California becomes 1st state to require teaching of gay history Around Town, posted by Editor, Pleasanton Weekly Online, on Jul 15, 2011 at 7:29 am
California has become the nation's first state to require its public schools to teach students about the history and contributions of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people. The new law, SB48, was signed by Gov. Jerry Brown yesterday and will take effect in January.
Read the full story here Web Link posted Friday, July 15, 2011, 6:44 AM
Posted by Gettin Out, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Jul 15, 2011 at 8:29 am
Its amazing where California's education priorities are these days. We have kids that get to high school and don't know their multiplication tables or how to do fractions. About 30% of the student population is highly deficient in English. The teaching of English, foreign languages and history has become a joke. Science is "just to hard" for most students. Parents are constanly howling about too much homework, yet the load is much lighter than in most developed countries. Most children these days are taught little about the founding fathers, yet they get Martin Luther King indoctrination every year in grades 1-6. Yet, we will now devote time and resource to GLBT history. Give me a break!!!
California used to be just loony. Now it is simply becoming a basket case. San Francisco is rotten to the core, and the loonism is spreading throughout the Bay Area and down the coast. I have a couple more years left here, and I can't wait to get the hell out.
Posted by steve, a resident of the Parkside neighborhood, on Jul 15, 2011 at 8:39 am
Gettin Out-your post hit the nail on the head. This state has long been a source of laughter and puzzlement around the world because of bizarre priorities like this indoctrination. Of all the things to focus our kids education on, considering the poor results we're getting from our schools now. Unbelievable.....and all driven by a political and deviant social agenda of folks like Leno and one of the posters above, who choose to force themselves on the rest of society. Give it a rest and go find a hobby.
Posted by steve, a resident of the Parkside neighborhood, on Jul 15, 2011 at 9:08 am
Happy, I don't think you really want all of us taxpayers moving out. Who will fund your 'free' clinics once the gravy train has left town? Who will be left here? It'll be like a scene from the movie 'Zombieland'.
Posted by great idea, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Jul 15, 2011 at 9:15 am
What a great idea! Let's manipulate history so we can try to get a different response out of people regarding loving, respecting, and tolerating others. If we artificially emphasize people with certain sexual preferences, and of course not report anything negative this group has done (that probably won't be allowed) - then maybe, yeah - we can change the world. Or at least California. What??? I'm so comforted to know our legislature is hard at work on this sinking ship.
Posted by Frank, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Jul 15, 2011 at 9:53 am
I don't know what is worse. Teaching this stuff or the theory of evolution. Don't laugh. These so called "teachers" want us to believe that people, animals, plants, and the earth itself just kind of put itself together by chance. When all the scientific evidence confirms the Bible, it drives the Marxist liberals crazy so the come up with this nonsense like evolution.
Posted by sad, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Jul 15, 2011 at 10:37 am
Sad.... Not because I have an issue with someone's sex life. But sad because it does not belong in the discussion.
If we list each 'contributor' with the fact they are Gay, do we also adjust the history books to be sure that those that are Straight are also so clearly identified as ‘straight’?
Do we place an asterisk next to each name with footnotes as to their sexual preference?
And leaving each school district and teacher to determine lesson plans? Are they crazy? This will result in thousands of different interpretations of what to teach and not teach. Who creates the individual standard for the school or teacher? Sounds like it is left to each to determine “whatever” they want.
And no direction as to what grade this discussion should occur in? 1st graders? 4th graders? Only high school? Again - no standard set or direction.
Any discussion of sex in schools belongs in a sex ed class in high school....that addresses 'sex'....not a history class. And parents should be able to exclude their child NOT from any sex ed class. Parents should reserve that right.
Posted by sad, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Jul 15, 2011 at 10:38 am
pardon my last sentence above. Should have said:
Any discussion of sex in schools belongs in a sex ed class in high school....that addresses 'sex'....not a history class. And parents should be able to exclude their child from any sex ed class. Parents should reserve that right.
