Dublin school cancels workshop on homophobic bullying, saying “both sides should be r

r93kaey5p2izun

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I think what you may be referring to is.....


....Not much has actually changed since.

I'm referring to the new Anti Bullying Procedures for Schools introduced in 2013. See circular 0045/13. Here's the press release. http://www.education.ie/en/Press-Events/Press-Releases/2013-Press-Releases/PR13-09-13.html

It has changed a lot in terms of what's required of schools.

One eyed Jack

Casen Obedient Jumper wrote: »

I'm referring to the new Anti Bullying Procedures for Schools introduced in 2013. See circular 0045/13. Here's the press release. http://www.education.ie/en/Press-Events/Press-Releases/2013-Press-Releases/PR13-09-13.html

It has changed a lot in terms of what's required of schools.

Ahh right, I thought when you said 'schools are obliged to provide specific education on this matter' you were referring to providing specific education with regard to homosexuality and transgender issues as part of the RSE programme.

The new policies were actually anti-bullying policies though that were committed to providing education with regard to bullying -

Implementation of education and prevention strategies (including awareness raising measures) that -

build empathy, respect and resilience in pupils; and

explicitly address the issues of cyber-bullying and identity-based bullying including in particular, homophobic and transphobic bullying

ANTI-BULLYING PROCEDURES FOR PRIMARY AND POST-PRIMARY SCHOOLS

Fuzzytrooper

Thr whole need for anti-bullying classes bugs the hell out of me. Used to do some youth work and I found that some parents basically wanted us to do their jobs raising their teenagers. If parents actually parented their kids properly then there wouldnt be a need for schools to teach them that bullying is wrong. As what most would call one of those Born-again Christians, I have definite views on homosexuality...but I also know what the bible says about judging others so you can be damn sure that my son will hear it from me if I ever find him treating someone different based on their sexuality. More Christians need to start following Christ's example that way. I wont comromise my standards with what I believe is right and wrong and I see judgement as a big no1 on that list. Got enough crud to sort out in my own life that i have no right.

Meangadh

hotmail.com wrote: »

Parents complain about stuff all the time and they are usually ignored.

I don't think that's true. Not in my experience- complaints from parents are not ignored, not nowadays anyway.

silverharp

Fuzzytrooper wrote: »

Thr whole need for anti-bullying classes bugs the hell out of me. Used to do some youth work and I found that some parents basically wanted us to do their jobs raising their teenagers. If parents actually parented their kids properly then there wouldnt be a need for schools to teach them that bullying is wrong. As what most would call one of those Born-again Christians, I have definite views on homosexuality...but I also know what the bible says about judging others so you can be damn sure that my son will hear it from me if I ever find him treating someone different based on their sexuality. More Christians need to start following Christ's example that way. I wont comromise my standards with what I believe is right and wrong and I see judgement as a big no1 on that list. Got enough crud to sort out in my own life that i have no right.

what would you do if you have a gay child? tell the their behaviour is evil but you wont judge them

Fuzzytrooper

Pretty much. It's not easy I know but I'd show my son the same love regardless. That's kind of the point of Christianity (which so many CHRISTIANS forget).

I've had that conversation with a guy in work. He is gay, I'm a Christian and we've discussed my views. He knows where I stand but he also knows I don't treat him any different to any of my other colleagues.

Taking an extreme example (not doing a 1-1 comparison or in any way equating murder with sexuality, so please don't read that context into this), but there was a case in America where a shooting took place in an Amish community. On the same day, or the day after members of the community came out and said basically that they don't judge the guy and they shouldn't think evil of him. If that's how they can act about someone who has just killed their wives and kids, how can I think evil or act in any way treat my son wrongly if he comes out as gay. What if my son was a junkie? I don't think anyone would dispute that being a drug addict is a good thing. Would I still show him the same love? Absolutely. Would I accept his habit. Not on your life.

elefant

Fuzzytrooper wrote: »

Pretty much. It's not easy I know but I'd show my son the same love regardless.

