Constructing Sexualities and Gendered

Bodies in School Spaces: Nordic

Insights on Queer and Transgender
Students 1st Edition Jón Ingvar Kjaran
(Auth.)
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://textbookfull.com/product/constructing-sexualities-and-gendered-bodies-in-scho
ol-spaces-nordic-insights-on-queer-and-transgender-students-1st-edition-jon-ingvar-kj
aran-auth/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Gay Life Stories: Same-Sex Desires in Post-

Revolutionary Iran Jón Ingvar Kjaran

https://textbookfull.com/product/gay-life-stories-same-sex-
desires-in-post-revolutionary-iran-jon-ingvar-kjaran/

Intimate Economies: Bodies, Emotions, and Sexualities

on the Global Market 1st Edition Susanne Hofmann

https://textbookfull.com/product/intimate-economies-bodies-
emotions-and-sexualities-on-the-global-market-1st-edition-
susanne-hofmann/

School Spaces for Student Wellbeing and Learning

Insights from Research and Practice Hilary Hughes

https://textbookfull.com/product/school-spaces-for-student-
wellbeing-and-learning-insights-from-research-and-practice-
hilary-hughes/

Constructing Race The Science of Bodies and Cultures in

American Anthropology Tracy Teslow

https://textbookfull.com/product/constructing-race-the-science-
of-bodies-and-cultures-in-american-anthropology-tracy-teslow/
Queer Business Queering Organization Sexualities
Routledge Advances in Critical Diversities 1st Edition
Nick Rumens

https://textbookfull.com/product/queer-business-queering-
organization-sexualities-routledge-advances-in-critical-
diversities-1st-edition-nick-rumens/

The Global Encyclopedia of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual,

Transgender, and Queer (LGBTQ) History Howard Chiang

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-global-encyclopedia-of-
lesbian-gay-bisexual-transgender-and-queer-lgbtq-history-howard-
chiang/

Bullying in School: Perspectives from School Staff,

Students, and Parents 1st Edition Lisa H. Rosen

https://textbookfull.com/product/bullying-in-school-perspectives-
from-school-staff-students-and-parents-1st-edition-lisa-h-rosen/

Supporting bereaved students at school 1st Edition

Brown

https://textbookfull.com/product/supporting-bereaved-students-at-
school-1st-edition-brown/

Excel 2016 in Applied Statistics for High School

Students A Guide to Solving Practical Problems Thomas
J. Quirk

https://textbookfull.com/product/excel-2016-in-applied-
statistics-for-high-school-students-a-guide-to-solving-practical-
problems-thomas-j-quirk/
CONSTRUCTING
SEXUALITIES AND
GENDERED BODIES
IN SCHOOL SPACES
Nordic Insights on Queer
and Transgender Students
Jón Ingvar Kjaran

QUEER Series Editors

STUDIES & William F. Pinar
EDUCATION Nelson M. Rodriguez,
& Reta Ugena Whitlock
 Queer Studies and Education

Series Editors
William F. Pinar
Department of Curriculum and Pedagogy
University of British Columbia
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

Nelson M. Rodriguez
Department of Women’s, Gender, and Sexuality Studies
The College of New Jersey
Ewing, New Jersey, USA

Reta Ugena Whitlock

Department of Educational Leadership
Kennesaw State University
Kennesaw, Georgia, USA
LGBTQ social, cultural, and political issues have become a defining fea-
ture of twenty-first century life, transforming on a global scale any number
of institutions, including the institution of education. Situated within the
context of these major transformations, this series is home to the most
compelling, innovative, and timely scholarship emerging at the intersec-
tion of queer studies and education. Across a broad range of educational
topics and locations, books in this series incorporate lesbian, gay, bisexual,
transgender, and intersex categories, as well as scholarship in queer theory
arising out of the postmodern turn in sexuality studies. The series is wide-­
ranging in terms of disciplinary/theoretical perspectives and methodologi-
cal approaches, and will include and illuminate much needed intersectional
scholarship. Always bold in outlook, the series also welcomes projects that
challenge any number of normalizing tendencies within academic scholar-
ship from works that move beyond established frameworks of knowledge
production within LGBTQ educational research to works that expand the
range of what is institutionally defined within the field of education as
relevant queer studies scholarship.

More information about this series at

http://www.springer.com/series/14522
 Jón Ingvar Kjaran

Constructing
Sexualities and
Gendered Bodies in
School Spaces
Nordic Insights on Queer and Transgender
Students
Jón Ingvar Kjaran
School of Education
University of Iceland
Stakkahlíð
Reykjavík
105 Iceland

Queer Studies and Education

ISBN 978-1-137-53332-6    ISBN 978-1-137-53333-3 (eBook)
DOI 10.1057/978-1-137-53333-3

Library of Congress Control Number: 2017931682

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s) 2017

This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the
Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of
translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on
microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval,
electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now
known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are
exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information
in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the pub-
lisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the
material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The
publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institu-
tional affiliations.

Cover illustration: © Radius Images / Alamy Stock Photo

Printed on acid-free paper

This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by Springer Nature

The registered company is Nature America Inc.
The registered company address is: 1 New York Plaza, New York, NY 10004, U.S.A.
 Foreword

This book makes an important contribution to the field of queer studies

in education. It provides significant insights into the institutionalization
of heteronormativity and cisnormativity in the Icelandic schooling system
and its impact on the lives of queer and transgender students. Kjaran’s
engagement with Foucault’s work on heterotopic spaces in schools leads
him to generate productive insights into queer subjectivities, and deepens
our understanding of schools as potential sites of queering and counter
hegemonic interventionist practices. While Kjaran’s study provides knowl-
edge about the lives of queer and transgender students in the Icelandic
school system, where research on this population is scant, and contributes
to our understanding of the marginalization, stigmatization and invisibil-
ity of gender and sexual minorities in the schooling system in this context,
his research has far wider implications in terms of its theoretical and philo-
sophical significance. He provides us with another window on the use of
Foucauldian- and Butlerian-inspired theory in education with its capacity
to deepen our understanding of the complexities involved in constituting
and negotiating queer/trans subjectivities and spaces in heteronormative
and cisnormative schooling contexts. Moreover, Kjaran provides empirical
insights into the limits of certain post-gay renderings of schools as pro-gay
sites that are somehow cleansed of homophobia.
Kjaran’s philosophical engagement with critical questions of utopia, as
they pertain to reflections on the Nordic context in terms of its progres-
sive policies and laws regarding human rights legislation endorsing the
livability and recognizability of same-sex relationships, is also a mark of his
distinctive contribution to the field of schooling genders and s­exualities.

v
vi FOREWORD

He draws attention to the need to be always attentive to the gaps between

policy and practice, which signals the importance and need for research
that is committed to policy enactment in schools (Ball et al, 2012) in its
capacity to generate more nuanced understandings of the operations of
heteronormativity and cisnormativy in the everyday lives of students and
educators in these institutional contexts. However, while Kjaran sheds
light on the workings and persistence of heteronormativity and cisnor-
mativity in Icelandic schools, in spite of this Nordic nation’s progressive
policy context, he is careful to position queer and transgender students
as agentic in carving out spaces of recognizability and livability that chal-
lenge familiar and reductive tropes of victimhood (Rasmussen, 2006). In
this sense and in reading the book I couldn’t help but return to Muñoz
(2009) and his reflection on queer utopias as concrete possibilities and
potentialities that need to be situated historically, and invocation to take
heed of struggles and political activism that precede the present moment
in envisaging a social imaginary for embracing gender and sexual diversity:

Concrete utopias are relational to historically situated struggles, a collectiv-

ity that is actualized or potential … Concrete utopias can also be daydream-­
like, but they are hopes of a collective, an emergent group, or even a solitary
oddball who is the one who dreams for many. Concrete utopias are the
realm of educated hope … Hope along with its other, fear, are affective
structures that can be described as anticipatory. (p. 3)

Embodied in the voices of queer and trans youth that are represented in
the pages of this book are definite signs of such anticipatory hope and
possibility that speak to utopian possibilities of envisaging a queer and
trans livability and recognizability (Butler, 2004) in the education system,
one which has been built on a history of queer and trans activism but
which can never ever be fully determined or realized in advance (Stryker
& Silverman, 2005; Carter, 2010; Valentine, 2007). It is in this sense
that Kjaran’s book speaks to an ethical commitment to continue to docu-
ment the lived experiences of queer and trans youth in the school system,
with the view to a consideration of anticipatory possibilities for think-
ing beyond the horizon of heteronormative and cisnormative constraints
for envisaging an alternative social imaginary for living gender and sexual
diversity in all of its shifting and indeterminate temporality.
Wayne Martino Ph.D.
 FOREWORD vii

Faculty of Education and Department of Women’s Studies and Feminist

Research
The University of Western Ontario, Canada

References

Ball, S., Maguire, M., & Braun, A. (2012). How schools do policy: Policy
enactments in secondary schools. Abingdon: Routledge.
Butler, J. (2004). Undoing gender. New York: Routledge.
Carter, D. (2010). Stonewall: The riots that sparked the gay revolution.
New York: St Martin’s Press.
Muñoz, J. (2009). Cruising utopia: The then and there of queer futurity.
New York: New York University Press.
Rasmussen, M. (2006). Becoming subjects: Sexualities and secondary school-
ing. New York: Routledge.
Stryker, S. (2008). Transgender history. Berkley CA: Seal Press.
Stryker, S., & Silverman, V. (2005) Screaming queens: The riots at
Crompton’s cafeteria (Documentary) KQED/Independent Television
Productions.
Valentine, D. (2007). Imagining transgender: An ethnography of a cat-
egory. Durham: Duke University Press.
 Acknowledgments

