Now that sounds like it was an interesting School Board Meeting. Hey! I want to be a special interest group too!
The Rapid City Journal has a report on what proably wasn’t your typical mundane school board meeting right before Christmas Break:
A proposed change to add the words “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” to the policy drew a record number of community members and five legislators to the board’s meeting Thursday night.
and..
“Our current policy must protect the rights of all students, not just special interest groups,” said local pastor Dale Bartscher, who is affiliated with the South Dakota Family Policy Council. “That includes fat, thin, short, if they have blue hair, whatever.”
A line of almost a dozen community members and legislators echoed the sentiment with personal stories of being bullied or bullying students for things that were not on the list – for having red hair, for being the new kid, for coming to school as a cowboy – smelling like the farm and the morning chores you just came from – as was Charles Kruse’s experience.
“Are you going to add cowboys?” he asked.
and…
Thursday night’s forum grew heated when state Sen. Gordon Howie, R-Rapid City, urged members to vote against the new policy because constituents disagree with it and that he would consider drafting legislation to pull education funding if they approved it.
Board member Wes Storm cut Howie off mid-sentence and later called the comments a “blatant threat of power” to the board.
State Rep. Don Kopp, R-Rapid City, said he wouldn’t be in line with Howie’s suggestion, but he would consider drafting legislation to simply block the policy change.
The people who proposed this change must have come out of a learning pod, and never gone to high school.
Harassment and bullying can come over wearing a shirt, being the new kid, or as the gentleman said, being a cowboy and smelling like you just did chores. In one instance, even a cartoon parody which designated redheads as a special class is now being used for harassment.
I think once or twice in High School, I heard about having a thick head of curly hair. Now that I’m older, and some of my high school contemporaries are more far more follicly challenged, that means I have the luxury of the last laugh, while they pursue hair plugs (IN YOUR FACE!)
Does that mean that if people want to be free from harassment, their first and best remedy will be to form the “Anti-shirt defamation league,” the “New Kid Empowerment Association,” and the “American Cowboy Liberties Union,” or “Thick Curly Hair Citizens,” for the purposes of petitioning school boards for their special line item in school policy?
No. Because that’s silliness. If eventually every single subset of society becomes a special interest group, at some point we all will be a special interest group.
Of course, then someone will petition to be recognized as an EXTRA special interest group, and we’ll start all over again.
Why don’t they just short-cut the process, and create a simple anti-bullying policy recognizing everyone’s right to learn in an educational environment free of harassment. That’s all that should be needed.
Then – and here’s the tough part – the schools need to actually enforce it.
If you enjoyed this post, please consider to leave a comment or subscribe to the feed and get future articles delivered to your feed reader.
Comments
Far too many of these “special cases” have come into being because school administrators refuse or ignore the anti-bullying rules already on the books.
All of this would be avoided if they just enforced what is already there. For a variety of reasons – none of them good – they just don’t do the job.
Back in the day, a teacher took the trouble makers in a seperate room. Normally the bullying was over when they came out.
Of all the cowboys I know, you start it with them, they finish it or died trying.
Cowboys do not need nannies.
And, if some bully starts on another kid physically (mentally Ibelieve is different) don’t punish the kid that teachs the bully the very lesson the little chigger needs.
You never know who can kick your a** so treat all with respect!
A simple concept that one could write a Nobel Peace Prize disertation on.
who are these short-sighted do-gooders? as pp, dale bartscher, and apparently most of the rest of the crowd at the meeting suggest, why not just a blanket policy that covers everyone? to carve out specific groups or segments of the population for bullying protection is just moronic.
Lexrex, that’s exactly what we did in Watertown when the school board reviewed it’s anti-discrimination policy some months ago. We provided a blanket statement that we do not tolerate ‘any’ type of discrimination. That seemed to satisfy everyone from all persuasions. Case closed.
I don’t think this policy is directed toward bullying only. It seems some have narrowed the issue down to bullying, but I don’t think that’s the case. It’s been awhile since I was on the board, but the policy appears to be directed toward “discrimination,” which has a more broad legal definition.
If I recall, there is a separate school policy on bullying in general.
Just add the protections to the “unborn” and this wouldn’t be a big deal. I’m sick of our party picking and choosing what issues are moral and just. Our GOP’s myopic view of what’s important has stymied our growth among younger voters and an overall growingly-diverse voting populace. Lest we forget that moral issues such as abortion bans went down in flames in South Dakota…twice. As well, South Dakota BARELY passed a constitutional ban on homosexual marriage. Barely. I’m a lifelong conservative and despise how the importance of “moral issues” have set up fellow Republicans to be hypocrites (Craig, Foley, Haggard, et al) and have led our beloved GOP down a path to where we have an uber liberal President and Congress. Let us as a party focus our vision and energy on the fundamental principles of our GOP such as limiting government, eliminating our national and state debt and lowering taxes. Happy Friday!
PP, I agree with you that the bullying policies should naturally cover all forms of bullying. But I also strongly agree with adding the words “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” to the discrimination policy to protect students from not only bullies but also from discrimination from teachers and other school employees.
Also, Gordon Howie came off like a huge jerk in that quote.
Let’s see here.
There are kids who can’t read despite years in the classroom, kids who come to school drugged or drunk and put other kids’ safety in jeopardy, kids who don’t come to school at all…and a myriad of other issues…but hours are spent on political correctness? There are plenty of laws that cover this sort of stuff. The school board doesn’t need to get involved.
