First school in nation to offer LGBT Studies Course --- why?

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14


We need diversity of studies.

We need to return to classical liberal arts education, and leave all this crap OUT of schools.


These agendized liberals are ruining the minds of children.

originally posted by: Seamrog

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14


We need diversity of studies.

We need to return to classical liberal arts education, and leave all this crap OUT of schools.


These agendized liberals are ruining the minds of children.

You know when you throw a word around "liberally" it can make things difficult to understand. Are you saying that we need to go liberal to get away from the liberals?

a reply to: Seamrog

I'd be interested to know your understanding of the word liberal.

and also what exactly are classical liberal arts ?

a reply to: ketsuko

I was being facetious. The previous poster didn't want to know anything about anyone else's sexuality (keep it hidden), so I returned the favor.

The implication made by the poster I responded to earlier was that all LGBT people make out in public. This is untrue. It's as untrue as saying that all heterosexual people make out in public. People who fall under the LGBT umbrella are a very diverse group. Some are more conservative, some are not. Some love to go to gay pride parades, some wouldn't be caught dead there.

I just get annoyed when I hear people say things like "all them gays like to run around naked and make out". How about if I said all Christians want to see gays executed? Would that be a fair statement, because I have heard more than one preacher say this, so that must mean all of them say it, right?

Between the gay issue and the racism issue...

I just want to be "human". I'm sick of wedding cakes and flags to be quite honest.

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14

originally posted by: NavyDoc

A highschool in San Francisco? Where almost 1/3 self identify? They probably are already hip to what GLBTQ means. The time would be better served with a pre-calculus class.

So you are saying that it is wrong for them to have a social studies course that actually let's them study these issues, and also allow for the non-LGBT people to increase their own awareness. People have only just begun to accept such people. Taking a single class, probably for elective, is a great idea probably for anyone.

It's just like, in undergrad I took two electives focused on ethnic issues, race, culture, etc. I took an African-American Studies course about real slave narrative literature. Then I took an American Indian studies course, which covered that history. Both were very eye opening.

A lot of people show a lot of ignorance regarding all kinds of topics like these, proving that we AREN'T at a point yet where people "don't need to learn about these issues."

Where did I use the term "wrong?"


What I have pointed out is that the US spends the most per student of any country in the world with some of the worse results in the sciences and math. What we don't need is more feel-good PC classes, we need more math and science and chemistry.

As others have said, discussing it as part of a wider health class? Sure, have at it. Devote an entire class to this one subject when so many real subjects are suffering? Please. It's pandering to the base of the area just like "intelligent design" classes pander to the base in places like Utah.

I agree with your points about making sure the fundamentals are covered. Those are the priority.

But the whole idea of electives, which I am sure this is, is to broaden the education.

What we do NOT need are high schools or colleges that offer no social studies, art, music, etc, courses. That won't create an enlightened citizenry.

And not devoting an entire class to this subject will not create neanderthals either.

Schools have the right to create any electives they want. We need diversity of studies.

And if you diverse your way out of basic literacy? Math?

C'mon. This is San Francisco. This is just PC pandering for that region, just like "intelligent design" is pandering in other regions. Same principle--so the locals can feel good about themselves. It doesn't make the kids smarter and, in both situations, they get plenty of that at home.

Want to challenge the kids and make them better "critical thinkers?" Have electives that are not just echo chambers for their local environment. Put the GLBT studies in Utah and the intelligent design class in San Francisco. Do AA studies in Utah and Mahan's "Influence of Seapower on History" in San Francisco.

ETA: besides, the school is "for the Arts" type of school. They have plenty of diverse humanities and probably need more math.

First, I'm from SF originally. Contrary to your point, people when I was in school were still calling people "fags" and "that is gay," etc.

This school sounds like a more high-achieving school anyways. Are you sure that they are lacking in math, science, or literacy? As a former middle school and high school teacher, I can say that when it comes to low-income schools that ARE under-achieving, those schools and teachers most definitely prioritize math, science, and literacy, often too much. They begin cutting everything but those.

So I don't think that in this day and age it's a real worry, as the schools that need to prioritize are trying to, often to the detriment to even basic social studies or "specials" such as music and art. There still is a HUGE gap in these schools, but it's not because they aren't focusing on those three subjects.

I'm not sure so much that it is "pandering." Again, diversity of thought is good. The earlier we teach diversity of thought, including everything from ATS subjects to LGBT, the less utterly brainwashed people will be as adults.

One of the biggest problems we have is that most people aren't taught any non-conventional stuff until often after high school or even later. And by that time, many people have already settled into a kind of conventional "head in the sand" mindset.

And if they teach less Shakespere to make room for the latest PC cause? What then of diversity?

