The Rainbow Families annual conference was this weekend. It is a convocation of resources for GLBT families all over the Upper Midwest. There are workshops about legal protection of partners and children, artificial insemination, transgender parenting issues, saving for college, and adoption, just to name a few. I've gone to the prospective parent workshops before, so this year, I decided to do the educator track. What I learned about the school conditions of GLBT youth was upsetting. It hasn't gotten much better in the ridiculously huge number of years since I graduated from high school.
The first session I attended was about transgender issues from preschool through high school. I chose this workshop because of my experiences with The Princess (those who don't know what I'm talking about should read Transgender 5-Year-Old: What's a Feminist Nanny to Do?). Two parents on the panel had children with stories very similar to The Princess' situtation. One parent's child is now 21 and fully transitioned. The other parent has a six-year-old who has legally changed his name to a boy's name and is identified in school as a boy. The school has even made a gender neutral bathroom available to him. When his mom talked about his future, she started sobbing, because she KNOWS he will be beaten and tormented when he gets older.
There was one panelist who told the tale that mom feared and that I worry The Princess will have to face someday. This young man graduated from high school last year. He transitioned in the middle of tenth grade. He was tormented for four years with no help, no protection from the school. He was beaten regularly by classmates and was sexually assaulted more than once. The principal's response? "Well, you weren't technically raped, so what am I supposed to do about it?" The school has video of some of the incidents, but they deny seeing anything "unprovoked." His very existence, according to school officials, warranted beating and sexual assault. His family won't back him, because they are angry that he has "embarrassed" them so.
This poor kid would try not to pee all day, and when he couldn't make it, he skipped class to drive home and go to the bathroom somewhere safe. He couldn't use the women's restroom without some girl's boyfriend beating him up, and going into the men's bathroom was the equivalent of a deathwish.
Stories like this explain some of the research on GLBT youth (although most if the research is actual on G, L, or B youth...transgender youth remain invisible). According to a 2005 study by GLSEN, "37.8% of students experienced physical harassment on the basis of sexual orientation." More than 25% were harassed on the basis of gender expression. Almost 20% were physically assaulted. 92% report hearing peers make derogatory remarks about GLBT people, and 39% report that no one ever intervenes. What is more disturbing is that 37% of GLBT students report hearing STAFF make derogatory comments!
In this climate, it is no wonder that GLBT students skip school more often than their heterosexual classmates. It is no wonder they suffer higher rates of depression and suicide. Who could endure that kind of abuse without some negative effects on the psyche?
But here in Minnesota, I thought smugly, the situation MUST be better. We're a blue state! We have one of the largest GLBT populations in the nation! The stories I heard from other teachers shot that theory down. Despite the fact that the Minnesota Human Rights Act forbids discrimination based on sexual orientation in the workplace and in educational settings, very few schools have an anti-discrimination policy that matches. In the majority of school districts in Minnesota, GLBT students remain unprotected, and the climate is utterly hostile.
Students who bring incidents of discrimination to the attention of administrators are often treated as if they were the cause of the problem...as if they deserve the bullying they endure. Teachers who advocate on behalf of these students are often harassed themselves. (NOTE: As stated before, trans students remain invisible. There are NO school districts that protect gender identity. Even the Minnesota Human Rights Act omits gender identity).
And still, people protest anti-bullying curriculum that mentions GLBT people. They say it is obscene and that they have the right to teach their children about sex when and as they see fit. If these people could see past their own ignorance and fear long enough to identify with the pain these students and families feel...if they could see the damage in that young trans boy's eyes as he talked about being held down and felt up and beaten in his school...maybe they would understand that it is not about sex at all. And it is NOT obscene. In fact, what could be more decent than letting your children learn to respect the life and well being of their classmates? Is it a waste of time to teach your kid that raping a classmate is wrong?
It starts with little things like name calling in elementary school, and it escalates. THAT is why we have to teach it in elementary school. We have to stop it before it becomes something much worse. I have to do all I can to stop it before The Princess gets to high school. I won't have him hurt.
To learn more about GLBT students, visit:
GLSEN http://www.glsen.org/cgi-bin/iowa/all/home/index.html
The Safe Schools Coalition http://www.safeschoolscoalition.org/safe.html
Groundspark,org (has amazing videos on all kinds of discrimination).
http://www.groundspark.org/
It always makes me sad to read about things like this. I'd hoped that in this day and age that people would be more open and accepting of peoples' differences. Unfortunately, that just still isn't so.
I honestly cannot fathom how a school, a place where kids are supposed to be able to learn and feel safe, can just sit by as their students are beaten and raped for being different. It's disgusting and shameful. I just pray that if I ever have children, and when I do, that they'll be in the kind of environment that will be willing to keep them safe and nurture them as they grow - not leave them to the violent whims of their classmates.
A really wonderful blog.
The mom of the six-year-old was really lucky to find the school she found. Their family got transferred to a small town because of work, and they just had to go with the neighborhood school. She was sure they would be shocked and unaccommodating, but they were great! Stories like that give me hope.
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/ediblewoman
I dont know what to do. I feel that know one should be treated this way, but in all honesty I don't agree with most of the glbt community either. I will not allow my brothers and sisters and children to be brainwashed into the complete opposite of what we've been taught. I dont want my sister to be encouraged to be a lesbian.
I would however, rain hell on anyone who hurt someone as sweet as you make the princess sound in the afore mentioned blog. I would destroy anyone raping a GLBT individual, I would for anyone really. I will not advocate but I will sure as hell do all in my power to make sure there is no discrimination.
I may not agree with the choice, but a choice it is. God may not have intended GLBT to exist, but since they do I will not allow them to come to harm on my watch. I feel for your pain, I really do, I dont mean to sound bigoted. One of my best friends came out awhile ago and some people rag on him kind of hard, but for the most part the community is accepting, and I'm in a red state.
So let it be known that there are people who, while they dont agree with you, detest what others do to the GLBT community.
I appreciate that you dislike the overt discrimination against the GLBT community, and would try to prevent the rape of any individual (I would hope), even if you "don't agree with us".
However, I need to point out that no one is trying to brainwash anyone. No one is trying to recruit you or your siblings or children to the gay side. Being gay or transgender is not a choice. It just is. (And honestly, I don't think God is the type to make mistakes, being God and all, so I see nothing wrong with being gay or trans.)
That's also not really the point of this blog post. The point is that discrimination shouldn't be happening, period. Teaching children not to tease each other is necessary. It doesn't matter what it's about - skin color, disabilities, gender expression, or sexual orientation - teasing, hurting, and discrimination are wrong. Teaching that something is wrong does not teach *it.* Children will not become trans or gay by learning that teasing trans or gay students is wrong. Perhaps they might learn to be a little more thoughtful, open-minded, and empathetic though.
I'm sorry, of course that was the point of the blog. I took it the wrong way. I just don't want the reverse discrimination to start. I am sorry though, I never meant to say that the GLBT community were maliciously brainwashing anyone. I just don't want my sister to feel that she should be gay. The teen years can be very confusing and I dont want her to think that becoming gay is the answer to all the questions she will have( if that makes anymore sense).
I completly agree that children should respect the choices of others, but maybe I can put my concern into a better light.
When I was fairly young, 10-11 years old, the good touch bad touch presentation became a BIG thing. It seemed that I would be sexualy harassed by everyone close to me before the year was out. I was terrified. One day me and my uncle were wrestling and his hand accidentally sliped down the back of my pants.
He didn't grope me, didn't even really touch me. Due to my education however, I immediately went and told my parents. Naturaly my parents questioned him, outside of my presence. Apparently they were satasfied with his answers because there were no repurcussions(thank god). I havn't talked about this since but I was ashamed that I might have caused such damage to my family
Now to link these two topics( and I dont want to incenuate that being gay is like child molestation, just for the record).
I dont want my sister to feel like, when they explain the confusing feeling that I imagine comes with first coming out, she must be gay. I hope you dont take that the wrong way. If she does end up being homosexual I will still love her of course, but I would really prefer she not have to go through such a monumentous change in the family.
I dont know if this clears up my name from the last post but I hope it's not worse.
First of all, I understand completely what you are saying with the over-emphasis leading to unfounded conclusions. Though I won't get into specifics, that's happened to me, too.
Secondly, you have to understand that there's a difference. We go through life expecting heterosexuality to be the norm. Questioning that is strictly for the minority. Asking others to question it is not the same as making them paranoid about molestation, in part because conclusions are strictly personal and relatively easy to come to. You ponder it for awhile and either decide or you don't. If you don't, you leave it for another day or acknowledge that your sexuality is flexible. Without the big stink our culture makes of it, the discovery of one's sexual orientation would be a happy, or at least neutral, affair, that everyone would go through.
Sorry, none of that was phrased well, but it's late and I'm out of eloquence for the day. Forgive me?
T.k.
If you'll do the same.
Sure thing
T.k.
I appreciate that you stand up against violence and harassment. The one thing I want to clarify is that there is a difference between education and promotion. In these anti-bullying curricula, no one is telling anyone to be a lesbian.