Posted by Joe, a resident of the Siena neighborhood, on Jul 15, 2011 at 10:39 am
I'm so sick of the garbage. "Gay history" being taught in our schools is RIDICULOUS. The left and the gays will say that I am full of hate and that I'm not tolerant. That is such BS and I'm sick of hearing it. Just for the record, no, I am no full of hate and I am not intolerant. However, I *do* have common sense. The Chinese, Japanese, Koreans, Canadians, pretty much everybody in the developed world are soaring past America in education. They are learning math, science, and physics...and what are we learning??? We're learning that it's okay if Bobby has two daddies! What on earth is going on here?
We (common sense Americans) will NEVER EVER be on "common ground" with the left---EVER. It ain't gonna happen. So now that we know this fact, how do we act? Simple--we beat them! (no, not physically beat....beat them as in elections and at politics). That's the only thing we can do. I hate to say it, but the left is winning--and they know it. I am seeing this great country getting flushed down the toilet. People are DUMB and I can't take it much longer. Something's gotta give, but I don't know what that something is. There are millions out there just like me, and I think we have been quiet for too long. We will need to act soon.
Posted by Steve, a resident of the Stoneridge neighborhood, on Jul 15, 2011 at 10:53 am
So now we're teaching our kids that being gay or lesbian does make a difference in what you do? I've always believed that your sexuality doesn't affect the mark you make in history, but I guess the homophobic State of California doesn't believe that. Now our kids will be taught about the different sort of person who is called gay or lesbian.
Posted by tim, a resident of the Vineyard Avenue neighborhood, on Jul 15, 2011 at 10:54 am
Chinese Student: "I know Calculus, Chemistry, and Physics"
California Student: "I know Harvey Milk"
Chinese Student: "That's great, now can I get some fries and extra mustard with that order?
when are we going to stop putting labels on people and recognize the person and the merit of their contribution. What a person achieves is not based on their gender, religious belief, color or sexual identify but on them as a human being and their character.
Posted by Informed, a resident of the Mohr Park neighborhood, on Jul 15, 2011 at 11:42 am
Politics 101 - using our public funded school system to further the goals of "social engineering." I support the concept of giving recognition to anyone who has played a key role in something that is truely historic - regardless of race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, etc... At issue is Sacramento's desire to ellevate the "sexual orientation" status in our classrooms. Imagine what the public outcry would be "IF" Sacramento were to pass a law saying that our public schools had to emphasize "Jewishness" in our history lessons, or emphasize "Christianity's" role in our history, or emphasize that Regan was a Democrat before he became a Republican, etc... In teaching "our history," schools should emphasize the contributions made by individuals and groups. IF we try to emphasize sexual orientation of historical leaders, where do we begin and end? What should we teach our children about the sexual activities of John Kennedy, Bill Clinton, Jerry Falwell, and many others?
Posted by Mary, a resident of the Vineyard Avenue neighborhood, on Jul 15, 2011 at 11:59 am
I am a supporter of gay rights.. I am not gay myself but have many friends that are, and I teach my daughter no matter your sexuality respect all humans.. HOWEVER.. I am not sure why Gay and Lesbians history would need to be added to the ciriculum, We can learn about Harvey Milk without putting a label on him.WHY put Labels on History???. I think we need to teach kids what it takes to be successful in the world, I think teaching Tolerance and Respect STARTS AT HOME!! we are all one race.. the human Race.. sexuality should have nothing to do with it.. God gave us all a choice for a reason.. if he/she wanted ONE Type then he/she would have created ONE Type.. we are all different to learn from each other, to make us better people.. I think that starts at home..
Posted by Sam, a resident of the Oak Hill neighborhood, on Jul 15, 2011 at 12:49 pm
Aren't we all getting a bit too worked up about all this? We know virtually nothing about what actual changes will be made in the textbooks. Also, the article doesn't seem to say anything about the grade level at which gay history issues will be introduced. I assume high school?
Gays certainly have had an influence on culture here in California and on San Francisco history and culture in particular. I heard that the reason that San Francisco has such a significant gay population is that during WWII many young men who were drafted into the military were then discharged at San Francisco and other port cities when the military discovered that they were gay. Being too ashamed to return to their home towns, they then stayed in San Francisco, giving a start to the gay community there. I don't know whether this is all true since schools didn't teach anything about gay history when I was in school.
