God forbid we teach our kids

11 is an age where the opposite sex starts to get interesting… unless you’re gay. Then YOUR sex starts to get interesting…

This is NOT a matter of “deciding”. NO ONE wakes up one morning at some arbitrary age and “decides” they’re going to be ANY sexual orientation. Seriously - when did YOU decide you’re heterosexual? (that’s presuming you are, of course)

What you so obviously don’t get is that a young gay person usually wakes up to the notion that they aren’t “like everybody else” BEFORE puberty… like around 10-12. They are already “saddled” with thinking about this Even if they are NOT LGBT, if they have a sibling or cousin who is, they are already “saddled” with thinking about this And that’s totally leaving aside any mention on the TV - and such mentions are pretty frequent these days.

So… I ask you again… what the fuck is a kid supposed to do for good information?

1 I’m sort of mind-boggled at the idea that there are people who think LGBT folks “decide” to be that way. What would such a “decision” involved? “Gee, it sounds like fun to be humiliated, ostracized, possibly disowned by my family, subject to harassment and greatly increase my risk of being victim of a hate crime. Let’s do it!” Somehow, I don’t think so…

(italicis mine)

Young children can learn to treat others with respect and tolerance with out learning about GLBT. Before high school I would prefer that the school not discuss any sex with my children. Children are ready for different messages about sex at different ages. I trust my own judgement about my children more then the schools.

Besides, I thought they didn’t have enough time/money to teach children math, science and how to read…

At what age did you “decide” that you were heterosexual? Seventeen? Thirteen? Or ten?

Any number of people at these boards could tell you what age they were when they realised (cf “decided”) that they were gay.

Don’t generalize. Many kids at 11 are not sexualized at all. Just because some are, doesn’t mean the rest need to be exposed to GLBT. Why not wait till 14 when its pretty clear that the vast majority are sexualized?

My language was unclear. I apologize. I didn’t mean that homosexuals simply “decide” they are gay. I meant that age is too early for them to be starting that decision making process. Or coming to terms/the realization that they are either straight or homosexual. Yes I realize no-one “comes to terms” with being straight, but anyway…

There are plenty of individuals whom might believe they are gay or are curious then come to the realization that they are not. Through experimentation or other means. There is plenty of time for that in High-school and afterwards… not at 11.

The way I read the OP, part of the problem the school had with this whole thing is that it (the school), didn’t have the opportunity to make sure that materials used, were, indeed, age appropriate. I’m not necessarily saying that the Wingspan rep had any notions of presenting inappropriate material, but what if the rep simply wasn’t firmly in touch with what was/was not appropriate? This is why presenters (ALL presenters) need to be overseen by the school! The teacher was well-intentioned, but still needs disciplinary action taken, IMHO.

And, no, I don’t think the teacher should be fired, just disciplined.

As a parent, I want to know what my daughter is being taught in school. If a speaker or a group is doing a presentation for any reason, I want to know about it. I have yet to encounter anything that I’d have forbidden her to hear/attend, but I reserve the right to make that decision. I also want to be able to talk to her ahead of time - some things I’d rather teach her myself. I have no problem with her getting a different point of view, and as she approaches adulthood, I encourage her to make up her own mind. But I want her to know my mind also. For example, if the school decided to run a safe-sex workshop, I’d be sure she knew going in why I don’t think it’s a good idea for her to be sexually active at her age.

I don’t think this is an unreasonable expectation. It’s my responsibility as a parent to prepare my daughter to take her place in the world. It is also my responsibility to decide what she needs to know and when she needs to know it. I will not cede that to the school board or the PTA or any group that thinks it knows better.

Middle schoolers are hardly “young children.” And this is a specific area of concern because GLBT kids are so often the targets of disrespect and intolerance because of their sexuality, starting at the first age that they begin to show the least bit of divergence from the behaviour and demeanor of their peers and that can certainly be before high school age.

Are we really trying to put forth the notion that 11 and 12 year olds are so sheltered and innocent that they have no concept of gay people? Or of people who dress as the opposite gender? Try Googling “I’m 11 years old” or “I’m 12 years old” and look at the webpages that kids are putting up. (I just did this.) Look at the television shows that they list as their favorites – Drew Carey, (with Drew’s brother the cross-dresser) Friends, (with lots of sex and innuendo in most episodes, and recurring lesbian characters) South Park (also featuring very bold sexual references and gay characters) and Will & Grace (I hope I needn’t explain). These kids are being exposed to messages about sex, and gay people and every day in their own homes.

And Eidolon909, since this is the Pit, I think it’s safe to say this: the idea that you are a teacher and that you would say

Well, that scares the hell out of me. You’re an educator? And you’re missing so simple and so obvious and so broad a point?

Everyday I get more and more reason to homeschool Baby tlw.

Involved in a “get your hands dirty” and doing something for/with the school and children, yes. Being able to solely determine the curicculum? No. The two examples I gave are not un-heard of. Those intolerant (and factually wrong) attitudes exist in certain schools and they exist because of parental pressure.

