LGBTTQ* Parenting

“Oct 1993 Two male flamingos in Rotterdam zoo, which have been in a loving relationship for years, are raising a chick hatched from a fertilized egg given to them by zoo keepers who felt sorry for them after their repeated attempts to steal the eggs from female flamingos.” (Donald, 2003).

Being a mother and having a father who is gay has given me an interest in the issues of Social Policy and LGBTTQ* parenting.  Parenting is an amazing thing and you will never understand just how great it can be until you actually are one.  Most people grow up knowing they want to have a child of their own, it seems to be the natural order of things that once you are an adult you find someone to settle down with and have children.  Then there are some people like me who try not to let society determine their fate and really never thought it was necessary to have children, what did I know I was a selfish teenager.  Then one day I was blessed with the most meaningful thing in my life, the birth of my daughter, and got something I never knew I needed.  I know the feeling of fulfilment in my life from having a child and I would never want to deprive someone of that opportunity.  So in an attempt to defy science, because yes biologically you need a man and a woman to reproduce, LGBTTQ* men and women have found other ways to have children together to fulfil, in my opinion, a basic human need of having a family.  There are many women looking to have artificial insemination (AI) so her and her partner can have a child together or many men and women who would like to adopt the children their partners have from previous relationships and then there is always the option of LGBTTQ* couples to together adopt children to raise (Tasker, 2010).  Sounds like some good options but oh wait unfortunately the world is cursed with people unlike me who think it is perfectly fine to enable such individuals to have a family.  Shocker, there has been a struggle for the LGBTTQ* community to engage in these options with Doctors refusing to perform AI on lesbian couples and laws that prohibit LGBTTQ* people to adopt or even become a foster parent (Donald, 2003).  The community has yet again not gone down without a fight and law suits along with the help of social democratic ideologies have led to changes in these laws.

If there is any government to LGBTTQ* community can turn to for help in my opinion it would be a social democratic one.  Social democracy believes in social justice and social change (Mullaly, 2007) and that is exactly what this issue needs, justice for those couples who want to have a family but cannot and a change in not only the laws but of the people who look down on LGBTTQ* parenting.  Social democrats believe in equality of condition regardless of your social status (Mullaly, 2007) so regardless of being LGBTTQ* or straight everyone should have the same opportunities to have a family.  This ideology believes that the government needs to do whatever it can to promote equality and social justice (Mullaly, 2007) and in areas of the country where there are influences of social democracy that is exactly what is being done.  There are many examples all over the world of these changes but our focus is on Canada and I found many law changes in our country alone on promoting LGBTTQ* parenting.  Ontario now allows lesbian and gay parents to take parental leave even if the child is not their own but they consider the child to be theirs based on the relationship they are in (Donald, 2003).  A study published by the Adoption Council of Canada recommended that whether you are single, married, heterosexual, or homosexual you should be eligible to adopt (Donald, 2003).  The first to go ahead with this recommendation was the BC NDP government which made it policy for same sex couples to be allowed to adopt; which was then followed by Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba and the North West Territories (Donald, 2003).  As of today same sex adoption is legal in 9 provinces and 1 territory.  BC also allows same sex couples the right to child support and the BC human rights council has fined a gynaecologist $3000 for refusing AI on a lesbian couple (Donald, 2003).  As well a fertility clinic in Ottawa has changed policy to allow lesbian couples to AI (Donald, 2003).  And In Toronto lesbians, gays, and bisexuals are able to become foster parents (Donald, 2003).  There have been great improvements but the fact that AI for lesbians and same sex adoption is still not accepted everywhere in Canada is unacceptable to me.  Maybe people with ignorant views on LGBTTQ* parenting just need to be educated and informed then maybe they will realize that there is no point in fighting it.  Besides why are people so worried about LGBTTQ* parenting is it really hurting anyone are these people really just looking out for the children?

I would love to inform these people that in fact children who grow up with same sex couples have substantially better relationships with their parents then children with heterosexual parents (Tasker, 2010).  If these people are looking out for the children then wouldn’t they be encouraging same sex parenting?  Tasker states some factors as to why this may be which include the fact that same sex parents want to protect their children from “homonegativity” so they provide a more warm and nurturing love and the fact that same sex couples plan to have children, it will never be an accident, so they are more prepared for the role of parenting (2010).  There have been many studies on lesbian families; one has shown that they provided equal or greater time spent with their children, parenting skills, and warmth and affection (Biblarz & Savci, 2010).  It has also been found that children of same sex couples to have no differences in the quality of relationships they have or the number of friends they have, no difference in depression levels or age of having sex (Biblarz & Savci, 2010).  So again I ask why this is even an issue, if there are no differences and if certain aspects are even better in same sex parenting then we should make it legal everywhere; there should not be a silly pointless law in the way of someone being a parent.  I know from experience that my father’s sexuality had no impact on whether he was there for me or was not and I see many heterosexual couples that should not be allowed to be parents but they are and there is nobody stopping them. I believe in equality for everyone so hopefully I have reached out to someone somewhere either educating the misinformed or letting someone know I support you and that changes have been made and we will always fight for more. 

Parenting resources for LGBTTQ* families can be found on the Canadian Rainbow Health Coalition (CRHC) website which “is a community-based movement dedicated to improving the emotional, physical, spiritual and mental health and wellness of people who have experienced significant inequities based on our sexual orientation and/or gender identity” (CRHC’s Mission Statement).

