Teachers’ intersecting identities of culture,ethnicity,religion and gender when addressing awareness of forced marriage in the classroom,in London,England: A case study of five teachers

Abstract

The UK (Westminster) government first legislated on forced marriage (FM) through the Forced Marriage (Civil Protection) Act 2007. Domestic abuse suffered before, during and after a FM was captured more recently through the implementation of the Domestic Abuse Act 2021, which built upon the concept of coercive abuse. In 2009, the UK (Westminster) government indicated that schools should play a role in the detection and prevention of FM. This paper investigates the perceptions and experiences of five South London teachers on FM, by focusing upon qualitative research through semi-structured interviews. This study was conceptualised and theorised within a feminist post-structural framework. The research drew upon intersectionality to capture how teachers constructed and negotiated their identities. The findings revealed that these teachers constructed FM as a racial and gendered issue and performed multiple identities. This paper highlighted how teachers require training and a safe space to untangle their perceptions regarding FM.

Introduction

Domestic abuse and forced marriage (FM) has grown significantly in the UK over the past 10 years, especially during the Covid-19 lockdown periods (Miles-Johnson and Courtenay, 2021). This has raised concerns within the UK (Westminster) government, which led to the introduction of the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act (2014), which criminalised the practice of FM in the UK, and more recently the Domestic Abuse Act (2021). In 2020, the then Home Secretary, Priti Patel, addressed the need to support victims of domestic abuse including children and announced funding to the sum of £2 million. The UK (Westminster) government launched the ‘Enough’ campaign in 2022, to combat violence against women and children.

The concept of arranged marriage (AM) and FM are often confused. Arranged marriages are when parents (or family members or an intermediary service) introduce prospective partners to their children as potential suitors to marry, and full consent is given by the bride and groom to the marriage. A FM is when one or both parties to the marriage do not consent.

High profile cases such as Dr Abedin (2008) and Ahmed (Ahmed v HM Coroner South and East Cumbria [2009]), brought Muslims, Islamic and marriage practices to the forefront of Western politics. The focus became negative norms and so-called practices and behaviours were associated with Islam and FM. Following the revelations of these high-profile cases, the UK (Westminster) government needed to appear visibly active in ‘doing something’ to tackle FM. In 2005, the UK (Westminster) government responded by creating the Forced Marriage Unit (FMU). The FMU’s first recommendation was to advocate for the implementation of the Forced Marriage (Civil Protection) Act (2007), which provided civil remedies for those confronted with an FM and survivors of FM.

Recognising that FM is a serious concern, the UK (Westminster) government commissioned the National Centre for Social Research to conduct research on FM. The findings were published in the report ‘Forced Marriage: Prevalence and Service Response’ (Kazimirski et al., 2009). The report identified that frontline services such as social services and schools could do more to help detect and prevent FM. Following the report, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, in 2009, released a 104-page policy document for frontline services entitled: HM government ‘Multi-agency practice guidelines: Handling cases of forced marriage’. These guidelines were revised in 2014 following the criminalisation of FM. The UK (Westminster) government, in these guidelines, made it clear that schools, colleges and universities need to be detection and prevention points for FM. The practice of FM became a criminal offence in 2014, under Part 10 of the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act (2014).

Although the government has a UK wide policy on teachers being frontliners on detecting and preventing forced marriage (HM Government, 2014), education is a devolved matter for the four countries (England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales). There is no formal UK government (Westminster) rollout of a FM programme for schools to embed in their curricula. Schools are not obliged to address the FM issue with students in the classroom. Therefore, the uptake of incorporating a FM session into a PSHE (Personal, Social, Health and Education) class is ad hoc and dependent on the school’s interest. Schools have the option of inviting the Forced Marriage Unit (FMU), a government funded department, to deliver a presentation to teachers and pupils on FM and provide posters and material on the issue. The FMU have a rule of not canvasing schools and will not approach them for an audience. However, the FMU travel throughout the UK running roadshows for all frontline service providers, such as doctors, social workers and teachers to attend.

Literature review

This paper does not aim to encompass the forced marriage (FM) debate in terms of the cultural practice and the intricacies of consent (Chantler et al., 2009; Gill and Harvey, 2017; Ijaz and Abbas, 2010). The link with FM relates to the government’s challenge in raising awareness on social issues and their choice to construct the role of teachers to undertake such a task.

Hence, the focus of the research is to explore teachers’ perceptions of being positioned in this role of preventing and detecting FM. Teachers’ identities and emotions are heavily embedded within this paper. There is a wide range of literature that covers how teachers’ identities were being embedded and shaped by emotions (Hargreaves, 1998, 2000; O’Connor, 2008; Zembylas, 2003). Hargreaves (1998) and Zembylas (2003) argued that emotions are at the epicentre of the teacher’s role, and hence identity. O’Connor (2008) described how caring for students can lead to hurt, disappointment, anger and feeling powerless. Earlier studies (Hargreaves, 2000; Lasky, 2005) considered the display of emotions as illustrating teacher vulnerability.

