 2uuS).
This means that uominant, hegemonic uiscouise ueployeu in the EFL
textbook can not only be challengeu by the teachei but alteinative, pio-
giessive uiscouises piomoteu. These can then be shaieu, taken on boaiu
oi at least consiueieu - oi iesisteu, by stuuents. Recognizing the )*+(',
'$',-" natuie of uiscouise means howevei that all language choices
maue in the EFL classioom can confiont anu potentially tiansfoim uis-
ciiminatoiy piactices anu iueological values (Faiiclough, 1989, 1992).
Language then can be a piimaiy factoi thiough which tiauitional, sexist
anu heteionoimative genuei iepiesentations - like otheis - aie explicit-
ly anu implicitly both peipetiateu anu challengeu (NcCluie, 1992, p. S9).
uiven that Foucault's anu Faiiclough's theoiizations of powei enable
iesistance to the noimative genuei assumptions, when applieu to the
EFL context, these make classioom inteiaction epistemologically anu
iueologically veiy uynamic anu complex, with a gieat ueal of negotiation
(at the level of textbooks, teachei-stuuent inteiactions, stuuent-stuuent
___________________
1
See Pennycook (1994) on English anu linguistic impeiialism.
!" #$%&&% '%()*+,-./ 0.%1, '%.0%/ #%&) 10&2)3*%&2
inteiactions) of genuei ioles, genuei steieotypes anu genueieu anu het-
eionoimative uiscouise potentially taking place.
While textbooks may play a iole in social constiuction (see uoiuon,
2uu4), as aigueu by Shaiuakova anu Pavlenko (2uu4), language text-
books may moie specifically empowei oi uisempowei language leain-
eis. The big question though is: what uoes it uepenu on. This is taken up
in the next two sections of the aiticle.
!"# %&'#( &) *#+*,&&-./
Textbooks seem the most piototypical as well as the most ie-
seaicheu of language leaining mateiials (Sunueilanu, 1994, p. SS). In the
197us anu 198us extensive ieseaich into genuei iepiesentation in foi-
eign language textbooks was conuucteu. Nost of the analyses weie con-
tent oi linguistic oiienteu with the focus on the text-as-piouuct (Sunuei-
lanu !" #$., 2uu2, p. 22S). In this sense textbook content was tieateu as
non-negotiable anu the fact that leaineis may have (potentially uiffei-
ent) iesponses to the textbooks' content was baiely consiueieu. Conse-
quently, textbooks weie conceiveu of as veiy poweiful iesouices with
the potential to convey non-negotiable poitiayals of men anu women.
Still, the analyses of the 197us anu 19u8s geneiateu a numbei of con-
sistent finuings conceining the iepiesentation of women anu men, giils
anu boys in English language textbooks. As Sunueilanu !" #$. (2uu2,
p. 22S) uesciibe, the finuings ielating to the (eailiei) poitiayals of women
can be aptly uesciibeu with such teims as 'Exclusion', 'Suboiuination',
'Bistoition' anu 'Begiauation'. Eaily content analyses of language text-
books founu males to be ovei-iepiesenteu (e.g., Poiecca, 1984). vaiious
ieseaicheis also founu genueieu patteins of occupational steieotyping in
both type anu iange of jobs. Nen weie founu to occupy a gieatei iange of
occupational ioles than women (e.g., Schmitz, 197S). Noie specifically,
analysts iuentifieu an 'inauequate male' steieotype, i.e., male piotagonists
peifoiming housewoik tasks bauly (Pascoe, 1989). Relationship steieo-
typing was anothei finuing wheie women weie seen moie often in iela-
tion to men than men weie to women, usually in a ielationship of 'flaunteu
heteiosexuality' oi a peipetually happy nucleai family anu associateu
stiongly with the uomestic spheie (Pihlaja, 2uu8). Women weie also
founu to be steieotypically ovei-emotional anu timiu (e.g., Talansky,
1986) as well as "moie likely than men to be the butt of jokes" (Sunuei-
!""#$" %& '%($) *+ )$,-.*%+ .% /$+0$) -+0 "$1#-,*.2 *+ .3$ 456 7,-"")%%8 9 :+ %;$);*$( <=
lanu !" #$., 2uu2, p. 22S). The linguistic analyses also founu uisempowei-
ing uiscouise ioles foi female chaiacteis in the analyzeu English language
textbooks. In geneial women weie founu to peifoim a naiiowei iange of
uiscouise ioles compaieu to men (e.g., Baitman & }uuu, 1978; Talansky,
1986; see also Poulou, 1997). Bellingei's ieseaich ievealeu that the veibs
associateu with female chaiacteis ieflecteu "some of the tiauitional steie-
otypic female behavioial patteins" (Bellingei, 198u, p. 272).
Even though the eaily analyses of foieign language textbooks uisie-
gaiueu the piocess of inteiaction between text anu ieauei anu assumeu
authoiitative position of the text, they testifieu to the unequal iepiesen-
tation of male anu female chaiacteis. If we accept that uiscouise is al-
ways concuiiently socially iepiesentational #%& socially constitutive
(Faiiclough, 2uu1), these images can be seen to have the potential to
legitimate the ielative 'Exclusion' anu 'Suboiuination' of female chaiac-
teis anu 'Bistoition' of genuei ielations in geneial - uepenuing, intei
alia, how they aie useu anu talkeu about in class. Some of these eaily
finuings still await attention on pait of syllabus uesigneis anu textbook
authois (see Kobia, 2uu9; uhaibavi & Nousavi, 2u12). Bowevei, }ones
anu colleagues (1997), who lookeu at thiee EFL textbooks ('!#&(#)
*%"!+,!&-#"!. '/"$-%! *%"!+,!&-#"! anu 0//1 23!#& 4) to analyze specifi-
cally the language of uialogues (a chaiacteiistic featuie of language text-
books), founu an encouiaging level of genuei faiiness, achieveu thiough
the cieation of genuei balance in social anu occupational ioles.
At this point the booklet "0n Balance" shoulu be mentioneu as a pub-
lication wiitten foi publisheis with the aim of iaising awaieness of gen-
uei bias. The booklet also pioviues teacheis with iueas as how they
coulu iesponu to 'genuei bias' encounteieu in textbooks. Foi example,
teacheis aie iecommenueu to get involveu in awaieness-iaising thiough
uiscussion, subveision, anu caieful selection of texts anu textbooks
(Sunueilanu, 1994; see also Sunueilanu !" #$5, 2uu2).
The question that Sunueilanu !" #$. (2uu2, p. 224) pose is: "what, if
anything, may genuei steieotyping in wiitten texts (anu othei foims of
genuei iepiesentation) mean foi the leainei's genuei iuentity." Leaineis
can inwaiuly iesist what they ieau as well as outwaiuly contest it but in
fact "ieauei's iesponses aie unpieuictable" (Sunueilanu !" #$5, 2uu2,
p. 22S). Sunueilanu (2uuu, p. 1S4) uiscussing vaiious scenaiios con-
cluues that "looking at the text alone may be a fiuitless enueavoi."
