Noise in my head threatening to cause rupture

I'd be proud to stand with you Snood.

I'm wondering if the reason for this might be 1) to avoid pointing out specific students that may not be "out" and 2) to avoid having those that may seem "flamboyant" or "artistically inclined" or whatever other term often gets applied to gays, tagged as specific to that group when some people are those things without being gay.

I don't question your judgement of the situation, Snood. You're there and I'm not. Just wondering if there is some protection of the gay/lesbians taking place by not addressing sexuality specifically. I mean, if someone is black, they are black and most people know it. If someone is Hispanic, it's kind of obvious. But, some things aren't as obvious. So might having that discussion force some out of the closet that aren't ready? Or, might it get some labeled as gay that aren't and cause them to question themselves? I don't agree with not teaching sex ed, as you indicated your district has decided to do, but with that being the case, isn't discussing sexual orientation in the scope of harassment and bullying stepping over that line?

I'm not saying the admin is right. Just wondering if that might be their angle.

Do you (can you) have any contact with the kids who are being bullied?

It seems like it could be so powerful to have just one adult say "I know -- I see it. It's wrong."

I understand there may be limitations and repercussions there -- you're saying that the administration is wrong to fail to stop it.

But could that fall under confidentiality, privileged communication between counselor and client?

It also puts you on the spot -- the natural response from them is "so can you do something about it?" And there's only so much you can do, and they might not want to hear that.

Just thinking aloud I guess.

Such a difficult situation.

It seems like not being allowed to Say it's about sexual orientation is a form of bullying in itself.

snood, have you looked at those "it gets better" videos on youtube?
Maybe I'm in the dark, and was the only person in the world who hadn't seen them yet, but some of them really moved me.

Here's a link to a thread I started about it...

http://able2know.org/topic/162685-1

Snood, I have a crazy idea. I don't know if anyone else has suggested such an idea.

Since you are bared from discussing homosexuality, could we get around the ban another way? Since kids spend so much time playing games on their TVs, do you think they could be educated by a game that demonstrates about how homosexuality is created in the womb? It would not consist of sexual activity, just what happens to babies in the womb. Kids love to look at sexy games on TV. How could a game be created that would make them realize that Gays have no control over their homosexuality? Maybe even ignorant adults could learn something from such a game.

BBB

Bookmark

Cycloptichorn

Uh, BBB, you just said homosexuality, womb, sexy, sexy games and gays in six sentences. You have broken every law in Louisiana!

(having trouble picturing such a game that would come close to being acceptable anywhere, let alone the Bible Belt)

It has long been proved that homosexuality begins when the baby is still in the womb.

A child's sexual organs are determined by hormone levels at a specific period of pregnancy. Sexual orientation of the brain is also determined by hormonal levels after the determination of the sexual organs.

If the hormone levels are sufficiently different at the two times of determination, a child can easily have male organs with a "female" brain.

It also appears to be much easier to create male homosexuality than female. At this point in our knowledge it seems that androgen levels are important in female homosexuality.

To ban homosexuals, it would require infanticide.

I know, that's why I said I had a crazy idea.

BBB

silliness. does "in utero" have any bearing on human rights? that's the logical equivalent of saying "Blacks are not to blame because they're black in utero. how ******* absurd. humans have rights because they're human.

Me too!

http://able2know.org/topic/162182-1

Looks like we started them really close to each other too (within 3), I never saw yours though.

I wonder what might happen is some outsider contacted an activist organization and told them that the Leesburg, LA school system had a policy to blame the victim of harrassment for the problem? Maybe told them they'd heard a rumor that the school administration wouldn't do anything about it.

Do you think something like that might help?

I agree.
Many states disallow the discussion of sexuality with minors in their public school systems.

If you are not allowed to deal with the problem as bullying because of the intolerance of homosexuals, then would it be possible for you to address it as bullying because of the intolerance of the flamboyant and the effeminate? The bottom line is that bullying is perpetrated by the stronger individuals against the weaker, and the administration has no right to dismiss complaints about bullying as being dramatic and exaggerated.

Cue Twilight Zone music.

I think these videos are important not just on the issue of homosexuality.

We're ALL different.

Yep.

(I didn't go back far enough in the topic number, btw, they were 503 apart, not 3.)

I think when you witness bullying - you can stop it decisively. You don't have to mention why it's wrong - just that bullying and teasing is unacceptable. When gay kids start to see they're safe around you, they may approach you for help. I'd have contact information for national advocates in my desk...just in case. I hope when you leave there, you can drop a dime on this school anonymously. Very tough spot to be in.

I was thinking this as well. I'd like them to get a spotlight on them. Maybe one of us could do it without implicating snood?

Hmmm. I know what you are saying, but I disagree. I get that that has been the approach to date. I think that assumption works when bullying is the big kid against the smaller kid. However, we have gay military members that are anything but weak. We have other populations that have been bullied without being physically or mentally weak.

I think I'm bothered by the weaker / stronger argument in that it implies the one being bullied is bullied because they are weak rather than because they are different.

In this kind of bullying I think it's just hatefulness.

I was just thinking squinney that the bullies are the weak ones.

I think what it is - is that when a person is desperate to fit in - and are really insecure - they look desperately for some one with a weakness - and attack them to draw attention away from their deficiencies by focusing attention on someone else's. Since gayness affects such a relatively small percentage of us, attacks on them are more widely accepted by the majority.