Given that almost 1/3, 5 times the national average identify, I doubt that people are being called "fags" and tossed into lockers. In fact, I'd bet that it's the other side that gets marginalized and insulted. A military kid would probably be a pariah.

originally posted by: Moresby

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14

originally posted by: NavyDoc

A highschool in San Francisco? Where almost 1/3 self identify? They probably are already hip to what GLBTQ means. The time would be better served with a pre-calculus class.

So you are saying that it is wrong for them to have a social studies course that actually let's them study these issues, and also allow for the non-LGBT people to increase their own awareness. People have only just begun to accept such people. Taking a single class, probably for elective, is a great idea probably for anyone.

It's just like, in undergrad I took two electives focused on ethnic issues, race, culture, etc. I took an African-American Studies course about real slave narrative literature. Then I took an American Indian studies course, which covered that history. Both were very eye opening.

A lot of people show a lot of ignorance regarding all kinds of topics like these, proving that we AREN'T at a point yet where people "don't need to learn about these issues."

Where did I use the term "wrong?"


What I have pointed out is that the US spends the most per student of any country in the world with some of the worse results in the sciences and math. What we don't need is more feel-good PC classes, we need more math and science and chemistry.

As others have said, discussing it as part of a wider health class? Sure, have at it. Devote an entire class to this one subject when so many real subjects are suffering? Please. It's pandering to the base of the area just like "intelligent design" classes pander to the base in places like Utah.

I agree with your points about making sure the fundamentals are covered. Those are the priority.

But the whole idea of electives, which I am sure this is, is to broaden the education.

What we do NOT need are high schools or colleges that offer no social studies, art, music, etc, courses. That won't create an enlightened citizenry.

And not devoting an entire class to this subject will not create neanderthals either.

Schools have the right to create any electives they want. We need diversity of studies.

And if you diverse your way out of basic literacy? Math?

C'mon. This is San Francisco. This is just PC pandering for that region, just like "intelligent design" is pandering in other regions. Same principle--so the locals can feel good about themselves. It doesn't make the kids smarter and, in both situations, they get plenty of that at home.

Want to challenge the kids and make them better "critical thinkers?" Have electives that are not just echo chambers for their local environment. Put the GLBT studies in Utah and the intelligent design class in San Francisco. Do AA studies in Utah and Mahan's "Influence of Seapower on History" in San Francisco.

ETA: besides, the school is "for the Arts" type of school. They have plenty of diverse humanities and probably need more math.

This is a very high powered college prep High School. All students take a full academic class load AND do additional study in performance or the arts.

Approximately 90% of the students go on to college. And more 30% of those complete some form of graduate school.

Most of these kids would smoke you in math.

Do a little research before you make assumptions.

I doubt it. Post the average math sat scores and we can talk.

originally posted by: NavyDoc
A military kid would probably be a pariah.

Got you beat. Navy Dad and Jehovah's Witness Mom.... in the 60's. I did't whine about it though. I used it and grew.

Oh look !

Another fear-mongering hyperbolic thread fully loaded with divisive speculations and assumptions on ATS...

originally posted by: queenofswords
28% of this school's children identify as LGBTQ. Wow! (And some people still think there is "nothing in the water"?)

But, then again, this IS San Francisco. But, do we really and truly need to offer a course of study for this?

This just sounds like more reason to divide us, [/url]

So to educate people about those different than them who have been historically ostracized is dividing us?

I guess all that bullying I and other people who were somehow different, suffered because of we were in high school really united people huh?

I guess it united the bullies. Is that the kind of nation and world you want?

originally posted by: JadeStar

originally posted by: queenofswords
28% of this school's children identify as LGBTQ. Wow! (And some people still think there is "nothing in the water"?)

But, then again, this IS San Francisco. But, do we really and truly need to offer a course of study for this?

This just sounds like more reason to divide us, [/url]

So to educate people about those different than them who have been historically ostracized is dividing us?

I guess all that bullying I and other people who were somehow different, suffered because of we were in high school really united people huh?

I guess it united the bullies. Is that the kind of nation and world you want?

How is having a class about GLBTQ issues in a performing arts school in San Francisco where almost 1/3 of the student body already identifies as GLBT "educating people about those different than you?" Sounds like they got that covered. If it was really about educating about different it would not be about a group that is already accepted. It'd be about gun ownership or Reaganomics--that would really be educating the students about people different than them.

originally posted by: NavyDoc
If it was really about educating about different it would not be about a group that is already accepted. It'd be about gun ownership or Reaganomics--that would really be educating the students about people different than them.

Yeah and we can see how open THOSE people are towards Gay issues. "I'll take my kids out and home school them...." So it's a one way street. It doesn't work that way. Besides, why do we teach history? If we're white, say, that means we already know what we have experienced in the past? No, thus it's taught.