Theie aie a numbei of issues to be consiueieu by wiiteis, publisheis
anu analysts in ielation to textbooks anu theii use by stuuents anu
!" #$%&&% '%()*+,-./ 0.%1, '%.0%/ #%&) 10&2)3*%&2
teacheis. Foi instance, to what extent shoulu textbooks ieflect - if only
symbolically - the way the woilu ieally is. Relateuly, shoulu textbooks
constiuct moie 'piogiessive' images of femininity anu masculinity than
cuiiently obtain. Theie may foi example be a clash between wom-
en'sgiils' piofessional aspiiations anu the steieotypical poitiayals of
women in theii EFL textbooks. Anothei issue ielates to leaineis' inteiac-
tion with the text at conscious anu unconscious levels - aie they awaie
of genuei steieotyping. Bo they think it is impoitant. Bo they say any-
thing about this - to the teachei oi fellow stuuents.
Sunueilanu (in Nills & Nustapha, foithcoming) uetails an agenua foi
futuie textbook stuuies. She auvocates !"#$% &'!& analyzing specific text-
book sub-genies such as 'ieauing compiehension texts', 'uialogues',
'giammai exeicises' as well as looking at the polysemy of meaning of
given textbook texts, anu points to the value of the methous anu insights
of ciitical uiscouise analysis (foi example, analysis of tiansitivity, in
paiticulai agent anu patient, anu if these aie genueieu). Also of paiticu-
lai impoitance in the context of the cuiient pieuominance of visual cul-
tuie is the focus on image analysis anu multimouality of the textbooks'
content (see also uiaschi, 2uuu; Faiiclough, 2uu1, p. S). Foi example, is
a potentially genuei piogiessive text accompanieu by equally piogies-
sive image(s) oi, if theie is a lack of congiuence between text anu visual,
what uo they 'mean' when seen togethei.
In the 199us theie has been a uecline in content anu linguistic anal-
yses of genuei in language textbooks. 0ne of the ieasons, as suggesteu
by }ones $# &'. (1997), may be that genuei bias is now in geneial less
eviuent than hitheito. Theie was also a call foi analyses that woulu in-
coipoiate less content analysis anu moie ciitical anu linguistic theoiies
(see Sunueilanu, 2uuu). Nost impoitantly howevei, "theoietical uevel-
opments suggesteu that text itself may not be the most appiopiiate fo-
cus of stuuy" (Sunueilanu, 2uuu, p. 1S2).
!"#$%"&'( *#+, #&-./0 *%" 1*"2*3--,4 *"2*
In 2uuu in hei aiticle entitleu "New unueistanuing of genuei anu
language classioom ieseaich: Texts, teachei talk anu stuuent talk," Sun-
ueilanu pioposeu a new peispective as to how textbooks shoulu be ana-
lyzeu in teims of genuei iepiesentation anu genueieu uiscouise, stait-
ing with "let us consiuei the possibility that looking at the text alone may
!""#$" %& '%($) *+ )$,-.*%+ .% /$+0$) -+0 "$1#-,*.2 *+ .3$ 456 7,-"")%%8 9 :+ %;$);*$( <<
be a fiuitless enueavoi" (Sunueilanu, 2uuu, p. 1S4). What she auvocateu
in this anu fuithei publications (e.g. Sunueilanu !" #$%, 2uu2) is that what
neeus to be investigateu is the teachei's uiscouise in ielation to gen-
ueieu texts as these may be 'available iesouices' foi his oi hei leaineis'
continually ueveloping iuentities. This appioach to looking at the text-
books unueilines the teachei's agency in the tieatment of the text but at
the same time uoes not pieuict how a given textbook text will be au-
uiesseu by the teachei. This appioach extensively uiveiges fiom a ue-
teiministic tieatment of text anu incoipoiates ciitical uiscouise peispec-
tives (Faiiclough, 1992).
Sunueilanu !" #$. (2uu2) use the teim "talk aiounu the text" (a con-
cept fiom liteiacy stuuies) to explicate how the language teachei in
hishei 'ieau alouu' iole talks about genuei in textbooks. Fiom a ciitical
uiscouise peispective 'talk aiounu the text' exemplifies one foim of 'con-
sumption' of the text anu "as soon as a text is 'consumeu', it ceases to be
text alone" (Sunueilanu !" #$%, 2uu2, p. 229). The eaily iathei ueteiminis-
tic positioning of textbooks' content anu inueeu influence has been ie-
placeu with one that allows foi uiffeient anu vaiious (even opposing)
&#'($)'* of the same text anu thus piouucing a vaiiety of inteipieta-
tions. A teachei's 'talk aiounu the text" can in the case of (some) EFL
instiuctois constitute an example of a so-calleu 'teachable moment'
(Bavighuist, 19S2), i.e., an iueal leaining oppoitunity to offei some in-
sight to stuuents. Thus a teachei's piogiessive (anu appealing) tieat-
ment of a genueieu text may foi example lenu itself to a lively classioom
uiscussion uuiing which stuuents aie able to exploie a vaiiety of pio-
giessive anu non-piogiessive ioles (incluuing non-heteionoimative
ones) that men anu women occupy in a paiticulai community, along
with theii social implications anu consequences (see Nelson, 2uu7).
Exploiations of 'talk-aiounu-the text' in teims of genuei iepiesenta-
tion neeu to focus on those textbook texts in which genuei is somehow
eviuent - what Sunueilanu !" #$. (2uu2) call a 'genuei ciitical point'. This
extenus to many iepiesentations of women, men, boys, giils anu genuei
ielations moie wiuely, piogiessive, tiauitional, oi both. Teacheis then
neeu to uo something #+,-" the paiticulai genuei ciitical point (Sunuei-
lanu !" #$%, 2uu2, p. 2S1). Theie aie of couise a myiiau of possibilities
heie ianging fiom ignoiing it to accepting potentially uisciiminatoiy
content by passive acceptance to active anu foiceful iejection of sexist
content anu piesenting it in a way that allows foi an emeigence of
a moie piogiessive poitiayal of genuei ielations (see Sunueilanu !" #$%,
!" #$%&&% '%()*+,-./ 0.%1, '%.0%/ #%&) 10&2)3*%&2
2uu2). Consequently, genuei-baseu texts aie not necessaiily vehicles of
uisciimination if teacheis choose to use them ciitically in the classioom,
as a means of challenging stuuents' piesuppositions - a teachei can 'ies-
cue' a sexist oi extiemely heteionoimative text. 0n the othei hanu, the
most non-sexist textbook can become sexist in the hanus of a teachei
with sexist attituues (Sunueilanu, 1994, p. 64):
a text is aiguably as goou oi as bau as the tieatment it ieceives fiom the teachei
who is using it; in paiticulai, a text iiuuleu with genuei bias can be iescueu anu
that bias put to goou effect, peuagogic anu otheiwise (Sunueilanu, 2uuu, p. 1SS).