I would like to express my gratitude to the many people who saw me through
this book: to all those who provided support, talked things over, read, wrote,
offered comments, allowed me to quote their remarks and assisted in the edit-
ing, proofreading and design. I would especially like to thank Professor Wayne
Martino for encouraging me in writing this book and giving me constructive
comments and good feedback through the whole writing/production pro-
cess. Above all I want to thank my participants, who shared their experiences
and trusted me with their stories. I dedicate this book to them and indeed
queer youth globally, that still need to struggle with heterosexism and het-
eronormative culture in schools. I also wish to thank my publisher, Nelson
Rodriguez, for giving me the opportunity to publish this book within the
Queer Studies and Education Series. Moreover, I wish to personally thank the
following people for their contributions to my inspiration and knowledge and
other help in creating this book: Sólveig Friðriksdóttir for preparing the index
and reading through the bibliography and other references, Rafn Kjartansson
for proofreeding the book at different stages, my two former PhD supervisors,
Professor Ingólfur Ásgeir Jóhannesson and Guðrún Kristinsdóttir for their
constructive feedback and support, Professor Debbie Epstein for her sup-
port and encouragement during my Ph.D-studies, and Þorvaldur Kristinsson,
writer and independent researcher on queer lives and reality, for inspirational
and fruitful discussion in relation to queer issues in Iceland and worldwide. I
would also like to express my thanks to everyone that gave me their kind per-
mission to use or quote their material in this book. And last but not the least,
I express my gratitude to the students, staff members and administration of
the two high schools where I did my fieldwork when conducting the research
for this book.
ix
 Contents

1 Introduction   1

2 The Schooling of Gendered Bodies and Sexualities  13

3 The Nordic Context: LGBTQ Civil Rights and

Educational Policies on Gender and Sexual Minorities  59

4 The Institutionalization of Heteronormativity in Schools  97

5 Ethical Relationality and Heterotopic Spaces in Schools 147

6 Queering Schools, Queer Pedagogy 177

7 Beyond Queer Utopias and Post-gay Agendas 203

Bibliography211

Index233

xi
 List of Figures

Fig. 1.1 The drawing, which I noticed on the wall in one of the
classrooms during my fieldwork, formulates a penis and
the text reads: “dogga mikið” which means “engage in
doggy-style sex”. This drawing and others alike confirm
further the (hetero)sexualized nature of school spaces,
particularly within the informal school culture, of which
this book will address further 2
Fig. 3.1 Attitudes toward homosexuality in Northern Europe in
2008 [European Values Survey (2008)] 70
Fig. 3.2 Education index from 1980 to 2013 in the Nordic countries
in a global comparison (perspective) 73
Fig. 4.1 Advertisement for sandwiches called Sómi (can also mean
decency in Icelandic) in the 2006 yearbook. The model is a
student at Hilly. The text accompanying the picture is playing
with words as it reads: “Don’t you have any decency.” The
text and the picture draw on the pornographic discourse,
frequently depicting women in degrading situations (e.g.,
having their faces covered with fluids) 118
Fig. 4.2 A picture from an interview with a male over-achiever at
Hilly in the 2010 yearbook 119
Fig. 4.3 A picture from an interview with a female over-achiever at
Hilly in the 2010 yearbook 120
Fig. 4.4 Advertisement for outdoor clothes in the 2010 yearbook.
The models are students from Hilly and the advertisement
is partly designed by them 121
Fig. 4.5 ‘Busaball Poster A’ 122

xiii
xiv List of Figures

Fig. 4.6 ‘Busaball Poster B’ 123

Fig. 4.7 WC for girls/women at Hilly 130
Fig. 4.8 WC for boys/men at Hilly 131
Fig. 4.9 WC for girls/women at Field 132
Fig. 4.10 WC for boys/men at Field 133
Fig. 4.11 Gender-­neutral WC at Hilly—queering the WC 134
Fig. 4.12 Trophies of victory at Hilly 139
 List of Tables

Table 2.1 Interrelation between heterosexism and heteronormativity 24

Table 2.2 Overview of key findings from different surveys on school
climate for LGBTQ students 37
Table 3.1 Overview of sexual and gender equality in the Nordic
countries61
Table 3.2 Overview of education policies with respect to gender and
sexualities74
Table 4.1 Visual representation in terms of gender and sex ratio of
students at Hilly 116
Table 4.2. Images showing nudity (fully or partly) and objectification
of girls and boys at Hilly 116
Table 4.3 Images of embracing, kissing or holding hands 116
Table 4.4 Descriptions of discursive strategies used in visual
representation of gender/sexuality at Hilly 117
Table 5.1 The four ethical dimensions manifested in the narratives
of our participants 149

xv
 CHAPTER 1

Introduction

School spaces have been depicted, transnationally as “highly sexualized

sites”, within which struggles around sexuality and gender identity are
pervasive, at least for those sexualities and gender identities that do not
conform to the (hetero)norm, and hegemonic performances of gender.1
In fact, within school spaces,(hetero)sexual identities and gendered norms
are produced through everyday schooling, structures and processes. At
the same time students’ bodies and actions in terms of gender perfor-
mances and sexualities are highly policed and regulated, often rendering
them in Foucauldian sense as ‘docile bodies’.2 Through these institu-
tional processes of schooling, heterosexuality is often assumed whereas
non-­heterosexuality is silenced, particularly in terms of the classroom cur-
riculum and textbooks.3 This book therefore contributes to the ongoing
discussion about the intersection of gendered bodies and sexualities in
making and remaking of school spaces, by drawing on ethnographic data
and interviews with LGBT/queer students in high schools in Iceland, a
small Nordic island community, close to the Arctic Circle. At the same
time the book addresses the notion of the Nordic countries as a queer
utopia, particularly in respect to schools and education (Fig. 1.1).
The Nordic states are all small countries with a total population of 23
million. They took a special Nordic approach to modernity by adopt-
ing, in the early twentieth century, the so-called Nordic model, which
has since the 1980s become a standard term both in the political and

© The Author(s) 2017 1

J.I. Kjaran, Constructing Sexualities and Gendered Bodies in School
Spaces, DOI 10.1057/978-1-137-53333-3_1
2 J.I. KJARAN

Fig. 1.1 The drawing, which I noticed on the wall in one of the classrooms dur-
ing my fieldwork, formulates a penis and the text reads: “dogga mikið” which
means “engage in doggy-style sex”. This drawing and others alike confirm further
the (hetero)sexualized nature of school spaces, particularly within the informal
school culture, of which this book will address further

academic ­discourse.4 The Nordic model embraces a “universalist” wel-

fare state aimed specifically at enhancing individual autonomy, promot-
ing social mobility and ensuring the universal provision of basic human
rights, as well as for stabilizing the economy, alongside a commitment to
free trade.5 Moreover, the Nordic states have, since the early twentieth
century, promoted gender and social equality. In terms of gender equality,
the Nordic countries early on granted suffrage to women and, according
to the World Economic Forum’s Global gender gap index from 2015, the
Nordic countries rank among the highest in the world.
The inclusive and all-embracing aspect of the Nordic model has, since
the last two decades of the twentieth century, gradually come to apply
to sexual minorities, and, although to a smaller extent, to gender non-­
conforming individuals. In this respect, the Nordic countries can be seen
as progressive and leading the way on various issues concerning LGBTQ
rights and inclusion of LGBTQ themes in the social model of the Nordic
states. In fact, in terms of livability and LGBTQ rights, the Nordic coun-
tries as a whole can be depicted as a queer utopia, at least in a global
comparison.
The focus of the book is on empirical cases from Iceland, an integral
part of the Nordic family of states. These cases will be connected to the
Nordic context and the international discussion on sexual and gender
 INTRODUCTION 3

minorities with regard to schools and education, bringing the local knowl-
edge/perspective, into the global sphere, and thus contributing further to
the growing knowledge on these issues transnationally. Icelandic society
has, in line with other Nordic countries, changed radically during the past
three decades in respect to LGBTQ rights and societal attitudes toward
LGBTQ citizens. Today, LGBTQ citizens have the same legal rights to
partnership, adoption or artificial insemination as heterosexuals, taking
ninth place in European comparison of the legal environment in respect
to LGBTQ citizenship rights, according to a recent report of IGLO-­
Europe.6 However, in respect to social attitudes toward LGBTQ people
Iceland scored the highest in the latest European value survey, indicating
their degree of acceptance for gender and sexual minorities.7 Being a fur-
ther indicator of positive public attitudes toward LGBTQ people is the
high attendance of Icelanders at the Gay pride celebration, being a family
festival and one of the largest outdoor festivals in Iceland.8 Furthermore,
spokespersons for an Icelandic travel agency for LGBTQ people have
reported their clients feeling safe and welcome in Iceland, enabling them
to be out irrespective of gender performances or sexuality.9 Thus, given
these changes, particularly those in respect to social attitudes, feeling safe
and the provision of welcoming social environments for LGBTQ people,
Iceland has sometimes been portrayed as a queer utopia, although some
commentators have criticized the queer utopian discourse.10 However, the
election of 2009 further entrenched the queer utopian image of Iceland,
particularly abroad, and was widely noticed in the media.11 After that elec-
tion the first openly lesbian/gay Prime Minister in a Western democratic
society led a central-left coalition government, an important marker of
acceptance of LGBTQ people in Iceland.
Iceland is also known for its progressive gender equity policies, being
in that respect in line with Sweden and Norway, which are considered to
be the most progressive Western societies in terms of their gender equity
policies.12 In fact progressive policies as well as civil rights and laws for
LGBTQ people have evolved gradually in all of the Nordic countries dur-
ing the past decades, giving the notion of the Nordic context as a utopia
in terms of gender equality and LGBTQ rights. However, in the book, I
question the discourse of the Nordic queer utopia and argue that there is
a gap between progressive civil society on the on the one hand and schools
and the education system on the other hand, particularly in terms of
implementation of policy and visibility of LGBTQ students. In fact, upon
entering the classroom, the visibility of LGBTQ people and d ­ iscussion
4 J.I. KJARAN

