(Page 19 of 73) - Sexual Diversity and Public Schools in Canada and the United States authored by Rayside, David.

There is a core of opposition to any school recognition of sexual diversity that is driven by
abhorrence of homosexuality. The sinfulness or unnatural deviance embodied by it leads to
depravity and sickness, predatory on the young. That end of the spectrum is stronger in the U.S.
than in Canada, but on both sides of the border there are softer versions of discomfort and unease
with sexual difference that shapes reactions to developing full inclusiveness in public schools.
Such views might see heterosexuality as the only natural orientation, and youthful deviation from
it likely to lead at the very least to unhappiness. Without being as extreme as the religious right,
adherents of this view will see homosexuality only though the lens of risk and danger. As a
result, they will want schools to either avoid the subject entirely or deal with in circumspectly.

Such unease can translate into firm resistance as the larger issues surrounding public education
get raised. Adherents to “preservationist” views of schooling will resist drives for more
inclusive schooling as one more in a series of reformist distractions. Many who have no
particularly strong religious adherence believe that schools should teach a set of core values that
preserve important elements of tradition. These and many others are also fearful of exposing
children and adolescents to what they would see as excessive doses of the real world – a world
they see as full of distractions and temptations. And then too there are many who see parental
control and parental teaching as preemptive of schools in such issues as sexuality.

The debates which have so dominated public schooling for decades, then, bring to conservative
ranks a variety of sympathizers who do not have a categorical opposition to the recognition of
sexual diversity. They may well create more doubts about how far schools should go than around
any other gay-related policy areas.

Such debates also create the potential for building alliances between advocates of inclusiveness
and those defending other reformist perspectives, especially where they are under attack by
conservatives. This does not mean that reformers are invariably prepared to address sexual
orientation in their school advocacy, for many will themselves be uncomfortable around issues of
sexual difference or worry that their inclusion on the agenda will jeopardize other gains.

The play of these issues becomes further intensified in the U.S. because the party system reflects
these differences in view. Democrats and Republicans generally differ on schooling issues,
especially on the role of religion in schooling. And because the great majority of elections at all
levels in the U.S., including those for school board, are run on the basis of party-based
candidacies, these issues will regularly get raised. This provides advocates on both sides with
continuing incentives to organize politically.

Canadian school board elections are held at the same time as local elections, but both are more
likely to be non-partisan than federal or provincial elections. It is not uncommon for candidates
for school boards to arise from inside partisan networks, or locally-specific quasi-parties (like
Vancouver’s Non-Partisan Association and the Coalition of Progressive Electors), but even in
such cases, school board coalitions tend to be loose.
GAINS AND LOSSES ON STUDENT-CENTRED INITIATIVES