Contact: Facebook.

Education and Gays

by Jim Andris

I've been asked to set down some thoughts on education and gays, being a professional educator in the St. Louis Metropolitan Area. I'll restrict my comments to elementary, secondary, and college education, and to parents, teachers, students and subject matter.

Before I get into the general discussion of education and gay people, I do want to talk about the bottom line, as far as I'm concerned. That is the law. At this point in time, our biggest enemy is the law which makes gay sex illegal. With so many issues to focus on, why single out the sodomy statutes as the bottom line? Simply because of the association with the criminal. As long as society defines gay sex as a criminal action, we cannot achieve more refined distinctions of human rights! So our first priority needs to be the removal of any gay sex from criminal status.

I also want to talk a little about a limitation on education. We have traditionally placed much emphasis on education in the U.S. Education is supposed to get us jobs. Public education taught a generation of immigrants to read and write English. More recently, public education was singled out to bear the burden of solving our racial problems.

But this traditional view of education is passing. People no longer believe that a degree means a job, and they have the unemployment checks to prove it. Parents are not bluffed by high sounding pedagogical talk any more when it comes to spending their tax dollars. Bussing is no longer regarded as a viable solution to deeper racial problems.

My own view is that much of schooling is a holding place for kids that parents don't quite know what to do with. And most administrators are quite happy to conduct a holding action with these kids. Some kids have more direct experience with the realities of life than many of their teachers. They know first hand about drugs and sex and the failures of marriage. They've seen it all.

By now you've probably got the definite impression that you're not going to get a lot of suggestions about how formal education can make for a better society. I'm rather pessimistic about what and how much education can do. Uncle Jim does have a few hard-nosed observations about some things that education in the U.S. needs, and needs immediately, though.

Students and Secondary Education

Let's start with students, since supposedly that is the one thing that education cannot do without. My calculations lead me to suspect that there are about three or four million gay students in the U.S. I want especially to hone in on high school. I would say that there are maybe 1 1⁄2 million gay high school students. There are three things that we (you and I) could do immediately to help these students.

The first (and most likely) thing to do would be to concentrate on educating high school counselors to the facts of growing up gay in the late 20th Century U.S.A. All the stuff that you and I already know. Like: it ain't a sin, it ain't an illness, it doesn't mean you're a sissy, and the only thing wrong with it is that a lot of people don't like it. Gay kids do not need any more hassles from their high school counselors than they're already getting from their budding macho classmates and their image conscious parents.

They need straight ('straight' means not crooked) information on entry into the gay community. Kids need support in exploring their sexuality, what ever it may be. Think about it. Concentrate on the counselors.

The second thing that we could do would be to concentrate on and support all efforts to get a balanced sex education program into the high school. As recently as 1973, a well-known publisher put out a sex education textbook and manual for high school teachers which mentioned homosexuality only once—to warn teachers to warn their students that homosexuals were child-molesters and that children should be discouraged from associating with them. (What does such information do to a homosexual child who hears it?) Kids need accurate facts on the nature of homosexuality. That is is a normal variant of human sexuality. That homosexuality is distributed throughout all occupations and social strata at a fairly constant and significant percentage. And so forth.

I must confess that we are fighting an even bigger bugaboo with sex education than just prejudice against homosexuals. A lot of people are just plain scared to talk about sex. Nothing gets the taxpayers so irate as a modern sex education program, even if it says nothing about gays. I guess we have to work toward desensitizing talk about sex, too. There is a real problem here. If the Briggs initiative passes in California in November, it will be illegal for anyone to advocate homosexuality as a viable life style and still teach school. So much for First Amendment rights! All the old arguments crop up. How many times have you heard "Sex education is for the home." We need to patiently explain that many homes do not do their job. That students already have a massive amount of misinformation from their friends and from TV and from the movies.

