NSJLE 2022 PROCEEDINGSBEYOND INCLUSION:
FACILITATING LGBTIQA+
AFFIRMATIVE JAPANESELANGUAGE LEARNING
CLAIRE MAREE
University of Melbourne

9

NSJLE 2022 PROCEEDINGS

10ABSTRACT
While there is increasing interest in exploring issues of equity and discrimination around gender and sexuality as it relates toJapanese society, culture and language, there is still a perception that discussion of sexual orientation and gender identity
is taboo. How can Japanese language professionals facilitate learning and exploration around sexual orientation, gender
identity, expression and sex characteristics (SOGIESC) in Japanese? I turn to work by Knisely & Paiz (2021) which advocatesfor “locally relevant” LGBTIQA+ inclusive pedagogies. I present a brief overview of developments in education policy, shifts inpublic attitudes and recent guidelines for inclusive language. I also introduce some of the creative ways in which Japanese
speakers navigate gendered language norms. The paper concludes by an invitation to consider how Japanese language
professionals might collaborate to create and maintain learning spaces which not only include a diversity of SOGIESC, butalso affirm LGBTIQA+ students and teachers.

INTRODUCTION
There is growing recognition that Japanese language learners in Australia are eager to explore issues of equity anddiscrimination around gender and sexuality as they relate to Japanese society, culture and language. One indicator of thisis the request I received to deliver a keynote on that topic at the National Symposium on Japanese Language Education(NSJLE) 20221 and the comments I received following the talk. Colleagues teaching at primary, junior and senior highschools approached me to share their experiences of teaching trans2 and non-binary3 youth. They spoke of students who
were keen to explore ways in which they can express their own diverse gender identities and ways to refer to trans andnon-binary family and loved ones in and through Japanese. In the “‘Be Inspired Be Inspiring’—Creating affirmative andsupportive learning environments for LGBTIQA+4 teachers and learners of Japanese” later the same day,5 we discussed
what terminology or linguistic strategies might be appropriate for different levels of Japanese Language Education (JLE)in Australia. Colleagues mentioned the entrenched view that any discussion of sexual orientation was taboo in Japanese
language and culture. This viewpoint often makes it difficult to respond to the needs of sexuality and gender diverse
students as well as of staff. This is complicated by anti-gender, anti-LGBTIQA+ discourse, which circulates globally.
Within a climate where there is inquisitiveness, but also caution, how can language professionals facilitate learningand exploration around sexual orientation, gender identity, expression and sex characteristics (SOGIESC)6 in Japanese?
How might we do this at time where there is an increasingly vocal anti-gender backlash playing out across the globe?
Contemporary research into LGBTIQA+ affirmative language teaching (Knisely 2023; Knisley and Paiz 2021; Paiz and Coda
2021), seeks to explore those questions in relation to a diversity of languages (see, for example, Paiz and Coda 2021).
Looking towards Japanese language education (JLE), previous research has pointed to the lack of representation ofsexuality and gender diverse individuals in textbooks and other teaching materials (Arimori 2017; 2020; Maree 1998; 2011;2020b; Moore 2019; Sall Vesselényi 2019; Yoshida 2023) and the difficulties in incorporating queer perspectives into JLE(de Vincenti, Giovanangeli and Ward 2007; Maree 2020b; Yoshida 2023). Less attention has been paid to approaches thatincorporate trans-affirming pedagogies and gender inclusivity.

1

Many thanks to NJSLE for inviting me to present a keynote on this topic in Melbourne, and to all who shared their experiences and thoughts.

2	Trans and transgender are umbrella terms used for those whose gender identity differs from the one they were assigned at birth. The Oxford
English Dictionary (Revised 2018) defines transgender thus: “Designating a person whose sense of personal identity and gender does notcorrespond to that person’s sex at birth, or which does not otherwise conform to conventional notions of sex and gender.”3	Non-binary is an umbrella term for those who do not identify as men or women. The Oxford English Dictionary (Revised 2018) defines nonbinary as: “Of a person: not identifying as male or female; having a gender identity that does not conform to traditional binary notions of gender(according to which all individuals are exclusively either male or female). Also: designating such a gender identity; of or relating to (people with)such a gender identity.”
4	In this article I use the acronym LGBTIQA+ (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Intersex, Queer, Asexual, plus) except in instances where
alternatives, such as LGBT and/or LGBTQ are used in Japanese. The “+” is used to express other identities that may not be expressed by thisacronym.
5	“‘Be Inspired Be Inspiring’—Creating affirmative and supportive learning environments for LGBTIQA+ teachers and learners of Japanese” wascoordinated by the International Network for Gender and Sexuality in Japanese Language Education (INGS-J) and featured Claire Maree and Maki
Yoshida as presenters and workshop leaders. Many thanks to all participants.
6

The acronym SOGIESC is used widely, including within the United Nations.

