Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2000 16:27:51 -0800 From: Jean Richter Subject: 1/10/2000 P.E.R.S.O.N. Project news 1. American School Board Journal article on protecting gay students 2. NY: Queer law conference 3. CA: School board accused of hiring biased advisor ======================================================================== X-Sender: jessea@uclink4.berkeley.edu Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2000 11:18:42 -0800 To: szakariya@nsba.org From: Jessea Greenman Subject: Your November poll regarding wording of harassment policies hi. what the analysis below reveals is that we lesbians and gays have more education to do. We have learned, as did Jews in Nazi Germany, that silence equals death. We need to educate educational policymakers that they must EXPLICITLY include gay and lesbian students in the word "all." The California State Board of Education passed a Health Education Framework inclusive of gay and lesbian youth about five years ago. During its debate about adding specific mention of gay and lesbian youth to "the list" enumerating types of students, one Board member said that the list was getting too long and they should revert to simply saying "all students." Sounds simple. Never yet has worked. Unless and until it is made clear by the all laws of this land, by all the schools of education, by all the teacher and administrator credentialing offices, and by all professional education associations and their training programs that ALL specifically DOES include gay and lesbian young people, and until that idea is put consistently into practice by PROTECTING such young people, then it is actually simpler to go ahead and explicitly state their inclusion on all lists and in all policies. What has happened in this country is an evolution [dare we use that word?] in language, thought, and practice. All used to mean all straight white men [e.g. all men are created equal...didn't include African-Americans, didn't include women since they couldn't vote or hold property, etc.]. Now we have arrived, after several centuries of continuous struggle to amend our Constitution and laws to make our modern understanding of the word "all" more explicit, to a generally accepted view that all does include people of color and women. We are not there yet regarding gays and lesbians. Thus, one of my favorites sayings [not original to me] when addressing matters of discrimination against lesbians and gays is "What part of 'liberty and justice for all' don't you understand?" [I believe the phrase may be attributed to former Colorado Congresswoman Patricia Schroeder]. American School Board Journal, January 2000 1680 Duke St., Alexandria, VA 22314 (Fax: (703) 549-6719) (E-Mail: szakariya@nsba.org ) ( http://www.asbj.com ) You Say When gay students are victims of harassment by fellow classmates, should school boards consider passing a policy that specifically forbids harassment and discrimination of homosexual students? Your answer: No. In fact, 83 percent of the respondents to our November poll say school districts should rely instead on the enforcement of a policy that forbids discrimination or harassment of any student without mentioning gay students specifically. "We have a tendency to write policy for every instance," says a board member in Pennsylvania. "Discrimination for whatever reason is wrong. We should not single out any group for special treatment, which forces the district to identify and monitor one student or group of students at the expense of the remainder of the student body." Many of you agree with this sentiment, saying all students deserve equal protection. "Discrimination policies should not be specific to one area, but should be all-inclusive for any form of discrimination" writes a superintendent in California. "To specify just gay students could send the wrong message to students with regard to other minorities." Enforcement of antiharassment and antidiscrimination policies must apply to district staff, too, some of you point out. "A zero-tolerance policy for bullying, harassment, and intimidation is the best answer," says a board member in Maine. "The climate needs to be safe and free from bullying ­ by teachers and coaches as well." That means addressing staff attitudes, adds a board member in California: "Teachers and administrators can be uncomfortable with the whole idea of gay people. It must start at the top and move quickly down through the ranks so all staff members understand, model, and enforce the antidiscrimination policy." Only 17 percent of you say antidiscrimination and antiharassment policies should specifically mention gay students. "Lack of specificity is a loophole we do not need when we're protecting people from harassment," says a reader in South Dakota. Disagreements over the wording of policies aside, one Indiana school board member sums up the real issue: "Most adults would resign if they were at risk of assault and battery on the job every day. Should we stand by while kids quit school because assault is tolerated by staff?" Letter: Protect them all We applaud your November article concerning schools' legal duty to protect gay students from harassment ("I Don't Feel Safe Here Anymore," by Rebecca Jones), because we often get calls from tearful parents whose children are about to give up on school. You ask whether schools' antidiscrimination policies should specify antigay bias or merely forbid harassment and/or discrimination of any kind. Many school boards choose to be crystal clear, forbidding harassment and discrimination of any kind but also specifying that certain forms of harassment and discrimination are included, such as that based on race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, and other categories. This policy makes clear to everyone exactly what will not be tolerated. It is not only the right thing to do, it also best avoids liability. A murky policy does not best prevent harassment, and thus does not best avoid liability. Beyond the issue of prevention is the issue of meaningful discipline when prevention fails. If student harassers are disciplined under a nonspecific policy, they can legally challenge the discipline because the policy lacks adequate notice of what is prohibited. Often in the public debate on this issue there will be a cry of "what's next?" ­ the suggestion that the list of protection will get longer and longer. Well, all student are entitled to a safe environment that allows them to get a sound education. So if a school has a significant problem with harassment and discrimination against any particular group of children ­ actions that make them feel unsafe and interfere with their education ­ then that school should consider adding to the list to be crystal clear, no matter how long the list gets. ­ David S. Buckel, Staff Attorney, Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund, Inc., New York, NY Letter: Roots of violence Rebecca