The third thing that we could do for our 1 1/2 million gay high school students is to give them a taste of their cultural heritage. How much good could be done by one high school history teacher or English teacher by silencing the snickering of a homophobic class with a good presentation of Walt Whitman as the Good Gay Poet? Those lines really come alive when you see that old Walt was talking about Peter Doyle, the streetcar conductor, or that those kisses he planted on the lips of wounded and dying confederate soldiers rose from some deeper passion than just abstract comradeship. Just for effect, I'll list a few of the names that were deleted from my and probably from your formal education. Plato, founder of Western philosophy, Leonardo da Vinci, who wrote beautiful gay poetry, Tennessee Williams, who revolutionized American theatre, and Oscar Wilde, a British Mark Twain, if ever there was one.

Perhaps this desire to see gay history is a pure pipe dream on my part. People don't even see any need for women's or black history in the high school curriculum, so how can they be expected to grasp this need? Still, there is a lot of emphasis on multi-cultural education these days, and we do seem to have a unique culture. Maybe we could slip one in on them (if you'll pardon the expression.) I've said a bit now about secondary students, so in the spirit of not being tedious, I'll try combining two more topics I suggested—elementary education and teachers.

Parents, Teachers, and Elementary Education

Nothing threatens most parents more than the thought of one of their sons turning out to be gay. We can compare this attitude to the attitude of people toward non-believers in the Middle Ages. People were afraid to even discuss the possibility that there was no God, and questioners were burned at the stake as heretics. If you talk much to parents of gays, you quickly discover that their main concern is what other people will say and do. Most of them come to realize after a while that they still love their gay children.

But we must realize that we are dealing with a powerful taboo in discussing homosexuality and children. Most parents want to protect their children from homosexuality at all costs. The thought of a gay elementary teacher violates this taboo. We need to be very realistic about this.

One reality is that we can expect no help from the Supreme Court. There will be no landmark decisions comparable to the 1954 decision on segregated schools. Nixon's legacy was a court that clearly intends to set no precedents where gay rights are concerned. The recent Gaylord vs. the State of Washington decision was that a gay teacher could be fired merely because he or she is gay. The U.S. Supreme Court let this decision stand.

Another reality is that we are in the middle of a conservative backlash. Conservative political groups, small but well funded, and backed by rich industrialists, are making major inroads in the political scene. They are using fear and smear tactics on every issue from women's rights through property taxes, to gay rights. And our citizens are responding in large numbers to these campaigns of ignorance and confusion. The wave of hope of the early seventies has been replaced by a wave of hatred of anything non-conventional. The ignorant, selfish majority has learned well from the struggling minorities how to demand "their rights".

Given this dismal situation, then, what about elementary education? We must not be discouraged, even though the situation is discouraging. We must strive to get the truth out to as many I parents, teachers and administrators as possible. What is that truth?

People have to come to understand how gay and straight sexuality are formed. It is popular in gay activist circles now to argue that people have no choice over their sexuality. The strategy here is that if you can't change someone, then you might as well stop hassling them and make the best of a bad situation. It's a strong argument, but there's just one problem. People do have a choice over their sexuality. Now, of course, I've made a very controversial statement. But my experience leads me to this conclusion.

The vast majority of children are conceived with the potential to be bi-, homo-, or heterosexual. The child is a growing, responding, thinking being and quite early on makes decisions about his or her gender, and which parent will serve as a model. By the age of five, many children are making decisions about the choice of sexual partner. There is no simple formula for "making a homosexual", but I believe that an examination of the family dynamics in almost every case will show why a child choses his or her sexuality.

Now I am not saying that as adults, we can simply reverse our decisions if we choose. Most of these early decisions are buried under layers and layers of later choices and experiences. Only a skilled therapist can uncover these decisions (or a very rare and perceptive individual by him/herself). But what bearing does all this have on gay teachers and elementary education? Just this.

The family, and not the school, is the cradle and single most important source of the vast majority of homosexuals. When I was growing up in school 90% of all my teachers were women. Was I tempted to be a woman? Of course not. Nor were most of my male classmates. As a child I actively scanned my environment for role-models. I mainly wanted to be like some of my boy friends. Only I wanted to have sex with them too.