Peace and Love

Brittany

References:

Biblarz, T., & Savci, E. (2010). Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Families. Journal of Marriage and Family, 72, 480-497. DOI:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2010.00714.x

CRHC’s Mission Statement (2011). Retrieved October 25, 2011, from http://www.rainbowhealth.ca/english/whatis.html

Donald, C. M. (2003). Adoption Parenting Issues for Lesbians, Gay men, and Bisexuals. Retrieved from http://www.clgro.org/pdf/Adoption_and_Parenting.pdf

Mullaly, R. (2007). The New Structural Social Work (3^rd ED). Don Mills, ON: Oxford University Press.

Shepherd, H. (May, 22). Did You Hear The One About The Gay Flamingos And Their Adopted Chick? [Photograph]. Retrieved from http://www.hilaryshepherd.com/rantsnraves/2007/05/22/gay-flamingos-adopt-chick/  

Tasker, F. (2010). Same sex Parenting and Child Development: Reviewing the Contribution of Parental Gender. Journal of Marriage and Family, 72, 35-40. DOI:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2009.00681.x

NDP stands in solidarity with LGBTTQ* community

The NDP or the New Democratic Party of Canada is a left leaning group on the political spectrum.  This socially democratic party has always been recognized for their support of minority groups within our nation.  This included members of the LGBTTQ* group whom often struggle to find a place in our society where their needs are met and basic rights are acknowledged and achieved.  We live in a nation where there is growing support for members of this group, and the social democrats are the fundamental believers who promote freedom and equality.  According to Mullaly, “social democrats believe that a reduction in inequalities reduces feelings of isolation or alienation and creates a greater sense of belonging or social cohesion” (Mullaly, 2007,).  They advocate co-operation, acceptance, and freedom and strive to eliminate policies and belief systems that encourage oppression and exclusion.  The New Democratic Party of Canada has been very vocal in their support of the gay community. “Happy Pride!” states Jack Layton, the late leader of the NDP party, back in June.  “As Pride celebrations take place across Canada, I am proud to stand in solidarity with members of the gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgendered and transsexual communities, along with all my New Democrat colleagues.” (NDP.ca, 2011) In this statement, Layton acknowledges the importance of pride festivals, claiming that they promote awareness to the public regarding members of the LGBTTQ* who still face discrimination and violence to this day.  He also acknowledges an incentive to reintroduce Bill Siksay’s Transgender Rights bill.  This bill was reintroduced by NDP LGBTT critic, Randall Garrison, and it firmly gives Transgendered and Transsexual Canadians rights under the Human Rights Act, as well as protection against hate-crimes under the provision of the Criminal Code (Dale Smith, Xtra.ca, 2011).  These policies fall in line with typical social democratic ideologies where “working within the parliamentary system and achieving socialism through democratic and evolutionary change” (Mullaly, 2007,) is the answer to societal issues.

 Another example of trying to change and implement policies within the system is the rise of the Purple Letter Campaign which focuses on developing gender and sexual orientation policies in schools in British Colombia.  The BC NDP party is in full support of this policy because they promote the rights of individuals in the LGBTTQ* community. Even Layton himself has spoken on behalf of his party in support of Anti-Bullying Day, addressing bullying within schools as a serious issue that is in need of public recognition (NDP.ca, 2011). Despite the fact that MLAs from both the NDP and Liberal parties have agreed to sit down with the campaign organizers of the Purple Letter Campaign, they have recieved explicit support from the NDP party, whereas the Liberal party has expressed "quiet support" (Moreau, 2011).  This explicit support from the NDP is consistent with their ideology, which promotes equality of condition and are therefore more active in intorducing policies such as these.  The Liberal party, however, is inclined to promote equal opportunity, which lies more in the hands of the individual, hence their "quiet support" of this campaign.

I would say that it’s obvious where the NPD party stands in terms of their goals to change policies to include and protect the rights of LGBTTQ* members, and I commend them for their unwavering support. I hope they continue to campaign for the rights of LGBTTQ* members, as well as other minority groups. We’ll miss you, Jack Layton.

  -   Julia

References:

Dale Smith (Sept, 2011). Trans bill reintroduced in House of Commons, Xtra!.ca. Retrieved from: http://www.xtra.ca/public/National/Trans_bill_reintroduced_in_House_of_Commons-10807.aspx

Jack Layton (June, 2011). Statement from New Democrat leader Jack Layton on Pride, New Democratic Party of Canada, Retrieved from: http://www.ndp.ca/press/statement-from-new-democrat-leader-jack-layton-on-pride

Jack Layton (Feb, 2011). Statement from New Democrat leader Jack Layton on Anti-Bullying Day, New Democratic Party of Canada, Retrieved from: http://www.ndp.ca/press/statement-by-new-democrat-leader-jack-layton-on-anti-bullying-day-0

Moreau, Jennifer (September 16, 2011). Activist launches 'purple' campaign: Hopes to see all schools, including private ones, adopt gay-positive policies. Retrieved from: http://www.burnabynow.com/life/Activist+launches+purple+campaign/5411698/story.html

Mullaly, R. P., (2007). The new structural social work (3^rd Ed.). Don Mills, ON: Oxford University Press

Image from: http://www.glaaforum.org/glaa_forum/2011/08/ndp-leader-jack-layton-dies-in-canada.html

Who is in favour of supporting the LGBTTQ* community? The Social Democrats are!

 

Social democrats (as opposed to those who hold a conservative or a liberal ideology), are a political group who are supportive of LGBTTQ* groups. For those who are not a member of this group, one can only imagine what LGBTTQ* group members are faced with. One thing people can do is educate themselves and others on the issues that affect sexual minorities and provide them with support, resources and acceptance. Sexual minorities have come a long way in their fight for acceptance, as well as community supports. One belief held by social democrats is that human beings are social beings and that we all need social supports from our community in order to achieve our full potential (Mullaly, 2007).

