Heteronormativity and the Experiences of Lesbian and Bisexual Women as Social Work Students

Hylton, Mary

doi:10.5175/jswe.2005.200300350

Cited by 52 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…He goes on to suggest that in order to critically reflect, social workers must "find some space and time …find somebody else … and foster a sense of safety and openness" (Singh 2006, 6). Achieving these last requirements, fostering safety and openness, seems far from easy for lesbian and gay workers enduring heterosexism and homophobia in the UK (Brown 1998;McGhee 2005) and elsewhere (Messinger 2004;Hylton 2005). Others side-step any necessities for time or space, whether safe or otherwise, by focussing their definitions of critical reflexivity on creative and experiential learning in the workplace (Gould 2004) and on transformative theoretical constructions of power (Fook 2004).…”

Section: What Is Reflection?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Reflecting on What? Addressing Sexuality in Social Work

Trotter¹,

Crawley²,

Duggan³

et al. 2009

Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: What Is Reflection?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Reflecting on What? Addressing Sexuality in Social Work

Trotter¹,

Crawley²,

Duggan³

et al. 2009

Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Hylton (2005) found that faculty disclosure of sexual identity often benefits their LGBTQ students, as 'out' faculty become invaluable resources and supportive role models. An instructor's outness and curricular efforts can underscore support and inclusiveness for LGBTQ students within schools (Cain, 1996), while also providing a mentoring relationship (Lark & Croteau, 1998).…”

Section: Faculty Outnessmentioning

confidence: 99%

Outness among LGBTQ Social Work Students in North America: The Contribution of Environmental Supports and Perceptions of Comfort

Dentato

Craig

Messinger

et al. 2013

Social Work Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examines various environmental factors that may impact a lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, or queer (LGBTQ) social work student's level of 'outness' (disclosure) with regard to their sexual orientation or gender identity. An internet-based survey was conducted, comprised of LGBTQ undergraduate and graduate students from social work programs across North America (n ¼ 1,018). Utilizing Pearson's chi square analysis, significant associations correlated between outness and the following six areas: (1) LGBTQ student perception of other students' overall level of comfort with their sexual orientation or gender identity within the program; (2) the number of faculty that know about their sexual orientation or gender identity; (3) the number of students that know about their sexual orientation or gender identity; (4) how supported they felt with regard to their LGBTQ identity within the program; (5) the percent of faculty that are supportive of LGB and Q issues; and (6) awareness of openly LGBTQ administrators or staff members. Implications for social work education and practice are examined, as are suggestions for continued research.

show abstract

“…A recent qualitative study conducted with 19 lesbian and bisexual female students and recent graduates about their master's of social work (MSW) program experiences found that most participants had faced subtle prejudice or heteronormativity in their programs. This was often apparent in faculty's and peers' discomfort with LGBT issues, including during classroom discussions, and in the invisibility of LGBT students and faculty as well as curriculum content on LGBT issues (Hylton, 2005). Even among sexual minority faculty, homophobia in its internalized form can interfere with teaching and student learning.…”

mentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Although schools of social work often include curriculum and content on LGBT people in their educational programs, studies have highlighted the need for more comprehensive integration of LGBT content into the social work curriculum (Hylton, 2005;Martin et al, 2009;McPhail, 2008). The heterosexist and heteronormative nature of social work education that locates heterosexuality as dominant to/over other forms of sexuality has also been documented (Hylton;Johnston, 2002). This nature works against the comprehensive and effective integration of LGBT content and also creates a negative environment for LGBT students (and staff and faculty).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%