The curricula simply say that there are people in the world who love best a person of the same gender (and even though gender is somewhat inaccurate, and they really should say "sex," most programs are careful NOT to say sex, as one of the arguments against these lessons is that they are teaching sex).
And they say that there are families that have two moms and families that have two dads, and that those families deserve respect as much as other families. They also say that name calling and harassment is wrong. That's IT! That is hardly promotion of a lifestyle, especially given the statistics about which I just wrote. It is all taught in a very age-appropriate manner.
Rainbow Families teaches people how to respond to discrimination against GLBT people even if they are morally opposed to the lifestyle. Many people are morally opposed to violence and want to protect young people, but they don't know how to speak up against harassment without sounding like they are condoning homosexuality. Look into it. There are resources out there for the fair minded.
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/ediblewoman
"I will not allow my brothers and sisters and children to be brainwashed into the complete opposite of what we've been taught."
Wow. Too bad no one was there to defend YOU while you were being brainwashed.
"So let it be known that there are people who, while they dont agree with you, detest what others do to the GLBT community."
Claims like this are insultingly disingenuous when coupled with comments like "God may not have intended GLBT to exist..." that directly contribute to the climate of hatred against the GLBT community. You don't get a free pass just because your intolerance is religiously inspired, nor because it does not manifest itself in physical violence.
I wouldn't say I'm intolerant just because I don't agree with your life style, but your right I worded that completly wrong. I really hope you can get past my ignorance to see the benevolence behind it, but I fear I may have pissed you off with my unthinking declaration of my disagreeing stance.
I have gay friends. I love them and tell them so often. I am not religious and was just pointing out a partial reason, but I wont get into that. My main point I was trying to make was that I am appauled at the level of violence and discrimination present in whichever areas your talking about, it really isnt an issue where I'm from. Apparently we are really accepting around here.
I apologise for saying anything and I will stay out of you clique from now on so as not to offend anyone with my bigotted, unfounded, damnedable views.
Again I am sorry.
sincerly,
locke
I read your comment on HopeforMankind's blog, which prompted me to revisit the comments you referenced there. I have to say that I don't think you were personally attacked here. I think your views were challenged. Yes, they were called intolerant. They may have been called ignorant (I don't remember if they were, but the bit about brainwashing and recruiting could have been called that). But you gave your opinion on the matter, Hammy gave his. Don't take that stuff personally. Take it as a cue to examine your opinion so you can either back it up or change it. That's what these exchanges are for. I do hope that you'll come back.
And for the record, Hammy is as hetero as they get. And he's not one to finesse a response.
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/ediblewoman
Instead of mentioning any specific groups, why dont they educate children on basic compassion and understanding of everyone.
Hammy, I think his quote was expressing the fact that NO-ONE wants their children, or younger siblings exposed to ANYTHING that can take on a sexual nature or connotation, before they are ready.
I think a resonable compromise would be to just educate anti-bullying on a broader scale, instead of making it primarily about homosexuality.
"my first name must be, "He aint sh@t", cause everytime I come through, yall be like "He aint sh@t"!....I'll be dat" --Redman
"Anything that can go wrong, Will go wrong"----Murphy's Law
The reason is, of course, that not all children face the same level of bullying and harassment. Demographically, it is plain that a these kids are being targeted because of their percieved sexuality. The root cause of these incidents is not because of a lack of "basic compassion and understanding," but rather a specific area of ignorance that leads to social aggression being directed explicitly at gay kids (and kids who are percieved to be gay).
It seems to me that if a child is aware enough of another child's sexuality (or perceived sexuality) to target him or her for a violent attack because of it, then its long past time that someone began to educate that child about the relevant subject matter.
Kids are ALREADY being broadly taught not to bully one another (at least in theory). The problem here is that there is a specific area of ignorance that creates the impression that the rules for "normal" kids don't apply where the gay and transgeneder kids are concerned. The desire to KEEP these children ignorant IS THE PROBLEM. A parent that would rather see a gay kid getting beat up and raped rather than having his own child educated in the hopes of preventing that kind of violence has MONUMENTALLY FUCKED UP VALUES...in my humble opinion.
TTFN,
percivale
-------------------------
Check out Progressive PRIDE, a Gay-Straight Alliance for the Progressive U community.
Honeslty. Do you really believe that?
Children, especially before high school, make fun of, or bully anyone who is different. I remember when I was in school, people bullied you if you didnt have the nice clothes, or you were over weight, or you only had one parent, I could just keep going. Americans have to start thinking as Americans. There should be no GLBT communities, the same way there should be no "white" or "black" communities. We have to work and live together.
Sorry for the rant, but, basically all I'm saying is that children hate who are different. So, a class that "targets" a specific group would only further their differences. However, if we started in Kindergarten teaching that it is wrong to belittle ANYONE no matter what. One, it would teach the same material that you are pushing for, and two it would not put people in groups. People would just be people.
I dont know, thats just what I think
"my first name must be, "He aint sh@t", cause everytime I come through, yall be like "He aint sh@t"!....I'll be dat" --Redman
"Anything that can go wrong, Will go wrong"----Murphy's Law
"There should be no GLBT communities, the same way there should be no 'white' or 'black' communities. We have to work and live together."
That is the first thing I've read from you that I could almost agree with. We do all have to work and live together. However, the GLBT population is the most openly discriminated population we have out there right now, and the "community" is really a community within the community. People need resources and empowerment from each other to fight discrimination. It's not an actual separate community. Until there is equality, this is necessary.
As far as teaching children not to belittle anyone, it's a good idea in theory. In the situations at hand, it sounded like the teachers and parents were almost promoting the harassment of the GLBT kids. No kid is going to buy it unless the actions of the adults change, or all groups that are discriminated against are talked about. It's not like the anti-bullying programs are only about GLBT kids.
-Sonja :)
"Democracy works only when you vote. When you don't take the time to vote for the candidate you find the least offensive, you run the risk of electing the candidate you find the most offensive."
Ironically, the only way to REALLY educate the adults is to begin as children. I do agree that the learning process must start early, so why not devote your attention to the children, in a non-divisive way.
Adults who have hatred for any kind of people are unteachable. We cant try to teach adults to change their views or beliefs, but we can teach compassion to children.
Although, I do not support the "idea" of open homosexual marriages, I do support compassion for all peoples. These were two things taught to me early on in life. I had gay people in my schools, and never thought to harass or belittle them, even if it was percieved as cool. I think my actions in school were a direct result of my compassion for everyone, even those who were different than me.
"my first name must be, "He aint sh@t", cause everytime I come through, yall be like "He aint sh@t"!....I'll be dat" --Redman
"Anything that can go wrong, Will go wrong"----Murphy's Law
The elevated level of violence and discrimination faced by gay and transgendered kids--far beyond the normal statistical prevalence for kids in general--is a well established demographic fact. Despite being one of the smallest minority demographics, anti-gay bias crimes represent the third most common expression of bias-motivated bias (behind race and religion). Depending on precisely how you spin the statistics, this places gay people at between three to seven times as likely to be the target of an anti-bias crime than any other identifiable identity-based group.
From the U.S. Department of Justice: Crime in the United States (2004)
FBI Shows Gay-Bashing Increase in 2006
Factsheet: Bullying and Gay Youth
stopping anti-gay abuse of students in public schools
Gay, Lesbian, & Bi Teens: Students & Schools
I would say that kids make fun of and bully other kids that they perceive to be different. And, they bully gay and transgendered kids EVEN MORE because that ignorance is promoted and perpetuated by the unwillingness of many people to face up to the facts. And, lets not forget that this wasn't just an example of a kid being picked on by his peers. This child was RAPED.
Tell me this...when you were young and in school, how many times were you called a "nigger" every day? (I apologize for using such an offensive term, but I think it is appropriate to do so in this context.) Well, for gay kids, that is an occurrance that (on the average) happens once every 14 minutes.
"While trying to deal with all the challenges of being a teenager, gay/ lesbian/ bisexual/ transgender (GBLT) teens additionally have to deal with harassment, threats, and violence directed at them on a daily basis. They hear anti-gay slurs such as “homo”, “faggot” and “sissy” about 26 times a day or once every 14 minutes." (Bart, M. Creating a safer school for gay students. Counseling Today, September 1998)
Use of terms like this would be considered COMPLETELY unacceptable, and would be aggressively confronted and suppressed if the basis of the discrimination was racial. But, because this is happening to gay kids, this slurs are largely ignored and go unpunished in our schools today.
I disagree. I think kids "hate" other kids who they have been taught to believe are different.
That sounds pretty rediculous to me. Ignorance promotes hatred, but knowledge promotes understanding. I don't know of any instances where the opposite has ever proved to be true.
We DO start teaching that in kindegarten. However, because of the voluntary ignorance that is promoted by some, that lesson isn't being learned when it comes to gay and transgendered kids. Also, I can't help but wonder if your position isn't being influenced by your own well-documented anti-gay sentiments. It seems awfully convenient that you don't see it as a big deal that a group of people that you have actively spoken out against in the past are being violently targeted.
