Schools, Marriage Equality, and What We’re Teaching Our Children

The Grossmont Union High School District in California voted 4-0 yesterday in support of Proposition 8, the November ballot initiative that would ban marriage of same-sex couples in California. It is believed to be the first public school board in the state to do so.

The San Diego Union-Tribune notes that some supporters of the ban have expressed concern that if same-sex marriages are legal, kindergarteners will have to be taught they are the same as opposite-sex ones. While the exact reasons of the Grossmont board are unclear, it doesn’t seem like a stretch to assume they are concerned about teachers having to address issues related to same-sex relationships.

Ugh. I can’t imagine being an LGBT student and/or the child of LGBT parents in that school district.

The school board would do well to take note of a great article on young adult literature with LGBT content by Katherine Mason, an assistant professor of English Education at Kennesaw State University in Georgia. It’s aimed at secondary-school English teachers, but well worth reading by all educators and parents of teens and pre-teens. Mason discusses results of research she conducted among teachers in the state, looking at their awareness of and attitudes towards literature with LGBT content.

Among other things, she found, “Not surprisingly, the respondents who were most adamantly against the use of YAL with LGBT content were also the ones who were least likely to have read any of those texts themselves.” Many felt that using such literature in the classroom necessitated discussions of sex. Others worried about the reactions of parents and administrators, or were concerned the use of LGBT works would be seen as “politicizing” the classroom. She concludes:

Maybe one purpose of YAL with LGBT content is to educate teachers: to help us empathize with students (and colleagues) who may be questioning their own sexual orientation or gender identity; to help us become informed, comfortable, responsible, and courageous in our responses to homophobic and gender Stereotypie comments and slurs; to help us create a classroom and school environment in which students feel they have a sense of place and where they can express themselves fully. Perhaps, this is the first step for us: simply reading the texts ourselves. Particularly for teachers who feel that their hands are tied by administrative and parental restrictions, maybe the first step is to simply make ourselves more aware of the quality adolescent literature available that features LGBT characters. . . .

It is not a question of whether or not we want students to think about talk about or act on their feelings and uncertainties. They most certainly will. We can either deny our students’ physical, cognitive, and emotional development or we can acknowledge it and prepare ourselves to respond appropriately and compassionately to their needs.

Mason includes a useful reading list, but her analysis of teachers’ attitudes and concerns is, to my mind, the more important part of this piece.