NSJLE 2022 PROCEEDINGS

11

Acknowledging that the legal, social and cultural circumstances of LGBTIQA+ people differ significantly across the globe, I
turn to work by Knisely and Paiz (2021, 29), which advocates for “locally relevant, culturally responsive pedagogies.” Transaffirming queer-inquiry based pedagogies, or TAQIBPs (2021, 31), critique heteronormativity7 and also focus on the “(de)construction of gender and cisnormativity” (2021, 29) as it operates in the language classroom and language more broadly.
Cisnormativity is a mechanism of oppression that privileges cisgender8 individuals and sets cisgender as the norm on whichsocial, legal and cultural structures are formulated and operate. The TAQIBPs toolkit commences with “a self-inventory for
instructors to investigate their knowledge, practices, and positionality” (Knisely and Paiz 2021, 31). Provoked by the prompt
to “investigate knowledge” in the target language, and aware that developments in education policy and shifts in public
attitudes in Japan towards LGBTIQA+ people and SOGIESC issues are not widely known to Japanese language educators, I
first present a brief overview of activism-led change. I then introduce recent guidelines for inclusive language and, buildingon Japanese language research, touch on creative ways in which Japanese speakers navigate gendered language norms.
Finally, in conclusion I invite us to think about how we can aim to build and/or maintain learning spaces that not only include
a diversity of SOGIESC, but also affirm LGBTIQA+ students and teachers. At all points, I am mindful of the constraints oflocal teaching and learning environments and advocate for collaborative networking to offer support across the profession.

CIVIC ACTIVISM AND EDUCATIONAL CHANGE
In Japan, civic activism around sexual orientation, gender identity, expression and sex characteristics has had some impact
on educational policies. One of the earliest examples is the removal of the reference to “homosexuality“ (同性愛dōsei’ai)
as “sexual perversion delinquency” (倒錯型性非行tōsakugata seihikō) in the Ministry of Education’s Basic document aboutproblem behaviour of students (生徒の問題行動に関する基礎資料 Seito no mondai kōdō ni kansuru kiso shiryō, 1979)
from 1993. The legal case that gay and lesbian peer support and activist group OCCUR filed against the Tokyo Municipal
Government (TMG) in 1991 was the catalyst for this change. After lodging a complaint about discriminatory behaviour
experienced by members of OCCUR whilst using the Fuchū Youth Center Facilities, which were under the management of
the TMG (Watanabe 2017; for an overview of the case see Nakagawa 2019), the TMG refused the group permission to use
the facilities again. As part of their defense, the TMG cited the Basic document about problem behaviour of students as well
as dictionary definitions of “homosexuality” as evidence of a “lack of consensus” around homosexuality in Japanese society
at the time. OCCUR went on to win the case at the High Court level in 1997.
The passing of the Gender Identity Disorder (GID) Special Cases Act (commonly known as the GID Act) in 2003, effective
in 2004 (for an overview of the law see, Nohno 2004) has also impacted on support offered to trans and gender nonconforming students at primary and secondary schools. Under the GID Act, individuals who meet specific conditions9can alter their gender on official government documents. As GID, or seidōitsusei shōgai,(性同一性障害), is classified as a“disorder” (障害shōgai) and therefore a treatable medical condition, education institutions were duty-bound to establish
policies for GID students who could not yet alter their legal gender (Watanabe 2017; Mitsunari 2017). It wasn’t until 2010,
however, that the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) issued a “notice” (通知tsūchi)outlining the necessity of schools to “take into consideration” (配慮するhairyosuru) children with GID.
As Watanabe (2017) notes, Japan’s National Cabinet formally endorsed human rights policies in 2002, which means
public schools offering compulsory education are also duty-bound to include provisions to counteract anti-homosexual
discrimination. It wasn’t until 2017, however, that direct reference to “homosexuality” (同性愛dōsei’ai) appeared as partof the MEXT Act for the Measures to Prevent Bullying (MEXT 2017) in a clause that calls for schools to adopt appropriate

7	As Wieringa notes, “(h)eteronormativity refers to a system in which sexual conduct and kinship relations are organized in such a way that a
specific form of heterosexuality becomes the culturally accepted ‘natural’ order. Thus biological sex, sexuality, gender identity and expression
and normative gender roles are aligned in such a way that a dominant view on sexual and gender relations, identities, and expressions is
produced” (2014, 210).
8	The term cisgender “can be used to describe individuals who possess, from birth and into adulthood, the male or female reproductive organs(sex) typical of the social category of man or woman (gender) to which that individual was assigned at birth” (Aultman 2014, 60).
9	The individuals must be unmarried, not have children who are minors, have a diagnosis of GID and have completed sex affirmation surgery(referred to as sex reassignment in the laws). These conditions represent severe incursions on human rights and have been contested by UN
Human Rights experts. A recent case brought to the Japanese courts has resulted in a 2023 ruling that the condition of forced sterilization, onepart of required surgical interventions, is unconstitutional.

NSJLE 2022 PROCEEDINGS

12

measures to strengthen teachers’ “correct understanding” of “gender dysphoria” (the term used in Japanese legalese),“sexual orientation and gender identity” as a counter measure for bullying.

