Hiding in the Backwaters Just one more blog on the net.

Typical

In the New York Post, Steve Dunleavy registers an opinion against the new high school for gay students recently announced by the mayor and the school board. Before sharing his opinion that a gay high school is "idiotic, socially wrong and morally wrong" he tells us about his gay uncle, his gay cousin and his gay Australian friend, with whom his is still good friends even though said friend gave him "the most complete barroom beating of his life." He offers these details of his life as proof "that there is not a tissue in [him] that is anti- gay."

I'm sorry, Mr. Dunleavy, but apparently there is at least one tissue, and maybe a few more, that is anti-gay. If you were truly devoid of anti-gay sentiment you would be more concerned about setting a dangerous precedent of segregation and the negative aspects of isolation that will come into play into these children's lives. Instead you are offended that the school board is "institutionalizing a way of life which has been roundly condemned by the Bible, the Koran and the Buddhist scriptures."

It boggles my mind that people can live with this kind of hypocrisy in their lives. Mr. Dunleavy speaks of his gay cousin as someone that he reveres and then a few paragraphs later condemns his "way of life." This kind of self- deception is unique to adults. My own sisters hope to instill this same kind of contradiction in their own children with respect to me. However, my sisters haven't figured out how to do that, because children are too innocent and not capable of such hair splitting. They will identify and be confused by the inherent contradiction. Perhaps that is what my mother meant when she told me that my own children are "too young to have to deal with this."

There is nothing to "deal with." We are not talking about a bad habit--like overeating or drinking too much--and yet that is how homosexuality is still viewed by most of America, even by those who have loved ones who are gay. Mr. Dunleavy asks the questions: "Who knows whether a kid at the age of 13 is gay?" The kid knows. "Is it sociological? Is it genetic?" These two questions belie Mr. Dunleavy's prejudice and suggest that he has never really talked to his uncle, his cousin or his friend about what it means to be gay, that because of his prejudice against their "way of life" he has never taken the time to really get to know them.

I would also be opposed to "gay high school", but that's not really what we're talking about here. I am told the kids we are talking about are "at risk" children. Kids who have abuse heaped upon them because they are do not fit into the definitions society has created for men and women. Particularly tragic, criminal even, is faculty who are complicit in the abuse by do nothing to stop it. Removing gay children from a hostile environment is not the answer. It's only a band-aid. One has to wonder if isolating these gay children is actually doing them a disservice by not preparing them for a world which--as Mr. Dunleavy makes abundantly clear for us--is still largely intolerant of their existence. Still, some children grow stronger under abuse and adversity, others crumble. If this is the best way for these kids to grow and thrive, then I'm all for it.