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

K4t

bb1234567 wrote: »

Exactly
But for some reason a lot of people don't think like you and are seemingly obsessed with ranting about gay people despite their sexuality having zero effect on their lives.

People like to rant and people always think they're right. I'm an uneducated, redneck from Mayo so take solace if you like in the fact that I'm standing beside you the next time someone tells you it isn't normal or it's unnatural.

mickstupp wrote: »

I have genuinely no idea how anyone can believe such a thing. This was touched on in the freedom of speech thread and I didn't understand it there either.

Because, if you read the rest of my post, you'd see that sometimes that one person is right. And they deserve the chance to change the minds of the majority.

Why should those who are actively detrimental to the health and wellbeing of other people, and sometimes detrimental to society, be valued over those whose lives are adversely affected by them? It's like you're arguing for the rights of the perpetrators over those of the victims.

They're not valued over other people. And their views are not valued over other people's views. They are simply allowed to hold those views.

Why should the opinion that 'homosexuals are sick, sinful, disgusting sub-human scum' be tolerated in any way, shape, or form?

Because if it's not, the opinion that 'homosexuals are normal, natural human beings' might not be tolerated some day.

bb1234567

K4t wrote: »

People like to rant and people always think they're right. I'm an uneducated, redneck from Mayo so take solace if you like in the fact that I'm standing beside you the next time someone tells you it isn't normal or it's unnatural.

Because, if you read the rest of my post, you'd see that sometimes that one person is right. And they deserve the chance to change the minds of the majority.

They're not valued over other people. And their views are not valued over other people's views. They are simply allowed to hold those views.

Because if it's not, the opinion that 'homosexuals are normal, natural human beings' might not be tolerated some day.

I'd find it hard not to believe you're trolling

and just to prove my point that groups like that are segregating gay and straight people, i just looked at their website. It says .........


ShoutOut volunteers are young LGBTQ people or straight allies.


Straight Allies? ??

bb1234567

Deleted User wrote: »

and just to prove my point that groups like that are segregating gay and straight people, i just looked at their website. It says .........


ShoutOut volunteers are young LGBTQ people or straight allies.


Straight Allies? ??

people who don't treat us like ****, yeh

bb1234567

Deleted User wrote: »

and just to prove my point that groups like that are segregating gay and straight people, i just looked at their website. It says .........


ShoutOut volunteers are young LGBTQ people or straight allies.


Straight Allies? ??

Do you think there are many homophobic shoutout volunteers?

K4t

bb1234567 wrote: »

I'd find it hard not to believe you're trolling

I'm explaining how, just as we have a situation where Gay people are not treated unequally under the law (which is great obviously), we could just as easily have a situation where they are, if we were to suppress any opinion we disagree with. People will always hold crazy, hateful views and we can recognise them as that. The problem arises if suddenly someone starts recognising reasonable and rational views (such as equal rights for gay people) as crazy and hateful and decides they should be suppressed and censored.

K4t

DeadHand wrote: »

The world will never be rid of homophobia. So long as differences exist, so too will irrational hatreds. The most we can strive to do as a society is limit and contain it.

Once gay people recognised by all as not being different, but as human beings, irrational hatred will still exist but it won't be homophobia. It will simply be irrational hatred.

Even in that impossible hypothetical, the person's opinion should not be protected from peaceful challenge.

Of course, but we were talking about bullying, suppression and tolerance of that person's opinion. Peacefully challenge it all you want.

Little CuChulainn

jobbridge4life wrote: »

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1054139X11000541

Suicide disproportionately affects LGBT youth. Homophobic bullying is widely recognized by educationalists as being rampant and particularly pernicious (of course not all victims of homophobic bullying are gay).

That's behind a subscription wall so I can't check it out.