TTFN,
percivale
-------------------------
Check out Progressive PRIDE, a Gay-Straight Alliance for the Progressive U community.
You are right. I believe that the GLBT communities have been victims to "hate-crimes" at alaming rates. Yes. However, educating elementary school kids on ANYTHING that parents deem "sexual" is wrong. Also, you are right, Education prompts understanding. However, to educate a third grader on the difference between heterosexuality, and homosexuality is a bit out of line.
"Tell me this...when you were young and in school, how many times were you called a "nigger" every day?"
As for your question about my experiences of racism, I went to a predominantly white urban high school in Chicago. My freshman year I heard the word "nigger" more times from classmates than my name. (A bit of an exageration). But, seriously I was forced to defend my honor because the administration at my school had no concrete evidence to prove my assertions. I had to slap a few people around, serve my suspensions (plural), and when I came back to school I didnt heard those kinds of remarks anymore.
That was the way I handled it. I am not sying that gay people should go on "ass kicking" tirades, but the first thing I learned in my high school was that people bully those who let them.
"my first name must be, "He aint sh@t", cause everytime I come through, yall be like "He aint sh@t"!....I'll be dat" --Redman
"Anything that can go wrong, Will go wrong"----Murphy's Law
The point you keep missing is that none of these anti-bullying curricula teach exclusively about GLBT families, and none of them teach anything remotely sexual. They teach about families and the different configurations and colors of families, including straight families, single parent families, grandparent-run families, etc. The protest only happens when a same sex family is included.
And what does that teach a kid about whether or not it is right to insult/discriminate/bully a kid from one of those families? If their parents bully GLBT families at the PTA meeting, and then the kid is told by the parent to "opt out" of the lesson because the school is teaching about something wrong, do think that kid will get the message that bullying ANYONE is not okay? Or will they get the message that bullying everyone EXCEPT the gay people and gay people's kids is wrong?
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/ediblewoman
Ediblewoman, if you are right about the fact that they teach to students the different types of family structures, I agree, you have to include GLBT families.
Maybe they can start young and general, and by the time the get to middle school, you can get specific.
Just because children tend to mimic what they learn. So, I think if you include GLBT families on top of hetero-families into a young childs brain, the child might want to mimic what he hears about.
For instance, when I was very young it was cool to play "house", where you picked a girl as your mate, and during school hours you were supposedly married. You held hands, gave kisses on the cheek, and there were even occasions of "cheating" between couples. This was all in like the first grade. Now, looking back it was the beginning of my sexuality. Those times formed how I would interact with the opposite sex. There were some boys who couln't get a girl, even back then. If they would have known about GLBT families, maybe they would have formed their own "gay" family since all the girls were taken.
"my first name must be, "He aint sh@t", cause everytime I come through, yall be like "He aint sh@t"!....I'll be dat" --Redman
"Anything that can go wrong, Will go wrong"----Murphy's Law
This is a tired, stereotypical myth that has been thoroughly disproved in the literature of child psychology. Young people who are exposed to gay people are no more likely to be gay themselves than young people who aren't. Heck, even that fact that you're worried about this is just one more example of the same sort of ignorance that CREATES THESE PROBLEMS in the first place. The underlying premise of your concern is that being gay is "wrong," and THAT is the very seed from which this kind of violence is grown.
TTFN,
percivale
-------------------------
Check out Progressive PRIDE, a Gay-Straight Alliance for the Progressive U community.
I disagree. Frankly, if a parent can't (or more likely won't) educate and control his or her child well enough to prevent them from physically assaulting other students, then they have in my opinion abrogated the right to get upset when the school has to step in and do it for them. Also, it is my experience that the programs that attempt to educated about these issues in the lower grades aren't the least bit "sexual," but it is rather the prejudice of the objective parents that compels them to deem ANY discussion of LGBT issues in ANY context as such.
I don't think anyone is suggesting that it is appropriate of that third-graders even need to be instructed in any kind of detailed anatomical explanation of the ins-and-outs (pardon the pun) of sexual intercourse, but I don't think it is unreasonable to expect a third grader to grasp things like "sometimes little Johnny and little Suzie like each other, but sometimes little Johnny likes little Billy instead." Kids at that age regularly deal with concepts that are related to sexuality (like Valentine's Day) without having to understand that adults sometimes do more on that day that give each other a card and a piece of candy.
Unfortunately, the situation that we are describing for gay and transgendered kids isn't an exaggeration, and it is pretty primitive, I think, to suggest that a bullied kid has to either put up with the harassment or respond violently themselves. Public schools have an obligation to provide a safe environment for their charges, and trying to pretend that what is happening to these kids is in any way typical is just flat out wrong.
TTFN,
percivale
-------------------------
Check out Progressive PRIDE, a Gay-Straight Alliance for the Progressive U community.
you are right. Thats what I meant. I shouldn't have had to defend my name and honor but I did. It was sad that I was punished for it.
GLBT teens shouldn't have to defend their honor either, but and this is from an individual standpoint, on must do what one deems nessisary for their survival, and if someone is violently abusing me, I only see a few options, violence being one.
"my first name must be, "He aint sh@t", cause everytime I come through, yall be like "He aint sh@t"!....I'll be dat" --Redman
"Anything that can go wrong, Will go wrong"----Murphy's Law
I know I probably sound really harsh about all of this, but this is an issue that I have a LOT of personal experience with. Unlike a lot of gay kids, I was physically imposing enough to stick up for myself physically when I was attacked (more than once) by someone who wanted to beat up the "fairy." But, a LOT of kids aren't so lucky, and aren't able to defend themselves, and they shouldn't have to. It drives me NUTS when I hear about kids being beaten, raped and even KILLED because some other kid decided that having a gay kid in the class was just too much to bear.
The ONLY way that this crap is ever going to change is if we stop dancing around the subject and CONFRONT this ignorance HEAD ON. There is absolutely no rational reason to consider homosexuality to be a taboo subject in our schools. There are gay kids in those schools. There are gay families in our country. There are FACTS, and it serves NO ONE to pretend otherwise and ignore the fact that gay kids and adults are being subject to a truly staggering level of violence and harassment. If we can't face up to this and even TALK about it, even with our kids, then how will it ever get any better!?!?!
TTFN,
percivale
-------------------------
Check out Progressive PRIDE, a Gay-Straight Alliance for the Progressive U community.
Its these punk ass kids who cant beat on anyone else so they decide to beat on the kid labeled as "soft" or "gay". Your right. I am not a physically imposing person, and I know alot of hate directed towards me was simply because they thought that they could get away with it.
I hope school principles can look past opinions and recognize that bullying is probably the biggest school stress for children, outside of expectations and homework.
"my first name must be, "He aint sh@t", cause everytime I come through, yall be like "He aint sh@t"!....I'll be dat" --Redman
"Anything that can go wrong, Will go wrong"----Murphy's Law
From a conservative "pro-family" site in Indiana:
"Victory in Indiana! Hate Crimes Legislation Dead"
"Today I am able to bring you good news! In a previous email last week I alerted you to a very dangerous bill that the Representative Greg Porter drafted. HB 1459 the Indiana Hate Crimes bill flew out of committee with a vote of 9:1. House Bill 1459 would have made it a worse crime to assault a gay man walking out of a bar than attacking a grandma walking down the street. It would have created 2 classes of victims, and punished someone more because of their thoughts. This bill represents an attempt to give special protection to homosexuals and cross dressers by stating that a crime against them is to be treated with more severity than a crime against a senior citizen, a child or a pregnant mom. It was a step in the wrong direction for the freedom of speech. I believe a crime is a crime, and needs to be punished to the full extent of the law! One would wonder, would the next step have been to prohibit speech that someone views as hateful? For example, will legislation be introduced to prohibit pastors from speaking out against the homosexual lifestyle? This legislation has already been introduced in the US congress (HR 254), and stands with the votes aligned ready to pass. Already, we have people who are being arrested under the “Hate Crimes” laws. Ask these 2 grandmothers in Pennsylvania who have received a 40 year jail sentence for passing out what Pennsylvania described as hate speech. (The Bible!!!)"
WHY was it turned down? The same reason it has been for years- one representative added anti-choice bills into the amendment, knowing it wouldn't be passed. Ignorance has got to stop.
If the government won't protect a group of people, we can't expect schools to. Maybe we need to hit higher- government first. Then religion. Religion was not meant to preach hate or make excuses for violence!
.
-Sonja :)
"Democracy works only when you vote. When you don't take the time to vote for the candidate you find the least offensive, you run the risk of electing the candidate you find the most offensive."
"What do you want me to do? He wasn't technically raped..."
A school official this ignorant and stupid. I hope he gets fired. How can schools hire such moronic authority figures?
I feel for the Princess. I hope he (or she?) doesn't have to deal with such harrassment as described in those stories.
~ *~
This is a signature, an automated thingy that pops up when I comment, not a demand to see my blog!