The majority of the literature in this area attempted to unravel the complex, multiple layers of identities constructed and imposed by society (as discussed by Butler, 2011; Duff and Uchida, 1997; Foucault, 2002), yet accepted and prized by individuals. Duff and Uchida (1997) described teachers’ identity as co-constructed, negotiated and constantly transforming. They further conceptualised how identities can be assigned (through the eyes of others) or claimed (self-constructed). Varghese et al. (2005) built upon Duff and Uchida’s (1997) views and described how identity was shaped by three key components; identity as multiple, shifting and in conflict; identity as central to social, cultural and political contexts; and identity as constructed, maintained and negotiated via discourses.

Foucault (2002) discussed the concept of the passage of time and the fluidity of historical change. Likewise, discussions about homosexual identities have evolved from a taboo subject in the UK to being openly expressed and discussed in many, but not all, situations. Jackson (2007) discussed how homosexuality is constructed as being a threat to society, and homosexual teachers posed a risk of contaminating the safe space that the school can offer. However, Butler (2011) suggested that multiple, socially constructed, pre-determined sexualities and genders exist amongst marginalised groups that she introduces as performative gender theory. Butler (2011) claimed that gender identity is a product of performed behaviours and actions.

Francis (2003) cited in Flintoff et al. (2008) discussed the sexed body as problematic within feminism. By separating gender from sex, Francis (2003) argued that the focus becomes how men and women are socially constructed as opposed to biologically constructed. Hence the construction of what is masculine and feminine is constructed by self, others and society.

This study employed intersectionality as a framework to capture how teachers constructed and negotiated their identities. Crenshaw (1989) coined the term intersectionality to encapsulate the multiple discrimination trajectories encountered by black and minority ethnic (BME) women, such as ethnicity, gender and class. They evaluated white feminist middle class perspectives and raised awareness of experiences of black women. Subsequently, intersectionality has developed to embrace all strands of diversity, by drawing upon the minority cultures as opposed to just the majority cultures (Hancock, 2016; Knudsen, 2006).

This research concentrated on teachers’ intersecting identities of culture, ethnicity, religion and gender that are influenced by the government’s FM policy, which has emerged through social milieux that teachers are now forced to address within the classroom. This paper is particularly interested in how social justice policies, imposed by the UK (Westminster) government, shape teachers’ identities. The literature does cover teachers’ responses to teaching controversial and sensitive topics, yet, little is said about how this impacts teachers’ emotions.

Hess and Stoddard (2011) conducted a study to examine how the events of 9/11 and its aftermath were presented to secondary students by way of an extra curricula topic. They highlighted how there were stark differences between educators and political leaders on how the ideological message should be portrayed in the schools. Hess and Stoddard (2011) found that teachers were more concerned about their students emotional capability to deal with the issue, rather than their own. They concluded that the lack of information to support students to understand the issue led to further confusion. They suggested that teachers should include material that is excluded to ensure a complete and accurate narrative. Stoddard et al. (2022) built upon Hess and Stoddard’s (2011) study and addressed the emergence of populism, nationalism and an overall policy of protectionism. Their study analysed the approach teachers took to addressing the mid-term 2018 US elections. They concluded that teachers should be given flexibility and autonomy on how to address controversial issues.

This study explored how teachers have exercised autonomy when addressing FM in the classroom. Braun et al. (2010) examined policy enactment, which encapsulated the understanding that policies are interpreted and translated by teachers, and not just implemented. They concluded that teachers draw upon personal values, which is informed by their culture and ethos, when enacting policy. The study by Maguire et al. (2020) built upon Braun et al.’s (2010) work and suggested that ‘contextual factors’ provided a sensitive approach towards policy making and policy enactment. This is effective as it supports a customised approach to the schools’ needs, as opposed to a generic and dictated approach to policy enactment. It is fitting for this study to draw upon policy enactment to understand how teachers construe the sensitive topic of FM.

It was a struggle to unearth literature that considered or debated teachers’ identities constructed by UK government policy not directly related to educational reform.

Methodological approach

The methodology for this paper combined a review and analysis of secondary data (namely policy documents, literature, legislation and statistics) and empirical qualitative data once ethical approval was gained.

This research is a case study, based upon the observations of five teachers followed by interviews, which took place pre-covid in 2018. This was a topical issue at the time, as literature was emerging on how effective the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act (2014) was on curbing FM (Gill and Harvey, 2017). There were very few schools delivering FM sessions, and even fewer teachers willing to be interviewed about their experiences of delivering a FM session. Hence, this paper exhibited the data through a case-study.

This research is informed by a feminist post-structural framework that coincides with the epistemological belief system of multiple truths constructed by subjective experiences. This study allowed for qualitative data collection, through semi-structured interviews with teachers who address FM in the classroom and have a vested interest (Weaver and Olson, 2006) in FM policies (the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act, 2014; the Forced Marriage (Civil Protection) Act (2007)). This provided rich, descriptive, explanatory data which unlocked multiple truths through different perceptions and experiences of the participants by giving them a voice (Hughes and Cohen, 2010). The sample represented teachers who discuss the enactment of policy (Braun et al., 2010) in a practical setting; the classroom.