Anita Blow wrote: »

RCSI study investigated suicide among LGBT students in Ireland, reporting a "Striking" relationship between LGBT status and ill mental health.
The author; Prof. Cannon concluded from the study “There were high rates of depression and about 50% [of LGBT students] had engaged in an act of deliberate self harm, such as minor cutting and overdoses, compared with less than 20% for the rest [heterosexual students]. It appears if you are of minority sexual orientation you are at a tenfold risk of self-harm behaviours.”
The Irish National Suicide Research Council had similar findings, reporting that "young people with worries about their sexual orientation and who were bullied had higher rates of self-harm. The disapproval of family members may also be a factor."

I must be having a dopey day. I just can't see how 50% is 10 times 20%

PopePalpatine

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

I must be having a dopey day. I just can't see how 50% is 10 times 20%

I'd still be worried if the rate of self-harm was 20% higher for LGBT youths than their heterosexual counterparts, but hey, don't let that stop you from minimising their distress.

jobbridge4life

One eyed Jack wrote: »

They exist to insulate people from society on the basis of their sexuality. They're spotlighting a common trait among a section of society and closing themselves off from society.

Yes exactly that makes perfect sense when you consider the fact that this same group supposedly trying to cut themselves off are everyday, everywhere trying to secure greater acceptance, greater inclusion and more normality with every strength they have often in more bigoted countries paying for this with their very lives. Only no wait, it doesn't, in fact it makes no sense.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

That's fine by me and all, couldn't care less, I find them a bit ridiculous myself that they think they need to do that (the hell is the difference between a high jumpers ability or a marathon runners ability simply based on who they're attracted to?).

The only way you could find them ridiculous is if you didn't understand the reason for them, which probably explains the sentence in brackets. Does it make sense to you that able and supremely talented athletes who happen to be gay would chose to limit the possible recognition of their talent, not to mention income, in order to form some kind of segregated club? Gay sports people face a particularly hard journey, there are countless recent testimonies that show this. Look at Donal Óg. Sport is too often not a friendly space for gay people. As someone who abandoned basketball in secondary school because of homophobia I can testify that I certainly didn't stop because I wanted to only impress other gay people.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Claiming that they remedy anything in society though is an utterly nonsensical justification for their existence if you're trying to fight for equality in the same breath. If you're fighting to be treated no differently to anyone else in society, then separating yourself from that society is simply defeating the purpose of your aims.

Well that is just not applicable to the real world on any level. People form clubs and societies dedicated minorities everywhere. We have irish speaking schools and districts, clubs and there are numerous advantages conferred on irish speakers by the state, are irish speakers seaking to split themselves off from society or some how affronting their equality? I mean it is just nonsense.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

If on the other hand you want to see yourself as a perpetually persecuted special snowflake, then I could understand why you'd think you had to separate yourself from society, not because you're being excluded by society, but because you've chosen to exclude yourself from society.

Oh yes more and more gays are excluded from society, shrinking ever further into the darkness.:pac:

jobbridge4life

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

That's behind a subscription wall so I can't check it out.

You can read the abstract can't you?

floggg

One eyed Jack wrote: »

It certainly would be, which is why I never argued that. I argued that sports people separating themselves from other sports people on the basis of their sexuality is defeating the whole purpose of wanting to be treated equally to everyone else.

Firstly, why are they separating themselves? Those events are LGBT themed, but inclusive. Nobody is excluded, and anybody who want to participate can.

Secondly, you again fail to appreciate the nature of equality if you think that in order to be treated equally, you need to act equally. If you need to conform in order to be treated equally, you aren't being treated equally.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

That's exactly my point - People who are LGBT aren't any different to anyone else. If you want the same treatment, respect and protection of society as everyone else, then I personally don't see any reason why I should treat you any differently based on who you're attracted to. Why are you arguing that I should see you as any different to me, and that not only should I acknowledge what you see as different about yourself, but I should celebrate it? What for? Why should I take any interest in who you're attracted to? Why should anyone?

