NYC's Gay High School

I was going to say because America is the sun that shines on the rest of the world. But I won't. Nah just to stir the pot I will.

I think, in the context of farts, it is America's moons au !!

Soz, it has been an interesting ride, so to speak Did anyone actually read the article I posted about Harvey Milk? Just curious. As for American farts, is it just me, or do they smell like everything all your neighbours are cooking put together....that and ass?

Gay high school
unfair & unwise





In the 1981 comedy "Stripes," Bill Murray and Harold Ramis enlist in the Army to escape dead-end jobs. An Army recruiter asks them the now-quaint screening question: "Are either of you homosexual?" Ramis replies: "No, we're not homosexuals, but we are willing to learn." Murray adds: "Would they send us someplace special?"
A special school for homosexuals. That's funny, right? Well, it is laughable, but in New York City it's no joke.

In the depth of a budget crisis, the city has burned $3.2 million to fund Harvey Milk High School, a public school segregated for gay students. So finally you know what your property taxes skyrocketed to fund.

But, let's be fair. It's not just for gays.

It's for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender students. To protect this preferred class of students from hurt feelings, city education bureaucrats say, a pricey separate school is vital.

Yes, imagine the daily plight of New York's countless transgender high school students who are unfairly forced to choose between the boys' and the girls' bathroom. At last, presumably, Harvey Milk High School will offer a much-needed third choice.

The school's new principal, William Salzman, brags: "This school will be a model for the country." True, it certainly will be popular with late-night comics from coast to coast.

Yet if the Education Department thinks the school is worthy of boasts, how about a few questions?

What's next? How about a special school for chubby kids who get picked on too much?

Let's get thoroughly tolerant. Why not end the discriminatory practice of picking only the fastest runners for the track team? And aren't those old-fashioned letter grades just the arbitrary imposition of the majority opinion?

Silly questions? Not for the silly education bureaucrats who dreamed up this ridiculous idea.

Try this radical thought: Let's make all schools safe for all students. Instead of carving out an elaborate preserve for one group or another, we should demand that public schools eliminate abuse and violence that threaten any child in New York City, the liberal citadel of nondiscrimination.

What happened to equality? And if this scheme doesn't sound unequal to you, try explaining Harvey Milk High School's laptop computers, small classes and new cafeteria to parents struggling to protect a kid trapped in one of the city's worst schools.

But is protecting kids the real goal here? Not quite. Protecting a political agenda is the actual mission.

The truth is, we're not doing a confused ninth-grader any favors by plucking him out of his school and shipping him off to some gay academy of social engineering. Adolescents have enough problems to work out without a special high school recruiting them to a gay lifestyle.

And please skip the usual prattle about tolerance. Tolerance is not the same as endorsement or encouragement. Taxpayer money has no rightful role promoting a gay lifestyle.

Critics will claim opposition to Harvey Milk High School is an extension of bigotry against gays in general. Not so.

The sad fact is anyone who wants to hinder gays should want the city's education bureaucracy to take responsibility for gay education. If city schools teach homosexuality as successfully as they teach everything else, it will decline dramatically.

Long is state chairman of the Conservative Party.

This article brings up one point I don't think we've explored.

Parents in NY (and in other parts of the country wherein the budgets are small and the class sizes are high) will do nearly anything to assure that their children get into better schools. This includes things like faking a residence.

So, here's a scenario - the folks are short on cash, the kid can't get into Stuyvesant or Bronx Science, but doesn't want to go to a school with huge classes and outdated textbooks. "Hey, Johnny," (or Janie) say the parents, "say you're gay and we'll get you into this better school!" I don't think this is an impossible scenario.

jespah - I agree, and I'd love to see the lawsuit brought when they first argue that a child can't get in.

jespah
Can you picture a straight High School student posing as gay to get int a school? I can't. In addition the curricular and elective courses I am sure will be very limited. With a 100 students I can't see even the knuckle heads at the board of Ed having the normal full array of courses. If they did they would need dozens of teachers.

Why? What's wrong with being gay?


Didn't they spend $3.2M on this school with kids getting laptops and such? Doesn't sound like they skimped to me.

Where did you get those figures, Scrat? Sugar said the building renovation was $2.3 million (no cite).

Don't forget the and "questioning" part. If a straight student says he or she is questioning his or her sexuality, well, let him or her. I don't think they can or plan to do much about that. But, again, this is not the only school designed to serve a specific population -- SkisOnFire had the most comprehensive list of varying types of "specialist" schools. Are all of these schools undermined by people sneaking in? Sure, maybe some kids will fudge the "questioning" bit to get in. So what?