In order for LGBTTQ* groups to further thrive in our Canadian society, an increase in social policies needs to continue. As a result, I believe this will moreover increase our societies acceptance of LGBTTQ* groups. Social democrats (although it has been a struggle) have attempted to do so by implementing social policies that would benefit sexual minority groups. Mishna,  Newman, Daley & Solomon (2009), contend that “change should be implemented in families, schools, religious institutions, social policies and laws to combat sexual prejudice and to provide... [sexual minorities with]... supportive environments...” (p.1608). Mishna et. al. (2009) suggest  implementing an “inclusive school curricula, beginning in kindergarten, with a focus on accept[ing]... and... appreciating difference, reinforced by support throughout the school” and a “school policies that incorporate zero tolerance for queer bulling” (p. 1606). In order for such polices to be successful in the school setting, the school staff would require training to support LGBTTQ* groups and other students who may have a negative view of sexual minorities (Mishna et. al., 2009). In addition, Mullaly (2007) would agree with the thought of equality for LGBTTQ* groups because it is one of the values held by social democrats that “social services” should meet the needs of society “to the fullest extent possible” (p. 128).

In a country that is believed to pride on its acceptance of diversity, why not also be a country that prides itself of LBGTTQ* groups as part of their uniqueness? A goal of social democrats is to have a society that is accepting of sexual minorities and take steps forward to diminish the “sources of injustice and oppression” (Mullaly, 2007, p. 122) encountered by sexual minorities. A positive step in this direction was displayed in recent months in Burnaby, British Columbia, in which a policy was passed – this displayed acceptance toward LGBTTQ* groups in the school setting. According to the Centre for Civic Governance is an initiative of the Columbia Institute (June 18, 2011), “the “Burnaby School Board unanimously passed policy 5.45, Sexual Orientation/Gender Identity. The policy... [is]...intended to address the diversity within schools and to create an atmosphere of respect and safety.”  A supporter of this policy, Larry Hayes (Board Chair) commented that “[w]e believe this policy will help to foster respect, acceptance and understanding in our schools-and our community” (The Centre for Civic Governance is an initiative of the Columbia Institute, June 18, 2011).

Although there has been an increase in social policies that support sexual minorities, socialists are aware that gaps are still prominent that continue to affect LGBTTQ* groups – these gaps need to be filled. Studies have shown that LGBTTQ* groups are more likely than heterogeneous groups to have more social and psychological issues (Travers, Guta, Flicker, Larkin, Lo,  McCardell, Meulen, and The Toronto Teen Survey Team, 2010). Social service providers are  well aware of some of the issues affecting sexual minority groups and as a result, they have made recommendations on how to embark upon such issues (Travers et. al., 2010).  One of the recommendations provided by Travers et. al. (2010) is that staff need to be trained on issues affecting LGBTTQ* groups so they are better equipped to provide support and resources. Moreover, social policies need to further support  sexual minorities in order to provide them with a more promising future.

I believe that once societies are able to fully accept LGBTTQ* groups, LGBTTQ* groups will be better able to contribute their talents and abilities to society and the social and psychological issues many continue to endure will be narrowed. Mullaly (2007) suggests in order for this to occur, we need to form a collectivist society in that we must elect social democratic governments. Social democrats have my vote, where do you stand?

Stephanie M.

References

Mishna, F., Newman, P. A., Daley, A., & Solomon, S. (2009). Bullying of lesbian and gay youth: A qualitative investigation. The British Journal of Social Work, 39, 1598–1614. doi:10.1093/bjsw/bcm148

Mullaly, R. (2007). The new structural social work ( 3rd ed.). Don Mills, ON: Oxford University Press.

Polaski, A. (2011, January 27). LGBT groups are approaching gay curricula the wrong way [photograph]. The Good Men Project. Retrieved from http://goodmenproject.com/newsroom/lgbt-groups-are-approaching-gay-curriculums-the-wrong-way/

The Centre for Civic Governance is an initiative of the Columbia Institute. (June 18, 2011). Anti-homophobia and discrimination policy unanimously passes at Burnaby School Board meeting. Retrieved from http://www.civicgovernance.ca/resources/1380

Travers, R., Guta, A., Flicker, S., Larkin, J., Lo, C., McCardell, S., Meulen, E. V. D., & The Toronto Teen Survey Team (2010). Service provider views on issues and needs for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered youth. The Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality. 19(4), p. 191-198.

Stay out of my bedroom, Harper!

