That’s the question my spouse Helen asked over at her blog. I’ll let you pop over there for her thoughts on the subject.

One solution, from educational psychology researchers at Purdue University, is to teach science in kindergarten by integrating it with language teaching. Bravo—that’s the kind of integrated instruction I’ve written about before. President Bush’s No Child Left Behind Act focused on reading and math to the detriment of other subjects, but there’s no reason one can’t learn to read and write by reading and writing about science, or history, or social studies. It really took a major university study to figure this out?

The article does, however, make the excellent point that: “The goal of science education at the earliest levels should be to encourage and refine children’s innate love of exploring the world around them and to help that enthusiastic behavior grow into true scientific literacy.”

I should add that I’m not one to value scientific education over that of history, literature, or the arts.  I’m a big believer in the full range of the liberal arts as the basis of an education. Since scientific literacy is a part of that, however, I’m all for it.

The article is worth a read if you’re an educator or have young children.

Politics and Law

• The Florida Department of Children and Families agreed to provide state Medicaid insurance, subsidized college tuition, and other benefits to the adopted son of gay Key West resident Wayne LaRue Smith. Smith became the first gay person to adopt in the state, after first fostering the boy and then being named his legal guardian. The DCF did not challenge the adoption, because it came after a legal guardianship, but because of the guardianship, they refused to provide the benefits normally given to children adopted from state care.
• Lesbian moms Angela Alfarache and Ivonne Cervantes are the featured couple in a New York Times story about marriage equality in Mexico City.

Schools and Youth

• The San Francisco school board voted in favor of $120,000 for instruction and services related to gay and lesbian issues. District staff must seek outside funding to cover the costs, but the measure guarantees at least a half-time position and other services, including the tracking of bullying based on sexual orientation.
• Change.org is running a petition asking Montgomery County Schools, near Washington, D.C., to stop allowing “ex-gay” organization Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays (PFOX) to distribute literature to high school students telling them that if they were LGBT or knew someone who identified as LGBT, they could change. (Much as I abhor the thought of such distribution, I wonder whether, from a legal perspective, they could ban PFOX but not PFLAG. Any lawyers want to weigh in? Could the PFOX material be proven fallacious or hateful, for example?)
• After a public hearing, the Tulsa County Union Public School District voted to keep the book Buster’s Sugartime on library shelves. The book is the print version of the television episode in which rabbit Buster visits a two-mom family at their maple sugar farm in Vermont. The episode caused an outcry a few years ago from President Bush’s Secretary of Education.

Personal Stories

• NPR’s StoryCorps has a wonderful, touching piece in which MJ Seide talks to her granddaughter Genna Alperin about falling in love with her partner, Genna’s other grandmother. Go listen, but have tissues handy.
• Haaretz.com has a good feature on gay and lesbian families in Israel, and in particular, their interactions with schools. (Thanks, Alex!)
• Thomas Beatie, who made headlines two years ago as the first pregnant transgender man many people had ever seen, is now pregnant with a third child for him and his wife Nancy.
• Chicago Now’s Lavender Menace column has a fun piece on “How to Throw a Lesbian Baby Shower“—during the Super Bowl.

Resources

• Trans Youth Family Allies has a very useful set of Frequently Asked Questions about gender variant and transgender youth.

I am a member of the Amazon Associates program, and get a small referral fee from all purchases made at Amazon.com via links on this site. You are under no obligation to purchase through them.

Overall, this is a great film, aimed at the elementary school ages, that focuses on children of various backgrounds speaking about their families. There are children with same-sex parents, opposite-sex parents, single parents, parents of different races, adoptive parents, children living with grandparents, and more. It is a wide-ranging sampling of the great diversity of family life in our country. If there is one gap, it is that there are no children with transgender parents—or at least none that speak about having them.

This is not primarily a film about Rosie and her family, although there is one segment in which she speaks with her daughter Vivienne Rose about her recent separation from her partner Kelli. Divorced and separated parents will appreciate their dialogue, in which Rosie assures Vivienne Rose that they are still a family.

The musical guests, including They Might Be Giants, Sweet Honey in the Rock, and Ziggy Marley, are terrific. I hope HBO puts out a CD or DVD of just the music, in addition to a DVD of the whole show.

Here’s the tricky part. The latter part of the film talks a lot about how families came to be, and necessarily gets into explanations of sperm and egg. The explanations here are age-appropriate for elementary school children. One scene involves an animated sperm wooing an egg to the strains of Frank Sinatra. Some of the children also discuss amongst themselves their understanding of sperm meeting egg. Most are clinical and unrelated to any sexual activity, and may even help parents to realize that they can explain these issues without freaking out about discussing sex with their kids. One child, however, does state that a man and a woman “have sex” in order to make sperm meet egg, but there is no further explanation of what “sex” is.

