In order to set the scene for this volume, I begin the chapter with a narrative of my experience on the day when I got promoted to a professor at a Japanese university by combining my professional experience to the ideologies of native-speakerism and trans-speakerism. I also include the overall background of the study through providing the aims of the research, explicating the significance of the current inquiry, and outlining the core ideas of this book: native-speakerism and trans-speakerism. In other words, this chapter delineates how these two influential ideologies in language education come together in this book and makes a case for why the present inquiry is a fertile endeavor to make. The chapter concludes with a brief description of the structure and content of the volume.

The current chapter delves into the experiences of NNES university professors in Japan, scrutinizing noteworthy events and incidents that they came across while working in their particular settings. The chapter opens, much like Chapters 4 and 5, by offering narratives from four university professor participants. As with the previous narratives, these ones also represent the initial phase of data analysis as well as a portion of the research results. These narratives were then subjected to constructing grounded theory approaches, which led to the discovery of several notable and oft-repeated codes. These were subsequently organized to construct a conceptual framework. This chapter justifies and explains the multifaceted, yet interconnected, principal categories and their incumbent subcategories of university professor participants’ experiences involving native-speakerism and trans-speakerism: they are linguistic, cultural, and professional native-speakerism, in addition to Global Englishes, intercultural competence, and professionalism (including contextual knowledge) in relation to trans-speakerism. Pertinent excerpts and anecdotes from the interview data are used to establish and expound upon the categorizations. Finally, the chapter concludes with the conceptual framework of the university professors’ experiences and several recommendations for practice involving native-speakerism and trans-speakerism.

This chapter describes the origin, development, and subsequent conceptualization of native-speakerism, as well as profiling relevant research on it. Importantly, it also offers my own understanding and interpretation about the notion. To do this, the chapter presents a selection of previous discussions and empirical research into native-speakerism and documents some of the most deleterious effects that native-speakerism has had on the lives and identities of both NESTs and NNESTs worldwide – specifically the effects on NNES teachers and researchers in Japan, who are the focal points of this book. I commence this chapter with a theoretical overview of the ways in which native-speakerism came to be recognized and defined. I then introduce my own analysis of what native-speakerism entails at this moment in time within the ELT field. Afterward, I provide an overview of germane conceptual and empirical studies on native-speakerism while offering my own critiques of them as I do so. With the key points and positionings of the discussion established, I conclude this chapter by positing my case for the originality and significance of this endeavor and by presenting the focal research questions which the research within this volume attempts to answer.

I commence this chapter by introducing the narratives of four graduate school student participants who partook in this endeavor. The participants’ narratives are a representation of the interview data that were relayed to me. They function as the initial phase of data analysis as well as serve as part of the findings because they are presented largely intact as concise stories which are both the basis for analysis and the vehicles for portraying the interview data pithily. The analysis involved subjecting these narratives to constructing grounded theory methods in which I sorted, synthesized, integrated, and formulated a number of prominent and recurrent codes in order to determine several categories and eventually a conceptual framework (theory). I introduce in this chapter primary categories concerning linguistic, cultural, and academic native-speakerism, in addition to Global Englishes, intercultural competence, and professionalism (including work ethics) related to trans-speakerism. I explore and illustrate these by referring to germane excerpts and anecdotes from the interview data to support and expound on the categorizations. This chapter ends with a conceptual framework (theory) and recommendations for practice.

I open this chapter with a discussion about an alternative concept to native speakerism – trans-speakerism. This is a modern ideological viewpoint that is devoted to enhancing diversity, equity, and inclusion for all language speakers, teachers, and researchers in the field. I begin by comparing the notion of trans-speakerism with the idea of native-speakerism, then proceed to present its definition, highlight its significance, and introduce the terminology it spurns for describing persons who are subsumed within its precepts: global speaker of English (GSE), global teacher of English (GTEs), and Global Englishes researcher (GER). I continue this chapter with an outline of the research upon which this book is based, which includes: (a) a description of the ways in which I selected the participants and ensured ethical compliance, (b) information about the participants, and (c) an account of how the data collection procedures were followed as well as how the data were treated, analyzed, and interpreted.

In this chapter, I introduce the narratives and primary categories of the secondary school teachers within this inquiry. They include linguistic, cultural, and pedagogical native-speakerism, in addition to Global Englishes, intercultural competence, and professionalism (including second language learning experiences) related to trans-speakerism. I explore and extrapolate these by selecting germane excerpts and anecdotes from the interview data to support and elucidate these categorizations. I do so while being fully cognizant of, first, the conditions under which they occurred (i.e., excerpts of particular experiences of particular participants in their particular contexts) and, second, the circumstances in which they were presented to me during the interviews (i.e., stories constructed in particular ways at a particular moment of their professional lives with me as their particular interlocutor). The narratives presented in this chapter were drawn from four secondary school teachers in Japan.

