Gender and sexuality in the Japanese health and physical education curriculum and textbook

Gender and sexuality in the Japanese health and physical education curriculum and textbook: An anti-oppressive perspective

保健体育カリキュラムと教科書におけるジェンダーとセクシュアリティ：反抑圧的視点

Shawna M. Carroll (Associate Professor, Graduate School of Education, Okayama University)

Tomoka Ogawa (Alumni, Okayama University)

Abstract

This paper examines a health and physical education textbook using an anti-oppressive framework to expose and challenge systemic oppression affecting LGBTQX youth and individuals with marginalized genders and sexualities, with the hopes that other educators can do the same with their respective materials. While progress has been made in promoting knowledge and openness towards LGBTQX identities, there is still much work to be done to address historical and entrenched oppression. By analyzing a Japanese junior high school textbook, this research offers insights for educators to examine their own materials through an anti-oppressive lens. Findings reveal that the government-approved textbook, influenced by heteropatriarchal views, perpetuates the oppression of marginalized genders and sexualities. By recognizing how textbooks prioritize boys/men, reinforce binary views of sex/gender, heterosexuality, and gender stereotypes, educators can adopt alternative approaches that challenge systemic oppression in the classroom.

1. Introduction and Background

Health and physical education (HPE) is a vital part of the curriculum aimed at promoting students' physical and mental well-being. However, there is a concern that the curriculum and materials may be detrimental to the well-being of students in Japan, particularly those with non-dominant genders and sexualities. This study analyzes a Japanese junior high school textbook using critical discourse analysis and an anti-oppressive lens to investigate how the textbook reproduces systemic oppression for non-dominant genders and sexualities in the hopes that educators can use this as a lens to evaluate their own materials.

In Japan, approximately ten percent of the population identifies as not conforming to cisgender and heterosexual norms (JLGBTRI, 2019). However, the understanding of marginalized genders and sexualities (LGBTQX) among the general population remains relatively low. We use “X” to include X-gender individuals, a term developed and used in Japan to describe a non-binary gender identity. Lack of education is widespread and the majority of LGBTQX-identified individuals have never learned about LGBTQX people or terminology in school (JLGBTRI, 2019). Moreover, bullying of LGBTQX individuals is prevalent, and 20% of LGBTQX students have been taught that same-gender relationships are abnormal (Hidaka, 2017). Support for LGBTQX students in schools is often contingent upon their coming-out, which is rare due to societal pressures (Hidaka, 2017).

Teachers' knowledge and understanding of LGBTQX topics also present barriers to inclusive and anti-oppressive education. Few teachers in Japan have received formal education on LGBTQX topics (Dale, 2016). Given the limited information and societal discourses surrounding gender and sexuality in Japan, heterosexuality and cisgender identities are consistently presented as the norm through laws, social media, advertisements, and education (Sensoy & DiAngelo, 2017). Stereotypical heteropatriarchal biases, explained more in section 3, are perpetuated through media representations, reinforcing fixed ideas of masculinity and femininity from an early age (Master et al., 2021). Consequently, it is important to examine how these discourses are reproduced in textbooks, enabling educators to critically evaluate their own materials.

2. Previous analysis of health and physical education curricula and textbooks in Japan

In this paper, the content of a Japanese government-approved textbook for health and physical education (HPE) was examined (Dainippon-tosho, 2020); however, the government-approved curriculum, also referred to as the ‘course of study’ and ‘course of study and explanation’ documents (MEXT, 2017), serves as the basis for the textbooks. Previous analysis of HPE curricula and textbooks in Japan has revealed the reproduction of gender and sexuality norms and inequality (Matsuo, 2016; Teramachi, 2018; Wang & Hirata, 2022). While the curricula have undergone revisions to eliminate gender segregation and promote gender equality, such as ending gender segregation in technical and home economics education (Matsuda, 2020), implicit teachings of gender and sexuality remain embedded in the documents (Matsuda, 2020; Teramachi, 2018; Wang & Hirata, 2022).