Mind Control is Easier Than You Think
That poor kid had the misfortune of attending a school in one of those districts that violates the Minnesota Human Rights Act. As a way of pacifying the student, they allowed a GSA to start up, but only after he graduated. They are allowed to meet, but they are not allowed to advertise, organize, or otherwise make their presence on campus known. And the principal has tons of parent support in his discrimination, including, sadly, the panelist's parents.
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/ediblewoman
I would think that if school can take the time to explain that everyone is different and everyone is special in regards to skin color, the same should apply to sexual orientation. Kids aren't being protected by the subject being ignored, they are only learning that since it is "wrong" to talk about, then it must be "wrong." Communication with kids about anything and everything they may have questions about is an important part of the learning process. No child should be denied the knowledge of something because the adults are afraid. Knowledge should never be feared as it is the lack of knowledge that causes all the problems.
And kids know about it anyway. Especially if they have a friend from a gay family in their class. And even if they don't, they hear about it everywhere. I mean, come on, how many kids watch the Family Guy? Too many. I think it's important to combat the misinformation they give each other.
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/ediblewoman
This is exactly why kids should be educated younger. Why have them walking around repeating misinformation for their classmates? If schools address the issue of homosexuality and allow kids to ask questions, I think a lot of the confusion, fear, and bigotry can be tremendously reduced.
I do think it awesome that one school made accomadations for their transgender student. If more schools were willing to show this kind of acceptance, less bigotry and intolerance among the student population would exist.
Kids have a tendency to mimic adult response. If adults show negative attitudes towards acceptance of these individuals, the students will in turn treat these individuals negatively.
why dont they just teach a broad ani-bullying corriculum. Teach that it is wrong to harrass, or abuse anyone who is percieved as different, whether it be skin color, sexual orientation, or what ever.
I think less parents will be cautious to hear about a general anti-bullying class.
"my first name must be, "He aint sh@t", cause everytime I come through, yall be like "He aint sh@t"!....I'll be dat" --Redman
"Anything that can go wrong, Will go wrong"----Murphy's Law
First of all, I love the title to your blog, very clever and caught my eye immediately. Also, as I began reading I was saddened and disgusted by occurrences at the school you described. I agree with what others have sad, it is so disappointing to hear that even in our country, the "land of the free," people who do not follow the straight and narrow path constantly face discrimination and ridicule. And this is occurring in every state, red or blue, even in my home state of California, the so-called most liberal state. I remember gay hate crimes occurring at my high school, a school once known for its activism and for hippies. I agree that the change must start in the elementary schools. However, this can only go so far and the people that children receive the majority of their information and ideas from are their parents. Therefore, until parents are more respectful of people's differences, and teach their children to be kind to all of their peers, no matter their sexual orientation, race, etc. there will probably be no change. Lets just hope that when we are all parents we can start that revolution (or perhaps speak with our parents!).
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/kelliecor
Come meet my weight training teacher sometime. I'm enjoying making him uncomfortable by saying things like, "Sorry, I have to skip your class tomorrow. I'm vice-president of the school's GSA, and we're doing presentations to the health classes." Or, better yet, my statistics teacher, who's not only a lazy bum, but ignores students who start extensive conversations on how some skateboarder or another "can't be a fag, because he's too awesome!" Or maybe my anatomy/physiology class members who like to show off how smart and un-P.C. they are by deliberately referring to transgendered people by the wrong pronouns.
While I have never been physically assaulted for my gender or sexuality, these little things drive me batty. It's hard to stand up to a room filled with ignorant people.
(It might interest you to know that, at least where I live, GSAs are becoming far more inclusive of transgendered people. We are actively campaigning for gender-neutral bathrooms and regularly hold discussions and workshops on the topic. Not good times, but getting better.)
T.k.
Having spent most of my short life in Hawaii, i have seen and accepted almost anything.
In my experience attending high school in Hawaii, i found differences in sexual orientation to be widely accepted. Often, males/females who related to the opposite sex and choose to live as the opposite sex were generally accepted. The same goes for gays, lesbians, and bisexuals. I don't personally know anyone who is trans gendered, but i would expect more acceptance in Hawaii than the "mainland."
In fact, two of the most popular dancers in our school were two males - both who danced in rather feminine roles and one who lived as a female.
So hearing these stories of complete and utter non-acceptance is hard for me to truly understand. And really, it makes me very sad.
Great Topic!
-Antonea
The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable man persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man. -George Bernard Shaw
I'm taking a class that posed this question, the thought process being that if we find the root, we can kill it at that. Obviously a lot of kids grow up in families with bigotry, against the LGBT community, people of other races, religions, classes, genders even. (Be glad you're a boy, son, you don't have to wash dishes and you get to play baseball!")
Some families don't have this going on. In my family, nothing negative was ever said by my parents, about anyone really, as a member of a group. Individuals, yes, but they weren't talked about as being part of a group. So, I had the thought growing up that people were individuals. My brothers, on the other hand, listened to some bigoted friends, and have their share of bigoted comments to make.
Discrimination and lack of respect toward certain groups starts in the home, but not necessarily each child's home. If the majority of parents there are promoting the hateful attacks, then maybe it's them that need to be taught.
Just to be clear, "sex" is biological, and "gender" is personal.
-Sonja :)
"Democracy works only when you vote. When you don't take the time to vote for the candidate you find the least offensive, you run the risk of electing the candidate you find the most offensive."
Thanks.
I think the reason some of the anti-bully stuff says "same gender" instead of same sex is because the vocal detractors dpon't know the difference, but they hear teh word sex and have a fit. Not all the curricula uses gender in place of sex, though. Just the ones that have taken flack for the presence of the word 'sex.'
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/ediblewoman
And thank you! :D
It does distract from the issue to use "sex" instead of "gender." Educating the parents is more likely to impact the kids, I think. Maybe PTA meetings? Maybe letters sent home and workshops at schools for both the parents and kids? You can do all the teaching in schools about mutual respect, but when the kids go home, they'll see the same discrimination and hate. How many kids have the power or will to tell their parents how it really is?
-Sonja :)
"Democracy works only when you vote. When you don't take the time to vote for the candidate you find the least offensive, you run the risk of electing the candidate you find the most offensive."
Wow, I didn't realize that things were getting so bad for LGBT high schoolers. I knew the LGBT kids at my school through drama productions and they found acceptance through that program. It was quite a beautiful thing. I knew that they were harassed by some, but many others supported them, so they were ok.
Are LGBT kids really not able to find absolutely no real support from anyone at their schools? This must change if it is true.
www.progressiveu.org/blog/americangirlinchina
But even in very supportive environments, it is impossible for teachers to catch and stop every gay slut that's tossed about. Wouldn't it be nice if they could experience a whole school day in which no one made fun of their sexual identity and they didn't have to witness anyone else being insulted by being compared to their sexual identity? I don't think there is a day that goes by without encountering at least one gay slur. Not for me, anyway, and I'm not even in a high school on a daily basis.
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/ediblewoman
Most of the comments made, kids don't even believe. Everyone has gotten picked on for some reason, whether it be sexuality, gender identity, wearing glasses, being poor, being rich, being a "nerd," being a "jock," being a "freak," being... a kid. The name-calling is something that sucks and it does torment some kids. Luckily, I grew up with cruel brothers, and nothing bothered me by the time I was in school.
Name-calling isn't right, but I couldn't imagine kids not being cruel with their words. They learn from the adults in their lives. ("You asshole ! You just cut me off!") You get a few kids starting with the name calling, then everyone joins in on it, and that's when it gets dangerous. It's the violence that worries me. As much as name-calling sucks, it doesn't kill. Violence can.
-Sonja :)
"Democracy works only when you vote. When you don't take the time to vote for the candidate you find the least offensive, you run the risk of electing the candidate you find the most offensive."
Most of the comments made, kids don't even believe.
I disagree. In elementary school, my best friend and I were both the "smart kids" of our grade. We were both labeled as "nerds" and "geeks" and "geniuses" (all said as taunts) by our classmates, and they took every opportunity they could to remind us of our lowly nerd status. After awhile, that becomes how you think of yourself. "Oh, I'm just the class nerd...", like you're not really worth anything. My friend had it worse than I did...he also got called "sissy" because he was quiet, shy, and didn't play sports. The label stuck with him through high school, and despite always wanting to join the military after high school, he didn't because he didn't think he was good enough.* Labels do stick to you, and if you're called that often enough, it can become part of your identity, whether it should or not. Name-calling may not kill directly, but it can certainly damage your self-esteem and self-confidence.
*This does have a happy ending - two years after graduating high school and being away from those people, he finally did join the military, and is now much happier about life.
My point is that kids do what the other kids do.
In that situation, and I've been there, the kids would rather not take responsibility for not understanding something, and work harder. They would rather think of the "smart kids" as being something different and negative. Kids are jealous when one person completely understands a concept while they have to work hard to do it.
In other cases, economic status, race, religion, and any other differences a child perceives is exasperated in his or her mind, based on what they learned at their home or by peers. It doesn't necessarily mean the child believes it, as the child doesn't really have many opinions or belief that are his or her own by experience.
