DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Rant >> New York opens a public high school for gays...
Pages:  
Showing posts 26 - 50 of 69, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 07/28/2003 06:01:32 PM · #26
Originally posted by wingy:
Oh yeah, and I originally assumed this was in the rant forum. It seems like that's where it should be.


I agree. Some discussions can't be addressed without it needing the Rant disclaimer.
 07/28/2003 06:05:41 PM · #27
Originally posted by bamaster:


Homophobia? Please point this out, because I don't see it. If anything, this thread is about the political retards that fold under the pressure from a tiny minority. This is the same mentality that is challenging the word God in our Pledge of Allegiance. And homophobia is what you see?


So you're saying that if something doesn't impact a majority, it shouldn't be done? THAT'S what's bunk.

This is simply an attempt for some people who get it to give these kids -- AND THEY ARE KIDS -- the education they deserve in an environment that doesn't automatically shame them for who they are.

As for not finding the homophobia in this forum: DUH. Anytime someone mentions a gay issue, people automatically start to bring up poligamy and beastiality and dildos and bagel boofers and whatever other twisted thing they can think up on the spur of the moment. THAT'S homophobic, or at least, as I said before, ignorant.
 07/28/2003 06:09:14 PM · #28
I am amazed by the level of homophobia that has been displayed in this thread.

As a person who went throught half of high school as openly lesbian, and as someone who had (and has) a number of gay friends in high school, I would like to explain my take on this school.

First of all, public displays of affection are not the only thing that shows that someone is gay or straight. Talking about girlfriends/boyfriends, wearing rainbows or triangles, or being part of a gay-straight alliance are all ways that a student can be openly gay in school without making out with someone in the hall.

At my high school, which was a rather liberal one, there was a fairly high level of homophobia. I know several gay students who were beat up because of their sexuality, and many, many more (including myself) who were called derogatory names. Even the administration showed a level of intolerance. While I doubt that anyone from my school would have opted to go to an all-gay school, there are a very large number of gay students who have such a horrible time in high school that they either drop out or become very depressed.

Although I know that many of you probably dont agree with homosexuality, I find it hard to believe that anyone on this site would want someone to suffer to that end if there were a viable alternative.

Message edited by author 2003-07-28 18:09:43.
 07/28/2003 06:09:40 PM · #29
Sorry. I can't stop. I originally thought the school was kind of a dumb idea too, until you all just proved to me exactly how right it seems.

Originally posted by bamaster:

Besides, isn't it against the rules to show Public Displays of Affection in public school systems? How would students actually know if a student is gay or not?


So you're saying that the only kids that get teased for being gay are the ones that go down on each other in the hallways between classes? I'd hate to see what your idea of the qualification exam for this school must be....

Message edited by author 2003-07-28 18:10:53.
 07/28/2003 06:13:52 PM · #30
the insanity level of this thread has skyrocketed...let's go to the rant forum
 07/28/2003 06:18:07 PM · #31
Originally posted by achiral:
the insanity level of this thread has skyrocketed...let's go to the rant forum

We're already there.
 07/28/2003 06:20:49 PM · #32
Originally posted by muckpond:

So you're saying that if something doesn't impact a majority, it shouldn't be done? THAT'S what's bunk.

This is simply an attempt for some people who get it to give these kids -- AND THEY ARE KIDS -- the education they deserve in an environment that doesn't automatically shame them for who they are.

As for not finding the homophobia in this forum: DUH. Anytime someone mentions a gay issue, people automatically start to bring up poligamy and beastiality and dildos and bagel boofers and whatever other twisted thing they can think up on the spur of the moment. THAT'S homophobic, or at least, as I said before, ignorant.


Yes, I am saying that the voice of a small minority does not justify turning back years of de-segregation. I'm tired of hearing how defenseless gays are. Do they want equality or not?

And I feel strongly that these high school KIDS be treated equally. Alongside the fat kid who gets punched in the face for being fat. My school system had a "short bus" for those that needed special attention, but their NEEDS were different. I challenge these KIDS to tell me their learning needs are similar to those mentally and physically handicapped.

And let's not call everything homophobia. Sometimes I feel victim to "straightphobia". I've said it before, America is becoming the land of opportunity for everyone that isn't gay, overweight, handicapped, job-less, children-less, home-less, etc-less.
 07/28/2003 06:20:53 PM · #33
nm

Message edited by author 2003-07-28 18:22:06.
 07/28/2003 06:23:46 PM · #34
Originally posted by bamaster:

If anything, this thread is about the political retards that fold under the pressure from a tiny minority.


