Cessandra, I understand where you are coming from, and there’s nothing to be ashamed of. People have a history of spilling their guts on this board! It’s not “weird”! (Or, if it is, it’s a GOOD weird, OK?)
Growing up fat, I remember not having a lot of sympathy for the thin kids. And then I found out that they get shit too. It varies, it depends, and I can’t quantify who gets more shit. But I had my eyes opened. There are people outside of your “group” that are MISERABLE. So what do you do? Do you just stand up for “your group” and tell the other group that they are on their own? Or do you, in the name of trying to ease the pain of EVERYONE, stand up for all groups who are targeted for misery?
I grew up in LA, as an artsy kid, and artsy adult. This means, by default, that I hung around with a lot of gay people. A lot of fabulous creative gay people were in the arts world, at least in my circle. And I have discovered (this is just my personal observation) that my gay friends knew exactly where I was coming from, with my “social leper” emotional scars. They were very supportive. Sometimes, they were the only ones who understood. We were compadres, I thought. We all got shit for who we were, we all knew that people could be mean, and shitty. They were a great comfort to me.
But I don’t see that here with some of you, and it saddens me. Maybe you just haven’t been around enough, I don’t know. But let me tell you, we social lepers need to unite, not divide!
What the fuck are you talking about? Kids aren’t going to get counseling in schools because I took issue with your idiotic “I think gays are weird” and “I don’t understand or condone the homosexual lifestyle” bullshit? Is that what passes for logic in your world?
For the record, since your illiteracy shines forth so brilliantly, the two statements I made that directly spoke to the OP were that there should NOT be special treatment accorded to gay, lesbian and bisexual teens. Of course, if you were this much of an idiot in high school, I can see why safe zones are necessary, though I would be surprised if you limited your contempt to just the gays and lesbians.
I did not say I DID, just that I am free to.
[/quote]
And you will notice that I also conceded that you are free to. To insult me, basically.
“Weird” and “idiot” are not the same thing. So which is it? And, pray tell, which one of my privately-held thoughts makes you call me an “idiot”? Is it the monkey toes? The bowling? The Country Music? The grits? Because, I remind you, I never said anything about homosexuality. So why am I an idiot, pray tell?
Could have fooled me. “Thinking” something is “weird” is not DOING anything, and it isn’t even necessarily an insult. It is just an admission that a person doesn’t “get” something. So if someone wants to, in passing, mention that they think monkey toes are weird, as long as they make it obvious that the aren’t monkey-hostile, how horrible is this? Granted, it may not always be the most welcome comment, but in the grand scheme of things, how terrible is it, really?
If this person makes it obvious that they not only think a certain thing is “weird” but they also abhor it, sure, (as I have mentioned waaaaaay earlier) you are certainly entitled to take offense. But thinking something is weird is not this horrible, destructive thing. Perhaps actually saying that you think it is weird will get more attention, and maybe it isn’t always the wisest thing to say, considering how easily people will call each other “dipshits” and “fuckwads” around here. But I think the proper response would be “what do you mean by that, exactly?”
You can call him a dipshit, sure. And since I am not with him on the “condone” thing (since I find it irritating) I think you have made a case from this person’s subsiquent posts that he is not all warm and fuzzy about homosexuality. (It doesn’t mean that he would actually do anything really damaging to gay people, however.) However, you called him a “dipshit” at his first comment, at the mere mention of “weird”. And I think you need to find out what they meant by that first, before you start calling them a “dipshit”. For all you know, it could be a mostly harmless (if perhaps badly timed) comment from someone who is also thinking, “Whatever floats your boat! More power to you! I think bowling and Country Music are weird too, but so what?”
But that is how things are supposed to work, right now. In Minnesota, the state where all this is takin place, it is a crime to harass anyone for their sexual orientation. It isn’t working, right now. It may work later on. In the meantime, there are hundreds of kids who need this specifically targeted type of help.
