View Full Version : CA gov signs landmark law to teach gay history in public schools
http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2011/07/14/general-us-teaching-gay-history_8565510.html
They see rainbows...others see angry parents... :eek:
They know what is better for your kids than you do.
lol Yeah. The New History: Davy Crockett was wrong and Liberace was right.
monsterhunter
07-14-2011, 15:26
I would say there goes the neighborhood, but that boat sailed some time ago.
An outrage! There were no gays or lesbians anywhere in America until Merv Griffin bought the Beverly Hills Hilton in 1987.
They don't teach AMERICAN history, WTF should they teach GAY history?
Who cares about gay history?
Oh, and where is the STRAIGHT history?
Unfreakingbelievable.
rubberneck
07-14-2011, 17:06
Does Governor Moonbeam get his own chapter in the book or is it only half a chapter because he is bisexual?
Gay history 101 test questions
1. Who was the first gay to introduce a gerbil into a tube?
2. Name the village people.
3. What were Freddie Mercury's greatest hits?
4. What do Ellen Degeneris, Rosie O'Donnel and Janet Reno have in common? :rolleyes:
An outrage! There were no gays or lesbians anywhere in America until Merv Griffin bought the Beverly Hills Hilton in 1987.
:D:D:D
AngelsSix
07-14-2011, 18:48
Can we just force secession of California from the rest of the country? What a bunch of whack jobs!
Can we just force secession of California from the rest of the country? What a bunch of whack jobs!
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/southern-california-pushes-secession/story?id=13984532
Even some of the counties want out of Kalifornia.
Gay history 101 test questions
1. Who was the first gay to introduce a gerbil into a tube?
2. Name the village people.
3. What were Freddie Mercury's greatest hits?
4. What do Ellen Degeneris, Rosie O'Donnel and Janet Reno have in common? :rolleyes:
ROTFLMAO........ TOOOO FUNNY!!!!
Sad but True!!!
Oh, don't worry 'bout that smoke or those flames, Gov...here, I rosined up your bow for you.
incarcerated
07-14-2011, 20:22
Nothing to see here: merely grooming the attitudes, beliefs, values and political views of the next generation of Democrat voters. Move along.
[COLOR="Pink"]Gay history 101 test questionsCOLOR] :rolleyes:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cockAce7opo
Richard :munchin
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cockAce7opo
Richard :munchin
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PwOVuOBtpPU&NR=1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cockAce7opo
Richard :munchin
That's clearly faked. The fig leaves didn't show up until after the apple got bit. Sheez. ;) Then again, I wonder what they did with the fig itself? :confused:
Pat
They don't teach AMERICAN history, WTF should they teach GAY history?
Who cares about gay history?
Oh, and where is the STRAIGHT history?
Unfreakingbelievable.FYI, California standards for social studies and history are here (http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CBkQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cde.ca.gov%2Fbe%2Fst%2Fss%2Fd ocuments%2Fhistsocscistnd.pdf&rct=j&q=california%20social%20studies%20standards&ei=ZXcfTqGrKo_KiALhjomqAw&usg=AFQjCNFLfdYGyI39k6r6Hjt32O8yfbj5sA&cad=rja).
Many academic social and cultural historians care about LGBT history, as well as the history of other cohorts who had previously been pushed to the margins. The focus on those on the margins often leads the creation of new analytical tools and to broader debates that can greatly improve our understanding of the past.
The "straight" history is well represented in the "great man" approach to the past that dominated American historiography from the age of the gentleman scholar, to the professionalization of the craft, to the rise of the "new" social history of the 1960s. At present, this traditional approach to history remains the paradigm in traditional biographical works, and prevalent in studies focusing on politics, diplomacy, and war. This is to say if you don't like your history from "the bottom up," one can find plenty of excellent examples of the "top down" approach. (IMO, the best works are those that combine elements of both.)
For those who believe the alleged excesses of the "new" history for being too "PC" oriented, I strongly recommend that you spend an afternoon in the stacks of a decently stocked public library skimming through general and popular histories written in the nineteenth century. You may be surprised by what you find--especially if you happen to be of Irish descent, or if you are not from New England, or if you come from a working class background, or if you come from a Catholic background, or if you are a woman.
If one has time, one could also look at the census data collected in the mid 1800s and as those data were published at the time (as opposed to how it was re-tabulated after World War II). During the mid 1800s, three ethnic groups were of abiding interest: Native Americans, blacks, and the Irish. One group to push West, another to keep in the South, and a third to keep out.* And to think there was a time when many thought the history of those three groups wasn't worthy of attention either.