Well, that seems like a misrepresentation in order to minimize the support for pro-gay actions in politics.
You seem to be operating off of the assumption that only homosexuals support pro-gay political actions. The truth is that a substantial portion of the straight population often supports such actions. Therefore, the pressure is not from a tiny minority, it is from a significant portion of the population.
Suggesting that political figures "fold" implies that they wouldn't support the actions in question without the political pressure involved, which isn't necessarily true either. However, if they do "fold", it is highly unlikely that they've done it for a tiny minority, as such moves would not be politically successful and such people wouldn't last long in politics.
I think the gay-rights movement is more widespread than you would like to give it credit for.
People don't always just fight for themselves, sometimes they fight injustice that threatens others as well.

Although, with all that said, I still think this is a bad move, promoting separation instead of acceptance. If student abuse is really the problem here, then a school for heavily abused students, regardless of the reason for abuse, might be a much more acceptable solution.
 07/28/2003 06:34:41 PM · #35
Originally posted by muckpond:
So you're saying that the only kids that get teased for being gay are the ones that go down on each other in the hallways between classes? I'd hate to see what your idea of the qualification exam for this school must be....


STOP! Call the Straight Police! I'm offended!!!

Oh come on. I was beat up because I was in the school play, which was famous for having all the gays. People told my girlfriend, whom I was sexually active with, that I was gay. All because I took Drama. Go figure.

Of course it is easy to pick out the ones that are openly gay. Especially the ones that flaunted it, and you know what I mean. And they were teased like everyone else was. And let me tell you something, NO ONE can out cuss a flaming gay guy! Boy! I learned more dirty words from my nelly queen friends than anyone else.

Are there exceptions? Certainly. Do they deserve special consideration? Perhaps. What's the solution? Private schools. Actually, I'm curious as to what YOUR idea of qualifying for this school is. If they get called a dirty name? Get punched? Get shot? Get AIDS? I dunno. Awww, what the hell. I like this school idea. Just so when it causes more problems I can say, I was not one of the silent majorities that didn't speak up.

Where do I send my money?
 07/28/2003 06:38:42 PM · #36
Originally posted by wingy:

Although, with all that said, I still think this is a bad move, promoting separation instead of acceptance. If student abuse is really the problem here, then a school for heavily abused students, regardless of the reason for abuse, might be a much more acceptable solution.


Wingy, I disagree that the gay-rights movement is so abundant. I know it's influence, believe me. Because it is loud, doesn't mean it's widespread.

But I agree with you completely about the real issue. Separation is not the answer.
 07/28/2003 07:11:38 PM · #37
Originally posted by punkdyke:

Although I know that many of you probably dont agree with homosexuality, I find it hard to believe that anyone on this site would want someone to suffer to that end if there were a viable alternative.


I don't think anyone should have to suffer in school for any reason...therefore I would like to see New York also start a school for the kids with bad acne, or braces, or glasses, or overweight

How about an all audio/visual school or an all jock school, all cheerleader school...

When does anyone in charge of all this nonsense ever going to sit back and say..."Hey, you know maybe this was a bad idea?"

Seems to me that if there are bullys at good ole PS 35 that picked on and beat up the gays and lesbian kids, NY has made the hunt so much easler by placing them all in one place.....
 07/28/2003 08:03:53 PM · #38
go back to the beginning of this thread, and replace the word/concept "gay" with "female" or "black" or some other formerly (or not so formerly) ostracized group -- historically, those groups had to start their own schools in order to get the education they were rightfully entitled to ~ does anyone think that THAT was a bad idea?
 07/28/2003 08:41:16 PM · #39
Originally posted by spiderman:
go back to the beginning of this thread, and replace the word/concept "gay" with "female" or "black" or some other formerly (or not so formerly) ostracized group -- historically, those groups had to start their own schools in order to get the education they were rightfully entitled to ~ does anyone think that THAT was a bad idea?


If homosexuals were not presently allowed to attend regular public schools these cases would be comparable, but such is not the case. Schools for only females or only blacks were generally inferior to their white/male counterparts as well, and when the time came that blacks and females could attend school alongside white/male students it was a step forward from separate schools. If homosexuals are already attending school alongside heterosexuals, why would it be desirable to step backwards towards separate schools?
 07/28/2003 09:05:14 PM · #40
Originally posted by spiderman:
historically, those groups had to start their own schools in order to get the education they were rightfully entitled to ~ does anyone think that THAT was a bad idea?