about different performances of gender and sexuality seem to disappear,

whether in terms of textbooks, course content, teaching practices and
school environment. LGBTQ people and those who do not conform to
the hegemonic performances of gender or sexuality are often constructed
as deviations from the norm and strange, and even depicted as “abjected”
others.13 This particularly applies to the informal school culture, which
embraces the traditions, culture and social interactions among students
and teachers.14
These processes of exclusion and silencing of LGBTQ reality and
lives within schools have been reported for example by Ferfolja, draw-
ing on the Australian school context.15 She has argued that institutional
processes within schools have enabled homophobia and heterosexist ide-
ology to thrive, in spite of apparent broader societal acceptance of non-­
heterosexuality, along with legislation that condemns anti-homosexual
discrimination in education.16 As will be discussed in this book, particu-
larly in Chap. 3, this has also been the case in Iceland and other Nordic
countries, where there is a discrepancy between policy and enactment
when it comes to inclusivity of LGBTQ themes in the school curriculum.
The equal rights approach, reflected in the policy document discussed in
Chap. 3, is important, but when it comes to schools, its gains are mainly to
remove direct discrimination and formal hindrances. It has much less abil-
ity to deal with hidden barriers, attitudes and heteronormativity, which are
rooted in the institutional processes of many schools. There, the “power
of heterosexuality”, when it operates as a norm, renders LGBTQ students
as abnormal and subjected to intense scrutiny and control, as will be dis-
cussed further in Chaps. 4 and 5.17
Thus, the main focus of the book is to give empirical examples from
Iceland, a rather liberal and progressive Nordic country, of how sexuality
and gender intersect in producing heteronormativity in the school system.
It will draw on international literature on LGBTQ youth in schools and
speak from a local context to the global readership. In that sense, the cases
and the examples discussed in this book can contribute further to the
growing knowledge on how heteronormativity gets institutionalized and
enacted within educational settings by bringing in examples from a Nordic
perspective. Furthermore, the book will address the discourse that speaks
to utopianism, which has been framed within progressive policies and laws
on gender and sexual equality. The notion of the Nordic as a queer uto-
pia is a dialectic one, in the sense that there is a gap or a tension between
policy and enactment, particularly within the school context. Thus, there
 INTRODUCTION 5

is a danger of relying on this kind of social imaginary, drawing on the

discourse of utopianism in terms of LGBTQ policies and laws, because
it is the actual enactment of these policies and how these are taken up in
schools that matter. Thus, “queer utopia” in the Nordic context, in the
language of the Italian philosopher Giorgio Agamben, is a potentiality, in
the sense of being a space that is present but not actually existing in the
present tense.18 In other words, the “Nordic queer utopia” is constantly
in becoming. This is discussed further in Chap. 3 and in the final chapter
of the book.
The analytical focus of the book is on the institutionalization of het-
eronormativity in high schools and how different spaces are gendered and
(hetero)sexualized. Moreover, the focus is on how LGBTQ students claim
their own space, both physical and discursive, how they are constructed
within different spaces and how they constitute themselves through vari-
ous practices of the self. I engage here with Foucault’s writings on the
technologies of the self, subjectification and heterotopia in order to dem-
onstrate how power of heterosexuality/heteronormativity operates within
schools, but also how these processes are resisted or transgressed by the
students themselves through various modalities of transgression. One way
to understand transgression is to look into how the LGBTQ students
who participated in my research challenged and transgressed gender nor-
mativities, heteronormative practices and the regime of heterosexuality.
Furthermore, in their practices of the self, they constructed themselves
as empowered agents that were able to transgress and change their social
environment with their actions and bodies. This will be discussed in Chap.
5. I am also inspired by Butler’s works and will use her concepts and
theories on gender and sexuality, such as the heterosexual matrix and per-
formativity of gender. The theoretical framework as well as concepts used
throughout the book will be discussed further and introduced in Chap. 2.

Statement of Aims
The main objectives of the book are threefold: empirical, theoretical
and practical. The empirical objective is concerned to contribute further
to research on LGBTQ youth worldwide and extend the knowledge of
the situation of LGBTQ students within the educational system. More
significantly, it will further extend the literature on transgender and
transsexual students/youth, of which there are rather few studies world-
wide, and how they are disciplined by and navigate dominant hetero-
6 J.I. KJARAN

normative and restrictive binary systems of gender. Moreover, the book

will provide insights into the relevance and significance of a particular
Nordic perspective from a small island, where in spite of support for
progressive policies regarding sexual and gender equality there remains
a discrepancy between policy and practice with respect to LGBTQ
rights and attitudes in the school system as set against an engagement
with the international literature on LGBTQ youth and schooling. This
policy gap is manifested with regard to the curricula, textbook/course
content and underlying cultural norms of the “informal” school, which
legitimates heteronormative and gender normative social relations that
are reflected in interactions of students and also in teachers’ pedagogical
approaches.
The theoretical objective embraces the intersection of gendered bod-
ies and sexualities in the production of spaces in schools. By doing so, I
view space(s) as actively produced by the individuals, who inhabit it; in
other words they construct (produce) space(s) through their embodi-
ment, actions and behavior.19 Thus, in order to analyze the intersec-
tion of spaces, sexualities and gender I will use different theories on the
production of space(s)20 as well as Foucault’s sociological and analytic
concepts on spatiality (the concept of heterotopia), power and subjec-
tification.21 This approach has the capacity to draw attention to onto-
logical questions of LGBT/queer embodiment and spatiality, and how
LGBTQ subjects are able to influence and change their environment
with their presence, actions and embodiment. The practical objective
entails informing teachers, counselors and policymakers worldwide
about various manifestations of heterosexism and gender regimes within
schools, giving an example from a Nordic country. The study is signifi-
cant in that it will provide ethnographic insights into the policy-practice
interface and further knowledge and understanding of gender and sexual
normativities in specific school contexts and how such conservative het-
eronormative systems are not simply imposed on queer and transgen-
der students but actively resisted (transgressed). Moreover, it will focus
on trans issues and transgender students in the school system, which
has internationally not been included extensively in studies on LGBTQ
youth and schools. Thus, the focus on LGBT/queer students in the
school system has the potential to further inform policy and practice in
the education system particularly with regard to making schools more
inclusive for all students.
 INTRODUCTION 7

Welcome to Iceland: Entering the Field

Iceland is a Nordic island society close to the Arctic Circle and has a popu-
lation of around 330,000. The capital is Reykjavík, in the southwestern
part of Iceland, and the second largest town is Akureyri in the northern
part of the country. An ethnographic study was conducted at two high
schools22 in these locations: at Hilly situated in Reykjavík, and at Field,
located in Akureyri. At both sites, I observed different spaces, which I
divide into the “official school” and the “informal school”. The official
school includes curriculum23 and regulations, thus setting the parameters
for the informal school which, on the other hand, embraces the traditions,
culture and social interactions among students and teachers.24 Thus, dur-
ing my observations, I was interested in the official and informal processes
of the school and the way in which the physical and non-physical (discur-
sive) space affects students in relation to sexuality and gender.
Hilly is a traditional high school with a relatively long history. At the
time of the study, it had around 1300 students. They have a similar back-
ground, and most of them are from well-off homes. The mean grades of
the students admitted into the school were well above the national aver-
age in Iceland. Accordingly, Hilly is considered an elite school. It has a
class-based system, which means that the same group of students attends
the same “class” until graduation. Field is almost of an opposite charac-
ter to Hilly, except in size, since it also has around 1300 students who
have, however, a more heterogeneous background. It is a module school,
based on a unit-credit system, which comprises a mixture of vocational
and academic lines of study. Field, established in the 1980s, has a shorter
tradition than Hilly. Both schools are housed in relatively new buildings,
and facilities for students and teachers are rather good, although Field has
more communal spaces allocated to students. It is also easily accessible
for students with disabilities, with wide corridors and the whole building
consists of only one floor.
I conducted ethnographic fieldwork at the two schools during
the school year 2011–2012. At Hilly, I did fieldwork for five months
(November 2011–April 2012). Field was visited twice, once in October
2011, for three days and then again in February 2012, for four days.
During the fieldwork, I interviewed LGBTQ students, teachers, social
workers and student counselors. I also attended various classes, especially
at Field, where I visited both vocational and academic classes. At Field, I
gained access through a student counselor, who was very helpful during
8 J.I. KJARAN

my fieldwork and who introduced me to teachers, students and other fac-

ulty members. I had been teaching at Hilly for several years, which made
it easier for me to gain access and establish trust and contacts. In addi-
tion to the ethnographic data collected at these two schools, the research
draws on semi-structure interviews with LGBTQ students from other
high schools, mostly within the metropolitan area of Reykjavík. All the
participants are introduced when they first appear or are quoted for the
first time, in Chaps. 4 and 5.

