CA Schools Curriculum: Inclusive of Historical Accomplishments of Gay Men & Lesbians

[Nova]

I'm still curious about the historical figures that are gay and how that will be introduced to kindergarten and first graders.

I doubt they will be introduced at that age. I think whatever is said at those ages will focus on the idea that not all families look the same. Or else districts will leave the whole subject to later grades.

ETA my daughter is visiting from Massachusetts. She says her kids learned about the Pilgrims in 2nd grade and that was the extent of "history" at that age. I don't know if California kids learn about Father Serra and the missions or what, but I doubt they are learning history in enough detail to get into who was gay. I suspect this law will have more effect on middle and high school curricula.

 

[Charlie09]

I doubt they will be introduced at that age. I think whatever is said at those ages will focus on the idea that not all families look the same. Or else districts will leave the whole subject to later grades.

I will agree to disagree with you. I believe an agenda has just been green lighted - and it was specifically given to include kinder, and I believe it will.

 

[Nova]

I will agree to disagree with you. I believe an agenda has just been green lighted - and it was specifically given to include kinder, and I believe it will.

Everything is an agenda from some point of view and everyone has many agendas. What do you think will be taught to kindergarteners?

 

[Charlie09]

Everything is an agenda from some point of view and everyone has many agendas. What do you think will be taught to kindergarteners?

I don't have any idea....we'll have to see how it evolves.

 

[Nova]

I don't have any idea....we'll have to see how it evolves.

Well, I don't think it's going to be that the great poet W.H. Auden preferred oral sex with Chester Kallman, his longtime partner.

(Yes, I'm mildly embarrassed to admit I know that. I wrote the "Auden" entry in an encyclopedia of gay theatrical artists published by the U. of Michigan Press. So I learned a lot of odd facts about him, none of which are included in the encyclopedia, nor will they be taught to schoolchildren of any age.)

(ETA I wrote the Kallman entry (he wrote opera librettos), not the Auden entry. Since Kallman wrote almost exclusively with Auden, I was basically creating a bio of their partnership, at home and in the theater. I apologize for the senior moment above and to whoever wrote the Auden entry.)

 

[tlcya]

Because the open gay lifestyle is so recent, historically speaking that is, how then do we determine who was in fact gay in history and who may have been? The great majority of historic figures were in the closet then, so how do we now "out" them and is that really okay?

I have never been a fan of outing someone if they were not ready to be comfortable in their own skin. As to outting dead historical figures, IDK how I feel on that one.

Who decides who was gay? What is the criteria?

I agree, Nova. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

 

[Charlie09]

Well, I don't think it's going to be that the great poet W.H. Auden preferred oral sex with Chester Kallman, his longtime partner.

(Yes, I'm mildly embarrassed to admit I know that. I wrote the "Auden" entry in an encyclopedia of gay theatrical artists published by the U. of Michigan Press. So I learned a lot of odd facts about him, none of which are included in the encyclopedia, nor will they be taught to schoolchildren of any age.)

I don't think there's a bit of embarrassment in that piece of knowledge or the posting of it.

I do though, continue to search on the gay figures to be included in the new curriculum and what I find are continued references to Harvey Milk, but to just identify him as gay, and not explain the full (and really quite complicated ) issues facing the SF board, and how it impacted Feinstein and the rest is twisting history.


http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/15/us/15gay.html

I missed this little nugget

The landmark law, which was authored by Democratic Sen. Mark Leno, also bans material that reflects adversely on gays.

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/pol...chool_to_teach_gay_history.html#ixzz1SOsN95dr

Apparently if you're gay, you're the only segment in society that can't have your history or community portrayed completely.

Here's the act in it's entirety

An act to amend Sections 51204.5, 51500, 51501, 60040, and 60044
of the Education Code, relating to instruction.


LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST


SB 48, Leno. Pupil instruction: prohibition of discriminatory
content.
Existing law requires instruction in social sciences to include a
study of the role and contributions of both men and women and
specified categories of persons to the development of California and
the United States.
This bill would update references to certain categories of persons
and additionally would require instruction in social sciences to
include a study of the role and contributions of lesbian, gay,
bisexual, and transgender Americans, persons with disabilities, and
members of other cultural groups, to the development of California
and the United States.