But they don’t feel free to do so, because they are harassed constantly. And there’s no way to know who supports gay kids, and who has reservations about supporting them, unless the teacher volunteers the information somehow… like being part of a safe zone.
I believe all kids should be safe in all areas of all schools. It doesn’t work like that, right now. I believe it may, in the future, if we continue to make progress in supporting the most downtrodden members of our society, and find ways in which to make them feel safe, respected, and included. The safe zones are a good step in that direction.
You want safe zones for every kid? Start safe zone programs. Don’t begrudge us the progress we’ve made in fighting the kind of ignorance you’re spewing.
Oops! I read that wrong the first time. Scratch my first response to this. But I will ask, then, why did you call me an “idiot” before if you really don’t know much about me?
Yep. For all kids, not just gay kids. Do you think it is impossible for the safe zones to have some sort of indication that they are very gay-friendly, while still letting the other kids know they’re welcome as well? Or is this just a “gay kids only” thing with you? Because, as I have explained before, the pink triangle by itself isn’t going to send the message that ALL kids are welcome.
Who is “us”? Who is “we”? All downtrodden social lepers, or just your specific group of downtrodden, social lepers? It’s this “you take care of yours, we’ll take care of ours” bullshit that cheeses me off. I WANT to make sure that gay kids get help. I’m not gay, and yet my heart goes out to ALL troubled kids, gay or not. I am all for a system that makes sure that gay kids KNOW they are welcome to talk. I just want the other social lepers out there to know that they are specifically included as well.
You are again showing that you are bigotted towards anything that is not your cause. You have left out the quotes that anyone has made about how badly they were treated or refered to your statistics showing that gay kids get picked on. Not a single one of us has said gay kids don’t need help. We have said that there are other groups who need help, and implied, maybe even the same amount of help. If this offends you, then you need to come back to reality. Not a single one of the people you have attacked have said anything more than the fact that these zones are exclusionary, and we have proved it. You are quickly starting to sound like a hatemonger, and I know, at least I hope that you are too intelligent to not see the points that have been made over and over and over and over. Not a single one of us has said that we don’t like gays, in fact many of us have pointed out that we have lots of gay friends. I do not use the word friend lightly, I use it to mean someone that I can honestly say that I love. You are so blinded by your cause you cannot even admit that there are kids who these zones would make feel unwelcome and are willing to leave then out in the cold, you heartless prick.
I don’t recall anywhere that I called you an idiot. What I think you are taking as me calling you an idiot was when I said “you are free to think anything is weird, and I am free to think you are an idiot if you do” or something to that effect. But I didn’t actually call YOU an idiot. I was speaking using the general you, my apologies for not making that one clear.
And “gays are weird” in conjunction with his subsequent posts it’s clear that 'Uigi has some issues with homosexuality. But “gays are weird” in conjunction with his previous posts it’s clear that he is a dumbass, given the context of the thread in which he said it. The subsequent posts just told me he is an intolerant dumbass.
I’m not saying all high schoolers are incapable of understanding they shouldn’t harass each other. But I went to high school with kids that were. My stepdaughter, niece and nephews go to school with kids that are. And as for actually teaching kids about tolerance, I am strongly opposed to sending the message through physical abuse. Your mother made a mistake there.
It fucking isn’t. It is wrong, however, to insist that faculty members remove a symbol that specifically states “Here you will find toleration for the expression of your feelings.” The pink triangle is a message of solidarity and support and any child who feels excluded because of that probably needs to seriously examine his or her feelings towards homosexuality in the first place.
Yes it fucking did. “Straight Pride” is hate speech, plain and simple.
It may have been passive but it opens the door for less passive forms of harassment. “If Elliot can wear a ‘Straight Pride’ t-shirt and get away with it,” the more homphobic bullies among the students think, “then we should be able to get away with harassing students we think are gay a little more aggressively.” Anyone who remembers high school knows how the more prickish bullies can get away with pulling shit if nobody’s looking. Or sometimes even if somebody is.