Don’t get me wrong—I think it is important for children to receive honest and age-appropriate explanations of these issues. For parents looking for a way to start these conversations, Rosie’s film is a great tool.

My concern is that by mixing discussion of family structure with discussion of reproduction (no matter how simplified and age-appropriate), Rosie will turn away parents who do not feel their children are quite ready for the latter. They will therefore not reap the benefits of the former.

Also, the right-wing has already tried to ban family diversity films that do not touch on reproduction at all. In fact, one of their main arguments for keeping LGBT-inclusive media out of schools is that it is not “appropriate” for young children—with the implication that it necessarily involves talking about sex. It doesn’t. As most readers here likely know, embracing family diversity is first and foremost about family structure.

By blurring the line, and discussing both family structure and reproduction in one film, however, Rosie risks adding fuel to the right-wing argument that “all” discussion of LGBT families is at root a discussion about sex. That is not to say that she shouldn’t have done this—but we as a community should be prepared to deal with the reaction.

Perceptive and open-minded parents will understand the difference, though, and will appreciate A Family Is a Family Is a Family for what it is—a celebration of family diversity and the various ways our families came to be.

(HBO, through various ad networks to which I belong, has purchased advertising for “A Family Is a Family Is a Family” on this site.)

They have produced a series of lesson plans for different ages, along with a variety of other resources. Good stuff.

On a related note, this seems a good time to mention a separate initiative in the U.K. Leading LGBT group Stonewall has produced a feature film on homophobic bullying that it is sending to all secondary schools in Britain next month. The movie, FIT, is an adaption of a play the organization produced that has been seen by 20,000 pupils to date. The Times calls it “a kind of gritty take on the shiny E4 drama Glee.”

Without getting into heavy cinematographic comparisons between the two, I’ll say that it looks pretty good from the trailers, even if it doesn’t star Jane Lynch.

Will teachers actually show it? The Times asked the same question of the film’s writer and director, Rikki Beadle-Blair, who said they will be doing screenings for teachers so they can view the film, ask questions, and become more comfortable showing it in class.

It makes me wonder, though: What advantages does a fictional drama have over anti-bullying documentaries like the ones from Groundspark? What disadvantages? How do they complement each other? And most importantly, why can’t we do something like this in the U.S., even at a state level? (Aside from the fact that the right-wing goes apes**t every time someone mentions LGBT-inclusive diversity education.)

Trailer after the jump:

This is awful, but given the Boy Scout’s previous history with gay matters, it is perhaps not surprising. (For the record, I also have a serious problem with the fact that the Boy Scouts don’t allow atheists or agnostics to be leaders, either.)

What is interesting, however, and what I hope will stir some discussion among those of you who are around over the holiday, is this comment from one of the mothers:

Cate Wirth said Tuesday that she expects her son to remain in Scouting, despite this incident. And as of Tuesday afternoon, she had not told the boy about the comments.

“I still think Scouts is a good thing for him because he doesn’t have a dad and he’s really drawn to a lot of stereotypical male stuff that Scouting does, outdoorsy stuff,” Wirth said. “I don’t want my personal issues to impact his life in that way. I was concerned if he knew about it he might be uncomfortable going.”

She said of her decision to allow him to continue in Scouts, “Politically, if he weren’t a 10-year-old boy I’d feel differently about it. I wouldn’t support the organization. But his needs come first.”

First, kudos to Wirth for putting her son’s needs and interests above all. I’m not sure I could have resisted the urge to yank my son out of the organization.

At the same time, I find myself uneasy about her words. “Stereotypically male stuff” does not in fact need to be done by a male. That’s one of the arguments trotted out by those who say all children should have a mother and a father, so let’s put that old canard to rest right now. My opinion is that yes, there are certain ineffable things about being male that are usually best conveyed by someone who identifies with that gender (parent or otherwise). Specific activities, on the other hand, should not be so gendered.

If the Wirths are not outdoorsy types themselves, however, that is fine. I’d like to imagine, though, that there are options other than the Boy Scouts for their son—but then again, without knowing their particular location, schedules, etc., it is hard for me to say. Perhaps the Boy Scouts are indeed the best alternative for them. The whole situation reminds me of the many trade-offs we must make as parents. Again, they deserve credit for making what must be a hard decision.

I have to wonder, though: Tanney told them, “We wouldn’t want you pushing your lifestyle on the boys.” How long before their son lets slip a remark about having two moms or accidentally reveals a family photo that he tucked away in his backpack? Would the Scouts go so far as to reject the son of lesbian moms, regardless of his own sexual orientation, because of the danger of exposing other boys to their “lifestyle”?

