Should public schools teach about homosexuality?

[Kulindahr]

It's not about it being important to me, it's about the sexual and mental health of gay youth and more social acceptance of young homosexuals.

If we start young, we won't have people growing up into self-loathing, gay-hating closet cases.

Is shaping society a proper goal of schools?

 

[fabulouslyghetto]

Is shaping society a proper goal of schools?

I thought that had been part of the "game plan" for years, perhaps I was mistaken.

 

[Kulindahr]

sometimes im left open mouthed at how different america and the uk are on homosexual issues. many secondary schools (children aged 12 to 16) are teaching homosexual issues not in biology but in citizenship, pshe whatever you want to call it. i think its more important to teach kids about homosexuality in society rather than in science because thats where the problems lie right? i mean no scientist would say its wrong.

There are "scientists" in the U.S. who deny that homosexual attractions, encounters, activities, or relationships occur in the animal world -- they're stuck in the same mindframe that refused to look into Galileo's telescope, because the sun couldn't possibly have spots. And there are many, many in education who don't want kids to know that animals do it, because "it might give them ideas".

 

[LiquidSky]

Yes...in junior high and high school.

 

[Kulindahr]

Should public schools teach about chips on shoulders?

 

[gewhite3]

Of course it should be taught. How else are kids going to learn how to fling up curtains and arrange flowers in a proper fashion?

 

[SLOPPYSECONDS]

Labels created! From what why ?

Then labels create more labels under their labels and the snow ball go down the mountain getting bigger and bigger and then lands on the town.

Children do not need to learn anything! What they do need to learn is the adults fears that the children pick up and they mimic digest and the web of fears and peers and all over again.

By no fault of their own the child is stuck with many labels before they even know what they are and before they know it while other children do pick up what is going on and use it and so on but the end result is the complicated postioning of individuals with in the whole.

Luckly amongst it all are kids that do see it all or come to discover the farce that keeps the game going and masquerades of all.

Since the world is of an age where many are now able to say it and look at it and think this is stupid but the balance of those that are still children even they adults and still have not grown up where wealth and resources over flow, to those that are adults but only children and live with extremes that many adults will neva experience and do not have access or power or even know they can say this is stupid makes for a lot of pulling in all directions which you can say is the world today.

Why a kid that says ( What are you talking about? ) Adults should stop and think before they run a mile going nowhere as there is nothing to say because all they are doing is passing on their fears etc to kids shrugging their shoulders at the adult and thinking whats up with this adult going on about what?

Since you can not get rid of the mess around schools and the parents that raise children a great deal of pressure is on Adults to reign in their own bullshit and relax!

Why I say it is possible but how it is done is extremely important and not to focus on the very young for they are fineeeeeee.

 

[NickCole]

It's a matter of equality. Why should gay kids be forced to go thru a sex ed class geared towards heterosexuality? How is that fair? Include both or do nothing at all. And doing nothing at all is far worse than teaching about homosexuality to a few straight kids or their ignorant parents for a few days.

I think we should go a step further and start teaching gay history in the classroom as well. Harvey Milk and Stonewall are just as important to this country as Cesar Chavez, MLK and the Civil Rights movement. It's all apart of what makes us American and it shouldn't be ignored because of bigotry and ignorance.

And it kind of makes me sad to see GLBT people on a gay forum arguing FOR keeping homosexuality out of the classroom.

Well stated.

I think you're right.

 

[Glafna]

For instance, I asked you a little while ago what Obama's education plan was and you didn't even know he has one. And yet you're supposedly so interested in what kids are taught in public schools. So your ignorance about the President's education plan is pretty amazing. But there it is: ignorance.

Stop right there Nick, before you try to hijack ANOTHER thread. This has NOTHING to do with Obama, and yet you start dropping the O-bomb... again.

Give it a fucking rest... you don't like Obama... now let us try to come on here without hearing you say it every other post.

It's absurd to expect public school students to be taught everything, so some ignorance is going to remain following a public school education. And a lot of people may not be interested in homosexuality as a subject taught in school. Just because it's really important to you doesn't mean it is or should be to everyone.

It isn't about teaching them everything. It's about putting it down, in the textbooks, and in the discussions, that homosexuality and gay history is just as important as heterosexuality and black history.

 

[Kulindahr]

However, I definitely don't believe it should be taught in a biological aspect, because as a Biology major, I know that the biological and genetic origins, if any, are still inconclusive and arguable.

Are you saying that favts we can't explain fully yet shouldn't be taught????

 

[Kulindahr]

It isn't about teaching them everything. It's about putting it down, in the textbooks, and in the discussions, that homosexuality and gay history is just as important as heterosexuality and black history.

It's also about being accurate: when a king, or a priest, or a general, or an inventor was gay, and it made a difference at all in his or her life, it should be mentioned. Some rather evil men in history were gay, and some outstandingly good ones, and when their being gay had any significance, it should be mentioned, not hidden.

