Diversity, Dignity, and My Daughter
by Anonymous
An anti-bullying program’s political slant leads one mother to reflect on the real meaning of diversity and dignity.
When I pulled my minivan up to the curb of the school sidewalk, my daughter, instead of saying the customary prolonged goodbye to her 4th-grade classmates while I look on rather impatiently, approached the van door without the slightest hesitation, waving a bright yellow paper. As soon as she opened the door, she exclaimed excitedly that a day-long field trip to a local college was planned and all I had to do was sign the permission slip so she could go. I asked her what they were going to do at the college. She hesitated for a second as she looked down at the paper in her hands and said that they were going to learn about bullying awareness. Since there had been many incidents of bullying at the school during the past year, I was hardly surprised to hear this. And I was relieved that the school was trying to address the problem.
That evening, when my daughter was doing her homework, I looked at the permission slip again. Just to make sure that the program would be appropriate for my 9-year-old, I decided to investigate online the organization that was running it. I soon discovered that the college’s gay/lesbian/bisexual/transgender student group co-teaches one of the programs for middle-school-aged children, and that this program also happened to be advertised on the site of a prominent national gay-rights activist group. I have nothing against organizations working with other groups in order to determine how they might best approach school problems like bullying. In fact, work needs to be done on many fronts to prevent school bullying, which can result in alienation, depression, or even suicide among our youth.
But this bullying awareness program claimed to do something else: to celebrate diversity. Upon further investigation, celebrating diversity turned out to be a celebration of moral relativism: the shallow and self-satisfied yet insidious and contradictory sort of relativism that, while paying homage to “liberty” (read: indeterminate self-fulfillment), and “equality” (read: the leveling of all differences and distinctions including natural ones), undermines and replaces religious and other traditional views of morality.
Instead of being taught the necessity of distinguishing between noble and base or right and wrong, our children are told at a tender age to be equally open to all ways of life on the grounds that all values are subjective. I wondered if the real intention of the classes on diversity for students my daughter’s age was to prevent in the future any principled opposition to homosexuality: the organization was attempting to get children, once cast out in the murky waters of relativism and left stranded without a moral or spiritual compass with which to orient themselves, to blindly accept homosexuality on equal footing with traditional sexuality. Being taught that all lifestyle choices are conventional and acceptable and based on an individual’s right to self-definition and self-expression would likely confuse my daughter, either sapping the strength from her own religious and moral convictions in the future or, even worse, preventing them from ever taking root.
I do not want my daughter to be exposed to a worldview that, with regard to moral truth and virtue, breeds indifference at best and contempt at worst. In fact, I would like to teach my daughter a very different lesson about bullying prevention, namely that the inviolable worth and dignity of all people is an objective moral principle, and this principle provides us with a basis for how we treat other people. And it is through moral conduct (e.g., just treatment of others and concern for the common good) that we express our good character and sound judgment and exercise those virtues that, at their peak, lead to honorable and noble achievements and human excellence.
So, with these concerns in mind, I told my daughter that she could not participate in the bullying awareness program. She said that she was very upset with me because she didn’t want to be the only student who was not allowed to attend the field trip. When she asked for an explanation, I discovered that I had no idea how to talk about these issues in a way that would be appropriate for a 9-year-old. Anxious to reassure her and explain things properly but, at the same time, fearing I would make matters worse, I told her how important it is for me to protect her and do the right thing, even if doing the right thing is sometimes very difficult. And I asked her to put her trust in me, even when I cannot always explain everything to her because it would be inappropriate to do so. As I was reconsidering this “explanation” and trying to anticipate her response, my daughter said that she wanted to tell me a story about her best friend, who is Muslim. I wasn’t sure if this story would have anything to do with what we had been discussing, but, for the time being, I was relieved to be off the hook.
My daughter said that last spring her best friend was not allowed to go on the class trip to the pool (a class trip of which my daughter was particularly fond) because she cannot wear anything that shows her bare legs. Apparently my daughter’s friend was a little upset when she witnessed the excitement and eager anticipation of all her classmates as they were being shuttled onto the bus that was departing to the community pool. Nevertheless, and much to my daughter’s surprise, her best friend compliantly, and only with a small sigh of resignation, accompanied her mother to the school parking lot and got in the car that was to take her home. Then my daughter asked me if her best friend obeyed her mother without any objections because she knew her mother was trying to protect her modesty.