I wasn't saying that the people that are being insulted (and every kid has been) aren't hurt by the statements. "Perceptions make discrimination self-reinforcing, then prejudice becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy." (Unlevel Playing Fields)
-Sonja :)
"Democracy works only when you vote. When you don't take the time to vote for the candidate you find the least offensive, you run the risk of electing the candidate you find the most offensive."
Finding acceptance in one extra-curricular activity at school is not even close to being accepted in every activity high schools have to offer. Kids should be able to freely participate in whichever program they are interested in without fear of being discriminated against just because of who they are. If they are only comfortable in drama and unable to extend past that department, there is definitely a lack of support from the school.
I think my optimism and my background is clouding my judgement. I don't want to believe that things have gotten this bad and I'm become content with the situation at my old high school. You guys are right, a little acceptance isn't enough. More must be done.
www.progressiveu.org/blog/americangirlinchina
The Day of Silence is next Friday, apparently. I'd participate in it, but that night is my school's Relay for Life, and I kinda need to be able to talk during that...
~C
Check out the latest entry in the Between The Lines column!
Want the highest rated list to change? RATE those blogs, then!
I love relays!
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/ediblewoman
I think it's a walk for Cancer. At least that's what the Relay for Life is in my town.
I think that's the standard for Relay for Life. The pick a well known area and invite people to walk and raise money.
I heard about that. Aren't there specific situations where it's all right to talk? For like school and such?
Violence against any group is wrong, unless there is no other way to prevent them from trespassing upon the rights of others. Bullying and violence are directed at ANY group perceived as different, especially if they also appear to be too weak to defend themselves.
While this is unfortunate, and to be prevented, you have not presented any evidence that government sponsored propaganda of the sort you seem to think is required will help at all. Perhaps it will can you prove it?
The danger inherent in your proposal is the establishment of indoctrination by government schools against the parents’ wishes. While I understand that you favor centralized power when it benefits your side of a given question, consider the effects it has had when it was directed against you, as it often has been in the past.
The better route is freedom in the form of choice. You should be able to choose your lifestyle, and others should also be free to choose theirs. Forcing everyone to do the same thing is just wrong.
"A faith that cannot survive collision with the truth is not worth many regrets."
-Arthur C. Clarke
Parents have the right to opt their students out of anything in Minnesota. In fact, one teacher at the conference had some children opt out of civil rights movement lessons that discussed racial equality. The parents who protest these curricula are trying to force complete invisibility on GLBT families. Do you think that is any way to protect students? We've done the anti-bullying thing for years without mentioning gay families, and the statistics on violence against gay youth, or heterosexual youth who are perceived to be gay, just keep going up. They can't remain unmentionable anymore. The stakes are too high. All these lesson tell kids is that these people exist (which is a fact, and not propaganda) and that they should not be teased, called names, ore beaten up for the fact of their existence. That's hardly forcing the detractors to do anything. They can still choose to beat people up if they wish.
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/ediblewoman
I just think they should be able to choose to go to schools that respect their opinions. Perhaps if there was enough demand there could be separate shools for everyone of these silly controversies for those that consider them of the foremost importance. Vouchers, not national ciriculum, is the future I want.
Has violence against GLBT and those perceived as such actually become a worse problem? I'm unconvinced. It has always been a problem. This is an attempt to solve it that may help, but there is no proof yet.
"A faith that cannot survive collision with the truth is not worth many regrets."
-Arthur C. Clarke
I believe that will just bring us back to segregation.
=D
In choosing freedom, even for my enemies, I try to be consistent. Homogenous is not diverse.
"A faith that cannot survive collision with the truth is not worth many regrets."
-Arthur C. Clarke
Do you really think that identifying a sub-population that is subject to excessive, identity-targetted harassment and violence in the context of a public institution, and then including a mention of that sub-population in a program designed to combat that harassment and violence to be an inappropriate action for that instiutitution? Your argument might have merit, if the harassment and violence faced by these kids were the same as that faced by the general population of the schools. But as that is clearly not the case, how do you justify the argument that no special steps should be taken to curtail these attacks?
TTFN,
Blackout
-------------------------
Yes, I've changed my username from "percivale" to "Blackout." Go here if you want to know why.
Unfortunately, there is clear evidence (discussed in more detail in the comments above) that the harassment and violence being faced by gay and transgendered kids in our schools are not the same as that which "ANY group" normally faces. The levels of bullying against this specific demographic is significantly elevated from the norm, and tends to be more severe than that which is faced by other minority groups.
I'm not sure what compels you to equate a program that teaches students that it is unacceptable to physically assault other students because of their perceived identity to "government propaganda." Acutally, if you had followed the links provided by ediblewoman (in her original blog) and by myself (in the comments above), you would have seen that several of these links contain information specifically on the studied effectiveness of programs of the type we are discussing. However, I will be happy to provide you with a more direct and detailed set of links addressing your concerns...
Study Proving That Schools Can Take Steps to Improve Student Safety Has National Implications for Addressing Harassment on the Basis of Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity
"In a more detailed look at school climate and harassment based on actual or perceived sexual orientation and gender nonconformity, the 2003 Preventing School Harassment survey found that there are specific steps schools can take to improve safety, reduce harassment, and strengthen students’ connections to school and community."
Click here to download the full Safe Place to Learn report.
Click here to download the Safe Place to Learn summary fact sheet.
Bullying prevention in schools: Executive summary
"That tailored initiatives be developed to address the unique needs of the community which can vary according to geographic location (rural versus urban) and community make-up (e.g., ethnocultural groups, persons with disabilities, members of the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered community)."
Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine:
Effects of Antibullying School Program on Bullying and Health Complaints
"Rigorous evaluations of school violence prevention programs commissioned by Congress, the U.S. Departments of Education and Justice, and the U.S. Surgeon General have all found prevention of bullying to be among the most effective programs for reducing school violence." (LINK)
I think that I have made myself clear on many occasions that I do not in principle agree with the institution of government controlled, "public" education. However, that institution is a reality, and as such our government has a responsiblity to ensure that it is managed equitably, and that the safety of the young citizens left in its care is reasonably protected. That is (obviously, I think) not happening when it comes to the gay and transgendered kids that have been left in the State's care.
As for the "wishes" of the parents, there are a number of points that I would offer in response. The first is that, quite frankly, parents do not have the right to exert individual ideological control over the cirriculum of a public insitution...especially when that ideological objection is (as this one is) primarily of a religious character. That's why we don't have prayer in schools, and don't teach creationism in our science classrooms. The second point is one that I mentioned above, i.e. that if a parent has failed to educate his or her child sufficiently to understand that it is not acceptable to harass and assault other students because of their perceived identity, then that parent's "wishes" can reasonably be contradicted by the actions of the State taken in response to that parent's failures. The third point is that parents who object to having their kids exposed to these programs DO have the right to remove their child from the public institution, and to educate that child privately in accordance to whatever standards they wish.
I'm not quite sure what you mean, here, but you seem to be suggesting that it is wrong to require that students who participate in public education refrain from harassing and assaulting other students, based on their opinions of those other students' "lifestyles." The only thing that is being "forced" here is for students (and their parents) accept certain facts...i.e. that gay families exist, and that gay and transgendered students have the same right to be protected from harassment and assault as any other student.
TTFN,
percivale
-------------------------
Check out Progressive PRIDE, a Gay-Straight Alliance for the Progressive U community.
"The better route is freedom in the form of choice. You should be able to choose your lifestyle, and others should also be free to choose theirs. Forcing everyone to do the same thing is just wrong."
Is the statement about "turning kids gay" by educating them? The choice to live your own life as long as you're not hurting anyone else without people beating you down for it is freedom.
Ignorance is incredibly frustrating. The biggest point is that we're all human beings and for that we should all be respected. Really, if you don't agree with something somebody is or does, that's fine, don't do it. Interracial couples still get harassed and violated. Why do people feel that other people's relationships affect them so much?
-Sonja :)
"Democracy works only when you vote. When you don't take the time to vote for the candidate you find the least offensive, you run the risk of electing the candidate you find the most offensive."
"Is the statement about "turning kids gay" by educating them?"
Can that be done? I am afraid I don't see where you got that, except by assumption, from what I said. Some of the parents may have that fear. We do know that environmental issues are present in gender identity, and sexual orientation. The ages that are most likely to be influenced are younger than school age.
---
"Ignorance is incredibly frustrating."
Might I suggest that ignorance is omnipresent in humans, and disagreement is what frustrates you?
"A faith that cannot survive collision with the truth is not worth many regrets."
-Arthur C. Clarke
...to kowtow to the irrational fears of the ignorant, and there is no other term, really, that applies to people living in the 21st century that are still operating under the myth that being exposed to information about gay people will turn kids gay.
TTFN,
percivale
-------------------------
Check out Progressive PRIDE, a Gay-Straight Alliance for the Progressive U community.
Are you more likely to do any given act if it is encouraged or forbidden?
