Just because something is not overt does not mean it does not exist. And this is what I often have to remind myself of. Just because most of my students do not harass the two openly gay students in my classroom does not mean that these young woman are not harassed or that they do not experience times of unease or fear due to their sexuality. I can control what goes on in my classroom, discipline students who make disparaging comments, educate them about the hurtfulness of their actions/speech, explicitly demonstrate my support of LGBT issues, but what happens when my students leave the confines of my room?
I struggle with how to effectively foster a safer, more accepting atmosphere in terms of the school as a whole. If it is a battle to get my own students, who I have built personal relationship with to see how their actions can impact others (both positively and negatively), how can I reach students who I have no real connection to? The task is so daunting, I can understand the impulse to "sometimes. . .ignore it" (8). But when we get to feeling overwhelmed by it all and start lamenting the lack of hours in the day, we need to take a step back and prioritize. Is it really more important to get through the last three linear function examples or to ensure that the students in your class feel safe and supported?
Meyer's teachers are right--most undergrad education programs "don't sufficiently prepare [us] to address incidents of harassment or bullying" (9). But regardless of our preparedness or lack there of, this is our reality and we can either throw our hands up in the air at the expense of our students' well-being or we can fight the good fight as hard and uncertain as it is knowing that we may be the only person defending our students' right to be themselves. The consequences of turning the other way are dire.
To underscore the 
seriousness of our charge, I want to end tonight's blog with an article about the mistrial of Brandon McInerney, who shot and killed his classmate Lawrence King at their California high school in 2008. The prosecutor in the trial argued that McInerney killed King because McInerney subscribed to a white-supremacist philosophy that taught all gays were an "abomination" while the defense argued that McInerney was driven to murder by King's unwanted sexual advances. In September, the jury in the case deadlocked not over McInerney's guilt but rather the appropriate punishment for the crime given McInerney's age (15) at the time of the shooting. He is set to be retried later this year. Whatever ends up happening to Brandon McInerney, one thing remains very clear in this case, the adults who were suppose to watch out for these children failed them. Eliza Byard, executive director of GLSEN, summed it up best when she argued that "The systems in place to support Oxnard students failed to avert disaster two years ago and resulted in this incredible loss. There is much to be done to fix these broken systems and hold adults accountable for their part in avoiding future tragedy."
seriousness of our charge, I want to end tonight's blog with an article about the mistrial of Brandon McInerney, who shot and killed his classmate Lawrence King at their California high school in 2008. The prosecutor in the trial argued that McInerney killed King because McInerney subscribed to a white-supremacist philosophy that taught all gays were an "abomination" while the defense argued that McInerney was driven to murder by King's unwanted sexual advances. In September, the jury in the case deadlocked not over McInerney's guilt but rather the appropriate punishment for the crime given McInerney's age (15) at the time of the shooting. He is set to be retried later this year. Whatever ends up happening to Brandon McInerney, one thing remains very clear in this case, the adults who were suppose to watch out for these children failed them. Eliza Byard, executive director of GLSEN, summed it up best when she argued that "The systems in place to support Oxnard students failed to avert disaster two years ago and resulted in this incredible loss. There is much to be done to fix these broken systems and hold adults accountable for their part in avoiding future tragedy." 
Kelly,
ReplyDeleteBoth your final line and the feeling of helplessness you describe in not being able to shape/monitor your students' language and actions outside your classroom got me thinking.
Not unlike others, the school where I teach has instituted an advisory-type program. The topics we are asked to cover range from job interview and resume writing skills to green economy and bullying stuff. In other words, this monthly time is as close as we come to being allowed to explicitly transmit the rules and codes of power, independent of any academic tie-ins. The two teachers follow their assigned class through their time at the school and are supposed to serve as additional familiar and caring adults in the building. Ideally, this is the forum for the kind of discussions that would curb the use of ignorant, homophobic language from teenagers who may never have been taught about its deleterious effects. I both hope the school has a month lined up for that talk and sadly, simultaneously doubt it. Topics like that seem touchy for political types and kind of risky for an administrator as it might be perceived as an endorsement, I guess. Like in Oxnard, I wonder what your school does in terms of "systems to support" Attleboro's students. Is it effective in your view?
Seth, From my perspective, there are a lot of systems of support at AHS. We have an active GSA that is headed by two openly gay faculty memebers. But, like Kelly says despite these systems that we see, and the values we up hold in our classroom, we can't be with our students throughout the building...I'd like to hope that my AHS colleagues are as equally supportive, and I know that the admin is, but it's so hard to know with some of them. It's a hard conversation to have, and one that I actually find easier to have with students...
ReplyDelete