RAISING AWARENESS OF THE NEEDS OF LGBTIQA+ STUDENTS AT THE
TERTIARY LEVEL
Since the 1990s, students have created communities and organised LGBTIQA+ peer support events on Japanese university
campuses. The formation of an intercollege sexual minorities network called Rainbow College in 2006 saw support growacross Japan. Since the mid-2010s, too, university initiatives framed around discourses of diversity and inclusion havecomplemented student led clubs. The tragic suicide in 2015 of a graduate university student who was a victim of outing has
been a catalyst for further change. A survey conducted by Kawashima (2017), however, indicates that in 2017 university
campuses in Japan lagged behind secondary schools in regard to support for, and initiatives aimed at increasing awarenessof, the needs of LGBTIQA+ students.
Kawashima (2017, 220–231) lists ten problematic areas in relation to SOGIESC at universities and suggests countermeasures
for the tertiary sector. These include making systematic changes to awareness raising training for staff and students andincreasing the expertise of university counselling services. In an updated examination of the state of support for LGBTIQA+
students and staff, and SOGIESC related measures, Kawashima (2020) notes that more student support services include
reference to LGBT students through diversity initiatives and that the number of universities who issue guidelines on “gender/
sexual diversity” (性の多様性sei no tayōsei) has increased. Students can use their preferred name at an increasing numberof universities, and some do not require a diagnosis of GID to do so. An increasing number of women’s universities accept
or have plans to accept trans students: Ochanomizu University and Nara Women’s University (2020 ~ ), Miyagi Gakuin
Women’s University (2021 ~ ), Notre Dame Seishin University (2023 ~ ), Japan’s Women’s University (2024 ~ ) and Tsuda
College (2025 ~ ). On some campuses trained psychologists can coordinate with the student affairs office to offer aid tostudents. Support for job hunting and career development is available using information from community organizations
such as Work with Pride.

PUBLIC OPINION
Advocacy, activism and lobbying have raised public awareness of the issues LGBTIQA+ individuals face in Japan in regard
to partnership rights and discrimination in the job market. The most recent surveys indicate that over the past decade, theJapanese public has come to demonstrate more positive attitudes towards LGBTIQA+ people (Ikuta et al. 2018; Kamano
et al. 2020; PEW 2020). As of June 2023, 328 local governments had enacted same-sex partnership ordinances by which
couples can register their partnerships locally (Nijibridge, 2023). The partnership certificates do not offer the same rights aslegal marriage, and a campaign for marriage equality is currently being orchestrated through a series of civil court cases
across the country (see the Marriage for All website for more details).
Looking to the workplace we find that, although figures decreased between 2018 and 2020, over 38% of LGBT workers inJapan report experiencing harassment and/or discriminatory behaviour (Muraki, Hiramori, Mikami and Yamawaki 2021, 8).
Lobbying by civic sector groups to raise awareness around “SOGI Harassment” (ソジハラスメント sojiharasumento) led tothe inclusion of reference to sexual orientation and gender identity in amendments pertaining to power harassment in theworkplace under the Act on Comprehensive Promotion of Labor Measures and Stabilization of Employment of Employees
and Enrichment of Their Working Lives, Etc. (the “Labor Measures Comprehensive Promotion Act”) (2021). Employers are
now required to implement measures to prevent workplace harassment, including breaches of privacy.
Legislative changes and changes to public opinion, however, occur within an emerging backlash of anti-LGBT, anti-transrhetoric. Most recently this has occurred alongside public debate surrounding the term “gender identity” in relation tolegislation to “Promote public understanding of diversity of sexual orientation and gender identity”（ 性的指向及びジェン
ダーアイデンティティの多様性に関する国民の理解の増進に関する法律 seiteki shikō oyobi jendā aidentiti no tayōsei）that
was passed in 2023. Three expressions are commonly used for gender identity in Japanese: Jendā aidentiti （ジェンダー
アイデンティティ）in the katakana script, seijinin (性自認) and seidōitsusei (性同一性). Seijinin (性自認), is comprised of

NSJLE 2022 PROCEEDINGS

13

the character sei (sex/gender) and jinin (self-acknowledgement). Seidōitsusei (性同一性) is comprised of sei (sex/gender)and dōitsusei (identity/oneness). The use of dōitsusei （同一性）as a term for identity can be traced to the translationof Erikson’s ego identity (自我同一性 jigadōitsusei) and this makes the latter more commonly used in medical andpsychological discourses, hence its use in the GID Law (see above). Conservatives argued that the term seijinin (性自認)
was inappropriate as jinin (self-acknowledgement) had connotations of self-determination. After heated debate with atransphobic thrust, jendā aidentītī (gender identity) was adopted making the “SOGI understanding Bill” one of the few to use
a loan word rendered in katakana for a central concept contained in the legislation.

