Do You Support LGBTQ History Classes Being Taught In Public Schools?

[TheRadicalAnarchist]

I personally would love a LGBTQ History class as an optional class. Not only because I am gay, but because I love history, and would love to learn about gay activists and such. Would you like to have this as an optional class, or elective?

[TheGodlessUtopian]

I would support such a curriculum. I remember at my elementary school there was a short lesson plan when it came to the Civil Rights movement so I think it would be good to include some of the queer right movement as well. Whether this would be optional, mandatory, a big or small plan, would be largely up to the individual schools, I suppose.

[Brosa Luxemburg]

I doubt anyone would argue differently here, and if they do they probably deserve to be banned or restricted.

[Dunk]

Sure. Why not?

Sadly, flexibility in curriculum is not something a high school teacher usually has at their fingertips. So maybe a teacher would sometimes like to bust out A People's History instead of some garbage revised in Texas, but can't. At least, that's the impression one of my profs gave me. She had a doctorate in history and queer studies, and said she left high school because her hands were tied and they didn't like her there.

I didn't even know anything about Stonewall until two years after high school, when my friend told me about it. I felt incredibly ignorant, embarrassed, and angry I hadn't been taught about something so important.

[NewLeft]

Yes, we need a "people's history" course.

[Brosa Luxemburg]

Yes, we need a "people's history" course.

Shouldn't that just be called history class?

[revolt]

I would support that being a part of history classes. my objection to it being a course all by itself is pretty much just that I don't think it would be a topic you could make a whole semester or year long class out of.

[Eagle_Syr]

I don't think we should especially focus on any particular group, but we do need a "history of the people" course that tells history from the perspective of the lower classes.

[revolt]

I cant edit posts until I have the required amount of posts so this will be a double post, but I was taught about the Stonewall riots in school. even watched a pretty great documentary on it and the lives of LGBT people in general in the 1950's and 60's.

[Dennis the 'Bloody Peasant']

Absolutely support that idea. Until their is the afrementioned 'peoples history' told from a broad spectrum of the working class, there needs to be focus on some specific groups that are often over-looked.

[Anarchrusty]

Absolutely. Some of the world's greatest minds were gay like Francis Bacon, Freddie Mercury, Keith Haring, Andy Warhol, Richard Simmons, George Michael, Marc Almond.

What would our cultural luggage be without them?

[Ned Kelly]

I reckon historical figures shouldn't be whitewashed just cos they preferred something different in bed.

[Igor]

I reckon historical figures shouldn't be whitewashed just cos they preferred something different in bed.

Literally nobody here is saying this, especially because this would be more about LGBT rights and queer struggle history, not just "he was gay and she was gay and"

But yeah, of course LGBT history should be taught. It's an integral part of human history and it should be taught as such. Just having different modules for it or doing shit like having a "LGBT history month" are cool etc but have the potential side effect of alienating LGBT history from "normal" history.

[Zav]

I would that we had no need for such a class, but, alas, we do. I will support them, though I'm not sure there would be enough material to constitute its own class. Perhaps it could be worked into Sex Ed, along with the history and politics of contraception and the relationship between sex and gender egalitarianism. Sex Ed, where I grew up, was a part of Health class, but it should be its own year-long course, and mandatory. If parents and religious organizations don't like it, then fuck them. It's the 21st century.

[Igor]

I would that we had no need for such a class, but, alas, we do. I will support them, though I'm not sure there would be enough material to constitute its own class. Perhaps it could be worked into Sex Ed, along with the history and politics of contraception and the relationship between sex and gender egalitarianism. Sex Ed, where I grew up, was a part of Health class, but it should be its own year-long course, and mandatory. If parents and religious organizations don't like it, then fuck them. It's the 21st century.

Honestly, "material" isn't the first thing that's going to run out on high school or undergraduate level history, what's getting taught pales usually in comparison to what's actually relevant for understanding of the issue. There's more than enough LGBT history out there to make up for a separate module.

[Zav]

Honestly, "material" isn't the first thing that's going to run out on high school or undergraduate level history, what's getting taught pales usually in comparison to what's actually relevant for understanding of the issue. There's more than enough LGBT history out there to make up for a separate module.
I suppose it depends how the subject is taught and on the students, among other things. We need such a class now, and in our hetero-normative macho culture, who is going to take the class other than Queer students if it isn't in the mandatory curriculum?
Perhaps we could have both a historical unit or two in the Sex Ed classes and an optional secondary class that goes far more in depth. Argument resolved.

[wsg1991]

you will find many contradictions ,

[Omsk]

If we are speculating about a socialist society, than no, because such subjects will be covered in the normal history class which will be greatly different from the current. As for the history class of today, i'm afriad that's impossible.

[Althusser]

It probably won't be a reality in most states in the US anytime soon. In places like Arizona, they've banned Mexican history and other types of ethnic studies because they don't want to "inspire hate" against whites and such. The way I feel is that resentment is deserved where resentment is due, and purposely lying about history and sugarcoating the facts has much worse consequences.

Anyway, I doubt LGBTQ will actually be worked into the curriculum in the near future, but I'll support it.

[Teacher]

At the K-12 level I don't think it would be a great idea simply because I think LGBTQ history should be integrated into the regular curriculum of World History/US History and you'd be hard-pressed to find enough students to sign up for it as a separate class.

I am a high school history teacher and we barely have any kids sign up for European History, Sociology, Philosophy etc.