The teachei's iole then emeiges as inueeu ciucial in uealing with is-
sues of genuei anu sexuality as he oi she usually not only ueciues on the
selection of texts to be coveieu in class but also iemains veiy much in
chaige of how these texts aie tieateu. Be oi she fuithei facilitates (pai-
ticulai) classioom uiscussion topics with the powei to enuoise some
views, iefute otheis anu iepiessignoie still otheis. Consequently the
teachei's uiscouise anu classioom uiscouise management uuiing intei-
action have enoimous potential foi piomoting oi not ceitain genuei
uiscouises anu hence genuei ielations in ways that (uis-)empowei stu-
uents.
!"#$%& ()* +#$%& &,--% .$ /0123 ,+45(&.#$6 7,&,8#$#89(&.:.&;
Although aiguably unueiplayeu by piesent uay mainstieam Applieu
Linguistics, ieseaich into sexuality in euucational settings is, we aigue,
a cuiient social impeiative.
2
Bullying anu haiassment leauing to home-
lessness (Rosaiio !" #$%, 2u12) anu acts of suiciue (Agostinone-Wilson,
2u1u; Swieiszcz, 2u12), both with iespect to non-noimative sexuality in
schooling contexts, have been extensively uocumenteu (Boin !" #$%,
2uu9). Language use in euucation pioviues feitile giounu foi exploiing
unequal powei uistiibution between the vaiious social actois involveu
in schooling. While the Foucauluian notion of 'elusive powei' (Foucault,
1978) is applicable heie, it is also impeiative to pinpoint specific
(uis)empoweieu actois in this ieseaich scene, i.e. teacheis (of vaiying
sexualities), stuuents (oi vaiying sexualities), paients, anu goveinments
___________________
2
In fact, it has been noteu that the numbei of publications in the fielu of social justice
anu equity in euucation has been on the iise foi at least a uecaue (Kaui, 2u12, p. 48S).
!""#$" %& '%($) *+ )$,-.*%+ .% /$+0$) -+0 "$1#-,*.2 *+ .3$ 456 7,-"")%%8 9 :+ %;$);*$( <=
oi othei funuing bouies.
S
Inueeu, powei anu language peifoimeu on
a numbei of uiffeient levels (e.g. teachei-stuuent, cuiiiculum uesigneis-
teachei) in this context leaus to the foimation of sociocultuial uiscuisive
piactices anu thus to the "inculcation of paiticulai cultuial meanings anu
values, social ielationships anu iuentities, anu peuagogies" (Faiiclough,
2u1u, p. SS2). The following oveiview of finuings in the fielu of language
anu sexuality in the EFL incluues textbooks, classioom inteiaction as
well cuiiiculum uesign anu a mounting iesistance to institutional noi-
mativities - iesistance which take the foim of !"#$#!%& anu '())" *)+%
,-,#)..
0ne of the aieas of gieatest inteiest foi ieseaicheis in the fielu of
language anu sexuality is the means of sustaining heteiosexuality as the
noim, i.e. ieseaich into /)$)"-0-"1%$#2#$3. The concept is most often
unueistoou as "all linguistic mechanisms that leau to heteiosexuality
being peiceiveu as the natuializeu noim" (Notschenbachei, 2u1u,
p. 11).
4
A ielateu concept is that of /)$)"-.)4#.1, uefineu as "uistinction
in which non-heteiosexual foims of activity, iuentity, anu community aie
uenigiateu oi penalizeu anu heteiosexuality is piivilegeu" (Queen, 2uu6,
p. 288) which is imbueu with issues of powei imbalance. It is these is-
sues, along with that of accompanying homophobic language use, that
aie at the heait of ieseaich into language anu sexuality in euucational
settings.
Euucation anu (sexual) equality ieseaich has been conuucteu with
vaiying intensity. As fai as Polanu is conceineu, sexual-iuentity-baseu
ieseaich is something of a novelty. So fai, bioauly anti-uisciiminatoiy
piojects have been conuucteu (Abiamowicz, 2u11; Zukowski, 2uu4)
followeu by naiiow investigations of non-heteionoimative stuuents at
the 0niveisity of Waisaw (Biozuowski, 2u11) anu the examination of
tieatment of LuBTQ issues in textbooks useu in Polish schools
(Kochanowski )$ %&5, 2u1S). In some othei countiies the situation seems
healthiei with numeious books, piojects, iepoits anu jouinals uevoteu
to social justice anu equity in euucation, incluuing the situation of
LuBTQ stuuents in schools (Elia, 2u1u; Fianck, 2uu2; uoiski & uoouman,
2u11; Bickman & Poifilio, 2u12; Kehily, 2uu2; Toomey )$ %&5, 2u12).
What is the ieason foi this quantitative (anu qualitative) uisciepancy. It
is inuisputable that ieseaich is somehow ielateu to the political climate
___________________
S
This list shoulu be tieateu as open-enueu.
4
See also Notschenbachei (2u11) on Queei Linguistics.
!" #$%&&% '%()*+,-./ 0.%1, '%.0%/ #%&) 10&2)3*%&2
of a given countiy. The poweiful iesponsible foi allocating ieseaich
funus (be it goveinment bouies oi ieseaicheis themselves) aie in a posi-
tion to eithei hinuei oi fostei ceitain inquiiy paiauigms. uiay (2u1S,
p. 4S) theoiizes heteiosexuality in teims of "stiategically piivilegeu" in
the eia of capitalism, anu thus also in the ELT unuiveisifieu maiket. In
Polanu, all the piojects mentioneu above, along with the one that the
authois of this papei aie involveu in, have been funueu by exteinal
souices.
S

!"#"$%&'()*+,- /0% 1"2%3 "4 +%&+5""6$
7(#8 3%4%3%#9% 2"36$
:
;
In his autobiogiaphy (2u1u), Nichal ulowinski, a famous Polish lit-
eiaiy ciitic, wiites about his quest foi finuing a label foi his sexual iuen-
tity. 0nce he hau come acioss the lemma 'homosexual' in the !"##$%&$'(
)%*+*,-./$01/ he felt ielieveu, even though the uefinition
7
woulu be
consiueieu fai fiom acceptable nowauays. This exemplifies the powei
iefeience woiks, such as uictionaiies anu encyclopaeuias, have yielueu
ovei maiginaliseu gioups, not least in teims of iuentity. Bowevei, fai
fiom being objective, these publications have authoiiseu subjective,
iueologically-loaueu meanings anu uiscouises which have the potential
of contiibuting to the oppiession of the less poweiful (Biaun & Kitzingei,
2uu1; Kiamaiae, 1992; Noon, 1989; Tieichlei, 1989).