The junior high school HPE curriculum has been described as heterosexuality-based, disregarding individuals who do not identify as heterosexual and assuming heterosexuality as natural (Matsuo, 2016; Teramachi, 2018; Wang & Hirata, 2022). It assumes that all students will have an interest in the opposite sex and reinforces a gender binary, assuming significant differences between males and females (Wang & Hirata, 2022). Although the curriculum aims to create a gender-equal and just society, research suggests little evidence of such intentions, with no explicit content addressing previous gender segregation or gender-based discrimination in society (Teramachi, 2018).

Limited research has focused on the representation of gender and sexuality in HPE textbooks in Japan, particularly at the junior high school level. Existing analyses mainly ensure coverage of specific gendered topics such as menstruation (Hoka & Kasai, 2017), swimming during menstruation (Fujiwara et al., 2006), ovulation and basal body temperature (Yoshida & Kasai, 2012), and sexual development and disease (Muraki et al., 2011). While important, these studies do not address gender or sexuality as the primary focus of research or examine systemic oppression as a cause of the results.

Studies analyzing senior high school health and physical education textbooks reveal a focus on the declining birthrate and the pressure on girls to become pregnant at an early age (Nishiyama, 2017), emphasizing motherhood and highlighting differences in sexual desire between women and men, with masturbation discussed solely for men (Seimiya, 2020). These findings align with the sexist and heterosexist aspects observed in previous research about the curriculum.

One study by Sorihashi (2021) examined the HPE curriculum, as well as junior and senior high school textbooks from the post-World War II period until 2009. The analysis revealed that youth's sexuality was seen as a problem requiring control through education on sexually transmitted diseases (STDs). There were also explicit messages about purity, instructing men to marry women who have not had sexual intercourse. In the 1990s, textbooks began discussing preventative measures such as condom use, but abstinence linked to purity remained present (Sorihashi, 2021). These findings highlight the heteropatriarchal aspects present in the HPE curriculum and textbooks in Japan, where the education of STDs is framed through the lens of women's purity. Educators should be aware of the ways these histories are embedded in current curriculum and textbooks.

3. Anti-oppression conceptual framework

To analyze the government-approved junior high school HPE textbook, we employ an anti-oppressive conceptual framework that views oppression as systemic rather than the fault of individual teachers. The foundation of this framework was built on Carroll’s (2021) previous work developing anti-oppressive global citizenship education, which was developed based on the work of important scholars such as Sensoy and DiAngelo (2017), Kumashiro (2002, 2015), and Ngo and Kumashiro (2014). To view the textbook or other teaching materials through an anti-oppressive lens means to try and “work against oppression" (Kumashiro, 2015, p. 1) in the hopes of transforming systems of oppression. As explained by Kumashiro (2002), “We need to acknowledge that there is a reason certain voices are silenced in the first place” (p. 58). This framework allows us to understand how oppressive structures are created and reproduced within the education system through power hierarchies and exclusions. To grasp this framework, it is essential to familiarize ourselves with key concepts.

3.1 Prejudice, discrimination, and oppression

Prejudice and discrimination are fundamental concepts in understanding oppression. Prejudice refers to a person’s preconceived thoughts, attitudes, and assumptions about different social groups, often based on stereotypes (Sensoy & DiAngelo, 2017). Prejudice becomes discrimination when these internal judgments are acted upon through actions such as exclusion, ridicule, threats, or violence. Everyone holds prejudices and engages in discriminatory behavior, whether consciously or unconsciously (Sensoy & DiAngelo, 2017). Even individuals who explicitly commit to not discriminating against others may still exhibit discriminatory actions based on their conscious and unconscious biases (Greenwald et al., 2015). To confront and address these biases, it is necessary to understand the systemic nature of oppression (Carroll, 2021).

Oppression is not individual, but systemic (Sensoy & DiAngelo, 2017). It occurs when the beliefs of dominant groups permeate the institutions of society, such as education, government, and media (Carroll, 2021). Dominant groups wield power in society and have historically accumulated and maintained that power, leading to the privileging of the dominant group while marginalizing non-dominant groups. This systemic oppression can manifest across various identities, including but not limited to race, gender, and sexuality (Kumashiro, 2002). In the context of Japan, examples of oppression may include racism against Black, Chinese, and Korean individuals, sexism against women and gender non-binary individuals, and heterosexism favoring heterosexual individuals while oppressing those who do not conform to heterosexual norms.

