Our BetterMost Community > Chez Tremblay
Lawsuit over Brokeback Mountain in class
Mikaela:
Thanks Chrissi. As usual you''re so kind. :)
--- Quote from: ineedcrayons on May 14, 2007, 04:02:27 pm ---Everyone here involved in the situation -- the students, their parents, the teacher -- is a product of a cultural in which pre-adolescent kids are not supposed to be shown explicit sex or nudity.
--- End quote ---
And also, the product of a culture where everyone seems to be suing everyone else for big sums of money on every possible (and impossible) pretext. The teacher in question must have known about *that* risk, just as much as she should have realized it was poor judgement to show this film rated R (even if she disagreed with the rating) to 12-year olds in the US. (But when she chose to do something like that, at least she chose to show a film that could do the kids no harm and might open their eyes to a broader perspective than some of them are evidently getting at home... Imagine what she might have shown them!) Still, there was more than one cultural trait that should have warned her off.
So based on that and the news story I'm a bit curious and not totally certain as to why the teacher did it. Deliberate provocation in order to achieve discussion among the kids and between kids and parents and bring new insights? Promote tolerance? Wanted to just shock and thrill and become popular with the kids by showing something "risqué" and otherwise off-limits? Wanted her 15 minutes of newsworthy fame? Plain stupid and without ability to consider consequences of her actions - i.e. lacking the common sense that Scott mentions? ???
Not that her reasons have any bearing on the reactions of the people whose 12-year old needed "psychological treatment and counseling". :-\ For some reason I totally imagine this counseling to be along the lines of the kind that Ted Haggard used to offer not too long ago. ::) Poor kid.
HerrKaiser:
both postings by Scott and Mikaela above make great sense to me.
In answer to Mikaela's question of "why?" would a teacher do this.... I think this is one small event among thousands that happen every day in public schools where teachers present classroom material of which parents are unaware and about which many would object. Teachers do it because they actually do have a fairly broad scope of authority on teaching materials, and many teachers also have a personal desire to implant their personal ideas on their classes. Most of the time, parents (and the kids) roll their eyes and just let things go that ought not to have been in class; obviously others make a point by taking legal action. My guess is that the teacher in this case was not 'testing the water' to see if any parent would take issue; rather, she wanted to be avante gard in her own mind and viewed that way by her colleagues.
Fran:
--- Quote from: HerrKaiser on May 14, 2007, 05:50:51 pm ---both postings by Scott and Mikaela above make great sense to me.
My guess is that the teacher in this case was not 'testing the water' to see if any parent would take issue; rather, she wanted to be avante gard in her own mind and viewed that way by her colleagues.
--- End quote ---
I believe it was a substitute teacher. She probably didn't know the kids or the parents. The sub probably didn't feel like teaching and took the easy way out: a movie.
The newspaper articles are saying this was a class of 8th graders -- kids in 8th grade are mostly 14 or close to it by the time the school year ends. The 12-year-old must have been double-promoted somewhere along the way, or else the reporters got the grade wrong.
moremojo:
It's interesting that the movie is back in the news after all this time, but unfortunate that is in such a context as this. For such a beautiful, life-affirming work of art, a lot of negativity has accrued around this creation: the humiliating loss at the 2006 Oscars, Annie's embarrassing article attacking the Academy (sorry, Annie, I love ya, but that was not your proudest moment), Randy Quaid's lawsuit, and now this.
My own two cents': The substitute teacher should definitely have sought parental and administrative permission before showing any R-rated movie to students. She showed a considerable amount of contempt for the potential feelings of lots of people by ignoring this procedure (I'm wondering if her sub status gave her more chutzpah for such an action). At the same time, I think the girl's family is overreacting by their absurdly litigious claim, and their attitude does seem tinged with homophobia (and homophobes do not deserve any coddling anymore).
ednbarby:
--- Quote from: HerrKaiser on May 14, 2007, 04:36:38 pm ---Actually, I was only responding to your direct quote...that "God, I hate what Bush has done to this country. So to speak. I also can't help but think that this kind of crap would not fly at all if we had a social liberal in the White House." If that does not mean without Bush as president (and if he wasn't president it would be Kerry) this case would have no standing, then I do not know what you mean. I read your words literally; if your meaning was otherwise, how are we to know?
Again, just responding to the words used, and it seems fair and reasonable to question your belief that social attitudes would be so different (in such as short time) if Kerry was pres.
--- End quote ---
Interesting that you have taken my words so literally, and yet you have neglected to directly quote me when I said not once but twice that the teacher should not have shown an R-rated film to her students.
I'm not defending the teacher. What she did was wrong. But I also think our society is in a sad state when it seems acceptable to many that this girl's guardians are actually *suing* the school board over it. The same guardians who also had a problem with some of the reading material the school was teaching. This was a substitute teacher who did not inform the school or the kids' parents she was showing the film. She was wrong on a number of levels. I don't think the school board should be held accountable for her actions. It would be entirely acceptable to me if I were the parent and a substitute teacher taking it upon herself to show 12-14 year olds an R-rated movie upset me and my child to see that she got fired and never hired to teach there again. But to sue them? That's just insane. And you're right - the number of such frivilous lawsuits in such cases probably hasn't increased since Bush took office. But I think that the current climate in this country that he has largely instigated empowers these kind of right-wing nut jobs to spout their closed-minded little views citing that it is "against their faith."
It's true: I hate what I think George W. Bush has done to my country with his fear- and war-mongering and his pandering to the Christian Right. You don't agree. That's fine. But please allow me the levity to criticize the man just as I have allowed Conservatives the levity to criticize Clinton for 8-plus years, now. It's only fair. And it's still a free country. At least last I checked - I haven't read the papers today.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version