Evil? Good grief.
Do you think he would be born evil? Or just decide to be?

Fuzzytrooper

Ah but sure we're all evil......Everyone is equally good/evil. There's no one better or worse before God. By being gay, my son would be no more evil than I am and I would be no more righteous in my own nature than him.

Daith

Anyway,

The school released a statement in which they had to consult their Catholic board of management and it's very clear they're a Catholic school.

Also it was never cancelled just postponed despite Shout Out not actually being told about it until a half an hour before.

Gatling

Religious homophobic 's says it all

floggg

Fuzzytrooper wrote: »

Ah but sure we're all evil......Everyone is equally good/evil. There's no one better or worse before God. By being gay, my son would be no more evil than I am and I would be no more righteous in my own nature than him.

I'm not going to argue your beliefs with you, but I would say it is important that you show your children that would be accepted and loved if gay from the minute they are born, not just if they came out to you.

The hardest part for a lot of lgbt choldren is the fear that the will never be accepted for who they are by the people closest to them.

PS - while I don't think there was any mala fides on your part, the analogies used were clumsy and not really comparable.

Murder and drugs is something you choose to do, for one reason or another. Nobody chooses to be gay. So if you consider homosexual acts to be sinful, then just know your god has placed an extra burden on them from birth, and your faith calls on them to forgo the happiness and support you take for granted in your own relationship.

How many straight members of your faith would forgo that? Could you?

So even we accept that homosexual acts are sinful (which I obviously dont), I don't think they should be compared to murder or drugs under any circumstances.

Edit - not meant as a criticism. Its one of the more reasonable and Jesus-like stances on the issues I've seen from Christians. Just wanted you to see it from the perspective of your hypothetical gay child.

SpaceTime

The education system here seems to operate in a different dimension to the rest of us!

The reality is this is a state funded service that you're obliged to send your kids to.

There are times I really wonder about this country though. We're not capable of standing up to this kind of stuff.

I bet absolutely nothing will be done because of absolute deference to religious 3rd parties about this. there'll be some hand wringing and we'll continue on as normal with a school system that's proudly catching up with 1953.

Ireland - one foot in 2015 the other in 1935

Fuzzytrooper

floggg wrote: »

I'm not going to argue your beliefs with you, but I would say it is important that you show your children that would be accepted and loved if gay from the minute they are born, not just if they came out to you.

The hardest part for a lot of lgbt choldren is the fear that the will never be accepted for who they are by the people closest to them.

PS - while I don't think there was any mala fides on your part, the analogies used were clumsy and not really comparable.

Murder and drugs is something you choose to do, for one reason or another. Nobody chooses to be gay. So if you consider homosexual acts to be sinful, then just know your god has placed an extra burden on them from birth, and your faith calls on them to forgo the happiness and support you take for granted in your own relationship.

How many straight members of your faith would forgo that? Could you?

So even we accept that homosexual acts are sinful (which I obviously dont), I don't think they should be compared to murder or drugs under any circumstances.

Edit - not meant as a criticism. Its one of the more reasonable and Jesus-like stances on the issues I've seen from Christians. Just wanted you to see it from the perspective of your hypothetical gay child.

Fair points, I would hope mini Fuzzy would know that he's loved and accepted regardless of whatever circumstances (he's less than 4 months old so time will tell).

And apologies if I caused offence. My intention was not to compare murder/drugs to homosexuality but to illustrate that even if my son did things that are obviously wrong that I will still love and accept him.

On a side note, you'd be surprised how little choice some drug addicts have once they get started on that slope. I have a lot of friends who have lived in that world and if anyone needs love and acceptance rather than judgment, it's those with addictions.

floggg

Fuzzytrooper wrote: »

Fair points, I would hope mini Fuzzy would know that he's loved and accepted regardless of whatever circumstances (he's less than 4 months old so time will tell).