The world is going mad, and Rapid City, a tiny spot on the map, is fueling the fire.
How about an hours-long discussion about how to educate kids well enough so they can go to college or get a job?
Wow. What a concept.
donald, i agree that there’s a difference between bullying and discrimination policies, and the policies should be dealt with separately.
schools and businesses should have some leeway to discriminate against certain conduct they deem improper. for instance, a school might rightly believe that a classroom is not the proper place for a male teacher to come out as a cross-dresser.
“I’m a lifelong conservative and despise how the importance of “moral issues” have set up fellow Republicans to be hypocrites (Craig, Foley, Haggard, et al) and have led our beloved GOP down a path to where we have an uber liberal President and Congress.”
It was the conservative movement that lead the GOP to success in 2004. It was attitudes like yours that killed the GOP and now have lead to the Democrat takeover of DC. If you want to be honest, stop calling yourself a conservative and use “Progressive” instead.
I dunno. I’d rather have a few hypcrites in the GOP than have a Dem/lib party full of wife cheaters and people who have sex partners who are prostitutes (Edwards, B. Clinton, Spitzer, Bawney Fwank….and on and on and on) who aren’t hypocrites only because they have no “moral values.”
That said…this School Board debate isn’t about moral values. It is codifying political correctness when that’s already been done at other governmental levels.
Since when does wanting to be treated like everyone else constitute being a ’special’ interest?
Gays/lesbians are already given special treatment, it’s called beatings, bullying, firings, property destruction based solely on their sexual orientation. That’s the kind of ’special’ treatment they are getting these days.
Tbey should be judged on the quality of their character, their skills, their experience, their value as human beings.
Adding sexual orientation to policy also protects YOU. Then gays/lesbians will be getting the exact same treatment as YOU. They will be getting EQUAL treatment, not treated as second-class citizens.
To conflate sexual orientation with having long hair is extremely offensive and demeans all GLBT South Dakotans.
Shame on you PP.
My son, and I think to an extent even my grandson, had what they called “mullets” for a haircut back in the day. I, of course, have had the same haircut for 50 years. What does long hair have to do with this?
Elais,
The many homosexual people that I know–in my family and in my profession–HATE all the negative attention that they get because of activists who stir up trouble all the time. They just want to live their lives and be left alone. Making your sexual choices part of a public debate invades their privacy. Any nondiscrimination policy should apply equally to everyone and should never need to mention what choices that you make in the bedroom.
Thank goodness for reasonable people like PP!
I hear you #19. Perhaps if not for PP getting razzed about having a thick head or curly hair (I, for one, have never run into the anti-curly-hair bully gangs in my long experiences) he would not be as reasonable as he is today.
2:02 from 5:52: And your point is? I think what you are saying that Vitter’s a hypocrite? If so, I agree. But heck. For every Republican “moral values” hypocrite, there’s a Dem/lib who did the same thing except they don’t talk about or have standards, and are therefore not hypocrites, right?
PP, you inspired an ugly (typically, from Anonymous) quote on my blog.
8:44 am PP’s point that the fundamental policy does include sexual orientation and gender identity, and that making them a focus is not only unnecessary, it draws attention to children in those categories as being strange and exclusive.
I couldn’t disagree more. PP is making this point to try to sound reasonable, and it shows great ignorance of what the lives of LGBTQ young people and adults face: reminders every day from the majority that they are “less than” and do not deserve fair treatment, and that any adverse experiences are THEIR FAULT .. from “pushing their sexuality into people’s faces” (in other words, being honest about who they are).
This attitude, in light of overt (and tolerated) homophobia in our schools, and even in our public meetings, cf. Gordon Howie’s bullying of the School Board to make cheap political points with his base.
Re: Gordon Howie came off like a huge jerk in that quote.
I think he deserve censure for using his political influence to interfere in a local debate — yet not even in his own District!
I hope his primary efforts to take over the Republican nomination go well. I just may register Republican to help him out.
Curtis-
My point remains that High school kids will pick on other kids for a myriad of reasons far too varied to ever quantify in special interest regulations.
Bullying is bullying. And those rules ashould be enforced before we attempt to single each and quantify every subgroup out for special “protections.”
“LGBTQ”? you’re adding a Q? when does it stop? why don’t you just use the whole alphabet? that way you’ll every conceivable sexual orientation covered. and the little kids will get to practice their alphabet. a win-win.
I think people are way off track when they talk about bullying in regard to this issue. Most districts have separate policies regarding student behavior that attacks this problem from a more general level.
This is more about adult and official government behavior. How is the district going to behave toward these students? For example, many high schools have policies regarding appropriate behavior for public demonstration of affection (eg., kissing, holding hands in hallways, etc.). If such pdas are allowed for heterosexual students, is it appropriate to ban or single out for sanction same sex pdas? (Careful: if you ban all pdas, or even same sex pdas, then there would be a lot of suspensions on athletic teams).
Thank You for making the statement of no bullying period. The thing that always makes me mad is we have to have a special rule for some whiner group that things they need special protection, when they already have that protection. No different then that offensive Hate Crime Bill for minorities. To date I’ve never heard anyone state that it was a “Love-crime” when I stabbed them. A crime is a crime – padidiots !!!
SDMIke