小學大部分是“無性”的環境。兒童在年輕時期不經歷性吸引。年幼的孩子是“無辜的”，需要保護性和性（沃特金斯，2000）。Adrienne Rich認為，異性戀是一種暴力的政治制度，有其義務實踐什么天生的或自由（富，1983）。這個理論被Debbie Epstein，戈德史密斯學院，倫敦，英國的教育學教授，他從1990以來，研究有關性別和教育。愛潑斯坦的人主要集中在小學性糾紛豐富的說，小學的網站生產和執行者和穩定的生育目的的婚姻、愛和安全感。她認為“強制異性戀”擴展到教育機構和地方性識別沉默但異性戀允許甚至鼓勵。一個例子是，在小學里的孩子理想的想象力的發揮和表演了一個異性戀家庭生活–男孩作為父親的男人，一個女孩的母親/女性。有那些孩子，但是，規范性異性戀模式不適合在他們的家庭環境。
<标题> Primary school is for the most part an ‘asexual’ environment. Children at a young age do not experience sexual attraction. Young children are “innocent” and in need of protection from sex and sexuality (Watkins, 2000). It is argued by Adrienne Rich that heterosexuality is a political institution of violence and that there is nothing innate or free in its compulsory practice (Rich, 1983). This theory is attacked by Debbie Epstein, Professor of Education at Goldsmith’s College, London, England, who has been researching issues relating to sexuality and education since 1990 .Epstein who primarily focuses on sexuality in primary schools, disputes Rich by saying that primary schools are sites for the production and enforcement of heterosexuality and stable marriages for the purpose of procreation, love and security. Her view on “compulsory heterosexuality” is extended to educational institutions and identify places where sexuality is silenced but heterosexuality is permitted and even encouraged. An example would be imaginative play in elementary school where children idealize and act out a heterosexual family life – a boy acting as a father/man, a girl a mother/woman. There are those children however, where the normative heterosexual model does not fit in their home environment.