And apologies if I caused offence. My intention was not to compare murder/drugs to homosexuality but to illustrate that even if my son did things that are obviously wrong that I will still love and accept him.

On a side note, you'd be surprised how little choice some drug addicts have once they get started on that slope. I have a lot of friends who have lived in that world and if anyone needs love and acceptance rather than judgment, it's those with addictions.

I don't disagree as regards drug addicts - though again you should bear in mind that there is nearly always a conscious decision, or set of decisions, to start along that track (except when those Albanian gangsters from Taken are involved).

With homosexuality, nobody had that choice

Daith

floggg wrote: »

With homosexuality, nobody had that choice

You have a choice to be religious though.

silverharp

Fuzzytrooper wrote: »

Pretty much. It's not easy I know but I'd show my son the same love regardless. That's kind of the point of Christianity (which so many CHRISTIANS forget).

I've had that conversation with a guy in work. He is gay, I'm a Christian and we've discussed my views. He knows where I stand but he also knows I don't treat him any different to any of my other colleagues.

Taking an extreme example (not doing a 1-1 comparison or in any way equating murder with sexuality, so please don't read that context into this), but there was a case in America where a shooting took place in an Amish community. On the same day, or the day after members of the community came out and said basically that they don't judge the guy and they shouldn't think evil of him. If that's how they can act about someone who has just killed their wives and kids, how can I think evil or act in any way treat my son wrongly if he comes out as gay. What if my son was a junkie? I don't think anyone would dispute that being a drug addict is a good thing. Would I still show him the same love? Absolutely. Would I accept his habit. Not on your life.

The thing is your work mate only expects you to be civil to him. Your attitude to your theoretical gay child would be similar as if they had let you down by joining the circus or becoming heroin dealers. The kid would know deep down that you don't fully approve of him or her despite what you say

conorhal

It's an idiotic decision on the schools part and I suspect an 'inarticulate choice of words'. No child should be bullied because of their sexuality but it's disengenuous to suggest that the school is advocating that sombody should, for the sake of ballance, be there to promote homophobic bullying.

That said, I wouldn't let this group next or near kids. They tipify the societal balkanization that I see occuring everywhere. The problem isn't homophobic bullying, it's just bullying. The suggestion that the victims of such are somehow special cases or different to any other child who's confidence is demolished by other children's determination to wield power over them is stupid.
There absolutely should be classes and modules in schools that deal with the issue of bullying and specifically mention and address it in all it's forms, but making a special case for race, sexuality or gender only drives the atomization of our culture into nothing but a series of special interest groups and that's bad for society and marks those kids out as 'different to other victims' and thus seperates them from their fellow students.
I'd prefer the ginger kid with glasses to stand next to the gay kid and say, 'no more, not for him and not for me', then see them squabble over the pecking order of their status as victims. I'm sick of the way we've been importing US style interest group identity politics. It's devisive and corrosive to a healthy society.

Hoop66

Donkey Oaty wrote: »

Fact of the day: Coláiste Eoin has the same motto ("Fiat Justitia") as the British Royal Air Force and the Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court.

Maybe we shouldn't mess with these guys.

RAF's is "Per Ardua Ad Astra".

And I think the Eastern Carribean Supreme Court is "Transite ad sinistram latus dutchie"

Daith

conorhal wrote: »

That said, I wouldn't let this group next or near kids. They tipify the societal balkanization that I see occuring everywhere. The problem isn't homophobic bullying, it's just bullying. The suggestion that the victims of such are somehow special cases or different to any other child who's confidence is demolished by other children's determination to wield power over them is stupid..

Except it's actual Department of Education policy that all schools have mandatory polices on homophobic bullying.

The group who are not even an exclusive LGBT group is used to help schools with that. Their workshops are in line with the Dept of Education policy. They have more workshops around a whole range of youth/school issues.