You don't have to take any interest. But the proper response to events like pride or the gay games in that event would be indifference - which is perfectly fine.

But if you admonish LGBT people for celebrating their difference, or even just forming common interest groups based on some quality or trait they all share, then you arent respecting our right to be different.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

No, what you describe above doesn't, but if you were solely to play sports exclusively with gay groups, can you see how that would be excluding yourself? That would be decreasing your social outlets.

Why? Do Irish people who form and join GAA clubs abroad exclude themselves from their host society? Not in most cases - they simply want to spend time with people they have something in common with or can relate to in some sense.

That doesnt mean they withdraw from society. Or that those events are exclusionary. Have you any evidence that participants in the gay games aren't otherwise integrated into society?

Or that straight people aren't involved in those events?

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Again, I never said anything like that. But you see what you did there? You're implying that I should only be entitled to comment if I were gay. How do you ever expect LGBT people to integrate into society if you want to exclude people from the discussion on the basis of their sexuality? Defeating the purpose somewhat, isn't it?

I'm sorry if I misunderstood your comment accusing people of considering themselves "special little snowflakes" because of their perception of homophobia. Though I can't really com up with any favourable interpretation of your words.

I am not seeking to exclude you from any conversation. However, I don't believe you are in any position to lecture gay people on homophobia or their response to it. If you have never been a victim of a particular form of discrimination, its rather difficult to understand it.

Again, would you presume to lecture an ethnic minority on racism, or their responses to it? I would doubt it, and I would equally doubt thy would take you credibly. Unless you have experienced something, it's difficult to understand how it would effect you.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

No, but you'll presume to judge people on the basis of their sexuality like homophobia is any different from racism or any other form of discrimination. People judge other people and discriminate against other people who are different from them all the time. This is why I'm often reluctant to bother with these online discussions and like you only do so against my better judgment, because all too often the words retarded, homophobe, religious kiddy fiddlers, etc are bandied about ad nauseum, with no regard for the fact that it fcuking hurts every time I read it, and that's just me. I'm well used to it by now though because I've had to develop a thick skin, so it doesn't hurt any more like when I was called a retard in school, like when I was called a child molester for being seen going into mass, because I understand that as Emer O' Reilly said in that article - some people are just ignorant pigs.

But I am not judging you in any way - I am simply saying you cannot judge me or anybody else until you have walked in our shoes. If you yourself received abuse for whatever reason, then I empathise with you. Some people are just ignorant pigs, but that doesn't mean they can't cause harm.

I'm not going to argue whose experiences were worse here. But it seems apparent that most gay people feel difficulties in living openly and authentically, and have experienced various degrees of discrimination.

Again, unless I have misunderstood your special snowflake comment, your response, which seems to be get over it and don't make a big deal of it. To me, that suggest you somehow feel either the vast majority of gay people are exaggerating their experiences or are relatively weak for unable to take it in stride. Either response is absurd, and assumes they are all of a similar character. Perhaps the truth is that its not always easy, and it can be difficult to grow up gay (though thankfully its not so difficult as you grow older and both you and your peer group begin to accept you).

One eyed Jack wrote: »

What makes me an authority on being a human being? Well, no more qualified than anyone else really, including yourself.

You are certainly an authority on being human.

But what makes you an authority on being a human who has experienced homophobia directed at him? How can you tell people how to respond to it when you have never experienced it directed at you (I assume you did receive the usual school yard "your gay" taunts, but I imagine they don't tend to cut as deep if you aren't actually gay, much like I tend not to get agitated by your ma jokes when i know she didn't actually sleep with my friend who made it).

It's really difficult to take criticism from somebody seriously when they have no personal experience or expert knowledge seriously.