Tienus in ieseaich similai to the investigations of the iepiesenta-
tionconstiuction of 'genuei' in textbooks can be noticeu with iespect to
the categoiy of 'sexuality'. These stuuies, howevei, have been caiiieu out
mainly outsiue the EFL context (Bawkins, 2u12; Bickman, 2u12;
}ennings & Nacgilliviay, 2u11; Kochanowski $# /,2, 2u1S; Suaiez & Balaji,
2uu7).
8
uioss negligence anu iueological bias have been uocumenteu in
a numbei of textbooks. To stait with the most pieuictable flaw, most
___________________
S
All Polish ieseaich piojects mentioneu so fai have been financeu by the Stefan Ba-
toiy Founuation. The ieseaich into genuei anu sexuality in the context of Polish EFL
(caiiieu out by }ane Sunueilanu, }oanna Pawelczyk, anu Lukasz Pakula) has been funueu
by the Biitish Council.
6
3$4$'$%*$ 5-'67 is a teim encompassing encyclopaeuias, uictionaiies, thesauiuses
etc. (Baitmann, 2uu1).
7
The uefinition can be founu in ulowinski (2u1u, p. 47-8).
8
Examples of the cuiiiculai subjects incluue biology, civics, anu sociology.
!""#$" %& '%($) *+ )$,-.*%+ .% /$+0$) -+0 "$1#-,*.2 *+ .3$ 456 7,-"")%%8 9 :+ %;$);*$( <=
textbooks aie peimeateu with heteionoimativity, foi example, by men-
tioning only nucleai families. Bowevei, moie uistuibing aie instances of
behaviouial uefinitions of homosexuality (founu in Polish textbooks foi
Family Euucation
9
) as the effect of a piolongeu exposuie to poinogiaphy
along with the 'infoimation' that it is cuiable anu can be tieateu with,
intei alia, electiotheiapy (Kochanowski !" #$%, 2u1S). This policing of -
assumeu anu at the same time unnameu - heteiosexuality communicat-
eu to stuuents who might not have fully uevelopeu ciitical text ieception
constiucts non-noimative sexualities as ueviant anu unwanteu. vieweu
fiom the peispective of the EFL stuuents, uncontesteu by teachei au-
thoiity, these legitimiseu uisciiminatoiy uiscouises may then stait cii-
culating in- anu outsiue the classioom, "making stuuents feel moie al-
ienateu anu, as a iesult hinuei|ingj theii language leaining piocess"
(uiay, 2u1S, p. S7; Nelson, 2uu7, p. 69).
1u
uiay (2u1S) notes that EFL
textbooks aimeu at inteinational auuiences featuie exclusively heteio-
sexual iuentities thus exhibiting "monosexualising tenuencies" (Nelson,
2uu6). 0ui own expeiience, foi example, suggests that nucleai families,
with two maiiieu opposite-sex paients aie common in EFL textbooks, as
is the topic of heteiosexual attiaction anu iomance. Yet, uiay (2u1S)
also obseives that some mateiials tailoieu to meet the neeus of moie
specific localiseu auuiences take up the subject of homosexuality.
!"#$%#&'()*%#+ -)(%%.//0%1 2'##. 3#+(4/4*#%5
Seen as a foium foi ieseaich-infoimeu uiscussions, the classioom as
a site imbueu with heteionoimativity has iecently come unuei sciutiny
(Rothing, 2uu8). Liuuicoat (2uu9), in his analysis of classioom talk,
notes contestation anu iesistance to non-heteiosexual iuentities in this
allegeuly uesexualizeu enviionment. Numeious examples auuuceu in his
stuuy testify to the fact that heteiosexual fiaming of stuuents' iuentities
is the noim, anu he aigues that this has the potential to hinuei linguistic
attainment.
In the woilu of EFL, Cynthia Nelson (1999, 2u12, 2uu8, 2uu7) has
championeu utilizing the insights of Queei Theoiy (see Sullivan, 2uuS)
___________________
9
Polish name of the subject: &'()*+#,-! .* '(-# + /*.0-,-!.
1u
This has been coiioboiateu by King (2uu8), who uiaws on the concept of 'imag-
ineu communities' (Anueison, 198S) to show yet anothei possible motivation foi foieign
language leaining: constiucting sexual iuentities in a non-native language.
!" #$%&&% '%()*+,-./ 0.%1, '%.0%/ #%&) 10&2)3*%&2
to pioviue a uiveisity-inclusive enviionment in the classioom; similai
attempts have been obseiveu in the acauemic context (Noiiish &
Sauntson, 2uu7). Nelson (2uu7) aigues that, iathei than cateiing foi the
LuBTQ minoiity, the classioom shoulu be open to a wiue spectium of
iuentities (e.g. ethnic as well as sexual) anu be piepaieu to hanule iele-
vant uiscussions. Beie, the teachei may neeu to waive theii powei in
favoui of empoweiing stuuents anu acting as a facilitatoi of in-class uis-
cussions. Yet shoulu the homophobic views emeige, teacheis neeu to be
piepaieu to exeit theii powei to challenge them. Nelson (2uu7) also
auvocates incoipoiating lesbian anu gay themes to exploie uiveigent
cultuial meanings anu meaning-making piactices with the intention of
unpacking stuuents' noimative questions about gay people with a view
of challenging heteiosexual hegemony. This coulu, she suggests, involve
examining the life histoiy naiiatives of queei iesiuents who aie pait of
the same local communities as the language leaineis. Such piactices
have been subject to empiiical sciutiny by testing stuuents' peiceptions
of the iatio of heteio- to homosexual themes intiouuceu in the context of
the classioom: even gay-fiienuly stuuents vieweu gay themes as moie
fiequent that stiaight ones even though the actual iatio was 2:1 iespec-
tively (Ripley !" #$%, 2u12).
11
0thei ieseaicheis (Be vincenti !" #$%, 2uu7)
have tentatively piobeu into integiating queei peispectives into theii
own language teaching piactices. Foi example, in line with Nelson's pio-
posals is 0'Nochain's (2uu6) attempt at intiouucing local queei naiia-
tives into the EFL classioom in }apan. This contiibution pioviues initial
eviuence that non-noimative themes can be successfully uealt with even
in what might seem like potentially unfavouiable conuitions
12
(foi othei
examples, see Pavlenko, 2uu4; Benesch, 1999).
The iecent blossoming of ieseaich into the issues of inequality in
euucation seems to have iesulteu in iaising the awaieness of piactition-
eis. As Swieiszcz (2u12) points out although some teacheis see the lack
of piofessional tiaining as pioblematic in acting against homophobic
ihetoiic, they feel the call to uo so. Zack !" #$% (2u1u) founu that othei
gioups of teacheis incluue "confionteis" anu "integiatois." While the
foimei see themselves as capable of embiacing egalitaiian woiluviews
anu piomoting them uuiing classioom inteiaction, the lattei iecognizes
___________________
11
Such iesults aie explaineu by the phenomena of novelty attachment anu content
substitution.
