Rainbow Academy!Follow

(CNN) -- Public school officials in Chicago, Illinois, are recommending approval of a "gay-friendly" high school because harassment and violence are causing gay students to skip class and drop out at alarming rates.

What do you think? Is this a gateway to mass segregation by groups that feel persecuted? Is this even a responsible alternative given that gay kids will have to find a way to get along in society? Or is this a cool idea?

It all depends on how they define "gay-friendly". Honestly, I think it's just a slippery slope waiting to happen. I'd rather all schools put more policies in place to prevent this sort of thing being necessary, but then again, kids will be kids. But it's kind of sad that in my entire county I only know of one school with a gay-straight alliance, and it only has something like 7 members IIRC. It only makes them feel more secluded from everybody when it seems like they're the only ones aware that their issue exists.

Separate but equal?

First thing that came to my mind. They might bypass that argument of course, because the school is open to anyone. It's an interesting article. Apparently most gay people get harassed (said 82% get verbally harassed, and around 22% get physically assaulted). The result is that these kids are truant more often, and the end result is that a gay child has a .5 GPA lower on average than a straight child.

I can't tell if it's a good idea or not. Eventually they need to confront the fact that people in this world are ignorant and cruel, and keeping them safe in high school may or may not give them the time and tools to develop a way to deal with that reality.

I really think the better idea would be to get the state to pass some sort of gay-protection law. Apparently neither Illinois nor NY has a law like that. It seems to me that would be the better route to start with, instead of this quasi-segregation (in the name of protection). Then you can string up the little @#%^s who tease and torture them! Of course, a quote in the article said it best: while we're waiting on the legislation to get passed or the ignorant views to change, these kids are dropping out and failing to graduate.

Tough issue.

I wonder if they'd get a reaction like the NY school did when it opened, with a conservative preacher rallying a crowd outside screaming at the kids to turn away from their sodomistic desires?

Edit: Spelling errors make me hard to understand.

Edited, Oct 13th 2008 12:35pm by LockeColeMA

The "better" idea is to take Harvey Milks program and apply it to all schools in the district. Nothing like seeing your graduation rates shoot up 40%.

I went from Locked to Lockjaw? You're cute, Varrus.

And why, yes, I think parts of society could use some additional legislation for them. I could think of a few off the top of my head... say, EEOC?

The point is these kids aren't being protected. They're putting up with abuse and torment, and the current school system isn't helping them; as the statistics have shown, the schools and laws are failing these kids. "Equal protection under the law" doesn't seem to make sense when "everyone for themselves" is the rule; my point is we need a law in the first place.

I know you probably don't agree; you're all for less government, let the people take matters into their own hands, and deregulation in general. And it works well with the economy, so why not with the kids, right?

... oh wait.

I'm with the school of thought (pun intended) that says schools should have a very low tolerance of prejudice, whether it's against race, coloUr, faith, sexual orientation, physical/sensory disability etc.

It's about taking serious action to tackle unacceptable behavioUr, rather than focusing on whatever misguided bull-poo is used as a justification by haters.

"Gay-Friendly" sounds like a PR Meme that will feed into the hands of bigots (varrus) as a slippery slope, and divert attention from the offensive behavioUr.

Curious how you justify "Bad idea, BAD BAD Idea."

I mean, besides what you said. Are there statistics? The ones shown so far (with the NY version of this school, mentioned by Kaelesh, the Harvey Milks school) have increased the graduation rate to 95% (average graduation rate in NY is around 50%). Apparently it worked for those kids, hence why it's being recommending in Chicago. The thing about the Chicago school is that it's going to cater to homosexuals but be open to anyone, and it's going to be six times as large as Harvey Milks.

"Growing a thick skin" sounds like something someone who wasn't picked on much would say. The results of the Stanford Prison Experiment sound closer to what it going on here; you get treated like crap for long enough, you internalize the message. Possible just as bad, the torturers are given the message it's a good thing to do this. Nothing is being done to set up the opposite message, and the cycle of homosexual hatred is continued and even encouraged by the lack of a punishment.

I go with my original idea. The first thing done should be to provide protection for these kids with some legislation. Make it so the public schools can actively fight back. Make teachers held accountable to report abuse, and give out detentions, suspensions or mandatory intervention meetings when sexual discrimination cases come up.

I'm just a layman and don't know the best course to take, but saying "grow some skin" won't help the psychologically and physically abused kids in this system. Again, maybe putting them into their own safe environment would give them the time to develop the cognitive and psychological tools to deal with the cruelty of the world, I don't know. The Harvey Milks school, however, shows that it will at least give them the ability to graduate.

Yeah, but did you see how the gay kid was dressed? He was asking for it...

Whoa. Whoa whoa whoa. Let me get this straight (heh, pun). You say that kids become neo-***** and skin heads because they're getting beaten up by roving gangs of well-dressed, savage gays?

Or are you trying to make this a "white kids join gangs to protect themselves from black and Latino gangs?" Because that's a total strawman argument. I'm pretty sure that when skin heads beat up gay kids, it isn't because they're afraid they're about to be jumped by the Fab Five.

As for the second part, the Constitution requires no re-write to protect you from assault. I think you might want to reread it (and the relevant judicial literature) if you think that it does. The point of legislation to help gay kids is that they AREN'T be protected.

I do like the "I joined a gang to protect myself from roving gangs of gay kids" idea though :) That made me chuckle.

First of all, it's a silly notion. We put up with this **** so much, we rarely notice it anymore. But if you did decide to provoke a group of particularly violent gay people, I would hope they'd face appropriate sanction from the judicial system for assaulting you. That's never okay, even when the victim is doing something provocative.

But, as you're so fond of saying, thanks for making my point for me.

You don't want to wear the RIBBON?