The above video shows Stephen Harper speaking in April, 2005. “Your beliefs, your values, our values are the real Canadian values,” he proclaims at an anti-gay marriage rally, in Ottawa. "And you know my position; you know the position of the Conservative Party of Canada. When elected Prime Minister at the next election, we will bring in legislation that defines marriage as the union between one man and one woman."  That said, it’s clear where Stephan Harper, our Prime Minister and leader of the Conservative Party of Canada, stands with regards to same-sex marriage and the rights of all members of the LGBTTQ* community.  It’s also clear that Harper has no hesitation indicating that the Conservative Party of Canada represents and reinforces this belief as a whole.  This lends to the possibility that there is an incentive to incorporate this way of thinking into social policy now that that the Conservative Party holds a majority position of government.  While same-sex couples have had access to marriage since 2005 and he claims that he will not re-open the debate about same-sex marriage (CTV.ca News Staff, 2006), Harper has repeatedly voted against it.  As infuriating as this belief system is, it doesn’t come as much of a surprise, given that this is part of the typical neo-conservative ideology, which tends to express blatant opposition to gay rights, women’s, and human rights movements (Mullaly, 2007).  Neo-conservatives tend to place much emphasis on “the return to the value norms of the traditional two-parent family and to traditional male and female roles” (Mullaly, 2007). So where does that leave those who lie outside of these “traditional” norms? Given that they believe that the ideal society is “hierarchal, patriarchal, authoritarian, and inequitable” (Mullaly, 2007) and that the Church should act as a moral basis of thinking and behaving (Mullaly, 2007), members of LGBTTQ* (as well as other minority) groups don’t stand much of a chance in achieving a comparable level of social status as say, your typical white, middle-class, heterosexual male.  As homosexuality is becoming more and more socially acceptable, many groups and organizations are taking initiative to promote tolerance, acceptance, and fight for the safety and rights of members of LGBTTQ* groups. However, given that the conservative ideology “decries the progressive changes that have come about from such social movements as feminism, gay and lesbian rights, and multiculturalism” (Mullaly, 2007), this would make it very hard for activists to fight for equality in a conservative society. Allow me to emphasize that pretty much all of these members of the LGBTTQ* group are hardworking, law-abiding, taxpayers who contribute to the economy like anyone else outside of this group.  The only difference is what we do behind closed doors. Uh, seriously? There are also many studies that suggest that LGBTTQ* partnerships are very much the same as heterosexual relationships, in that they fall in love the same way, and experience the same passions, desires, insecurities, and commitment levels as heterosexual partnerships do (Baeccman, Folkesson, & Norlander,1999). According to Mullaly, the ‘Moral Majority’ – the religious, right-wing population of North American, is the foundation of the neo-conservative ideology (Mullaly, 2007). Literal interpretations of the bible have influenced the beliefs of people who adhere to the Catholic Church regarding their attitude towards sexual minorities.  One study has found that 75 per cent of Christian religions ‘condemn homosexuals and homosexuality in the eyes of god’(Rodriguez & Ouellette, 2000). 

Many conservative think tanks, policy makers, and politicians undermine the issue of gay rights and protection laws by claiming that homosexuality is a choice.  For example, take the comments made by John Cummins, the future leader of B.C.’s Conservative Party on Victoria’s CFAX radio, where he claimed that homosexuality is a conscious choice and is no need of protection under B.C.’s Human Rights Act (CBC.ca News Staff, 2011). Now, I’m sure I’m not the only one who finds this unsettling. We pride ourselves as a nation that is accepting and inclusive, but when we have politicians that support an ideology that contradicts this idea, then what kind of future do we make available for those who are considered to be undeserving of certain rights? Despite the fact that John Cummins holds power at a provincial level, not federal, do we have a reason to fear that we may lose the rights that we’ve fought so hard to achieve? Will we move backwards if those who hold these beliefs succeed to indoctrinate the voting majority that we are not entitled to the same protection and human rights as everyone else? I think it’s definitely worth thinking about and discussing.  Now, click the link below if you want to watch Harper squirm as he listens to a young lady’s rendition of Lady Gaga’s “Born This Way”. Enjoy!

http://unicornbooty.com/blog/2011/05/02/girl-sings-born-this-way-to-ultra-conservative-canadian-pm-stephen-harper/

Julia

References:

Baeccman, C., Folkesson, P., & Norlander T., (1999). Expectations of romantic relationships: A comparison between homosexual and heterosexual men with regard to Baxter's criteria. Social Behaviour and Personality, 27, 363-374

CBC.ca News Staff (May,2011). Sexual orientation rights questioned by B.C. Tory. CBC News. Retrieved from http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2011/05/12/bc-john-cummins-gay-rights.html

CTV.ca News Staff (2006). Harper declares same-sex marriage issue closed. CTV News. Retrieved from http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories/20061207/samesexmarriage_vote_061207/

Mullaly, R. P. (2007). The new structural social work (3^rd Ed.). Don Mills, ON: Oxford University Press

Rodriguez, E.M. and Ouellette, S.C. (2000) Gay and lesbian Christians: homosexual and religious identity integration in the members and participants of a gay-positive church. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 39(3), 333-47.

Neo-conservatism vs. The LGBTTQ* community?

If we were to search for the word “conservatism” in the dictionary, the definition would come as “the disposition to preserve or restore what is established and traditional and to limit change” (Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictonary, 1983).Which is indeed the core principle of neo-conservatism: to conserve existing things.
The LGBTTQ* have organized themselves to fight for the equality and the justice they deserve for many years. However with gay rights activists come gay-rights opponents and the issue of homosexuals’ rights has turned into a controversial, legal battle, which to this day is still fought all over the globe. Neo-conservatives are a great example of gay-rights opponents. They believe that the LGBTTQ* community should have their rights taken away for a variety of reasons.
Firstly, it comes as no surprise that the topic of homosexuality is one that causes controversy for neo-conservatives. Mullaly (2007) wrote “neo-conservatives prefer to maintain traditional institutions and processes, which should only be modified with extreme caution”(p.70). In other words, neo-conservatives prefer to keep things the way they are, and believe change should be slow and evolutionary. Therefore this has put them in opposition to increasing the cultural acceptance and legal rights of homosexuals. 
The legalisation of same-sex marriage was a radical step forward for Canada, it being the fourth country to do so. Of course, the Conservative government wasn’t pleased about it, and so they tried to re-examine the issue, by having a free vote, still they were defeated. Hence why “on December 7 ,2006, the House of Commons effectively reaffirmed the legislation of same-sex marriage by a vote of 175 to 123, defeating the Conservative governments motion.” (The New YorkTimes,2005).
According to Mullaly (2007) “neo-conservatism believes that the traditional, heterosexual, married couple with children is the cornerstone of society” In other words, neoconservatives believe that the traditional family is the basic building block of society and same-sex marriages aren’t  part of societies norm. They believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman.
Mullaly(2007) wrote  neo-conservatism “accommodates the religious right with its literal interpretations of the bible” and that neoconservatives “have strong views on sin and reject non-Christian values” (P. 79). Therefore one could say that Neo-conservatives have faith based beliefs.
Neo-conservatives interpret passages from the bible literally and they believe that these passages are instructive in today’s society.(Mullaly p.79).  As a result because homosexuality is considered sinful in the bible, they also believe it to be sinful. Some neoconservatives go as far as to believe that homosexuality is a chosen, abnormal and changeable lifestyle which is hated by God. 
 Often, Neo-conservatives can even express hostility towards same-sex relationships (Mullaly, p.79) Examples of unfriendliness towards homosexuals can be demonstrated by Conservative leader and Current Prime Minister Stephen Harper.  The party leader went to anti-gay rallies during the same-sex marriage debate before it was made legal, and declared “we can win this fight”. (The National, 2005)
Harper has also been quoted for stating: 

