Normalizing Homosexuality in Public Schools

Most people lack an understanding on how far the gay community has advanced throughout history. A factor behind this issue derives from not educating and acknowledging homosexuality within public school parameters. Instead of receiving guidance from informed individuals, students were left to interact with misleading-based evidence. Since correct information was inaccessible to students, society could not recognize the gay community with accurate lenses. The aftermath of sexual discrimination, in this case, has resulted in silencing the history of an entire minority. While normalizing its culture, this essay explores the causes behind homosexual opposition and how students obtain the potential to implement a change. First, the diverting factors to against sexual orientations must be recognized for the explanation of its corrections to make sense. The association of perv, criminality, and immorality to being gay sprung a negative reaction by America. Constantly referring to a population with these distasteful terms led to the hindering of its approval. Progressions through time, however, has revealed the falsity of these delegations. After reasoning upon this dissociation, proper education on homosexuality can strengthen the equal treatment sought to be achieved by society. Including matters of homosexuality to sexual education will assist to eliminate the promiscuous stereotype against gay men. To further enlighten students within social studies, addressing civil rights disputes of homosexual discrimination and the hate crimes prevention act help explain the significance of learning from its root problems. The aim of this demand is to improve the treatment of homosexuals by training America’s youth to standardize diversity. The LGBT community should be acknowledged in public school curriculum for the purpose of achieving a broader acceptance of homosexuality.

The human race is constantly battling against labels. From rejecting unhealthy foods because of their nutritional facts to dismissing a product due to its unaffordability, there is an infinite range of responses to what labels communicate. Distinguishing labels from a stereotype, however, is that the latter resonates across society because of a commonly triggered reaction. Labels can hitherto snowball beyond its intentions to depict a false sense of judgement. Since society failed to identify homosexuality as a lifestyle, it became a sexual behavior taught in the form of anal sex. The characterization of anal sex as inappropriate led to the stereotyping of gay men as promiscuous. Emerging from heteronormative culture, the allocation of this concept reasons that any deviation from procreational sex was viewed as perverted. With a desire to exist during a time of turmoil, gay men overlooked this subjection by partaking in sexual misconduct. This disregard of the public opinion enraged oppositionists to furthermore portray homosexuals as sexually irresponsible, intimately driven, and sleazy. In The Effect of the Promiscuity Stereotype on Opposition to Gay Rights, authors David Pinsof and Martie Haselton conducted an experiment to measure the impact that this label had on support for homosexuality. Results indicate that representations of gay men as promiscuous interact with mating strategies to predict opposition to gay rights in order to exemplify the ignorance behind shaming gays for having no ulterior motives (2017, p.6). Unfortunately for homosexuals there was no displaying of facts but a reliance on the public to interpret its meaning. Prevalent among society, it is the denouncement of being ?over-sexed’ that has heightened hostility towards the LGBT community. Homosexual relationships did not receive legislative support since the community was portrayed as facetious in sexual matters. Constricting means of a healthy relationship from gay people only made matters worse. Since gays did not have the right to wed, then it became pointless to date for life. It is vital to understand that stereotypes manipulate the truth for the purpose of oversimplifying an image or idea.

People tend to lose sight behind the importance of addressing sexual expression in school. Due to the fact that it is uncomfortable or contradictory to communicate, public school teachers are simply not doing enough to spread awareness about the existence of a gay population. As a result of silencing these intimate topics in school, students across America are uncertain on how to approach homosexual affairs in healthy contexts. The article Afraid of Who You Are: No Promo Homo Laws in Public School Sex Education criticizes state legislations that do not require schools to mention homosexuality in sex education. Leora Hoshall states that In addition to instructing students that homosexuality is not “acceptable,” teachers in Alabama public schools are required to teach that “homosexual conduct is a criminal offense in order to destabilizes any attempt to normalize a minority (2013, p. 223). This misguidance eventually implied that gay people have an obscene amount of sex. The upholding of this stereotype was reinforced with the constraint that the LGBT community did seek stable and healthy relationships. Instead of helping stereotype homosexuals, teachers should encourage students to practice safe partnership with both sexual interests in mind. Not only does including homosexuality affairs within sex education derail gay stereotyping, but it also allows students to develop more support for gay marriage. The truths of same-sex marriage exploited throughout schools can guide students to adopt healthier relationship goals and understand that homosexuals are ordinary. Furthermore, children may be taught that homosexuality is similar to that of heterosexuality because both orientations aim towards marriage.

Originating in early European governments, politicians began to publicly shame same-sex affairs by punishing those found guilty to death. The Buggery Act of 1533, implemented by King Henry VIII, established that engaging in homosexual affairs was considered unlawful and criminal (Bentham, 2006, p.1). Another major reason that led to an opposition of homosexuality was that it was criminalized. The prosecution of life or death forced early developments to obtain a zero tolerance of gay interactions. These procedures that addressed sexual orientation in a harsh manner were not only unjust, but extremely demeaning. Since citizens were taught to strictly abide by the law, it was absurd that these governing bodies were allowed to manipulate the minds of society to accept the existence of such prejudices. The repeal of this act alone did not have enough impact to fully decriminalize the implications behind being gay.

