It occurs to me that one of the problems dispelling the "they will and want to teach homoSEXuality to your kids", in school or in mysterious gay recruitment centers, is to actually spell out what gays think parents should tell their kids about 'the ghey'.
Here's my 2-cents (I'm sure there are people more qualified than I). And, face it, parenting doesn't come with a manual so the need is ever present.
1. Don't try to execute a parental duty by asking your kids if they are gay, but create an accepting environment for them to tell you.
Kids listen. They watch. If you make nasty cracks about gay people on TV, disparage "those queers in Provincetown or San Francisco or Fire Island" or wherever, or laugh or chuckle when someone makes a comment about two girls in love or two guys holding hands, you are making a hostile environment for your kid, who may one day need to tell you something.
Some might say it is best to ask your kid, if you suspect. A young kid who is unsure, might feel compelled to lie to a question about it. Now he/she is 'locked in a lie', on top of everything else.
Some might say it's enough to just tell your kids, "It's okay, if you have something to tell me, it's okay if you are gay". But I'd argue that is not enough. On top of the fact that even most nongay kids, but not all, have trouble talking to their parents about their sexual feelings, kids may well look, on average, to regular behavior patterns and other modes of defining and finding a true 'safe space' than accept an off-hand verbal assurance. Actions speak louder than words.
So, the general thought is to do and say what you can indirectly, treat all your kids the same, and let your gay kid come to you with the information, on average.
Notice, if you want, based on your religious precepts or whatever, you can still teach your kids not to be promiscuous or "sexually adventurous", if that is your belief. Tell kids that "gay" is really reserved for people who 'truly, deep down, feel that way', but not for everyone. It's really that simple. The kids will get it.
2. Don't lie to your kids or set up a double standard
If you deliberately impose an information blackout on kids about grownups who are gay or a disinformation regime, then you've broken the scared parenting trust, and it will backfire, if ever the child comes to find the truth.
I also think it is a problem if parents set up a double-standard for their kids, in terms of the truth. If they send a signal or a message that "we love you because you're not like those other gays", that's a mistake. Same if the message is "God doesn't love gay kids, but we love you because you are our son/daughter, nonetheless". That dichotomy is a grave breakdown in authority. It's so much at odds with itself, that the core negativity of it could be internalized.
I'm sure this list could go on. Every parent-child relationship is unique, on top of it.
Still, this is a far cry from "teaching homoSEXuality"; it can be put into a soundbite; and it sidesteps wild cries about "teachable moments" and "promoting [sex] or homosex". What do "we" want parents to teach kids?: don't lie and do actively create an environment in which your gay kid can come to you.
This story, covered by Dan Savage, caught my eye. It's possible that Dan underestimates what I'll call 'best-little-boy-in-the-world-syndrome', after a similar title, or even something more fundamental. Some kids really do live for and seek the approval of adults, of parental figures. That can last well into later years. Paradoxically, perhaps, the "feeling" for a "connection" with a parent often continues even if that parent was physically abusive (!).
So, if someone's cherished relationship with their grandmother was perceived to be 'at risk', and that person has a perceived position of influence with others so that there is a political, intrafamily aspect to "disappointing" or "challenging" a key individual, one could imagine all types of associated behaviors, perhaps even including suicide (there might be all kinds of signs of 'acting out' or other 'cries for help').
However you come to judge all these ruminations, things are changing. But, I'm still struck every time I read a story about those who never told their parents until very late, and parents who replied, "We always suspected, but can't understand why you didn't tell us." Until one truly understands the psychology in a sympathetic way to both sides of that equation, it's hard to answer, 'what should parents tell their gay kids?'...
Showing posts with label Gay - Hate. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Gay - Hate. Show all posts
Thursday, October 21, 2010
What should parents tell their kids or their gay kids?
Saturday, October 2, 2010
The absence of malice does not equal the presence of love
This is not the reply I would have written, from Dan Savage, but that is what is great about the diversity of activists that we have. !
And here is the message that I have, shorthand, for Christians like Dan's reader (the religious right is not monolith):
We find, over and over, in practice, that the perceived absence of a malice against gays "in your heart" is not enough. Absence of malice is not the same as the presence of love. And where love does not exist, where love is not asserted, hate of many kinds flourishes.
So what is it going to take, i.e. "what can I do?"?
Concerned Christian parents have to finally come to be able to say these words in the same sentence, "love", "gay kids": As in "God loves gay kids" or "We all must love our gay kids, not bully them, because when tragedy strikes, victim and abuser, they are all our sons". And daughters. Say them in their heart, in their local school, in their voting booth.
