Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by useless, Jul 16, 2011.
Exactly. Gays have not shaped many parts of history.
The Holocaust, for one.
Good thing it isn't. Stop opposing everything even remotely associated with the left.
best post yet in this thread.
We teach on the Holocaust already.
The reason why (and the reason why I suspect on this thread are resistant to teaching gay history) is because people resent homosexuality being part of mainstream culture and society. Such resentment is quite sad.
Eh, we don't have to spend years and years learning thousands of characters just to read a newspaper.
Seems strange to me, history should be about the important events that have happened, not whether or not gay people or straight people were involved. Compared to most other groups oppressed by Nazi Germany, the gays were a very small portion. 10,000 people compared to over 10,000,000 others. That's less than .1% of the deaths. History classes should say, "yes, the Jews, Roma, Slavs, resistance forces/partisans, gays, disabled people, and minority religions were all persecuted". It just seems like a law like this gives undue weight to sexuality.
I also have a bad feeling that the teachers teaching this will use this law as an opportunity to further all the rumors about various historical figures being gay, when there is very little evidence to show that.
I read a book once by a gay man in France who had been put in a concentration camp. He was in a part of town at night known as a clandestine meeting spot for gays. Someone stole his watch there and he went to the police. When he reported it they put him on a list of homosexuals. When the Nazis invaded he was put in a concentration camp. I don't remember much about what happened in the camp but he saw one of his friends torn apart by dogs from what I do remember.
Gays were a small group persecuted by the holocaust but it does matter. Why should gays be denied their role in history? I do agree that it shouldn't take up too much of the course, maybe a day or two. Also there should be some standard curriculum because it's true that some historical figures are identified as gay but we really don't know for sure and either way it's not that important. I think it should focus on the struggle for gay rights in America with maybe a mention of other countries as well.
I think it should be mentioned where it was important. There's no point in saying "you must spend X amount of time on it".
I think it would make a great senior level or college elective class.
For grade school kids? Gimme a break. This isnt a 'good start'....its simple political pandering.
This is why we need a voucher system in California. Low income parents should not be forced to send their children to schools that mandate teaching history about a social group that has had little to no impact on the shaping of this country.
I guess I should consider myself lucky that I completed my public education in California months before Brown signed this monstrosity into law. Still, I fear for the future of public education.
I think it should be in any course that mentions the rights for other minorities. Regardless of scale, all this identity-based discrimination should be treated the same, and the same message should be said about each: it is WRONG.
Now, for our conservative faithful, this is a non-issue; you can believe homosexual activity to be immoral without massive legal or social persecution against it.
Thankfully, that isn't the toss up.
The law doesn't give a grade level for when the instruction has to begin, and it gives local school boards a lot of leeway on how to implement the requirement. It doesnt appear that elementary schools have to cover gay history (which I would agree, wouldn't really be appropriate.)
Gays, as a group, might not have been as influential to our national history as some other groups, but they are certainly important in contemporary California history.
And of course, running home the idea of discrimination being wrong against any identity group is always a good concept to teach...
I'd leave it to the parents, but as there are parents who practice discrimination, I'd say it's safer to just mandate it instead.
I beg to differ. Has the gay community had an equal or greater amount of influence on California's founding and heritage as the Spanish missionaries, the pioneers of the Gold Rush, or the life of William Randolph Hearst? Once you include gay history in the curriculum, all other subject matter, including math and science, suffers as a result.
So they should be totally ignored?
I don't understand how the other subjects would suffer.
Including math and science? How?
The American Declaration of Independence didn't have as much of an impact as the Agricultural Revolution but who really gives a rat's posterior.
I can't really figure out why I'm discussing this with someone who calls himself the tyrant, has anyone but Obama 2012 as his signature and calls the teaching of gay history a monstrosity but then I don't really understand why I do lots of the things I do.
I don't see the problem. When we covered "The non-Black Civil Rights Movement" in AP US History my teacher included the Stonewall Riots along with NOW, AIM, and the migrant workers movement lead by Chavez. If the teacher is so bad that they can't find a way to shove in 10-15 minutes of class time or assign a reading, then I think a case for incompetancy has been made to the union review board to fire the teacher.
Yes, it is not appropriate to expose young children to homosexuality.
Separate names with a comma.