(NAME-MCE) Name-mce Digest, Vol 973, Issue 1
Warren Blumenfeld
wblumen at iastate.edu
Sat Nov 29 11:08:16 CST 2008
Thank you so very much Christine for articulating
many of the thoughts that have been on my mind for a number of years.
I truly appreciate you for bringing the issues to
the surface for investigation and dialogue.
I have heard many rationalizations for not
including
LGBT/Heterosexism/Homophobia/Biphobia/Transphobia
issues (as well as issues around people with
disabilities/Ableism) within Multicultural
Education circles, and specifically within NAME,
and I am including below my take on these discussions.
The themes around which some people rationalize
their exclusion of LGBT issues within the context
of multiculturalism center around the following:
1. LGBT People Do Not Have a “Culture”
In truth, all social identities are socially
constructed. Some assert that Sexual and gender
identities do not comprise “cultures,” and,
therefore, do not fall under the category of
“Multicultural Education." Those who hold this
view, according to Sleeter & Grant,
(2007), “[Begin] with the premise of diversity
rather than justice [, which] can lead to
addressing only diversity, and ignoring justice issues” (p. 184).
Koppelman (2008) adds that “[some] say
multicultural education includes recognition of
women, gays and lesbians, people with
disabilities, and other minority groups;
opponents to this idea argue that such groups do
not constitute distinct cultures and therefore
should not be included” (p. 311).
2. Multicultural Education is Based on a Single Focus:
While the multicultural education movement, in
its formative years, focused primarily on issues
of “racial” and “ethnic” exclusion in the school
curriculum, over the years, the field has
expanded to encompass other identity categories
and forms of oppression in addition to racial and
ethnic groupings and racism. Though many
theorists and practitioners (critical
multiculturalists) are making the connections,
some theorists and practitioners, however,
continue to assert that there is a hierarchy of
oppression, and that, for example, race and
racism trump all other identities and forms of
oppression. Others see gender or socioeconomic
class as the primary lens of analysis.
According to Sleeter & Grant (2007), “Many ethnic
studies educators view race as the basic form of
oppression
[w]hile radical feminists insist it is
gender and class analysts argue that it is the
economic structure.” (p. 177). They continue:
"Studying multiple forms of diversity is seen as
superfluous, a waste of time, and is said to
weaken the study of the form of diversity that is
of greatest concern
. Moreover, many educators
tend to view race, gender, and other social
markers of difference as unitary, often failing
to address the nonsynchronous or complex and
contradictory nature of experience within groups
as well as the way in which multiple
characteristics intersect in shaping social life”
(reference to McCarthy, 1990 in Sleeter & Grant, 2007, p. 177).
Kincheloe & Steinberg (1997) critique what they
see as this “left-essentialist multicultural”
position, which they view as focusing primarily
upon a set of fixed properties that defines a category of people.
"The narrowness of essentialist multiculturalism
is further exemplified by the tendency of its
proponents to focus their attention on one form
of oppression as elemental, as taking precedence
over all other modes of subjugation
.Instead of
struggling to articulate and act on the basis of
a democratic politics, the various identity
groups that constitute the ranks of essentialist
multiculturalism have confronted one another over
who can claim greater victimization and
oppression privilege. Thus, essentialist
multiculturalism has concerned itself more with
self-assertion than with the effort to build
strategic democratic alliances for social justice" (p. 22.)
3. Inclusion of LGBT Issues Would Jeopardize
Incorporation of Multiculturalism into Schools
Some maintain that since heterosexism is so
widespread and visible throughout U.S. society,
possible inclusion of LGBT issues and discussions
around heterosexism within an overall context of
multiculturalism could potentially jeopardize
incorporation of multicultural education
curricular issues in educational institutions.
Grant and Sleeter (2007) acknowledge that
“Although a growing number of books for children
and adolescents address sexual orientation,
textbook publishers have avoided referring to
people who are not heterosexual because of
backlash when schools have attempted to do so” (pp. 60-61).