Existing law prohibits instruction or school sponsored activities
that promote a discriminatory bias because of race, sex, color,
creed, handicap, national origin, or ancestry.
Interesting that religion isn't included

Existing law prohibitsthe State Board of Education and the governing board of any school
district from adopting textbooks or other instructional materials
that contain any matter that reflects adversely upon persons because
of their race, sex, color, creed, handicap, national origin, or
ancestry. This bill would revise the list of characteristics included in
these provisions by referring to race or ethnicity, gender, religion,
disability, nationality, and sexual orientation, or other
characteristic listed as specified.Oh there it is, so we can teach that fundamentalist Christianity is not evil (whew, I was worried for a minute)
Existing law prohibits a governing board of a school district from
adopting instructional materials that contain any matter reflecting
adversely upon persons because of their race, color, creed, national
origin, ancestry, sex, handicap, or occupation, or that contain any
sectarian or denominational doctrine or propaganda contrary to law.
This bill would revise the list of characteristics included in
this provision to include race or ethnicity, gender, religion,
disability, nationality, sexual orientation, and occupation, or other
characteristic listed as specified.
Existing law requires that when adopting instructional materials
for use in the schools, governing boards of school districts shall
include materials that accurately portray the role and contributions
of culturally and racially diverse groups including Native Americans,
African Americans, Mexican Americans, Asian Americans, European
Americans, and members of other ethnic and cultural groups to the
total development of California and the United States.
This bill would revise the list of culturally and racially diverse
groups to also include Pacific Islanders, lesbian, gay, bisexual,
and transgender Americans, and persons with disabilities.
Existing law provides that there shall be no discrimination on the
basis of specified characteristics in any operation of alternative
schools or charter schools.
This bill would state the intent of the Legislature that
alternative and charter schools take notice of the provisions of this
bill in light of provisions of existing law that prohibit
discrimination in any aspect of their operation.
This bill also would make other technical, nonsubstantive changes.



THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. Section 51204.5 of the Education Code is amended to
read:
51204.5. Instruction in social sciences shall include the early
history of California and a study of the role and contributions of
both men and women, Native Americans, African Americans, Mexican
Americans, Asian Americans, Pacific Islanders, European Americans,
lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender Americans, persons with
disabilities, and members of other ethnic and cultural groups, to the
economic, political, and social development of California and the
United States of America, with particular emphasis on portraying the
role of these groups in contemporary society.
SEC. 2. Section 51500 of the Education Code is amended to read:
51500. A teacher shall not give instruction and a school district
shall not sponsor any activity that promotes a discriminatory bias
on the basis of race or ethnicity, gender, religion, disability,
nationality, sexual orientation, or because of a characteristic
listed in Section 220.
SEC. 3. Section 51501 of the Education Code is amended to read:
51501. The state board and any governing board shall not adopt
any textbooks or other instructional materials for use in the public
schools that contain any matter reflecting adversely upon persons on
the basis of race or ethnicity, gender, religion, disability,
nationality, sexual orientation, or because of a characteristic
listed in Section 220.
SEC. 4. Section 60040 of the Education Code is amended to read:
60040. When adopting instructional materials for use in the
schools, governing boards shall include only instructional materials
which, in their determination, accurately portray the cultural and
racial diversity of our society, including:
(a) The contributions of both men and women in all types of roles,
including professional, vocational, and executive roles.
(b) The role and contributions of Native Americans, African
Americans, Mexican Americans, Asian Americans, Pacific Islanders,
European Americans, lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender
Americans, persons with disabilities, and members of other ethnic and
cultural groups to the total development of California and the
United States.
(c) The role and contributions of the entrepreneur and labor in
the total development of California and the United States.Whew, the unions get a say in the textbooks too!
SEC. 5. Section 60044 of the Education Code is amended to read:
60044. A governing board shall not adopt any instructional
materials for use in the schools that, in its determination, contain:

(a) Any matter reflecting adversely upon persons on the basis of
race or ethnicity, gender, religion, disability, nationality, sexual
orientation, occupation, or because of a characteristic listed in
Section 220.
(b) Any sectarian or denominational doctrine or propaganda
contrary to law.What is this exactly?

SEC. 6. It is the intent of the Legislature that alternative and
charter schools take notice of the provisions of this act in light of
Section 235 of the Education Code, which prohibits discrimination on
the basis of disability, gender, nationality, race or ethnicity,
religion, sexual orientation, or other specified characteristics in
any aspect of the operation of alternative and charter schools.

 

[Donjeta]

Because the open gay lifestyle is so recent, historically speaking that is, how then do we determine who was in fact gay in history and who may have been? The great majority of historic figures were in the closet then, so how do we now "out" them and is that really okay?

I have never been a fan of outing someone if they were not ready to be comfortable in their own skin. As to outting dead historical figures, IDK how I feel on that one.

Who decides who was gay? What is the criteria?