Posted by Steve, a resident of the Stoneridge neighborhood, on Jul 15, 2011 at 1:08 pm
I'm sure some of the trivia concerning why certain groups of people migrated into areas is interesting, it's probably too much for a general history background. I seem to recall that it was difficult to even include the mass Irish emigration. Perhaps when students are in college, they can learn more about these things. For now, I'd be happy if my kids understood our Constitution, government and generally how we made it from the 1600's to 2011.
Posted by Yet Another Teacher, a member of the Hart Middle School community, on Jul 15, 2011 at 2:59 pm
Predictable reaction from the [removed]
Insert the word "blacks" or "Jews" or "women" or "Latinos" in place of "gay" in any of these objections, and you'll have word-for-word the same Chicken Little predictions of educational apocalypse when the teaching of those blacks, Jews, women, and Latinos have had on Californian and American history. Gays needed to be "added" to history because they are part of history, a part that's been ignored.
As for the "superior" Chinese students: international studies show that when it comes to creative thinking, American students trounce kids from most other cultures. We need to change the way we teach science and math, but then again, we live in a country in which Tea Bagger types cry bloody murder if we try to teach the scientific fact of evolution rather than the Biblical fairy story.
I should also note that Chinese teachers don't have to deal with having students who speak 10-15 different languages in their classroom and come from many different cultures...but that note, I suspect, would be lost on the [removed], who want America made into a lily-white country and so forth.
Really, I can't even work up a good head of steam against you people. You're so predictable in your over-the-top reactions that you're beyond parody. It's like hunting dairy cows with a sniper rifle.
Posted by Sydney, a resident of the Carriage Gardens neighborhood, on Jul 15, 2011 at 3:05 pm
Earlier I posted that schools might begin by emphasizing what has become the consensus view of Lincoln biographers and historiographers -- namely, that Abraham Lincoln was bisexual (having shared single beds with men for at least a decade in his pre-married life). PW editors, perhaps ignorant of this, deleted my post. All the more reason to begin teaching the prevalence of gayness and bisexualtiy among our most important historical figures. (Unbelievable!)
Posted by Mike, a resident of the Highland Oaks neighborhood, on Jul 15, 2011 at 3:12 pm
If you accept that homosexuality is congenital rather than preference, then you should have no worries that including this in the curriculum will do anything more than increase society's appreciation of the fact that contributions to society are made irrespective of race, religion, gender or what someone has for lunch on any particular day, which is good, right?
Posted by steve, a resident of the Parkside neighborhood, on Jul 15, 2011 at 3:30 pm
Mike----until there's a cure.
YAT- [portion removed] Interesting your substituting race for gayness as part of your defense of the indefensible. Are we now saying we're teaching classes specifically on Jewish, black and Latino history? When will there be time for reading, writing math and science? Sounds like you're going to have to get up much earlier to cover this new silo-ing apporach to historical studies.
Also, interesting is your comment about the Chinese not having to deal with multiple languages. In P.C. California, your comment could be deemed racist since you have to 'deal' with multiple groups who won't assimilate. And you blame 'tea bagger's' for being racist? You like to throw that term around a lot in your defense of gays. [portion removed]
Posted by Puh-lease, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Jul 15, 2011 at 5:24 pm
"...no answer for me about teaching evolution in schools and how it led to this. It all starts with teaching lies like evolution."
That's because one look at the site and its amateurish conclusions proves them right. Spend the $20 and buy a book called "The Beak of the Finch."
And evolve a bit yourself.
On topic, it's tough to say what they'll teach, but if students spend a class period or two learning about how gays have contributed to society, I'm all for it. Maybe they could cover the topic during the wasted half days at the end of the year, because no way will that ever end up on NCLB.
Posted by Yet Another Teacher, a member of the Hart Middle School community, on Jul 15, 2011 at 6:03 pm
There may be a shortage of many things in this world--oil, drinkable water, money--but there is definitely a bountiful harvest of hateful, blind bigotry. Thank goodness you lot don't represent the majority of Pleasantonians.