3.2 Heteropatriarchy

Heteropatriarchy is a key aspect of the systemic oppression we examine and ask teachers to examine in the textbook. It encompasses both heterosexism and sexism, where heterosexual, cisgender men are privileged, and those who are not are marginalized. By employing an anti-oppressive framework and understanding the concepts of prejudice, discrimination, and oppression, we can shed light on how heteropatriarchy is reproduced within the HPE textbook. This analysis helps to uncover the systemic issues within education and contributes to the broader discourse on creating inclusive and equitable learning environments.

4. Methods

The selected textbook for our analysis was a government-approved junior high school HPE textbook published by Dainippon-tosho in 2020. The curriculum that is foundational to the textbook dedicates only two out of 300+ pages to address gender and sexuality, with minimal in-depth explanations provided. This excerpt from the curriculum demonstrates the reproduction of heteropatriarchal discourses, as it emphasizes the development of reproductive organs and functions during puberty, heteronormative perspectives, and the necessity of appropriate attitudes and behaviors related to sex: “...during puberty... ejaculation is observed in boys and menstruation in girls, and pregnancy becomes possible... sexual urges and interest in the opposite sex increase... respect for the opposite sex and coping with sexual information, are necessary” (MEXT, 2017, p. 220-221, emphasis added). These ideas frame the textbooks which are approved by MEXT.

Within the textbook, we focused our analysis on pages 46 to 69, specifically examining the section that covers the sexual health unit and the bodily development of students. We employed critical discourse analysis (CDA), a research method used in various disciplines to study how language functions and constructs meaning within social contexts (Van Dijk, 2001). CDA focuses on the social aspects of language and explores the specific effects of language on individuals and society. By analyzing language, CDA unveils how discourses reflect and contribute to the social world (Rogers, 2011). Textbooks play a central role in teaching in Japan, serving as material objects produced in educational settings that are constitutive of social institutions. Therefore, analyzing the language and images in a textbook allows us to uncover the representation and oppression of non-dominant genders and sexualities in HPE.

Employing the anti-oppressive framework described earlier, we examined the language used in the textbook to reveal how systemic oppression is reproduced, specifically regarding gender and sexuality. Our research question was, ‘How does the textbook reproduce systemic oppression for non-dominant genders and sexualities?’. To address this, we posed research sub-questions that explored 1) the language used to explain different genders and sexualities, 2) the assumptions made regarding these identities, and 3) the inclusion and omission of language related to systemic oppression. By addressing these research questions, we aimed to uncover how the textbook contributes to the reproduction of oppressive structures, specifically in relation to gender and sexuality, and encourage educators to analyze and challenge the oppressive systems reproduced in their resources asking similar questions that fit their contexts.

It is important to note that our analysis focused on a single textbook and does not claim to represent all junior high school textbooks. Rather, it serves as an example of how the curriculum is translated into textbooks and the oppressive discourses they contain. This methodology aligns with previous research on analyzing English textbooks in Japan to help educators analyze their own materials (Carroll, 2022).

5. Findings

5.1 Name enders and gendered language

Regarding name-enders and gendered language, the textbook did not utilize pronouns or name-enders like "彼" (his), "彼女" (her), "ちゃん" (a feminine name-ender similar to Ms.), or "くん" (a masculine name-ender similar to Mr.). The textbook also avoided using gendered terms like "彼女" (girlfriend) and "彼" (boyfriend), which can be exclusive and assume heterosexuality. We encourage teachers to check if their textbooks or materials included these exclusive, gendered terms.

5.2 Binary gender and assumed heterosexuality

In 2023, Japan ranked 125th out of 146 countries in its gender gap, worse than in 2022 (WEF, 2023). According to the statistics and based on the anti-oppression framework utilized, cisgender men are the dominant group in Japan. Thus, a few things were examined to evaluate the position of genders. The analysis of the textbook revealed a bias towards boys over girls, as boys were introduced first nine times compared to girls who were introduced first only three times. We encourage teachers to check for the prioritization of males in their materials.