I agree, Nova. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

JMO, if they stick to the facts it should be okay in my book. Suppose there was a male poet and we know that he was married to Mary, wrote a lot of love poetry that is addressed to a man named Thomas and he was very close to someone called Tommy. Maybe he was bisexual or a gay in a closet, hiding a passionate love affair with Tommy or secretly yearning for him, or maybe Tommy was an object of platonic artistic inspiration and there may be no way to know that. So just tell them the facts that are known about him.

 

[Charlie09]

JMO, if they stick to the facts it should be okay in my book. Suppose there was a male poet and we know that he was married to Mary, wrote a lot of love poetry that is addressed to a man named Thomas and he was very close to someone called Tommy. Maybe he was bisexual or a gay in a closet, hiding a passionate love affair with Tommy or secretly yearning for him, or maybe Tommy was an object of platonic artistic inspiration and there may be no way to know that. So just tell them the facts that are known about him.

That's not what the education act reads. We will now be teaching kids specifically about certain historical characters BECAUSE they are gay, transgendered or bi.

 

[Donjeta]

That's not what the education act reads. We will now be teaching kids specifically about certain historical characters BECAUSE they are gay, transgendered or bi.

I wonder which transgendered historical characters will be included. I couldn't think of anybody in particular and looked it up on Wikipedia and it seems like most of the people they can think of are contemporary. The vast majority were born in the 20th century and are still alive. There are very few listed that I would consider historical characters.

List of transgender people - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Nova]

Because the open gay lifestyle is so recent, historically speaking that is, how then do we determine who was in fact gay in history and who may have been? The great majority of historic figures were in the closet then, so how do we now "out" them and is that really okay?

I have never been a fan of outing someone if they were not ready to be comfortable in their own skin. As to outting dead historical figures, IDK how I feel on that one.

Who decides who was gay? What is the criteria?

I agree, Nova. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

As it turns out, lots of historical figures were quite openly gay or, if they didn't have that concept, were quite openly partnered with a member of the same sex.

The "curtain of silence" on the subject that was enforce by law in English-speaking countries only began in the late 30s and lasted through the mid-60s. There's a lot more information out there than one might expect, given our recent history.

And we don't accord historical figures privacy in other areas. Why would this be different?

(ETA and BTW: what is fairly recent is the concept of gay people as a separate "type" of person. Open same-sex relationships go back thousands of years.)

 

[Nova]

That's not what the education act reads. We will now be teaching kids specifically about certain historical characters BECAUSE they are gay, transgendered or bi.

I doubt any school board is going to pick a bisexual at random, and there's no quota specified in the act.

So I think districts will pick well-known figures that in many or most cases would end up in a history book anyway.

 

[Nova]

I don't think there's a bit of embarrassment in that piece of knowledge or the posting of it.

Well, it wasn't my goal when I started 8 years of college!

I do though, continue to search on the gay figures to be included in the new curriculum and what I find are continued references to Harvey Milk, but to just identify him as gay, and not explain the full (and really quite complicated ) issues facing the SF board, and how it impacted Feinstein and the rest is twisting history.

All history courses involve oversimplification, at least until the graduate level (and even then, many times). I was the first one to mention the complicated relationship between Harvey Milk and Dan White, but if that assassination isn't taught in all its complexity in the 7th grade, well, neither is anything else about history.

...Apparently if you're gay, you're the only segment in society that can't have your history or community portrayed completely.

As I'm sure you realized later in your post, in fact there is a long list of groups that receive the same protections.

I don't think the act says you can't teach a negative fact about an individual who is a member of one of those groups. You can teach Watergate and Nixon's role in it without attacking Quakers.

 

[Charlie09]

I doubt any school board is going to pick a bisexual at random, and there's no quota specified in the act.

So I think districts will pick well-known figures that in many or most cases would end up in a history book anyway.

like who?

 

[Nova]

NOTE: when I wrote in post #133 that "I was the first one to mention the complicated relationship between Harvey Milk and Dan White...", I meant I was the first poster in this thread to do so. I regret my lack of clarity.

I certainly wasn't the first to write that history. I lived in New York at the time and it seemed like two more assassinations in a long line that began with JFK.

 

[Nova]

like who?

Achilles, Socrates, Alexander the Great, Christopher Marlowe, Walt Whitman, Oscar Wilde, Gertrude Stein, James Baldwin (kill two birds with one stone), Jack Kerouac, Leonard Bernstein, Harvey Milk.

I'm sure I'm omitting some very important lesbians, but they were never my area of expertise.