No school is forced to use them and they can come up with their own polices.

floggg

Fuzzytrooper wrote: »

Thr whole need for anti-bullying classes bugs the hell out of me. Used to do some youth work and I found that some parents basically wanted us to do their jobs raising their teenagers. If parents actually parented their kids properly then there wouldnt be a need for schools to teach them that bullying is wrong. As what most would call one of those Born-again Christians, I have definite views on homosexuality...but I also know what the bible says about judging others so you can be damn sure that my son will hear it from me if I ever find him treating someone different based on their sexuality. More Christians need to start following Christ's example that way. I wont comromise my standards with what I believe is right and wrong and I see judgement as a big no1 on that list. Got enough crud to sort out in my own life that i have no right.

I think there is definitely a need for these classes, because all the evidence we have clearly establishes that parents aren't doing this.

In fact, I think we give far too much deference to parental wishes regarding children's education at times. I dont think any parent should have the right to withdraw kids from modules on equality/anti-bullying, sex ed etc.

I think in each case the state should ensure that each child is taught the basic objective facts in each case, the requirement to respect others despite our differences etc.

It can then be up to parents to fill in any morality based information around that if they wish.

So for example on sex ed, all children should be thought the facts of all issues such as contraception, STD etc regardless of their parents wishes. After that, if their parents want to tell them sex before marriage is a sin that's fine but at least that way if kids do decide to have sex they will know how to protect themselves and their partners.

Fuzzytrooper

floggg wrote: »

I think there is definitely a need for these classes, because all the evidence we have clearly establishes that parents aren't doing this.

In fact, I think we give far too much deference to parental wishes regarding children's education at times. I dont think any parent should have the right to withdraw kids from modules on equality/anti-bullying, sex ed etc.

I think in each case the state should ensure that each child is taught the basic objective facts in each case, the requirement to respect others despite our differences etc.

It can then be up to parents to fill in any morality based information around that if they wish.

So for example on sex ed, all children should be thought the facts of all issues such as contraception, STD etc regardless of their parents wishes. After that, if their parents want to tell them sex before marriage is a sin that's fine but at least that way if kids do decide to have sex they will know how to protect themselves and their partners.

I agree that there is definitely a need, but it annoys me that this is the case. By the time they get to school, or at least shortly after, kids should know not to make fun of others, belittle them etc. I know that's not the case in reality and hence the classes but grrrrrrr.........better call Joe

Hoop66

Fuzzytrooper wrote: »

I agree that there is definitely a need, but it annoys me that this is the case. By the time they get to school, or at least shortly after, kids should know not to make fun of others, belittle them etc. I know that's not the case in reality and hence the classes but grrrrrrr.........better call Joe

But they regularly don't though, do they. If the parents think there's nothing wrong with homophobic bullying, and perhaps even do it themselves "yer mans a poof", what chance do the kids have of knowing it's wrong?

floggg

conorhal wrote: »

It's an idiotic decision on the schools part and I suspect an 'inarticulate choice of words'. No child should be bullied because of their sexuality but it's disengenuous to suggest that the school is advocating that sombody should, for the sake of ballance, be there to promote homophobic bullying.

That said, I wouldn't let this group next or near kids. They tipify the societal balkanization that I see occuring everywhere. The problem isn't homophobic bullying, it's just bullying. The suggestion that the victims of such are somehow special cases or different to any other child who's confidence is demolished by other children's determination to wield power over them is stupid.
There absolutely should be classes and modules in schools that deal with the issue of bullying and specifically mention and address it in all it's forms, but making a special case for race, sexuality or gender only drives the atomization of our culture into nothing but a series of special interest groups and that's bad for society and marks those kids out as 'different to other victims' and thus seperates them from their fellow students.
I'd prefer the ginger kid with glasses to stand next to the gay kid and say, 'no more, not for him and not for me', then see them squabble over the pecking order of their status as victims. I'm sick of the way we've been importing US style interest group identity politics. It's devisive and corrosive to a healthy society.

This is such faux concern bull****.

There seems to be this idea that acknowledging any difference in people is divisive, intolerant and harmful.

