A Critical Discourse Analysis of No Promo Homo Policies in US Schools
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 8923925 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Brian Barrett (0000-0002-5604-9159, SUNY Cortland, corresponding author), Arron M Bound (SUNY Cortland) |
| Year | 2015 |
| Volume | 51 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Pages | 267-283 |
| Publication date | 2015-07-04 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Educational Studies (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0013-1946 • E-ISSN: 1532-6993 |
| Publisher | Taylor & Francis (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/00131946.2015.1052445 |
| OpenAlex | W1766249449 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 9 |
| References cited | 17 |
This article presents a critical discourse analysis of no promo homo policies and their effects in US schools. No promo homo—short for “no promotion of homosexuality” (Eskridge, 2000 Eskridge, W.N. (2000). No promo homo: The sedimentation of antigay discourse and the channeling effect of judicial review. New York Law Review, 75, 1327–1411.[Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar], p. 1329)—polices have been adopted across nine states and several local school districts in the United States. They direct teachers and school officials to take a neutral position on the subject of sexual orientation and identity and often restrict or prohibit any school-based instruction, counseling, discussion, or activity that could be construed as being positive about or promoting homosexuality (Bonauto, n.d.; Cahill & Cianciotto, 2004 Cahill, S., & Cianciotto, J. (2004). US policy interventions that can make schools safer. Journal of Gay & Lesbian Issues in Education, 2, 3–17.[Taylor & Francis Online] , [Google Scholar]; Eskridge 2000 Eskridge, W.N. (2000). No promo homo: The sedimentation of antigay discourse and the channeling effect of judicial review. New York Law Review, 75, 1327–1411.[Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]). Our analysis suggests that, despite their claim to neutrality, no promo homo policies are actively harmful both to students who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender (LGBT) as well as to the broader school community. In an effort to ultimately promote healthier, more equitable school environments and experiences for all students, this article aims to raise awareness about the problematic effects of no promo homo policy language and the assumptions that often underlie it
Homosexuality · Human sexuality · Lesbian · Political science · Sexual identity · Sexual orientation · Sociology · Transgender · Education Discipline and Inequality · Gender Studies · Hate Speech and Cyberbullying Detection · LGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Democratizing dual enrollment
Anti‐LGBTQ+ sex education laws
Outing the Politics of Knowledge Production
Power of Language
Mirrors of power
The Role of Political Ideology in Public Opinion toward Enumerated Antibullying Policies in Public Schools
Fiddling with young kiddies’ minds’
Homophobic Bullying and Cyberbullying
Strengthening discipline in state schools
The discourse-historical approach
Beyond Risk
The Discovery of Grounded Theory
Identity, Speech, and Equality
Queer Youth Experiences with Abstinence-Only-Until-Marriage Sexuality Education
X. Desire
Inequities in Educational and Psychological Outcomes Between LGBTQ and Straight Students in Middle and High School
Homosexuality in adolescence
Voices of Queer Youth in Urban Schools
Queering the State
Gay-Straight Alliances in High Schools
| Unique citing works | 9 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 1 |
| Citation span | 2017 - 2025 (9) |
| Citation velocity | recent |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 9 |