Failing to incorporate LGBT issues in
multicultural education in this context is based
on a paradoxical foundation and upon circular
reasoning: “We cannot discuss LGBT and
heterosexism issues within overall topics of
multiculturalism and social justice prejudice
reduction because there is too much prejudice
against LGBT people.” What is wrong with this “logic”?
4. LGBT Issues Inappropriate for Young People
Discussions of LGBT/heterosexism topics have not
been included in discussions of overall
multicultural topics by some under the assertion
that these issues are unsuitable for young
children, and should be left to parents to
discuss with their children. This reasoning is
grounded on the assumption that LGBT concerns are
based primarily around topics of sexuality and
sex acts, rather than on broader issues of
relationships, culture, history, identity, and social oppression.
In addition, Sleeter and Grant (2007) point out a
major problem in the area of multicultural
education remains a bias against lesbian and gay
parents. “Ryan and Martin (2000) point out that
many educators are ignorant of and prejudiced
against gay and lesbian parents. They argue that
schools need to implement anti-bias training for
teachers and policies that specifically invite
both partners in sexual minority families into the school” (p. 170).
5. Heterosexual Privilege and/or Bias
Some theorists and practitioners involved in
multicultural education and social justice
“refuse to engage with queer theory” (Kumashiro,
2002, p. 57, in Sleeter & Grant, 2007, p. 193)
because it may expose the ways in which
heterosexuals perpetuate oppression of sexual
minorities, resulting in a narcissistic injury to
heterosexual multicultural theorists and
practitioners and to the larger field of multicultural education.
Conclusion
In truth,
heterosexism/homophobia/biphobia/transphobia
(prejudice and discrimination against lesbian,
gay, bisexual, and transgender [LGBT] people) is
pervasive throughout the society and each of us,
irrespective of sexual or gender identity and
expression, is at risk of its harmful effects.
First, heterosexist conditioning compromises the
integrity of people by pressuring them to treat
others badly, which are actions contrary to their
basis humanity. It inhibits one’s ability to form
close, intimate relationships with members of
one’s own sex, generally restricts communication
with a significant portion of the population and,
more specifically, limits family relationships.
Heterosexism locks all people into rigid
gender-based roles, which inhibits creativity and
self expression. It often is used to stigmatize,
silence, and, on occasion, target people who are
perceived or defined by others as gay, lesbian,
or bisexual, but who are, in actuality, heterosexual.
In addition, heterosexism is one cause of
premature sexual involvement, which increases the
chances of teen pregnancy and the spread of
sexually transmitted diseases (STDs). Young
people, of all sexual identities, are often
pressured to become heterosexually active to
prove to themselves and other that they are “normal.”
Societal heterosexism prevents some LGBT people
from developing an authentic self identity, and
adds to the pressure to marry someone of the
other sex, which in turn places undue stress and
oftentimes trauma on themselves as well as their
heterosexual spouses and their children.
Heterosexism combined with sexphobia (fear and
revulsion of sex) results in the elimination of
discussion of the lives and sexuality of LGBT
people as part of school-based sex education,
keeping vital information from all students. Such
a lack of information can kill people in the age
of AIDS. And homophobia (along with racism,
sexism, classism, sexphobia) inhibits a unified
and effective governmental and societal response the AIDS pandemic.
With all of the truly important issues facing the
world, heterosexism diverts energy and attention
from more constructive endeavors. It also
prevents heterosexuals from accepting the
benefits and gifts offered by LGBT people,
including theoretical insights, social and
spiritual visions and options, contributions in
the arts and culture, to religion, to education,
to family life, indeed, to all facets of society.
Ultimately, it inhibits appreciation of other
types of diversity, making it unsafe for everyone
because each person has unique traits not
considered mainstream or dominant. Therefore, we
are all diminished when any one of us is demeaned (Blumenfeld, 1992).
The meaning is quite clear. When any group of
people is scapegoated, it is ultimately
everyone’s concern. For today, lesbian, gay,
bisexual, and transgender people are targeted.
