The presentation led me to recognize multiple conundrums concerning the issue of non-heterosexuality. The address of the matter itself seems, to me, in our school, to be paradoxical in nature. The entire premise of the presentation, and indeed any and all groups supporting any other orientation than "straight" is to reinforce opinions that those other orientations are, in fact, normal. As far as I am concerned, I think the presentation did a wonderful job of bringing to light the fact that yes, people other than heterosexuals walk the streets of Keene, New Hampshire, and that those people do not have anything wrong with them, that they can even be outstanding citizens.
However, the issue is just as much centered around "outstanding citizens", if the term is taken literally. The people whom so many are trying to identify as normal are being separated from heterosexuals socially through presentations like this previous one. The captain of the football team seen in the film that was displayed did seem to have it all, and what seemed to surround the fact that when he came out, he was not put on display immediately and used as an example: "this is a homosexual. He is an outstanding individual, and all people like him are to be respected and accepted without question"...that part came later. However, when he first came out, he was essentially given the reaction of "so what". He wasn't different, he wasn't outside the norm and someone to be idolized or rejected; he was himself, and no more or less.
That kind of reaction is, what I consider to be, crucial to incorporating tolerance of sexual orientation other than heterosexual into our society. However the paradox lies in this fact: that the issue cannot be fixed if it is not addressed head on, yet addressing the normality of the individuals is doing just as much harm as good. Therefore, the most logical solution would be to respond to transgressions rapidly and forcefully. There is a no tolerance policy for so much in the school, yet language and actions concerning "alien" orientations is not dealt with any better than a minor curse let slip. Detention in school, fines or sentences outside of school: any kind of discrimination should not be tolerated if the issue is to be solved.
People who are just like everyone else do not need to be singled out from everyone else, and if any individuals are singled out, is not the purpose of the event defeated? Again, I entirely support the motivations and reasons driving the groups and actions taken in defense of this matter; I do, however, consider the matter to be far more complicated and require far more planning to solve than it seems is being considered. I ask the question: why are there groups for supporting people of other sexual orientation that seem similar in purpose as groups for recovering addicts? Why are these people who are the same treated as being different by their defenders? Why are the symptoms of the issue being addressed and not the root? Finally, why are we still struggling with the same issues of discrimination against "unlike" individuals and groups when on paper, during the development of this country, it was stated that "all men are created equal"?
I have to say, this is very interesting and I do feel enlightened to an extent after reading it, although I do take issue with some of your points and have some different opinions that I would like to share.
ReplyDeleteFirstly, I definitely agree with what you've said about non-hetero people not having to be "outstanding" to be respected or supported. Like you said, the most important thing was that people were able to say, "so what". But, I think that it is important that the kid was a football captain. Not in the fact that being the captain of a football team is outstanding, which it is, but that having someone who is gay excel in a sport that is stereotypically straight and considered masculine, characteristics that are often considered antonyms to characteristics often associated with homosexuality, helps to cast aside the opinion that people who are homosexual cannot do the same things as their heterosexual friends and colleagues. If this is the message that is taken from the clip than I think it should be considered successful.
Secondly, I think that your idea for a tolerance policy is too strict and will be met with opposition from the masses. People love their freedom of speech. The day that people cannot say what they want without being reprimanded will be met with many riots. People would be outraged if they were fined for what they said in public; they simply would not accept the punishment for their actions. While this is true in a public setting, I also think that fines are too strict for a school setting for the same reasons. What you have said about issuing detentions and suspension type punishments is more feasible.
I am not saying that I wish for this injustice to continue. I would like to live somewhere that is free of discrimination, but it takes time and strategy for these things to happen. Responding rapidly and forcefully, while making a statement, will not yield the best results. The American people are just too stubborn.
Jacob,
ReplyDeleteI appreciated that you brought up the fact that by treating people as different because of their sexual orientation, even if we are trying to help, we end up perpetuating the idea that homosexuals are something other than normal. I agree with your perspective that a zero-tolerance policy should be placed in school regarding bullying of any sort to those of a different orientation. I think that in a school environment, punishments are too often given out for "offenses" that are not significant, and behaviors that truly compromise the learning environment are ignored.