On another topic. Sir Michael Howard has done as much as any other individual in the past century to advance military history as a topic worthy of sustained and serious intellectual inquiry and discussion. His contributions include our increased understanding of Clausewitz, the role of war in the development of modern Europe, the art and practice of strategy during the First and Second World Wars, the vitality of official military histories, and the viability of teaching military history in an academic environment. Moreover, thanks to the standards that Professor Howard has helped to set, military historians have been able to counter some of the more futuristic claims of the pro-RMA crowd.
And, as it happens, he is gay.
:munchin
__________________________________________________
* If you decide to make this journey, you may consider the advantages of checking your emotions at the door--if you think you're agahst now....
Barbarian
07-15-2011, 06:05
Doesn't seem like there would be a lot to teach.
Gay History: They used to get beat-up alot. Now, not as much. The end.
But seriously, how is that an important part of a child's education? How does knowing gay history help them prosper in life? I personally wouldn't want my child exposed to that sort of thing.
merely grooming the attitudes, beliefs, values and political views of the next generation of Democrat voters.
Yep. You're exactly right.
Shadow1911
07-15-2011, 10:20
FYI, California standards for social studies and history are here (http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CBkQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cde.ca.gov%2Fbe%2Fst%2Fss%2Fd ocuments%2Fhistsocscistnd.pdf&rct=j&q=california%20social%20studies%20standards&ei=ZXcfTqGrKo_KiALhjomqAw&usg=AFQjCNFLfdYGyI39k6r6Hjt32O8yfbj5sA&cad=rja).
On another topic. Sir Michael Howard has done as much as any other individual in the past century to advance military history as a topic worthy of sustained and serious intellectual inquiry and discussion. His contributions include our increased understanding of Clausewitz, the role of war in the development of modern Europe, the art and practice of strategy during the First and Second World Wars, the vitality of official military histories, and the viability of teaching military history in an academic environment. Moreover, thanks to the standards that Professor Howard has helped to set, military historians have been able to counter some of the more futuristic claims of the pro-RMA crowd.
And, as it happens, he is gay.
:munchin
__________________________________________________
* If you decide to make this journey, you may consider the advantages of checking your emotions at the door--if you think you're agahst now....
Here is the problem I have. This is a great example. Sir Michael Howard should be lauded for his work, as should all people who have a major impact on history. Why do they have to be labled as gay. I don't care if the Wright brothers were gay, strait, or transgender. What I do care about is how the developed the airplane. Teach history not sociology. There is a class for that already.
Well, as is the case with religion, it is already being taught in many high school level courses, especially in Honors and AP coursework, because it is impossible to remove it from the higher-levels of the honest study of History, Sociology, Anthropology, Psychology, Philosophy, the Arts, and Government.
And so it goes...
Richard :munchin
Gay history 101 test questions
1. Who was the first gay to introduce a gerbil into a tube? Bill Hillar.
2. Name the village people? Original members were: Victor Willis (the police officer character), Felipe Rose (the Native American), Randy Jones (the cowboy), Glenn Hughes (the biker), David Hodo (the construction worker) and Alex Briley (the G.I.).
3. What were Freddie Mercury's greatest hits? Mercury wrote 10 of the 17 songs on Queen's Greatest Hits album: "Bohemian Rhapsody", "Seven Seas of Rhye", "Killer Queen", "Somebody to Love", "Good Old-Fashioned Lover Boy", "We Are the Champions", "Bicycle Race", "Don't Stop Me Now", "Crazy Little Thing Called Love" and "Play the Game".
4. What do Ellen Degeneris, Rosie O'Donnel and Janet Reno have in common? They all wear comfortable shoes.
Did I pass
Blue
Originally Posted by rdret1
Gay history 101 test questions
4. What do Ellen Degeneris, Rosie O'Donnel and Janet Reno have in common?
But the final exam for Gay history 401 offers a slight variation of the above question.
Who do Ellen Degeneris, Rosie O'Donnel and Janet Reno have in common?
A much tougher question to answer........
Tress
Who do Ellen Degeneris, Rosie O'Donnel and Janet Reno have in common?
A much tougher question to answer........
Oprah?
So what presentations will they now be showing during Sex Education? :eek:
Here is the problem I have. This is a great example. Sir Michael Howard should be lauded for his work, as should all people who have a major impact on history. Why do they have to be labled as gay. I don't care if the Wright brothers were gay, strait, or transgender. What I do care about is how the developed the airplane. Teach history not sociology. There is a class for that already.
Agreed.
