That gay high school buzz
Jul. 29th, 2003 11:47 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
judecorpApparently, the Harvey Milk High School in New York City is all the news these days, because it's planning to expand and offer services to more students. Some of my LJ friends have been posting about it, mostly negative. There's been talk of "separate but equal" and other inherently negative catchphrases. And of course I have thoughts.
Did you know that when I was thinking of relocating to NYC, I had a phone interview with the Hetrick-Martin Institute? Heck, this could have been my job! (What was I thinking, deciding to stay in Columbus??!?!)
This is not a segregation situation, or a "separate but equal" means of education, for the primary reason that no one is forced to attend this school. It's an alternative school, like all of the other alternative schools that lump willing kids based on a certain academic subject or characteristic. The school has been operating two classrooms for quite some time now, and I believe the expansion will allow for 100 students.
100 students in the NYC school system. That's hardly a drop in the bucket.
Segregation would imply that all queer youth (or straight youth, or whatever youth) were being rounded up and forced to attend a different school. It would imply that the quality of education was in some way different than a traditional NYC public school. To be honest, how can you tell? There are so many different types of charter, alternative, and specialized public schools in NYC that there is no easy description for a "regular" school.
Let's face it - there is incredible variation among queer youth. Some of them are more well-adjusted than others. Some of them have more supportive families than others. Some of them have more social skills than others. Some of them blend into the mainstream better than others. Can you imagine being a transgender youth in a public school system? Can you say, "being eaten alive?" I can, especially when I think about a 14 (I think) year old I know, a biological male who prefers to present as female (and does a pretty convincing job!) and has for his entire life. Luckily, this young person has incredible parents, and a safe place to hang out - our youth drop-in center.
It's no secret that there is an elevated rate of suicide among queer young people. One of the contributing factors, it has been theorized, is a heightened sense of isolation. Falling into a common angst trap of adolescence, queer youth often feel as if they are the only queer people in the universe. They often do not have available role models or an available dating pool, among other things. They spend those years where the aim is to secure an identity in concealment and denial.
Having a safe social space is often enough to carry these youth through the high school years. But what about those students for whom queerness is more of an issue than others, or who may have more issues, problems, disabilities, or difficulties compounding a newfound queerness, or who may "stick out" more readily and thus be easier targets? To me, it's not terrible to offer these young people a safe space where they can concentrate on their education without worrying about potential slander, jeering, or violence. It's not terrible to allow a young person to use hir intellect to complete schoolwork rather than perpetually justify hir existence. If queer youth didn't need safe spaces, why would they be in such demand?
It's easy to try to make the leap between LGBT individuals and those of other minorities in society. And it's easier, I think, to consider previous (disastrous) attempts at segregated education fueled by racism rather than, for example, some successful Africentric education programs in inner cities. Those aren't "separate but equal" programs - they're established alternative programs designed with students in mind.
Please let's not be so quick to compare Segregation in Schools (ethnic segregation) with the expansion of the Harvey Milk School. It's like apples and oranges here, I promise. For example... remember that school in the South that held a "White Prom" and a "Black Prom"? Remember how shocking it was that so many of the students were in favor of it? Remember the bitter taste of racism in your mouth as you read about it, thought about it, conceived it?
Have you ever attended an alternative Prom for queer youth? Or if you're older than that, have you ever wanted to? Have you ever wanted the freedom to take the date of your choice, wear the formal outfit of your choice? Have you ever wanted the freedom to hold hands, sit, eat, dance, take photographs, share moments, and show intimacy without becoming a spectacle? Do we not celebrate The Other Prom in Columbus, laud its high attendence and safe atmosphere?
This is a 100-student school, people, and it is an /option/. For some students, it may be their ONLY option ensuring a safe, healthy education. LET IT GO. MAKE MORE.
Do I think that this underwrites dealing with homophobia and heterosexism in our society and our school systems? Of course not. There are a lot more than 100 queer kids in the United States. Are we enhancing the problem by placing the youth in a separate school? One look at that 14 year old I was talking about up there, and you'll see there's no "enhancing" required. I promise.
Did you know that when I was thinking of relocating to NYC, I had a phone interview with the Hetrick-Martin Institute? Heck, this could have been my job! (What was I thinking, deciding to stay in Columbus??!?!)
This is not a segregation situation, or a "separate but equal" means of education, for the primary reason that no one is forced to attend this school. It's an alternative school, like all of the other alternative schools that lump willing kids based on a certain academic subject or characteristic. The school has been operating two classrooms for quite some time now, and I believe the expansion will allow for 100 students.