Again, would I be taken seriously if I presumed to lecture people suffering from depression or who were the victims of racism seriously? No - because I have no idea what it is actually like to be in that position, and it would be arrogant and ignorant of me to presume to know how I would or should deal with it.

floggg

Deleted User wrote: »

Its called PR. Bands use it when promoting a new album or tour. Then it stops.
LGBT used it properly to get accepted during the sixties and the purpose of the group was to promote equal opportunity and gain acceptance and i applaud them for that because they achieved it.
Yet the group stuck around. They couldnt fight for acceptance and equal opportunity, they started fighting for existence. Creating scenarios like a Christian bakery not making them a gay cake. Then asking for donation to help them with this fight.

LGBT people were accepted in the 60s? News to me. I thought decriminalisation only happened in the 90s civil partnerships in 2010, and the referendum on our relationships was scheduled for May 2015. We also have legislation which enables schools and hospitals to fire LGBT people and lack protection for children of LGBT people.

In any event, while you think the baker case absurd, can you tell me whether you support the right of landlords to deny service to LGBT people? Employers (other than schools/hospitals) to refuse to hire them? Or medical and other professionals to refuse them service?

Now same question for black people?

floggg

K4t wrote: »

Laws, it wasn't the Jim Crow-era, it was Jim Crow-Laws. It's an important omission and a significant difference.

Gay people are not discriminated under the law in Ireland. And in a case where they might appear to be like SSM, we are holding a referendum in May which will hopefully pass.

Yes. Without exception.
Take for example a person in Russia, a heterosexual person, who is campaigning vigorously for equal rights for homosexuals and advocating for how homosexuality is completely natural and normal etc. That person is more likely to be bullied in Russia, not for what they have no control over which is being a heterosexual, but for the views and opinions they hold. If that person is bullied so badly that they stop expressing their views and even change their opinion to agree the bullies, it will lead to a very bad life for not only homosexuals, but everyone in Russia.

When we do eventually rid the world of homophobia and there is one last person left who holds the opinion that homosexuals are sick, sinful, disgusting sub-human scum, it is that person's voice and opinion that will need protecting the most.

Gay people are discriminated against under Irish laws. As you said, we are yet to have the referendum on marriage equality, and there is circa 150 differences between marriage and CP (the fact that our rights are being voted on is proof of our relative inequality). We also have gay people who can be fired from jobs in educational and health care sectors on the basis of their sexuality.

Obviously discrimination by private individuals also exists.

But I will be the first to admit we have made great progress in a short space of time, and I hopefully we will complete the job sooner rather than later. But lets not pretend we are there yet.

K4t wrote: »

Yes. Without exception.
Take for example a person in Russia, a heterosexual person, who is campaigning vigorously for equal rights for homosexuals and advocating for how homosexuality is completely natural and normal etc. That person is more likely to be bullied in Russia, not for what they have no control over which is being a heterosexual, but for the views and opinions they hold. If that person is bullied so badly that they stop expressing their views and even change their opinion to agree the bullies, it will lead to a very bad life for not only homosexuals, but everyone in Russia.

When we do eventually rid the world of homophobia and there is one last person left who holds the opinion that homosexuals are sick, sinful, disgusting sub-human scum, it is that person's voice and opinion that will need protecting the most.

That really is an absurdly stretched example. Are you arguing that heterosexuals are the biggest victims of the Russian gay propaganda laws?

Or that the silencing of straight allies of LGBT people is worse than the silencing of LGBT people themselves?

And no, the voice of the last homophobe is no more deserving than anybody else's voice. Just because he's the last bigot, it doesn't mean we have to help ensure his message survives.

that doesn't mean we should violate his rights, but if his message can't earn respect on its own merits, then we should let it die out in silence.

floggg

mickstupp wrote: »

I have genuinely no idea how anyone can believe such a thing. This was touched on in the freedom of speech thread and I didn't understand it there either.

Why should those who are actively detrimental to the health and wellbeing of other people, and sometimes detrimental to society, be valued over those whose lives are adversely affected by them? It's like you're arguing for the rights of the perpetrators over those of the victims.