Tomorrow, they may come for you. Everyone,
therefore, has a self-interest in actively
working to dismantle all the many forms of
bigotry, including
heterosexism/homophobia/biphobia/transphobia. I
believe that we are all born into an environment
polluted by heterosexism (one among many forms of
oppression), which falls upon us like acid rain.
For some people, spirits are tarnished to the
core, other are marred on the surface, and no one
is completely protected. Therefore, we all have a
responsibility, indeed an opportunity, to join
together as allies to construct protective
shelters from the corrosive effects of bigotry
while working to clean up the homophobic
environment in which we live. Once sufficient
steps are taken to reduce this pollution, we will all breathe a lot easier.
References
Blumenfeld, W. J. (1992). Homophobia: How we all
pay the price. Boston: Beacon Press.
Grant, C. A., & Sleeter, C. E. (2007). Doing
multicultural education for achievement and equity. New York: Routledge.
Kincheloe, J. L. & Steinberg, Shirley, R. (1997).
Changing multiculturalism. Philadelphia: Open University Press, p. 22.)
Koppelman, K. L., & Goodhart, R. L. (2005).
Understanding human differences:
Multicultural education for a diverse America. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Kumashiro, K. (2002). Troubling education: Queer
activism and antioppressive pedagogy. New York: RoutledgeFalmer.
Ryan, D., & Martin, A. (2000). Lesbian, gay,
bisexual, and transgender parents in the school
systems. School Psychology Review, 29(2), 207-216.
>Dear NAME Family,
>
>I am writing to follow up on the Town Hall Meeting conversation begun
>at the 2008 NAME Conference. In a way, I am writing to follow up on
>the myriad conversations that have taken place at every NAME
>Conference and every NAME Board Meeting since I joined NAME in 1993.
>
>After the most recent Town Hall Meeting, I had a somewhat challenging
>follow up conversation with an outgoing board member--someone with
>whom I think I basically agree with about the politics of
>multicultural education--including how these politics are impacting
>the NAME board and related organizational health--but with whom I have
>always had a strained interpersonal relationship. Sometimes, it is
>the tension part of dynamic tension that makes us act--and that is the
>case here. I am compelled to write this because of the failure to
>communicate that occurred between me and this outgoing board member a
>few weeks ago.
>
>When I joined the NAME board in 1996 (I think), there were some
>complex organizational dynamics at play--a tension between white women
>and black men about how work got done in NAME, as well as a tension
>between founders and other board members also about how work got done
>in NAME--there was some overlap between these tensions, but some
>differences in them as well. Over my time on the board these tensions
>became less intense as the board became more diverse, as
>organizational decisions were made to ensure that diversity continued,
>and as founders became more visibly actively engaged. As many of you
>know, I fought for things while I was on the board and, in so doing,
>left more than one board meeting in tears because of how those fights
>made me feel about NAME and about myself. I had some work to do on me
>and NAME had some work to do without me--so after my term ended, I
>dedicated myself to supporting NAME in other ways. No matter how
>frustrated I have been with NAME, I have stayed involved, and actively
>so.
>
>Before I joined the NAME board, I understand that there were
>challenging board discussions that led up to sexual orientation
>finally being added to the organizational mission statement. While I
>was on the board, but more since I left, I know that there have been
>some members of the organization who have gone so far as to consult
>civil rights attorneys to see if, through a loop hole in the by-laws,
>sexual orientation could be dropped from the NAME mission, and some
>members of the board who have suggested that the multicultural
>education of children has nothing to do with sexual orientation. I
>have heard NAME board members and organizational members who are
>eloquent in expressing their profound critical consciousness about
>issues of race and racism, suddenly unable discuss issues of sexual
>orientation with the same justice-loving spirit because of what "their
>pastor" said.
>
>I have also heard NAME members and board members suggest that NAME
>founders and, more generally, older people, perhaps especially older
>black people in NAME, do not "do" anything and, further, have "never"
>done anything of value or import to the field or to the organization.