B.S.

Pretending that there is no differences between people is divisive, intolerant and harmful because when those differences arise they then become all the more marked.

In this case, nobody is saying that homophobic bullying is any better or worse than any other type of bullying, or that lgbt people deserve more protection.

It's simply a case of acknowledging and tackling one specific form of bullying, and the issues it presents.

All discrimination and bullying is wrong, and I don't think anybody is disputing that. But there are various forms of bullying and discrimination and each comes with its own language and codes, issues and challenges.

Homophobia can take very different forms to racism for example. It can be targeted against gay and straight students, and often can be done unintentionally.

There is nothing wrong or divisive in taking time to address the particular issue this form of bullying presents as long as you aren't making it to be the only form of bullying or suggesting that other forms see acceptable.

Since nobody is doing that however the faux outrage is ridiculous.

SpaceTime

Put it this way: this is actually a life or death issue.

People end up committing suicide over issues surrounding this kind of bullying or social exclusion and teenagers are amongst the most vulnerable to being unable to see things in perspective.

The decision is an absolute disgrace - end of story!

eviltwin

I think the school deserve kudos for inviting these guys in the first place. Okay the handled this badly but as they have given talks before the school must not have any problems with the group. It's more than a lot of schools would do. They wouldn't be invited to my kids school, that's for sure.

whisky_galore

Sweet Jesus, if some parents don't agree with it, they could always take their kids out and not make a fcuking song and dance about it.

No news story then, I would wager.

Now the whole damn country knows and the school's name is mud.

One eyed Jack

SpaceTime wrote: »

Put it this way: this is actually a life or death issue.

People end up committing suicide over issues surrounding this kind of bullying or social exclusion and teenagers are amongst the most vulnerable to being unable to see things in perspective.

The decision is an absolute disgrace - end of story!

Apparently being unable to see things in perspective isn't limited to teenagers.

That's genuinely not being smart or anything, and of course nobody is denying that people have chosen to take their own lives because of being subjected to bullying, but let's not jump the shark altogether and suggest that simply because teenagers weren't given a talk as part of an anti-bullying strategy with specific references to homophobia, that teenagers are any more likely to take their own lives than they were before.

One eyed Jack

whisky_galore wrote: »

Sweet Jesus, if some parents don't agree with it, they could always take their kids out and not make a fcuking song and dance about it.

No news story then, I would wager.

Now the whole damn country knows and the school's name is mud.

The parents themselves didn't make any song and dance about it. Mr. Meehan made a song and dance about it when he publicised the issue on social media. That's where the news story came from.

Riskymove

eviltwin wrote: »

I think the school deserve kudos for inviting these guys in the first place. Okay the handled this badly but as they have given talks before the school must not have any problems with the group. It's more than a lot of schools would do. They wouldn't be invited to my kids school, that's for sure.

That's the sad thing really

The school was one of the first to have these workshops and held a couple at least going on what was said yesterday.

Their poor response really fed the social media frenzy...could have been nipped in the bud tbh

SpaceTime

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Apparently being unable to see things in perspective isn't limited to teenagers.

That's genuinely not being smart or anything, and of course nobody is denying that people have chosen to take their own lives because of being subjected to bullying, but let's not jump the shark altogether and suggest that simply because teenagers weren't given a talk as part of an anti-bullying strategy with specific references to homophobia, that teenagers are any more likely to take their own lives than they were before.

However, putting forward a view in a school that being LGBT is a major issue or that there are 'two sides' to a discussion about it, is going to really undermine some very vulnerable people.

One eyed Jack

SpaceTime wrote: »

However, putting forward a view in a school that being LGBT is a major issue or that there are 'two sides' to a discussion about it, is going to really undermine some very vulnerable people.

I think what was far more likely to undermine people is Mr. Meehan's lack of consideration for the Board of Management, for the parents and for the students themselves, when he decided to publish his tweet. I actually think he's done far more long-term damage to his organisation than any good he was attempting to do by publicising the incident. What school Board of Management would want to be involved with his organisation now, knowing that they could easily end up in the middle of a social media shìtstorm over an incident that could so easily have been avoided.