Heterosexuality, including eventual marriage, is assumed within society, and the rights and oppression of same-sex couples and/or non-binary gendered relationships are ignored. Thus, it was examined whether or not the textbook mentions sexual minorities, and what language is used, and encourage educators to check their resources for this language. The textbook analyzed assumes heterosexuality as the norm and disregards the rights and experiences of same-sex couples and non-binary individuals. It emphasizes heterosexual relationships and uses language that reinforces this assumption. For example, the textbook states, "In the period that your body starts to mature to produce children, you should respect people of the opposite sex" (Dainippon-tosho, 2020, p. 53, emphasis added).

Additionally, there are images and statements that perpetuate heterosexism, such as the picture titled junior high school students “become interested in the opposite sex" (Dainippon-tosho, 2020, p. 54), which shows a girl looking at boys in a romantic way. Several sentences later reinforce heterosexuality, stating that it is natural for pubescent children to be interested in the opposite sex and that relationships with the opposite sex enrich their lives (Dainippon-tosho, 2020). In addition, a picture of a boy thinking about a girl reinforces the exclusive focus on heterosexuality (Dainippon-tosho, 2020, p. 60), without any mention of non-heterosexual realities.

In summary, the textbook assumes heterosexuality and neglects sexual minorities, with numerous sentences and images reinforcing this bias while lacking any content on non-heterosexual relationships or identities.

5.3 Assumptions about biology

The curriculum and subsequent textbooks need to consider the lives of non-cisgender students, including transgender, intersex, X-gender, and non-binary individuals. Several findings highlight the textbook's adherence to a binary gender system. The textbook divides students into women versus men based on secondary sexual characteristics (Dainippon-tosho, 2020) and describes specific functions assigned to cisgender women and men (Dainippon-tosho, 2020). The textbook also emphasizes differences in opinions and actions between men and women (Dainippon-tosho, 2020) and suggests an "appropriate" way to understand sex based on the opposite sex (Dainippon-tosho, 2020, p. 55). These examples demonstrate the textbook's exclusive focus on a binary gender system (as well as assumed heterosexuality), with no acknowledgment of gender minorities.

5.4 Stereotypical gender roles and families

Japan has traditionally seen women in the role of housewife and mother, and in contrast, men are expected to work outside for their families due to the patriarchal system. Therefore, it was examined if the textbook reproduces stereotypical gender roles. A student’s essay is introduced which is about a relationship between a mother and a father. In the essay, the student explains that their parents share the housework with each other. Although the textbook did not explain gender equality directly, it is expressed indirectly using this student’s essay about housework. However, this is the only example of a family system shown, which still reproduces a binary gender system and heterosexism.

5.5 Power and oppression

Systemic oppression that creates barriers for those marginalized due to gender and/or sexuality is not only in society but is also reflected within education. Therefore, it was examined if such issues related to power and oppression are introduced in the textbook. One graph explained, “what junior high school students want to know about sex,” and included “issues about gender equality” and “homosexuality” as choices (Dainippon-tosho, 2020, p. 54). Although the graph shows that some students surveyed want to know about gender equality (15% boys and 13% girls) and homosexuality (25% girls and 20% boys) (Dainippon-tosho, 2020, p. 54), the textbook did not explain any of the topics. Apart from this graph, there was no information about power or oppression within society, education, or within the topic of sexual health.

6. Discussion

The analysis reveals that the textbook analyzed reproduces oppressive systems that marginalize individuals who do not conform to the dominant heteropatriarchal understanding of gender and sexuality. We encourage educators to analyze their own resources for similar topics. Although the textbook avoids explicit language indicating a binary gender through name-enders, the use of name-enders like "-chan" for girls and "-kun" for boys is commonly practiced by teachers and can reproduce oppression against gender minority students. When gender binaries found in the textbook are translated to speech in the classroom, incorrect use of name-enders may be used which fails to recognize students' gender identities and reinforces a socially constructed gender binary. To foster inclusivity, teachers can adopt gender-neutral terms like "-san" for all students and use inclusive terms such as "guests," "class," or "everyone" instead of "girls and boys" to refer to groups if they are speaking in English (Duke University, n.d.), which is practiced by author 2 (Ogawa).