FACILITATING LGBTIQA+ AFFIRMATIVE JAPANESE LANGUAGE LEARNING
The developments in Japanese education and legislation outlined above provide evidence that counteracting discrimination,and enacting inclusive and affirmative practices in the Japanese language sector, are relevant concerns for the teachingprofession. Research in applied linguistics and second language pedagogy, too, argues that we must go beyond the“inclusion” of LGBTIQA+ language learners towards “affirmation.” Indeed, the limitations of token inclusivity are central todiscussions of critical applied linguistics (Pennycook 2001; 2022) and queer approaches to language teaching and learning(Nelson 2006; 2009; Moore 2019). Token inclusivity, which relegates discussion of SOGIESC to only one lesson, may reinforce
the notion that LGBTIQA+ events and issues are “controversial” or relate to the “special interests of a small group” (Knisely
and Paiz 2021, 30). To avoid this and move towards affirmation, in recent approaches educators are encouraged to adopt
an “early and often” approach (Knisely and Paiz 2021, 30) whereby LGBTIQA+ language and peoples are fully integrated into
the curriculum from as early as possible.
The way in which facilitating LGBTIQA+ affirmative Japanese language learning may be achieved will differ for each learning
environment. Any approach must be relevant for the level at which the language is being taught, and the context within
which it is being taught. Knisely and Paiz’s TAQIBPs encourages respectful engagement. The aim of respectful engagement
is to “raise students’ awareness of LGBTQ+ lives and how they are mediated and constrained through language” (Knisely
and Paiz 2021, 29). Through respectful engagement, students become empowered to “not only perform gender and sexual
identities in locally relevant, linguistically fitting ways that render them understandable to socially significant others, butalso to advocate for themselves and others” (29). Note here, the emphasis is on the “locally relevant” and “linguisticallyfit”—that is it must be “fit” for the local learning environment, and “fit” for the target language.
One pathway to building respectful engagement is to “draw student’s attention to the queer world around them” and tobring “local LGBTQ+ content into the classroom instead of relying on often problematic, mass-produced representation”(Knisely and Paiz 2021, 29). Within the Australian JLE context, it may be possible to incorporate local LGBTQIA+ celebrations
such as the Sydney Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras and/or local Pride festivals into teaching and learning activities, especiallyas reported on Japanese language media such as SBS Japanese. This can be one way of offsetting representationsof LGBTIQA+ people and individuals in Japanese mainstream media, which continue to be somewhat problematic, assuggested by guidelines such as those prepared by the Japan Alliance for LGBT Legislation (2022) and Pride House Tokyo,
in association with GLAAD and Athlete Ally (2021).

MISGENDERING
Going beyond inclusion to practice affirmation of LGBTIQA+ in the classroom begins with creating an atmosphere in which
lived experiences, when shared, are not negated. This includes not engaging in misgendering. The Japan Alliance for LGBT
Legislation produced media guide defines misgendering as using “incorrect language” such as honorific address terms andpronouns that “do not respect the individual’s gender identity” (本人の性自認を尊重せず honnin no seijinin o sonchō sezu)(2021, 13).
In Japanese, pronouns form part of a complex network of self and other address terms that relate not only to gender,
but also social hierarchies and the formality of the language setting. Queer and trans speakers adopt different strategies
to negotiate the complex pronoun system. In Maree’s (2007) work on queer Japanese speakers, for example, a lesbian
woman discusses how she uses the hyperfeminine first-person pronoun あたし (atashi) so that she can have it understoodthat “I’m a woman.” Another lesbian speaker spoke of being “stunned” when they were told not to use (informal firstpronoun) ぼく (boku), but (formal first-person pronoun) わたし (watashi) when they entered primary school. It is not only
LGBTIQA+ Japanese language users who negotiate these norms. We only have to turn to autobiographical writings andNSJLE 2022 PROCEEDINGS

14

popular culture to find a variety of writers recounting their personal experiences of navigating Japanese self-reference.
Japanese users (that is, those who use Japanese, Japanese speakers) negotiate self-referencing and pronouns in theireveryday language use. Not everyone uses the same self-reference term in all interactions. The same individual mightuse ぼく(boku I/me), おれ (ore I/me), わたくし (watakushi I/me), パパ (papa Dad/me), or わし (washi I/me) to refer tothemselves over the course of a single day.
Well-known studies by Miyazaki (2004; 2023) note how linguistic repertoires in friendship groups in a high-school homeroom
class vary significantly due to the power dynamics within the group, and their positionality viz-a-viz localised gender norms.
Within their friendship groups, students used a range of terms from ぼく(boku I/me), おれ (ore I/me), あたし (atashi I/me),and would even avoid pronouns all together due to bullying. As Miyazaki explains some groups of girls used ore, which theyevaluated as being “cool,” “powerful,” “independent,” and “assertive” (2023). Not all pronouns and/or address terms might
be deemed appropriate for the local classroom context. However, rather than offering an account of pronoun usage as agrammatical “rule” bound to cisnormative gender binaries, it may be possible to demonstrate the richness of Japanese
self- and other-references as one pathway to encouraging respectful engagement and affirmation in the classroom.
In the language classroom, exercises focused on discussing oneself and one’s family and friends are common. In thesecontexts, students may wish to avoid misgendering their siblings. Indeed this is one concern that educators—from primaryschool to tertiary level—have often voiced to me in conversations. Japanese kinship terms, which mark both gender andage, may be a challenge here if we adhere to textbook patterns. However, just as English has the alternative gender neutralterm sibling, the term kyōdai （きょうだい）can be used in a similar manner. While kyōdai can be written in a combination ofcharacters that indicate gender （兄弟・兄妹）, writing it in the hiragana script （きょうだい）removes the visual reference
to gender. Along the same lines, to refer to a non-binary older or younger sibling in Japanese, using alternatives to indicate
relative age and not gender, is also a possibility (see Table 1).
Table 1
ALTERNATIVES FOR REFERENCING OTHERS
Expressions

