Chapter 4: Data Analysis
4.2 Love and dating…
Overwhelmingly, the participants in this study showed a great interest in romantic love. This was similar to findings by Reddy & Dunne (2007). Some of the responses were:
‘well, you don’t see boys everyday and when you do see them its…its new. It’s nice. I like it’
(Simeshni)
‘I think in an all girl school when they see a guy they just wana do as much as they can with that guy (laughs) before he runs away or whatever the case is but with a co-ed school I think you have more time’ (Denise)
Single-sex schools are assumed to be sites that prevent the distraction of young men by young women and vice versa (Jackson, 2010). Jackson (2010), states that many parents tend to send their children to single-sex schools due to fear of pregnancy and sexual harassment, basically to keep the young women away from young men. The data from this study suggests that is not the case for these young women. All the young women had been in relationships and some were currently in a relationship. There were 7 out of the 10 participants who had engaged in sexual activity despite attending a single-sex school. The data suggests that being in a single sex school did not make much difference to the attraction of finding partners and that the desired partners were boys and men. This is not surprising given the dominant culture of heterosexuality.
From my own experiences, there is a common understanding that single-sex schools for young women are associated with homosexual relationships. None of the participants claimed to be lesbian or admitted to forming homosexual relationships. This could be because of the dominance of heterosexuality within and outside of schools that there continues to be silence around same-sex issues.
The participants were aware of the notion that lesbianism is rife in single-sex schools:
‘I think everyone thinks that there’s only lesbians in all girl schools and it’s totally wrong’
(Denise)
‘All the time’ was mentioned by many of the young women to describe whether people associated single-sex schools and lesbianism. There were 2 out of the 10 young women who admitted to experimenting but not forming relationships with the same sex. These 2 young women emphasised that they were in heterosexual relationships and distanced themselves from the identity of lesbianism.
‘I…err…kissed my friend once because all my friends decided to do it. We said people think we doing it anyway so let’s just do it’ (Mishka)
‘yes because my friends did it so I wanted to do it also. It doesn’t mean I am a lesbian though’
(Trishalia)
Both of these young women had decided to experiment with the same sex because of their friends. This may have placed certain pressures on these young women so that their experiences could be similar to that of their friends. Mishka explains that the reason why her friends had decided to experiment with the same sex was due to stereotypes that the social environment had formed on lesbianism and single-sex schools. This also demonstrates the social dynamics present in the construction of their sexual identity. Social interactions have impacted the decisions that these particular young women have made, although they may not have an interest in pursuing homosexual relationships.
The majority of the young women mentioned that even though being in a single-sex school meant that they did not interact with boys in school, it was not difficult for them to find partners.
When asked how they were able to find boyfriends, the typical responses were:
‘at first I thought it would be difficult but as you start talking with different girls then eerrr talking to them and going places then you meet a lot of people’ (Denise)
‘eerrmm..my friends are always hooking up with other girls’ brothers and cousins. One way or the other you end up chatting to someone and then meeting them. Also there’s Facebook, people inbox you and then you like chat to them’ (Mishka)
‘you come across guys from all boy schools’ (Husna)
The excerpts above show that there are many networking avenues through which young women could make contact with men and arrange to meet outside of school. The interest in forming relationships encourages young women to communicate with young men. Denise suggests that schools are not the only place to meet boys. Husna mentions ‘all boy schools’ that attend certain functions that are held at the girls’ school. Strict rules are implemented when these young men attend these functions so that certain behaviours are controlled. Mishka and many of the other participants also mentioned social networks as a form of communicating with young men.
According to O’Keeffe et al. (2011), social networks such as Facebook provide a platform for adolescents to communicate, increasing their ability to socialise and in this case, to socialise with
young men. Mishka states that eventually they meet these young men that they chat to. This indicates that although it may seem challenging to form heterosexual relationships when in a single-sex school, many of the participants found ways to work around this challenge.
A few of the young women however, found that being in an all-girl school limited their opportunities to get boyfriends. This is evident in the following responses:
‘when you in an all girl school there’s hardly…there’s no time and then because of..eerr…my age, I’m restricted’ (Shasmita)
‘like you know you not meeting guys like if you in a normal school like you know…they not there so you can’t like…you know…hook up and stuff’ (Maiyuri)
Shasmita and Maiyuri did not share the majority view that it was easy to meet young men out of school. Shasmita mentions that because of her age her parents had placed restrictions that
prevented her from going out to meet young men. Maiyuri also sees school as the main source to meet people and that the absence of young men makes it difficult to obtain a boyfriend. Both these young women however have boyfriends that they met at school during a function that the local all boys’ school was invited to. The preceding excerpts suggest that there are restrictions that most Indian families place on girls’ movements and that these young women felt that being in a single-sex school limited their opportunities to form heterosexual relationships.
However, some of the participants indicated that they found creative ways to work around these restrictions, including lying to their parents:
‘they lie to their parents to go out and say oh I’m going with my girlfriends or I’m studying’
(Shasmita)
‘after school they lie to their parents and say that they going to hockey and stuff but in fact they gone out gallivanting with their boyfriends’ (Janine)
Jackson (2010), states that parents send their children to single-sex schools to remove the
distraction between young men and young women. Therefore, some of these young women have to resort to lying to their parents out of fear that their parents would not accept their
relationships. This implies that if parents chose to send their daughters to single-sex schools
because they wanted to protect them, this may have had the opposite effect. Furthermore, while it seems as if the young women were taking control of their lives by making their own decisions, they may be putting themselves at risk by going to places that are unsafe. This shows the
importance of parental communication and interest, as explained by Chirinda et al. (2012) which plays a vital role in reducing sexual risk.