The prioritization of males is evident in the textbook, with boys being presented first in nine instances compared to only three instances for girls. This bias towards males is reflective of broader patriarchal systems, as seen in societal language patterns and practices. For instance, the phrase "men and women" ("男女") is commonly used, whereas "women and men" ("女男") is rarely used. Additionally, some schools in Japan arrange student attendance lists by gender, with boys listed above girls (Teach for Japan, 2022)—a manifestation of the hidden curriculum (Jackson, 1968), or the unwritten lessons, values, and perspectives students learn in school (GSP, 2015). This prioritization of males may not only relegate girls and women to a secondary position but also instill the belief that male precedence is natural or right (Kim et al., 2018). The privileging of men extends beyond the textbook and is interconnected with the systemic oppression of gender in Japan. One recent example of systemic oppression includes Tokyo Medical University’s (and other universities in Japan) adjusting entrance exam scores for females to limit their admission (McCurry, 2018), as well as the underrepresentation of women in managerial occupations and parliament (WEF, 2023).

The prioritization of men not only harms women but also reinforces a false binary gender system. The textbook reproduces false binary language and assumptions of cisgender identities alone, disregarding the existence of intersex individuals and those who identify as X-gender, non-binary, transgender, or other non-cisgender identities. The erasure of genders beyond the cisgender binary creates environments where rates of suicide and bullying are higher among those facing systemic oppression (JLGBTRI, 2019).

The textbook's reinforcement of the binary gender system is also intertwined with the belief in substantial differences between women and men. The statement that students can understand sex ‘appropriately’ by trying to understand and respect the opposite sex assumes only binary genders and heterosexuality. Moreover, the notion of ‘appropriateness’ implies that imagining sex outside the explained binary and stereotypical gendered roles is deemed inappropriate. Such framing may lead students to believe that genders outside the gender binary are somehow inappropriate, or that dominant gender and sexuality are ‘normal’ and others are ‘inappropriate,’ which reproduces systemic oppression.

The reproduction of patriarchy and the prioritization of males within a binary gender system cannot be separated from the reproduction of heterosexism. Throughout the textbook, heterosexuality is explicitly emphasized, with students expected not only to respect the “opposite sex” but also to experience sexual attraction towards the “opposite sex.” However, not everyone desires romantic or sexual relationships with the opposite sex, and respect for others should be unconditional, regardless of their sexualities and/or genders. With this, students perceive heterosexuality as ‘normal’ and other sexualities as abnormal. Furthermore, the textbook fails to consider students who may not have an interest in love or sex even at puberty, such as those with asexual identities. These discourses are mirrored in society, where the prevailing belief is that heterosexuality is normal and sexual minorities are strange. For example, heterosexual couples are predominantly featured on TV and in advertisements, while same-sex marriage remains unrecognized by law in Japan. As mentioned previously, research has also shown that 20% of LGBTQX-identified students learned that sexual minorities are ‘abnormal’ (Hidaka, 2017).

It is clear from the student survey displayed in the textbook that students are interested in learning about gender inequality and same-gender partnerships. However, the textbook missed the opportunity to provide students with this knowledge. While the amount of content a textbook can include is limited, it is crucial for junior high school students to comprehend issues of gender equity through concrete examples such as career choices and equitable distribution of childcare. Moreover, ongoing debates about LGBTQX rights in Japan, such as the recognition that not allowing same-sex marriage is unconstitutional or is in an unconstitutional situation by four court rulings (French, 2023), indicate that more students would likely be interested in understanding the systemic oppression faced by those with marginalized genders and sexualities. In addition, insufficient explanations in the textbook could lead students to believe false information spread through social media. As teachers rely on textbooks as their primary planning and teaching tool, the textbook's role in shaping students' education is significant.