If it weren’t for the occasional force-fed diet of acceptance, we’d probably still have segregated schools (or do you guys think calling in the National Guard was a bad idea in Little Rock?). And in this case, I’m all for forcing an issue down people’s throats in the name of honesty and acceptence of a group of people that will always be around these children for the rest of their lives.

GLBT people exist! They do! And they are constantly being prejudiced against. Isn’t it time that this stops? Get over your prejudices- that speaker didn’t go in there and start talking about which lube works best for anal sex. (OK, I wasn’t there, but I’m pretty sure that didn’t happen) The speaker was there to talk to children about acceptance and about different lifestyles. I am willing to bet that there was not one anatomical discussion had that day. It was probably about people living a certain way and why that isn’t bad.

I don’t see the difference here between GBLT issues and the fight for racial equality or evolution studies or religious tolerance. Would you all be up in arms if a Rabbi went to the school to discuss his religion? Or a muslim went to discuss their lifestyles and beliefs? Would you force the parents to sign a waiver allowing Johnny and Suzie to listen to a speaker on racial equality? I don’t think so. But because you probably still have an inate fear of GBLT’s converting your children you’ll argue that “proceedures weren’t properly followed” because it is mighty convenient and keeps “those people” away from impressionable youths. feh.

And no, I do not follow the PC way…I think PC-ism is at is best intellectual McCarthy-ism, forcing people to think one way and only one way. Having a speaker discuss something, even controversial, is a far-cry from forcing someone to toe-the-line. The children of today’s world get plenty of information from the hate-side of GBLT issues on a daily basis, why can’t they hear someone give the non-hate side once in awhile? Let them make up their minds after that.

My question to you is quite simple: What are you all really afraid of when someone talk’s about GBLT issues to children? What do you think you are protecting your children from by denying them that speaker?

-Tcat

Most middle schoolers are what I would call “young children”.

Many children who are different are the target of disrespect and intolerance. Not all children who are teased are GLBT. Children who are fat, ugly, smelly, poor, too tall, over developed, under developed, culturally different and or just plain weird are subject to abuse daily at that age. In fact it is a pretty safe bet that more kids are subjected to hell because they are fat at 11 then because they are transsexual.

I think that a general message of tolerance and respect for people who are different is important and young ages. That is as far as I think the school should take it. Sexual issues should wait until high school and only then with parental notification and consent.

Eidolon:

Kids call each other kike. Kids call each other nigger. Kids call each other chink. Who cares? It’s just insults, right?

The idea that fag is less insulting than kike or nigger or chink is, actually, infuriating to me as a gay man. It is just as bad. It is generally ignored. And it does need to be addressed. Regardless of whether sexually repressed parents approve or not. Just as white supremacist parents who oppose curriculum about the Holocaust or the Civil Rights movement are ignored when they start their nutcase maunderings at school board meetings, so should homophobic parents who don’t want their little Johnny to know there are gay people.

Tlw wrote:

No. Because we’re talking about children.


Tomcat wrote:

For me, nothing. And in fact, I taught my daughter about all those things and more. She made her own decisions about such matters. I told her that I would always love her no matter what life decisions she made.

But I would not make my agenda your agenda. I would not presume to teach your children what I think is important without your permission.

My question to you is quite simple: why would you make such presumptions about other people’s children?


Jayjay wrote:

Teaching children to behave respectfully does not require any indoctrination other than general ethics.

There were 58 kids at that lecture. At a conservative estimate of a 5% occurrence of homosexuality, if the kids there were selected randomly from the school population, 3 of them will turn out to be gay. Which means that one of the gay kids will attempt suicide.

If the kids were there because they expressed an interest in the subject matter, the number is, of course, higher.

This was probably a number of the kids’ first exposure to the idea that, if they were gay, there was hope. That they weren’t the monsters their peers made them out to be. That they were people too, and they could lead good and fulfilling lives. That there were people who cared about them, even if they were gay.

Because the opposite agenda is all over the school system. Every day every one of these kids is bombarded with information that tells them that if they’re gay, they’re bad. It comes from the students in the form of anti-gay slurs, and it comes from the schools in the form of just this kind of “oh, we can’t talk about gay people, that’s just too dirty for children” bullshit. It’s time the schools at least provided an alternative to this constant bombardment of prejudice, because it is literally killing some children.

The news feed here has changed the story somewhat. Now they’re saying that “THE TEACHER DID NOT GET PERMISSION FROM THE DISTRICT BEFORE INVITING THE SPEAKER.” Which is a far cry from “no one in the administration knew anything about this.” Which always seemed unlikely to me; how do you get sixty students together out of at least three classrooms without anybody knowing about it, and then sneak a speaker into the building for a presentation? But, seeing as this is local news, we’ll wait to see if anything develops. None of the other local stations are covering it, and nothing appeared about the story in this morning’s local paper.

We’re already educating our kids about gay people in our schools. We’re teaching them that gay people are to be derided with impunity, and that they are deserving of scorn, ridicule and abuse. The kids in school who are coming to realize their sexuality are being taught to hate themselves. You try having a crush on a same-sex classmate when you’re 12 years old, and see how much fun that is in the current educational environment. If being exposed to positive information about gay people can prevent the suicide of one kid, then you’d better be prepared to come up with some very good reasons why it’s unacceptable. And all that’s been come up with here is the very same ignorance that this program was designed to counteract.