12
The sight of ieseaich was a women-only Chiistian college.
!""#$" %& '%($) *+ )$,-.*%+ .% /$+0$) -+0 "$1#-,*.2 *+ .3$ 456 7,-"")%%8 9 :+ %;$);*$( <=
the powei of existing cuiiicula but still attempt to incoipoiate anti-
homophobic ihetoiic into the local teaching piactice (Zack !" #$%, 2u1u).
Anothei poweiful change as iegaius teaching sexual uiveisity in the
classioom in the 0K context has been the ievision of the &#'()**+ ,*-
.'/0!1"2*' *, 34-"5!- 6(41#"2*' #'( 7+2$$/ by 0FSTEB
1S
(see uiay, 2u1S).
Fuitheimoie, anti-uisciiminatoiy teachei tiaining in the 0K is offeieu by
.'1$4/2*' ,*- 8$$
14
, wheie homophobic bullying is an impoitant concein.
Less optimistically, it shoulu be emphasiseu that while the issue of
heteiosexism was signalleu in the Anglophone euucational context ovei
a uecaue ago, 'sexuality' as a cultuially (anu linguistically) impoitant
iuentity categoiy has been insufficiently auuiesseu oi iecogniseu in few
othei euucational contexts. Theie is, howevei, a palpable uemanu foi
intensifieu make-up foi the aiieais, not least as this state-of-affaiis has
been shown in e.g. the 0K to leau to excessive veibal anu physical mani-
festations of homo- anu tiansphobia.
1S
Lack of ieseaich in this aiea con-
tiibutes to the maintenance of the status quo of heteionoimativity along
with the lack of cultuie-specific methous foi counteiing institutionaliseu
uisciiminatoiy piactices.
!"#$%&'("#')
+$,&(-(#. /-"012- 32-'32$4(52 5(0 $-(4($0% 3210.".(2'
The ieseaich piesenteu so fai can be insciibeu in a bioauei anu iela-
tively iecent euucational pioject unuei the label of 1-2"21#$ 0!(#9*92!/
(Nonchinski, 2uu8; Noiton, 2uu8). As iegaius language leaining, Noiton
anu Toohey (2uu4) iuentify foui key themes: seeking ciitical classioom
piactices, cieating anu auapting mateiials foi ciitical peuagogies, exploi-
ing uiveise iepiesentations of knowleuge, anu seeking ciitical ieseaich
piactices. Peuagog2!/ is intentionally pluial to ieflect the uynamism of
uiffeient techniques anu methous of teaching that, while auuiessing
issues of unequal powei uistiibution anu inequality, aie cultuie-
sensitive (anu iecognize that, foi example, what may be seen as oppies-
sive in one cultuial context may be seen as libeiating by those in that
___________________
1S
0ffice foi Stanuaius in Euucation, Chiluien's Seivices anu Skills, which caiiies out
inspections anu iegulatoiy visits of schools (http:www.ofsteu.gov.uk).
14
http:www.shaunuellenty.com |accesseu: Feb. 2, 2u14j.
1S
Tiansphobia is uefineu as "feai oi hatieu of tianssexual oi tiansgenuei people" by
the 0xfoiu English Bictionaiy |accesseu: Feb. 2, 2u14j.
!" #$%&&% '%()*+,-./ 0.%1, '%.0%/ #%&) 10&2)3*%&2
context). Ciitical teacheis aie also awaie of the constitutive powei of
language anu of uiffeient languages - which both ieflect anu may con-
stiuct oui liveu expeiiences. The iuea of ciitical peuagogies seems pai-
ticulaily ielevant heie as 'powei', 'access' anu 'iuentity foimation' aie
ciitical concepts whose blenuing seems not to have been fully appieciat-
eu in the euucational ieseaich, incluuing the Polish EFL context.
Woik in the fielu of ciitical peuagogies impoitantly extenus to the
social categoiies anu iuentity labels of 'genuei' anu 'sexuality'. vieweu in
the postmouein fashion (Foucault, 1978), as fluiu anu constantly being
ieuefineu, in pait thiough social actois' own agency anu iesistance, both
ciitical peuagogies anu queei peuagogies constitute ielatively novel
appioaches to exploiing, unueistanuing anu potentially impioving the
leaining conuitions of the uisempoweieu social gioups, such as women
anu LuBTQ people, in paiticulai in the Polish context. Noie impoitantly,
howevei, any ieseaich caiiieu out thiough these appioaches is intenueu
to tiavel beyonu the acauemia to teachei euucation anu to actual class-
ioom piactice (see Noiton, 2uu8). In the woius of Zack !" #$% (2u1u) - as
iegaius sexuality, but as also applieu to genuei issues:
&! '()" * +,-./0! "1! )2/$$) #30 23-4$!05! "1#" 4/$$ #/0 6-(35 !0(7#"-,) /3 !88!7
"/.!$6 71#$$!35/35 1-'-+1-9/7 ,1!"-,/7 #30 9!1#./-,) 41!,!.!, #30 41!3!.!,
"1!6 -77(,% :3$6 "1!3 7#3 +(9$/7 )71--$) 9!5/3 "- ",#3)8-,' "1! 1-'-+1-9/7 #30
1!"!,-3-,'#"/.! #""/"(0!) "1#" +!,+!"(#"! 1#"! #30 0!,/)/-3 (Zack !" #$%, 2u1u,
p. 11u).
!"#"!"$%"&
ABRAN0WICZ, N. (2u11) &/!$2# ;/!-9!73# |The uieat Absenteej. Waiszawa: To-
waizystwo Euukacji Antyuyskiyminacyjnej.
ABuER, C. T. (2uu1) Biscouise In Euucational Settings. In: Schiffiin, B., Tannen, B.
& Bamilton, B. (Eus.) <1! =#309--2 :8 >/)7-(,)! ?3#$6)/). Lonuon: Blackwell,
P. SuS-17.
Au0STIN0NE-WILS0N, F. (2u1u) @#,A/)' ?30 B0(7#"/-3 C!6-30 D0!3"/"6E F!A(#$/"6
?30 F71--$/35. Basingstoke: Palgiave Nacmillan.
ANBERS0N, B. (198S) D'#5/3!0 G-''(3/"/!)E H!8$!7"/-3) :3 <1! :,/5/3) ?30 F+,!#0
:8 ;#"/-3#$/)'. Lonuon: veiso.
BAXTER, }. (2uuS) I-)/"/-3/35 J!30!, D3 >/)7-(,)!E ? K!'/3/)" @!"1-0-$-56. Basing-
stoke: Palgiave.
BRA0N, v., & KITZINuER, C. (2uu1) Telling It Stiaight. Bictionaiy Befinitions 0f
Women's uenitals. L-(,3#$ :8 F-7/-$/35(/)"/7). S, P. 214-2S2.