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: NavyDoc
If it was really about educating about different it would not be about a group that is already accepted. It'd be about gun ownership or Reaganomics--that would really be educating the students about people different than them.

Yeah and we can see how open THOSE people are towards Gay issues. "I'll take my kids out and home school them...." So it's a one way street. It doesn't work that way. Besides, why do we teach history? If we're white, say, that means we already know what we have experienced in the past? No, thus it's taught.

So if other people refuse to teach "diversity" that is an excuse to not teach "diversity" all the whole time crowing about diversity? That does not make a lot of sense.

The excuses sound like Bill Clinton's "I tried Marijuana but I didn't inhale." False. Dishonest. And, frankly, unbelievable.

I'd much more respect an honest answer of "so they support GLBT, deal with it" than this disingenuous nonsense about "diversity" and "tolerance."

If a largely gay supportive school has a class on being gay, it's not about "diversity" gay is already a thing there.
If a largely gay supportive school has a class on being gay, it's not about "tolerance" it is already tolerated.

Honestly it's about supporting something they already agree on and it's an echo chamber for their views and they don't want any dissention.

Honestly--which yearbook photo is more likely to be published at that school: a guy kissing his boyfriend at prom or a guy wearing an NRA hat?

My post stands as it is. You want diversity in one direction and not another. THAT isn't diversity. See?

originally posted by: NavyDoc
Honestly--which yearbook photo is more likely to be published at that school: a guy kissing his boyfriend at prom or a guy wearing an NRA hat?

I see what your saying though. Teach the SF kids about conservative values. Conservatives are perfectly OK to NOT teach their kids about diversity. I'm not impressed with selfishness.

originally posted by: intrepid
My post stands as it is. You want diversity in one direction and not another. THAT isn't diversity. See?

originally posted by: NavyDoc
Honestly--which yearbook photo is more likely to be published at that school: a guy kissing his boyfriend at prom or a guy wearing an NRA hat?

I see what your saying though. Teach the SF kids about conservative values. Conservatives are perfectly OK to NOT teach their kids about diversity. I'm not impressed with selfishness.

See, I can make the same argument--you only want diversity taught one way and that isn't diversity. At least conservative are honest--they don't want stuff they don't like taught. Liberals are dishonest--they don't want stuff they don't like taught while at the same time talking about diversity.

Liberals hate true diversity and refuse to teach it.

Lets hide our kids from education, lets pretend people arent different, lets make sure our kids dont learn from us the parents so they grow up disliking people becasue there different.

I guess schools no longer concern themselves with simply teaching reading, writing, math, history.

Now schools are . . . . I don't know.

If parents aren't complaining about it, then it's not a big deal.

Because, in the end, the parents should have the final say. Not the teachers, not the schools, not the local government or any feel-good activists.

originally posted by: beezzer
I guess schools no longer concern themselves with simply teaching reading, writing, math, history.

Now schools are . . . . I don't know.

If parents aren't complaining about it, then it's not a big deal.

Because, in the end, the parents should have the final say. Not the teachers, not the schools, not the local government or any feel-good activists.

I agree with the above, as long as you don't tax me for it. Don't tax me to support your school and I don't give a crap what you teach there.

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: intrepid
My post stands as it is. You want diversity in one direction and not another. THAT isn't diversity. See?

originally posted by: NavyDoc
Honestly--which yearbook photo is more likely to be published at that school: a guy kissing his boyfriend at prom or a guy wearing an NRA hat?

I see what your saying though. Teach the SF kids about conservative values. Conservatives are perfectly OK to NOT teach their kids about diversity. I'm not impressed with selfishness.

See, I can make the same argument--you only want diversity taught one way and that isn't diversity. At least conservative are honest--they don't want stuff they don't like taught. Liberals are dishonest--they don't want stuff they don't like taught while at the same time talking about diversity.

Liberals hate true diversity and refuse to teach it.

Really? Have you checked their website? The courses are quite extensive. Including:

AMERICAN DEMOCRACY - 12th Grade • Homework: 0-30 minutes nightly. Grading: 25% individual presentations/essays, 25% journal/daily entries/short answer items, 50% formal assessments once every three weeks (2 total), 50 extra points may be earned by presenting a pre-arranged topic to the rest of the class.

PREREQUISITES: Students must have satisfactorily completed World History.

The characteristics and development of the government of the United States is the focus of the course: Democracy in the United States as envisioned by the Constitution, and the origins and context from which U.S. modern democracy arose. The class explores how state and local governments are organized looking closely at the events which have forced amendments to the Constitution.

www.sfsota.org...

a reply to: NavyDoc

If all the kids are Americans, why do we need to teach American History?