Do you think kids call each other “fag” because they believe its true? Its used in the same context as calling someone a motherfucker or an asshole.

If its directed as a slur toward an obviously gay individual then there is a big difference. And I daresay there are not many middle-schoolers who are obviously gay.

In addition, if a word is anathema then it needs to be so for all involved. You have a large segment of the gay population who have co-opted fag to destroy its impact. Yet its only acceptable for homosexuals to call each other a fag? Its either descriptive or a slur. Not one for some and another for others.

Plus which, who is this “we” that is teaching “my” kids? As soon as “I” get to have input on what “This single teacher” decided to teach “my” kids without any authority, participation or approval from “we, the community,” or “we, the parents,” or “we, the school board.”

So don’t give me that “we,” unless you really mean “we, of the Secret Gay Agenda,” who use unauthorized and inappropriate propoganda on your kids.

If it’s so wonderful and appropriate, why didn’t they get approval from the district AND the local PTA?

MrVisible

When I was 12, I had a crush on a girl, and I endured considerable teasing, picking, and bullying by classmates on account of it.

Children can be cruel to anyone for any reason. If they don’t have a reason, they’ll make one up: she’s too fat; he’s too skinny; that girl has cooties; that guy picks his nose; Susy flirts with Billy; Billy flirts with Johnny.

You’re conflating holding a viewpoint with being ignorant. A parent might be well aware of the issues that concern you but have other issues of their own that concern them.

If you want to advocate so-called public schooling, then you have to live with decisions that are made by the majority mob. If you prefer to stand on principle, then advocate home or private schooling, where you can insist that your children be taught values that you hold dear.

"But I would not make my agenda your agenda. I would not presume to teach your children what I think is important without your permission.

My question to you is quite simple: why would you make such presumptions about other people’s children?"

My permission? So EVERYTHING needs to have a consent form signed? EVERYTHING needs to be agreed upon and signed by mommy and daddy? That does NOT sound like a Libertarian principle to me. The Harry Brown I voted for would not have agreed to that (but then again, he might not agree with my position either…). That sounds like a nanny-state mentality.

I am saying that this IS one of those cases where permission doesn’t need to be gotten. Same as religious and racial tolerance discussions. There aren’t many more subjects that I think should be treated like this, but there aren’t many more topics as broad as this- this is pretty big, pretty normal. This is not a specific, or a sub-plot, this is normal, everyday stuff. GBLT people are a part of everyday life. Deal.

This is not my agenda versus yours. And that is where the presumption argument fails. I do not presume to to force my ideas about GBLT people that are any different than my ideas about religious and racial topics…HAve the discussions and let people make up their own minds.

I agree with your basic arguments that ‘basic ethics’ should be good enough, but I disagree when it comes to the practical issues of it. I feel that tolerance and acceptance is taught by showing how people differ and how they are the same. Just saying “be good to one another” doesn’t work. I wish it did, but it doesn’t. You have to show people why X and Y are OK, especially when they have been taught before that it wasn’t.

Again, what do people think they are protecting their children from by denying that speaker?

I gotta run, I’m late to a meeting…

-Tcat

So, your classmates knew about it, then? You weren’t afraid to tell them about your feelings, for fear of getting the living shit beat out of you? You didn’t have to hide something that basic from the people around you, for fear that even those that cared about you would reject you? You didn’t think that, because you had a crush on this person, that you might get thrown out of your family?

Lucky you.

Meanwhile, I maintian my point; we’re already teaching kids about gays and lesbians in school. We’re teaching them to hate gay people, and to hate themselves if they are gay. If schools can disseminate that kind of hatred, they damned well better be able to try and help counteract it as well.

Some viewpoints are ignorant, born of ignorance and only able to fester and grow in atmospheres supportive of that ignorance.

Suppose the teacher was an ultra-right-wing bigot and brought in Fred Phelps to talk to the class?

I think that a teacher should not unilaterally decide who to bring in as a speaker, because the Phelps scenario is as likely as the tolerance scenario.

Mr Visible wrote:

Are you joking? Sharing my feelings was exactly the reason I got the living shit beat out of me. Didn’t you understand that the reason I was picked on was because I had a crush on that girl? And how would having a guest speaker at my school have ameliorated being thrown out of my familiy?

You’re also teaching them to hate patriotic people, people who are fat, people who are Christian, people who are Jewish, and people who are Muslim. You’ve made your children so sensitive that they are utterly senseless. You’ve made them so diverse that they are banal. You’ve taught them to fix blame rather than fix problems. You want to end it? End public schools.

Sorry…I just don’t believe that a parent’s right to indoctrinate his or her child to follow their own intolerant worldview trumps my (and gay folk in general) right to live a life being treated as equal to straights. And the only way to ensure that is to make sure that the children have the opportunity to hear opinions that dissent from their parents’ ignorant braindrip.