So check out what profession/professions most of the people on this list are in.
7 Famous Gay Men Who Served in the US Navy -
Craig Claiborne (b. 1920), NY Times food critic
Rick Donovan (b.1963), porn star
Allan Gurganus (b. 1947), writer
Rock Hudson (1925-1985), actor
Armistead Maupin (b. 1944), writer
Harvey Milk (1930-1978), politician and Gay rights activist
Frank O'Hara (1926-1966), poet
2 Famous Gay Men Who Served in the US Air Force -
Leonard Matlovich (1943-1988), gay rights activist
Larry Townsend (b. 1935), writer
17 Famous Gay or Bisexual Men Who Served in the US Army -
Samuel Barber (1910-1981), composer
James Beard (1903-1985), food connoisseur and writer
William S. Burroughs (b. 1913), writer
John Cheever (1912-1982), writer
George Cukor (1899-1983), film director
Malcolm Forbes, Sr., (1919-1990), businessman and magazine publisher
Andrew Holleran (b. 1946), writer
James Ivory (b. 1928), film director
Larry Kramer (b. 1935), writer
Rod McKuen (b. 1933), poet
James Merrill (1926-1995), poet
Merle Miller (1919-1986), writer
Peter Orlovsky (b. 1933), poet
Rev. Troy Perry (b. 1940), founder Metropolitan Community Church
John Rechy (b. 1934), writer
Gore Vidal (b. 1925), writer
Dr. Tom Waddell (1937-1987), decathlon athlete and gay rights activist
3 Famous Gay or Bisexual Men Who Served in the US Marine Corps -
Dave Connors (1945-1985), porn star
Tyrone Power (1913-1958), actor
Oliver Sipple (1942-1989), thwarted the 1975 assassination attempt by SJMoore on Pres.Ford
What I do care about is how the developed the airplane. Teach history not sociology. There is a class for that already.
Like it or not, the record of groups like the so-called gay rights movement, their issues, and the success and failures of their activities are as much a part of the historical record as the development of the airplane.
Teach - don't preach. ;)
Richard :munchin
Like it or not, the record of groups like the so-called gay rights movement, their issues, and the success and failures of their activities are as much a part of historical record as the development of the airplane.
Teach - don't preach. ;)
Richard :munchin
What difference does it make if you emphasize that a certain person who accomplished a certain feat was gay or not? Does it increase the significance of the accomplishment if that is stressed as a point? An historic person's religion is usually not stressed unless it was relevant to the event, such as the pilgrims; Jesuits in Mexico; the crusades; the Inquisitions; etc. Even race is seldom stressed unless it was relevant to the event, such as the first (fill in the blank) to do a certain thing; tensions or troubles caused by race;etc.. When would one's sexual orientation be relevant in an historical context, unless it was directly related to a gay rights issue?
Like it or not, the record of groups like the so-called gay rights movement, their issues, and the success and failures of their activities are as much a part of the historical record as the development of the airplane.
Teach - don't preach. ;)
Richard :munchin
Fine. Are they going to teach that the so-called "pedophile priests" were, in fact, homosexual priests. I don't think so.
(Point of reference, before anyone asks, when I worked in television in the '70s, we had a community interest show that was taped for weekend airing. On one show we had a blind priest on. I forget the specific topic he was being interviewed about, but at the end of the program he mentioned that he was homosexual. [I don't think the term gay had been co-opted yet.] I, on "cans" with the crew, immediately asked why a celibate would say that. The interviewer didn't hear me but asked, roughly, the same question. The priest said that because of the military draft, many homosexuals joined the priesthood rather than admit that they were homosexual.) I'm just guessing that that little tidbit won't be covered.
Pat
When would one's sexual orientation be relevant in an historical context, unless it was directly related to a gay rights issue?If the historical evidence indicated that the person's sexuality played a role in what she did (or was not allowed to do) and how the person did what she did (or didn't do).Exactly. What it is about is pushing their morals and values on the children. That is the job of the parents to teach what is right and wrong. While I may not agree what some people teach their children in that matter as long as it does not violate any laws it is none of my business. The state has absolutely NO right to teach ANY moral values just history and what is legal or not.Are you saying that "traditional" histories don't have moral values and that those values were not foisted upon students?
Fine. Are they going to teach that the so-called "pedophile priests" were, in fact, homosexual priests.
I would hope that they would teach - in fact - that some of them had homosexual tendencies and some of them had heterosexual tendencies - and that those proven to be pedophiles were - in fact - pedophiles regardless of their sexual orientation.
Richard :munchin