Y'all talk amongst yourselves, hear? I'm not going to waste my time on people who live in the 21st century and still act and think like this is the Middle Ages. What you know about history, science, and pedagogy would fit in a thimble and leave room for my thumb.
(And is anybody curious about the "portions removed" from Steve's semi-literate rant?)
I would ask why Noah didn't take dinosaurs on the Ark (were there specific instruction to exclude them, or did the dinosaurs just sleep late and miss the boat?), but that would be like rattling the cage of a rabid monkey. Best to just let sleeping monkeys lie.
Posted by No wonder, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Jul 15, 2011 at 10:51 pm
History ? ? OH pleeeezze ! It's crap like this coming from our lousy legislators that our kids don't cut it. Obama said our schools can't make it to the 'top'. Silicon Valley CEOs say they can't find kids from American schools who can do math or science. And the UNIONS just want fewer hours in their school days. More junk time STEALS from hours for education skills being taught, so kids then graduate not fit to even enter college, understand a home loan, or able to fill our a job application. Forget the hope of having kids know our constitution or how we create congressional districts....It's all a very expensive waste. They can all watch the world shooting right by the US on their aps,...as long as somebody gives them the device, since they won't have jobs to buy for themselves
Posted by No wonder, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Jul 15, 2011 at 11:13 pm
Both groups in this exchange are equally twisted. I am definitely with the science of evolution. But, I find the airheads who lack the ability to appropriately 'weight' the essentials that must be taught to build competent, SELF-SUFFICIENT adults in the hours alloted in the school day....who stupidly call everything racist or bigoted,,,,which is NOT the case. There are only 24 hours in a day...and UNTIL CA schools can master reading (in English), writing, and arithmetic, the ONLY intellectural position would be,,,,the day is FULL....no room for god or gays ! ! I want a generation that doesn't want to live on WIC vouchers, school grants to avoid life, leaching, and demanding from others,,,equiped with the skills to provide for themselves AND EVERY CHILD THEY BREED ! ! !
Posted by ardent, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Jul 16, 2011 at 3:30 pm
Yet Another Teacher says: " I'm not going to waste my time on people who live in the 21st century and still act and think like this is the Middle Ages. What you know about history, science, and pedagogy would fit in a thimble and leave room for my thumb."
Since when did gay-dom become synonymous with knowledge? There is no objective point you can point to in all of science, philosophy, economics, or any other field of knowledge that states that teaching about being gay is part of any pedagogy. Gay-dom is a sexual orientation not a science, not a mathematics, not a economic formula.
In the old days, they use to teach homemaking to young girls. That has gone by the wayside. Now you want to state that NOT teaching same-sex Kama Satra is equivalent to a medieval mentality. Please.
To me understand the true nature of the origin of the gay life,a gay associate recommend that I watch the 2005 film "Gay Sex in the 70's" directed by Joseph F. Lovett for those who have Netflix. I remained opened as I watched the film. I was horrified, and am truly shocked that anyone would call NOT teaching gay-dom Medieval. See for yourself. But I am sure you will walk away dismissing the notion that current educational standards are less than minimal if they do NOT teach gay-ness. Tolerance to everyone maybe, but that's an American value.
Posted by Yet Another Teacher, a member of the Hart Middle School community, on Jul 16, 2011 at 3:51 pm
The contribution of gays, both closeted and open, will be integrated into the history that is already taught. The history will be age-appropriate, of course: what we teach in the elementary, middle, and high schools will be geared towards the intellectual and emotional maturity of the students at those different levels.
The definition of "knowledge" is "acquaintance with facts, truths, or principles, as from study or investigation; general erudition: knowledge of many things."
The fact that gay people have existed throughout human history, have been persecuted in many societies (and tolerated or even exalted in a few), and have made many contributions in the arts, sciences, etc., will be included to broaden and deepen our young people's understanding of history and of human society.
Here's an example of what may be included: Alan Turing was a British mathematician who was instrumental in deciphering the Enigma Code, which was a communications device the German military used to mask its top-secret communications. General Eisenhower said that breaking the Enigma Code, which Turing and his people did, was "instrumental" to the Allies winning World War 2.