100 students in the NYC school system. That's hardly a drop in the bucket.
Segregation would imply that all queer youth (or straight youth, or whatever youth) were being rounded up and forced to attend a different school. It would imply that the quality of education was in some way different than a traditional NYC public school. To be honest, how can you tell? There are so many different types of charter, alternative, and specialized public schools in NYC that there is no easy description for a "regular" school.
Let's face it - there is incredible variation among queer youth. Some of them are more well-adjusted than others. Some of them have more supportive families than others. Some of them have more social skills than others. Some of them blend into the mainstream better than others. Can you imagine being a transgender youth in a public school system? Can you say, "being eaten alive?" I can, especially when I think about a 14 (I think) year old I know, a biological male who prefers to present as female (and does a pretty convincing job!) and has for his entire life. Luckily, this young person has incredible parents, and a safe place to hang out - our youth drop-in center.
It's no secret that there is an elevated rate of suicide among queer young people. One of the contributing factors, it has been theorized, is a heightened sense of isolation. Falling into a common angst trap of adolescence, queer youth often feel as if they are the only queer people in the universe. They often do not have available role models or an available dating pool, among other things. They spend those years where the aim is to secure an identity in concealment and denial.
Having a safe social space is often enough to carry these youth through the high school years. But what about those students for whom queerness is more of an issue than others, or who may have more issues, problems, disabilities, or difficulties compounding a newfound queerness, or who may "stick out" more readily and thus be easier targets? To me, it's not terrible to offer these young people a safe space where they can concentrate on their education without worrying about potential slander, jeering, or violence. It's not terrible to allow a young person to use hir intellect to complete schoolwork rather than perpetually justify hir existence. If queer youth didn't need safe spaces, why would they be in such demand?
It's easy to try to make the leap between LGBT individuals and those of other minorities in society. And it's easier, I think, to consider previous (disastrous) attempts at segregated education fueled by racism rather than, for example, some successful Africentric education programs in inner cities. Those aren't "separate but equal" programs - they're established alternative programs designed with students in mind.
Please let's not be so quick to compare Segregation in Schools (ethnic segregation) with the expansion of the Harvey Milk School. It's like apples and oranges here, I promise. For example... remember that school in the South that held a "White Prom" and a "Black Prom"? Remember how shocking it was that so many of the students were in favor of it? Remember the bitter taste of racism in your mouth as you read about it, thought about it, conceived it?
Have you ever attended an alternative Prom for queer youth? Or if you're older than that, have you ever wanted to? Have you ever wanted the freedom to take the date of your choice, wear the formal outfit of your choice? Have you ever wanted the freedom to hold hands, sit, eat, dance, take photographs, share moments, and show intimacy without becoming a spectacle? Do we not celebrate The Other Prom in Columbus, laud its high attendence and safe atmosphere?
This is a 100-student school, people, and it is an /option/. For some students, it may be their ONLY option ensuring a safe, healthy education. LET IT GO. MAKE MORE.
Do I think that this underwrites dealing with homophobia and heterosexism in our society and our school systems? Of course not. There are a lot more than 100 queer kids in the United States. Are we enhancing the problem by placing the youth in a separate school? One look at that 14 year old I was talking about up there, and you'll see there's no "enhancing" required. I promise.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2003-07-29 09:02 am (UTC)Forcing young people who clearly don't fit in, who are abused daily but are LEGALLY REQUIRED to attend the abuse - how does this help the problem? Isn't that like using the young people to fight the battle that the adults should be fighting?
Why would we be giving the responsibility to "change things" to the young people? Why would we use them as casualities in order to make a point? The point has been made already, dear - some schools are horrible places for some kids.
There should still be in-service programs to educate teachers and school staff about the issues faced by queer youth. There should still be world-wide movements designed to make our universe a more tolerant place. There should still be strong messages that abuse (verbal, physical) targetting certain populations of people is WRONG.
We may be, by doing this, sheltering these young people for a set number of hours a day. But we're not keeping them from society. We're not keeping them off the streets, out of the stores and churches, out of their homes. We're telling them that they can hang their "thick skin" at the door of their classroom and get their work done.
And in that time, in that time when we know they're safe, the rest of us had better be busting our asses to ensure that they'll continue to be safe the minute they leave school.