“Regarding sexual orientation or, more accurately, what we are really talking about, sexual behaviour, the argument has been made ... that this is analogous to race and ethnicity.... (For) anyone in the Liberal party to equate the traditional definition of marriage with segregation and apartheid is vile and disgusting."

Harper’s previously mentioned quote demonstrates a view on the LGBTTQ* community that many other Neo-conservatives seem to share. When he states that sexual orientation is essentially promiscuous sexual behaviour, he is saying that one is not born homosexual, but that they choose to be.
In conclusion, Neo-conservative views towards homosexuals can be at times hostile and controversial. However thanks to other ideologies (such as liberalism) same-sex marriage has been legalised for almost a decade. While there are still individuals in our Canadian society who view homosexuality as deviant or sinful and have trouble accepting it; homosexuality is no longer a sinful practice to admit to.
                                                      

References

·         Boag, K. (2005, June 15). CBC News Indepth: Evangelism. CBC.ca - Canadian News Sports Entertainment Kids Docs Radio TV. Retrieved October 17, 2011, from http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/evangelical/

o   Llewellyn, W. (1983). Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary . USA : Merriam-Webster Inc. .

·         Mullaly, R. P. (2007). The new structural social work (3rd ed.). London: Oxford University Press.

o   Canada passes bill to legalize gay marriage - The New York Times. (2005, June 29). NY Times Advertisement. Retrieved October 16, 2011, from http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/29/world/americas/29iht-web.0629canada.html

A Neo-Conservative Perspective on Sexual Minorities in the School Setting

The above youtube link provides a video narrate by Jazmine Khan a transgender individual who provides a positive commentary on how the a program called Out in Schools  has provided him and many other sexual minorities with an easier “coming out” transition and a support system. The OIS program is a high school outreach program that uses video presentations and workshops to engage youth and educators on the issues related to homophobia and violence. The purpose of the program is to promote safer and more diverse communities that are free from discrimination and bullying (Out in Schools, 2010).  He also contends that Culture Guard a neo-conservative advocacy group has posted a video on their website claiming the OIS program is not about anti-bullying but is a program that exposes students to homosexual pornography.

The ideological views of the neo-conservatives are far from accepting the equalization of the LGBTTQ groups because it violates their traditional beliefs and values. Neo-conservatives are known to abide by the doctrine of the Bible, so they believe in a societal foundation of “the traditional, heterosexual, married couple with children...” (Mullaly, 2007, p. 75). As a result of their beliefs, attempts have been made to stop the development of social policies and programs in schools that support LGBTTQ groups.

Attempts have been made by people in the media to stop the OIS school program from entering schools in Vancouver, B.C.  For example, Culture Guard president Kari Simpson had made an attempt to get the media and police involved in shutting down an Out in School s program (Barsotti, September 14, 2011). Kari Simpson, in a recent news paper article, made many accusations about the program in which she claimed it is a waste of taxpayers’ money and “introduce[s] children into homosexist politics and pornography” (Barsotti, September 14, 2011). Mullaly (2007) suggests that when neo-conservatives feel like their status quo is being threatened by social democratic groups (in this case, the implementation of anti-homogenous programs in schools), they will exercise their power in an attempt to prevent this from happening. Fortunately, Kari Simpson’s attempts to bring the program to a standstill were unsuccessful, in which a police spokesperson commented, “this is the first I’ve heard of it” (Barsotti, September 14, 2011).

In Xtra Canada's  Gay and Lesbian News, Barsotti (September 14, 2011) interviewed Out on Screen executive director Drew Dennis, who stated that “[t]he Out in Schools teachers learning resource guide includes student work units and meets Ministry of Education prescribed learning outcomes...” and “[t]eachers have a lot of confidence in our presentations, and we’re only showing age-appropriate films in the high schools”. Regardless of the video created by Kari Simpson, many people - colleagues, families, funders - are still in support of the OIS programs being implemented in schools.  They believe the program has shown to have a positive impact on students, especially sexual minorities (Barsotti, September 14, 2011). 

According to Mullaly (2007), the social ideological belief of neo-conservatism is that “the role of the state is to provide law and order... it does not interfere in the economy by... helping the unsuccessful” (p. 80). The neo-conservatives are against revolutionary adjustments to their view on traditional society, in which they hold a preference to sustain their values and beliefs – otherwise societal change is proceeded with “extreme caution” (Mullaly, 2007, p. 70). An example of exclusivity was witnessed within my First Nations community, as a counsellor attempted to implement a social policy that would  ban gay people from entering the reserve - whether the individual was from the reserve or not. This Neo-conservative belief was quickly put to rest in a band meeting by another counsellor and community members. The community member proceeded to state, “your daughter is gay, are you going to ban her from the reserve too?”

