Liberal Teacher Tells Students It’s ‘Offensive’ to Identify as ‘Straight’

[rogue06]

Regardless of what the story ends up being here, I don't think that there will actually be a move toward declaring heterosexuality to be wrong. I could see putting a kibosh on the word "straight". The simple fact is that the vast majority of people are heterosexual, including most liberals.

I think they're trying to make "cis" the only acceptable term

I remember a feminist blogger named "witchy wind" about 15 years ago who was posting on Tumblr or some such site that all heterosexual intercourse was rape because women cannot consent due to inherent power structures in society. We all had a laugh about it in the politics discussion site I hung out on then, and I haven't seen the idea come up since.

That was actually a fringe view that was making the rounds several decades ago. IIRC, it was associated with Andrea Dworkin

[CivilDiscourse]

So, it's not exactly an isolated opinion.

Here is a teacher newsletter/blog/something, that is voicing the same opinion. https://www.teachwire.net/news/dont-...guage-matters/

[Cerebrum123]

Regardless of what the story ends up being here, I don't think that there will actually be a move toward declaring heterosexuality to be wrong. I could see putting a kibosh on the word "straight". The simple fact is that the vast majority of people are heterosexual, including most liberals.

I remember a feminist blogger named "witchy wind" about 15 years ago who was posting on Tumblr or some such site that all heterosexual intercourse was rape because women cannot consent due to inherent power structures in society. We all had a laugh about it in the politics discussion site I hung out on then, and I haven't seen the idea come up since.

I've seen people say stuff like being straight is a trauma response. There are even LGBTQ people who are saying that you can convert straight people to being gay. They are literally taking the same stance that the conversion camps did but applying it to the opposite side and I've been seeing it appear more and more at an alarming rate.

[Stoic]

So, it's not exactly an isolated opinion.

Here is a teacher newsletter/blog/something, that is voicing the same opinion. https://www.teachwire.net/news/dont-...guage-matters/

Strange that the reason given for considering "straight" to be offensive is not applied to the term "gay".

Perhaps not an isolated opinion, but I think it's destined to remain a minority opinion.

[Juvenal]

Perhaps it is your personal policy to never directly disagree with students, but if ever there was a time to so contradict, it would be in defending oneself in a politically charged situation that is headed straight for the national news and possibly leading to disciplinary option. If the teacher really has nothing to hide here, now would be the time to set the record straight. People who were blatantly slandered should say so, not offer incoherent non-denials.

Checking just now, this one's got no legs outside right-wing media. I'd say he's better off just ignoring them, and that his administration has come to the same conclusion. Did you notice there was another incident with this guy a couple years ago stemming from teaching about the patriarchy? That one never grew legs, either.

Disengagement works. That's why it's my policy.

I don't [teach anymore]. Not for me.

It was difficult for me, too, at first, but I kept working at it, and it got better. I tried many different approaches on my own, and then I asked for advice from people who'd been teaching successfully for much longer than me. I tried those approaches too, and checked to see how they worked out in my classroom.

And now, fifteen years later, I'm the journeyman offering advice to the newcomers.

What makes you think your advice is better than mine?

Having said that, that's a complete non sequitur and you know that. I am speaking with how the teacher responded to being questioned after the fact, not the original alleged incident.

Maybe you think the incident is over because of your experience as a sub. That would be incorrect. So long as this guy has that kid in that classroom, the incident isn't over.

Good on your for spotting the non sequitur though. I changed my focus from the likely affects following from his response for him and his students in his classroom, to the likely affects of your preferred response for you and your students in yours.

And then I stopped and asked whether that concern was moot. There's nothing wrong with objectively assessing one's limitations. Good on you again for looking elsewhere for the work that can best harness your skills.

I've got limitations, too.

For instance, I lack the needed skills to be a right-wing media personality. I can't find it in myself to care enough about an ideology to give up any pretense of objectivity. I'm an atheist because the cognitive dissonance required to remain a Christian as I conceived the term at the time became overwhelming. I'm not eager to entertain those feelings again.

[Mountain Man]

Checking just now, this one's got no legs outside right-wing media. I'd say he's better off just ignoring them, and that his administration has come to the same conclusion. Did you notice there was another incident with this guy a couple years ago stemming from teaching about the patriarchy? That one never grew legs, either.

Yes, the liberal media is quite effective at suppressing stories that make practitioners of their agenda look bad.