This final chapter, divided into three major parts, draws together the findings and discussion presented in previous chapters and provides recommendations and implications for stakeholders and researchers. The first part outlines summaries of findings and relevant literature followed by a conceptual framework, which exhibits diagrammatically the findings of this study and their interrelationships. The second part regards recommendations for further research and the limitations of my study. A narrative of my reflection on the journey of the study and the writing of this book concludes the volume.

At the turn of the century as the western frontier came to a close, America expanded its reach across the Pacific and in so doing solidified a burgeoning modern gay identity steeped in imaginations of the “Orient.” Pacific Islanders and Asian immigrants themselves in fact played a crucial role by illustrating a different way of being to western writers such as Joaquin Miller and Charles Warren Stoddard, even as they were appropriated in bohemians’ explorations of their own same-sex sexuality.

Our knowledge of Japanese sexuality from the tenth to the twelfth centuries is limited chiefly to the imperial court. Sexuality was constructed textually through key concepts from Chinese culture and the globally unprecedented rise of writing by women in Japanese. Emperors, princes, and high-ranking aristocratic men were often polygynous and marriage was not controlled by either law or religion. Virginity was rarely valued and there was no primogeniture. ‘Divorce’ and ‘remarriage’ were frequent. Incest taboos were limited, applying to full siblings and parents and their biological offspring. While most aristocratic women were to be seen only by their fathers, husbands, or sons among men, women and men serving at court might have multiple sexual partners and social hierarchy played a dominant role in men’s access to women’s bodies; legal prosecutions for rape were nil. There is evidence of pederasty both at court and in temple complexes by the late tenth and the early eleventh centuries, respectively. Non-pederastic homosexuality seems to have had a sudden efflorescence at the end of the period. Definitive evidence for female homosexuality does not appear until the thirteenth century, but probably existed earlier.

In a remarkable article published in the official journal of the Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs in December 1992, the Director-General of the Economic Affairs Bureau and one of the most senior figures in the Ministry, Kazuo Ogura, wrote in an analysis of Japan’s diplomacy that only Australia could fill the role of Japan’s real partner in an Asian-Pacific regional alliance: their similar democratic values, market economies and approach to free trade, and common interests in security and political matters, gave the two countries a firm basis for a continuing and closer partnership. This view was warmly endorsed by Australia’s Foreign Minister, Gareth Evans, as echoing his own remarks about Australia being a natural ally of Japan, and was enthusiastically taken up by the Australian press in terms of the opportunity and challenge presented to Australia.

Between 2006 and 2010, the bilateral relationship between Australia and Japan blossomed in new and important directions. Most significantly, Australia and Japan mobilised bilateralism into regional and global spheres, representing a balancing of relations in the areas of politics and security to complement the hitherto robust history of trade and investment. In an era of new security challenges and shifting geopolitical circumstances in the Asia–Pacific region and beyond, Australia and Japan included each other in their evolving regional diplomatic strategies. At the same time, political leaders in both countries dealt with the vexed issue of Japanese whaling in the Southern Ocean by playing to the charged emotions prevalent in their respective domestic constituencies, while simultaneously sending a ‘business as usual’ message between officials. The disconnect between policy-makers’ pragmatism concerning the political situation in the partner nation, on the one hand, and popular outrage stoked by media reports and official statements, on the other, undermined the momentum achieved in the broader bilateral relationship.

Canberra’s foreign policy orientation has shifted inexorably towards the Asia-Pacific region over the last quarter century. Into the 1970s, Australia viewed itself as in, but not of, Asia. The demise of ’White Australia’ notwithstanding, Canberra remained the capital of a far-flung European outpost. Today, that geopolitical identity seems quaintly archaic. Australia is unambiguously an Asia-Pacific country. Its chief trading partner is Japan; its main ally is the United States; and its strategic analysts’ main focuses are Indonesia and China. Within this broader regional context, Canberra considers North-East Asia, South-East Asia, and the South Pacific as sub-regions of particular concern for Australian foreign and defence policy. But what about South Asia, an area conventionally defined as encompassing India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal, the Maldives, and Bhutan? What role do these countries play in Australia’s international relations? Do Australian policy-makers perceive them as important? Have Canberra’s links with the subcontinent traditionally been characterised by amity or enmity? What is the nature of these relationships today?