We must get people to see that kicking all the gay teachers out of school won't save a single child from homosexuality. Children will just look around for appropriate role-models until they find them or figure out a role for themselves.The point is here that the child is actively seeking to confirm decisions that he or she already has made. In fact, the real tragedy is that because there are not openly gay role models in the schools and in most communities, millions of children with a gay script (life plan) will suffer needlessly. How can that happen? Well,from my own experience I know that there are countless gay men and women who have tried to live the straight life. Gradually, they discovered that this was not really for them. Many gay people go through the equivalent of adolescence 5, 10, or 15 years late. Had there been open gay role models, they would have been spared the wasted years. (I don't mean to imply that it is a waste of time to lead a hetererosexual life, only that for some people, this is time spent developing an inauthentic self.)

It occurs to me that there is a great irony in all this for people like Anita Bryant. On the one hand, these conservatives go around screaming for the government to leave the people alone, to stop taking their money for the loafers on welfare and to stop telling them how to educate their children. Yet it is clear that the family is producing homosexuals as efficiently as it ever did. If they really wanted to strike at the root of the problem, they would have training programs, government supervised, for all perspective parents, to assure that the family dynamics were proper for producing only hetererosexuals. Each parent would have to go through extensive psychoanalysis to discover hidden expectations he or she was setting up for their children.

But of course, that will never be condoned by the Conservative caucus, and so we can anticipate that the U.S. family will continue to pump out children gay and straight in a ratio of about 1 to 9. (What proportion of these children are bisexual is another question.) It is very foolish to think that 3 million children are going to enter psychotherapy to examine their early choices concerning sexuality, and even more foolish to think that they will all change. Most evidence shows a very low if nonexistent change rate.

In the mean time, don't be surprised if gay elementary school teachers keep silent about their sexuality. They've read the handwriting on the wall, and they are smart to keep their mouths shut. The best thing that we can do is to work toward changing the forces that influence the schools and society in general— the law, the telly, business, housing, and organized religion. Society changes first, schools follow. Sorry folks, but that's the way it is.

Subject Matter and College Education

Of the entire system of formal education in the U.S., I hold the most hope for the college and university as having a significant role in changing attitudes about gay people. There are several things we have going for us. First, most people (supporters of Oral Roberts University and similar institutions excluded) are content to let college students study what they may, although students are still quite uptight about having a course dealing with gay sexuality on their records. Second, the courts have generally upheld the right of gay students to meet and receive funds from the university along with other legitimate groups. This comes under First Amendment rights. Third, the strong tradition of academic freedom and tenure makes it safer for a professor to study and become an expert on almost any subject matter without much fear of losing his or her job.

Of course, most, if not all of us have to create that expertise in gay studies on our own, because historically there hasn't been any courses or programs offered in gay studies. I have found, however, that my own knowledge of the subject grew naturally. It is a fascinating topic. As with other areas of formal education, how far one can go in dealing with the problems of gay people depends to a great deal on the area of the country, the type of institution, and the academic traditions of a particular institution. At my school, SIUE, for example, I estimate that there are 50 or 60 gay faculty, yet only myself and possibly one other person are in any way pursuing gay studies or gay issues. Chicago seems to be the nearest city to St. Louis with an active gay academic community. They recently formed a chapter of the Gay Academic Union there.

Given the relatively safe university environment, I am convinced that every university needs courageous tenured professors who will speak out responsibly on issues relating to gay rights. Professors need to know that one can be responsible yet be a gay activist. A handful or less of professors on each campus will need to establish open lines of communication, to coordinate gay studies offerings, and to seek to make the academic community a safe and rewarding place for gay people to live, learn, and play. This goal is well within our grasp.

It goes almost without saying that the universities owe a great debt to the courageous students who during the early 70's formed student gay groups. These groups continue to be a source of aid and inspiration to gay people on campuses. If you are a student at a university and are gay, you are doing much by simply being a member of a gay student organization. If your institution does not have a gay student group, then you may want to get in touch with a gay student group in the area (Washington University has one, for example). See if you can find out something about forming one at your school.

There are so many things that a gay professor can do to be helpful! Go to your university book store and take a list of good books on homosexuality. Check out their holdings. Do they carry the Advocate at the newsstand, for example, along with the Playboys and the Ouis? Do they have a good display of recent gay novels such as Front Runner or of sympathetic treatments of the gay condition such as Family Affair? If not, pressure them to balance their holdings. Do the same with the library.

