You know how jokes are often funny because they are based in an ugly truth?
While the debate over Safe Schools has descended into a slinging match between alleged "homophobes" and "progressives," there remain important - and, alas, neglected - questions to be asked of the program.
Late last week, I opened my email to an excerpt from a Safe Schools brochure you can find it on page 24a quote showing how a supportive father responded to his bisexual son: Neither of us can help that, it's just who we are. After my initial questioning of the evidential underpinning Safe Schools last yearI have received a steady flow of feedback from concerned parents and others.
Through its content developer and collaborator Minus18Safe Schools links students to guides on binding breasts, tucking penises, online "dating" services, even links to BDSM, a hardcore porn site and sex shop which was quickly deleted after the initial parliamentary criticism.
And now, in its very own content, Safe Schools is comparing the objectification of Asian women with bi-sexuality. Not only has racialised objectification long been known to harmbut pornography is also under fire from the medical profession for its damage to children. So how could a program that promotes such content supposedly safeguard children?
Proponents of Safe Schools argue that this content speaks to young people in their own language. Yet the topics covered include cissexism, pansexuality, allosexuality and demisexuality - ideas that appear more relevant to liberal arts graduates rather than school-aged kids.
The program has been repeatedly touted as "evidence based" and "world leading," yet any actual evidence of how this particular content will reduce bullying is yet to be seen. In fact, far from challenging bullying, the mocking of other students appears to be a core tenet of the program - with students encouraged to print out Safe Schools posters touting slogans such as "GROSS!
Not only is the tone and content matter of the program deeply concerning, but the entire basis underpinning Safe Schools is highly debatable. The core premise underlying Safe Schools is "queer theory.
Queer theory propositions - such as the 51 gender categories, and growing - are more likely to be found discussed on Tumblr than in any empirical study.
That hasn't stopped them from being rolled out into schools in various countries. Queer theory confuses and divides academics, even those in the LGBT community, and emerged from the obtuse world of post-structuralist philosophy.
If all of this doesn't sound much like a child-friendly anti-bullying framework, that's because it isn't. Undoubtedly, anti-bullying measures and programs to break down stereotyping are invaluable.
How exactly Safe Schools will achieve this by educating children on new theories of gender has not been explained. Can children can be encouraged to embrace diversity without being taught to accept problematic theories of gender, or without mocking straight students?
Why the links to pornographic content? How does the racial objectification of Asian women teach kids to embrace diversity? Anyone who questions the validity of the Safe Schools approach is shot down by the dogmatic left, who demand strict devotion to their supposedly progressive doctrine.
Those seeking impartial evidence for the program are labelled "fundamentalist" in a painfully ironic bid to avoid analysing the actual question at hand. Apparently, seeking evidence-based school programs now constitutes phobia, bigotry and fundamentalism. This is precisely why Safe Schools needs to be under review.Bullying Bullying has been a growing problem in the world but more prominently has this become an issue in America.
In Ann Hulberts article “Elephant in the Room” of Slate Magazine, she takes a position regarding anti-bullying programs that are being made to reduce this crisis.
Bullying must be stopped or prevented no matter how long it will take, it is a deeply concerning matter. Bullying does not always have to be childish play, it can be extremely violent.
People may be bruised, injured, or even killed. Bullying must be stopped or prevented no matter how long it will take, it is a deeply concerning matter. Bullying does not always have to be childish play, it can be extremely violent.
People may be bruised, injured, or even killed. However, understanding the origins of bullying is critical. Without the deep understanding the origins of a behavior provide, efforts to prevent bullying will continue to fail.
The Impact of Bullying. Bullying in the workplace can have a significant impact on both employees and the organization as a whole.
The health impact to employees experiencing bullying can include insomnia, depression, anxiety, irritability, isolation, illness, and low job satisfaction.
Bullying must be stopped or prevented no matter how long it will take; it is a deeply concerning matter. Bullying does not always have to be childish play, it can be extremely violent.
People may be bruised, injured, or even killed.