>
>While I feel despair when I hear these things being said, I know that
>my NAME friends, some of them my closest NAME friends, are some of the
>worst offenders on all fronts--my NAME friends are, in fact,
>homophobic, heterosexist, racist, and agist. The truth is, I am too--
>I would venture to assert that we all are. What makes us different--
>as NAME people--from the rest of the ists in the world, is that we
>came to multicultural education and to NAME because, ostensibly, we
>recognized the impact of isms on ourselves and others, that this
>impact was antithetical to justice, and that we could do something to
>stop this impact and facilitate justice--that we could move ourselves
>and others to resist and reject these isms and build anew through
>multicultural education.
>
>I am acutely aware that while all issues of majority/minority
>differences and related prejudice, discrimination, and oppression
>share certain elements, they are also very different. I understand
>that it may make movement with respect to sexual orientation more
>difficult for some if we draw comparisons between the experiences of
>prejudice and discrimination that people face on the basis of sexual
>orientation to those that people face on the basis of race. To be
>sure there are comparisons to be drawn, but if in drawing those
>comparisons we alienate those who might otherwise become allies, we
>need to look for alternative arguments to bring folks along--yes, even
>inside NAME. Isn't that what we do as multicultural educators?
>
>I want to acknowledge that I have probably worked harder to build and
>maintain relationships with founders, older folks, older black folks,
>and others who struggle with the sexual orientation issue, more than I
>have with the younger, generally lighter skinned folks (at least those
>who have continued to attend NAME) who eschew the contributions of
>NAME elders and seem, to me, to dismiss the obvious link between race
>and age in assessing these contributions. So, on the one hand, I have
>prioritized relationships on the basis of affinity for the race-based
>dimension of multicultural education, but within these relationships,
>I have pushed folks--sometimes pretty hard--around the sexual
>orientation issue. On the other hand, I have not made the same effort
>to engage, in many cases other white people, on the basis of affinity
>for the sexual orientation-based dimension of multicultural education,
>and then, while engaged on this topic, push them--with equal fervor--
>on issues of race, especially from a generational point of entry into
>debate. I have work to do to honor my commitments to both race and
>sexual orientation in relationship to my NAME involvements.
>
>I also want to mention that I do not believe that the sexual
>orientation/race schism in NAME or generally is as clear cut as the
>preceding paragraphs may make it sound. For purposes of discussion
>here I am sure I have oversimplified it, though not intentionally so.
>So, if you have depth to add to the conversation here, by all means
>add it. In writing this I am mindful that no matter how hard I try to
>be comprehensive in my analysis, I will inevitably miss important
>points, so please, help me by raising them in reciprocal dialogue.
>
>As alluded to above, many people--and many of them people of color--
>have come to NAME with high expectations and end up walking away in
>frustration either because of the homophobia and heterosexism OR
>because of the attention to sexual orientation. We only scratched the
>surface of this at the Town Hall Meeting, but we need to dig into it
>much more deeply because if NAME does not successful deal with the
>meaningful integration of this issue into our organizational practice,
>we will fail as a multicultural organization.
>
>While it is true we may fail for other reasons more related to our
>failure to grow from an idealistic grassroots childhood into a
>sophisticated non-profit adulthood (another conversation altogether),
>part of our waning attendance is because we have not figured out how
>to DO what we as multicultural educators SAY--we talk our walk very
>well at least in compartmentalized ways, but we have yet to truly walk
>our talk--we have the theory down pretty well, but not the practice.
>I can talk about race and racism at the most sophisticated levels, yet
>I do not, as alluded to above, exert myself to the extent that I could
>to engage other white folks at NAME in the examination of these issues
>as they impact our organizational dynamics. Too, while my very best
>friend in the world is gay, I do not exert myself to the extent that I
>could to engage those most hostile to his presence, many of them
>people of color in leadership roles in NAME, in the effort to make
>NAME a more affirming place for him to be--yet I implore him to attend
>the conference every year. So even those of us who have come to NAME
>and have stayed with it in spite of its challenges find ways to
>retreat within NAME to affirming sub-groups--while some of this is
>natural and positive, some of it occurs as an act of avoidance.
