From: owen@autodesk.com (D. Owen Rowley)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: Call/Fax/Write Fernandez
Date: 12 Dec 92 04:32:32 GMT

In article <1g7nnpINNhqt@hp-col.col.hp.com>, smithw@col.hp.com (Walter Smith) writes:
> chuck@fourier.ssd.kodak.com (Charles S. Collins 726-9461) writes:
>>The purpose of this curiculum is not to promote homosexuality.  The curriculum
>>is intended to extend the definition of family to include all the families
>>served by the school district.  A growing number of these families are headed
>>by two adult partners of the same sex.

> A couple of thoughts: Are there any figures as to how many of these families
> are headed by two adult partners of the same sex?  

another thought Walter, whats more important *one* individual child living
in a nightmare of hiding the reality of their own home situation, or the
ratio you ask for.

> And can you see where 
> those who view sex as an issue of morality may have a problem with their 
> kids being taught that a family with 2 mothers and no father is a normal 
> family?  

Oh I can see that you have a problem, what I wonder is can you see the
problem with how you see our familys and your desire to teach yet another
generation that we are not normal.

>>These children quite naturally feel as though
>>they don't belong in their school community. They are alienated by the fact
>>that their reality doesn't match the standard taught at school.

> I can see where that would be a real problem.  
 
I'm starting to think that perhaps you are not being completely
forthcoming about why you are engaging in this discourse.
You have come to this forum with claims of wanting to learn, but some things
you say seem.... odd. Are yu playing Good-cop to Claytons Bad-cop?

could you elaborate on this answer and tell us just waht problems you see,
and whose problems they are?

Perhaps you'd like to offer us your thoughts on how you would remedy the
.. *problems*.

> > And regarding religous beliefs, why don't the Protestant families protest
> > when books about the Pope are included in the school curriculum?  What about
> > the many books depicting religious practices around the world?  Shouldn't 
> > God-fearing Christians demand that they be removed from the shelves?

>I've never seen/heard of books about the Pope in school curriculem.  As for 
>books about other religions,I imagine there are those "God-fearing Christians" 
> that *do demand that they be removed.  I also suspect that they are a distinct
> minority.  (I hope)  But from what I've gathered talking to other parents (I'm
> a parent) this idea of teaching homosexual families as normal is more 
> objectionable than either of the other 2 examples cited. 

This is one of those *odditys* I refer to.?
What can be objectionable about accepting the simple concept that what
occurs in nature is natural?
What can be the harm ?
It seems to me that this is only objectionable or seen as potentially
harmfull if you believe the stereotypical junk about homosexuals recruiting
your children? 
Teaching that queers exist in our world and that this is a normal variation
of the way people relate and live is not going to turn a stryt oriented kid
queer. Not teaching that queers exist in our world and that this is a normal
variation of the way people relate and live is not going to turn your queer
oriented kid strayt.

Of course if you believe that all the queers who tell you that this is their
intrinsic nature are lying to you, I don't know what else we can say !

If I'm on the wrong track about your motives and you are just really having
a hard time groking some of thse simple concepts please give me some
indication that you are willing and ready to delve into this issue in 
a meaningfull way. 


Jojo's posting said it an eloquent fashion that is the best article 
I've seen in this forum.. period.
read it and read it again. Rarely will you have the oportunity to 
have such deep level ascii based communication.
Jojo is one of our treasures.
Truly a son that a daddy could be proud of :-)

> > I believe the bottom-line here is that the adults who are protesting the
> > "Rainbow" curriculum are afraid that their children may be persuaded to
> > become homosexual or that homosexuality may threaten the survival of
> > families.  This is not rational.  This is homophobia.  And homophobia
> > hurts everyone.
 
> This is where I got lost.  If I dont want my daughter to be homosexual,
> I'm homophobic?  That word seems to have little meaning, instead serving 
> as a politically-correct-buzzword.  As for threatening the survival of 
> families, I'm not sure what you are driving at. 

I totally agree that the buzzword homophobia is overused, but its an
insidious thing this cultural angst about queers.
In our society , homophobia is institutionalised. It appears to be the 
*normal* state of things. But its really denial of the basic nature of 
part of the population, it might even be denial of a basic part of 
nature of the entire population.

You are responding to what you feel is a charge of overt homophobia, you
apparently don't feel that you are overtly being homophobic.
You don't perceive the homophobia the way people who live in St Augustine 
don't smell the rotting marsh grass, it is too familiar to you.

Don't take it as a charge, take it under advisement and think about it.

I understand that you don't want your daughter to be a lesbian, but your
*wanting* or *not wanting* is not going to effect the reality of whether she
is or isn't. However Your *not wanting* is going to effect her, and in a
negative way if the reality is that she is a lesbian. 
Its also gonna affect her social relity regarding other women who are
lesbians. Some of us would like to see the end of that cycle.

Not wanting her to be a lesbian reflects your negative emotional response
to the idea of homosexuality, ideas that are based on social taboo and 
culturaly ingrained discrimination. it *is* a phobia in that sense.
I don't think you are a conscious homophobe like Dannemyer and Sheldon,
but some of my peers here in soc.motss don't know how to distinguish
between the two forms of that particular malady. Frankly many of us are 
just bloody well sick and tired of it, and don't care if strayt folks get
bent over being on the recieving end of grief for a change.



LUX ./. owen

--
D. Owen Rowley {uunet,fernwood,sun}!autodesk!owen

  " It will be a cold March 17th that I celebrate the imposition of
	Romes rule, on Pagan Ireland. Erin go ppphhhhhttttttt! "