Also interesting that this apparently isn't the first time this particular teacher has pulled a similar stunt, which renders your skepticism of the student's account unwarranted.

[rogue06]

Checking just now, this one's got no legs outside right-wing media.

And who is surprised about that? The MSM typically spikes stories that don't fit their narrative.

For instance, when old Joe travels abroad you have to turn to the foreign press to get details of all of his flubs and gaffes because our press rarely if ever covers them.

Occasionally this practice turns around and bites them such as when the New York Times was dutifully ignoring all of the negative stories circling around Obama's Green Czar, Van Jones, disdainfully dismissing them as nothing more than rightwing chatter. That was right up until Van Jones resigned as a result and a red-faced Times had to play catch up, informing their readers of the entire backstory that they had been ignoring so the readers would no longer be kept in the dark.

[CivilDiscourse]

And who is surprised about that? The MSM typically spikes stories that don't fit their narrative.

For instance, when old Joe travels abroad you have to turn to the foreign press to get details of all of his flubs and gaffes because our press rarely if ever covers them.

Occasionally this practice turns around and bites them such as when the New York Times was dutifully ignoring all of the negative stories circling around Obama's Green Czar, Van Jones, disdainfully dismissing them as nothing more than rightwing chatter. That was right up until Van Jones resigned as a result and a red-faced Times had to play catch up, informing their readers of the entire backstory that they had been ignoring so the readers would no longer be kept in the dark.

I'm going to agree with stoic in part here. The opinion this teacher expressed (straight is an offensive description) seems to be not a widely held opinion. I did some googling looking for talk, and there really isn't much there. It's not entirely isolated, as I shared above, but there's if you search for "straight is offensive" or something similar, there's not alot out there. If this was a commonly held belief, you would expect there to be more websites or articles dedicated to calling out this offensive term.

[Sparko]

There's irony there. The term "straight" originated in the gay community as slang for heterosexuals. So, now for the claim that the term they chose for us is offensive to them is kinda funny.

Source: https://getmaude.com/blogs/themaudern/the-etymology-of-heterosexuality

1900s: Straight
The phrase “straight” came out of gay communities in the mid-twentieth century. At a time when gay sex was still illegal, it was slang for “going straight” – as in getting “back on the straight and narrow” after having sex with men. The word “straight” has also given us the concepts of “straight culture”, and perhaps most wild of all, the concept of Straight Pride. “If queer people have drag and disco, do straight people have Maroon 5”? jokes one gay journalist.

© Copyright Original Source

So if "straight" is offensive because it implies others are "crooked" then shouldn't "gay" be offensive because it implies heterosexuals are "depressed and unhappy?"

[One Bad Pig]

Maybe we need to go back to using earlier slang and identifying ourselves as AC or DC.

[rogue06]

I'm going to agree with stoic in part here. The opinion this teacher expressed (straight is an offensive description) seems to be not a widely held opinion. I did some googling looking for talk, and there really isn't much there. It's not entirely isolated, as I shared above, but there's if you search for "straight is offensive" or something similar, there's not alot out there. If this was a commonly held belief, you would expect there to be more websites or articles dedicated to calling out this offensive term.

I heard similar statements regarding mothers being termed birthing people when that first started, yet here we are today with birthing people sections in the gift card aisles around Mother's Day.

I mean, it could be argued that only a tiny fraction of the public are truly confused regarding the difference between men and women but look at where our society is.

[Mountain Man]

Maybe we need to go back to using earlier slang and identifying ourselves as AC or DC.

acdc.jpg

[KingsGambit]

Maybe you think the incident is over because of your experience as a sub.

You've repeatedly referenced a job I held 9 years ago, which I never appealed to as giving me any sort of insight, or even mentioned. It's frankly weirding me out a bit.

[Juvenal]

You've repeatedly referenced a job I held 9 years ago, which I never appealed to as giving me any sort of insight, or even mentioned. It's frankly weirding me out a bit.

Excuse me for assuming you were relying on your experience, however limited, rather than just talking out your patoot.

My bad, carry on.

I'm going to follow my own advice until we next engage on a topic you know something about.

[Juvenal]

And who is surprised about that? The MSM typically spikes stories that don't fit their narrative.

You misspelled fringe media.

Again.

For instance, when ...

... the topic's got nothing to do with your political partisanship and you catch a squirrel out of the corner of your eye, it's like when a dog sniffs its vomit.

Focus, rouge.