I was a little surprised that my daughter used the word modesty in the context of how one dresses, for we had never talked about this at home. My daughter explained to me that her friend sometimes discusses with her the inappropriateness of dressing immodestly and chasing boys. (Now I knew why my daughter had previously asked me about the difference between playing tag with boys and chasing them because you “like” them.) But what surprised me the most was not that my daughter seemed to understand on some level my very inadequate explanation as to why she couldn’t attend the bullying awareness program, but that she took some comfort in knowing that she was not alone, that there was someone else’s mother in her school who also made unpopular moral decisions and a daughter who sometimes felt a little disappointed and embarrassed as a result of them. A little smile appeared on my daughter’s face when I pointed out that this friend of hers would probably not attend the field trip either. My hope—and perhaps it is an unrealistic one—is that the friendship between the two girls will help my daughter gain a bit of confidence when her own beliefs are put to the test (as they inevitably will be in the near future) by a set of very different beliefs held by the majority of other children with whom she goes to school.
Loading ...
Very nice, well-written article.
Thank you for sharing.
Excellent article.
The current anti-bullying campaign, promoted by President Obama, is all about promoting the homosexual agenda. There is no more bullying now than there ever was and we never had programs before. But now they have found a way to get in more “diversity” training under the guise of anti-bullying.
Instead of being taught the necessity of distinguishing between noble and base or right and wrong, our children are told at a tender age to be equally open to all ways of life on the grounds that all values are subjective. I wondered if the real intention of the classes on diversity for students my daughter’s age was to prevent in the future any principled opposition to homosexuality: the organization was attempting to get children, once cast out in the murky waters of relativism and left stranded without a moral or spiritual compass with which to orient themselves, to blindly accept homosexuality on equal footing with traditional sexuality. Being taught that all lifestyle choices are conventional and acceptable and based on an individual’s right to self-definition and self-expression would likely confuse my daughter, either sapping the strength from her own religious and moral convictions in the future or, even worse, preventing them from ever taking root.
All. Respect. Lost.
My llife IS as valuable as YOURS. The fact that yours happens to be traditional DOES NOT MAKE IT BETTER.
Wow, just. WOW. What if they taught literally all the major religious views on morality? Not just christian morality? How would you feel then? What if they taught islamic and hindi morality? What is wrong with telling your kid to respect all people? Seriously, you have no idea what you are saying lady. I have never been in friendlier, kinder, more open and loving circles than ones in which the members excepted fully any lifestyles that did not cause harm to others. Homosexual, transgender, and fetishistic, as well as heterosexual and cisgendered.
“I wondered if the real intention of the classes on diversity for students my daughter’s age was to prevent in the future any principled opposition to homosexuality”
Well, gosh, are gay people society’s only minority group? And as more and more people reject organized religion, and Christianity becomes practices by a quaint few, won’t it be a good thing to have minority groups valued and welcomed?
Is this woman for real??? I mean, in WHAT world does she live in? She claims to want to do something about bullying, but then, totally and absolutely denies that HER OWN attitude to homosexuals might be the very source of the problem. As long as people like her exist in this world, LGBT youths will continue to be bullied, harrassed, intimidated, and kill themselves. This woman is an example of WHY it is critical to implement MANDATORY bullying progams in all schools. To remind parents that it DOESN’T MATTER what religion tells them. I don’t care at this point. I really don’t. Intimidating people is never acceptable. Telling your kids that homosexuality is wrong is hate speech. Plain and simple. It is EXACTLY like telling your child that the black person next door is less intellingent than your white kid, and therefore should have less privileges. There’s no difference. And honestly, I don’t think this woman realizes the full extent of her hate and contempt about gays and lesbians. It is truly disgusting, and honestly, if THAT is what Christianity is all about, well I don’t want to have ANY part of it. And I will tell MY kids (because yes, I am a lesbian and I intend to have kids) that this kind of behavior is utterly unacceptable. Shame on her. EVERY CHRISTIAN should be appalled at these comments. The American society is very, very sick at the moment, if this kind of speech is allowed to go by unchallenged, seen as “the norm.” But make no mistake, one day these people will be seen as pariah (as this mother seems to imply, at the end of this post), as they fully and absolutely deserve.
“When she asked for an explanation, I discovered that I had no idea how to talk about these issues in a way that would be appropriate for a 9-year-old. ”
–
All you should need to do is present to her your rational, well-thought out reasons why homosexuality is wrong. What’s difficult to explain about that?