 

[MCsNo1Fn]

1. They can pull their kids from the class if they'd like them to remain ignorant, if I'm not mistaken this option has always been available to anyone who disagrees with sex education period.

2. It's not just about GAY SEX, there's more to homosexuality than sex, there are historical, cultural, social and political aspects to be considered.

3. "Forced to learn" is a misleading title. Any person who's worth half a bag of donkey shit shouldn't need to be forced to learn. Ignorance shouldn't be tolerated or promoted. Oh, unless it's religious ignorance then it's okay.

As I said, this type of class should be optional. Just because a straight person may not want to sit through a class about homosexuality doesn't mean ANYTHING. But thinking they'd be ignorant by not, makes you ignorant. It's pretty sad to think that's the type of mentality we have nowadays. Learn about homosexuality or your ignorant!!!!! There are a lot of things that are taught by NATURE and SOCIETY, and isn't/shouldn't in a class room. This is one of them.

 

[fabulouslyghetto]

^Why shouldn't it be taught in a classroom? What differentiates it from other subjects that are taught other than the fact that it's socially unacceptable?

And you might want to look up the definition of ignorant. You're throwing the word around carelessly, I used it in the proper context.

 

[Kulindahr]

But thinking they'd be ignorant by not, makes you ignorant. It's pretty sad to think that's the type of mentality we have nowadays. Learn about homosexuality or your ignorant!!!!! There are a lot of things that are taught by NATURE and SOCIETY, and isn't/shouldn't in a class room. This is one of them.

Excuse me, but being ignorant means you haven't learned about a thing -- that's the definition. If I don't learn about the Civil War, I'm ignorant... about the Civil War.

Recall here that one of the prime reasons for having sex education in the first place was that kids were "learning" about sex in the locker room, where sex is about conquests, "getting some", and all the rest that regards other people as property to be manipulated for one's own pleasure.

That you die when you fall in front of a speeding train is "taught by nature", too, but falling in front of a train isn't a productive way of learning a lesson.

 

[MCsNo1Fn]

Excuse me, but being ignorant means you haven't learned about a thing -- that's the definition. If I don't learn about the Civil War, I'm ignorant... about the Civil War.

Exactly. I'm sure there's a LOT of people that don't want to learn about homosexuality or gay sex. And that seems to be considered a terrible, unacceptable thing. The acceptable thing in a gay person's eyes seems to be EVERYONE having to be taught this subject matter. And I highly disagree.

 

[bankside]

Exactly. I'm sure there's a LOT of people that don't want to learn about homosexuality or gay sex. And that seems to be considered a terrible, unacceptable thing. The acceptable thing in a gay person's eyes seems to be EVERYONE having to be taught this subject matter. And I highly disagree.

I'd force people to learn physics too. But I'm a bastard that way.

 

[andysayshi]

It's also about being accurate: when a king, or a priest, or a general, or an inventor was gay, and it made a difference at all in his or her life, it should be mentioned. Some rather evil men in history were gay, and some outstandingly good ones, and when their being gay had any significance, it should be mentioned, not hidden.

Well said!!

This discussion is more far-reaching than just sex-ed. Recognition of homosexuality is integral to understanding facets of humanity, of politics, of art, etc.

For example, one can't fully understand the work of Michelangelo, without appreciating that his focus on the perfect male form was almost certainly a result of his homosexuality.

(Actually, during my high-school education in Australia, I remember being told many historical figures were gay, both in History and Art classes. It's obviously less of an issue here.)

 

[Kulindahr]

Exactly. I'm sure there's a LOT of people that don't want to learn about homosexuality or gay sex. And that seems to be considered a terrible, unacceptable thing. The acceptable thing in a gay person's eyes seems to be EVERYONE having to be taught this subject matter. And I highly disagree.

I'd force people to learn physics too. But I'm a bastard that way.

LOL -- I was going to say evolution, since that's a sore spot in some regions.

MC, if we start leaving things out of school that some people find to be "terrible" or "unacceptable", we'll end up teaching nothing after about the fifth grade. Making education 'comfortable' is the liberal approach -- surprised to see you going there.

Of course, I don't believe the government should be running schools in the first place, so... go organize a school that teaches things the way you want.

 

[MCsNo1Fn]

It would be one thing to teach about gay HISTORY. But as far as teaching it in sex-ed, that part should be optional. I agree with including it in our history books, but as far as sexual education goes, if I were straight, I certainly wouldn't want to be forced to sit through it. I know I didn't like sex ed to begin with, so yeah, meh.

 

[fabulouslyghetto]

If I was straight I wouldn't mind sitting through it. Do you mind sharing why you would mind? What separates homosexuality from math or civics?

You get +10 points if you answer this without any homophobic statements. Good luck.