Challenging the use of homophobic language in schools: Mumsnet and Stonewall campaign

[RebeccaMumsnet]

"That's so gay." Um, actually it probably isn't.

It's also something most of us don't want to hear, and it's absolutely something young people shouldn't have to hear in the classroom.
That's why, for Anti-Bullying Week this year, we've teamed up with Stonewall on Gay. Let’s Get Over It, a campaign to provide guidance to schools, parents and young people, and to address the misuse of the word 'gay'.

Mumsnetters talked about the need for the campaign here, and you can get involved in it here.

Do share on Twitter #GetOverIt, Facebook and Google+ - the more people know about the campaign, the more we can challenge unacceptable language and change the culture of our schools. And do feel free to discuss it here too.

Tomorrow, Will Young will be coming into MNHQ for a webchat about the campaign at 12pm - watch active for the webchat thread which will be up later and post your questions to him there.

Gay has another meaning as rubbish, lame etc. lots of children using the word don't even realise it could be viewed as negative to "actual" gay people. BUT BUT BUT it only became used to mean crap, as being gay is thought to be crap. It is not random, it is based on the negative connotations of being gay. It's crap to be gay; so something that is crap can also be called gay. Iyswim.
From my reading of the thread I am heartened to see that the people objecting to or trivialising the campaign do not appear to be teachers. The bad side of that is that they are parents of children.

I am glad Dixie that people posting here in support do make a difference. We just have to keep speaking out. It's the little things that matter. There will be a cultural shift, well there already has been, but still more to do.

elskov - I really don't get your objection to telling primary aged children about same-sex relationships, or that this should be stored up until they are older. My cousin is in a civil partnership and has a baby with her partner. My children, aged 2 and 5, visit them and their little cousin. The 2 year old just completely accepts that the baby has two mummies. The 5 year old has asked a little about it and it has been very straightforward to explain that Cousin and Cousin Partner love each other and so they got married. I have not got into technical explanations about lesbian sex! (although I did give her a straight-forward explanation of how my cousin's partner had a baby without there being an obvious daddy - she already knows the biological basics of how a baby is created and grows in a heterosexual relationship).

So for us it's completely irrelevant when to introduce the idea of same-sex relationships - it's completely part of their lives because of my cousin. And not in the least bit complicated to explain or age-inappropriate.

To all the gay people posting who are surprised at some of the attitudes on this thread - there are plenty of people in heterosexual relationships who DO get why this matters and ARE bringing up their children to be accepting of same-sex relationships - why, they might even end up in one themselves! Hopefully you know plenty of these tolerant heterosexuals personally!

And finally, my DH is a secondary school teacher and always picks up pupils who he hears using 'gay' as an insult, even before this campaign .

Just out of interest, was it ever acceptable to use the N-word in schools? Before political correctness came in.

Using the word 'spaz' or 'retard' in that way needs tackling too, its offensive to disabled people

Also, 'slags', 'sluts', 'ho's' etc, as they are generally only applied to women and what is SO wrong with sexual promiscuity?

Hmmmm.... That's SO BLONDE !

There seems to be a bit of low grade philosophy at work here and a basic misunderstanding of why school children call each other names, constantly poke fun at and insult each other.

Kids in the middle of puberty (and that's who we're talking about) are at sea in many, many ways. Using "that's so gay" is really no different for them to "spaz" or "dickhead" or "four eyes". It's simply a way of saying (to themselves) "I'm very normal indeed (I hope) and I know where I stand in the world". Which, of course, they know they don't.

Teenagers identify with this group or that (and flit and change continually) until they find a place where they feel they can look at the world and say "I am what I am", and while the overwhelming majority of teenagers have no problem at all with the notion of homosexuality, are far less uptight, worried, confused or in the dark than a similar group would have been twenty years ago, they all use "that's so gay" as an expression to simply mean "that's rubbish". As incomprehensible to me as "sick" meaning "brilliant" but, crucially, with zero homophobic overtones. Who will start a poster campaign when the linguistic fad swaps from "that's so gay" to "that's so blonde" or "that's so Northern"? Who will start the poster campaign that says "100% of kids who wear glasses are called "four eyes by their peers"?

The language will alter over generations but the behaviour will always exist as people in the most turbulent phase of their lives negotiate the bumps and obstacles of puberty and growing into young adults. Identifying who you are, what you care about and what you believe is a bumpy process and by attacking a minority you clearly identify yourself with a majority (i.e. "I'm very normal indeed").

Although I appreciate the sentiment behind this poster campaign, whoever thought it up is either unaware, or knows and doesn't care, that within minutes of them going onto the walls of Britain's schools someone will scrawl under the headline "THATS SO GAY" the simple and defeating one liner
"yes it is".

Lastly, I honestly believe that the generation who are at school now need no education at all in the business of not discriminating against gay people (or any other people) and that a campaign like like this could actually be counter-productive.

"Using "that's so gay" is really no different for them to "spaz" or "dickhead" or "four eyes".

