The Discourse of Heterosexual Subterfuge names the discursive strategies used by the female students to constitute sexuality as being potentially different, while operating from within the safety of a normative heterosexual frame of reference. The female students use the contradictions evident between biological versions of knowledge, social values and personal ideals as a means of authorising this position. This discourse develops directly from the female students‘ classroom transcripts and features the discursive strategies of biology and personal response, compromise, resistance and counter-discourses.
In order to have a voice within the sex education classes, the female students have to comply with the health educators‘ uniform and cohesive version of knowledge, which requires a yes/no or true/false response to questions regarding sex, sexuality or sexual decision-making. This is clearly problematic for the female students; however, within the discourse of heterosexual subterfuge, they comply with the health educators‘ position while using their personal experiences to problematise its limitations. The following excerpts for the female students‘ classroom transcripts demonstrate how they often give the answer the health educators are expecting, but immediately follow this up with an alternative version of sex, sexuality or sexual decision-making which better reflects their own lived experiences.
Health educator: It‘s the woman‘s responsibility to use contraceptives, true or false?
it‘s their responsibility you know, cause like the guy can‘t be trusted to have a condom or something.
Health educator: A woman can‘t fall pregnant when she‘s having her periods, true or false?
Female student: True. But like sometimes it‘s hard to know whether you‘re having your period or not, like it can be really light, just spots, and you can fall pregnant then. Health educator: You can get pregnant the first time you have sex, true or false?
Female student: True. But it would also depend on whether you‘re having your period and stuff yet. I mean I know girls who didn‘t get their period until they were like 16 or 17 and they couldn‘t have got pregnant if they had sex before then.
This discourse demonstrates that the female students have clearly accumulated a vast body of knowledge regarding sexuality that is neither uniform nor cohesive. However it also demonstrates that they are aware of the ambiguities and possible dangers involved in being a sexually knowledgeable female within the dominant patriarchal, hegemonic and heterosexual environment, and do not say anything to overtly destabilise heteronormativity. The female students do not assume heterosexuality as normative within this discourse, or privilege it in terms of best sexual practice; but their discursive practices and strategies within class do signify their own heterosexuality. The following excerpts demonstrate how the discursive strategies convey meaning about sexual differences within the female students‘ classroom transcripts.
I think it would be better if you lived in the city if you were gay or lesbian. Like you know how everyone in the country knows who you are and whatever.
Yeh, and they can discriminate against you when you‘re different, but in the city you can kind of blend in.
I agree, cause I think there are more people that are gay and lesbian in the city.
My cousin‘s gay and he lives in the county. He has friends there.
In this school it would be really hard if you were a guy and you were gay, like the boys here are really bad news. Yeh, but if you were a girl and gay, they‘d be all over you, like the boys think lesbians are hot, you know. All that girl on girl stuff.
you can‘t get them to see that any sort of homophobia is wrong.
Gay guys must really feel hated, I think that‘s sad.
The Discourse of Heterosexual Subterfuge acknowledges how heterosexual relationships operate within the female students‘ experiences to position them in socially unjust and potentially dangerous ways. Being able to experience the ideals of romance, marriage, motherhood and family are considered desirable and very positive aspects of sexuality within the female students‘ data; however, what they believe you have to submit to in order to achieve these things is considered neither positive nor necessarily advantageous for a female‘s sexual, mental or physical well-being. In particular, the instability of hegemonic masculinity as it is performed within the sex education classes, is used to justify their support of alternative versions of sexuality, heterosexuality and gender; at times it is also used to support their need to adopt an apparently acquiescent silence towards the male students. The following conversation held by female students is offered as an example.
I mean, I‘m just not interested in having a boyfriend while I‘m here. I like all that stuff, but guys can be such pigs you know.
Yeh, and like they‘re always hanging out after sex. Or saying they are [laughter].
Yeh, and even if you say yes the first time, well that doesn‘t mean you‘re going to say it again.
I mean why can‘t they just be normal you know, not be trying to show off all the time, saying how tough they are. Why don‘t they just talk to you and stuff? Why do guys always have to be so macho?
Yeh, I‘d like to meet that guy.
I just walk away from the guys here. I‘ve had some really bad experiences at this school and it‘s just better not to say anything.
The Discourse of Heterosexual Subterfuge enables positive feelings and emotions to be expressed by the female students within the relative safety of motherhood statements. In this way pleasure, happiness and any other positive emotions can be understood as supporting heterosexuality in ways that conform to the male students‘ authorised version of femininity. The female students do
not express any positive feelings or emotions with regards to sex, sexuality and/or sexual decision-making and issues of sexual pleasure, desire, fantasy, lust, attraction, or orgasm are not evident in any of the female students‘ data.