Is Schooling a Risk? Gender, Power Relations, and School Culture in Uganda

‘Sex education should be taught, fine…but we make sure they control themselves’: teachers' beliefs and attitudes towards young people's sexual and reproductive health in a Ugandan secondary school

“…This is consistent with Mirembe and Davies (2001) and Muhanguzi's (2011) characterisation of gender roles in Uganda, as well as the representation of girls and boys in the PIASCY documents discussed above. Stereotypes of dominant masculinity and vulnerable femininity appear to be reinforced at the school through teachers' informal advice to students outside the classroom as well as the formal curriculum and interactions between girls and boys in the classroom:…”

“…The reinforcement of gender stereotypes which portray girls as 'the weaker sex' may be increasing their susceptibility to STIs including HIV, as well as early pregnancies which ensure the loss of their educational opportunities. Mirembe and Davies (2001) and Muhanguzi (2011) have identified aspects of the school environment as a potential risk to young people's SRH in Uganda, including sexual relationships between teachers and students, but given the potential sensitivity of this topic, it was not raised during interviews with teachers in this study. Only one of the participants from outside the school (Mary, Straight Talk representative) referred to transactional relationships between teachers and female students, but this was in a university context.…”

“…The official construction of national culture from a policy document is perhaps not the most authentic reflection of a country's socio-cultural context, but the construction of 'normal' sexual behaviour, 3 as well as the construction of problematic femininity and dominant masculinity, 4 in the PIASCY documents seem consistent with Muhanguzi's (2011, 722) recent description of the sexual landscape in Uganda as one characterised by, 'homophobia, misogyny, male domination, female marginalisation... [and] control of female sexuality'. Mirembe and Davies (2001) and Muhanguzi (2011) are among those who also argue that, as a result of the perpetuation of socio-cultural phenomena such as 'hegemonic masculinity, gendered discipline patterns, sexual harassment and "compulsory" heterosexuality ' (2001, 402), schools in Uganda cannot simply be viewed as agents of change which promote students' SRH, but can themselves constitute a risk factor in the lives of young people. Moralistically informed responses to SRH are inevitably gendered in Uganda, as they are all over the world (Stone and Ingham 2006, 201), with 'sexual double standards' and 'common strands of gender inequality rooted in patriarchal beliefs' characterising the norms relating to gender and sexuality in the country (Wolff, Blanc, and Gage 2000, 304;Mirembe and Davies 2001, 402).…”

“…Mirembe and Davies 2001;Warwick and Aggleton 2002;Neema et al 2006;Stone and Ingham 2006;Kibombo et al 2008). In the global south, they potentially provide the opportunity to reach large numbers of young people due to increasing levels of school enrolment (UNESCO 2009), but also serve as an environment in which information can be discussed by teachers, who are 'trusted sources of knowledge and skills in all education systems' (Warwick and Aggleton 2002, 5;UNESCO 2009, 3).…”

The representation of gender in English textbooks in Uganda

“…This study takes a constructivist approach, investigating gender in the context of language learning in order to explore the relationship between the two. It has been pointed out that many students learning English as a second language belong to cultures which have a history of discrimination against women (Yepez 1994) and this assertion is substantiated in our study of a Ugandan ESL class which is immersed in a culture predominantly biased against women (Mirembe and Davies 2001;Kikampikaho and Kwesiga 2002). Constructivists 'acknowledge the historical, political, social and cultural aspects of language learning' (Davis and Skilton-Sylvester 2004, 383) and, furthermore, note that gender is not a fixed, immutable construct but one which can be re-shaped by external factors including textual influences (Sunderland et al 2001).…”