Why should the opinion that 'homosexuals are sick, sinful, disgusting sub-human scum' be tolerated in any way, shape, or form?

We should tolerate their right to express their opinion, but we should not, nor are we required to, respect it, protect it, or refrain from attacking that message (but not the messenger) mercilessly and unrepentantly.

if the message can't survive said attacks, then it is a reflection of its own inherent weaknesses.

floggg

Deleted User wrote: »

and just to prove my point that groups like that are segregating gay and straight people, i just looked at their website. It says .........


ShoutOut volunteers are young LGBTQ people or straight allies.


Straight Allies? ??

How exactly does the fact that straight people are involved with their program prove that they are segregating gay and straight people?

If anything I would have thought it proved the opposite.

Little CuChulainn

jobbridge4life wrote: »

You can read the abstract can't you?

Not much in that.

PopePalpatine wrote: »

I'd still be worried if the rate of self-harm was 20% higher for LGBT youths than their heterosexual counterparts, but hey, don't let that stop you from minimising their distress.

Again, I'm not trying to minimise anything. I'm asking if the youths identified would benefit as much from a more general approach to their issues instead of one focused on their orientation, which would also have the benefit of helping others. I'm asking is orientation an issue that needs to be addressed individually compared to issues like weight, hair colour or height or would a more general approach be as effective and benefit more people. Surely the approach should be to encourage young people that their differences, whatever they may be, make them no better or worse than their peers rather than highlighting a specific difference as being more important to acknowledge.

Annasopra

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

Again, I'm not trying to minimise anything.

What? You've spent half this thread minimising the effects of homophobia on young peoples mental health

Little CuChulainn

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

What? You've spent half this thread minimising the effects of homophobia on young peoples mental health

No I haven't. I'm pretty certain homophobia is very damaging, I just don't think it's more damaging than a kid being harassed for being a ginger or a midget or a whale and I think treating the root cause of each of these would be more effective than trying to treat the issues individually. And I don't think it's an issue that causes suicidal inclinations in itself.

SpaceTime

General subplot from certain posters seems to be "don't mention the gay". It's long past due that people stopped living in denial. A significant % of the population is gay or bi and an even larger % are victims of homophobic bullying (including many straight people).

It's an important topic and it's an issue that does need to be challenged and discussed or its not going to change.

There are plenty of other bullying issues but this one along with racism and online cyber attacks are some of the biggest issues facing teens and adults and they absolutely need to be addressed.

You have to discuss specifics and deal with bullying flashpoints. This is one of them.

Would you suggest an anti-bullying curriculum in Northern Ireland for example that didn't deal specifically with sectarian issues because " ah shure it's grand since the peace process? "

Homophobic bullying is a big issue at schools and until very recently it's been something that schools didn't do anything about.

I know in my own school it was aimed at one particular member of staff. Name calling, jeering, talking behind his back etc etc.
The guy was a really excellent teacher, dedicated, couldn't be nicer but took early retirement most likely due to the atmosphere from students over the decades.

Bumped into him out shopping etc since and he's still one of the soundest blokes out there. Just a shame that nobody ever intervened to make his career a lot more normal.

The topic wasn't broached because it was never brought up because it was a conservative institution and I don't think the staff or students had the backbone or support to deal with it.

Most people aren't bullies and when you give them the tools and the sense that they'll be taken seriously if they defend a victim then I think you go a long way towards breaking the cycle.

Just using the above to illustrate it can be hellish for staff too!

Annasopra

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

No I haven't. I'm pretty certain homophobia is very damaging, I just don't think it's more damaging than a kid being harassed for being a ginger or a midget or a whale and I think treating the root cause of each of these would be more effective than trying to treat the issues individually. And I don't think it's an issue that causes suicidal inclinations in itself.

Again you are doing this. You are minimising the affects of homophobia by trying to compare it to other things. As well as that you are trying to minimise by downplaying the risks of suicide.