In this specific case where children are concerned I would go as far as to say they could be taught to not wear clothing without embarrassment, and even participate in bisexual orgies. Why, except to advance this cultural agenda, would you pretend to think otherwise?
http://sex.ncu.edu.tw/members/Ho/paper/Trans-Sexuality_Bisexual.pdf
Sexual behavior in different cultures is quite distinct.
http://www.altpr.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=Sections&file=index&req...
http://www.bockwall.com/aahours/lifestyle.html
"Cultures vary tremendously in how early they start having sex, how open they are about it, and how many sexual partners they have,"
http://www.livescience.com/health/060727_sex_history.html
http://www.bigeye.com/sexeducation/history.html
http://everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=1231254
Your motive for pretending to ignorance of the sexual history of humans is quite transparent. You wish to change our present culture. To a large extent I am with you in that desire, but I stop short at trying to remove peoples choice, and would never ridicule them for believing differently. When YOU do so you reveal at least one form of ignorance.
"A faith that cannot survive collision with the truth is not worth many regrets."
-Arthur C. Clarke
Based on the evidence already presented to you regarding the specific actions in question, here (i.e. identity-motivated bullying), it would seem that these programs do in fact lower the levels of harassment and violence faced by these kids.
As to the question of sexual oritientation and how it is formed, your argument would seem to rely on two basic fallacies. The evidence does not support the myth that exposure to information about gay people effects the ultimate sexual orientation of a child. The second fallacy you seem to be suggesting is that even such exposure did have such an effect, that it would be "bad" for the kids involved (relying on the idiotic assumption that being gay is inherently "wrong"). Both assumptions are incorrect, and irrelevant in any case.
The context of this discussion involves a very specific set of circumstances (i.e. identity-motivated bullying in a public schools setting), and proposes a solution to combat that circumstance so that ALL of the kids in that setting can live and learn without being subject to an inordinate degree of negative treatement.
Your reductio ad absurdum fails to gain purchase in this argument, because we aren't talking about anything as extreme as public nuditiy or sexual orgies. We're talking about kids who are being at best harassed to the point that their educational oppotunities are limited, to at worst that they are literally chased out of the educational environment entirely or even killed because of the ignorant fear that your position encourages.
The idea that ALL citizens (including children) have a right to be secure in their persons is a fundamental principle of American society, and the fundamental individual rights to life and liberty of these children rather obviously supercedes any argument of social freedom that is predicated on the imagined right that one's beliefs about sexuality provides one with an excuse to harass or violently attack other citizen.
As for the following sources, how do these in any way relate to the issue at hand?
None of these sources address the subject of this blog, since the programs being discussed do not promote any particular opinons about sexuality beyond the simple recognition that having a negative opinion about someone else's sexuality does not provide you with an excuse to harass or attack someone.
In what way am I "pretending to ignorance of the sexual history of humans?" Frankly, your attempts to draw this discussion off-topic is disingenuous, and "transparently" motivated by something other than a concern for the welfare of these children. And, yes, I do ridicule people who demontrate an unabashed willingness to tolerate harassment and violence against a group of people because you think their identity is "undesireable." To quote my favorite founding father (Thomas Jefferson), "Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions." And in this I think your opinions certainly qualify.
It is one thing to "believe differently," and I think I have demonstrated an consitent willingness to defend those with whom I disagree, even when that disagreement rises significantly above the norm. But when an honest advocation of a contrary belief translates into harassment of individuals and begins to escalate into a common pattern of violence against those individuals, I don't think it is in the least bit unreasonable to draw a line and say, "no." And, when that harassment and violence takes place within the walls of a public institution, I don't think it is at all unreasonable for that institution to react to protect the victims whose are trying to use that institution in accordance with its intended purpose, and to punish those who would disrupt that purpose through their anti-social behavior.
From a very high view-point, one could argue that there are rights in conflict here, but it seems plain to me that the right to be secure in one's person easily overrides the right to harass and attack people that you don't like. To suggest otherwise is both intellectually and ethically vacuous.
TTFN,
percivale
-------------------------
Yes, I've changed my username from "percivale" to "Blackout." Go here if you want to know why.
"As to the question of sexual oritientation and how it is formed, your argument would seem to rely on two basic fallacies. The evidence does not support the myth that exposure to information about gay people effects the ultimate sexual orientation of a child. The second fallacy you seem to be suggesting is that even such exposure did have such an effect, that it would be "bad" for the kids involved (relying on the idiotic assumption that being gay is inherently "wrong")."
Please provide the quote where I said anything of either sort. Why even respond when you don't address what is said, and the conversation is with someone else?
"A faith that cannot survive collision with the truth is not worth many regrets."
-Arthur C. Clarke
The problem with any discussion with you, chillbill, is that you don't really SAY much. You imply a lot, but because you never actually SAY it (or write it, rather) outright, you can always fall back on the "show me where I said any such thing" argument when it comes time to back up your point. I've seen you use this technique in enough arguments to know it isn't really worth engaging with you. It never goes anywhere.
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/ediblewoman
Ediblewoman you are an outstanding writer, I am not suprised that your reading skills are good as well. these arguments just don't go where you assume they will, unless you address what I actually say. I cannot be expected to 'back up' points I did not make, can I?
I say exactly what I intend to, nothing more. This discussion is a great example of how others fill in what they think I mean in order to disagree. It is actually pretty funny at times. People come into many of these subjects assuming there are only two points of view. I rarely fall into the classic positions.
I am in favor of FAR MORE graphic and complete education of children than ANY public school currently offers. I never said I wasn't. Yet you see how this discussion has gone.
By allowing vouchers and school choice there could be far better training of this sort offered, and those that did not want any at all could get what they want as well. It is the half-assed compromise that we are left with in the current system, where neither side is well served, that I find most objectionable.
"A faith that cannot survive collision with the truth is not worth many regrets."
-Arthur C. Clarke
There comes a point when a writer has to ask himself, when the greater portion of his audience "misunderstands" him in a consistent manner, that perhaps it is the presentation, and not the reception of one's ideas that is failing to convey the inended message. And frankly, chillbill, I am of the opinion that you intentionally provoke this kind of "confusion." Rather than just plainly saying what you mean, you like to dance around the subject at hand, leveling shots at the subject while refusing to be held personally responsible for what you say, evasively backpedaling and denying even the most obvious implications of your words.
You keep asserting this, but you have made quite a few comments in this disucussion that leads me to suspect that your assertion is not an honest one. Here are a few of the things that you have said that seem to contradict the position you now claim...
"The danger inherent in your proposal is the establishment of indoctrination by government schools against the parents’ wishes."
"It is propaganda to set a single ciriculum for public schools and then force everyone that cannot afford private schools to be brainwashed by it."
Issue two is Gay studies or "Edugaytion"
Not exactly the 'three Rs' is it?"
"Sexual education, even the heterosexual variety, qualifies equally for the title social engeneering."
"Time wasted for cultural teaching is not a bad thing, but it should not be required, and the parent should have full controll of which."
Taken together, these comments undermine your support for a "graphic and complete education." As is often the case in our discussion, your opinion seems to flip-flop, sometimes within the same comment. I don't think you can reasonably expect us to believe that you are for a "graphic and complete education," when you so ardently oppose even the mention of gay and lesbian people in school programs.
Well, let's carry your idea though a few logical extrapolations. Do you think that a parent should be able to acquire a voucher and send his or her child to a school that teaches that evolution is not a valid scientic theory? Do you think that a parent should be able to acquire a voucher and send his or her child to a school that teaches that the earth is flat, or that the earth sits in a fixed position, and the sun and the rest of the universe circles around it? Do you think that a parent should be able to acquire a voucher and send his or her child to a school that teaches that slavery isn't wrong, or that women shouldn't be allowed to vote? Do you think that a parent should be able to acquire a voucher and send his or her child to a school that teaches that the Holocaust never happened, and that Hitler was justified in his persecution of the Jews? Do you think that a parent should be able to acquire a voucher and send his or her child to a school that teaches that religion is a disease, and that while violence directed at religious people is technically "wrong," it isn't appropriate to explain to kids that it isn't okay to beat up religious people, even though they are sick in the head fanatics who are responsible for most of the world's problems?
I think your answers here (if for a change you actually decide to directly answer the questions asked to you) will be most enlightening.
TTFN,
Blackout
-------------------------
Yes, I've changed my username from "percivale" to "Blackout." Go here if you want to know why.
'backpedaling' from things I did not say would be a waste of time. Nothing you quoted has any statement saying that gay should not be mentioned. You are accusing me of it, I have never said it. That is the tactic you face when you answer unfounded accusations. The demagogue that accused you then shouts "see! He denies it!" and acts as though you brought it up.
---
"I don't think you can reasonably expect us to believe that you are for a "graphic and complete education," when you so ardently oppose even the mention of gay and lesbian people in school programs."
I oppose the right of people to oppose the mention, not the mention itself. Note this is just one of many controversies that would be solved by allowing all parties to have their way, and allowing NONE of them to force their way on others.
---
The answer to all of the voucher questions (and even more equally crazy ones) is...If their students can pass a standardized test they should be accredited. It is not the governments’ job to tell you what to think.
Vouchers have the same problems as all theories in that they need to be tested to find a reasonable compromise and optimum solutions.