Neo-conservatives view the lifestyle of sexual minorities as immoral, in which this was displayed by the Coptic Churches in Toronto, Ontario. According to Toronto news reporters, Casey & Brown (August 5, 2011), the Toronto Catholic District School Board was to vote on an equity policy that would endorse equality for individuals who identified as LGBTTQ. In response to this vote, “[t]he Coptic church is threatening to pull its children from Toronto’s Catholic schools if the board goes ahead with its equity policy…” which in turn “could cost the board up to $40 million” (Casey & Brown, August 5, 2011). Further, Mullaly (2007) states that “the more [social] services the state provides, the more it weakens the traditional source of welfare... [such as] the family, and... the churches” (p. 85).

I believe the OIS programs should be implemented in schools because education is the key to understanding the experiences of sexual minority students. Social workers working in the school setting must advocate for the implementation of school prevention programs related to homophobia and violence. School social workers could also provide support to LGBTTQ students through such programs and provide supportive counselling services as needed. Programs such as OIS, would allow students to be more aware of the issues surrounding LGBTTQ groups. On the other hand, I feel that if the neo-conservatives have the ability to control the vision of the state, they also have the ability to influence social policies in school settings, and among many other social institutions, negatively impacting sexual minorities. If these social policies are implemented, sexual minorities will be further discriminated against and the efforts made by many who believe and continue to fight for the acceptance of LGBTTQ groups will be dismantled. I believe social policies should be put in place to allow LGBTTQ groups to reach their full potential as equals in our Canadian society.  

Stephanie M. 

References  

Barsotti, N. (2011), September 14). Simpson files police complaint against anti-homophobia program. Xtra. Canada’s Gay and Lesbian News. Retrieved from

http://www.xtra.ca/public/Vancouver/Simpson_files_police_complaint_against_antihomophobia_program-10757.aspx

Casey, L., & Brown, L. (2011, August 5). Coptic church threatens to withdraw students over gay policy. Toronto Star. Retrieved from http://www.parentcentral.ca/parent/education/article/1035498--coptic-catholics-threaten-to-withdraw-students-over-gay-policy

DU Queer and Ally Commission (2007). Safe zone definitions: Terms commonly associated with the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Intersex, Queer & Questioning communities. University of Illinois Springfield Safe Zone Program. Retrieved from http://www.du.edu/cme/pdf/DUstarterLGBTIQAterms.

Mullaly, R. (2007). The new structural social work ( 3rd ed.). Don Mills, ON: Oxford University Press.

Out in Schools ( 2010). Retrieved from http://www.outinschools.com

neoconservative ideologies will not help our LGBTTQ youth

A neoconservative government will hamper progressive movement for the LGBTTQ community.  They are not in support of same sex relationships and believe marriage should be between a man and a woman only (Mullaly, 2007).  They do not believe in equality and despise gay and lesbian rights movements (Mullaly, 2007).  If we want our children to grow up to feel free to be themselves and live in a world where everyone is treated equal, than in my opinion stay away from the Conservative party.  In my experience adolescence was a very vulnerable time full of insecurity and doubts, the experience of other LGBTTQ students seem to be the same.  Recent findings by Out In Schools, a program that teaches high school students about homophobia and violence, have stated that 34% of LGBTTQ youth have been threatened with violence at school, 17% have been assaulted, 71% have seriously considered suicide and 46% have even attempted it (Chau, 2011).  Luckily these victims of abuse are starting to speak up and demand help (Andre, Wells, Wells, 2007).  With many programs booming, such as Out In Schools, students may begin to be more accepting and if anything those who identify with LGBTTQ might start to feel comfortable and open about it.  There are many factors lying in the way of ending discrimination and discrimination may always be there but one way to help may be to not elect a Conservative government as they’ve shown no interest in helping the community.

These programs rely on funding and with a neoconservative ideology of less government spending on social programs they’re not the ones we will be able to turn to (Mullaly, 2007).  They believe that the individual is the problem and that nobody should help you but yourself (Mullaly, 2007).  They say that you must be mentally ill or a drug addict to have such problems (Mullaly, 2007) but it is the harassment of the LGBTTQ community that leads them use drugs and alcohol as a relief from the abuse (Andre et al, 2007).  It is not being an addict that led them to the problem but that the people who hold neo conservative ideologies about the LGBTTQ community may have pushed them to a mental illness such as depression which may direct them to substance abuse.  The way I see it is the neo conservatives are the problem not the people who are just trying to live the way they were born to.  I don’t think a neo conservative would ever understand this because of people like John Cummins, BC Conservative party leader, who said that “sexual orientation is a "choice issue" on a talk radio program on CFAX 1070 radio in Victoria, B.C.” (Chau, 2011).  You can imagine the outrage by the LGBTTQ community to hear that apparently they chose to go through this abuse like they chose to refer to themselves as LGBTTQ just so they could enjoy the discrimination that comes with it.  Since the induction of a Conservative government in 2006 there have been substantial budget cuts to equality programs such as Gay pride parades (Debra, 2001).  With a perspective of less government funding and a non-supportive view of the LGBTTQ community, programs to help them would not be very high on their list of things to do.


Fortunately, despite the Conservatives among us, many steps have been made to support the LGBTTQ community.  They include changes to Canadian laws and legislation for sexual minorities that require specific educational policies and practices (Andre et al, 2007).  Many groups and organizations have been founded that offer support and help with socializing, and self-esteem building for LGBTTQ youth (Andre et al, 2007).  A unique camp was developed in 2004 in Alberta called Camp FYrefly which is for those who are LGBTTQ between the ages of 14 to 24 (Andre et al, 2007).  This camp aims to build leadership in order to make positive changes in their lives (Andre et al, 2007).  There is a website managed by the Winnipeg Rainbow Resource Centre called HelpingOut that provides educational information helping students and teachers become aware about LGBTTQ issues (Andre et al, 2007).  Others across Canada include the Pink triangle services, supporting our youth, and the triangle school program just to name a few (Andre et al, 2007).  It seems that progress and changes are happening so let’s not ruin it by electing a conservative government.