That's a very important contribution of a gay man to world history. But the story takes a tragic turn as Alan Turing was later convicted of "indecency" for having consensual same-sex relationships, lost his security clearance, and had to agree to be chemically castrated. Turing understandably became despondent and this hero of World War Two committed suicide on June 8, 1954. The British government later issued the following apology many years after the fact:
"Thousands of people have come together to demand justice for Alan Turing and recognition of the appalling way he was treated. While Turing was dealt with under the law of the time and we can't put the clock back, his treatment was of course utterly unfair and I am pleased to have the chance to say how deeply sorry I and we all are for what happened to him ... So on behalf of the British government, and all those who live freely thanks to Alan's work I am very proud to say: we're sorry, you deserved so much better"
Now I'm through with you knuckle-draggers. Keep ranting on about the GAYS and GAY-DOM all you want. Your kind have always existed and always will. You're called "bigots". It's not a pretty tag, but it fits you.
Posted by ardent, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Jul 16, 2011 at 4:47 pm
Yet Another Teacher says: "Now I'm through with you knuckle-draggers. Keep ranting on about the GAYS and GAY-DOM all you want. Your kind have always existed and always will. You're called "bigots". It's not a pretty tag, but it fits you."
Now Teacher starts usiung pejoratives to describe the person the Teacher doesn't agree with. Then (I love this part) states that "your kind" existed for a long time. Now isn't that what Teacher is attempting to eradicate, you know the name calling of someone that doesn't agree with a certain belief system. "Your kind" like gay / black / Mexican / White Male / Democrat / Republican / Liberal / insert type you don't like.
Then (drum roll please, here it goes)- I'm the bigot, or anyone that doesn't fall in line with Teacher's value system. We're the knuckle draggers (please, so much name calling, like the name calling you're against.) What's not pretty is something called HYPOCRISY. And guess what, I'm highly educated, a productive member of society, and have done more for education that you can imagine. But, that's not your argument. You just want your value to be the exclusive value for everyone around you, you know like the knuckle draggers you disdain. HYPOCRISY is the modern sin. Because I have views about gays and education doesn't put me in a category you've built for your conceptual enemies.
Take a second, if you haven't run off to get away from diverse points of view, and think about your statements. It's the mirror image of what you say you're against. Again: HYPOCRISY, the modern sin.
Posted by Patriot, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Jul 16, 2011 at 5:07 pm
Well said. You have written the words of what at least 80% of Americans know to be true and would like to say to Yet Another Teacher. It is the mirror image - HYPOCRICY. I bet most Teachers do not feel like Yet Another. I do not personally know any that do. Thank You, Ardent, for your honest comments.
Posted by Gil, a resident of Livermore, on Jul 16, 2011 at 5:14 pm
Just like Ardent, I'm really highly educated too. Really I am. I find myself having to tell people that all the time.
The biggest problem our society faces is criticism of gay bashers and haters. See, Ardent and me have been discriminated against since time immemorium. Try being anti-gay and see the kinds of problems you run into: your family might disown you for your heterosexual tendencies and orientation; people will inflict violence upon you because you walk and talk like you're straight; people might not rent an apartment to you because they're afraid their neighbors might think because they rented to heterosexuals they must be heterosexual too; you might experience difficulty getting employed anywhere because you aren't a lisper; and you'll not be permitted to serve your country unless you hide your heterosexual tendencies from all others.
See, it's a equal playing field. And so to criticize gay bashers and haters as knuckle-draggers is just soooooo much hypocrisy. Gays and their supporters ought to learn how to tolerate those who have kicked the stuffings out of them, who refuse to recognize gays as persons with rights against discrimination, who view gays as the perverted sickos they are, and who refuse to permit our schools' acknowledgement of the accomplishments of gays in the classroom. I am just soooooo sick of being punished for being a homosexual ... um ... check that, I mean for being a HETEROsexual. I am NOT a homosexual. I hate homosexuals. Really. Alright. I'm confused. So what? You're all hypocrites.
Posted by Julie, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Jul 16, 2011 at 5:27 pm Julie is a member (registered user) of PleasantonWeekly.com
Whoa! Ardent, when did including the contributions of the gay community turn into teaching the "same-sex kama sutra"? Is that really what you think will be included on the curriculum or are you just trying to stir people up to your side with such inaccurate, inflammatory comments?
