Send message to Author

Paper short abstract

This study examines the implementation of LGBTQ+ guidelines at a national university in Western Japan. It argues that the mere publication of guidelines serves as a performative act that benefits the institution's image rather than genuinely supporting the LGBTQ+ students and staff.

Paper long abstract

In recent years, an increasing number of Japanese universities have introduced guidelines for LGBTQ+ students and staff, reflecting a broader trend in higher education to address diversity, equity, and inclusion. These documents, on the one hand, promote understanding and outline support policies; the impact of these measures remains unclear and raises concerns that they may constitute "performative allyship", symbolic acts that fail to challenge existing norms or benefit marginalized groups. By employing a mixed-methods approach that combines quantitative data with personal narratives, this case study critically examines the implementation of LGBTQ+ guidelines at a national university in Western Japan.

Survey results regarding the readership of the university’s LGBTQ+ guidelines (N=253) indicate a gap between awareness and engagement: while half of the respondents were aware of the guidelines, only one-fifth had actually read them. Further analysis reveals that such awareness significantly associates with prior knowledge of LGBTQ+ issues and participation in SOGIE-related workshops and training, rather than with the university’s dissemination efforts. To contextualize the argument, personal stories illustrate experiences of "institutional silencing" that persist despite the existence of supportive guidelines. Reports of dismissive attitudes by faculty and gatekeeping during the integration of queer elements into language class activities suggest that, without proper enforcement, the guidelines fail to intervene in actual instances of queerphobia.

This paper aims to highlight that simply publishing guidelines may serve as a performative gesture that benefits the institution's image and perpetuates "institutional queerphobia." Our analysis suggests that without confronting underlying power dynamics and ensuring genuine engagement, "standardized" guidelines risk becoming tools for "rainbow-washing" that leave real issues faced by LGBTQ+ individuals and critical aspects of LGBTQ+ well-being unaddressed. To move beyond superficial guidelines-making, institutions must consequently seek approaches that actively dismantle the silence and oppression surrounding queer issues within Japanese higher education.