Gendered terms

Alternatives

Referring to family

きょうだい きょうだい しまい

きょうだい
年上のきょうだい, 年下のきょうだい

兄弟 , 兄妹, 姉妹
あね あに いもうと おとうと

姉, 兄, 妹, 弟
Referring to others〜ちゃん, 〜くん〜さん

As noted above, introducing inclusive alternatives to the JLE classroom may be met with resistance from other teachers
and/or colleagues. To counteract this, it can be strategically useful to indicate that such initiatives emerge from Japan.
For, as well as the media guidelines mentioned above, many local governments have guidelines on how to avoid
cisheteronormative assumptions about gender and/or sexual orientation in dealings with the public.
Table 2 shows some alternative phrasings used in the Chiyoda Wards LGBTs pamphlet. The term pātonā (パートナー partner)
is given as an alternative to gendered terms such as danna-sama (旦那様your husband) and oku-sama (奥様your wife).
Hogosha no kata (保護者guardian) or go-kazoku no kata (ご家族の方family member) are offered as alternatives for mother
and/or father. Note, too, the suggestion to avoid phrases such as otoko rashii (男らしいmanly/masculine) or onna rashii (女らしいwomanly/feminine). The suggestion is to replace the otoko (男man) and/or onna (女woman) with the referent’s nameand the address suffix san (さん). The resultant phrase ~san rashii (〜さんらしい) does not translate well into English but
could be rendered as “name-like,” “very name” to describe some aspect of the referents behaviour and so on.
Table 2
ALTERNATIVE TERMS INCLUDED IN LOCAL GOVERNMENT GUIDELINES
Gendered terms

Alternatives

だんなさま

パートナー

おくさま

旦那様、奥様
おとこ

おんな

男らしい、女らしい○○さんらしいNSJLE 2022 PROCEEDINGSGendered terms
とうかあ

お父さん、お母さん

15

Alternatives
ほごしゃ

かた

かぞく

かた

保護者の方、ご家族の方

Recent research into LGBTIQA+ affirmative language classrooms promotes the use of examples from the target language
yet also cautions care when bringing examples to the local context. A wide range of resources is available via the internet;
however, it may be difficult to ascertain the most appropriate materials for the age group language level and local context.
To that end, it may be useful to explore materials available on local government websites that have official relations in thecity or state in which the classroom is located. For example, Osaka, which has a long-standing relationship with Melbourne,
has a comprehensive handbook for employees as well as posters with public service messages around SOGIESC and arange of other resources. This includes a pamphlet for children and their guardians titled LGBTってなんやろ (LGBT tte nan
yaro I wonder what LGBT is), which has suggestions for further reading.
Another resource that may be useful is NPO ReBit’s Ally Teacher’s Tool Kits, which are available online. The tagline for the
Tool Kits is “すべての学校をセクシュアルマイノリティの子どもにとってもすごしやすい場所に” or “Please be a Teacher
Ally who makes school a comfortable place for sexual minority children.” The term sugoshiyasui 過ごしやすい– literally“comfortable to be in” aligns with notions of safe(r) space. ReBit uses a cute arai-guma (アライグマraccoon) to promote theconcept of allyship. Mascots are commonly used in Japanese culture to promote public awareness campaigns and local
government initiatives (see for example, Occhi 2021). The racoon figure plays on the Japanese pronunciation of ally (アライarai) which is a homophone of arai （あらい）in arai-guma（浣熊 raccoon）. ReBit explains the concept of “ally” as “a term
meaning” supporter [lit. a person who understands], which “refers to people who think “I know about LGBT things!” Rebit’sLGBT tool kit for primary school includes a lesson plan, teachers’ and students’ worksheets, a list of recommended books
and audiovisual materials available via YouTube.

TERMS FOR SEXUAL ORIENTATION AND GENDER IDENTITY IN JAPANESEAs well as concerns around self-determination and misgendering, Japanese language learners may want to use a variety ofterms to reflect their own personal identities, or those of their loved ones. As terms for sexual orientation, gender identity,
expression and sex characteristics are constantly in flux, contemporary audiovisual content can be instructive here todemonstrate the range of terms in use. One YouTuber by the name Kazue-chan has produced short videos for Coming out
Day (October 21)10 for the past few years. Available via the internet, the videos feature people from LGBTIQA+ communities
who introduce themselves using a variety of different Japanese terms. The terms used by those who appear in Kazuechan’s 2022 video demonstrate the wide range of terms currently in use in Japanese to refer to sexual orientations, gender
identities and/or SOGIESC (Table 3.).
Table 3
SOGIESC TERMS USED IN CONTEMPORARY YOUTUBE VIDEOS
Sexual orientations

パンセクシュアル,ジニセクシュアル, バイセクシュ
アル, ポリアモリー, アセクシュアル,

pansexual, gynesexual, bisexual, polyamory,
asexualGender identities

FTM, Xジェンダー, トランスジェンダー, ノンバイナ
リー, FTX, 無性別, トランスジェンダーMTF, MTF,
FTM寄りFTX, トランスジェンダー・FTM, 男性でも女性でもないFTM [female-to-male transgender], X-gender,transgender, nonbinary, FTX [female-to-x], nosex/gender, transgender MTF [male-to-female],male-to-female, FTM leaning FTX, transgender
FTM, neither man nor woman11

Sexual orientation and/or gender identity

ゲイ, レズビアン, ゲイ寄りバイセクシュアル, アロ
マンティックセクシュアル, クィア, Q（決めなくていいと思います）gay, lesbian, gay leaning bisexual, aromantic
asexual, queer, Q (no need to decide)10

National Coming Out Day originated in the USA but has spread to many regions and countries globally.