Organization of the Book

In the introduction I give an overview of the main arguments of the book
and its objectives. I also introduce the field as well as the context of the
research the book is based on. Chapter 2 lays out the theoretical founda-
tions where I particularly draw on and discuss the work of Foucault and
Butler, as well as engaging with queer theory, which forms the epistemo-
logical and ontological perspective of the research. Chapter 3 addresses
the Nordic context and traces the development of progressive human
rights policies as they relate to sexual and gender inequality. Moreover, it
addresses the education polices related to schooling sexualities and trans-
gender identities. As will be discussed the discourse as manifested in the
laws and policies documents has the tendency to speak to utopianism and
in that sense the Nordic context has often been portrayed as a queer uto-
pia. This notion of utopianism will be discussed and interrogated. Chapter
4 analyzes the institutionalization and spacialization of heteronormativity
in schools, drawing on the embodied experience of LGBTQ students as
well as visual data. Chapter 5 is about ethical relationality and hetero-
topic spaces in schools. Theoretically, I draw here on various theories on
space and spatiality. Foucault’s concept of heterotopia is foregrounded
in the analysis as well as Massey’s theoretical work on spatiality. In addi-
tion I employ Foucault’s work on the practices of the self when analyzing
how LGBTQ students constructed themselves as subjects/subjectivities.
In Chap. 6 I engage with queer critical pedagogy and bring in empiri-
cal data from the classroom in order to demonstrate how some teachers
were either able to transgress dominant (normal) teaching practices at
their school or include LGBT/queer topics in the classroom curriculum.
The last chapter synthesizes my main arguments and discusses utopianism,
particularly the notion of the Nordic as a “queer utopia”. This discussion
will entail critical engagement with the post-gay literature, which generally
 INTRODUCTION 9

claims that homophobia is diminishing in schools and society in general in

the global north.25

Notes
1. Allen, 2007, 2009; Epstein, 1997; Epstein and Johnsson, 1998;
Ingrey, 2012; Jones, 2011; Mirembe and Davies, 2001; Neary
et al., 2016; Rasmussen, 2006.
2. Allen, 2009, 2013; Ferfolja, 2007a, 2007b; Redman and Mag an
Ghaill, 1996; Sauntson, 2013.
3. Ferfolja, 2007b; Sauntson, 2013.
4. Christiansen and Markkola, 2005.
5. Brandal et al., 2013.
6. ILGA-Europe, 2014.
7. European Value Survey, 2008.
8. Björnsdóttir and Kjaran, 2011.
9. Personal communication with the manager of Pink Iceland
(http://www.pinkiceland.is/).
10. Ellenberger, 2013.
11. Ring, 2013.
12. World Economic Forum’s Global gender gap index from 2015.
13. Epstein, 1997; Martino, 1999, 2000; Lipkin, 2004; Pascoe, 2007;
Kjaran and Jóhannesson, 2013; Mayo, 2013.
14. Gordon et al., 2000; Kjaran and Jóhannesson, 2013.
15. Ferfolja, 2007a.
16. Ibid.
17. Rasmussen, 2006; Hansen, 2007; Concannon, 2008; LeFrancois,
2013.
18. Agamben, 1999.
19. See e.g., Binnie, 1997; Bell et al., 1994; Hubbard, 2001; Lefebvre,
1991; Oswin, 2008.
20. See e.g., Massey, 1994, 2005.
21. Foucault and Miskowiec, 1986; Ingrey, 2012.
22. In Iceland primary or compulsory school is from the age of 6 to
15. After that most students choose to attend upper secondary
schools (junior colleges), from the age of 16 to 20 (16 to 19 from
2015 after the law on the upper secondary school was changed).
Thus the Icelandic upper secondary school is equivalent to the last
two years in high school and the first two years in college. I,
10 J.I. KJARAN

t­ herefore, use the term “high school” throughout the book rather
than upper secondary school or junior college in order to attune
more to the global reader, as the term “high school” is better
known and used throughout the world.
23. Here curriculum refers to content of knowledge, planning of
teaching and learning, and pedagogy.
24. Gordon et al., 2000.
25. McCormack and Anderson, 2014; McCormack, 2012, 2014.

Bibliography
Agamben, G. (1999). Potentialities (D. Heller-Roazen, Trans.). Stanford: Stanford
University Press.
Allen, L. (2007). Denying the sexual subject: Schools’ regulation of student sexu-
ality. British Educational Research Journal, 33(2), 221–234.
Allen, L. (2009). ‘The 5 cm rule’: Biopower, sexuality and schooling. Discourse:
Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 33(4), 443–456.
Allen, L. (2013). Behind the bike sheds: Sexual geographies of schooling. British
Journal of Sociology of Education, 34(1), 56–75.
Bell, D., Binnie, J., Cream, J., & Valentine, G. (1994). All hyped up and no place
to go. Gender, Place and Culture, 1(1), 31–47.
Binnie, J. (1997). Coming out of geography: Towards a queer epistemology?
Environment and Planning A, 29(2), 237–248.
Björnsdóttir, K., & Kjaran, J. I. (2011). “Lokaskref að vera alveg sama.”
Margröddun í gleðigöngunni [“Final step of coming out”. Polyphonic voices
in the Icelandic gay pride]. In S. B. Ómarsdóttir (Eds.), Rannsóknir í félags-
vísindum XII. Félags- og mannvísindadeild (pp. 92–100). Reykjavík:
Félagsvísindastofnun Háskóla Íslands. Retrieved from http://skemman.is/
stream/get/1946/10251/25562/3/Rannsoknir_%C3%AD_felagsvisindum_
XII_Stjornmalafr%C3%A6dideild.pdf
Brandal, N., Bratberg, Ø., & Thorsen, D. E. (2013). The Nordic model of social
democracy. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Christiansen, N. F., & Markkola, P. (2005). Introduction. In N. F. Christiansen,
K. Petersen, N. Edling, & P. Haave (Eds.), The Nordic model of welfare. A his-
torical reappraisal (pp. 9–31). Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanum Press.
Concannon, L. (2008). Citizenship, sexual identity and social exclusion: Exploring
issues in British and American social policy. International Journal of Sociology
and Social Policy, 28, 326–339.
Ellenberger, Í. (2013). Iceland: Trouble in queer paradise. Retrieved from ­http://
gayiceland.is/2013/trouble-in-queer-paradise/
 INTRODUCTION 11

Epstein, D. (1997). Boyz’ own stories: Masculinities and sexualities in schools.

Gender & Education, 9(1), 105–116.
Epstein, D., & Johnson, R. (1998). Schooling sexualities. London: Open University
Press.
European Value Survey. (2008). Retrieved from http://www.europeanvaluesstudy.
eu
Ferfolja, T. (2007a). Schooling cultures: Institutionalizing heteronormativity and
heterosexism. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 11(2), 147–162.
Ferfolja, T. (2007b). Teacher negotiations of sexual subjectivities. Gender and
Education, 19(5), 569–586.
Foucault, M., & Miskowiec, J. (1986). Of other spaces. Diacritics, 16(1), 22–27.
Gordon, T., Holland, J., & Lahelma, E. (2000). Making spaces. Citizenship and
difference in schools. London: Macmillan.
Hansen, A. L. (2007). School-based support for GLBT students: A review of three
levels of research. Psychology in Schools, 44, 839–848.
Hubbard, P. (2001). Sex zones: Intimacy, citizenship and public space. Sexualities,
4(1), 51–71.
ILGA-Europe. (2014). Annual review of the human rights situation of lesbian, gay,
bisexual, trans and intersex people in Europe. Retrieved from https://dl.drop-
boxusercontent.com/u/15245131/Annual%20Review%202014%20web%20
version.pdf
Ingrey, J. C. (2012). The public school washroom as analytic space for troubling
gender: Investigating the spatiality of gender through students’ self-knowledge.
Gender and Education, 24(7), 799–817.
Jones, T. (2011). A sexuality education discourses framework: Conservative, lib-
eral, critical, and postmodern. American Journal of Sexuality Education, 6(2),
133–175.
Kjaran, J. I., & Jóhannesson, I. Á. (2013). Manifestations of heterosexism in
Icelandic upper secondary schools and the responses of LGBT students. Journal
of LGBT Youth, 10(4), 351–372.
Lefebvre, H. (1991). The production of space. Oxford: Blackwell.
LeFrancois, B. (2013). Queering child and adolescent mental health services: The
subversion of heteronormativity in practice. Children and Society, 27, 1–12.
Lipkin, A. (2004). Beyond diversity day: A Q&A on gay and lesbian issues in schools.
Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.
Martino, W. (1999). ‘Cool boys’, ‘party animals’, ‘squids’ and ‘poofters’: Interro-­
gating the dynamics and politics of adolescent masculinities in school. British
Journal of Sociology of Education, 20(2), 239–263.
Martino, W. (2000). Policing masculinities: Investigating the role of homophobia
and heteronormativity in the lives of adolescent school boys. The Journal of
Men’s Studies, 8(2), 213–236.
12 J.I. KJARAN

Massey, D. (1994). Space, place and gender. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota

Press.
Massey, D. (2005). For space. London: Sage.
Mayo, C. (2013). LGBTQ youth and education: Policies and practices. New York:
Teachers College Press.
McCormack, M. (2012). The declining significance of homophobia: How teenage
boys are redefining masculinity and heterosexuality. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
McCormack, M. (2014). The intersection of youth masculinities, decreasing
homophobia and class: An ethnography. British Journal of Sociology, 6(1),
130–149.
McCormack, M., & Anderson, E. (2014). The influence of declining homophobia
on men’s gender in the United States: An argument for the study of homohys-
teria. Sex Roles, 71(3), 109–120.
Mirembe, R., & Davies, L. (2001). Is schooling a risk? Gender, power relations,
and school culture in Uganda. Gender and Education, 13(4), 401–416.
Neary, A., Gray, B., & O’Sullivan, M. (2016). A queer politics of emotion:
Reimagining sexualities and schooling. Gender and Education, 28(2), 250–265.
Oswin, N. (2008). Critical geographies and the uses of sexuality: Deconstructing
queer space. Progress in Human Geography, 32(1), 89–103.
Pascoe, J. (2007). Dude you’re a fag. Masculinity and sexuality in high school.
Berkely: University of California Press.
Rasmussen, M. (2006). Becoming subjects: A study of sexualities and secondary
schooling. New York: Routledge.
Redman, P., & Mag an Ghaill, M. (1996). Schooling sexualities: Heterosexual
masculinities, schooling, and the unconscious. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural
Politics of Education, 17(2), 243–256.
Ring, T. (2013). The legacy of the world’s first out lesbian prime minister.
Advocate. Retrieved from http://www.advocate.com/politics/politicians/
2013/05/03/legacy-worlds-first-out-lesbian-prime-minister
Sauntson, H. (2013). Sexual diversity and illocutionary silencing in the English
National Curriculum. Sex Education: Sexuality, Society and Learning, 13(4),
395–408.
World Economic Forum’s Global Gender Gap Index. (2015). Retrieved from
http://reports.weforum.org/global-gender-gap-report-2015/rankings/
 CHAPTER 2

The Schooling of Gendered Bodies

and Sexualities

Schools are contested places, where the power of heterosexuality oper-

ates at various spatial levels.1 They are sites where sexuality and gender
identity is constructed, most often by reproducing heterosexuality and
gender normativities, while at the same time othering or excluding gen-
der non-conformity and silencing non-heterosexuality through various
schooling and institutional practices.2 This applies both to the formal
school and the informal school culture, often defined as the “unofficial
curriculum”3 or the “hidden curriculum”.4 In this chapter I address the
theoretical foundations of my research in relation to schooling sexualities
and gendered bodies. The chapter addresses the spatial turn in sociology,
outlining various theories on space and spatiality, with regard to school-
ing and schools, drawing, for example, on Massey’s work on the intersec-
tion of space and gender, as well as Foucault’s notion of heterotopia and
disciplinary space(s). Furthermore, the chapter engages with Butler’s and
Foucault’s theoretical works on practices of the self, resistance (modalities
of transgression), as well as gender and sexuality. Queer theory is also dis-
cussed as it forms the ontological and analytical perspective of the research
presented in the book. These theories and concepts are then referred to in
later chapters and elaborated further upon in the connection to the empir-
ical data, particularly in Chaps. 4 and 5. Thus, in many ways, this chapter
frames the remainder of the book. But before I start engaging with the
theoretical framework, I would like to spell out and discuss identity labels

© The Author(s) 2017 13

J.I. Kjaran, Constructing Sexualities and Gendered Bodies in School
Spaces, DOI 10.1057/978-1-137-53333-3_2
14 J.I. KJARAN

in terms of sexuality and gender and how they have either been put under
the queer umbrella or conventionally depicted by using acronym of five
capital letters, LGBTQ,5 which in fact excludes at the same time it includes
different identities.

LGBTQ+ or Queer as an Identity Label?

Identity is neither unitary nor fixed. Individual subjects are, throughout
life, continuously developing their identities and they invest in different
identity categories during their life span. I therefore emphasize in my
research the fluidity and instability of identities and identity categories.
These are also contextually dependent and can both be limiting and lib-
erating, convey past stigmatization and negative meanings.6 This is espe-
cially the case with sexual categories. For some individuals they can be
liberating, but for others, limiting. Hence, the lesbian identity is liberat-
ing for some, as the term lesbian is gender-specific and therefore renders
lesbians more visible as women who desire women.7 On the other hand,
the lesbian label can simultaneously be excluding for others, as it does
not include those women who do not want to ascribe to any particular
sexual identity category. The same applies to men who have sex with men
(MSM). They neither identify as gay nor bisexual when expressing their
same-sex desire or engaging in sexual activities with men.8 Almaguer has
for example discussed this aspect with regard to Chicano men, arguing
that forms of homosexual desire, identity and practice are different from
those forms dominant in the global north.9 They are more under the influ-
ences of a sexual system that does not distinguish between gay and straight
but rather between the active and the passive partner in sexual acts. In this
sexual system, the active one is seen as masculine and strong while the
passive one is in “gender-coded way” understood as feminine and thus
devalued. This kind of sexual system and sexual practices have also been
reported in Muslim societies, where sex between men has historically been
culturally accepted and, for example, mentioned in Middle Eastern classi-
cal literature.10
Since the queer turn in the 1990s, the LGBT community, particularly
in the USA, has frequently used queer as a noun. Thus they have reclaimed
it and thereby neutralized its past-stigmatized meaning. Ettinger has
emphasized the empowered aspect of using queer, as it gives marginal-
ized and oppressed groups an increased agency over their own life.11 This
 THE SCHOOLING OF GENDERED BODIES AND SEXUALITIES 15

can also, according to Ettinger, be an effective strategy to “reject and

transform the categories produced by a hostile and hegemonic heterosex-
ual discourse”.12 Here, Ettinger is stressing the confrontational aspect of
queer, which opposes the assimilationist politics of the gay and lesbian lib-
eration movement.13 Thus, queer has become an identity category, at least
for those individuals who do not want to be labeled with the LGBTQ+
abbreviation. They feel more empowered using queer, as it does not force
them to identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender. However, queer
as an identity label or an umbrella term can impose certain problematic
limits with regard to addressing significant differences that exist among
gender and sexual minorities. The use of “queer” in this sense can, for
example, contribute to a fundamental erasure of transsexual embodiment,
which Namaste, among others, has criticized, and I will turn further about
this later in this chapter.14
Khayatt has also criticized the use of queer as an identity category.15
According to her, queer does not account for different power relations,
such as race, gender or disabilities, which are intrinsic to all sexual catego-
ries. She reflects upon this issue in retrospect to her previous work on the
experience of lesbian teachers. She asks whether her research would have
developed differently if she had used queer as an identity category instead
of the lesbian label. She admits that it would have included a wider range
of women, including those women who were questioning their sexuality.
However, it would have, according to Khayatt, “diluted the very category
of women whose lives interested me at the time”.16 So in order to conduct
the research and analyze the data, she used the term “lesbian” as a fixed
category of sexuality. The lesbian identity category was, in that particular
research context, more inclusive and empowering for women who desire
women instead of the queer identity category.
Thus, one needs to be aware of the context and the aim of the
research when deciding to use queer or a particular sexual identity
category. As Khayatt has demonstrated, the queer identity can be limit-
ing for some individuals, as it may render their sexual identity invisible
and reduce their agency. I myself identify as a gay male, not as queer. I
would, therefore, not use the queer category to describe myself. Many
of the participants in my research felt the same when I interviewed
them. They identified as lesbians, gays, bisexuals or trans. Thus, queer,
as an identity or an identity category, can be problematic as it includes
but at the same time excludes certain sexual/gendered identities. The
16 J.I. KJARAN

same applies to the abbreviated acronym LGBTQ+, which can also be

limiting, although it does draw distinctions between different sexual/
gendered minority groups. In the book, I therefore use the acronym
LGBTQ and queer interchangeably to express marginalized sexualities
and gender performances at schools. Furthermore, in line with queer
theory, I use “queer” as a verb. In that sense, to queer is to challenge
and disturb the dominant discourses of normalcy. It is a political act,
whether one practices it from the platform of academia or through
transgressive quotidian performances. To queer can also involve a criti-
cal approach to text analysis. As Dilley has pointed out, a queer text
analysis has the purpose of drawing attention to the relations between
sexuality, power and gender.17