7. Conclusion

This paper analyzed a junior high school HPE education textbook (Dainippon-tosho, 2020) to investigate the reproduction of systemic oppression of marginalized genders and sexualities, based on the heteropatriarchal oppression evident in the curriculum. Employing critical discourse analysis from an anti-oppression perspective, findings show the textbook fails to provide sufficient opportunities for junior high school students to understand gender and sexuality minorities. We encourage educators to analyze their resources to see if theirs are similarly reproducing systemic oppression. LGBTQX students, comprising approximately one in ten of our students in Japan (JLGBTRI, 2019), are neglected in both the analyzed textbook and the curriculum, reproducing systemic oppression that privileges cisgender and heterosexual identities. To address this issue, the curriculum and textbooks should incorporate the identities and experiences of gender and sexuality minorities, challenging the current normalization of cisgender, heterosexual, and male privilege. As this is not the case at the present time, teachers can supplement materials to ensure students are receiving information that does not only favor cisgender, heterosexual identities.

While the aim of this anti-oppressive analysis is to improve the content of the curriculum and textbooks, schools and teachers can take additional steps to supplement their materials. Establishing all-gender toilets throughout school floors and aboloishing or allowing students to choose their school uniform (pants or skirt) can promote inclusivity. Teachers should be mindful of the name-enders and pronouns they use when addressing students and can opt for gender-neutral terms like "-san" or ask students to share their preferred name-ender. Some may protest this as more difficult because of the class size in Japan; however, it is a practice that has been confirmed to work by author 1’s graduated students who are now practicing teachers. In addition, author 2 is a practicing junior high school teacher and provides students with a welcome survey at the start of the year. One of the questions asked on this survey is how the students would like to be referred to (e.g., first name, last name with(out) ‘-san’, etc.), which she honors through her teaching practices. Furthermore, teachers can reconsider their grouping practices, which often perpetuate oppression against gender minority students who do not conform to the binary division of girls and boys. Educators should also actively educate themselves on LGBTQX issues and systemic oppression to teach in an anti-oppressive manner. Embracing an anti-oppressive approach to understanding gender and sexuality is the first step toward creating schools and societies where gender and sexuality minorities feel accepted and comfortable. It is hoped that other educators will examine their materials to ensure they do not reproduce systemic oppression that affects LGBTQX and female students.

References

Carroll, S. M. (2021). Anti-oppressive global citizenship education theory and practice in pre-service teacher education. Policy & Practice: A Development Education Review, 33, 7-27.

Carroll, S. M. (2022). Analyzing textbooks for elementary English education: An anti-oppressive perspective for intercultural understanding. CTED, 12, 167-182. https://doi.org/10.18926/CTED/63306.

Dainippon-tosho (2020). Junior high school health and physical education.　Dainippon-tosho.

Dale, S. P. (2016). Teaching LGBT rights in Japan: Learning from classroom experiences. Human Rights Education in Asia-Pacific, 86, 219-232.

Duke University (n.d.). Gender pronouns resource guide. https://students.duke.edu/belonging/icr/csgd/pronouns/ (accessed 25 January 2022).

French, A. (2023). Japan court rules lack of same-sex unions at odds with constitution. https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Gender/Japan-court-rules-lack-of-same-sex-unions-at-odds-with-constitution#:~:text=The%20rulings%20are%20part%20of,right%20to%20equality%20for%20all. (accessed 9 November, 2023).

Fujiwara, Y., Hashimoto, M., Fujiwara, S., et al. (2006). The lack of understanding about menstruation by university freshman is because in textbooks written for elementary, junior and high school classes the subject of menstruation was never addressed. Kawasaki Medical Welfare Journal, 15(2), 445-453.

Great Schools Partnership (2015). Hidden curriculum. https://www.edglossary.org/hidden-curriculum/ (accessed 25 January 2022).

Greenwald, A.G., Banaji, M.R., & Nosek, B.A. (2015). Statistically small effects of the Implicit Association Test can have societally large effects. JPSP, 108(4), 553–561.

Hidaka, Y. (2017). Survey of LGBT attitudes: Issues of bullying and workplace environment. https://health-issue.jp/reach_online2016_report.pdf (accessed 25 January 2022).

Hoka, C. & Kasai, A. (2017). Courses of study, its explanation, and physical education: A study on menstruation in health and physical education textbooks and health guidance. Aomori Chuo College University Research, 28, 45-57.