Don't worry. I have no intention of concluding my fight for social justice just because I have a building to put 100 kids in so they don't get beaten up from 8am to 3pm.
no subject
Date: 2003-07-29 09:11 am (UTC)Still, wouldn't it make more sense to edjucate the students in the schools and stop ALL the abuse, not just of gay kids but of everyone "different"? We can certainly do both, fine. But with money as stingy as it is if you had to chose one - which comes out on top?
See what I'm sayin? I dunno maybe I am making no sense. I'm not saying it is a bad idea, or a total idea or anything of the sort. I'm saying if I had to send the money one way or the other - I would rather use it to help stop all the various abuse and to edjucate all sorts of kids against random bullshit hate. If I had to choose. If not, sure go for as much as you can, by all means. Every bit helps somehow.
no subject
Date: 2003-07-29 12:20 pm (UTC)But what do you do when abuse is keeping a young person from finishing school? What do you do with a young person who is so tormented that their only options (to them) are drop out, or commit suicide? How quickly can you change the climates of the schools (and our society) to help that young person? Do you consider that young person an unfortunate casualty, a necessary evil?
I used to babysit a kid that had ADHD so badly that he simply couldn't perform in a standard classroom. So they moved him to special education, and he still couldn't cut it. And by this time, other kids certainly picked up how different he was, how he got in trouble for behavior, how he was failing. He got chewed up at school, like every other child in special education classes. How many "short bus" or "special ed" jokes do adults tell TO THIS DAY? Are you saying that this kid I used to babysit shouldn't have attended a local alternative school that was a little more forgiving, and had a more open learning style so he could function better? Are you saying that instead, the school should have educated the students that "making fun of kids with behavior problems" is bad? Would that have helped him get his diploma?
The money for the school comes from the HMI's budget. They've been funding the smaller school independently for a long time. They may have gotten more money from elsewhere to expand, but it's still their money. It's not like you will now have a "queer tax" in your locality to cover a specific alternative education program.
Similarly, it could be said that all adolescents have adjustment problems, right? And I bet it would benefit almost all adolescents to attend some sort of "adolescent support group" where they could air out their concerns and work through their problems. But would ONE support group for ALL adolescents be the best bet? Or would it be more helpful, at least part of the time, to split the population into smaller groups of adolescents struggling with similar issues?
no subject
Date: 2003-07-29 10:01 am (UTC)I guess that one thing that I want to give you to chew on at the moment is this; what makes the 14-year old transgendered youth more important than a normatively-gendered, straight, geeky, thin, effeminate male classmate who is also subjected to ridicule and physical harassment? One would be eligible for this alternative school, and the other would still be subject to daily beatings.
no subject
Date: 2003-07-29 11:26 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-07-29 12:18 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-07-29 08:21 pm (UTC)Again, I'm not saying that this is a bad idea. I'm just saying that there are alot of good arguments as to why it's not a great idea, either. It may well be the best available compromise, in fact.
no subject
Date: 2003-07-29 09:45 pm (UTC)If that's the case, we'd better close all of the alternative, charter, and magnet schools.
no subject
Date: 2003-07-29 09:53 pm (UTC)What I'm getting at is the fact that while it's nice to talk about it being great to provide these services and to protect the kids, there are always going to be those that can't be served, and I guess I worry about them just as much as those who are fortunate enough to live where they can avail themselves of the services. And, by the same token, what of the kids in the city who have parents that they can't come out to in order to get places in the alternative school. At least with a performing arts school or a math/science/tech school, there isn't the shameful stigma in the minds of the parents that goes with your child being qualified for that particular school.
I think that such a school would be a good thing if I didn't see it as something more that the phobes could use as examples of "special rights" and all that. And unfortunately that's what I see coming out of all the publicity that this story is generating.
no subject
Date: 2003-07-31 10:14 am (UTC)We had a good chat about this at the youth support group last night. (Wow, I've really missed doing that.) There was overwhelming support from the youth for the program, and overwhelming desire to attend such a program. It was very eye-opening.
But about your comment above, do you think the opponents really even need "evidence" to use this defense? Heck, just the idea that queer people should be able to use the sidewalk is enough for them to cry "special rights."
no subject
Date: 2003-07-31 10:36 am (UTC)In theory, this is a wonderful thing (let's have that clear right now). One wonders how many suicides and mass-homocides would be stopped by having something like this available. I'm just trying to be pragmatic and see the other side of the issue, as well. Damn my cold politician heart! ;)