–
Perhaps it is the ‘rational, well-thought out’ part that stumps you? Or is it, perhaps, that you feared the questions your daughter might ask, because, when you came down to it, you knew you didn’t really have a good answer yourself why your religion promotes hatred of a group of people? Your daughter sounds intelligent and insightful, based on the response she did give you; did you avoid answering, even in a minimum sense, because you worried that your daughter might see something behind your words that you don’t wish her to see?
–
It’s difficult to tell a child something when you cannot explain it in a simple, rational sense. Sometimes that difficulty is because the issue is complex. In this instance, I’d be more willing to wager that it’s because you yourself don’t understand exactly why your religion – a religion that is supposed to be founded on “loving thy neighbor” and not judging others has become focused on – has become a pulpit for a dislike, fear, and hatred that has no basis in the real world to which you can point.
No, of course I don’t get published. Really? REALLY? I did not say a THING out of line. You know what, this woman is just plain IGNORANT.
Jamie Ann,
You said, My life IS as valuable as YOURS. … What is wrong with telling your kid to respect all people?
But that’s exactly what she said!
“…the inviolable worth and dignity of all people is an objective moral principle…” That means that she believes that you are as valuable as anyone else.
“…and this principle provides us with a basis for how we treat other people…just treatment of others and concern for the common good…” That means she believes that her kid should respect all people.
———–
Skulander,
You said, Intimidating people is never acceptable.
This woman agrees! She said, “…there had been many incidents of bullying at the school during the past year….I was relieved that the school was trying to address the problem.
————-
Here’s where there seems to be a difference of opinion:
There is a difference between respecting the inherent worth and dignity of a person, and offering uncritical approval of their actions. If I have a neighbor who is doing something that I believe is wrong (say, cheating on his taxes), I still need to treat him with the dignity that he deserves as a human being. But I do not need to respect, or approve of, his actions. I can tell my child, “Yes, Bob cheats on his taxes. And cheating on your taxes is wrong; it is a form of lying, and violates the 8th Commandment.” But if I then caught my child throwing rocks at Bob (bullying) or writing “Cheater!” on his garage door (harassment), my child would be in trouble for not respecting Bob’s dignity.
@Ginny
Yes, but cheating on one’s taxes is illegal. Being gay is not. Wanting to not be bullied because one holds one’s partner’s hand in public is also not illegal. Teaching your children to not judge people based on the gender of the person with whom they want to hold hands, and all that holding hands may or may not entail, is teaching your children to respect everyone.
This woman does not want to teach her daughter to respect everyone’s handholding. And that’s a shame.
@Emma
Was there something in the article about holding someone’s hand?
@Ruth
When kids are bullied in school, often enough it can be about such benign things as holding hands. Do you think they’ve having sex in the hallways or something? What exactly does this mother imagine they are going to teach her daughter?
“I do not want my daughter to be exposed to a worldview that, with regard to moral truth and virtue, breeds indifference at best and contempt at worst. In fact, I would like to teach my daughter a very different lesson about bullying prevention, namely that the inviolable worth and dignity of all people is an objective moral principle, and this principle provides us with a basis for how we treat other people. And it is through moral conduct (e.g., just treatment of others and concern for the common good) that we express our good character and sound judgment and exercise those virtues that, at their peak, lead to honorable and noble achievements and human excellence.”
I’m just not seeing how two little children holding hands would be a source of disrespect by this author.
Bullying is bad, regardless of why it is done.
Ruth, what does the mother think this anti-bullying workshop is going to teach her child, then? Other than being nice to people, not calling other children names, etc.
Given that this is a group of nine year olds, I’m sure the university workshop will have age-appropriate discussions. So the only reason the mother has to not allow her child to go is that she doesn’t like that it’s being run by a group supportive of gay rights.
The reasoning that same-sex sexual behavior is immoral is not well met by a counter argument that this behavior is moral; the best that critics of Anonymous mnight do is argue for moral neutrality, not moral approbation. And yet they imagine that such neutrality would actually be neutral rather than anti-moral.
Sexual orientation and consenting sexual behavior between informed, committed adults is always morally neutral. Judgments about sexuality and sexual behavior may be religious in nature but not moral.
@Chairm
Okay I argue now that homosexuality is moral, just as moral as heterosexuality.
@Emma
“…by a group supportive of gay rights.” is not the objection.
The objection, as I understand it, is that the group advocates teaching children to celebrate behavior that the mother truly believes harmful to society.
If the little girl had a classmate who said that he was being molested by his uncle, she would be taught by the values of her own home not to in any way “bully” him as a result of what he had told her.
But the mother would be strongly opposed to her daughter being taught that such behavior was OK or should possibly be called “marriage”.