As this research is based upon peoples’ experiences of teaching FM, it is necessary for the method of data collection to allow individuals to express themselves in their own way. Structured interviews or surveys do not provide sufficient flexibility; the chosen method needs to incorporate narratives and a strategy for discovering new ground. Discussion on FM is a complex, sensitive and controversial (Hess and Stoddard, 2011) subject. Hence semi-structured interviews are an appropriate method of data collection, as they allow sufficient in-depth information to be gathered and for explanations to be provided for clarity. Also tone and expressions can be recorded that cannot be gathered and understood through questionnaires. Interviews allow for empirical data to be generated through the natural course of a conversation (Bell, 2010). This complements the feminist post-structural framework of qualitative, in-depth, narrative data collection.

Information gathered through interviews is subjective, but provides personal views and rich insights into peoples’ lives, experiences, opinions, attitudes and feelings (May, 2011). Semi-structured interviews are not rigid and allow the participant to provide a narrative and answer questions on their own terms (Gilbert, 2008).

The data was collected through five classroom observations of teachers delivering a presentation on forced marriage to their tutor group. This was followed by semi-structured interviews with each teacher, to explore the intersecting identities that teachers associated with, when addressing forced marriage in a classroom context. Each classroom observation was 45 minutes in length, and the interviews were approximately 1 hour long. The observations formed the bases of the questions for the interviews, which were tailored to the teacher.

This paper explores how five teachers (Rani, Tess, Ania, Diya and Ed) construct themselves and their own identities when addressing FM. An emic approach (Tatli and Özbilgin, 2012) to intersectionality (Crenshaw, 1991; Hancock, 2016) was adopted to understand the emerging strands of diversity that the teachers consider as prevalent in their identities. Intersectionality (Crenshaw, 1991) embraces gendered and racial trajectories, by rejecting a single axis framework such as multiculturalism and feminism. Instead intersectionality offers a complete framework that encompasses feminism, anti-racist theories and recognises all strands of diversity.

Sample

A number of schools in London were approached, but most of the headteachers acted as gatekeepers, and refused for their teachers to be interviewed on the topic of FM, in fear that this would portray an ‘FM problem’ at their school. Only one out of the 58 schools contacted agreed for their teachers to be observed and interviewed. This South London secondary girls’ school had a mixed sixth form college attached to it. The age of the students ranged from year 7 (11–12 year olds) to year 13 (17–18 year olds). The classes observed were sessions delivered to students across these year groups. To ensure free-will, a general email was sent to all the teachers in the school, inviting them to participate in the research. Five out of the 20 teachers contacted agreed to participate in this study. As only five teachers were observed and interviewed, this made it difficult to generalise and present claims about new and emerging discourses. It is acknowledged that findings from this research can only be applied to these participants.

As part of a feminist post-structural framework, this research was not seeking an equally diverse, balanced and representative sample. All data collected was qualitative, subjective experiences and a valuable contribution to the research.

The Forced Marriage teaching material for the observations

The school used for this study did not address FM in any shape or form prior to this study. To support this study, the headteacher collapsed the timetable for all 5 year groups and worked with the author to arrange for the Forced Marriage Unit (FMU) to deliver a presentation to the teachers and students. Next, the headteacher instructed the head of PSHE to prepare a tutorial presentation for the teachers to deliver in the classroom to facilitate the author’s observations. The material for the observation was provided by the FMU, based upon the UK FM policy, and tailored for age appropriateness for the different year (age) groups. The sessions consisted of a Power-Point presentation followed by a discussion for the older pupils and true or false statements for the younger pupils.

The female teachers spoke of how they had experience of teaching sensitive issue (Stoddard et al., 2022), in particular sexual health and relationships. However, the male teacher interviewed explained how he thought it was inappropriate for him to address sexual issues with young girls. Therefore, a female teacher stood in for him in these sessions. Hence, his experience of addressing sensitive issues was limited.

Ethical issues

Participants were emailed with information on consent and an information sheet on resources for support. The consent form explained that by taking part in the interview, participants were consenting to their responses being used anonymously using pseudonyms in this paper. However, consent could be withdrawn up until the paper was published. Participants completed and returned the consent form to the author. The information sheet contained the details of organisations who offered advice and support on issues relating to forced marriage.