Love the "recruiting" language in the article. Why do some conservatives seem to think homosexual sex is so irresistable?

Scrat



That is not the question. Do you see a youngster who is straight going around posing as being gay. Let's not be naive . As for what is wrong with it the question should be what is right with it?It is unatural and an unfortunate condition.

That 3.2 M was for setup. Now it has to be staffed with Language teachers, English teachers, math teachers, science teachers and, etc., all for 100 students. How many teachers would you suppose would be needed in the different disciplines for just 100 students.

sozobe
Those special schools SkisOnFire listed had large populations and were not in place because of student problem but to teach specific disiplines. Or for particularly bright children who had to pass test inorder to enroll.They have always been with us.

Not much more than for larger schools, because it's not a problem to teach the same class to pupils from multiple grades. In my own school for example, I went to music and biology classesthat were taugt to 12- and 13th graders together (Germans go to school for 13 years). Teaching quality was not affected, and I suppose it could be done in most other subjects too. Of course I don't know whether there's some piece of stupid regulation that makes this impossible. It's possible of course.

As to the $3.2 million (or $2.3 million), note that these are costs of building renovation. A defunct building incurs costs no matter if you renovate it or tear it down and rebuild it, and no matter what you intend to use it for. So whichever figure is correct, it tells us nothing about the cost of actually putting a school in there rather than something else, which is the cost that matters. Sorry I keep coming back to cost arguments in this thread, but I do see the assertion that this school is terribly, terribly expensive for tax payers as a red herring, so I do want to make an effort to debunk it.

-- Thomas

Thomas
I was not talking about the quality of teacher but just the different teachers required. For example would a language teacher of which there would need to be several since several different languages taught in our schools also be teaching algebra or calculus. Would an English teacher be teaching Science and etc. The need for teachers in these different disciplines would be needed. Would these teachers lessen the need for teachers in other schools? The answer is an unequivocal no. As to the $'s spent in restoring a building. Although the building in question may have been restored it would not have been restored by the school system or the city at taxpayers expense. Thomas, I doubt you can equating the school system in NYC which is vast with your experience is possible.

au, I already talked about the fact that the renovation is almost certainly paid for by funds that were raised by the attached foundation, NOT the school system or taxpayer's expense. I'm willing to learn that things work differently in NYC, but all of the places I do know about forbid school funds to go to the physical creation of a new school. (Building, desks, etc.)

sozobe



Sorry I missed that bit of intelligence. However, building of schools and the like is part of the board of education budget. It is of course always better if someone else would pay for it. Now if someone were to pickup the operating expense that would be even better.

There you go.

au - You may be right, but you make it sound like a kid would have to go around in drag or limp-wristed to get in to the school. But I was trying to make a point about the absurdity of the idea itself. If they want to segregate some of the students, put those who make the public schools unsafe for anyone--including gays--in a separate facility. That--in my opinion--is a better way to make the system safe for these students. Of course, I do suspect that there is an agenda at play in forwarding the notion that these students have special educational needs.

Scrat
.

I have no idea where you got that impression or why. I believe the entire concept is asinine and belongs in the scrap heap.

You wrote of "posing" as gay. That's the image it conjurred up for me.

Scrat.
If you remember that was a response to someone saying that some students would pose as being gay just to get int the school.

Thanks, Scrat.

I liked this quote from the article:





How are you going to implement that little plan? How do you define "unsafe"? Where do these kids go? Say a gay student in Kansas is repeatedly harrassed by the entire football team. "Harrassment" includes both physical harm and threats of same and more commonplace bullying. The school has implemented the same punishments as they do for any other kind of harm or threat of harm, but the snide remarks, the covert stuff continues. Are they gonna send the whole football team off to NYC and leave the gay kid?

If your reply is "the gay kid should just deal with it", I went into on page 3 or stuff how most of 'em can, most of 'em do, but some of 'em CAN'T. And I just don't begrudge them the hope this school offers.

If you disagree with the some of 'em CAN'T part, have you found the errors in all of the studies that show that gay teens have a higher suicide rate, yet?

Again, I don't see this as either/or. I think the schools should be dealing with the bullies, that every attempt should be made for every school in America to be safe and comfortable for gay and lesbian kids. That very worthy goal is already in process, though, has been for a long time, with legislation, classes, specials on MTV, what have you, and I think the situation is improving. In 10 years, maybe the Harvey Milk school won't be necessary. I hope so.