In addition to the late British rule, sodomy laws in America corrupted the understanding of homosexuality as a normality. The beginning subversion to sodomy laws inaugurated a time when the government upheld the power to control America’s intimate activities. Despite the fact that these laws applied to every citizen, the focus eventually narrowed to discourage any action that contradicted public morality. A decree that once criminalized all sexual conduct soon sparked the beginning of homosexual victimization across the United States. An increasing ignorance to sodomy sparked when the heteronormative culture justified that premarital intercourse was acceptable while gay activities were not. Although regular sex became dignified, it was still considered a criminal offense to engage in same-sex relations. In a journal titled AND THEN THERE WERE NONE: THE REPEAL OF SODOMY LAWS AFTER LAWRENCE V. TEXAS AND ITS EFFECT ON THE CUSTODY AND VISITATION RIGHTS OF GAY AND LESBIAN PARENTS, Jennifer Naeger explains that intolerances remained to deprive homosexuals of their right to privacy because of the increasing support of sodomy enforcement (2004, p. 404). The author exaggerates how this shameful act restricted homosexual affairs from being incorporated to the mainstream culture. Through ridiculing certain minorities, it was reported again that being gay was a behavior and not recognized as a life choice. Although these events might be viewed as a series of fractional misfortunate events, the addition of these historical references in public schools can have a positive impact on respecting sexual orientation and appreciating the Declaration of Independence. It was indirectly established with sodomy laws that homosexuals and heterosexuals are common in deserving the right to be protected under civil liberties. Could this mean that other legislations targeting homosexuality see minimal validation? As a result of diminishing lives to a difference in sexual desires, this tragic history exploits the importance of democracy and why students should exercise their rights to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness.

The U.S claims that there are no second-class citizens, but what about homosexuals? The final contribution to discuss is how the immorality of the LGBT community enhanced its rejection by society. Cultural convergence is the key to advancing towards a collective conscience. Representing an array of ideas and beliefs is how a democratic nation achieves a better understanding of what it means to be human. Listening to the cries of injustice, acting upon the interest of equality, and fighting to obtain freedom has led the gay community to reach a time of such acceptance. Now that homosexuals are treated less harshly, it is important to acknowledge the prejudices of past and present to avoid reoccurring mistakes in accurately depicting homosexuality. Lawful discriminations such as attacks against employment and not protecting sexual orientations from hate crimes led to isolating gays from social acceptance. Americans were taught to justify against gay people in that it was right to be straight. The Briggs Initiative was a proposition in California to ban lesbians and gay men from teaching in public schools (Fejes, 2008, p.21). Ideally, the purpose behind this restriction was to remind America to approach the LGBT community with proceeding caution. Not only did the attempted bill remind citizens that homosexuality was debatable, but it also communicated the overall disapproval of such subjects to lesser equality. This denunciation of gays in professional work environments established that it was unethical to promote variances in sexual lifestyles. Acknowledging the Briggs Initiative in history class could teach students that assumptions should not be made based on the surface image. Through normalizing homosexuality, students can be taught that the true meanings of things are found from within.

The revision of what constitutes a hate crime is another example of recorded hesitation to protect the corrupt. A hate crime can ultimately be described as the terrorizing of individuals in consequence to race, ethnicity, or religion. In efforts to attain constitutional correspondence, the federal government soon expanded the characteristics of a victim to include sexual orientation, disability, gender, and gender identity. In Reconceptualizing Anti-LGBT Hate Crimes as Burdening Expression and Association: A Case for Expanding Federal Hate Crime Legislation to Include Gender Identity and Sexual Orientation, the writer explains the everlasting influence of recognizing sexual orientation as a liberty protected under the law. Jordan Woods identifies that wrongful harms have psychological impacts by stating that gays and lesbians who had experienced a hate crime assault reported significantly greater levels of depression, anger, anxiety, and posttraumatic stress than did subjects who experienced non-bias motivated assaults (2007, p. 92). The weak security of the LGBT community withheld any protection from prejudiced induced violence. This error in the justice system can teach students that not everything restricted by laws and legislations will remain wrongful to society. The Briggs Initiative and the Hate Crimes Prevention Act give students an opportunity to learn about the importance of upholding the constitution and how these protections founded ages ago still apply to today’s society.

During the repeal of sodomy laws, President Barack Obama once claimed that There will never be a full accounting of the heroism demonstrated by gay Americans in service to this country; their service has been obscured in history (Obama, 2010, p. 3). Giving LGBT subjects exposure in schools can help spread awareness that homosexuality is more than just same gendered sex, but that citizens obtain the right to choose their own sexual orientation. Accurate representations of the gay community can be implemented throughout democracy for the purpose of standardizing homosexuality. It is extremely important to derail associations of promiscuity, criminality, and immorality to the nature of being homosexual in order to reach a more unified society. Teaching students not to silence discrimination and to promote the exercising of American freedom are some contributions of including LGBT topics in school. The gay community should be addressed in public school settings for reasons beyond achieving homosexual support.

Did you like this example?

Cite this page

Normalizing Homosexuality in Public Schools. (2019, Nov 07). Retrieved December 7, 2021 , from
https://studydriver.com/normalizing-homosexuality-in-public-schools/

A professional writer will make a clear, mistake-free paper for you!

Our verified experts write
your 100% original paper on this topic.

Get Writing Help

Stuck on ideas? Struggling with a concept?

A professional writer will make a clear, mistake-free paper for you!

Get help with your assigment
Leave your email and we will send a sample to you.
Go to my inbox
Didn't find the paper that you were looking for?
We can create an original paper just for you!
Get Professional Help