The US Supreme Court thought it was a bad idea. "We conclude that in the field of public education the doctrine of 'separate but equal' has no place. Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal." Brown v Board of Ed.


07/28/2003 09:09:17 PM · #41
Originally posted by mavrik:


The US Supreme Court thought it was a bad idea. "We conclude that in the field of public education the doctrine of 'separate but equal' has no place. Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal." Brown v Board of Ed.


lol. way to go Mav, quoting "brown vs the board." Didn't we all learn that in school people?

The idea is simply ludicris. Enough said. I have no problem with the gay community except for the fact that I cannot fully appreciate rainbows the way I used to. It's a real shame. It would be like some other group, say the NRA, or some racist group, taking some other beautiful natural phenomenon and putting an association to it. Imagine the Man Boy Love League or whatever it's called having stickers of a solar eclipse on their cars...

07/28/2003 11:20:07 PM · #42
Originally posted by bamaster:

Friggin liberals....



Liberal? Mayor Michael Bloomberg?!? What dictionary are you using?
 07/28/2003 11:57:42 PM · #43
They just had a poll on CNN. The question was "should there be public schools designated for gay students. 33% say yes 67% say no

07/29/2003 12:25:27 AM · #44
I agree with Jason. Let us take the U.S. Star's and Stripes for the symbol since the Homo-crowd and Liberals want the USA to more European (Socialist/communist). This is why many of us home school; no Liberal union thug teachers, guns are allowed in our school to defend our property and selves, no wasted time on items such as this (distractions are a great education tool for Johnny who cannot read), I can say a prayer with my students without interference, and we can watch John Wayne movies anytime we want. Van
 07/29/2003 01:10:23 AM · #45
Originally posted by wingy:
If homosexuals were not presently allowed to attend regular public schools these cases would be comparable, but such is not the case.


what IS the same is the notion that even though EVERYONE is allowed to attend in this day and age, women and blacks sometimes need a different environment in which to learn - one free of the (either perceived or real) sexual/racial tensions found in an 'integrated' school.

for example, since 1991 enrollment at women-only schools has gone up 20 percent, and the percentage of schools at capacity enrollment has tripled. And while there are significant numbers on the OUTSIDE of the system who think that this is a troubling trend, the majority of those INSIDE the system believe they've acheived greater success because of their unique educational opportunity.
 07/29/2003 01:17:19 AM · #46
Enough of this empty talk or we are going to need GayDPChallenge!
 07/29/2003 02:23:33 AM · #47
I believe that special schools for special interest groups is a great idea... I have every intention of sending my daughter to a school that will not teach her that praying is unconstitutional.

My concern is that tax dollars will be paying for the gay school, but not for my 'pray' school... Maybe we need a seperation of Life style and State clause added to the constitution...
 07/29/2003 12:03:04 PM · #48
Originally posted by spiderman:
what IS the same is the notion that even though EVERYONE is allowed to attend in this day and age, women and blacks sometimes need a different environment in which to learn - one free of the (either perceived or real) sexual/racial tensions found in an 'integrated' school.


Sadly, I feel this threat is not "perceived" but is in fact real. I am Mexican, although most people confuse me for Italian. And I cannot ever say that I have felt being hated on for my ethnicity. But that does not mean I don't know that there are Mexicans who do experience this. I am as certain it exists for gays/lesbians.

I have a question however... is this a school for gays who happen to be harrassed? Or for people who are harrassed who happen to be gay? If it's the latter, can a straight goth kids who get harrassed be admitted? But if it's the former, does this set a precedence for any special interest group for public schooling due to unfair treatment?

What happens to the gays who are harrassed just a little bit? The hating won't stop and I fear those that are lightly harrassed will be harassed even more for being left behind. And this makes me wonder what happens after high school? Is it safe to say that these individuals only get harrassed during these four years? Or will a public all-gay college be necessary?

It needs to be stated that sexual orientation/confusion isn't the issue. But it the fact that a special interest group is being segregated. The problem is the ones that are hating, not the victims.
 07/29/2003 12:52:34 PM · #49
Originally posted by bamaster:

It needs to be stated that sexual orientation/confusion isn't the issue. But it the fact that a special interest group is being segregated. The problem is the ones that are hating, not the victims.


I'm all for an All-Bully high school. Take the haters out and toss them in a seperate school so they can all beat on each other.
 07/29/2003 12:58:20 PM · #50
I'll bet they'll have a helluva drama club!
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 08/27/2025 05:59:37 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/27/2025 05:59:37 PM EDT.