11
FTM (female-to-male) and MTF (male-to-female) are not widely used in contemporary Australia as they are considered inaccurate
representations of lived experiences.

NSJLE 2022 PROCEEDINGS

16

Table 3 contains terms that have entered Japanese over decades of interaction with international and/or global communities.
Many of these “loan words” have undergone processes of semantic change. That is, the terms are used within communities
at different times with slightly different meanings. In contemporary Japanese, the term “gay” is used predominantly by
men as a self-reference term. However, as McLelland (2004) notes, the term “gay” can be traced back to what he calls an“original gay boom” in occupation Japan when it was a slang term that played on the English “gay” and Japanese “gei” (芸art/artistic skill). Table 3 also contains terms that have emerged from the sociopolitical and cultural context of Japan. The
term x-gender, for example, emerges from the Kansai area of Japan. As Dale (2014, 270) notes, X-jendā “can be taken to
signify that one’s gender is neither female nor male but ‘x.’” X-gender is not commonly used in “cultural contexts outside
Japan” and Dale goes on to explain that many x-jendā people “frame their identity using terms such as FTX (female to X),
MTX (male to X), or XTX (used by intersex individuals or those who say that they have never identified as a specific gender).”
Within contemporary English language discourse, this framing is often labelled as “obsolete” or “out of date” because it
suggests a transition from “sex assigned at birth” rather than centring the lived experience of many transgender people.
A key component of the discussion of terms used by LGBTIQA+ individuals in reference to their SOGIESC, therefore, mustalso touch on the potential derogatory and/or pejorative force that terms may carry when used to refer to others, especiallyby individuals who are not part of the LGBTIQA+ community, and for how meanings change as terms are adopted into
Japanese. Depending on the context of the specific classroom and/or learning environment, these issues may be linked tocontent-based approaches that encourage students to explore loan words and/or reflect on their own education around
SOGIESC.
The many terms used by Japanese users in Kazue-chan’s Coming out Day 2022 video gives an indication of the variety
currently in use. Not all of these terms will be relevant and/or appropriate for each age-group or each classroom context;
however, turning to resources such as this facilitates awareness of the ways in which language associated with SOGIESC isin constant flux and change. This awareness is, I venture, key to the self-reflection required to build inclusive and affirmative
teaching and learning spaces.

BEYOND INCLUSION
Building and maintaining inclusive and affirmative teaching and learning spaces requires reflection and flexibility. It is no easytask. It can rarely be done alone. It is also constrained by local politics and discriminatory structures. We must, therefore, be
mindful to proactively plan for resistance (Knisely and Paiz 2021) and have strategies for managing any transphobic and or
homophobic discourse that may emerge in our local contexts. Identifying allies who will offer support and encouragement
is key to going beyond inclusion and moving to affirmative practices within local contexts. The International Network for
Gender and Sexuality in Japanese Language Education (INGS-J), formed in 2020, and coordinated by JLE practitioners
in Canada, the USA and Australia, is one such initiative that aims to offer support and work towards change. As well as
facilitating workshops and online seminars, the network supports the sharing of resources through publications and theonline portal.
Building on research into LGBTIQA+ inclusive and affirmative language teaching that advocate for self-reflection on thestate of the target language and culture, in this short article I have presented a brief overview of how activism andadvocacy have impacted on the representations of LGBTIQA+ people in educational contexts and contemporary measure
being adopted in schools and universities. I have also provided concrete examples of inclusive language that is used at
the local government level in Japan, and drawn readers’ attention to the vast diversity of identity terms that are usedby LGBTIQA+ individuals in Japan. It is hoped this may aid JLE professionals in navigating any perceptions that LGBTIQA+
inclusion and affirmation is not relevant to the Japanese language classroom as they move beyond inclusion to facilitate
more LGBTIQA+ affirmative Japanese language learning.