Jackson, P.W. (1968). Life in classrooms. Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Japan LGBT Research Institute (2019). LGBT Research Institute “LGBT Awareness and Action Survey 2019”: Latest results released. https://www.daiko.co.jp/dwp/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/191126_Release.pdf (accessed 6 September 2022).

Kim, J. Y., Fitzsimons, G. M., & Kay, A. C. (2018). Lean in messages increase attributions of women’s responsibility for gender inequality. JPSP, 115(6), 974-1001. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000129.

Kumashiro, K. K. (2002). Troubling education: Queer activism and antioppressive pedagogy. Routledgefalmer.

Kumashiro, K. K. (2015). Against common sense: Teaching and learning toward social justice (3rd Ed.). Routledge.

Master, A., Meltzoff, A. N., & Cheryan, S. (2021). Gender stereotypes about interests start early and cause gender disparities in computer science and engineering. PNAS, 118(48), 1-7. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2100030118

Matsuda, T. (2020). The hidden curriculum on gender. Online Journal of Humanistic Education, 3(2), 61-66.

Matsuo, Y. (2016). History of the interpretation of sexuality in the national curriculum in Japan: Most aiming at the formation of the cross-curriculum teaching at the high school level. Bulletin of the Center for Educational Practice, FOE, SU, 25, 185-198.

McCurry, J. (2018). Two more Japanese medical schools admit discriminating against women. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/dec/12/two-more-japanese-medical-schools-admit-discriminating-against-women (accessed 9 November, 2023).

MEXT (2017). The course of study and explanation for junior high schools (2017 notice): Health and physical education. https://www.mext.go.jp/content/20210113-mxt_kyoiku01-100002608_1.pdf (accessed 6 September 2022).

Muraki, K., Oohigashi, S., & Aoki, K. (2011). Sex education in elementary and junior high school textbooks. Mind and Body Health Science, 7(1), 26-33.

Ngo, B., & Kumashiro, K. K. (Eds.) (2014). Six lenses for anti-oppressive education: Partial stories, improbable conversations (2nd. ed.). Peter Lang.

Nishiyama, C. (2017). Falsehoods in the Ministry of Education/High school “pregnancy care” materials. Creative Society.

Rogers, R. (2011). Critical approaches to discourse analysis in educational research. In Rogers, R. (ed.), An introduction to critical discourse analysis in education, 2nd edition (pp. 1-20). Routledge.

Seimiya, Y. (2020). Sex education as an opportunity to rethink the “ideal female image”. Report, Osaka University Knowledge Archive, June. https://ir.library.osaka-u.ac.jp/repo/ouka/all/75958/01_05_seimiya.pdf (accessed 6 September 2022).

Sensoy, Ö. & DiAngelo, R. (2017). Is everyone really equal? An introduction to key concepts in social justice education, 2nd edition. Teachers College Press.

Sorihashi, K. (2021). The constitution of problematization of youth sex: An analysis of physical and health education textbooks. Gender Research, 24,153-170. https://doi.org/10.24567/0002000118.

Teach for Japan. (2022). [Education x Gender] What are the benefits of using a mixed male and female list at school? https://teachforjapan.org/journal/12888/ (accessed 9 November, 2023).

Teramachi, S. (2018). New courses of study from a gender perspective. Bulletin of the Faculty of Humanities, MU, 25(1), 105-122.

Van Dijk, T. (2001). Critical discourse analysis. In Schiffrin, D., Tannen, D., & Hamilton, H.E. (eds.), The handbook of discourse analysis (pp. 352-371). Blackwell.

Wang, H. & Hirata, Y. (2022). The current status and issues of gender-free education in Japan and China: Focusing on the analysis of school curriculum at the elementary and middle school levels. Bulletin of the Center for Teacher Education and Development, OU, 12, 103-117. https://doi.org/10.18926/CTED/63301.

World Economic Forum (2023). Global gender gap report 2023. https://www.weforum.org/publications/global-gender-gap-report-2023/ (accessed 9 November 2023).

Yoshida, N. & Kasai, A. (2012). Explanation regarding ovulation and basal body temperature from the new course of study, its teaching guide and health and physical education textbooks as authorized by the Japanese government. Bulletin of the Faculty of Education, HU, 107, 113-122.