What would you do in their situation? Do you feel it is necessary to give your children exposure to male influence (or female influence if you’re a gay dad), and if so, how do you do it?

What would happen, I wondered, at the actual performances? Protests? Catcalls? Snickers from fellow students in the audience?

The reality was much happier. Sarah S. Brannen, the author and illustrator of gay-inclusive children’s book Uncle Bobby’s Wedding, attended the show on Saturday and was kind enough to submit this guest post about it.

December 13, 2009

Falsettos in Concord

I went to see Falsettos at Concord-Carlisle Regional High School on Saturday night. According to the Boston Globe, it was the first-ever production of the musical by a public high school. A production of The Laramie Project by the Acton-Boxborough Regional High School two years ago met with pickets and protests, so I was delighted to see nothing outside the school but audience members hurrying through the cold.

Falsettos combines two one-act plays by William Finn and James Lapine: March of the Falsettos and, after an intermission, Falsettoland. The musical is through-composed, with no spoken dialogue other than an occasional line, and calls for just five actors in the first act with two more added in the second. The stellar high-school cast mastered the slightly dissonant jazzy harmonies and complex rhythmic interplay with apparent ease and only one line fumble in the entire show.

Although the lead role is ostensibly Marvin, who leaves his wife for a man before the musical begins, the central character is really his twelve-year-old son Jason, played in Concord by sophomore Hannah Kilcoyne. She was a tiny adolescent angsty joy to watch, and a big-voiced thrill to hear. I’m going to remember her name and look for her on Broadway a decade or so from now.

Zander Ansara was a strong Marvin, with Charlie Abend his hunky and boyish lover Whizzer. They were convincing as they portrayed all the multiple phases of their relationship and completely committed to the roles; it was fairly wonderful to sit in a public high school and watch two boys in bed together, one sleeping, the other singing him a love song, with nary a snicker from the audience. In fact, the song was received with rapturous applause.

Kailey Prior, as Marvin’s ex-wife Trina, proved a professional and convincing actress with a small but pretty voice. The lesbian couple in Act II have smaller roles but Jessica Stout has a stunningly beautiful voice and Celeste Hall, also a fine singer, was comically hilarious.

Finally, Evan Sibley as Mendel, the psychiatrist who marries Trina, had the audience eating out of his hand with his comedic timing, rubber face and strong singing.

Complex ensemble numbers like “The Baseball Game” and “Days Like This” were tight and delightful and most of the ballads were spell-binding. I have been to many, many worse professional productions. The small band played brilliantly, and Peter Atlas, the director and producer, is clearly great at his job as well as at ground-breaking programming.

A full house gave the three-hour musical their rapt attention and leapt to their feet, cheering, at the end.

Editor’s Note: I am a member of the Amazon Associates program, and get a small referral fee from all purchases made at Amazon.com via links on this site. You are under no obligation to purchase through them.

The right-wing group MassResistance, which campaigned against marriage equality here in the Bay State, recently sent out an online newsletter with the headline, “Concord-Carlisle High School presenting depraved homosexual musical.’’

The students don’t seem to mind. Director and math teacher Peter Atlas says that when he told the straight students playing the two gay male leads that if their performances were any good, people would likely assume that they, too, were gay, it wasn’t a problem for them. For sophomore Hannah Kilcoyne, who plays the 12-year-old son, the play hits closer to home. After being married to Hannah’s father, her own mom discovered she was a lesbian.

This isn’t about forcing some “homosexual agenda” on innocent students. This is about letting students experience the richness of drama—good, Tony Award-winning drama—that reflects their own lives and those of others around them.

What the Globe didn’t mention, however, is that MassResistance also said Atlas is “a long-time homosexual activist, a personal friend of Kevin Jennings, and former board member of GLSEN” (http://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen/09d/falsettos_play/index.html). Jennings, one of GLSEN’s co-founders, is now the Assistant Deputy Secretary of Education. The idea of a gay man having anything to do with children has whipped the right into a frenzy trying to remove him. Their objections to the high school play should be seen in the light of this larger goal.

It remains to be seen whether there will be any protests at the performances; regardless, these kids need your support and encouragement. If you’re in the Boston area this weekend, do try to attend. Performances will be this Friday and Saturday at 7:30 p.m., and Sunday at 2 p.m. in the high school auditorium, 500 Walden St., Concord. Tickets are $15 at the door.