NSJLE 2022 PROCEEDINGS17

REFERENCE LIST
Abe, H. 2020. “Performativity of gender in speech: life experiences of Japanese trans women.” U.S.-Japan Women’s Journal 58 (1): 35–57.
Arimori, J. 2017. “Japanese language education and diverse gender identities.” 2017 CAJLE Annual Conference Proceedings, 24–33. https://www.cajle.ca/
conference-proceedings/cajle2017-proceedings/.
——————. 2020. “Toward more inclusive Japanese language education: incorporating an awareness of gender and sexual diversity among students.”
Japanese Language and Literature: Journal of the American Association of Teachers of Japanese, 54 (2), 359–371. doi: /10.5195/jll.2020.
Aultman, B. 2014. “Cisgender.” TSQ: Transgender Studies Quarterly 1 (1–2): 61–62. https://doi.org/10.1215/23289252-2399614.
Dale, S. P. F. 2014. “X-jendā.” TSQ: Transgender Studies Quarterly 1 (1–2): 270–72. https://doi.org/doi: 10.1215/23289252-2400235.
De Vincenti, G., A. Giovanangeli and R. Ward. 2007. “The queer stopover: how queer travels in the language classroom.” Electronic Journal of Foreign
Language Teaching 4: 58–72.
GLAAD, Athlete Ally. 2021. Covering LGBTQ athletes at the 2020 Olympics and Paralympics: a resource for journalists and media professionals (in English andJapanese). Pride House Tokyo. https://pridehouse.jp/assets/img/handbook/pdf/mediaguideline_jp_v1.pdf
Ikuta, N., Y. Koike, N. Aoyagi, A. Matsuzaka, K. Ishihara, T. Hirohara, F. Saito and T. Takizawa. 2018. “Japanese university students’ views on lesbian, gay,bisexual, and transgender individuals based on previous encounters.” International Journal of Adolescent Medicine and Health 30: 1–3.
Ishida, H., ed. 2008. Seidōitsuseishōgai: jendā/ iryō/ tokureihō (GID: gender/ treatment/ special law). Tokyo: Ochanomizu shobo.
Japan Alliance for LGBT Legislation, eds. 2022. LGBTQ reporting guidelines: from the perspective of diverse genders/sexualities (Volume 2). https://lgbtetc.jp/
news/2467/.
Kamano, S., H. Ishida, T. Kazama, D. Hiramori, T. Yoshinaka, and K. Kawaguchi. 2020. Seiteki mainoritī ni tsuite no ishiki: 2019 (dainikai) zenkoku chōsa
hōkokukai haifū shiryō (Attitudes towards sexual minorities: 2019 (Second) National survey report). http://alpha.shudo-u.ac.jp/~kawaguch/2019chousa.pdf.
Kamano, S., T. Iwamoto, Y. Koyama, J. Shin, K. Takeuchi, Y. Chitose, D. Hiramori, H. Fujii, K. Fuse and M. Yamauchi. (2023). Summary report of the national
survey of family, gender/sexuality, and diversity. https://www.ipss.go.jp/projects/j/SOGI2/ZenkokuSOGISummary20231027.pdf.
Kawashima, S. 2017. “Daigaku de no seitekishikō to seijinin ga hitenkeigata no gakusei shien no kadai” (Issues for the support at universities of students who
have atypical sexual orientations or gender identities). In Kyōiku to LGBTI o tsunagu: gakkō, daigaku no genba kara kangaeru (Connecting education and LGBTI:
considerations from school, university sites), edited by M. Mitsunari, 211–35. Tokyo: Seikyūsha.
——————. 2020. “Zenkoku no daigaku no SOGI no tayōsei ni kansuru torikumi no gaiyō to Kita Kyūshū Shiritsu Daigaku ni okeru kadai. (Outline ofmeasures for a diversity of SOGI by universities around the country and challenges/issue for the University of Kita Kyūshū).” Human Relations: Journal of theFaculty of Humanities, the University of Kitakyushu 27 (1): 53–69.
Knisely, K. A. 2023. “Gender-justice beyond inclusion: how trans knowledges and linguistic practices can and should be re-shaping language education.” The
Modern Language Journal 107: 607–23.
Knisely, K. A. and J. M. Paiz. 2021. “Bringing trans, non-binary, and queer understandings to bear in language education.” Critical Multilingualism Studies 9 (1):23–45.
Maree, C. 1998. “Sei-i no aru kotoba (Se(x) words).” Gendai shisō (Modern thought) 26 (10): 122–35.
——————. 2007. Hatsuwasha no gengo sotoratejī toshite no negoshiēshon [kirinukeru/ kōshō/ danpan/ kakeai] kōi (Negotiation as a linguistic strategy of
speakers). Tokyo: Hituzi Shobo.
——————. 2011. “<watashi> wa nani o kataru koto ga dekiru no ka?: kotoba no manabi ni okeru fukugō aidenteitei” (Of what can I speak: complex
identities in language learning). In Gengo Kyōiku to Aidenteitei: Kotoba no Kyōiku Jissen to sono Kanōsei (Language education and identity; Language
education praxis and potentialities), edited by H. Hosokawa, 63–74. Yokohama: Shumpunsha.
——————. 2020. “Genuinely addressing gender and sexuality in the language classroom is essential.” Melbourne Asia Review 2. DOI:10.37839/
MAR2652-550X2.12. https://melbourneasiareview.edu.au/genuinely-addressing-gender-and-sexuality-in-the-language-classroom-is-essential/.
Marriage for All Japan. 2023. https://www.marriageforall.jp/en/plan/.
McLelland, M. 2006. “Japan’s original gay boom.” In Popular culture, globalization and Japan, edited by M. Allen and R. Sakamoto, 159–73. London: Routledge.
Mitsunari, M., ed. 2017 Kyōiku to LGBTI o tsunagu: gakkō, daigaku no genba kara kangaeru (Connecting education and LGBTI: considerations from school,
university sites). Tokyo: Seikyūsha.
Miyazaki, A. 2004. “Japanese junior high school girls’ and boys’ first-person pronoun use and their social world.” In Japanese language, gender and ideology,
edited by S. Okamoto and J. S. Shibamoto-Smith, 256–274. New York: Oxford University Press.
——————. 2023. “Masculine pronouns are not only for boys: Japanese girls breaking traditional relationships between gender and language in a school
context.” International Journal of the Sociology of Language 284: 131–57.
Moore, A. R. 2019. “Interpersonal factors affecting queer second or foreign language learners’ identity management in class.” Modern Language Journal 103:
428–42.
Muraki M., D. Hiramori, J. Mikami, and K. Yamawaki. 2021. Shokuba no LGBT hakusho: “yarubeki koto wa, madamada aru ~ shinkoku na harasumento to henka
no Kizashi,” ankēto chōsa niji VOICE 2018, 2019, 2020 ni yoserareta 7,162mei no koe kara (Nintei NPO Hōjin Niji-iro daibaishitī hen) (Workplace LGBT whitepaper:“there is still much to do—serious harassment and hopes for change,” 7,162 voices from the 2018, 2019, 2020 Niji VOICE survey (Compiled by NPO Niji-iro
diversity)).