Until that time, blaming "Satan" or "someone else" for the extraordinary social stress put on gay kids, made in God's image and called the same as everyone else, is spiritual violence, spiritual negligence, a parental abdication, a willful crime.
Today's Christians, who seek a just society for all, cannot leave these things undone, even as they pray for forgiveness for "things left undone".
Monday, March 15, 2010
Virginia: Not for lovers or employers
AN ACID RAIN, A STANK
Virginia's newly elected GOP are on the verge of hate speech, I'm sad to say.
The chilling effect is that these new GOP hatefills are proposing a 'confusion' in order to popularize and propagate the notion that it is okay and lawful to hate-on-gays, even though the law does NOT say one must do so.
There is no law mandating that one must discriminate in employment for or against gay and lesbians.FAITH OF OUR LOATHERS
Therefore, seizing this issue as one of their first post-electoral 'championship issues' does nothing but popularize the notion that it is okay to fire gays and lesbians.
It's a chilling effect, at a minimum, an intimidation at worst, on those who would put limits what you can not do, not what you can do, in regards to having the freedom to hire people on whatever terms you want.
The chilling effect is that these new GOP hatefills are proposing a 'confusion' in order to popularize and propagate the notion that it is okay and lawful to hate-on-gays, even though the law does NOT say one must do so.
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
Hate Crimes Legislation - Not "Largely Symbolic" At All, Part II
From the BBC News:
Det Insp Sue Cawley, of Lancashire Police, said: "Confidence in reporting sexual offences in the LGBT community seems to be low and we want to make sure that all members of the community feel comfortable reporting this type of horrific crime.
"We have a team of specially trained officers to support victims of rape and we want to make sure that members of the LGBT community have the information that they need to report such crime.
"We have a team of specially trained officers to support victims of rape and we want to make sure that members of the LGBT community have the information that they need to report such crime.
Is the Christian Legal Society Christian?
...conservatives are trying to castrate or erase our worthy antidiscrimination goals by using 'freedom to associate' and 'free speech' arguments for groups that, technically, don't even embrace those values...
With SCOTUS taking up the case of CLS v Martinez, one has to ask, "What makes the Christian Legal Society Christian?" They have a Statement of Faith, on their website, but the link to the amended version is hidden. How odd. In any case, it's not a credo that most would be familiar with. It certainly doesn't say anything about "gays", exactly.Michael Cole, Staff Council at HRC, has some of the facts of the case in legal context, although he doesn't link any of the cases themselves.
What's important general knowledge?
- CLS was not "kicked off campus", in any ordinary understanding of that term.
- CLS was provided use of campus facilities for meetings
- The University (Hastings) did not force CLS to accept any members or make anyone an officer
- The University withheld pooled 'activity fee' funding, because the chapter submitted a charter that didn't comply with the school's anti-discrimination policy and didn't get recognized.
What also catches my eye is that, these days, companies can use their weight to force suppliers and vendors (including law firms) to comply with antidiscrimination policies that are good for business.
Yet, Universities get questioned, if they try to do the same thing, even when the monies are coming from the public purse.
As you look at it, one asks, why did this ever come to court? Maybe there is an answer in the CLS history. Maybe "gay" is the thing for them, now. Who knows?
Right now, I'm leaning toward the conclusion of one of the comments on Volokh's blog: conservatives are trying to castrate or erase our worthy antidiscrimination goals by using 'freedom to associate' and 'free speech' arguments for groups that, technically, don't even embrace those values (many religious groups punish free speech as "heresy" and pass out punishment/reward depending on how people choose to confess and practice their faith, i.e. their 'association')... It's not just sad.
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Senator Hatch, Did You Read This?
I pick on you because you're one of those GOPers who excuse gay-targeted violence as "a tragedy", while refusing federal funds, over and over again.
Anyway,
Public safety officials say Sen. Matt McCoy, a Des Moines Democrat, received the [death] threat by telephone on Monday.
Monday, March 10, 2008
Sally Kern - Heard Round the World
All politics is no longer just local ... It's fascinating just how much of the ignorant, right-wing dogma she has imbibed and repeats rote.
The elements of homo-hate:
- there is an unspecified "agenda" (for power alone, it is intimated ...)
- we are in danger of being over-run, of losing control
- the threat is a real and present and worse than anything, up to and including "destruction"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)