It makes for a more hate-filled atmosphere and a less secure environment for the targets. They have a right to a harassment-free school day and t-shirts that provoke harassment infringe upon that right.
So perhaps Elliott Chambers would have suffered the same punishment in your high school. And rightly so!
No, I see the your reaction over a student suspended for hate speech as proof that you are someone who doesn’t fully understand the nature of oppression, and since you exist somewhat comfortably with some gay people, then oppression doesn’t happen.
Let me ask you a couple questions. How comfortable do you feel discussing sex with your gay friends? How comfortable do you feel if they point out an attractive man they see? What in heck makes you so uncomfortable about the thought of seeing a pink triangle posted in the window of a classroom door? We’re all agreed that safe zones should be open to everyone, and some of us here agree that the pink triangle is a symbol of toleration and understanding. Why take it down?
And does taking offense at hate speech and supporting its removal from a school environment merit calling us bigots? Your friend flesh99 seems to think so.
We are judging him on the quality of his ideas, which from my standpoint are pretty piss-poor. flesh99 doesn’t see a problem with the existence of hate speech in school - in fact, he doesn’t think there’s a problem to be dealt with at all. He’s not advocating a different approach to the problem, he wants to keep it there. He believes (like you do) that people have a right to hate. The only reason you’d want to reserve the right to hate someone for any reason whatsoever is because you actually have someone you want to hate. And the only people who want to hate someone are… bigots.
I am truly sorry you were brought up in such an environment. But it doesn’t validate the argument that the pink triangle focuses solely on gay and lesbian students. Just because you feel that way doesn’t make it so. An unpleasant truth, though you do admit this.
Huh? No, I personally don’t want anything that makes sure gay kids KNOW they are welcome removed. If there could be some way that a symbol could be devised which included the pink triangle, along other things, so that ALL kids knew they were welcome, I think that would be fine. But, as I said before, the pink triangle all by its lonesome isn’t doing that.
What? Did you read my posts? (And I think Cessandra touched upon it too.) I can see myself as a kid interpreting a pink triangle as somewhere where a specific group of kids are welcome - kids with deep concerns that are more significant than my own problems. And I might stay away out of deference to that, or because I decided that my problems weren’t “important enough”. Now while this is screwed up, I don’t think it’s homophobic, is it? And since some kids would come to the conclusion that they aren’t “good enough” to be included in the “safe zone”, isn’t this more evidence that they need help, and need to be included?
Problem is, all kids aren’t welcome in these “safe zones”. These teachers have chosen to be known as people who will not have any prejudices against gay kids who need help (I thought the OP implied that. Any objections?). This doesn’t mean they’ll give help to anyone (unfortunately). Some could be biass against certain religions or races. All the signs say is that they’re not homophobes.
Maybe the teachers who don’t feel uncomfortable talking with most should put up the “Not Elliot Chambers Safe Zone”. Maybe the teachers who aren’t racist could put up safe zones that reflect their beliefs. It’s up to them what they want to be approached about, and by who. Assuming these teachers are tolerant of everyone just because they’re tolerant of one group isn’t going to work.
This is insane. Look, if I put up a sign on my door saying Se habla español, I can’t conceive of someone understanding that to mean “no se habla inglés.”
Maybe I’m just a stupid cocksucker, but I’m failing to see how saying “this is a place where the rights of gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and the transgendered are respected and protected” means “the same does not go, however, for anybody else”.
Once again, did anyone read my post? I think it is entirely possible that a troubled kid might take such a sign to mean that their problems were not specifically covered. I don’t think that the kids would assume that they would be booted out if they were to walk into a gay “safe zone”, but on the other hand, these signs are here for a reason, and kids see that. I am just telling you - in my warped little teenage mind, I can clearly see myself interpreting such a sign as meaning that these “safe zones” are for specific kids with specific problems. Problems more serious than my own. And that I should show that deference, and leave the teachers to their important business of helping gay kids. And, after all, my problems are not as “serious”, so I can go elsewhere. That’s how I could see it. And all I’m saying is, how is it hurting you, or anyone else to add something to the sign to make sure all kids know that they are ALL welcome?