Theoretical approach and data analysis

Butler (2011), describes the notion of liberal feminism as associated with political and social inequalities and dedicated to achieving equality by abolishing barriers, such as educational barriers for women, whilst accepting and supporting differences. Initially, feminist theory considered gendered inequalities (Butler, 2011). However, subsequent waves and strands of feminism, such as black and lesbian feminism, have been extended to address other marginalised groups based upon ethnicity, sexuality and class (as discussed by Davis, 2008). Hence, feminist post-structuralism is a fitting framework within which to analyse the concept of forced marriage (FM), teachers’ identities and experiences of addressing FM. This is because the idea of FM is riddled with inequalities. First and foremost, FM restricts the social aspect of the right to marriage. Feminist post-structuralism, from a theoretical perspective, gives a voice to marginalised people, based on their gender and ethnicity (black feminism) and focuses on their personal experiences. FM has been constructed within the UK context as a racial and religious issue. The discourses upon which FM has been used, abused and sustained by the media (Miles-Johnson and Courtenay, 2021), is through associating FM with South Asian communities (as discussed by Chantler et al., 2009; Gill and Harvey, 2017; Ijaz and Abbas, 2010) with the main target group being Muslim females (Forced Marriage Unit Statistics, 2020). Gill and Harvey (2017) in their study explored the values and norms surrounding the perception of how gender is perpetrated and experienced. They found that gendered differences existed, and the roles remained integral to the FM process. They identified stereotypical perceptions that men defend the familial social status whilst women passively accept their fate. This paper rejected FM as a racial issue, and does not accept FM as an exclusively Muslim problem. This paper supports Gill and Harvey’s (2017) views and constructs FM as a gender issue. Hence, it was appropriate to draw upon a feminist post-structural framework to highlight the gendered inequalities within FM.

Data was transcribed and then coded to identify common themes, and then analysed thematically to classify emergent themes, which captured the experiences of the participants. These experiences related to their intersecting identities (Hancock, 2016) of ethnicity, culture, gender and religion.

Findings and discussion

Rani

Rani was a teacher and head of the PSHE at the institution where the research was conducted. She also co-ordinated the FM classes and teaching materials. Rani was a 31-year-old, British, lesbian Sikh, with an Indian heritage.

Through Rani’s interview it emerged that her cultural (South Asian) and gender/sexual (homosexual) orientation became her prevalent identities when she addressed FM in the classroom. She explained how her sister was forced into a marriage and therefore she was very aware of such practices in her family and culture (Gill and Harvey, 2017). However, being a lesbian, Rani felt that this shielded her from the pressures of a traditional marriage to a man from her caste and religion.

My parents did have expectations on me, but they have kinda gone out of the window. Because, I have lived my life in a different way from how my parents wanted me to. I’m gay and they have kinda realised that, so they know I am not going to have a traditional, marriage to a Jat/Sikh Indian guy. (Rani).

Rani’s mindset demonstrated how she was possibly naïve to how her multiple identities of ethnicity, being South Asian, and sexuality, that is, homosexual, posed a greater risk of being subjected to an FM, as constructed by dominant discourses (Chantler et al., 2009). However, it was during her preparations for the FM session that she became aware of how a number of FM victims were homosexual and were forced into marriage in an effort to suppress their sexual orientation and preserve the family’s honour. The implementation of the policy, through delivering lessons on FM, made Rani more aware of the threats and dangers that sexual minorities face with regards to relationships and FM.

. . .finding out all the information, things I didn’t consider before, like people who were LGBT, that’s one of the reasons the parents force them into marriage. . . Those kind of things, like the LGBT and the disabilities would not have come into my head instantly. . . (Rani).

This demonstrated how Rani was growing as a teacher and her knowledge was expanding, and allowing her to enact the FM policy (Braun et al., 2010). She applied a different lens to FM, by relating it to LGBT, and viewed it within an alternative perspective. Rani was aware of problems surrounding LGBT and FM as separate issues, but not as a combination.

She explained that, at first, she was concerned that her students may construct her as a potential FM victim due to her South Asian culture. However, since considering the profile of a potential FM victim, she felt her homosexual identity would become a greater threat to her being associated and positioned as a potential FM victim by the students.

. . .being LGBT carries its own burdens. People make assumptions that can be really out there and offensive. Now being on the FM radar is another stigma on top of everything else. (Rani).

Rani was concerned that by highlighting homosexuality as a reason for FM, her own homosexual identity would become prominent in the classroom setting. Rani feared that the students might construct her homosexuality as a destructive identity, resulting in her losing the students’ respect, her authority in the classroom and rapport with the students. This adverse exposure to Rani’s sexuality added another level of fear to her battle of acceptance (Butler, 2011) of being a lesbian within the educational arena (Jackson, 2007). For Rani the experiences of delivering the FM session were two-fold. Firstly, it was the responsibility of enacting (Braun et al., 2010) FM policy in the school, as an LGBT teacher. She was not entirely comfortable with enacting FM policy. Secondly, through this process, she became conscious and aware that her students may construct her within the discourse as a potential victim, initially because of her South Asian identity, and now because of another contributing layer of her identity, that of being homosexual.