Interrupting Hetero and Gender Normativities

in the School System

Britzman has been a leading theorist in queer/critical pedagogy.18 She

has argued that schools and educational workers need to develop a deeper
understanding and knowledge of queer theory in order to interrupt het-
eronormativity and develop anti-homophobic education. Moreover, she
has argued that “schools [in general] mediate the discourses of private
and public work to leave intact the view that (homo)sexualities must be
hidden.”19 Thus, in order to investigate the cultural logics of gendered
and sexual normativities that influence and construct the lives of students,
teachers, curriculum and school/educational contexts, I draw both on
queer and trans theoretical approaches and analytical insights. Queer the-
ory has brought forth a new understanding of how schools and school
systems reproduce heteronormativity and discriminate against sexual
minorities and gender non-normative students and teachers. So has trans-­
informed theoretical perspectives, which can enhance our understanding
of the need to address questions of gender expression, embodiment, gen-
der performances and gender non-conformity.20 In this section, I engage
with key concepts and theoretical approaches (epistemology), which have
evolved from queer and trans theoretical perspectives, and have informed
my research on schooling, sexualities and gender within the Nordic con-
text. In fact, queer- and trans-inspired theory has, in my view, the poten-
tials to transgress normativities of gender and/or sexualities in schools
and draw attention to the livability of LGBTQ+ students within school
settings.
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
 Tracheate Arachnids, with the last three segments of the
cephalothorax free and the abdomen segmented. The chelicerae are
largely developed and chelate, and the pedipalpi are leg-like,
possessing terminal sense-organs.
The Solifugae are, in some respects, the most primitive of the
tracheate Arachnida. Their general appearance is very spider-like,
and by the old writers they are uniformly alluded to as spiders. The
segmented body and the absence of spinning organs, however, make
them readily distinguishable on careful inspection. They are for the
most part nocturnal creatures, though some seem to rove about by
day, and are even called “Sun-spiders” by the Spaniards. The night-
loving species are attracted by light. They are, as a rule, exceedingly
hairy. Some are extremely active, while the short-legged forms (e.g.
Rhagodes, see p. 429) move slowly. They are capable of producing a
hissing sound by the rubbing together of their chelicerae. Only the
last three pairs of legs are true ambulatory organs, the first being
carried aloft like the pedipalps, and used for feeling and
manipulating the prey.
There has been much controversy as to the poisonous properties
with which these creatures have been very widely credited by both
ancient and modern writers. The people of Baku on the Caspian
consider them especially poisonous after their winter sleep. The
Russians of that region much dread the “Falangas,” as they call them,
and keep a Falanga preserved in oil as an antidote to the bite. The
Somalis, on the other hand, have no fear of them, and, though
familiar with these animals, have not thought them worthy of the
dignity of a name.
Several investigators have allowed themselves to be bitten without
any special result. Some zoologists have found and described what
they have taken to be poison-glands, but these appear to be the coxal
glands, which have an excretory function. Bernard[325] suggests that,
if the bite be poisonous, the virus may exude from the numerous
setal pores which are found on the extremities of the chelicerae. The
cutting powers of the immensely-developed chelicerae are usually
sufficient to ensure fatal results on small animals without the agency
of poison. Distant,[326] indeed, thinks they cannot be poisonous, for
when birds attack them they flee before their assailants.
 The Solifugae require a tolerably warm climate. In Europe they are
only found in Spain, Greece, and Southern Russia. They abound
throughout Africa, and are found in South-Western Asia, the
southern United States, and the north of South America. They
appear to be absent from Australia, nor have any been found in
Madagascar. Their usual food appears to be insects, though they
devour lizards with avidity. Some interesting observations on their
habits are recorded by Captain Hutton,[327] who kept specimens in
captivity in India. An imprisoned female made a burrow in the earth
with which her cage was provided, and laid fifty eggs, which hatched
in a fortnight, but the young remained motionless for three weeks
longer, when they underwent their first moult, and became active.
A sparrow and musk rats were at different times placed in the
cage, and were speedily killed, but not eaten. Two specimens placed
in the same cage tried to avoid each other, but, on coming into
contact, fought desperately, the one ultimately devouring the other.
It was noteworthy that the one which was first fairly seized
immediately resigned itself to its fate without a struggle. As is the
case with some spiders, the female is said occasionally to kill and
devour the male. A Mashonaland species, Solpuga sericea, feeds on
termites,[328] while a South Californian Galeodes kills bees,[329]
entering the hives in search of them. They are fairly good climbers.
In Egypt Galeodes arabs climbs on to tables to catch flies, and some
species have been observed to climb trees.
That their pedipalps, in addition to their sensory function (see p.
426), possess a sucking apparatus, is clear from an observation of
Lönnberg,[330] who kept specimens of Galeodes araneoides
imprisoned in rectangular glass boxes, up the perpendicular sides of
which they were able to climb for some distance by their palps, but,
being able to obtain no hold by their legs, they soon tired.
External Anatomy.—The body of Galeodes consists of a
cephalothorax and an abdomen, both portions being distinctly
segmented. The cephalothorax consists of six segments, the first
thoracic segment being fused with the two cephalic segments to form
a sort of head, while the last three thoracic segments are free, and
there is almost as much freedom of movement between the last two
thoracic segments as between the thorax and the abdomen. The
“cephalic lobes,” which give the appearance of a head, have been
 shown by Bernard[331] to be due to
the enormous development of the
chelicerae, by the muscles of
which they are entirely occupied.
The floor of the cephalothorax
is for the most part formed by the
coxae of the appendages, and the
sternum is hardly recognisable in
many species. In Solpuga,
however (see p. 429), it exists in
the form of a long narrow plate of
three segments, ending anteriorly
in a lancet-shaped labium.
A pair of large simple eyes are
borne on a prominence in the
middle of the anterior portion of
the cephalothorax, and there are
Fig. 217.—Rhagodes sp., ventral view. often one or two pairs of vestigial
Nat. size. a, Anus; ch, chelicerae; g.o, lateral eyes.
genital operculum; n, racket organs; p, The first pair of tracheal
pedipalp; 1, 2, 3, 4, ambulatory legs. stigmata are to be found behind
(After Bernard.)
the coxae of the second legs.
The mouth-parts take the form
of a characteristic beak, consisting of a labrum and a labium entirely
fused along their sides. The mouth is at the extremity of the beak,
and is furnished with a straining apparatus of complicated hairs.
The abdomen possesses ten free segments, marked off by dorsal
and ventral plates, with a wide membranous lateral interval. The
ventral plates are paired, the first pair forming the genital opercula,
while behind the second and third are two pairs of stigmata. Some
species have a single median stigma on the fourth segment, but this
is in some cases permanently closed, and in the genus Rhagodes
entirely absent, so that it would seem to be a disappearing structure.
The appendages are the six pairs common to all Arachnids—
chelicerae, pedipalpi, and four pairs of legs. The chelicerae, which
are enormously developed, are two-jointed and chelate, the distal
joint being articulated beneath the produced basal joint. In the male
there is nearly always present, on the basal joint, a remarkable
structure of modified hairs called the “flagellum,” and believed to be
sensory. It differs in the different genera, and is only absent in the
Eremobatinae (see p. 429). The pedipalpi are strong, six-jointed, leg-
like appendages, without terminal claw. They end in a knob-like
joint, sometimes movable, sometimes fixed, which contains a very
remarkable eversible sense-organ, which is probably olfactory. It is
concealed by a lid-like structure, and when protruded is seen to be
furnished, on its under surface, with a pile of velvet-like sensory
hairs.
The legs differ in the number of their joints, as the third and fourth
pairs have the femora divided, and the tarsus jointed. The first pair
has only a very small terminal claw, but two well-developed claws are
borne by the tarsi of the other legs. Each of the last legs bears, on its
under surface, five “racket organs,” believed to be sensory.
Internal Structure.—The alimentary canal possesses a sucking
chamber within the beak, after which it narrows to pass through the
nerve-mass, and after an S-shaped fold, joins the mid-gut. This gives
off four pairs of thin diverticula towards the legs, the last two
entering the coxae of the third and fourth pairs.
At the constriction between the cephalothorax and the abdomen
there is no true pedicle, but there is a transverse septum or
“diaphragm,” through which the blood-vessel, tracheal nerves, and
alimentary canal pass. The gut narrows here, and, on entering the
abdomen, proceeds straight to a stercoral pocket at the hind end of
the animal, but gives off, at the commencement, two long lateral
diverticula, which run backwards parallel with the main trunk. These
are furnished with innumerable secondary tube-like diverticula,
which proceed in all directions and fill every available portion of the
abdomen. The caeca, which are so characteristic of the Arachnidan
mid-gut, here reach their extreme development. A pair of Malpighian
tubules enter the main trunk in the fourth abdominal segment.
Other excretory organs are the coxal glands, which form many
coils behind the nerve-mass, and open between the coxae of the third
and fourth legs. They have been taken for poison-glands.
There is a small endosternite in the hinder portion of the
cephalothorax under the alimentary canal.
 The vascular system is not completely understood. The heart is a
very long, narrow, dorsal tube, extending almost the entire length of
the animal, and possessing eight pairs of ostia, two in the
cephalothorax and six in the abdomen. It gives off an anterior and a
posterior vessel, the latter apparently a vein, as it is guarded at its
entrance by a valve. The blood seems to be delivered by the anterior
artery on to the nerve-mass, and, after percolating the muscles and
viscera, to divide into two streams—the one returning to the heart by
the thoracic ostia, the other passing through the diaphragm and
bathing the abdominal organs, finally to reach the heart either by the
abdominal ostia or by the posterior vein.
The nervous system, notwithstanding the fact that the three last
thoracic segments are free, is chiefly concentrated into a mass
surrounding the oesophagus. Nerves are given off in front to the
eyes, the labrum, and the chelicerae, while double nerves radiate to
the pedipalps and to the legs. From behind the nerve-mass three
nerves emerge, and pass through the diaphragm to enter the
abdomen. The median nerve swells into an “abdominal ganglion”
just behind the diaphragm, and is then distributed to the diverticula
of the alimentary canal. The lateral nerves innervate the generative
organs.
The respiratory system consists of a connected network of tracheae
communicating with the exterior by the stigmata, whose position has
already been described. There are two main lateral trunks extending
nearly the whole length of the body, and giving off numerous
ramifications, the most important of which are in the cephalothorax,
and supply the muscles of the chelicerae and of the other
appendages.
The generative glands do not essentially differ from the usual
Arachnid type, though the paired ovaries do not fuse to form a ring.
There are no external organs, and the sexes can only be distinguished
by secondary characteristics, such as the “flagellum” already
mentioned.
Classification.—There are about a hundred and seventy species
of Solifugae inhabiting the warm regions of the earth. No member of
the group is found in England, or in any except the most southern
portions of Europe.
 Kraepelin[332] has divided the
group into three families—
Galeodidae, Solpugidae, and
Hexisopodidae.
Fam. 1. Galeodidae.—The
Galeodidae have a lancet-shaped
flagellum, directed backwards.
There is a characteristic five-
toothed plate or comb covering
the abdominal stigmata. The
tarsus of the fourth leg is three-
jointed, and the terminal claws
are hairy.
There are two genera,
Galeodes, with about twelve
species, and Paragaleodes, with
six species, scattered over the hot
regions of the Old World.
Fam. 2. Solpugidae.—The
Solpugidae comprise twenty-four
genera, distributed under five
sub-families. The toothed
stigmatic plate is absent, and the
tarsal claws are smooth. The
ocular eminence is furnished with
irregular hairs. The “flagellum” is
Fig. 218.—Nervous system of Galeodes.
very variable. abd.g, Abdominal ganglion; ch,
(i.) The Rhagodinae include cheliceral nerve; ch.f, chitinous fold;
the two genera, Rhagodes (Rhax) ch.r, chitinous rod; g.n, generative
and Dinorhax. The first has nerve; l, labial nerve; st, position of
twenty-two species, which inhabit stigma. (After Bernard.)
Africa and Asia. The single
species of Dinorhax belongs to East Asia. These creatures are short-
legged and sluggish.
(ii.) The Solpuginae contain two genera—Solpuga with about fifty
species, and Zeriana with three. They are all inhabitants of Africa,
and some occur on the African shore of the Mediterranean.
 (iii.) The Daesiinae number
about forty species, divided
among several genera, among
which the principal are Daesia,
Gluvia, and Gnosippus. They are
found in tropical regions of both
the Old and the New World.
(iv.) The Eremobatinae are
North American forms, the single
genus Eremobates numbering
about twenty species. The
Fig. 219.—Chelicera and flagellum of flagellum is here entirely absent.
Galeodes. (After Kraepelin.) (v.) The Karshiinae include
the five genera Ceroma,
Gylippus, Barrus, Eusimonia, and Karshia. They are universally
distributed.
Fam. 3. Hexisopodidae.—This family is formed for the
reception of a single aberrant African genus, Hexisopus, of which five
species have been described.
There are no claws on the tarsus of the fourth leg, which is beset
with short spine-like hairs, and in other respects the genus is
peculiar.
Fig. 220.—Chelicerae and flagella of A,
Rhagodes; B, Solpuga; and C, Daesia.
(After Kraepelin.)
Fig. 221.—Chelicera and flagellum of
Hexisopus. (After Kraepelin.)