Some of you are acting that if the pink triangle isn’t the only thing there, that it’s just a no-go. I want all kids to make sure they know they are welcome. And I’ve given my reasons why. Just because you wouldn’t interpret the signs that way, doesn’t mean that other (seriously depressed) kids might see it that way. If you don’t want to believe that, fine. But it doesn’t make it not so, and it doesn’t mean that there are real kids out there who have interpreted these signs in just this way. But hey - so what? You take care of “yours”, and leave us to take care of “ours”, right? :rolleyes:
The argument against the safe zones can be, I believe, summed up as concern that some kids who aren’t gay might feel excluded from the help offered to gay kids, if the symbol used to designate the safe zones is the pink triangle.
Want a solution? Great. Somebody here come up with a symbol that can be universally recognized to represent universal tolerance without reservation. Make up wording for a sticker that would make sure that every kid in a school zone would know, for certain, that they could reasonably expect to be treated with respect within this safe zone, and that the teacher has a considerate attitude towards their particular needs.
Make sure it cannot be misinterpreted, by anyone.
Do that, and I will support you completely. I’ll personally lobby for your program. I’ll lobby to make them available to every school in my city.
Until then, these safe zones are a huge step forward from what is available when I was in school. It’s a step towards making all kids feel safe in schools.
I can point out a flaw in the current system, you know. Why should I shut up? Even if I don’t have a completely developed alternative, I am entitled to point out when I see that the current way of doing is fraught with problems. I don’t have to “shut up” just because you want to “take care of yours” and you don’t want to hear any dissenting point of view.
I do have a vague idea of a sticker - it would include a pink triangle, and, I dunno, maybe some different nationality flags, or cartoons of all different-looking kinds of kids. With some sort of wording to the extent of, “ALL are welcome without fear of judgment, yadda yadda.” There, I have provided some sort of suggestion. It’s vague, half-baked, but at least it includes the idea that more than just one group is represented.
Instead of having contempt for a flawed system, I think I’ll support the people making an effor to make life better for kids.
The reason you should shut the hell up is that you’re not helping anybody by insisting on impossible criteria for all-inclusive social programs. The safe zone programs, however, are helping people. Maybe they need improvement. If you feel they do, then work to improve them.
I will indeed take care of my own. I understand the problems of gay youths, having been one, better than I understand the problems faced by urban black youth, or teenage mothers, or conservative christians, or any other group in need of support. I can use my experience best if I target a group whose needs I understand.
Because I can’t help everybody. No-one can. If we all work to make a difference, where we count most, then we’re getting somewhere.
If we all sit around nitpicking each other’s efforts to death, though, we’re not helping.
Sheesh. Why don’t you unwind a little? I wanted everyone to feel included. And apparently you don’t want to hear it, fine. But I won’t shut up.
Point me the way, I will try. What “impossible” criteria have I suggested? That all kids feel included? Why is this impossible? Besides, what exactly have you done to help the system be better, other than to tell me to shut up with my concerns about non-gay kids possibly feeling excluded with the current system?
Fine and dandy. But why do you resist the idea that these zones can be altered so that other kids need to be represented as well? I am not asking for anything to be taken away, just things to be added. I have even given you a half-baked idea for a sticker. And you don’t really care. You want me to “take care of my own”, and you also want me to shut up. Fine. That’s a mighty find compassionate attitude, fella.
But you can stop getting so upset and resistant to our suggestions for more inclusion. We don’t want anything taken away from “yours” - got it?
I don’t think I’m “nitpicking”, I have been quite specific with my concerns. I don’t want to exclude anyone. I don’t think my suggestion will make things worse. I don’t want gay kids left on the curb, forgotten and ignored. So I don’t know why you are resisting my concerns, or my suggestions.