>
>This avoidance grows when we look at those who have come to NAME but
>not stayed. Many folks get to NAME and forget that multicultural
>organizational development work is extraordinarily hard work--they
>come to NAME with a sense of idealism and forget that NAME is working
>to chart a challenging new course in trying to walk its talk--folks
>come and expect to find utopia and when they don't they retreat to
>other organizations entirely--organizations that represent the
>identity that they want the most affirmation for when that identity is
>not represented in NAME as they imagined it would be--when they find
>they have to fight for that identity in NAME too.
>
>Some of us who have come and stayed, as well as some of those who have
>come and left, fight/have fought only to make NAME but another
>organization that affirms only that one identity.
>
>We all seem to forget--at least from time to time--that the fight in
>NAME--while it has all the elements of the fight outside of NAME--is
>also different because we all come to NAME, at least in theory,
>because we want the fight outside NAME to be different--we come to
>NAME for rejuvenation and forget that we also have to practice our
>work with each other (walk our talk) if we are going to become more
>successful (more skilled) in pushing the outside envelop forward.
>There is no real role model for what NAME is seeking to accomplish--we
>are developing the model as we walk it together as unchoreographed as
>that walking is at times--so we have to come to NAME understanding
>these complexities and open to only moments of rejuvenation
>interspersed with hours of continued challenge and struggle. If we do
>not learn it in NAME, we can not practice it elsewhere.
>
>I must be drawing to a close because I start this sentence without any
>idea of where to take this conversation next, nor how to bring it to a
>logical conclusion. So I will end, perhaps tangentially, by
>mentioning the day today--Thanks Giving Day--a day riddled with racist
>history, and yet a day today that I appreciate because it reminds me
>to be grateful for what I have--to be attentive to my ongoing Freirian
>struggle to become more fully human. I am today, as I have been for
>15 years, grateful to NAME--it is NAME that calls me to remember the
>racist history of this day and that also reminds me to be thankful for
>my tremendous good fortune--much of which has come to me through the
>work of multicultural education.
>
>With thankful multicultural spirit,
>
>Christine (aka Christie and Chris)
>???
>Christine Clark, Ed.D.
>chriseclark at mac.com
>702.896.1527 Telephone
>702.896.4529 Facsimile
>702.985.6979 Cellular
>
>"What are the standards that we have? If we're concerned about
>unarmed truth--understanding this condition of truth is allowing
>suffering to speak--and unconditional love--understanding justice is
>what love looks like in public--then the question is, what suffering
>voices do we hear...and what kinds of concerns about justice are made
>manifest...?
>
>
>?Cornell
> West
>
>
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>This is a mailing of the National Association for Multicultural Education -
>(NAME) Listserv. The materials included reflect
>diverse perspectives of NAME Listserv
>participants and do not necessarily reflect a
>position of the National Association for
>Multicultural Education. If you would like to
>subscribe (or unsubscribe) to this listserv go
>to
>http://mail.nameorg.org/mailman/listinfo/name-mce_nameorg.org.
>You can read all past postings in the archives
>at http://mail.nameorg.org/pipermail/name-mce_nameorg.org/
>
>
>Name-mce mailing list
>Name-mce at nameorg.org
>http://mail.nameorg.org/mailman/listinfo/name-mce_nameorg.org
>
>
>End of Name-mce Digest, Vol 973, Issue 1
>****************************************
Dr. Warren J. Blumenfeld
Assistant Professor
Multicultural and International Curriculum Studies
Department of Curriculum and Instruction
Iowa State University
Ames, IA 50011
wblumen at iastate.edu
515.294.5931 office
515.232.8230 home
More information about the Name-mce
mailing list