Zander Ansara, who plays the male lead, tried out because he didn’t make the soccer team, and observes, “My friends don’t make fun of me for playing a gay character. They just make fun of me for being in a play.’’ And thus the age-old battle between jocks and drama/music geeks continues. Sue Sylvester would be proud.

Jane Lynch, I imagine, would be even prouder of what these kids are doing.

(Thanks to Sarah Brannen for the tip!)

[Update: Please see the comment below from Hannah Kilcoyne's mom.]

The ruling comes in response to a group of parents who filed a lawsuit over the district’s refusal to excuse their children from attending the classes. The parents are supported by the conservative Pacific Justice Institute.

On Tuesday, Alameda County Superior Court Judge Frank Roesch tentatively denied the parents’ request. He said the lessons don’t constitute health education, as the parents are arguing, and thus don’t fall under the state legislature’s has opt-out rules related to health lessons. John Knox White has details of the proceedings over at Stop, Drop and Roll. He reports that Judge Roesch was persistent in trying to pin down Kevin Snider, the Pacific Justice Institute’s General Counsel, on exactly how anti-bullying education is a part of Health Education:

Judge Roesch quickly stepped in to ask a question that he would return to over and over again. If a hypothetical teacher presents the question “A nurse has 30 stethoscopes and gives 5 to a doctor, how many stethoscopes does the nurse have?” is that health education?

Answer: No because it doesn’t meet the criteria of the Health Education Code.

He rephrased it later as “A mother nurse has 30 stethoscopes and gives 5 to her brother, a doctor, how many stethoscopes does the nurse have?” now it’s dealing with both family and medicine, is it health ed?”

Again, no. In the end, Snider similarly failed to prove that the anti-bullying curriculum was part of health ed. He did, however, reveal what the real fear is here , claiming, “Lesson 9 puts one group above all others and therefore it’s indoctrination into LGBT lifestyles.”

Judge Roesch was not swayed. He also asserted that allowing opt-out would go against California’s educational policy of providing equal rights and opportunities to all persons:

The result would be that parents who object to instruction in tolerance of individuals or families of other races or of mixed races, of persons with disabilities, or of persons or families of other races, ethnicity, or religion, would have the right to have their children excused from instruction on those topics. This result could not have been contemplated by the Legislature, since it substantially hinders the ability of schools to implement California’s policy under Education Code section 233 to provide equal rights and opportunities in public schools to all persons, regardless of sexual orientation, disability, gender, nationality, race or ethnicity, or religion.

The school board can now move ahead to approve an anti-bullying reading list at its meeting on December 8.

The case now goes to appeals court.

(Thanks, Groundspark!)

In my previous post, I cautioned the Maine equality group against responding in the same way the No On 8 group responded in California. The California response, I wrote, “focused on the lack of harm that marriage equality would cause the children of straight parents rather than stressing the harm to children of LGBT parents and LGBT youth themselves. The former will lead to many straight parents not caring whether the measure passes; the latter has a chance of appealing to their protective parenting instincts.”

Did Protect Maine Equality succeed? Here’s the first video. Read my opinion and see the second video after the jump. Add your own thoughts in the comments.

I think this is better than the No On 8 response, but still has its faults. On the good side, it positions Stand for Marriage Maine as a group of outsiders trying to harm the state’s children. I think that argument will go over well with native Mainers.

The ad talks about being proud of every child, regardless of his or her parents. That’s good—but then saying that the right-wing actions make our kids “feel ashamed” is soft-pedaling the harassment and bullying that can occur in an environment where all families are not valued equally. I want the ad to showcase one of the true stories from the Prop 8 battle, such as a six-year-old child tearfully asking his mom if they were still a family now that Prop 8 had passed, or an eight-year-old asking if it meant her moms would have to break up. (Marriage Equality USA has helpfully compiled these stories into a handy report (PDF).)

Additionally, at one point in the ad, a teacher speaks of schools being places where all children are welcome. Fair enough, but the ad never makes a strong connection between safe schools and marriage equality. It needs to show how inequality can lead to an environment that breeds harassment and bullying.

Queerty opined that the ad is “still letting that group [Stand for Marriage Maine] dictate the conversation about marriage equality.” True, to the extent that SfMM is trying to make it be about who is acting in the best interests of the children. As I said in my previous post, however, I think we do have the opportunity to reclaim that argument from the right—but we have to do so more strongly than simply saying inequality makes our kids “feel ashamed” and has some vague connection to safe schools.

Protect Marriage Maine put out a second ad last Friday as well, which isn’t children-specific, but includes some images of families with children. I think it’s a much stronger message of personal choice and independence. Let’s hope it does the trick.

What do you think of the ads? Will they sway the movable middle? What, if anything, would you have done differently?