BECKE-C0RNILL, B. & v0LKNANN, L. (Eus.) (2uu7M J!30!, F"(0/!) ?30 K-,!/53
N#35(#5! <!#71/35. Tbingen: uuntei Naii veilag.
!""#$" %& '%($) *+ )$,-.*%+ .% /$+0$) -+0 "$1#-,*.2 *+ .3$ 456 7,-"")%%8 9 :+ %;$);*$( <=
BE vINCENTI, u., uI0vANANuELI, A. & WARB, R. (2uu7) The Queei Stopovei: Bow
Queei Tiavels In The Language Classioom. !"#$%&'()$ *'+&(," -'&#).( /,(.+,.#
0#,$1)(.. 4, P. S8-72.
BR0ZB0WSKI, N. (2u11) 2&3#4)"$3,(#5 2&3#4)"$3,()6 7,8'&% 9 :,;, <,; =>%+,$?
@ABC /D:0E =%+;)+?$>$1 <, F()G#&A>%#$)# H,&A3,GAI)4 |Silenceu (FN): Situa-
tion 0f LuBTQ Stuuents At The 0niveisity 0f WaisawjJ Waiszawa: Queei 0W
(0niweisytet Waiszawski).
ELIA, }. P. (2u1u) Bisexuality Anu School Cultuie: School As A Piime Site Foi
Bi-Inteivention. *'+&(," @K :)A#L+,")%>. 1u, P. 4S2-71.
FAIRCL00uB, N. (1989) /,(.+,.# M(; 2'G#&J New Yoik: Longman.
FAIRCL00uB, N. (1992) N)A$'+&A# M(; ='$)," O1,(.#. Cambiiuge: Polity Piess.
FAIRCL00uB, N. (2uu1) /,(.+,.# M(; 2'G#&. Seconu Euition. New Yoik: Longman.
FAIRCL00uB, N. (2u1u) O&)%)$," N)A$'+&A# M(,">A)A6 01# O&)%)$," =%+;> @K /,(.+,.#.
Lonuon: Routleuge.
F00CA0LT, N. (1978) 01# P)A%'&> @K =#L+,")%>: M( Q(%&';+$%)'(6 R'"+4# Q. New Yoik:
Ranuom Bouse.
F00CA0LT, N. (1979) N)A$)8")(# M(; 2+()A1J Baimonuswoith: Penguin.
F00CA0LT, N. (1981) The 0iuei 0f Biscouise. In: Young, R. (Eu.) F(%>)(. 01# 0#L%6
M 2'A% =%&+$%+&,")A% 7#,;#&. Boston: Routleuge Anu Kegan Paul, P. 48-78.
FRANCK, K. C. (2uu2) Rethinking Bomophobia: Inteiiogating Beteionoimativity In
An 0iban School. 01#'&> M(; 7#A#,&$1 Q( ='$)," !;+$,%)'(. Su, P. 274-86.
FREENAN, R. & NCELBINNY, B. (1996) Language Anu uenuei. In: Nckay, S. L. Anu
Boinbeigei, N. B. (Eus.) ='$)'")(.+)A%)$A M(; /,(.+,.# 0#,$1)(.. Cambiiuge:
Cambiiuge 0niveisity Piess, P. 218-8u.
uBARBAvI, A. & N00SAvI, S. A. (2u12) A Content Analysis 0f Textbooks: Investigat-
ing uenuei Bias As A Social Piominence In Iianian Bigh School English Text-
books. !(.")A1 /)(.+)A%)$A 7#A#,&$1. 1 (1), P. 42-9.
uIASCBI, P. (2uuu) uenuei Positioning In Euucation: A Ciitical Image Analysis 0f ESL
Texts. 0!=/ O,(,;, *'+&(,". 18 (1), P. S2-46.
uL0WINSKI, N. (2u1u) S&.) @C$'$)6 @8'G)# M+%'C)'.&,K)$3(, |The Stiangeness
Ciicles: An Autobiogiaphical Novelj. Kiakow: Wyuawnictwo Liteiackie.
u0RB0N, B. (2uu4) I'm Tiieu. You Clean Anu Cook: Shifting uenuei Iuentities Anu
Seconu Language Socialization. 0!=@/ E+,&%#&">. S8 (S), P. 4S7-S8.
u0RSKI, P. C. & u00BNAN, R. B. (2u11) Is Theie A "Bieiaichy 0f 0ppiession" In 0.S.
Nulticultuial Teachei Euucation Couisewoik. M$%)'( Q( 0#,$1#& !;+$,%)'(. SS,
P. 4SS-7S.
uRAY, }. (2u1S) O&)%)$," 2#&A8#$%)T#A @( /,(.+,.# 0#,$1)(. U,%#&),"A. Lonuon: Pal-
giave Nacmillan.
BARTNAN, P. L. & }0BB, E. L. (1978) Sexism Anu TES0L Nateiials. 0!=@/ E+,&%#&">.
12, P. S8S-9S.
BARTNANN, R. R. K. (2uu1) 0#,$1)(. M(; 7#A#,&$1)(.6 /#L)$'.&,81>. Peaison Euu-
cation.
BAvIuB0RST, R. (19S2) P+4,( N#T#"'84#(% M(; !;+$,%)'(. Lonuon: Longmans.
BAWKINS, }. N. (2u12) Bon't Ask About Anu Bon't Tell The Lies Ny Teachei Tolu Ne.
In: Bickman, B. & Poifilio, B. }. (Eus.) 01# <#G 2'")%)$A @K 01# 0#L%C''I6 2&'C"#4
!" #$%&&% '%()*+,-./ 0.%1, '%.0%/ #%&) 10&2)3*%&2
!"#$#%& '() *+,",!-!. /0 1!,&#%!.#2)3 4,+56$ 7% ')8"9++:$. Rotteiuam: Sense
Publisheis, P. 2SS-S7.
BELLINuER, N. (198u) 'Foi Nen Nust Woik Anu Women Nust Weep': Sexism In
English Language Textbooks 0seu In ueiman Schools. ;+<)%=$ >"53#)$ 7%"),%!
"#+%!. ?5!,"),.-. S, P. 267-7S.
BICKNAN, B. (2u12) Banuling Beteionoimativity In Bigh School Liteiatuie Texts.
In: Bickman, B. & Poifilio, B. }. (Eus.) '() @)A *+.#"#B$ /0 '() ')8"9++:C *,+9.)<
!"#$#%& '() *+,",!-!. /0 1!,&#%!.#2)3 4,+56$ 7% ')8"9++:$. Rotteiuam: Sense
Publisheis, P. 71-8S.
BICKNAN, B. & P0RFILI0, B. }. (2u12) '() @)A *+.#"#B$ /0 '() ')8"9++:C *,+9.)<!"#$
#%& '() *+,",!-!. /0 1!,&#%!.#2)3 4,+56$ 7% ')8"9++:$. Rotteiuam: Sense Pub-
lisheis.