The same value system that teaches us that homosexual activity is against nature, also teaches us to respect people in other ways, including not bullying them.
@Ruth
The same value system that teaches us that homosexual activity is against nature, also teaches us to respect people in other ways, including not bullying them.
So, the belief system that is based on absolutely not at all on fact, but on a book in which you choose to put your faith? Did I mention that Jesus didn’t say a thing about gays? Did I mention I mention that you just /directly said that an adult male molesting his nephew is equivalent to homosexual relationships/.
Well, this is the same as saying you don’t think evolution should be taught. Except worse because /this leads to the general abuse of the queer community/.
@Emma
When I was looking for an activity to use in my example, I didn’t choose cheating on taxes because it is “illegal”; I chose it because it is morally wrong. I suppose I could have used the following analogy instead:
“Yes, Bob sleeps with his girlfriend. And sleeping with your girlfriend is wrong; it is a form of adultery, and violates the 6th Commandment.” But if I then caught my child throwing rocks at Bob (bullying) or writing “Sinner!” on his garage door (harassment), my child would be in trouble for not respecting Bob’s dignity.
—————–
As for hand-holding, that can be an expression of simple friendship, especially in younger children. But suppose we’re talking about older kids, whose hand-holding indicates a romantic attraction. You said, This woman does not want to teach her daughter to respect everyone’s handholding. This woman is teaching her daughter to respect people. Holding hands is an action; she does not have to teach her daughter to approve of everyone’s actions.
@Emma
Given that this is a group of nine year olds, I’m sure the university workshop will have age-appropriate discussions. So the only reason the mother has to not allow her child to go is that she doesn’t like that it’s being run by a group supportive of gay rights.
“Age-appropriate” is a phrase without a definition. I’m sure the university views whatever material they provide as being age appropriate. But I have read about many school programs on “health” or “safe sex” that are teaching some pretty detailed stuff to some pretty young kids. So this mother could legitimately object to the material regardless of what group is running the presentation.
Jamie Anne, you merely made an assertion and not an actual argument.
Sean sticks with moral neutrality as his best hiding place. That is where the typical SSMer runs to when this is brought up.
@Chairm
Tell me why it isn’t morally positive and I will argue then.
If you have an argument, as you claimed, that same-sex sexual behavior is moral, then, provide it.
If you would rather attempt to neutralize the argument that this behavior is immoral, then, you would just be retreating to an argument for moral neutrality, not moral approbation.
It was the former that you said you would undertake. It is okay if you changed your mind. You do not have to struggle with what no other SSMer has bothered to even attempt to do. Maybe moral neutrality is the best that might be proposed by SSMers, anyway.
Jamie Anne, if you had an argument that it is morally positive, it would exist independantly of an argument of moral neutrality or moral disapprobation. This is the point of the query.
I just wanted to say that believing that our sexuality has a specific meaning and purpose is not hateful. Believing that we should respect the design and function of our sexuality is not hateful. Believing that sexual acts that do not respect the design and function of our sexuality are disordered is not hateful. Calling a boy a “fag” and bullying him because he does not fit our stereotype of male typical behavior IS hateful and deplorable.
I really think the crux of the matter is love. If you love others, you don’t put them down, you don’t berate them and you don’t mistreat them. Loving, however, is not blind acceptance of everything one does. We can disagree, and even disapprove, and still LOVE.
When the human genome project revealed several years ago that homosexuality is not hardwired in the brain (meaning that it develops due to a number of different circumstances) it illustrated how important love and acceptance is in the lives of those who develop homosexual attraction. We need to relate to each other as human beings and not ostracize those who don’t fit our stereotypical views of gender (sorry America, but masculinity is not defined by sports and ribbons and bows are not what define femininity).
Studies have shown that those who experience homosexual attraction usually felt rejected by their peer groups or else didn’t feel a part of them. Many often didn’t feel close to or valued by their same sex parent. Alienation from and an attraction to what they believed was different from themselves (i.e. the ideal “male” or “female”) contributed, along with other factors, to their development of homosexual attraction. So, basically, a certain level of “woundedness” ushered in the development of a disordered attraction.
If these young people had felt unconditionally loved, in spite of differences from the stereotypical model of “male” and “female” (which varies from culture to culture– the French value artistic expression in males!) the whole push to normalize disordered sexual behavior would not exist or even need to exist.
So, brothers and sisters, LOVE ONE ANOTHER. But don’t have to call abnormal “normal” and don’t codify the woundedness that brings about disordered sexual attraction.