I see Mr Ireland hasn't bothered to respond to any replies.
Gidget7 addresses the controversy surrounding the presence of the Gay, Lesbian & Straight Education Network (GLSEN) in schools (#451). She states, “Zero tolerance policies are in effect everywhere. I have spoken with many students from many different schools, and bullying of homosexuals does not exist.” I will disagree and illustrate with my own experience.
When I was a kid, no one beat me up for being gay. I didn’t even really know I was gay until I hit puberty. Well before then, however, I knew I would not want to be gay, whatever that meant. “Fag” and “homo” were words I used myself on the playground—they were put-downs. They didn’t mean anything sexual in elementary school. In Junior High, they became sexualized. A “fag” liked other boys and a “dyke” was a girl who wanted to have sex with other girls… or the gym teacher. These words mushroomed in meaning and became truly dangerous, especially when I realized they applied to me.
I became an expert at the “faggot” jokes in high school. I didn’t dare act on crushes I felt for my classmates. I was cool, big man on campus, and no one suspected. I significantly shut-down my emotions to put off my internal monologue of sexuality—I was asexual, which, I might add, I think is a very good thing for teenagers. I’ll be clear, though, I was definitely gay. Although it was not the case for me, many kids who are perceived to be gay will become sexually active with the opposite sex to prove to their peers that they are not.
It worries me that Gudget7 thinks GLSEN advocates teaching “the ins and outs (no pun intended) of homosexual acts.” She goes on to say that, “sex, any kind of sex, is personal, private, and intimate.” I agree. According to their mission, GLSEN “strives to assure that each member of every school community is valued and respected regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity/expression.” It is every teacher’s responsibility to maintain an environment of respect in the classroom and on the playground. In my opinion, teachers who want all of their students to learn, and that is the point of school, are invested in providing a safe place for all. GLSEN helps give them the tools to confront putdowns and verbal harassment among their students.
Every day, teenagers tease, harass, cajole, and pressure each other. It’s an age-appropriate form of communication. School is a place where adults model behavior that is expected of adults—the students watch and learn. When a student calls another “queer,” most teachers will stop the exchange with a prompt, such as, “cut it out, guys” or “no more” and turn back to the chalk board. Often, both students are punished. Very few teachers will stop the situation and use it as a “teachable moment.” “Queer is an inappropriate word to use at school. It’s a powerful word that has been used to put people down and we don’t do that here. Everybody has the right to feel safe in my classroom, so if you choose to use words like that, you’re out.” For elementary teachers, GLSEN trains how to explain that that type of word is hurtful and that “we don’t use hurtful words at school.”
Gidget7’s thinks that “children should be left alone, to grow at their own pace, learning what they need to learn as is age appropriate.” DirtyHarryY2K asks, “Why burden children with sexual issues?” I believe it is important to teach human sexuality classes in junior high and high school. Misinformation is dangerous—kids learn a lot from each other and very little of it is accurate. Abstinence is not likely to be valued, nor the concept that each person’s sexuality is private.
If we neglect sexuality in the curriculum, we, as parents, miss the window of opportunity. Pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases are real issues for teens. Personally, I think abstinence is ideal and that it promotes teenage physical and emotional health. It’s extremely important to teach it, along with other reproductive health and family planning curriculum. I respect that many parents would rather handle these issues at home—I support opt-out permission slips for those families, but the vast majority of parents will never address the issues, so it’s a public health issue, and therefore, a public school issue. Gidget7 suggests, “you do not throw at kids, things they are not mentally or emotionally mature enough to handle.” I agree. Public health nurses, physicians, and mental health professionals should develop age-appropriate materials, not activists from either side of the debate.
I guess the core issue here is sexuality vs. sex. How many parents actually talk about the sex act? If a person has a photograph on his desk at work of his wife and child, no one thinks twice. If that frame contains a man and child, as mine does, some people become extremely uncomfortable. I guess they have vivid images of gay sex flash though their minds. I can imagine how uncomfortable I would be if I felt that way every time I saw a family portrait. But I don’t. I see the people smiling alongside their family members.
DirtyHarryY2K posits a fairly clear view of equality: “We are equal. You are legally allowed to do every thing I am legally allowed to do. You can legally marry someone of the opposite sex just like I can. And like me, you cannot legally marry someone of the same sex. That's equality, No?” Under that scenario, I guess, I have the right to be like you. That’s not equality. Looking at the diversity of human beings and assigning equal intrinsic value to each is equality. Do I have the legal protections that all Americans have? Can I equally protect those I love with health benefits and inheritance laws? As I face inequality, I do my best to address it.
My partner and I adopted a child in California. If we move to Oklahoma, which does not recognize gay adoptive parents, what would happen? How could we protect our child. If we vacation at Disney World and I should be hospitalized, the emergency room personnel could exclude my partner, since, in Florida, we have no legal relationship to one another. That also means I might not see my son. When one considers the patchwork of laws across the county, it personalizes the concept of equality. I am a proud American, but my America has shrunken down significantly because of the views of the majority in some areas.
I understand that DirtyHarryY2K feels that we are “playing house” by adopting children and that he does not allow us into his definition of family. I also read on this forum that there is some disagreement as to who should parent. Single people, single men, older heterosexual men are suspect… I’m sure some people agree that a marriage without procreation is pointless. We will always disagree. Marriage provides stability for society. And for some of us, we’re just pre-wired to settle down with one person.
Lentulusgracchus writes “White House social affairs are usually invitation-only, and this one is. What SoulForce contemplates doing is, indeed, defined socially by the word "crash, crashed." Actually, George W. Bush calls it, “one of the oldest and most unique traditions in presidential history,” and a chance for all Americans to visit “their house.” According to the White House website, “Children of all ages are welcome to attend, as long as there is at least one child six years old or under and no more than two adults per group.” Different from a state dinner or a private function, this event is designed to welcome all Americans for some good old-fashioned fun.
We are unable to attend the event this year, but if we were to attend, it would be for the benefit of our son, not to serve the message of inclusion. As parents, we cancel plans all the time because our son has a cold or hasn’t napped sufficiently. We’ve all seen the parent trying to eek out the most value of an all-day pass at Disneyland—the kids do not benefit. So, I would never use my child in this way. Anyone who does is missing the point of parenting.
DirtyHarryY2K wonders why I “would edit the word ‘pride’ out of [my] statement about gay pride parades? He even spelled ‘gay’ with a lower case ‘G.’” Again, I am not some amorphous “gay agenda” needing to keep my terminology consistent. There was a time when I used an upper case “G,” mostly when I was struggling with my sense of pride in my life. Now that I’m settled down in what I consider to be a very stable life with home and family, I have little need for the linguistic reinforcement. My “issue” these days is encouraging my boy to learn how to use his sippy cup. :-) Lentulusgracchus pits my statements against those of Michael Swift and Michelangelo Signorile (#456), both extreme writers not universally accepted by gay people. Swift may dream of “a society without families or marriage,” but I do not. What a sad dream.
I appreciate the time and thought many of you have invested in this conversation. I am learning more though this interaction what your concerns are, than through any dialogue I could have with those who agree with me on every issue. Thanks.