And, honestly, I think I'd be shocked with ANY documentary type movie about ANY type of sex in the 70's...gay or straight. I was too young to be sexually active in the 70's (thank goodness). It was a pretty "free" time. I'm betting documentaries about sex (gay or straight) would be markedly different if they focused on the 80's, 90's, or now. Let's keep things in perspective!
Posted by Ardent, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Jul 16, 2011 at 7:23 pm
Jule: " I think I'd be shocked with ANY documentary type movie about ANY type of sex in the 70's...gay or straight."
Julie the documentary was made in 2005, and it does bring forward the gay issue into modern times, beyond the 80's, 90's and up to now. And if won't see ANY documentary from the 70's, I'm not sure I'm the one who needs perspective. Viewing history should not preclude a generation because of its abrasiveness. OR: are you too a victim of selective education, that is we should only want what "I" want / what "I" deem appropriate? It seems the "I" is relative termed accessible to only socially avant garde members. Education is one thing. Expression and freedom another. I feel it's totally appropriate to draw lines and at least bring the question of social appropriateness to bear. Again its one thing to be homosexual (Like Gil) but another to teach it.
Posted by Guest, a resident of another community, on Jul 16, 2011 at 8:14 pm
Gil, or maybe it's really Jill, I think myself and many others are sick of being punished by the students' in schools that feel it's their right to punch, kick, spit, shove etc others just because of their sexuality. If schools are required to teach sex education, drug education and the like, they should also be required to teach tolerance as this is found in the everyday world- well at least in the United States for the most part.
I also read somewhere on here about how schools are raising drugged out kids. Let's not forget- when the school day ends, it's up to the parents/guardians to supervise them. It seems that people today have this mind frame of schools being responsible for kids 24/7. Obviously no matter what a school teaches, kids aren't going to listen (since this seems to be the mind frame). Teach kids history about homosexuality and they'll still continue to commit hate crimes- same thing with DARE program and all the kids getting drunk/doing drugs.
Posted by Ardent, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Jul 16, 2011 at 8:42 pm
Guest, there are two issues. The ones you're referring to are TOLERANCE and VICTIMIZATION. There is no room for bullying or violent crimes of any kind. Let me provide an analogy: Do you think that teaching kids to JUST SAY NO really reduces drug use in school k-12? The answer is already in - NO it doesn't. Does that mean we should tolerate drugs in school. NO. Being a victim of crime is a different matter. The problem is that resources (precious, dwindling resources) are being squandered everyday in our school systems. Is being gay bad. NO. It's a lifestyle. What I'm saying is that music programs, sports programs, tutoring programs are being cut. Teachers and administrators should apply a NO BULLYING POLICY across the board. They are not effective at doing this. That is what you're saying. Schools need to become efficient in the way they operate. They are not. But if you believe that teaching about gays, drug use, the horrors of becoming a runaway, the bleak future if you don't pop your math book is going to change student behavior, then that thinking is part of the "pop a pill", "teach a class", "Just Say No" mentality were all the bad things go away by merely re-booting the computer. Put bully's in juvey for a day or two. Have the school police officer crack down on drug use. Have a process where kids can tell about violent offenders without the fear of retribution. No one should be a victim of crime. I just don't want to mix up the issues. At the same time, if we don't start making these distinctions we're in for a lot more trouble than merely teaching about being gay, doing your homework and becoming a good citizen.
Posted by Julie, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Jul 16, 2011 at 9:38 pm Julie is a member (registered user) of PleasantonWeekly.com
Ardent, I based my comments on the title you offered: "Gay Sex in the 70's"...ergo I assumed it was about gay sex in the...70's.
"And if won't see ANY documentary from the 70's, I'm not sure I'm the one who needs perspective".
Umm, I never said I wouldn't ever *see* any documentary from the 70's, only that I'd be shocked by the sex in a "sex documentary" of the 70's (because gay or straight, that was a "looser era"). If you are going to refer to my words or to my post, then try to be accurate. I notice that you ignore the first paragraph of my post.
