LIST OF TABLES
5.6 CIRCUMSTANCES/CONDITIONS UNDER WHICH A TRANSFORMATIVE APROACH CAN BE USED TO EMBRACING LGBTI COMMUNITIES AT A
5.6.2 Changing of attitudes towards LGBTI communities
Another need is the changing of attitudes towards LGBTI communities to intervene on the perceptions and acceptance giving by others. Chopik, Edelstein and Fraley (2013) (cf. 3.5.2) advocate life for life adaptation in order to develop a transformative approach that caters for systematic problems through the changing of attitudes to accommodate diversity, for LGBTI communities that are struggling to participate at the university campus activities. The change of attitudes will seek to strengthen friendly connections required among students (cf. 3.5.2) (Hall, Evans & Nixon, 2013). To the researcher, Lemay and Clark (2008) support that social connectivity with other students revolves across life, by maundering about LGBTI communities’ relationships at times plays a continuation of friendly association with mates from high school to the advance stage in university, which may lead to long life companionships as married couples.
Mavhandu-Mudzusi (2014) (cf. 3.5.2) contends that attachments have a stronger effect to build a transformative approach on relationships to embrace LGBTI communities at a university campus. As both LGBTI communities and heterosexual students understand each other, it helps to connect mentally and spiritually thus increasing human development. In most cases, others perceived being non- heterosexual or being gender non-conforming as un-African (Brouard & Pieterse, 2012) (cf. 3.5.2), this indicates homophobic attitude among people. Meanwhile, a good number of studies have investigated the causes and characteristics of homophobia, but have not provided adequately how those practices/behaviours can be challenged
130
and minimised (cf. 3.5.2) (Rispel et al. 2012; Müller, 2013). LGBTI individuals are not only experiencing challenges in broader communities, but also in places like universities (cf. 3.5.2) (Arndt and De Bruin, 2006; Human Rights Watch, 2012;
Mavhandu-Mudzusi, 2014; Mavhandu-Mudzusi and Ganga-Limando, 2015;
Mavhandu-Mudzusi & Sandy, 2015). The challenges are mostly experienced in communities where heteronormativity is stressed, such as rural communities and extends to rural universities. Collins (2009) (cf.3.5.2) suggests that heteronormativity perspective mainly promotes heterosexuality as the only ‘normal’ sexual orientation without contest or trespass to other different sexuality. Therefore, word
“heteronormativity” to refers to a set of institutional practices that systematically legitimise and establish heterosexuality as the norm for sexual and broader social relations (Taylor & Snowdon, 2014) notwithstanding others sexual orientation practices.
The studies conducted, and media reports indicate that there is intolerance of any sexual orientation different from heterosexuality and gender roles indicate the extent of stigma and discrimination around LGBTI individuals (cf. 3.5.2) (DeBarros 2014;
Mavhandu-Mudzusi, 2014). Nonetheless, exposure of LGBTI communities to humiliation by regarding them as an outcast through the means of name-calling and public threat from heterosexuals is commonly found (cf. 3.5.2) (DeBarros 2014;
Mavhandu-Mudzusi 2014; Mavhandu-Mudzusi and Sandy 2015). Furthermore, Reygan (2013) (cf. 3.5.2) opens that there is a need for schools to be teaching anti- oppressive pedagogies which perhaps subscribe to sexual and gender minorities in education.
Beitz (2009) (cf. 3.5.2) acknowledges that socialisation propels a lifelong process which helps to learn social expectations and ways to interact with other people. At this, people apportion consciousness on sexuality so that they can learn to accept each other. Johnson (2014) asserts that socialisation assists populace to embrace LGBTI and consider it not as an oppositional and behavioural aspect that LGBTI is aberrant by violence in contest. Noteworthy, Grossman, Hammerness and McDonald, (2009) (cf. 3.5.2) argue that poor sexual education orientation of teachers in high schools may internalize learners from high schools to higher institutions, where campus clearly shows homophobia owards LGBTI communities. This perhaps will demystify the preconceived ideas of heterosexuality versus homosexuality.
131
Francis (2012), Francis and DePalma (2014) (cf. 3.5.2) emphasize that students should be equipped with skills to challenge inequality and discrimination in their study environment, and affirm that learning activities do not promote discrimination. Johnson (2014) affirms that the concept of diversity includes recognition for individual sexuality to support that each individual is unique in thought, and it encompasses individual differences.
SRC (Gi): Firstly…what you need to understand is that... change is a difficult thing…so now we know you should know that most of our students they are from rural areas…areas where…ah...ah… LGBTI communities are...are… not much been seeing there…or seeing things happening is not that way as present.. so for them came…to the institution of learning…therefore, for them……
coming into our institution of learning…therefore, there’s need for them to be educated…it means that since that you’re in the institution, there is a kind of thing for them to learn in an institution, there are particular the issue of LGBTI communities about issues around university…because some of the people hardly understand how someone can become a lesbian or someone become bisexual, they need to be taught throughout the process about LGBTI communities …therefore, students need to be educated….so that they understand.
USSP (Lisandary): Emm…m…I think one of the approach we can use…em...m…is the on the campus base, Is probably using what we called Edutem…to use edutem … to involve education at time…I think I like to…and lack of education
…emm…mm…we are a great of subject of change to students. I think I too lack of understanding about LGBTI communities…emm….m…approach I said is to hold awareness…emm…get LGBTI student to speak on the experiences…and to see how these adapt and how they are in the residences and how feeling each other and go they ….emm… approach of embracing a program of…of..
education terms where they will have time to entertaining- through health, play, drama…and songs that could be created and making entertainment that will bring all students together in the campus…creating awareness…take away fear for being LGBTI among students.
132
In respect to the above results; it was noted that despite the difficult change to do as stated by SRC (Gi), it is imperative we adapt to embrace others who may share different sexuality; LGBTI communities should be accommodated through education and deeper understanding about LGBTI communities. This will seek to transform reasoning and negative stereotype that the majority heterosexuals might have on LGBTI communities at a university campus.