Peace N Love

Brittany     

References:

Andre, P., Wells, C., Wells, G. (2007). Victims no more: Trends enabling resilience in sexual-minority students. Education for Social Justice: From the Margin to the Mainstream. Retrieved from
http://www.ctf-fce.ca/documents/Priorities/EN/pd/social_justice/SJC_BackgroundPapers_EN_web.pdf

Chau, C. (2011, May 27). LGBT organization: John Cummins "out of touch with reality". Vancouver Observer. Message posted to news: http://www.vancouverobserver.com/politics/2011/05/27/lgbt-organization-john-cummins-out-touch-reality%E2%80%9D?page=0,0

Debra. (2001). February 16, 2011. April Reign's blog: A weblog of human rights and politics.

Retrieved October 15, 2011, from http://aprilreign.breadnroses.ca/


Mullaly, B. (2007). The New Structural Social Work (3^rd Ed.). Don Mills, ON: Oxford University Press.

Unknown author. (2010). Harper’s new low: prorogation redux. [Photograph]. The trouble with

normal blog.

Neo-Conservative Views Fighting Rainbow Rights

                As part of the LGBTTQ* group, I’ve discovered it’s very difficult coming out during high school, there are no resources and absolutely no one to stand behind you and save you from the belittlement and ridicule you must suffer. In British Columbia, they have embarked on a rather large project so suitably named “Out in Schools”. This project is all about confronting the issues that surround homophobia and the ridicule the young participants of the LGBTTQ*group face every day. They are hoping to establish a safe place for those who suffer from neglect and are often mocked and to reach out to those who do not understand yet. (outinschools, 2011) They are now faced with a complaint due to a conservative anti-gay radio show host named Kari Simpson, who believes that there is more to the project than meets the eye. (slapupsidethehead, 2011)

                Kari Simpson truly believes that this project was established to “dupe parents and introduce children into homosexist politics and pornography, effectively recruiting children into a sexualized culture of porn and games of debauchery.” (slapupsidethehead, 2011) I personally find this incredibly offensive. The LGBTTQ* group has more often than not been antagonized, ignored and insulted. This program, will help the lives of so many members of the LGBTTQ* group that has yet to become an adult and because this program works, more will have the opportunity to become adults. Kari has tried to defend herself and her suspicion by simply announcing that she does not “hate gays” but that she, without prejudice, believes that this program will show pornography or encourage pornography and promote sexual activity with young adults. (cultureguard, 2011)          

                I believe this woman is fighting for something she believes in because it’s part of how she was raised and it very much leans towards a neo-conservative ideology. Mullaly said “that one of the beliefs is that traditional, heterosexual marriage with children is the cornerstone of society.” (Mullaly, 75) From my perspective, Kari, like many other neo-conservatives, assert their fundamental dissatisfaction for the LGBTTQ* group by reading as much fine print as possible and creating reservations and causing suspicion  in order to prevent growth in a program not unlike “Out in Schools.”  It takes a lot of courage to build up a program like this one and the LGBTTQ* group has suffered deeply over the years.   On the other hand, I am sure there are many people in society that wish to see this program fail, so we, as a society and as part of the LGBTTQ* group, must look and assume that one day that we will not have to fight for our right to have programs to support us.

Belinda

References:

Barsotti, Natasha. (September 14^th 2011). Simpson Files Police Complaint Against Anti-Homophobia Program. Retrieved from http://www.xtra.ca/public/Vancouver/Simpson_files_police_complaint_against_antihomophobia_program-10757.aspx

Johnstone, Ross. (2010). What is Out in Schools?. Retrieved from http://www.outinschools.com/content/What_is_Out_in_Schools_/1

Mullaly, R. (2007). The new structural social work (3^rd Ed.) Don Mills, ON: Oxford University Press

Unknown Author. (September 16^th2011). Conservative Radio Host Files Police Complaint Over School Anti-Homophobia Initiative. Retrieved from http://www.slapupsidethehead.com/2011/09/conservative-radio-host-files-police-complaint-over-school-anti-homophobia-initiative/ .

Webmaster. (September 13 2011). Video Part 2: Scammed, Swooned and Corrupted: The True Agenda of OUT IN SCHOOLS. Retrieved from www.cultureguard.com

Discrimination through Dismissal



The LGBTTQ* community has always been effected by discrimination within society due to differences in sexual orientation from that of the heterosexual norm. One example of this, in specific to the transgendered community, was presented at the Trails End Farmer’s Market, banning the employment of 3 transgendered employees from working at the vendors. This includes Dani Dominick and two others who have not released their names to the media. The owner of Trails End Farmer’s Market, Ed Kikkert, gave the vendor an ultimatum to remove the employee or do not set up the booth again at the market (AM980, 2011).  The reason given for this you might ask? Simply put, Dominick’s identity as a transgender made for a feeling of discomfort apparently brought to the market and the confusion as to which bathroom should be used (slapupsidethehead, 2011). The vendor owner, Karen Clarke who all three people were employed by, decided to stand behind her employee and did not reopen her booth.  A petition has been set up through www.change.org to spread the message to stop discrimination in the work place and raise awareness of the issues faced by LGBTTQ* community (AM980, 2011)

Society emits a certain acceptance for those outside of the heterosexual norm, but that acceptance only goes so far.  As stated in the CTV News clip by Dominick, the market does not have a problem with people from the transgender community shopping at the farmer’s market, just a problem with employing members of their community.  In my opinion, I view that in the similar way as the liberal ideology of social change, “liberals would make changes within the system rather than changes of the system – it would remain the same system” (Mullaly, 96).  Society has accepted that the LGBBTQ* community is not going anywhere and therefore is respected as a consumer, or a purchaser, but in all reality they are not ready to fully stand up in support of the community and back them up as employers.  While society may be warming up to the idea of the LGBTTQ* community being a part of society as whole they still have a long ways to go. Unfortunately, for the transgendered community, the idea of a man or woman feeling as though their physical genitalia does not match their gender identity is much more controversial and harder for society as a whole to be out right supportive.  This is how situations like that of the Trails End Farmer’s Market come to be.