Please skip to the top if you reply to anything here for fine fat boxes.
The following are statements that you have made at various points in this discussion:
If you go back and read my comment closely, you will notice that I said that your argument seems to rely on certain fallacies. These quotes are what leads me to infer these fallacies from your argument.
TTFN,
Blackout
-------------------------
Yes, I've changed my username from "percivale" to "Blackout." Go here if you want to know why.
"leads me to infer these fallacies"
Thanks, I am glad you know that I never actually argued, or even alluded to, those silly positions you infered.
If you are unsure of meaning ask specific questions I like to answer specifics. As best I can see you infered these positions:
1)"Homosexuality, or homosexual sex is wrong."
It holds no appeal for me, but I can't say I mind if you do it. Subject to the same standards as heterosexual sex ie. Consenting adults, Privately not publicly, precautions to protect against disease that could be spread to society as a whole. At least unwanted children are not a worry.
2)"You favor raping and beating gay and transgendered children."
I thought you were joking, so I ignored most of those. Is not a person that rapes a person of the same sex a homosexual by definition? Doesn't that make you most likely between the two of us to support such acts? I will assume that you do not until you say otherwise, because baseless accusations are REALLY RUDE.
Are there any other things I did not say that you wish to know my opinion of?
"A faith that cannot survive collision with the truth is not worth many regrets."
-Arthur C. Clarke
Do you even know the meaning of the word "infer?" It means "to derive as a conclusion from facts or premises; to guess, surmise; to involve as a normal outcome of thought; to point out : indicate; to suggest, hint." I have drawn these inferences because the contents of your comments have lead me to that conclusion though a normal process of rational thought. You comments have similarly led other participants in this discussion to that same conclusion, indicating that if your position is not being clearly understood, the flaw would appear in the way you have presented your ideas.
Your stated belief seems to run contrary to your position in this discussion. If this is really your position, how do you reconcile your defense of the idea that it is inappropriate to protect gay kids from the elevated levels of harassment and violence that they suffer at the hands of those who DO believe that "Homosexuality, or homosexual sex is wrong?"
Well, in typical fashion, you have answered the part of the question that you think you can get away with, and they deviated wildly away from what said in order to avoid having to answer the part of the question which you know you cannot support. I pointed out two fallacies to you. The second (that you seemed to be promoting the myth that being gay is "bad") you answered fairly. But the first fallacy that I brought up was "the myth that exposure to information about gay people effects the ultimate sexual orientation of a child," not "you favor raping and beating gay and transgendered children" (which I will come back to in a moment). The fact is that there is a signficant body of credible scientific research available on this subject, and NONE of it supports your repeated suggestion that being exposed to information about gay people is going to effect their basic sexual orientation.
And no, "a person that rapes a person of the same sex" is NOT "a homosexual by definition." That you think that it does mean this demonstrates that you have a very poor understanding of both sexual orientation and the psychology of the crime of rape. Perhaps if you had been properly educated on these subjects at a young age, your opinon would be less ignorant, now.
But, as for your creatively re-worded interpretation of my statements into, "you favor raping and beating gay and transgendered children," let me be blunt enough to clear up any possibility of confustion. Whether you "favor" these activities or not, it is plain that your position at least enables and at worst encourages this sort of behavior. Your refusal to even acknowledge that these kids suffer from an elevated level of violence and harassment, much less to accept that in the face of this abnormal violence that perhaps an abnormal response is warranted, bespeaks a position that utterly dismisses not only the basic rights, but the welfare and very lives of the children being victimized by this ignorance.
No. I think I have your opinion down prety well. The essenense of your argument attempts to cloak antisocial harassment and violence directed against other citizens under the guise of "freedom." Your position is intellectually deficient, and ethically vacant. Your tactics are disengenuous and your attitude inflammatory. Frankly, I can find nothing in your presentation thus far that is worthy of respect.
TTFN,
percivale
-------------------------
Yes, I've changed my username from "percivale" to "Blackout." Go here if you want to know why.
I did not address this 'turning kids gay' issue there either.
I think the causes are unknown. As does the source you cited. Those that fear this teaching do not know also. Roll your eyes as much as you wish, but you don't know.
Count the slurs...
...If you wish I am just ignoring them.
Why hate?
As I said, that was a guess of my interpretation of your paragraph. A guess is an assumption, yes. Is that not what you meant? That was an open invitation to better explain the comment if I was incorrect, but from what you replied with, maybe I was right?
Logical disagreement does not frustrate me. I find factual debates stimulating. When someone says that, basically, being gay might be contagious, it does frustrate me.
"We do know that environmental issues are present in gender identity, and sexual orientation. The ages that are most likely to be influenced are younger than school age."
That to me sounds like there's a potential for acceptance of and education about LGBT might influence a child's gender identity or sexuality. The debate about nature vs nurture when it comes to sexuality has yet to be decided. Gender identity issues have always been around, just not as publicized.
-Sonja :)
"Democracy works only when you vote. When you don't take the time to vote for the candidate you find the least offensive, you run the risk of electing the candidate you find the most offensive."
"Is that not what you meant?"
No choice is just choice. As in free to choose. Freedom is choosing, oppression is having your choices made for you. In this specific instance the right of parents to choose the type culture their children are educated in.
To expand on the rest of the question I tend to think Curt Cobain was right. We are all gay. If that is true, as it is from my observation and opinion, then "turning kids gay" would be impossible since they allready are gay.
It is a bit of a politically correct fallacy to think environment cannot influence a childs' sexual choices. The best example that is clearly availiable is the differences in teen pregancy rates at different times, and in different cultures. We know that a sizable portion of men in prison will resort to gay sex. If their environment can
'make them gay" why assume that a childs' environment cannot?
---
"When someone says that, basically, being gay might be contagious, it does frustrate me. "
Because you don't think so. Isn't that disagreement? Where do you think gay comes from? Not enviroment? Not genetics? What else is there?
"A faith that cannot survive collision with the truth is not worth many regrets."
-Arthur C. Clarke
"Where do you think gay comes from? Not enviroment? Not genetics? What else is there?"
I think you are mixing up your definitions here. Just because something is not entirely controlled by genetics does not mean that it is caused by social situations, like that example of teen pregnancy you brought up. There are so many factors that go into a child's development that parents have no control over that the whole nature/nurture debate might as well be a certain warm/primary-colored fish. How about prenatal conditions in the womb? I was just reading a book about how hormonal fluctuations can affect whether or not a child is transgendered ("The Riddle of Gender," Deborah Rudacille), and I can recall reading about a study showing that if a mother has multiple sons the younger one(s) has a higher chance of being gay (Time magazine, either last summer or the summer before). Both of these are firmly in the territory of endocrinology and have nothing to do with a social "environment," unless you count consumption of certain hormone-affecting drugs pre-conception as being social in nature.
T.k.
I just think it is foolish to assume that culture and early training are not a part of the whole picture as this poster and Percivale do. Here is a page, that I consider propaganda just as I consider Percivales' references biased, which gives references opposing that view:
http://www.conservapedia.com/Religious_Upbringing_and_Culture_Affects_Ra...
Chemistry, in the form of prenatal hormones, is a good possible influence to add to the list. Thus the mothers environment, and her genetics, history and age could be factors.
"A faith that cannot survive collision with the truth is not worth many regrets."
-Arthur C. Clarke
....Huh. Biased or not, that's something I did not know. However, I would counter with testimony from Arab nations (which are extremely opposed to homosexuality) on its prevalance there. See: "Desiring Arabs," by Joseph A. Massad, and "Gay Travels in the Muslim World," edited by Michael T. Luongo. For a review, see here: http://www.progressive.org/mag_scagliotti0308.
That site does make the HUGE error of genes = only unchangable thing about the body. The reality is, not only are there so many other pre-set biological mechanisms that go into determining who a person is, but that genes do change (what do they think cancer is?). It's really making the biologist in me cry sad, sad tears. :((
T.k.
It is not only disingenous, but a little sad the way you insist on constantly misrepresenting my positions. But that, too, is beside the point, as is your baseless delegation of mainstream sources to the real of "propoganda," simply because they do not align with the biased (and if truth be told, religiously rather than scientifically motivated) positions that you want to advance.
TTFN,
percivale
-------------------------
Yes, I've changed my username from "percivale" to "Blackout." Go here if you want to know why.
I'm still reading that you believe that these impressionable young minds, with education about the existence of LGBT as individuals and as part of a family structure could "turn kids gay."
"No choice is just choice. As in free to choose. Freedom is choosing, oppression is having your choices made for you. In this specific instance the right of parents to choose the type culture their children are educated in."
GAY KIDS ARE GOING TO SCHOOL! They're there already, whether or not they realize it at a young age. What about repression of sexuality to conform to avoid an oppressive society? Where's the freedom in that? Are you suggesting that schools blatantly deny the existence of an oppressed population because the parents should have freedom?
The knowledge or incidence of homosexuality, or the acceptance or even the tolerance of it, is not going to "turn kids gay." It is not contagious. (eyes roll)
-Sonja :)
"Democracy works only when you vote. When you don't take the time to vote for the candidate you find the least offensive, you run the risk of electing the candidate you find the most offensive."