Little CuChulainn

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Again you are doing this. You are minimising the affects of homophobia by trying to compare it to other things. As well as that you are trying to minimise by downplaying the risks of suicide.

By the same token, I can accuse you of minimising the affects of all other forms of bullying by looking for particular attention to be paid to an issue you think is more important which in turn leaves other victims out in the cold. Can you honestly say that encouraging self esteem in kids would not treat homophobic issues as well as other issues just as effectively. Why is it, in your opinion, that homophobia needs to be specifically addressed over other issues?

Annasopra

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

By the same token, I can accuse you of minimising the affects of all other forms of bullying by looking for particular attention to be paid to an issue you think is more important which in turn leaves other victims out in the cold. Can you honestly say that encouraging self esteem in kids would not treat homophobic issues as well as other issues just as effectively. Why is it, in your opinion, that homophobia needs to be specifically addressed over other issues?

You are creating a false hierarchy here. I never said homophobia should be addressed over other issues. I said it should be addressed.

bb1234567

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

No I haven't. I'm pretty certain homophobia is very damaging, I just don't think it's more damaging than a kid being harassed for being a ginger or a midget or a whale and I think treating the root cause of each of these would be more effective than trying to treat the issues individually. And I don't think it's an issue that causes suicidal inclinations in itself.

you would be wrong
http://seanduke.com/2013/04/01/gay-people-in-ireland-seven-times-more-likely-to-attempt-suicide/
I'm confused by the way you worded that last sentence, no simply being gay doesn't mean you're more likely to commit suicide but the way gay people are treated results in higher depression and suicide rates

and its ridiculous to even compare bullying of people for being ginger and for being gay.

K4t

floggg wrote: »

Gay people are discriminated against under Irish laws. As you said, we are yet to have the referendum on marriage equality, and there is circa 150 differences between marriage and CP (the fact that our rights are being voted on is proof of our relative inequality).

The only reason it is being voted on is because it requires a change in the constitution. It is not a reflection of gay people having less rights in Ireland in 2015. If it does not pass then it will but that won't happen.

We also have gay people who can be fired from jobs in educational and health care sectors on the basis of their sexuality.

We have employment law to deal with unfair dismissal, discrimination etc.

That really is an absurdly stretched example. Are you arguing that heterosexuals are the biggest victims of the Russian gay propaganda laws?

It's not absurd at all. I'm not saying heterosexuals are, I'm saying the actual opinions and views are, whether they be expressed by heterosexuals or homosexuals. Suppression and censorship of views, no matter what they are, is the beginning of the end.

And no, the voice of the last homophobe is no more deserving than anybody else's voice. Just because he's the last bigot, it doesn't mean we have to help ensure his message survives.

I never said it was "more deserving", I simply said it deserved as much protection as every other voice, and because it is the one minority against 99.99999% majority, it is likely it will need protecting the most from bullying, suppression, censorship etc.

that doesn't mean we should violate his rights, but if his message can't earn respect on its own merits, then we should let it die out in silence.

Of course. (And I can only hope and pray that hate crime legislation has been long done away with before that day comes)

Little CuChulainn

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

You are creating a false hierarchy here. I never said homophobia should be addressed over other issues. I said it should be addressed.

I haven't created any hierarchy. I've put everything on a level footing and suggested they can all be addressed with a more general approach that would help a kid not only with their sexual identity, but with other issues they might be facing too. For example, let's take the example of a fat 14 year old boy who is attracted to other boys. You put on this great workshop telling him how it's ok to be gay (that of course brings up the even more ridiculous idea of telling kids their sexual habits have to fall into some predefined labels but that's another issue) but he still goes home and looks in the mirror at something he hates. You haven't improved his mental health, you've just altered the focus of his depression.

bb1234567 wrote: »

you would be wrong
http://seanduke.com/2013/04/01/gay-people-in-ireland-seven-times-more-likely-to-attempt-suicide/

That's already been posted. I still don't see how the numbers work. How is 50% ten fold 20%?

bb1234567 wrote: »

I'm confused by the way you worded that last sentence, no simply being gay doesn't mean you're more likely to commit suicide but the way gay people are treated results in higher depression and suicide rates

Yes but you're not telling me why it is more important to highlight homophobic bullying over other forms. Surely addressing bullying in a more general way would be much more beneficial in that it would address all forms, including homophobic.

bb1234567 wrote: »

and its ridiculous to even compare bullying of people for being ginger and for being gay.