Order VI. Chernetidea.

(CHERNETES, PSEUDOSCORPIONES.)

Tracheate Arachnids, with the abdomen united to the

cephalothorax by its whole breadth. Eyeless, or with two or four
simple eyes placed laterally. Abdomen segmented, with four
stigmata. Chelicerae chelate, bearing the openings of the spinning
organs. Pedipalpi large, six-jointed, and chelate. Sternum absent or
rudimentary.
The Chernetidea or “False-scorpions” constitute the most compact
and natural order of the Arachnida. There are no extreme variations
within the group as at present known, while all its members differ so
markedly from those of other Arachnidan orders that their true
affinities are by no means easy to determine.
The superficial resemblance to Scorpions which has won these
animals their popular name is almost entirely due to the comparative
size and shape of their pedipalpi, but it is probable that they are
structurally much more closely allied to the Solifugae.
Chernetidea are not creatures which obtrude themselves on the
general notice, and it is highly probable that many readers have
never seen a living specimen. This is largely due to their minute size.
Garypus littoralis, a Corsican species, nearly a quarter of an inch in
length of body, is a veritable giant of the tribe, while no British
species boasts a length of more than one-sixth of an inch.
Moreover, their habits are retiring. They are to be sought for under
stones, under the bark of trees, and among moss and débris. One
species, probably cosmopolitan, certainly lives habitually in houses,
and is occasionally noticed and recognised as the “book-scorpion,”
and one or two other species sometimes make themselves
conspicuous by the remarkable habit of seizing hold of the legs of
flies and being carried about with them in their flight. With these
exceptions, the Chernetidea are not likely to be seen unless specially
sought for, or unless casually met with in the search for small beetles
or other creatures of similar habitat. Nevertheless they are very
widely distributed, and though more numerous in hot countries, are
yet to be found in quite cold regions.
Though comparatively little attention has been paid to them in this
country, twenty British species have been recorded, and the known
European species number about seventy.
As might be expected from their small size and retiring habits,
little is known of their mode of life. They are carnivorous, feeding
apparently upon any young insects which are too feeble to withstand
their attacks. The writer has on two or three occasions observed
them preying upon Homopterous larvae. As a rule they are sober-
coloured, their livery consisting of various shades of yellow and
brown. Some species walk slowly, with their relatively enormous
pedipalps extended in front and gently waving, but all can run swiftly
backwards and sideways, and in some forms the motion is almost
exclusively retrograde and very rapid. A certain power of leaping is
said to be practised by some of the more active species. The
Chernetidea possess spinning organs, opening on the movable digit
of the chelicera. They do not, however, spin snares like the Spiders,
nor do they anchor themselves by lines, the sole use of the spinning
apparatus being, apparently, to form a silken retreat at the time of
egg-laying or of hibernation.
External Structure.—The Chernetid body consists of a
cephalothorax, and an abdomen composed of twelve segments. The
segmentation of the abdomen is emphasised by the presence of
chitinous plates dorsally and ventrally, but the last two dorsal plates
and the last four ventral plates are fused, so that ordinarily only
eleven segments can be counted above and nine below.
The cephalothorax presents no trace of segmentation in the
Obisiinae (see p. 437), but in the other groups it is marked dorsally
with one or two transverse striae. The eyes, when present, are either
two or four in number, and are placed near the lateral borders of the
carapace towards its anterior end. They are whitish and only very
slightly convex, and are never situated on prominences. Except in
Garypus there is no trace of a sternum, the coxae of the legs and
pedipalps forming the ventral floor of the cephalothorax.
In the Obisiinae a little triangular projection in front of the
cephalothorax is regarded by Simon[333] as an epistome. It is absent
in the other sub-orders.
The abdomen is armed, dorsally and ventrally, with a series of
chitinous plates with membranous intervals. The dorsal plates are
eleven in number (except in Chiridium, which has only ten), and are
frequently bisected by a median dorsal membranous line. There are
nine ventral plates. There is a membranous interval down each side
between the dorsal and ventral series of plates.
The chitinous membrane between the plates is very extensible,
rendering measurements of the body in these animals of little value.
In a female full of eggs the dorsal plates may be separated by a
considerable interval, while after egg-laying they may actually
overlap. The four stigmata are not situated on the plates, but ventro-
laterally, at the level of the hinder borders of the first and second
abdominal plates.
The first ventral abdominal plate bears the genital orifice. In the
same plate there are two other orifices, an anterior and a posterior,
which belong to the “abdominal glands.” They were taken by some
authors for the spinning organs, but their function is probably to
supply material for the capsule by which the eggs are suspended
from the body of the mother (see p. 434).
The Chernetidea possess chelicerae, pedipalpi, and four pairs of
ambulatory legs, all articulated to the cephalothorax.
The chelicerae are two-jointed, the upper portion of the first joint
being produced forward into a claw, curving downward. The second
joint is articulated beneath the first, and curves upward to a point,
the appendage being thus chelate.
This second joint, or movable
digit, bears, near its extremity,
the opening of the spinning
organ, and is furnished, at all
events in the Garypinae and
Cheliferinae (see p. 437), with a
pectinate projection, the “galea,”
arising at its base, and extending
beyond the joint in front. In the
Obisiinae it is only represented by
a slight prominence.
Two other organs characterise
the chelicerae of all the
Chernetidea; these are the
“serrula” and the “flagellum.”
Their minute size and
transparency make them very
difficult of observation, and for a
long time they escaped notice.
The serrula is a comb-like
structure attached to the inner Fig. 222.—A, Chernes sp.,
side of the distal joint. The diagrammatic ventral view, × about 12.
a, Anus; ch, chelicera; g, generative
flagellum is attached to the outer opening; p, pedipalp; 1, 2, 3, 4, legs.
side of the basal joint, and recalls (The stigmata are at the postero-lateral
the antenna of a Lamellicorn margins of the 1st and 2nd abdominal
beetle, or the “pectines” of segments.) B, Tarsus, with claws and
scorpions, a resemblance which sucking disc.
gave rise to the supposition that
they are olfactory organs. It is more likely, however, that they are of
use in manipulating the silk.
The pedipalpi are six-jointed and are very large, giving these
animals a superficial resemblance to scorpions. According to Simon,
[334]
the patella is absent, and the joints are coxa, trochanter, femur,
tibia, tarsus, with an apophysis forming the fixed digit of the chela,
while the sixth joint is the movable digit, and is articulated behind
the tarsus. These joints, especially the tarsus, are often much
thickened, but however strongly developed, they are always narrow
 and pediculate at the base. The
coxae of the pedipalps are closely
approximated, and are enlarged
and flattened. They probably
assist in mastication, but there is
no true maxillary plate articulated
to the coxa as in some Arachnid
groups.
The legs are usually short and
feeble, and the number of their
articulations varies from five to
Fig. 223.—Chelicera of Garypus. f, eight, so that it is not easy to be
Flagellum; g, galea; s, serrula. (After certain of the homologies of the
Simon.)
individual joints to those of other
Arachnids. The coxae are large,
and form the floor of the cephalothorax. They are succeeded by a
short trochanter, which may be followed by another short joint, the
“trochantin.” Then come the femur and tibia, elongated joints
without any interposed patella, and finally the tarsus of one or two
joints, terminated by two smooth curved claws, beneath which is
situated a trumpet-shaped membranous sucker.
Internal Structure.[335]—The internal structure of the
Chernetidea, as far as their small size has permitted it to be made
out, bears a considerable resemblance to that of the Phalangidea.
The alimentary canal dilates into a small sucking pharynx before
passing through the nerve-mass into the large many-lobed stomach,
but the narrow intestine which terminates the canal is convoluted or
looped, and possesses a feebly-developed stercoral pocket.
Above the stomach are situated the spinning glands, the products
of which pass, by seven or more tubules, to the orifice already
mentioned on the distal joint of the chelicerae. The abdominal or
cement-glands are in the anterior ventral portion of the abdomen.
No Malpighian tubes have been found.
The tracheae from the anterior stigmata are directed forward;
those from the posterior stigmata backward. Bernard[336] has found
rudimentary stigmata on the remaining abdominal segments.
The heart is the usual dorsal tube, situated rather far forward, and
probably possessing only one pair of ostia. The nerve-cord is a
double series of ventral masses, united by transverse commissures.
These undergo great concentration in the last stages of development,
but in the newly-hatched Chernetid a cerebral mass and five pairs of
post-oesophageal ganglia can be distinguished.
There are two peculiar eversible “ram’s-horn organs,” opening
near the genital opening. They are said to be present only in the
male, and have been taken for the male organs, though other writers
consider them to be tracheal in function.
Development.—Some points of peculiar interest are presented
by the embryology of these animals, the most striking facts being,
first, that the whole of the egg is, in some cases at all events, involved
in the segmentation; and, secondly, that there is a true
metamorphosis, though the larva is not free-living, but remains
enclosed with others in a sac attached to the mother.
At the beginning of winter the female immures herself in a silken
retreat, her body distended with eggs and accumulated nourishment.
About February the egg-laying commences, thirty eggs, perhaps,
being extruded. They are not, however, separated from the mother,
but remain enclosed in a sac attached to the genital aperture, and
able, therefore, to receive the nutritive fluids which she continues to
supply throughout the whole period of development.
The eggs, which line the periphery of the sac, develop into embryos
which presently become larvae, that is to say, instead of further
development at the expense of yolk-cells contained within
themselves, they develop a temporary stomach and a large sucking
organ, and become for a time independent sucking animals,
imbibing the fluids in the common sac, and arranged around its
circumference with their mouths directed towards the centre.
Subsequently a second embryonic stage is entered upon, the sucking
organ being discarded, and the albuminous matter which the larva
has imbibed being treated anew like the original yolk of the egg.
It is an interesting fact that in this second embryonic stage a well-
marked “tail” or post-abdomen is formed, and the ganglionic nerve-
masses increase in number, a cerebral mass being followed by eight
pairs of ganglia in the body and eight in the tail. Subsequently a great
concentration takes place till, besides the cerebral mass, only five
closely-applied pairs of ganglia remain, corresponding to the
pedipalpi and the four pairs of legs. Moreover, the first pair
advances, so as to lie on the sides of, and not behind, the oesophagus.