I am not transgendered and I cannot pretend to understand the acts of discrimination they face daily.  We live in a diverse society which is unfortunately plagued by homophobia, preventing people from trying to understand a community that differs from the one they were brought up to see as true.  Taking the liberal stand point and accepting those differences is a good step in the right direction. However, until society is willing to make a drastic change in the system the problems that Dominick and LGBTTQ* community face will continue to stop at a mere petition to raise awareness instead of creating the necessary drive for social change. 

-Katelyn

References

AM 980. (2011). Trails end farmer's market removes transgendered employee. Retrieved from http://www.am980.com 
Mark. (2011). Farmer’s market removes trans employee. Retrieved from http://www.slapupsidethehead.com/ 
Mullaly, R. (2007). The new structural social work (3^rd Ed.) Don Mills, ON: Oxford University Press

Purple Letter Campaign: Liberalism and the LGBTTQ*

Bullying in junior high and high schools, particularly that of the LGBTTQ* community, has been gaining media and public attention recently. The good people of British Columbia have decided to take the issue into their own hands.  All over the province people are sharing their stories of encouragement and support, and it’s as simple as putting a letter in a purple mailbox.  It’s called the Purple Letter Campaign; the goal is to make schools safer for LGBTTQ* students and staff.  The letters will be delivered to BC’s premiere and minister of education (slapupsidethehead, 2011).  BC schools have no institutionalized policy regarding gay bullying.  A quick Google search later and I’m unable to find any such existing policy in Winnipeg school divisions either.  Supporters of the campaign want province wide sexual orientation and gender identity policy for schools (Purple Letter Campaign, 2011). This means that province wide any school that receives government funding (including Catholic private schools) would have to adhere to the policy (Moreau, Jennifer, 2011).

Naturally, the Purple Letter Campaign’s efforts have been met with some amount of hostility.  Anti-gay group Parents Voice oppose the campaign, on the utterly ridiculous grounds that it promotes gay pornography in schools (Gender Focus, 2011). They claim that the campaign is “not about anti-bullying, but about sexual activism and pushing the agenda of homosexual activists” (Moreau, Jennifer, 2011).  Yes parents, look out, lock your doors, and cover your child’s eyes; for lurking in the halls of your precious babies high school is….the homosexual activist.  Despite this incredibly insensitive and tactless objection, there are some less ridiculous opinions being voiced, such as freedom of religion and freedom of belief.  To me, it would seem that asking students not to harass folks based of something as trivial as sexual orientation is just basic human decency. 

           But that’s just my opinion; what’s more important is how our elected government officials responded.  The campaign has received explicit support from the NDP party in BC, and, perhaps not surprisingly, only “quiet support” from the liberal party (Moreau, Jennifer, 2011).  This is quite typical of the liberal ideology.  On the one hand, liberalism attributes social problems as not being “squarely the fault of the individual,” but rather to “social disorganization inherent in an urbanized and industrialized capitalist society and globalized economy” (Mullaly, 101).  Liberalism views social problems as resulting from social disorganization, not individual deviance.  Well that’s a relief; so if it’s not my fault I’m being bullied why the hesitance to commit and support the obvious logical and moral merit of the campaign? That’s because Liberals can be a walking contradiction, and why shouldn’t they be!  They are in the unenviable position of being in the middle of the political spectrum; therefore having to balance left wing ideologies with Conservative values.  So, while liberals may agree that social problems are not squarely the fault of the individual, “liberals see individuals rather than social groups as casualties of capitalism.” (Mullaly, 102) The liberal focus is on the individual instead of societal forces like sexism, racism, and homophobia.  It seems to me that the liberal point of view on the Purple Letter Campaign would be that though it is not through any fault of your own that you are being harassed, it is up to you as an individual to defeat the various social forces working against you.  This is sometimes referred to as “reluctant collectivism,” or “modified individualism” (Mullaly, 94).  To the liberal, ideally social organization is a last resort, used in situations where the autonomy and freedom of the individual is challenged (Mullaly, 93).  Because Liberals are in the unpleasant position of balancing between political ideologies, they aren’t comfortable explicitly supporting the Purple Letter Campaign (what would the Conservatives think!), though they are willing to quietly express their support.

Thanks for reading!

Love & Rage

Julianna

References:

Moreau, Jennifer. (September 16, 2011). Activist launches 'purple' campaign: Hopes to

            see all schools, including private ones, adopt gay-positive policies. Retrieved

            from: http://www.burnabynow.com/life/Activist+launches+purple+campaign/5411698/story.html

Mullaly, R. (2007). The new structural social work (3rd Ed.). Don Mills, ON: Oxford

 University Press.

Unknown Author. (September 15, 2011). Purple Letter Campaign Wants LGBT Policy

for BC Schools. Retrieved from: http://www.gender-focus.com/tag/purple-letter-campaign/

Unknown Author. (October 12, 2011). More letters wanted for Purple Letter Campaign. 

            Retrieved from: http://www.slapupsidethehead.com/

Unknown Author. (2011). Purple Letter Campaign: Working to make BC schools safe

and inclusive for all students. Retrieved from: http://purplelettercampaign.ca/about/