It doesn't look like the school actually requires his services now given that the students themselves (in both the boys, and the girls school) are quite aware of homophobia and bullying and off their own back decided to protest against the decision of the Board of Management, effectively undermining their authority.

That's never a good outcome for anyone involved in the school IMO, not for the Board of Management, not for the teachers, not for the parents, and least of all for the students.

Daith

One eyed Jack wrote: »

That's never a good outcome for anyone involved in the school IMO, not for the Board of Management, not for the teachers, not for the parents, and least of all for the students.

It's a pity the school couldn't have acted better then. Disappointed in them as Shout Out have had nothing but praise about their progressive LGBT polices anyway.

It was the schools fault for not giving an organisation who's event they cancelled with a half an hours notice any consideration. For the principal not deciding to ring Shout Out and let them know after they tried on multiple attempts to get in contact with the school.

The school showed no communication skills and just hoped it would blow over.

mickstupp

conorhal wrote: »

... They tipify the societal balkanization that I see occuring everywhere. ...

WTF does that even mean?
English. Do you speak it?

SpaceTime

Honestly, I just give up!

Ireland's always like this. You think you're living in a modern, forward-looking western country and then suddenly : BANG! you're back in the 1950s.

Gatling

SpaceTime wrote: »

Honestly, I just give up!

Ireland's always like this. You think you're living in a modern, forward-looking western country and then suddenly : BANG! you're back in the 1950s.

Whats worse is the apologist's excuse lets blame everyone one else

Daith

Gatling wrote: »

Whats worse is the apologist's excuces lets blame everyone one else

When they initially blamed sending the letters out late...

Gatling

Daith wrote: »

When they initially blamed sending the letters out late...

Isn't that funny itself ,

Is anyone on here currently connected to this school either as a past pupil/ member of board/ concerned parent by any chance,

steddyeddy

This school is state funded so it might be a good idea to take a look at their admissions policy. Bigotry seems to have too much sway here.

Donkey Oaty

One eyed Jack wrote: »

lack of consideration for the Board of Management

[the students] off their own back decided to protest against the decision of the Board of Management, effectively undermining their authority.

That's never a good outcome for anyone involved in the school IMO, not for the Board of Management, not for the teachers, not for the parents, and least of all for the students.

This kind of sentiment might go down well in the staff room or delivered to a naughty child in the principal's office, but in the real world it could be mistaken for pompous nonsense.

Not having a go at you for a cheap cheer, Jack, but everybody needs to lighten up.

Having a dig at those in authority is an essential part of our culture, and if the Board of Management feel that their authority is undermined, then they should consider how that came about and hang their heads in shame rather than blame students for standing up for what they believe to be right.

SpaceTime

That's part of the problem here in Ireland actually - there's been a long history of absolute deference to authority in education.

Being intelligent requires that you question everything. That's one area where our education system doesn't really seem to be all that good.

The modern, entrepreneurial, high end of the global economy that Ireland occupies requires broad minds and people prepared to challenge convention.

Obedient worker bees will get us nowhere anymore.

One eyed Jack

Donkey Oaty wrote: »

This kind of sentiment might go down well in the staff room or delivered to a naughty child in the principle's office, but in the real world it could be mistaken for pompous nonsense.

Not having a go at you for a cheap cheer, Jack, but everybody needs to lighten up.

I know you're not having a go Donkey, but I was perfectly willing to leave this one alone until I read SpaceTimes hyperbole and thought "GTFO" (though obviously I was a bit more polite in my wording, because I have to be, but in the real world, drawing a conclusion like that I'd have fcuked them out the door before they could put up any resistance!).

I personally think it's disgusting sometimes the way people with vested interests will try and use concern for the welfare children and teenagers to add value to their opinions, when the reality is as transparent as they simply want to push their own agenda.