Fig. 224.—Three stages in the development of Chelifer. A,

Segmenting ovum; B, embryo, with post-abdomen, maximum
number of ganglia, and developing sucking apparatus; C, larva.
(After Barrois.)

There are two ecdyses or moults during development, a partial

moult, concerning only the ventral surface of the “pro-embryo” as it
assumes the larval form, and a complete moult at the final stage,
before emergence from the incubating sac.
At the end of winter the mother cuts a hole in the silken web, and
the young brood issues forth.[337]
Classification.—The order Chernetidea consists of a single
family, Cheliferidae. Nine genera are recognised by most authors,
but their grouping has been the subject of a good deal of difference of
opinion, largely dependent on the different systemic value allowed by
various arachnologists to the absence or presence of eyes, and to
their number when present. Simon takes the extreme view that the
eyes are only of specific value, and he is thus led to suppress two
ordinarily accepted genera, Chernes and Roncus, which are
separated chiefly by eye-characters from Chelifer and Obisium
respectively. He relies rather on such characters as the presence or
absence of galea, epistome, and trochantin, and establishes three
sub-families as follows:—
 (i.) Cheliferinae.—Galea. No epistome. Trochantin on all legs.
Eyes two or none. Sole genus, Chelifer (Chelifer + Chernes).
(ii.) Garypinae.—Galea. No epistome. Trochantin on legs 3 and 4
only. Eyes four or none. Genera Chiridium, Olpium, and Garypus.
(iii.) Obisiinae.—No galea. An epistome. No trochantin. Genera
Chthonius and Obisium (which includes Roncus).
Whatever be the value of the eyes in the classification of this group
—and Simon adduces strong arguments for his view—there can be no
doubt of their convenience in practical identification. Moreover, as
Pickard-Cambridge[338] points out, a grouping of the genera
according to the eyes results, as regards British species, in pretty
much the same linear arrangement as Simon’s classification, and it
may therefore be convenient to mention that, of the six genera
represented in this country, Chthonius and Obisium are four-eyed,
Roncus and Chelifer two-eyed, while Chernes and Chiridium are
eyeless.
Sub-Fam. 1. Cheliferinae.—These Chernetidea have the
cephalothorax slightly narrowed in front, and generally marked
dorsally with two transverse striae, while the abdominal plates are
bisected by a dorsal longitudinal line. With the exception of Chelifer
cancroides, which is always found in houses, all the species are to be
sought under bark, though occasionally they are discovered under
stones.
The two genera of this sub-family are Chelifer and Chernes, the
species of Chelifer being two-eyed, and those of Chernes blind.
As already stated, Simon does not consider the possession of the
two—often very feebly developed—eyes of generic importance, and
admits only the genus Chelifer.
Five species of Chelifer (including Ch. cancroides) and five of
Chernes have been recorded in England.
Sub-Fam. 2. Garypinae.—The Garypinae have the
cephalothorax greatly contracted in front and often projecting
considerably.
There are three genera, Chiridium, Olpium, and Garypus.
Chiridium is eyeless, and appears to have only ten segments in the
abdomen, the tergal plates of which are bisected. C. museorum is
found in England, and is the only Chernetid except Chelifer
 cancroides which habitually lives
in houses. C. ferum is found
under bark in the south of France.
Neither Olpium nor Garypus,
which both possess four eyes and
eleven abdominal segments, have
as yet been found in this country.
Garypus, like Chiridium, has the
dorsal abdominal plates bisected.
There is a transverse stria on the
cephalothorax, and the eyes are
far from the anterior border. In
Olpium the dorsal plates are
undivided and the eyes more
anterior.
Sub-Fam. 3. Obisiinae.—
The cephalothorax of the
Obisiinae does not narrow—and
is, indeed, sometimes broadest—
Fig. 225.—Chelifer cyrneus, enlarged. anteriorly. The chelicerae are
(After Simon.) notably large, and the dorsal
abdominal plates undivided. They
are the most active of the Chernetidea, ordinarily running backwards
or sideways with their pedipalpi closely folded up against the body.
Four genera usually admitted fall within this group:—Obisium,
Roncus, Blothrus, and Chthonius.
Obisium has four eyes, parallel-sided cephalothorax, and curved
chelae on the palps. Roncus is like Obisium except in having only two
eyes, and is therefore disallowed by Simon, who also considers
Blothrus to comprise merely eyeless species of Obisium. In
Chthonius the cephalothorax is broadest in front, and the digits of
the chelae are straight.
The Obisiinae are found in moss and débris, and under stones.
Three species of Obisium, two of Roncus, and four of Chthonius are
recorded in England.
The subjoined list of British species of Chernetidea is taken from
the monograph of the Rev. O. P. Cambridge, cited above:—
Fig. 226.—Chiridium museorum,
enlarged. (After Simon.)
Fig. 227.—Olpium pallipes, enlarged.
(After Simon.)

Group I.—Four eyes.

Chthonius orthodactylus, Leach.

„ rayi, L. Koch.
„ tetrachelatus, Preyssler.
„ tenuis, L. Koch.
Obisium muscorum, Leach.
„ sylvaticum, C. L. Koch.
„ maritimum, Leach.

Group II.—Two eyes.

Roncus cambridgii, L. Koch.

„ lubricus, L. Koch.
Chelifer hermannii, Leach.
„ cancroides, Linn.
„ meridianus, L. Koch.
„ subruber, Simon.
 „ latreillii, Leach.

Group III.—No eyes.

Chernes nodosus, Schr.

„ insuetus, Camb.
„ cimicoides, Fabr.
„ dubius, Camb.
„ phaleratus, Simon.
Chiridium museorum, Leach.