New York Times Misses the Point on Same-Sex Families

The New York Times reported today on the Evesham, New Jersey School District’s decision to uphold a ban on the film That’s a Family, because of its inclusion of children with same-sex parents. (See my post on the matter.)

The Times tries to remain a neutral reporter, offering opinions both for and against showing such subject matter (depictions of same-sex families, not sex education) to children of elementary-school age. The big point they overlook, however, is that there are children of same-sex families already in preschools and elementary school classrooms. These kids know about same-sex families from birth—or at least from the point they can say “Mommy and Mama” or “Daddy and Papa.” This blows the whole “third grade is too early” argument out of the water.

When schools ban films and books showing same-sex families, they also make our children feel like oddballs and outcasts. No one would think of showing an educational film today that didn’t include racial diversity, and for good reason. Same principle should apply here. This isn’t a matter of teaching children about some distant community. This is about teaching children to respect others who may be sitting right next to them, sharing a juice box.

Furthermore, as I wrote a couple of weeks ago for Bay Windows (and have said before), “it is ridiculous to imagine notifying parents every time a child from an LGBT family wants to share family photos during show and tell or write an essay about going on an R Family cruise.”

They can ban curriculum items (films, books, etc.) that depict same-sex families, or have parents “opt out” of scheduled discussions, but to fully expunge us from the classroom, they’ll have to expel our children or limit their freedom to talk about their own families. And with most schools desperate for parent volunteers, do they really want to tell our children they can’t bring both parents to the school potluck? I make a darn good lasagna and my partner makes a mean batch of oatmeal cookies.

8 thoughts on “<em>New York Times</em> Misses the Point on Same-Sex Families”

  1. Those who say it’s inappropriate are so focused on the “sex” of same-sex families that they forget the “families.” Families are always appropriate.

    I wish there was some way to get that point across!

  2. Excellent points. Maybe we should call ourselves “equal gender” families. That would take care of so many issues, and it sounds rather positive, too.

  3. Beth: You raise a good point. I’ve also heard it said that “marriage equality” is a better term to use than “same-sex marriage”–because there is no distinct status of “same-sex marriage.” The institution of marriage is the same regardless of who takes part. Of course, the needs of grammar and clarity sometimes make the use of “marriage equality” impossible–but I try to do so when I can.

  4. Pingback: Mombian » Blog Archive » Families and Schools Roundup

  5. Pingback: Mombian » Blog Archive » Today Show Will Cover Diversity Film Ban

  6. Pingback: Family Pride’s Blog » New York Times Misses the point on same sex families

  7. Pingback: Mombian » Blog Archive » Canadian School Investigates Gay Teacher Who Displayed Photo of Spouse

Comments are closed.

Scroll to Top