I teach in a very conservative community and I've had colleagues get harassed by parents for teaching LGBTQ history. My principal showed me one lengthy email from a parent complaining that a project about the gay rights movement was displayed outside my colleague's classroom.. claimed teachers have no business promoting the "homosexual agenda" in schools.

Next year I will be the teacher sponsor of a new queer/straight alliance group which was very difficult to get started for the kids because the school makes them get parent signatures to sign up for a student group and many of them didn't want their parents to know they were gay because of the reactionary attitudes they have.

[MrCool]

Even watched a pretty great documentary on it and the lives of LGBT people in general in the 1950's and 60's.

What was the name of the documentary?

[Eagle_Syr]

I personally don't see why sexuality is anybody's business. Presumably once anti-homosexual thoughts die out in society, continuing things like gay pride parades and distinct "gay culture" would only have a negative effect on society.

[cynicles]

Absolutely. Some of the world's greatest minds were gay like Francis Bacon, Freddie Mercury, Keith Haring, Andy Warhol, Richard Simmons, George Michael, Marc Almond.

What would our cultural luggage be without them?

Don't forget Alan Turing! Where would we be without the father of mondern computer science who managed to kick some nazi ass along the way.

[Halleluhwah]

I personally don't see why sexuality is anybody's business. Presumably once anti-homosexual thoughts die out in society, continuing things like gay pride parades and distinct "gay culture" would only have a negative effect on society.

I don't see why, even in a future socialist state where homophobia has been eliminated entirely, we would ignore queer struggle in history anymore than we would ignore things like the civil rights movement, the fight for women's rights, Apartheid, etc. And for those who want to take history classes more advanced than something like HIS 101, LGBT movements would be one of many aspects of history a class could focus on.

How exactly do you think history should be taught? :confused:

Anyway, do you really think that anti-homosexual thoughts will simply "die out" in society if we just ignore them?

[Invader Zim]

Don't forget Alan Turing! Where would we be without the father of mondern computer science who managed to kick some nazi ass along the way.

The problem with this is that it doesn't progress the study of either the history of technology, intelligence history, the history of the British Home Front or LGBT history any further. Simply, stating that 'X' clever bloke who did 'Y' was gay doesn't tell us anything. Far more important would be to contextualise sexuality in class and gender terms.

For instance, Alan Turing's sexuality was not a secret to the authorities in the Second World War, and neither was that of some of his colleagues at Bletchley Park (such as Angus Wilson). And nor would it have been at Cambridge University, which in fact had a notable queer subculture (which in some respects was transferred to Bletchley Park). Therefore, if you were a young middle class academic from an elite ancient university, what you did in bed was ignored. However, if you were a woman in the Women's Services (such as the Women's Auxiliary Air Force), working at Bletchley Park and further afield, and it was discovered that you were a lesbian then you would be fired. That tells us far more about WW2 attitudes towards, gender, sexuality and class than simply noting that Turing was gay.

And that is the problem with a lot of school level history, when it comes to dealing with minority groups, it just boils down to "This bloke was gay, and look what he achieved."; and that is invariably what would happen if LBGT history was placed on the current history curriculum. Like 'black history' currently is, it would be a load of rubbish. Not, of course, that I would oppose placing it on the curriculum, just that the way they are built at the moment pisses me off.

[cynicles]

I wasn't trying to suggest that an LGBT history class be taught like that just adding a name to the list. I think most LGBT history is told in the reductive pure identity politics manner as a result of the liberalization of the gay rights movement in the 90's when in shifted from the left to the right.

[wsg1991]

having few lessons about human rights history is a good idea

[Peoples' War]

When a class covers civil rights, in any subject -- history, social studies, english, etc. -- it should be mandatory.

Yes, there should be an optional class for it as well.

[thriller]

I personally would love a LGBTQ History class as an optional class. Not only because I am gay, but because I love history, and would love to learn about gay activists and such. Would you like to have this as an optional class, or elective?

I assume you mean for high school? The college I attend has a LGBT Literature class, which I'm sure deals a little with history. I would assume bigger universities would have such a class (I attend a vocational school). For high school: that's an excellent idea, but good luck. The LGBTQ's still can't marry in most of the U.S., it's going to be awhile until the PTA allows something like "that" to go unnoticed.

[Eagle_Syr]

I don't see why, even in a future socialist state where homophobia has been eliminated entirely, we would ignore queer struggle in history anymore than we would ignore things like the civil rights movement, the fight for women's rights, Apartheid, etc. And for those who want to take history classes more advanced than something like HIS 101, LGBT movements would be one of many aspects of history a class could focus on.

Indeed. What I am saying applies more to the existence of a "gay subculture" more than anything else - I don't see the point of it because it just creates more division, it focuses on one group.


How exactly do you think history should be taught?
Well, we definitely need more focus on world history because alot of people don't know a damn thing when it comes to world history, especially from ancient times.

And we need a class specifically for US Imperialism in the 19th and 20th centuries

And we need a class for the history of the communist movement; it can focus on the USSR, Germany, Cuba, etc


Anyway, do you really think that anti-homosexual thoughts will simply "die out" in society if we just ignore them?

I'm not saying to ignore them.

[MustCrushCapitalism]

More than the history. It's of vital importance to go over unscientific bullshit such as that it's "a choice" or "unnatural".

[MuscularTophFan]

Why not? There are gay children too you know. It's not like being gay is a case of the cooties.

More childern should learn who Bayard Rustin was.