B0RN, S. S., K0SCIW, }. u. & R0SSELL, S. T. (2uu9) New Reseaich 0n Lesbian, uay,
Bisexual, Anu Tiansgenuei Youth: Stuuying Lives In Context. D+5,%!. /0 E+5"(
F%3 F3+.)$B)%B). S8, P. 86S-6.
}ENNINuS, T. & NACuILLIvRAY, I. K. (2u11) A Content Analysis 0f Lesbian, uay,
Bisexual, Anu Tiansgenuei Topics In Nulticultuial Euucation Textbooks. ')!B(
), G35B!"#+%. 22, P. S9-62.
}0NES, N., KITET0, C. & S0NBERLANB, }. (1997) Biscouise Roles, uenuei Anu Lan-
guage Textbook Bialogues: Who Leains What Fiom }ohn Anu Sally. 4)%3), F%3
G35B!"#+%. 9 (4), P. 469-9u.
}0NES, S. (2uu6) F%"+%#+ 4,!<$B#. Lonuon: Routleuge.
KA0R, B. (2u12) Equity Anu Social }ustice In Teaching Anu Teachei Euucation.
')!B(#%& F%3 ')!B(), G35B!"#+%. 28, P. 48S-92.
KEBILY, N. }. (2uu2) >)85!.#"-H 4)%3), F%3 >B(++.#%&C >(#0"#%& F&)%3!$ 7% >+B#!.
I)!,%#%&. Lonuon: Routleuge.
KELLY, A. (1988) uenuei Biffeiences In Teachei-Pupil Inteiactions: A Neta-Analytic
Review. J)$)!,B( 7% G35B!"#+%. S9, P. 1-2S.
KINu, B. W. (2uu8) "Being uay uuy, That Is The Auvantage": Queei Koiean Language
Leaining Anu Iuentity Constiuction. D+5,%!. /0 I!%&5!&)H 73)%"#"- F%3 G35B!
"#+%. 7, P. 2Su-S2.
K0BIA, }. N. (2uu9) Femininity Anu Nasculinity In English Piimaiy School Textbooks
In Kenya. '() 7%"),%!"#+%!. D+5,%!. /0 I!%&5!&)H >+B#)"-H F%3 K5."5,). 28, P. S7-71.
K0CBAN0WSKI, }., LEW-STAR0WICZ, Z., K0WALCZYK, R. & W[Z, K. (2u1S) >2:+!
1#.B2)%#!C *,2)&.3 ',)B# >2:+.%-B( *+3,B2%#:LA M+ N#+.+&##H ;/> 7 ;MJ *+3
O")< *,2)3$"!A#)%#! ; @#B( *,+9.)<!"-:# I4N'? 7 ',)B# P+<+0+9#B2%-B( |The
School 0f Silence: In Seaich 0f LuBTQ Anu Bomophobic Contents In Biology Anu
Family Life Euucation Textbooksj. Toiun: Piacownia Roznoiounosci.
KRANARAE, C. (1992) Punctuating The Bictionaiy. 7%"),%!"#+%!. D+5,%!. /0 >+B#+.+&-
/0 I!%&5!&). 94, P. 1SS-S4.
LINKE, u. (2uu7) Linguistic Aspects 0f uenuei In The Foieign Language Classioom.
In: Becke-Coinill, B. & volkmann, L. (Eus.) 4)%3), >"53#)$ F%3 Q+,)#&% I!%&5!&)
')!B(#%&. Tubingen: uuntei Naii veilag, P. 1S7-S9.
LIBBIC0AT, A. }. (2uu9) Sexual Iuentity As Linguistic Failuie: Tiajectoiies 0f Inteiac-
tion In The Beteionoimative Language Classioom. D+5,%!. /0 I!%&5!&)H 73)%"#"-
F%3 G35B!"#+%. 8, P. 191-2u2.
!""#$" %& '%($) *+ )$,-.*%+ .% /$+0$) -+0 "$1#-,*.2 *+ .3$ 456 7,-"")%%8 9 :+ %;$);*$( <=
NILLS, S. (2uu2) Rethinking Politeness, Impoliteness Anu uenuei Iuentity. In: Li-
tosseliti, L. & Sunueilanu, }. (Eus.) !"#$"% &$"#'(') *#$ +(,-./%," *#01),(,. Am-
steiuam: Benjamins, P. 69-89.
NILLS, S. (2uuS) !"#$"% *#$ 2.1('"#",,. Cambiiuge: Cambiiuge 0niveisity Piess.
N0NCBINSKI, T. (2uu8) 3%('(-01 2"$04.4) *#$ 56" 78"%)$0) 310,,%..9. New Yoik:
Spiingei.
N00N, R. (1989) 0bjective 0i 0bjectionable. Iueological Aspects 0f Bictionaiies.
7#41(,6 :0#4/04" ;","0%-6. S, P. S9-94.
N0RRISB, L. & SA0NTS0N, B. (2uu7) <"= 2"%,>"-'(8", ?# :0#4/04" *#$ @"A/01
&$"#'('). Basingstoke: Palgiave Nacmillan.
N0TSCBENBACBER, B. (2u1u) :0#4/04"B !"#$"% *#$ @"A/01 &$"#'(')C 2.,','%/-'/%01
(,' 2"%,>"-'(8",. Amsteiuam: }ohn Benjamins.
N0TSCBENBACBER, B. (2u11) Taking Queei Linguistics Fuithei: Sociolinguistics
Anu Ciitical Beteionoimativity Reseaich. &#'"%#0'(.#01 D./%#01 ?E @.-(.1.4) ?E
:0#4/04". 212, P. 149-79.
N0LLANY, L. (2uu7) !"#$"%"$ +(,-./%,", &# 56" F.%G>10-". Basingstoke: Palgiave
Nacmillan.
NELS0N, C. B. (1999) Sexual Iuentities In ESL: Queei Theoiy Anu Classioom Inquiiy.
57@?: H/0%'"%1). SS, P. S71-91.
NELS0N, C. B. (2uu6) Queei Inquiiy In Language Euucation. D./%#01 ?E :0#4/04"B
&$"#'(') *#$ 7$/-0'(.#. S, P. 1-9.
NELS0N, C. B. (2uu7) Queei Thinking About Language Teaching. In: Becke-Coinill, B.
Anu volkmann, L. (Eus.) !"#$"% @'/$(", *#$ I.%"(4# :0#4/04" 5"0-6(#4.
Tubingen: uuntei Naii veilag, P. 6S-76.
NELS0N, C. B. (2uu8) @"A/01 &$"#'('(", &# 7#41(,6 :0#4/04" 7$/-0'(.#C 310,,%..9
3.#8"%,0'(.#,. New Yoik: Routleuge.
NELS0N, C. B. (2u12) Emeiging Queei Epistemologies In Stuuies 0f "uay"-Stuuent
Biscouises. D./%#01 ?E :0#4/04" *#$ @"A/01('). 1, P. 79-1uS.