"OR: are you too a victim of selective education, that is we should only want what "I" want / what "I" deem appropriate?".
Why address this to me? Unlike you, I have not even posted an opinion about California's new requirement. I've stated nothing about what *I* want, but you have. So are you saying it's bad that *you* only want what *you* want or what *you* deem appropriate? Personally, I think it's fine that you have an opinion.
We agree on something, actually. I agree that schools should apply a "No bullying" policy across the board. And, you are right, they fail at this. My non-minority, straight child was bullied in elementary school simply for not being a "cookie cutter" P-Town type. The administration was completely ineffective.
For the record, I don't think the idea of this is to teach "about being gay". For example, including African Americans in history books didn't mean we were "taught" about "being" African American. Including the contributions from "women" didn't include lessons on "being a woman". It's a matter of ensuring that all youth feel represented in what they are learning, so that all youth (whether Latino, Gay, Caucasian, Heterosexual, Male, Female, etc.) feel they can aspire to achieve...anything. If a Latino girl only sees & hears about White males in her history, science, math, etc. textbooks and in the curriculum, she may feel she can't belong to a group of politicians, mathematicians, scientists, etc.
Posted by Ardent, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Jul 16, 2011 at 10:12 pm
I apologize for misstating your statements. I'm sure that if everyone sat down at a large round table, there would be more agreement that we realize. We all want the same thing. I like the idea of "exchanging ideas" and coming to consensus.
Again, I apologize for taking your comments out of context. It was not my intent.
Posted by Teacher, not behavior modifier, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Jul 16, 2011 at 10:37 pm
@"Teach kids history about homosexuality and they'll still continue to commit hate crimes- same thing with DARE program and all the kids getting drunk/doing drugs."
The above quote can only have been offered by someone who is incapable of learning; incapable of recognizing how others learn from and are influenced by the words of teachers, authors, and respect for others they interact with in their lives. Somewhere along the line, "Guess" missed the boat. Sadly, it appears education -- parental, school, self -- failed him.
So too with Ardent @"But if you believe that teaching about gays, drug use, the horrors of becoming a runaway, the bleak future if you don't pop your math book is going to change student behavior, then that thinking is part of the 'pop a pill, 'teach a class', 'Just Say No' mentality were all the bad things go away by merely re-booting the computer." This miserable soul seems to think education is about changing people's behavior; and because his behavior probably hasn't changed over the years, and because he's unable to get others to change their behavior to satisfy his concept, he pronounces education a failure.
We don't teach in order to get kids to behave, Ardent. We teach them in order to give them the tools to think through issues on their own, using their own reasoning abilities. Offering evidence of gay contributions to our history, no less than the importance of Western art, or medieval religion, or Schubert's string quartets, or the philosophy of Thomas Hobbes, is part of the overall tool kit we offer students. We hope that as we expand their horizons of knowledge that they'll become more knowledgable and more apt at sorting through all the complexities before them -- calculus problems, as well as problems of humans' involvement with one another.
Having said that, it sometimes (but not always) follows that one's behaviors advance alongside one's knowledge. That is why we tend not to find most deeply rooted fears and hatreds and prejudices among the educated in our society, but rather among the ill-educated. Perhaps one has to have experienced a modicum of successful education in order to appreciate this point. Sadly, there are those in our midst who are/were badly educated, badly parented, and so unable to move forward by way of learning from others.
Posted by Julie, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Jul 16, 2011 at 10:54 pm Julie is a member (registered user) of PleasantonWeekly.com
Ardent, thank you. It is indeed a different experience to exchange ideas face to face, rather than online!
To all those creating a correlation between the children in our school system and long-term employment at a fast food establishment: wow - you are discounting so many factors that go into a person's choice or pursuit of a career! You must put all your "eggs" in the proverbial basket of public education. Yes, sometimes my kids' education was lacking (even here in P-Town) and no, I did not sign them up for tutoring/academic support/workbooks/etc. However, I have provided an immense amount of support in the form of competent parenting, general caring & love, guidance and role modeling. Also, my kids do not have personalities that lead to aspiring to fast food "jobs" over having a "career" (also tied to my support). There are so many examples of successful people who had little or poor schooling. Those who work in fast food their entire life likely have other issues besides a "California education". Personally, I don't intend to degrade a person's choice of working in the fast food industry, I am only alluding to it as an "unsuccessful career" because a couple of posters here are holding it up as the ultimate "loser" career.