I have no problem with people having an agenda, but if they can't make their point without leaping to possible consequences like teenagers taking their own lives, that shows they clearly have no sense of perspective. I can't lighten up and let something like that go, when another aspect of the new anti-bullying measures in schools is the issue of cyber-bullying, because more teenagers in Ireland have taken their own lives because of cyber-bullying and false representations being made about them on social media, than have taken their lives because they experienced homophobic bullying in the school yard. The line between the online world and the real world is becoming more and more blurred every day, and I would say that homophobia is the least thing we need to worry about.

Homophobia is just one aspect of the nine grounds of discrimination against a person, and none of these grounds IMO should be given more precedence than the other. Cyber-bullying on the other hand, can involve any of these nine grounds, plus a few others such as physical appearance and social background.

If you want a fairer society and children to grow up with values of respect and tolerance for all people, then you teach children that all forms of bullying are wrong, rather than focusing on highlighting one particular aspect of a person that can contribute to a bullying culture and saying we'll place a higher priority on that particular aspect above all the other grounds.

Having a dig at those in authority is an essential part of our culture, and if the Board of Management feel that their authority is undermined, then they should consider how that came about and hang their heads in shame rather than blame students for standing up for what they believe to be right.

Having a dig at those in authority has never been a part of any culture I've been a part of. In fact I'm an advocate of the exact opposite. Recognising that authority isn't there to control the students, but rather to support and encourage them, is a far more important life lesson than teaching young people that people in authority are their adversaries. That attitude is actually conducive to bullying culture where a student who is experiencing harassment or bullying behaviour will not approach their parents or their teachers or the Principal for fear of being labelled a snitch, for fear of not being taken seriously, etc.

The parents, the teachers, the staff, the Principal, the Board of Management, all have the best interests of the students at heart, and for the head of an organization like ShoutOut to take to social media instead of working with the school to resolve the issue, simply sets a poor example to students IMO. They simply learned that when you don't get your own way, there's always the rent-a-mob online waiting to join you in vilifying your intended objectionable target. The very definition of cyber-bullying itself.

floggg

Donkey Oaty wrote: »

This kind of sentiment might go down well in the staff room or delivered to a naughty child in the principal's office, but in the real world it could be mistaken for pompous nonsense.

Not having a go at you for a cheap cheer, Jack, but everybody needs to lighten up.

Having a dig at those in authority is an essential part of our culture, and if the Board of Management feel that their authority is undermined, then they should consider how that came about and hang their heads in shame rather than blame students for standing up for what they believe to be right.

Agreed. I think organising the protest is a sign of great character by the students, teachers them an important to life lesson about standing for what the believe and solidarity, and makes any lgbt student there, closeted or out, feel a little better about themselves knowing that there are some people willing to stand firmly in their corner.

Fair play to them.

K4t

One eyed Jack wrote: »

If you want a fairer society and children to grow up with values of respect and tolerance for all people, then you teach children that all forms of bullying are wrong, rather than focusing on highlighting one particular aspect of a person that can contribute to a bullying culture and saying we'll place a higher priority on that particular aspect above all the other grounds.

Have to agree with this. By all means tackle homophobia on its own (god knows minds and attitudes need to be changed) but associating it with bullying under homophobic bullying both devalues other forms of bullying and highlights two very separate ideas, one which will never be eradicated (i.e. bullying) and one which will and should be sooner rather than later (homophobia).

Having a dig at those in authority has never been a part of any culture I've been a part of.

Knowing that you can have a dig at authority is important, but I agree it is better to respect authority when it is in your own and others interests to do so and not do it simply because you can.

Donkey Oaty

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I know you're not having a go Donkey,

I appreciate your thoughtful response, and lots of issues there to be discussed - I'm off for a bit, but hope to join you all later.

floggg

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I know you're not having a go Donkey, but I was perfectly willing to leave this one alone until I read SpaceTimes hyperbole and thought "GTFO" (though obviously I was a bit more polite in my wording, because I have to be, but in the real world, drawing a conclusion like that I'd have fcuked them out the door before they could put up any resistance!).