Why?

bb1234567

K4t wrote: »

The only reason it is being voted on is because it requires a change in the constitution. It is not a reflection of gay people having less rights in Ireland in 2015. If it does not pass then it will but that won't happen.
We have employment law to deal with unfair dismissal, discrimination etc.

It's not absurd at all. I'm not saying heterosexuals are, I'm saying the actual opinions and views are, whether they be expressed by heterosexuals or homosexuals. Suppression and censorship of views, no matter what they are, is the beginning of the end.

I never said it was "more deserving", I simply said it deserved as much protection as every other voice, and because it is the one minority against 99.99999% majority, it is likely it will need protecting the most from bullying, suppression, censorship etc.

Of course. (And I can only hope and pray that hate crime legislation has been long done away with before that day comes)

I honestly have no clue where you're coming from with this bit, like it boggles my mind
Wouldn't a world thats 100% free of homophobia not be more desirable? What good is an opinion that causes hatred discrimination and prejudice ?
If hitler came back from the dead and wanted a new holocaust to occur and people tried to make him change his hateful ways, would you be against that?

bb1234567

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

I haven't created any hierarchy. I've put everything on a level footing and suggested they can all be addressed with a more general approach that would help a kid not only with their sexual identity, but with other issues they might be facing too. For example, let's take the example of a fat 14 year old boy who is attracted to other boys. You put on this great workshop telling him how it's ok to be gay (that of course brings up the even more ridiculous idea of telling kids their sexual habits have to fall into some predefined labels but that's another issue) but he still goes home and looks in the mirror at something he hates. You haven't improved his mental health, you've just altered the focus of his depression.



That's already been posted. I still don't see how the numbers work. How is 50% ten fold 20%?




Yes but you're not telling me why it is more important to highlight homophobic bullying over other forms. Surely addressing bullying in a more general way would be much more beneficial in that it would address all forms, including homophobic.



Why?

Are ginger people forced to hide who they are for large parts of their life to avoid discrimination?
Are ginger people often thrown out of their own home by their parents for being ginger?
Are ginger couples afraid to hold hands while walking down the street?
Are ginger people bullied so badly that they often need to transfer schools?
Are ginger people 7 times more likely to attempt suicide than a non ginger person?
Are ginger people put in jail and even executed for being ginger in many of the worlds countries?
I would find it offensive if anyone genuinely believes that the bullying of people for being ginger and the bullying of people for being gay people is even slightly comparable

Little CuChulainn

bb1234567 wrote: »

Are ginger people forced to hide who they are for large parts of their life to avoid discrimination?
Are ginger people often thrown out of their own home by their parents for being ginger?
Are ginger couples afraid to hold hands while walking down the street?
Are ginger people bullied so badly that they often need to transfer schools?
Are ginger people 7 times more likely to attempt suicide than a non ginger person?
Are ginger people put in jail and even executed for being ginger in many of the worlds countries?
I would find it offensive if anyone genuinely believes that the bullying of people for being ginger and the bullying of people for being gay people is even slightly comparable

I get it, your pain is more serious, more real than theirs. Unfortunately none of that matters to a kid who is being called names and being the butt of countless jokes for something they have no control over.

Venus In Furs

Jeez, the downplaying of homophobic abuse is astonishing.
I see the auld "Everyone gets bullied for something" card has been played; my, such great material! :pac: