November, 2005
The HWDSB Equity Policy threatens to harm our kids.
The School Board is developing an Equity Policy which is intended to protect school kids from any form of discrimination. The Board is targeting race, class (socio-economic status), sexual orientation, gender, and physical or mental handicap as requiring special attention, and each is being addressed separately.
We are representing the Council in both the Classism and the Sexual Orientation segments of the Equity Policy development process. The Board has already completed the Racism segment; is close to completing the Classism segment (we were invited to participate almost at the end of this process); and is now just beginning development of the Sexual Orientation segment. Fortunately, we are full participants right from the beginning of the Sexual Orientation sessions.
The Board appears to be progressive in its agenda. However, there are serious problems emerging which can affect our children in harmful ways. We are taking the following positions:
- The Policy's Glossary is full of Marxist terms and language, and we have argued that the Board needs to remove these terms since they are divisive and will lead to hostility among kids and families. For example, the definition of discrimination in the Glossary is the following:
"The unequal treatment of non-dominant groups or individuals, either by a person, a group or an individual with dominant identity which, through the denial of certain rights, results in inequality, subordination, and/or deprivation of political, educational, social, economic and cultural rights."
Such language divides kids and families into victims and victimizers - based not on their behaviour or attitudes, but on their social class, race, sexual orientation, gender, etc. This in turn will generate anger, intolerance and conflict between the kids, families and communities who supposedly belong to these conflicting classes. We prefer to describe students as handicapped, or challenged by their poverty, race, culture, gender, or physical or mental disabilities. This is a much more constructive and much less political way of describing the same problems.
- We will argue that the Board should not be encouraging kids to question their heterosexual orientation. We disagree with any School program or curriculum content which celebrates, endorses or promotes homosexuality or any other alternative form of sexuality among children. We will further be arguing that the School Board should not be seen to be promoting or endorsing any kind of sexual behaviour before marriage among children - either heterosexual or homosexual. The Family Action Council endorses sexual abstinence before marriage. We are especially concerned that kids who define themselves as homosexual may use the Marxist ideas in the policy as a way to define themselves as victims and politicize their 'struggle against the dominant identity of heterosexuality,' with the approval and support of School authorities.
We have already presented our arguments about the Marxist agenda which is embedded in the Policy, but have not yet heard whether there will be changes.
Bob Maton, Ph.D.
|