Furthermore, through Rani’s cultural and homosexual intersecting identities, strong emotions (Zembylas, 2003) emerged, mainly sadness and vulnerability (Hargreaves, 2000; Lasky, 2005). From the experiences of delivering and enacting FM policy, Rani became more aware about issues relating to her homosexual identity. She expressed being upset by the fact that her homosexual identity, which she tried to embrace and promote within a ‘normalised gaze’ (Foucault, 1977: 25), was connected to FM discourses. Rani already felt ostracised and positioned as an outsider by her Indian community. Rani discussed how her homosexual characteristic excluded her from fully being part of her culture, tradition and religion, as that privilege was reserved for heterosexuals. Yet ironically, Rani felt that her students could still construct her within the constraints of the South Asian culture regardless of her sexual orientation.

. . .I don’t know, I mean, maybe they [students] do, maybe they think it could happen in my life. . . (Rani).

Rani harboured uncertainty about how she was perceived by her students. Rani’s intersecting identities that were prevalent at the time of addressing FM in the classroom were related to her South Asian culture and homosexual orientation.

Tess

Also, on the PSHE teaching team was Tess. Tess was a 31-year-old, white Canadian-born, lesbian. Tess grew up in the Bahamas. Her mother is a Jehovah’s Witness and her father a ‘militant agnostic’. Tess does not associate herself with any religion or culture, and instead focused her identity mainly around her sexual orientation, which was prevalent when she addressed the issue of FM.

. . .and my mum, obviously wants me to get married and have 2.5 kids and a white picket fence, and the fact that I’m a lesbian doesn’t really make her very happy. We never had an honest conversation about it. We just kinda tiptoe around the issue. It’s the big elephant in the room. (Tess).

For both Rani and Tess, discourses surrounding their sexual orientation dominated their identity that they proudly revealed and positioned above their other characteristics. Historically, homosexuality has been a taboo subject in the UK, and disclosure of homosexual orientations has been discouraged and suppressed around the world (as described by Foucault, 2002). Rani and Tess embraced this opportunity to highlight their homosexual identities as a prominent feature, which perhaps 40 years ago would have been difficult.

Embedded within the layers of the multiple identities (Cooper and Olson, 1996) were emotional discourses displayed by the teachers. These emotions emanated from teachers having to enact government policy and accepting the existence of FM itself. Tess expressed intense and extreme feelings across the emotional spectrum.

Tess is passionate about being a lesbian and that passion transpired in her homosexual identity through the ability to be free. This freedom clashed with the concept of FM, hence she expressed anger and frustration towards those who practised FM (Hess and Stoddard, 2011). Tess described her frustration when she was bound by professionalism. Hence, unable to behave towards the father of a potential FM victim in the way she desired.

. . .What I really want to do is turn around and smack her dad in the face and say, do you wanna know why your daughter is failing her GCSEs? It’s because you are putting her is a difficult position, wake up, and I can’t. . . and it is so frustrating. (Tess).

This appeared to demonstrate how Tess struggled to negotiate emotional closeness by managing professional boundaries (O’Connor, 2008). Tess expressed feelings of compromise and suppression. When asked what message should be given to the students, Tess’s response was emotional, suppressed, shaped and confined by professionalism:

My message would have been ‘sod your parents live your own life’. . .run away, do what you have to do, just get out of there. But obviously that is incredibly dangerous, and not entirely productive. . …I can sit there and say to my class, off the record, my personal opinion guys, here’s what I think, because this is my background, and this is my attitude towards it. I wouldn’t say that to everybody. But as a professional, as a teacher, I don’t think there is anything else. . ..I could do, anything else I can say. . … I struggle myself, because I get so, emotionally invested in things. I struggle not to let it, kinda eat me up. If I feel like I haven’t done everything that I can possibly do, because I can’t fight an entire war by myself. (Tess).

This passionate statement by Tess was bursting with emotions, mainly anger and fear (Hess and Stoddard, 2011). Further unpacking of the statement revealed Tess’s urge to defy authority and exercise her agency in order to promote freedom through independence (as discussed by Braun et al., 2010). She accredited this thought process to her own multiple identities. However, another layer of this statement introduced the element of fear of sharing her thoughts generally, as she perceived that this compromised her professionalism. In addition, Tess acknowledged that resisting authority was futile. Through restraining her emotions and agency, Tess was negotiating and partially suppressing her identities (homosexuality) and what they stand for (freedom of expression). Tess demonstrated, and Zembylas (2003) captured in research into teaching in conflict zones, emotions such as fear are implicated in the construction of teachers’ identities and teachers’ responses to policy implementation.

This notion of vulnerability became apparent within the data. The data suggested that, to some extent, all the female teachers struggled with their emotions. This small sample demonstrated the link between emotions and vulnerability expressed by the teachers, which supported the literature (Hargreaves, 2000; Lasky, 2005). The exception to these findings of vulnerability was the male teacher, Ed. He expressed little or no emotions and presented as a strong, confident identity and persona.

Ania

Ania was a 29-year-old Catholic of Polish origins. She moved to the UK from Poland with her family when she was 11. During the FM session and the interview, Ania’s ethnicity and religion featured as her prevailing intersecting identities.

Drawing upon Francis (2003) understanding of the sexed body and applying it to ethnicity in this study, it is arguable that the racial body is problematic within racism and multi-culturalism. This is because by separating racism from multiculturalism, the media and legislators are able to dictate socially acceptable cultural practices, as opposed to minority ethnic groups highlighting practices of racial inequalities and discrimination.

Ania questioned her own ethnicity, and distanced herself from her ethnic community. She condemned the Polish community and diaspora as spoilt, and discredited her roots for creating a racial body, whereby racism prevails over multiculturalism.

My parents are both Polish and emigrated to the UK in the 80s. I only had one long term boyfriend in secondary school, and he was a Muslim. I had one comment from my grandma, which was, “it’s ok, you are young, you will find a nice white man to settle down with one day” Which I found entirely offensive. . .I think my dad was leaning on that side as well. Which I think is more to do with the fact that Polish are. . .I .don’t think intentionally racist, I would say ignorant would be more the point, because they simply don’t have that in Poland. They don’t have a very mixed culture in general. . .I have never seen myself as Polish for these reasons, because I feel that I am actually British in terms of mixing cultures and stuff like that. . . (Ania).

Ania highlights two issues. Firstly, she illustrates how her Polish family constructs ethnicity and religion within a moral hierarchy whereby whiteness and Christianity are superior to South Asian ethnicities and Islam. This form of hierarchical positioning often produces negative stereotypes and discourses of non-whiteness and prejudice (as discussed by Brah and Phoenix, 2004; Wilson, 2007). Secondly, Ania demonstrated how she had reconstructed her ethnic identity over a period of time and space (relocation of countries) from Polish-European to British, which she felt was more accepting of multi-culture and faiths, than her Polish European roots.

In the classroom and during her interview, when discussing FM, Ania’s religious and ethnic identities intersected. However, her Britishness, tolerance and understanding of multiculturalism appears to fade, as her inability to understand and discuss FM overwhelmed her. Her approach was to become transparent, confront her fear of the unknown and express that she did not know what the difference between FM and Arranged Marriage (AM) was, nor did she know how it is possible for a man to be forced into a marriage. Ania’s approach was unusual as the teaching materials were explicit on how to approach FM and with thorough explanations, definitions and the message focused on this being a criminal offence. Ania apparently struggled to use the materials. This demonstrates that FM policy was not a straight-forward linear process. The enactment of policy will always be problematic because teachers are human beings with multiple identities.

Ania’s struggle to use the materials in the most effective way could potentially be contributing to the position of her intersecting identities relating to religion and ethnicity. Hence, the data suggested that FM policy was a complex issue; Ania had the information but she still struggled to deliver it. The emotions that Ania expressed and the experiences that she shared, illustrate that the process is complex.

Ania positioned herself in a similar moral hierarchy as her grandmother by dismissing FM as a practice she cannot relate to, understand or engage in a conversation about. She referenced her faith and racial up-bringing as an obstacle to understanding the FM process, hence she struggled to understand the FM teaching material. Ania’s religious and ethnic intersecting identities prevailed. Her automatic coping mechanism appeared to be to shut-down and hand over to the South Asian Muslim students in the class to explain, justify and discuss FM as part of their faith and ethnicity. Hence, subconsciously Ania was reproducing the dominant discourses surrounding FM as a South Asian Muslim problem (as discussed by Gill and Harvey, 2017).

Diya

Shaping characteristics (Duff and Uchida, 1997; Varghese et al., 2005) were visible in how Diya constructed her identities. Diya was a 44-year-old Sikh mother with an Indian heritage. Diya’s prevalent intersecting identities, which she discussed generally and which come through when she addresses FM, were her Indian culture and South Asian ethnicity.

Cultural identity comes from social interaction (as described by Giddens, 1991). Diya eloquently described this as:

. . .There are [governing] laws in every [country]. . .it’s like, [when] in Rome do what the Romans do. (Diya).

Diya made several statements about her culture that indicate that this was her most influential identity.

I studied both here in the UK and in India. I had quite an open-minded upbringing. However, when I returned to the UK, to continue my studies, there was quite a change in the way we were treated in the United Kingdom to the way we were treated back home, being raised back home. And I think it was more to do with, what would people say. You know, people were more conscious about the neighbours and relatives etc. But my parents were quite open-minded for their generation of Asian parents. I think they were quite strict in the sense that they wanted me to marry someone who was Asian, and they didn’t mind if they were Sikh or Hindu. When I was at University I met my husband who is of Caribbean descent. . .and when I approached my parents, my mum in particular was the one to completely disown me for eight years. They were just always about what will the neighbours say. It’s quite a traditional way of them to think, stereotypically. (Diya).

Diya defended her identities against the eyes of others and reclaimed her cultural identity as Indian (Duff and Uchida, 1997). Diya’s experiences illustrated how her cultural and racial identities interested. Diya demonstrated concerns about how she was positioned by others who construct her identity as non-Indian, and refers to the fluidity of society.

. . .because I have married out of my community, people might think that I am not a proper Indian person. . .We are living in an extremely cosmopolitan society. I think if you look around and count heads, you don’t see many Caucasian, British people around. Britain has adopted the curry as their national dish. It’s so cosmopolitan. You go out, you have multi-national cuisines. People travel abroad, the world has become smaller and people are more aware of things. I’m Indian and married a non-Indian, and done everything that people go, “ah, how did your parents react to that?” I get that all the time. (Diya).

Similarly, when addressing FM in the classroom, Diya’s prevailing and intersecting identities were her culture and ethnicity. She departed from the teaching materials to demonstrate that FM did occur in other cultures and ethnicities and spent a lot of time researching and presenting this information (Stoddard et al., 2022). However, ultimately, Diya concluded by sharing experiences of her cousins being forced in a FM. She explained that she did not want South Asian ethnicities to be stereotyped as dominant in FM practices, yet she chose to disclose several family examples of FM, following the hand-picked videos that she painfully searched for to de-stigmatise FM. By introducing the family examples, Diya personalised the session, which may have assisted with making the students more receptive to the session, but it also became counterproductive by reproducing the dominant discourses surrounding FM as a South Asian issue (as discussed by Gill and Harvey, 2017).

Ed

The obvious difference between Ed and the rest of the teachers was indeed one of the prevailing identities that Ed highlighted himself, his gender. Ed is one of only two male PSHE teachers at the school. He was the only male willing to participate in this study. Ed was a 38 year old, white, Christian. Teaching is a female dominated profession. However, men are able to position themselves within a feminine occupation by constructing masculine traits to reclaim roles as compatible with masculinity (as described by McDonald, 2013). Ed confirms this:

I have got used to the thing with girls, coz I have taught here for quite a long time. If you are saying no-one who isn’t a woman or from a culture or community where that happens. . .unless you are them you can’t talk about it. I think that is a very dangerous road to go down. (Ed).

Whilst recognising that some topics may be gendered and racialised, Ed did not consider his gender or ethnicity an obstacle to addressing FM. Ed resisted the notion that such issues should only be addressed by teachers whose identities match that of the topic being discussed. He attempted to neutralise the gendered and racial inequalities by advocating professionalism. Ed’s gender and ethnic identities intersected.

Both my parents are vicars so we were quite mobile. I ended up in a school in Kennington, which was a complete contrast to my school in Birmingham, where there was no multi-culturalism. The school in Kennington was 95% Afro-Caribbean kids, so it was quite a culture shock for me. I spent a year there. I have been shaped quite a lot by my experience of growing up in London and understanding how it is different from growing up in other parts of the country. I have learnt a lot from working here with Asian children. It has helped me understand and get over my stereotypes and ignorance. I am more aware of the different culture. (Ed).

Ed presented himself as a cosmopolitan, multicultural man and explained how his exposure to multicultural educational institutions had influenced his identity. Multiculturalism can be considered as a positive aspect of society through its social fusion of various cultures. However, Okin (1999) illustrated how such concepts, when considered and applied independently, can be discriminatory. According to Okin (1999) the intention of multiculturalism was to offer minority groups the prospect of preserving their culture from becoming extinct. Instead, neo-liberal society used this concept to assimilate minority cultures into observing western culture (Brah, 1996).

Ed demonstrated, and Hargreaves (1998) observed in research in dominant white school settings, teachers make special efforts to introduce awareness of multicultural diversity and dimensions to their teaching.

Ed’s prevalent identities mirrored those discourses, making ethnicity and gender at the forefront of the classroom discussions on FM. Ed deliberately highlighted FM as a South Asian (ethnicity) problem, even though FM was not constructed in the presentation slides as being associated with any particular ethnicity, culture or faith. The FMU material highlighted that FM can occur within any ethnicity, culture or faith. However, the statistics on the slide did depict members of the South Asian communities (Pakistan, India and Bangladesh), with the most reports of being subjected to FM. The focus should have been on FM occurring in all cultures, ethnicities and faiths and the fact that it is a criminal offence. However, Ed focused on the statistics and played down the wider message that FM can happen to anyone regardless of ethnicity, culture or faith.

During the classroom discussions, Ed focused on gender as being a major factor in FM. The FMU material did specify that 76% of FM victims were female. Ed latched on to this statistic and specifically focused upon the idea of females being promiscuous as a contributing factor to FM. This deviated and distorted from the actual reasons being reputation and honour. Ed did not relate promiscuity to boys and their behaviour and reputation, nor did he address male victims of FM. When speaking about controlling unwanted behaviour he chose to highlight female promiscuity as an example, as opposed to smoking as unwanted behaviours.

. . .controlling unwanted behaviour, for example, the idea that you might be being promiscuous, that means that you might be going out with lots of boys.

(Extract from observation of Ed’s class).

Ed spent more time than his female counterparts discussing gender as a prevailing characteristic of FM. He distanced himself from the FM concept and positioned his own male gender and white race as superior, hence, shielding him from FM practices. His discussion had the essence of the heroic white male saving the inferior South Asian females in society.

Forced marriage is not restricted to the South Asian community, although that is where the majority of it is. . .It’s a question of which traditions and cultures are good to keep or which ones are harmful. (Ed).

The discussion came across as being ambiguous and mirrored the position he already held as the white male teacher among an all-female student setting with the majority being from minority ethnic backgrounds, especially South Asian. Ed did not address gender as an issue of FM or women’s rights. Instead, he pathologised women. He described females as being promiscuous. Ed presented FM as women’s fault, because a reason for FM was female promiscuity. Hence, in his view women need to be educated to save themselves from issues surrounding FM. Ed constructs FM as a problem for women from a particular different group, mainly South Asian, and also for women who have sexual freedom. Young people need to be spoken to about women’s rights, especially in a girls’ school, where the audience is all female, like Ed’s class (Hess and Stoddard, 2011). However, Ed did not maximise this opportunity and instead used this platform to undermine women and point out females’ socially constructed shortcomings.

Ed’s position can be considered condescending towards the Asian female students, in the classroom, which is governed by his display of white superiority. Ed was the only male teacher in the data collected, and his identity as a white superior man dominated the discussion around FM in the classroom.

When the interviewer posed these interpretations from the classroom observations to Ed, which arose from his position towards Asian and female students, he became defensive and deflected the question. His response to the interviewer was ‘Do you think I’m racist and sexist?’ Ed’s defensive attitude illustrated his inability to recognise, when questioned, that he was demonstrating his inherent view that his cultural background is superior. This defensiveness could be interpreted as Ed’s need to preserve his culture and identity within a multicultural society (as discussed by Okin, 1999).

Teachers’ agency in the classroom

The data demonstrated that, when teaching, teachers bring their own experiences and knowledge, formulated from all types of sources, such as upbringing and their idea of being professional to enact policy (Hess and Stoddard, 2011). Foucault’s (2002) concept of power is prevalent in the data. The data demonstrated how teachers align and reproduce policy discourses relating to FM, but also their inner struggles, contradictions and positionings towards the same discourses (Braun et al., 2010).

Certain identities were more prevalent than others at different points of individuals’ lives and professional trajectories. The fluidity of time and space was captured in Foucault (2002) and in feminist work (Butler, 2011), which defined the temporality and specificity of identities. Upon accepting that identity and knowledge are fluid (Foucault, 2002), the opportunity to shift and reposition identities was available. The process that enabled the shift was usually triggered by additional information becoming available through training and experiences. Teachers were positioned as the primary resource in teaching and awareness. This paper found that teachers positioned and re-positioned themselves as they constructed and re-constructed their own knowledge of FM within both micro and macro social structures.

Conclusion

This paper has explored how identity politics are implicated in the process of enacting (Braun et al., 2010) FM policy, not just for the recipients, the students, but also for the teacher who delivers the FM policy message. This study unpacked how teachers resisted and reproduced gendered and racial discourses to construct FM. It was necessary to adopt an intersectionality approach (Hancock, 2016) and consider teachers’ intersecting identities to illustrate how identity politics are implicated in the implementation of FM policy. Along with being professionals, teachers’ have identities, which are informed by their background and ideas that position them and influence how they enact FM policy in the classroom. These dominant discourses shape how FM is addressed in the classroom, and the subliminal messages enriched with society’s views and individual cultural beliefs are suppressed and silenced.

The emotions expressed by the participants relating to forced marriage, demonstrate the complexity of balancing personal and professional practices. Understanding the multiple identities of teachers is a complex task. The emic approach was adopted to explore and concentrate on the intersecting identities that emerged in the field. These strands of diversity transpired as ethnicity, gender, religion and culture. This paper explores the outcomes of enacting the FM policy in the classroom of a school at a micro political level. This research brought together intersectionality and an emic approach, by concentrating on the identities that emerged through the fieldwork. These identities related to culture, faith, gender and ethnicity. Enactment of FM policies has its difficulties, as teachers are their own emotional and political entities influenced by their multiple identities. Unless all these issues are addressed, through training and a safe space, the enactment of FM policy will always be problematic. The material provided to the teachers was structured and prescribed for the younger pupils. However, more discretion was devolved to teachers with older pupils to facilitate discussion around FM. The research identified that more prescribed information was required throughout all sessions to focus teachers on the key issues/messages; to provide a narrative on exactly what to teach (Ania); emphasise the dangers of deviating from the material; and the trap falls of presenting FM in a stereotypical or misinformed way (Ed).

This study was conducted within a field where there are no previous studies or data, as the concept surrounding FM awareness in schools is new. The research was conducted after the introduction of the legal framework criminalising FM, the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act (2014). There is an increasing body of literature on the multiple identities of teachers (Hargreaves, 1998) and how these identities shift with the introduction of new tasks and responsibilities. This paper captured the implications for teachers’ identities when bestowed with the task of enacting FM policy, which is a timely, yet under-researched area.