You know, the usual suspects. None of those people is important just because he or she was gay, but the fact that he or she was gay influenced what made them important.

Maybe some text will throw in Harry Hayes, the found of the Mattachine Society (long before Stonewall) and, later, the Radical Faeries. He was an interesting guy and certainly colorful. He would make a lively addition.

Personally, I think the most important additions will be to American history, where the gay rights movement will be given its due along with racial civil rights and women's liberation. Each of these movements has some things in common but each also has unique things to teach us about our country.

***

But, Charlie, this question is a little like when you want to know exactly how much the rich are to be taxed from anyone who suggests the rich pay a fairer share. I'm not a CPA, but I know Warren Buffet should pay a higher percentage than his secretary.

I'm no more a middle school education expert than I am a CPA. I've taught queer history and theory, but at the university level and as part of more comprehensive courses. I was teaching play reading, so as a rule, I taught only what was necessary to understand the plays we studied.

So I admit I'm just guessing here. But I don't think it'll be a crisis if some student learns about someone just because he or she is LGBT. I survived the story of Washington and the cherry tree, which was already a known falsehood at the time I was taught it.

 

[Kimberlyd125]

Will they include bad gay people in the history classes? There are a lot of bad people in our history books.

Just wondering since this was marketed as a way to stop bullying.

 

[Emma Peel]

I would add...

Just because it's a law about gay history does not mean it's not a forward reaching law. Today's openly-bisexual influencers would be tomorrow's potential history-makers.

Wikipedia lists includes a number of openly bisexual cultural icons.

Some are too modern for "history" books - but perhaps they'll be in future editions - thanks to such laws as gay-inclusive history/social studies education.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_bisexual_people:_A-F

included as bisexual:

DH Lawrence
Margaret Mead
Edna St. Vincent Millay
Joan Baez
Alfred Kinsey
Simon de Beauvoir
Louise Bryant
Emperor Caligula
Leonard Bernstein
Casonova
Marlon Brando
Stanford White
Michael Bennett
Gore Vidal
John Cheever
Gertrude Stein
Janis Joplin
Frida Kahlo
Paul Taylor
Burt Lancaster

 

[Chewy]

History has nothing to do with sexual orientation IMO.

As you say, sex is a private matter. What you do in your bedroom is none of my business.
I will not judge you.

I have many friends who are gay. I have a family member who is gay. I love them all.

But the gov needs to stop forcing gay issues down our children's throats.

At 5 years old no doubt.

Gay people aren't the ones who are causing this issue. it's the groups of people who still feel the need to categorize people by who they have sex with and discriminate against them because of it.

If they were never ostracized because of their sexual preference there wouldn't be a need to undo that tragic bigotry.

It's a solution needed because of bigotry. Gay people aren't trying to recruit people.

 

[Charlie09]

Achilles, Socrates, Alexander the Great, Christopher Marlowe, Walt Whitman, Oscar Wilde, Gertrude Stein, James Baldwin (kill two birds with one stone), Jack Kerouac, Leonard Bernstein, Harvey Milk.

I'm sure I'm omitting some very important lesbians, but they were never my area of expertise.

You know, the usual suspects. None of those people is important just because he or she was gay, but the fact that he or she was gay influenced what made them important. None of these are people we learn about in elementary of Jr. High.

Maybe some text will throw in Harry Hayes, the found of the Mattachine Society (long before Stonewall) and, later, the Radical Faeries. He was an interesting guy and certainly colorful. He would make a lively addition.

Seriously? Why would he or the organization need to be covered before college?

Personally, I think the most important additions will be to American history, where the gay rights movement will be given its due along with racial civil rights and women's liberation. Each of these movements has some things in common but each also has unique things to teach us about our country.

***

But, Charlie, this question is a little like when you want to know exactly how much the rich are to be taxed from anyone who suggests the rich pay a fairer share. I'm not a CPA, but I know Warren Buffet should pay a higher percentage than his secretary.
Specifics are important. Theory is great in college, but I want to know real life how this (or taxes) will impact our kids or our future. Because with taxes as we've shown before...the numbers don't add up.

I'm no more a middle school education expert than I am a CPA. I've taught queer history and theory, but at the university level and as part of more comprehensive courses. I was teaching play reading, so as a rule, I taught only what was necessary to understand the plays we studied.

So I admit I'm just guessing here. But I don't think it'll be a crisis if some student learns about someone just because he or she is LGBT. I survived the story of Washington and the cherry tree, which was already a known falsehood at the time I was taught it.

It's the all let's change it, we'll define it broadly and hope for the best, when our schools are already having a hard time teaching the basics.