Go have a talk with your affirmative action officer. Give him or her material on the way insidious discrimination works at the university. Explain the basic problems and offer to be of any assistance. Send significant news clippings to his or her attention. Go to the president's office. Have a talk. Try to get a policy stating that there will be no discrimination on the basis of sexual preference. Write articles and letters for the school newspaper.

As you sit in committee meetings, don't let examples of discrimination pass. For example, I once requested that a course called "Human Sexuality" be retitled "Human Heterosexuality" because it contained only a minuscule amount of information on Homosexuality. I didn't get my way, but people had to rethink the issue. Try to put through a course dealing with homosexuality. You'll find out a lot about your colleagues ideas on the subject by just trying it. Offer to be a resource person to other classes on topics of gay problems.

Go to any program where you suspect there is inaccurate information being given about gay lifestyles. For example, make sure that prospective teachers deal with the problem of how they will relate to their gay students. Offer to help the the instructor of Teacher Education 201 or whatever to put together a unit on this problem.

As you build a reputation as a responsible educator who is trying to deal with gay problems, you will discover that students and professors start getting referred to you for help. Members of the broader community may contact you from time to time because they do not know what to do about a particular situation involving a gay person, usually young.

Above all, remember that just being an openly gay person who is responsible is a good thing. People have to confront their stereotypes when dealing with this type of person. Once in a class on education I shared with my class that I was gay and talked about how discrimination affected me. (The class properly dealt with problems of discrimination in education.) Almost all of my students said that the most valuable thing about the class was having a chance to know and interact with a real live gay professional.

I realize that the activities I have been describing would be perceived as very threatening by most gay college professors. It takes a certain kind of person to do these things. You have to be self-confident and strong. You have to be ready to make new friends and discard old ones, because that will most certainly happen if you come out. You have to have a sense of moral justice and to be willing to put this matter very high on your list of priorities. You have to take time out from other activities you may enjoy. You have to risk harrassment.

But on the other hand, if your experience is like mine, you will be immensely rewarded for actions such as I describe. After a few years on the "front", you will reap rewards. You will know who your real friends are; the ones who accept you for you and not some image of you that they prefer. You will know you are going to your grave an upfront, honest, and whole man or woman. You will become strong and self-confident in the process. You will eventually gain respect and recognition
for what you are. You won't have to tolerate so many "fag" jokes. That fact alone makes it worth it for me. I remember one time one of my colleagues told such a joke. I said, "I'd laugh, except I am one." He turned pale, but he doesn't tell me any more offensive stories.

Above all, you will know that you are not part of the problem, you are pare of the solution. But if you choose to be silent, I accept your choice, and I ask you to accept mine.

Odds and Ends

I don't intend to speak for bisexuality here. I believe that bisexuality is not just a combination of homo- and heterosexuality, but rather a different form of sexuality altogether. Bisexuals need to get their own liberation group going; they won't get much help or appreciation from people who are predominantly hetero- or homosexual. More power to them.

Changing the subject completely, we must remember that television is a major educative influence in this society. Most of the education that children acquire is acquired by imitation, and TV is a major source of role-models. I view TV today in the U.S.A. as basically an instrument of patriarchal, capitalistic society. The image of the rich white man as superior is the source of huge amounts of oppression and discrimination. Think about TV. How many female game show hosts can you think of? How many commercials show men doing housework or interior decorating? Are you convinced by the gay, the black or the male and female characters on TV? In my opinion, until TV portrays the sexes as equally potent, and until co-operation is emphasized more than competition, this media will continue to reinforce homophobic attitudes.

Conclusion

I would like to conclude by relating a story that George Carlin told recently on the Tonight Show. He was talking about his ideas for world peace. He said that what we could do is to require that every single person in the world has to be formally introduced to every other single person in the world. Then the "big boys" couldn't so easily talk people into going to war. As he put it, they would say, "What d'ya mean, go fight the Chinese? Are you kiddin'? I know those people, I met 'em!"

This neat little story makes a very important point for anyone concerned with gay problems. People are much less likely to be hostile toward people they know. There seems to be an obvious conclusion here somewhere …!?