...or answer specific questions.
If there cannot possibly be an effect from specific moral teaching why would you care at all what was taught?
"A faith that cannot survive collision with the truth is not worth many regrets."
-Arthur C. Clarke
The topic at hand is not about teaching kids to be gay. It's about not hating or discriminating against those that are or that live in a family with same sex parents. There's nothing immoral about teaching acceptance or even at least tolerance of people different than you.
-Sonja :)
"Democracy works only when you vote. When you don't take the time to vote for the candidate you find the least offensive, you run the risk of electing the candidate you find the most offensive."
"The topic at hand is not about teaching kids to be gay."
Someone brought that topic up. Can you remember who?
---
"It's about not hating or discriminating against those that are or that live in a family with same sex parents. There's nothing immoral about teaching acceptance or even at least tolerance of people different than you."
The immorality I am questioning is anyone that thinks THEIR morality is the only one that matters, and wishes to force it on everyone else. While it is prudish to do so humanity almost always has.
"A faith that cannot survive collision with the truth is not worth many regrets."
-Arthur C. Clarke
I stand firm in my original statement, that there is absolutely nothing immoral about teaching tolerance and acceptance of people different than you.
Are you suggesting that it's ok to harass and abuse gay or transgendered kids because you find homosexuality immoral? Is beating gay kids down, harassing them continuously, or raping them moral?
You desperately need a reality check. SOME KIDS ARE L/G/B/T, no matter how much you disagree with it. It's not because they learned about it, and thought, "Gee, what a great idea! I'll turn gay so I can live in fear that someone might kill me because of it!"
You're right though. I do believe my morality should be forced on everyone- treat others as you would want to be treated, regardless of differences- in race, religion, sexuality, any other traits, or even opinion.
-Sonja :)
"Democracy works only when you vote. When you don't take the time to vote for the candidate you find the least offensive, you run the risk of electing the candidate you find the most offensive."
You go, girl!
TTFN,
Blackout
-------------------------
Yes, I've changed my username from "percivale" to "Blackout." Go here if you want to know why.
"Are you suggesting that it's ok to harass and abuse gay or transgendered kids because you find homosexuality immoral?"
Why ask? Read what I HAVE said and the quote the "suggestion' you claim I made. This whole thread began on another piece of baseless inuendo by you. It is a bit tiresome.
---
"Is beating gay kids down, harassing them continuously, or raping them moral?"
Do you think so?
---
"You desperately need a reality check."
You desperately need to learn to read.
---
"I do believe my morality should be forced on everyone"
Obviously.
"A faith that cannot survive collision with the truth is not worth many regrets."
-Arthur C. Clarke
I don't find it baseless. From your words, I got the distinct impression that you felt that learning about homosexuality could turn kids gay. It wasn't innuendo, either. I straight up said that it sounded like you thought it could happen.
I love this. You refuse to answer a question, but instead dance around every topic so that you're not confirming or denying anything. When you're called on implying certain things, you can so easily say, "But I didn't say that!" Of course, you refuse to explain what you did mean. Are you in politics?
I am not ashamed to say that I wish more people would treat others as they would like to be treated, without judgment, disrespect, or dishonesty, no matter how different a person is.
-Sonja :)
"Democracy works only when you vote. When you don't take the time to vote for the candidate you find the least offensive, you run the risk of electing the candidate you find the most offensive."
"From your words, I got the distinct impression"
Yet you cannot find ANYTHING in my words to quote that says anything of that sort at all. YOU made a false accusation, own up.
I have answered all but the most blatantly insulting questions you asked, and expanded exactly what I meant extensively. You are still trying to fix a label on me rather than listening. As homophobes do to their victims, you are trying to dehumanize me.
Your MORALITY, in the form of your behavior, is a bit disgusting.
"A faith that cannot survive collision with the truth is not worth many regrets."
-Arthur C. Clarke
I have a question. If this topic was about racial bullying and discrimination in schools, would you think that it was appropriate to tell kids not to do it? "The danger inherent in your proposal is the establishment of indoctrination by government schools against the parents’ wishes. " So, a parent that believes in white supremacy would be against saying that people of all races are equal. That would be going against parents' wishes....
When kids are harassing other kids, they get the idea from their home or a peer. You said, "I just think they should be able to choose to go to schools that respect their opinions." Were you talking about the gay kids or the bullies? It doesn't matter. Either way, segregation is never a good idea. Chasing kids out of schools or refusing to help a particular group of kids is, among other things, a good way to open the school up for a lawsuit.
"It is propaganda to set a single curriculum for public schools and then force everyone that cannot afford private schools to be brainwashed by it." The curriculum you're referring to is teaching kids not to harass or abuse any other kids because of their race, gender, disabilities, religion, gender identity, sexual identity, or any other perceived difference. Hmmm... What part of that is brainwashing? What makes you think the kids being harassed have families that can afford to send them to another school?
I think ediblewoman and Blackout gave sufficient evidence that the problem is worsening, and doing nothing about it does promote it.
"We do know that environmental issues are present in gender identity, and sexual orientation. The ages that are most likely to be influenced are younger than school age." First of all, who is "we"? "Where do you think gay comes from?" The fact is, no one knows for sure what exactly makes up sexuality, although most theories include some combination of genetics, biology, chemistry, environment of a mother's womb, and social environment. You most definitely inferred that you believe teaching kids about LGBT people could cause homosexuality. I believe Blackout has already given you the definition of "infer."
"It is a bit of a politically correct fallacy to think environment cannot influence a childs' sexual choices. The best example that is clearly availiable is the differences in teen pregancy rates at different times, and in different cultures." What does the teen pregnancy rate have to do with LGBT kids? Being homosexual is not a choice. However, it is a choice to deny one's own sexuality. "We know that a sizable portion of men in prison will resort to gay sex. If their environment can 'make them gay' why assume that a child's environment cannot?" First of all, men in prison that do have sex with other men are not necessarily gay. Their environment does not allow them to have sexual relations with women, for the most part. Not to mention, oftentimes prison sex is rape, and therefore, has nothing to do with sex, just power. Thee is no correlation there between that environment and a school environment.
So what if it does bring more kids to realize that they ARE gay? Maybe kids that understand that some boys like boys and some girls like girls, they will have less confusion in their own sexuality. Telling kids this- that some boys like boys and some girls like girls does not tell them to.
I ask again... Are you suggesting that schools blatantly deny the existence of an oppressed population because the parents should have freedom? The morality of this is not about homosexuality. The morality issue is in the abuse.
Again, I will repeat that the curriculum does not teach kids how to be gay, but teaches them to be tolerant of ALL people that are different. Trying to reduce violence and other abuses in schools is not a cultural agenda.
"[Bullying] prevention could take many forms. The one that appeals the most to me is empowering the potential victims, which all kids are. The most obvious way to achieve this is martial arts instruction." Violence isn't a preventative measure, and promoting even more violence, even if it is self-defense, will only escalate the problems.
"It is propaganda to set a single curriculum for public schools and then force everyone that cannot afford private schools to be brainwashed by it." So the kids being harassed should just go to private schools?
"I say exactly what I intend to, nothing more. This discussion is a great example of how others fill in what they think I mean in order to disagree." Seriously, are you a politician?
-Sonja :)
"Democracy works only when you vote. When you don't take the time to vote for the candidate you find the least offensive, you run the risk of electing the candidate you find the most offensive."
Bullshit. Aside from the fact that these parents DO have a freedom to choose (i.e. to separate their children from the system of public education in favor of private instruction), nothing in our Laws or Constiutution supports the arguments that citizens are free to choose to attack other citizens or to harass other citizens in an attempt to drive them out of the public square.
Obviously, you are still contrained in your thinking by the myth that sexual orientation equates to the sexual act itself in isolation. Men in prison sometimes resort to same-sex activities because their situation is extreme, when the biolocal need for sexual release and phychological need for intimate human contact begins to override their innate sexualities. This is demonstrable in that those same men in prison consistently revert to their normal sexualities when separated from the extreme environment.
And again, nothing in your argument addresses the sort of education being offered in these programs. Saying, "hey, gay kids exist and have rights, too" and that "families whith parents of the same sex exist, and they and their families have thes same rights as you" is not in any way, shape or form an attempt to indoctrinate a child into any particular sexual identity or gender role. Even the suggestion is frankly sophomoric in its shallow (and I believe intentional) misrepresentation of both the context and scope of these programs.
Because you don't think so. Isn't that disagreement? Where do you think gay comes from? Not enviroment? Not genetics? What else is there?
To quote the American Psychological Association's Answers to Your Questions About Sexual Orientation and Homosexuality...
Of course, the question of disagreements concerning the biological, psychological and/or social origins of homosexuality is irrelevant in the context of this discussion. Raping a transgendered child isn't a reasonable form of "disagreement" in any case.
TTFN,
percivale
-------------------------
Yes, I've changed my username from "percivale" to "Blackout." Go here if you want to know why.
please delete.