Well, not surprisingly, I wouldn't want my children saying any of those, either!
But you miss the point. If "four eyes" was used to describe a pair of undesirable trainers or a broken phone then there might be a parallel. "Gay" is being used as a generic word to describe something useless or pathetic. Not as an insulting thing to say to an individual.

Minimonty everything you say sounds at surface level quite convincing until you remember that teenagers, actual real teenagers not just adults remembering bring teenagers, say they are unhappy about hearing gay used as a generic insult. Does their experience just not matter?
Incidentally not a word has ever been written on any posters I have up to do with sexual orientation. Not a single one.

"Fast forward a few years, we all grew up, and this new generation challenged the use of this language"

Adults telling pubescent kids not to do things the adults disapprove of has never had resounding success in the past, usually the opposite effect in fact, and I doubt this will be any different.

IMO this is an older generation, which themselves changed the meaning of the word, not liking it that a new generation, is changing the word's meaning again. It's just another sign of the generational shift going on.

The real irony is that this young generation is probably the least homophobic ever. They really are not the problem, targeting them is a huge own goal IMO.

My father told me recently that when he was at school, homosexuality was a criminal offence and only legalised in 1967. It is a big shift to go in such a relatively short time interval from that to now "celebrating" what is, in fact, an unfortunate condition which I would not wish upon anyone. Would not the best solution be for everyone (including children) to keep quiet about their own sexual proclivities, get on with their education and take up sport or learn to play a musical instrument instead of obsessing about sex? Teenage girls should practice the piano, not safe sex.

I cannot believe people are arguing against this campaign, such ignorance, I haven't heard one gay person arguing agsinst it.

Ivremember my uncle sounding like some of the posters here. Saying nigger isnt offensive, black people say it.

That sort ignorance about the power of words to hurt, just allows things to go unchecked. because it belittles the damage language can have.

The ability for society to stop using offensive language is very apparent for those of us that remember the 70s.

Language forms prejudgists and allows them to flourish.

Davejones I seriously hope you are taking the piss.

Have you been in a secondary school recently, monty? I can't remember the last time I heard the expression 'four eyes'. Certainly no kids use dickhead in the classroom, and on the rare occasions I have picked up the use of 'spaz', the kids have been describing themselves when they've been clumsy and have been completely unaware of its origins, so are not attacking a minority.

'That's so gay' on the other had is used casually all the time, even to me as a teacher. It doesn't register on their list of words that might cause offence, and yet it is causing offence, hurt and upset. To the teenager in my class who is suspecting that they might be gay, it will make a difference to hear teachers say 'don't use gay as an insult, it makes you look like you think there's something wrong with being gay'. And if teachers keep picking up on it, it will disappear from casual usage in classrooms as it registers on that list of unsuitable words.
That's a start.

Davejones you just can't be for real.

mimmum - "can't be for real" - why not? Do I not speak logically and factually? Do you rely upon reason and empiricism to debate or do you instead prefer emotion and base your arguments upon emotion?

See

www.bnp.org.uk/news/national/ethical-banking-co-op

Homosexual acts are a dead end and should be discouraged

If you are talking logically and factually, ( ) then how can you support this? Given the global population explosion, scarcity of housing in the UK, worries about running out of fuel etc, how can you support discouraging sex acts that don't end in reproduction (ignoring the fact that many gay couples manage to have children anyway).
And wouldn't it be a great way to tackle the problem of teen pregnancy? Turning them all gay by mentioning homosexuality?

Why is it always that when sexuality is mentioned, homophobes start banging on about sex? And being gay isn't contagious, spread by words.

You don't speak logically, you speak absolute utter bullshit. Factual would be something like this - "being gay is natural and also children should feel safe in the classroom" (don't even try to debate that with me, being gay is both normal and natural within the basic dictionary definitions of those words)

Then you cap it off by linking to the BNP. Why the hell would I look at anything they have to say?? Although the link address says something about banking, I have no idea what that has to do with this campaign unless you're spamming, and I'm certainly not going to read it

Penis-in-vagina sex with a condom is also a dead end. As is Penis-in-vagina sex with the pill. As is a man and a woman having oral sex. As is a man and a woman having anal sex.

Therefore, we must discourage all straight people from ever having anal or oral sex, and using contraception is unacceptable, because it's a reproductive 'dead end'

hmm

Also, heterosexual people who have been told they are completely infertile, must choose to live a celibate life. They are not able to 'reproduce' and so it's a 'dead end' and thus they must choose to not engage in dead end sexual acts

Lilka - steady on, girl - the BNP piece is about Musnet's campaign along with Stonewall, and talks of the contrast between the Coop bank's ethical stance and the hypocrisy of a homosexual, drug taking banker in charge of that ethical bank. Thought you would be interested in all aspects but.....

Dave, you are stating opinion as fact. Are you religious by any chance?

Sorry - Mumsnet - a typo

You do not address me with the word 'girl'. You address me as 'Lilka'

I don't read the BNP at all, ever. End of that line of discussion