Jones' article brought up many painful issues from my adolescence. I am now in a same-sex relationship, and although I had no problems before with my sexuality, my high school experience was much the same as some of those in the article. I am an intelligent person and have tremendous energy. It took my many years to see that. In high school, I was always a nerd, a spaz, a geek, and a fag. A fag. I had no sexual tendencies back then. I wanted to have a girlfriend. I wanted to go to the prom. I wanted someone to notice that I was special and valuable. I wanted to be loved. Nobody, not even I, could have guessed that I would have ended up in a same-sex relationship; they just called me a fag to hurt me, to denigrate me, to hit me where it hurt. I look at what happened at Columbine and I understand. I hate violence in all its forms, but I have been there. I have felt the shame and the helplessness, the sadness and the emptiness. It takes no stretch of the imagination to see how the two boys who murdered at Columbine, who started out as prey for the school bullies, yearned to turn into hunters and killers. Where were the teachers, the administrators, and the mechanisms that could have prevented Columbine? Why are the strong allowed to subjugate the smaller, the quieter, and the helpless? The worst part of my experience was that the faculty was in league with the physical and mental beatings. The attackers were the homecoming kings and queens, the heroes of the football and baseball teams, and the elite of the school clubs and service organizations. The "cream of the high school crop" were allowed free reign to victimize the "freaks, geeks, and nerds," whom they believed contributed nothing to the school or its reputation. The violence in our schools is preventable. Not only are children dying in the school violence we see on television; they are dying in a far more insidious manner that we don't see. Hearts, minds, and souls die every day because we are not sensitive or intelligent enough to nurture and protect them. But their bodies, their outer shells live on; and some of these children will become the kind of heartless, thoughless, and mindless killers that will strike again in another school. Count on it. Every person we lose to violence, and every person we lose when a heart breaks, is a crime against humanity. It shouldn't have to take a Matthew Shepard, a James Byrd, or a Columbine High School to awaken us, to end this where its roots often begin ­ in our schools. We are losing a war that we can win but don't yet want to. We should know better. ­ Carl Martin Ostergaard, Jr., Mendham, NJ Letter: People of faith Thank you for your honest, balanced, and mostly thorough story about the need to protect sexual minority students and the difficulties that a school board can encounter when attempting to perform what we believe is a moral duty. We do, however, have two complaints: While Louis P. Sheldon [founder and chairman of the Traditional Family Values Coalition] is a very good choice for representing those who oppose equal rights for sexual minorities, we felt that the article gave the unfortunate and extremely inaccurate impression that his views were typical of people of faith in general. And while public opinion obviously matters to elected officials, we live in a country which is governed by a Constitution that guarantees separation of church and state. Theological arguments, pro or con, should have no place in determining public school policy. ­ Barbara Lamond Purdom and Christopher Purdom, Coordinators, Interfaith Working Group, Philadelphia, Pa. Letter: Insults and taunts Thank you for covering the legal issues surrounding the recent permissive attitudes toward harassment of students based on sexuality stereotyping. Here in the Deep South, it is quite common to hear students use insulting terms such as "queer" many times within a few minutes. Most teachers and administrators, even in expensive private schools, tend to ignore such taunts. It is most regrettable that parents must resort to costly legal actions to provide for safe and professional school environments. I applaud your courage in finally dealing with t his topic in an open manner. It has been neglected far too long. ­ J. Leofsky, Montgomery, Ala. ================================================================================== From: SARATOGANY@aol.com Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2000 09:41:59 EST Subject: QUEER LAW 2000 Conference, 2/26/00, NYU School of Law To: SARATOGANY@aol.com, bdm3g@gateway.net QUEER LAW 2000 - Current Issues in Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender Law Saturday, February 26, 2000 at New York University School of Law Sponsored by the Lesbian and Gay Law Association Foundation of Greater New York (LeGaL Foundation) & the Bisexual, Gay and Lesbian Law Students Association at NYU School of Law (BGLLSA) Panel topics will include: Recent Developments in International Law Issues Facing Queer Student Groups Why Welfare is a Queer Issue Applying for (and Obtaining)! Fellowships LGBT Issues in Labor and Employment Law European Models for SSM/PACS Recent Changes in NYC's Legal Landscape and Their Impact on Sexual Minorities Pro Bono Successes Client-Centered Advocacy on Behalf of At-Risk LGBT Youth Mainstream Bar Associations and the LGBT Rights Movement Law, Politics, and the Digital Queer Public Interest/Advocacy as a Career If you want to receive a copy of the program/registration form, please send your postal mailing addressing address. ================================================================================== LOS ANGELES TIMES, January 7, 2000 Times Mirror Square, Los Angeles, CA, 90053 (Fax 213-237-7679 or 213-237-5319 ) (E-MAIL: letters@latimes.com ) ( http://www.latimes.com ) Gay Club Backers Cite Bias in District Advisor Trustees met with prominent Christian-rights attorney before voting ban. Lawyer says views don't cloud analysis. By KATE FOLMAR, Times Staff Writer Advocates for a gay student club are criticizing the Orange Unified School District trustees for consulting a lawyer known for defending conservative Christian causes before they voted to bar the club from a high school. On Nov. 18, the school board met in closed session with both its usual lawyer and with Sacramento lawyer David L. Llewellyn Jr., who has previously represented antiabortion activists, students seeking to advertise Bible clubs on campus and a school board in San Diego County that picked a sexual education curriculum that some believed mixed a strong abstinence message with religious undertones. [Deleted article. filemanager@qrd.org] ================================================================================ Jean Richter -- richter@eecs.berkeley.edu The P.E.R.S.O.N. Project (Public Education Regarding Sexual Orientation Nationally) These messages are archived by state on our information-loaded free web site: http://www.youth.org/loco/PERSONProject/