NSJLE 2022 PROCEEDINGS

18

Nakagawa, S. 2019. “LGBT to saiban; Fuchū Seinen no Ie saiban o furikaeru” (LGBT and court cases: reflecting on the Fuchū Seinen no Ie case). In LGBT omeguru hō to shakai (Laws pertaining to LGBT and society) edited by H. Taniguchi, 1–16. Tokyo: Nihon Kajo Shuppan.
Nelson, C. D. 2006. “Queer inquiry in language education.” Journal of Language, Identity & Education 5: 1–9.
——————. 2009. Sexual identities in English language education: classroom conversations. New York: Routledge.
Nijibridge. 2023. https://nijibridge.jp
Nohno, C. ed. 2004. Seidōitsuseishōgaisha seibetsu toriatsukai tokureihō (Exemption law for the sex status of people with gender identity disorder). Tokyo:
Nihon Kajo Shuppan.
Occhi, D. 2012. “Wobbly aesthetics performance and message: comparing Japanese kyara with their anthropomorphic forebears.” Asian Ethnology 71:
109–32.
Oxford English Dictionary (Revised 2018). https://www.oed.com/dictionary.
Paiz, J. M. 2019. “Queering practice: LGBTQ+ diversity and inclusion in English language teaching.” Journal of Language, Identity and Education 18 (4): 266–75.
Paiz, J. M., and J. E. Coda, eds. 2021. Intersectional perspectives on LGBTQ+ issues in modern language teaching and learning. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Pallotta-Chiarolli, M. and A. Rajkhowa. 2017. “Systemic invisibilities, institutional culpabilities and multicultural-multifaith LGBTIQ resistances.” Journal ofIntercultural Studies 38 (4): 429–42.
doi:10.1080/07256868.2017.1341013.
Pennycook, A. 2001. Critical applied linguistics: a critical introduction, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum.
——————. 2022. “Critical applied linguistics in the 2020s.” Critical Inquiry in Language Studies 19: 1–21.
Poushter, J. and N. Kent. 2020. “The global divide on homosexuality persists: but increasing acceptance in many countries over past two decades.” Pew
Research Center, 25 June. https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2020/06/25/global-divide-on-homosexuality-persists/.
Sall Vesselényi, M. 2019. “Nihongogakushūsha no jendā keiken: Hinigenronteki jendākan kara” (Gender experience of Japanese language learners: from a
non-binaristic perspective of gender). Journal of East Asian Japanese Language Education and Japanese Culture 22: 279–97.
Taniguchi, H. 2006. “The legal situation facing sexual minorities in Japan.” Intersections: Gender, History and Culture in the Asian context 12. http://intersections.anu.edu.au/issue12/taniguchi.html——————. 2019. LGBT o meguru hō to shakai (Laws pertaining to LGBT and society). Tokyo: Nihon Kajo Shuppan.
Thomson, C. K. and E. Otsuji. 2009. “Multidimensional examination of gender in a business Japanese textbook.” Japanese-Language Education around the
Globe 19 (3): 49–67.
Watanabe, D. 2017. “Sei no tayōsei” kyōiku no hōhō to kadai” (Methods and issues for gender/sex diversity education). In Kyōiku to LGBTI o tsunagu: gakkō,
daigaku no genba kara kangaeru, edited by M. Mitsunari, 145–166. Tokyo: Seikyūsha.
Weiringa, S. E. 2014. “Symbolic subversion.” TSQ: Transgender Studies Quarterly 1 (1–2): 210–12. doi:10.1215/23289252-2400046.
Yoshida, M. 2023. “Representations of gender and sexual orientation over three editions of a Japanese language learning textbook series.” Gender andLanguage 17 (2): 198–221. doi: 10.1558/genl.23358.