Posted by Ardent, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Jul 16, 2011 at 10:59 pm
The following quotes are samples of @Teacher statements: "The above quote can only have been offered by someone who is incapable of learning; incapable of recognizing how others learn" ... " "Guess" missed the boat. Sadly, it appears education -- parental, school, self -- failed him." ... " I can't even work up a good head of steam against you people. You're so predictable in your over-the-top reactions that you're beyond parody. It's like hunting dairy cows with a sniper rifle." ... "... I'm through with you knuckle-draggers ...Your kind have always existed and always will. You're called "bigots". It's not a pretty tag, but it fits you." ..."This miserable soul..."
These are quotes from someone who says they represent the knowledge of what education means. If a CEO, a principal of a school, a teacher in front of a classroom, a school board member or any other person who felt they were speaking for education addressed their audience in this way, any reasonable person would be shocked, dismayed and hopefully quick to see through the veil of superiority.
Teacher's pejorative name calling is bullying. Teacher's terms are vulgar and disreputable. There are many people through-out this post who have voiced their opinions, and many, (although not all) do NOT resort to name calling in such a disgusting and brutal manner. Those that do get rancorous do not say they represent the universe of education.
Classroom content is open to question because of dwindling resources. There are existing laws and policies that allow for a broadened understanding that mistreatment of any individual is illegal and should not be tolerated. Yes, there may be reasonable argument whether certain content programs are appropriate. The open market of ideas is the forum for this discussion. But, in no land of promise, does a person who places themselves as a spokesperson for education, higher learning, knowledge, behavior science speak to their audience like this.
Posted by teacher, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Jul 17, 2011 at 12:01 am
@"in no land of promise, does a person who places themselves as a spokesperson for education, higher learning, knowledge, behavior science speak to their audience like this."
Unable to address the comments of Teacher and Yet Another Teacher in a reasoned, intellectual manner, Ardent resorts to his predictable and not very effective fallback: You're all name-callers!
Tell you what, Ardent. We have names like bigot in our lexicon because there remain bigots in our midst. We have names like ignoramus in our lexicon because there remain ignoramuses in our midst. I didn't refer to you or your other personae as a 'knuckle dragger' -- that was opined by YAT, I think. But I wish I had. It is the most accurate descriptor of another poster that I have seen on these posts.
Please don't attempt to deceive us with the false assertion that you are attempting to engage in reasoned discussion and that you're willing to learn from others who have a different viewpoint than yourself. Your ideas come across as strident, inflexible, hate-filled, confused, and unyielding. You appear to be on a mission to convince anyone who will listen to adopt your hate-filled bigotry, and you seem to get perverse enjoyment in getting oppositional feedback which you seem incapable of reflecting upon, but only use as fuel to feed your bias and hatred. You come across as a child in desperate need for attention, and will post any form of garbage whatsoever in order to get it. And you're attempting to tell teachers what to teach and how to teach it? What a bigoted, sick joke.
Posted by Steve, a resident of the Parkside neighborhood, on Jul 17, 2011 at 7:30 pm
Teacher-spare us from your pompous, condescending lectures. No one can engage you in reasoned discussion since you already know what is best for all of us. You are afflicted with the same problem many leftists have-the need to tell the rest of us how to live without allowing us the courtesy of descent from the utopian views of those of your ilk. Preach to a different choir. One that appreciates your warped sense of reality.
Posted by Yelena, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Jul 17, 2011 at 8:06 pm
Teacher comment is a good one I think. STeve should read maybe.
""You appear to be on a mission to convince anyone who will listen to adopt your hate-filled bigotry, and you seem to get perverse enjoyment in getting oppositional feedback which you seem incapable of reflecting upon, but only use as fuel to feed your bias and hatred. You come across as a child in desperate need for attention, and will post any form of garbage whatsoever in order to get it.""