N0RT0N, B. (2uu8) Iuentity, Language Leaining, Anu Ciitical Peuagogies. In: Boin-
beigei, N. B. (Eu.) 7#-)-1.>"$(0 ?E :0#4/04" *#$ 7$/-0'(.#J New Yoik: Spiingei,
P. 4S-S7.
0'N0CBAIN, R. (2uu6) Biscussing uenuei Anu Sexuality In A Context-Appiopiiate
Way: Queei Naiiatives In An EFL College Classioom In }apan. D./%#01 ?E :0#
4/04"B &$"#'(') *#$ 7$/-0'(.#. S, P. S1-66.
PENNYC00K, A. (1994) The Cultuial Politics 0f English As An Inteinational Lan-
guage. Lonuon: Longman.
P00L00, S. (1997) Sexism In The Biscouise Roles 0f Textbook Bialogues. :0#4/04"
:"0%#(#4 D./%#01. 1S, P. 68-7S.
P0RECCA, K. (1984) Sexism In Cuiient ESL Textbooks. 57@?: H/0%'"%1). 18 (4),
P. 7uS-24.
Q0EEN, R. (2uu6) Beteiosexism AnuIn Language. In: Biown, E.K. (Eu.) 7#-)-1.>"$(0
?E :0#4/04" K :(#4/(,'(-,J Amsteiuam: Elseviei, P. 289-92.
RIPLEY, N., ANBERS0N, E., NCC0RNACK, N. & R0CKETT, B. (2u12) Beteionoima-
tivity In The 0niveisity Classioom Novelty Attachment Anu Content Substitution
Among uay-Fiienuly Stuuents. @.-(.1.4) ?E 7$/-0'(.#. 8S, P. 121-Su.
!! "#$%%$ &$'()*+,-. /-$0+ &$-/$. "$%( 0/%1(2)$%1
R0SARI0, N., SCBRINSBAW, E. W. & B0NTER, }. (2u12) Risk Factois Foi Bomeless-
ness Among Lesbian, uay, Anu Bisexual Youths: A Bevelopmental Nilestone Ap-
pioach. !"#$%&'( )(% *+,-" .'&/#0'1 2'/#'3. S4, P. 186-9S.
R0TBINu, A. (2uu8) Bomotoleiance Anu Beteionoimativity In Noiwegian Class-
iooms. 4'(%'& )(% 5%,06-#+(. 2u, P. 2SS-66.
SCBNITZ, B. (197S) Sexism In Fiench Language Textbooks. In: Lafayette, R. C. (Eu.)
7"' !,$-,&6$ 2'/+$,-#+( 8( 9+&'#:( ;6(:,6:' 7'60"#(:. Skokie, Ill.: National
Textbook Co., P. 119-Su.
Shaiuakova, N. & Pavlenko, A. (2uu4) Iuentity 0ptions In Russian Textbooks. <+,&(6$
=> ;6(:,6:' 8%'(-#-? )(% 5%,06-#+(. S (1), P. 2S-46.
S0AREZ, A. E. & BALA}I, A. (2uu7) Coveiage Anu Repiesentations 0f Sexuality In
Intiouuctoiy Sociology Textbooks. 7'60"#(: .+0#+$+:?. SS, P. 2S9-S4.
S0LLIvAN, N. (2uuS) ) !&#-#06$ 8(-&+%,0-#+( 7+ @,''& 7"'+&?. New Yoik: New Yoik
0niveisity Piess.
S0NBERLANB, }. (Eu.) (1994) 5AB$+&#(: 4'(%'&C @,'1-#+(1 )(% 8DB$#06-#+(1 9+& 5(:
$#1" ;6(:,6:' 5%,06-#+(. New Yoik: Pientice Ball.
S0NBERLANB, }. (2uuu) New 0nueistanuings 0f uenuei Anu Language Classioom
Reseaich: Texts, Teachei Talk Anu Stuuent Talk. ;6(:,6:' 7'60"#(: 2'1'6&0".
4 (2), P. 149-7S.
S0NBERLANB, }. (Foithcoming) uenuei Repiesentation In Foieign Language Text-
books: Avoiuing Pitfalls Anu Noving 0n. In: Nills, S. & Abolaji, S. (Eus.) 4'(%'&
2'B&'1'(-6-#+(1 8( ;'6&(#(: E6-'&#6$1 8( )( 8(-'&(6-#+(6$ !+(-'A-. Lonuon:
Routleuge.
S0NBERLANB, }., C0WLEY, N., RABIN, F., LE0NTZAK00 A. C. & SBATT0CK, }. (2uu2)
Fiom Repiesentation Towaius Biscuisive Piactices: uenuei In The Foieign Lan-
guage Textbook Revisiteu. In: Litosseliti, L. & Sunueilanu, }. (Eus.) 4'(%'& 8%'(-#
-? )(% F#10+,&1' )(6$?1#1. Amsteiuam: Benjamins, P. 22S-SS.
SWIERSZCZ, }. (Eu.) (2u12) ;'G0H6 2I3(+0#C J+1-63? 8 J+-&K'L? M6%&? .KG+$('H
8 E+%K#'? N+L'0 O+D+>+L## N .KG+$' |A Lesson 0f Equality: Attituues Anu
Neeus 0f Teaching Staff Anu Auolescents With Regaiu To Bomophobia In
Schoolj. Waiszawa: Kampania Pizeciw Bomofobii.
TALANSKY, S. (1986) Sex Role Steieotyping In TEFL Teaching Nateiials. J'&1B'0
-#/'1. XI (S), P. S2-41.
T00NEY, R. B., NCu0IRE, }. K. & R0SSELL, S. T. (2u12) Beteionoimativity, School
Climates, Anu Peiceiveu Safety Foi uenuei Nonconfoiming Peeis. <+,&(6$ => )%
+$'10'(0'. SS, P. 187-96.
TREICBLER, P. A. (1989) Fiom Biscouise To Bictionaiy: Bow Sexist Neanings Aie
Authoiiseu. In: Fiank, F. B. W. & Tieichlei, P. A. (Eus.) ;6(:,6:' 4'(%'& )(% J&+
>'11#+(6$ N&#-#(:C 7"'+&'-#06$ )BB&+60"'1 )(% 4,#%'$#('1 9+& P+(1'A#1- Q16:'.
New Yoik: Nouein Language Association 0f Ameiica, P. S1-79.
ZACK, }., NANNBEIN, A. & ALFAN0, N. (2u1u) "I Biun't Know What To Say.": Foui
Aichetypal Responses To Bomophobic Rhetoiic In The Classioom. 7"' O#:"
.0"++$ <+,&(6$. 9S, P. 98-11u.
Z0K0WSKI, T. (2uu4) .KG+6 =-36&-+0# |School 0f 0penminueunessj. Waiszawa:
Stowaizyszenie "0twaita Rzeczpospolita".