I personally think it's disgusting sometimes the way people with vested interests will try and use concern for the welfare children and teenagers to add value to their opinions, when the reality is as transparent as they simply want to push their own agenda.

I have no problem with people having an agenda, but if they can't make their point without leaping to possible consequences like teenagers taking their own lives, that shows they clearly have no sense of perspective. I can't lighten up and let something like that go, when another aspect of the new anti-bullying measures in schools is the issue of cyber-bullying, because more teenagers in Ireland have taken their own lives because of cyber-bullying and false representations being made about them on social media, than have taken their lives because they experienced homophobic bullying in the school yard. The line between the online world and the real world is becoming more and more blurred every day, and I would say that homophobia is the least thing we need to worry about.

Homophobia is just one aspect of the nine grounds of discrimination against a person, and none of these grounds IMO should be given more precedence than the other. Cyber-bullying on the other hand, can involve any of these nine grounds, plus a few others such as physical appearance and social background.

If you want a fairer society and children to grow up with values of respect and tolerance for all people, then you teach children that all forms of bullying are wrong, rather than focusing on highlighting one particular aspect of a person that can contribute to a bullying culture and saying we'll place a higher priority on that particular aspect above all the other grounds.

Again, this bull**** faux concern argument that this course was bad because it teaches kids that some forms of bullying are worse than others.

Where has that been written or stated?

Arming kids with the tools to tackle one type of bullying doesn't mean anybody considers it the only form of bullying or its victims more important.

It's simply addressing one form of bullying, and the unique language and issues it involves, at a time.

Your argument isn't too far removed from those who argue we shouldn't be voting on marriage equality unless we deal with fathers rights at the same time. Both are important, and just because we tackle one it doesn't mean we don't want to see the other addressed as well.

PS - I'm going to assume that the line about homophobia being the least of our concerns was just an incredibly poousway of trying to get your point about cyber bullying out rather than dismissing any one form of bullying.

Because that would completely undermine your whole point about treating all forms of bullying as one.

SpaceTime

I'm still baffled as to how there is "another side" to this though.

Would there be another side to say racist or sexist bullying?

Is there a proposal to claim that it's not bullying?

K4t

floggg wrote: »

Your argument isn't too far removed from those who argue we shouldn't be voting on marriage equality unless we deal with fathers rights at the same time. Both are important, and just because we tackle one it doesn't mean we don't want to see the other addressed as well.

The arguments are completely different. Bullying is a constant here, it will never be got rid of. So why associate and highlight homophobia with bullying instead of simply tackling homophobia as the separate issue it is? And then have anti-bullying workshops which illustrate how bullying will not be tolerated under any circumstances and give all sorts of examples.

K4t

SpaceTime wrote: »

I'm still baffled as to how there is "another side" to this though.

Would there be another side to say racist or sexist bullying?

Is there a proposal to claim that it's not bullying?

You can be racist, sexist and homophobic without being a bully. A person is perfectly entitled to hold those beliefs and express them. Associating them with bullying only complicates matters. They should be addressed separately from bullying, which is just bullying at the end of the day.

SpaceTime

Sure why highlight racism or sexism. Just give generic messages on anti bullying!

Honestly I give up! If this thread is a reflection of Irish life I don't want to live here anymore.

K4t

SpaceTime wrote: »

Sure why highlight racism or sexism. Just give generic messages on anti bullying!

Do both. Seperately.

Honestly I give up! If this thread is a reflection of Irish life I don't want to live here anymore.

A referendum proposing same sex marriage only taking place in 2015, and the fact that it very well may not pass, is a reflection on Irish life. This is merely a discussion on the best way to rid our society of racism, sexism, homophobia etc. I don't think anybody on this thread supports homophobic bullying or homophobia or bullying.