The bigger picture

Remember the reaction by Ellen DeGeneres to the shooting earlier this year in California of a 15 year old self-proclaimed gay boy Larry King? It's here if you missed it. According to the ever- emotional Ellen, it was all about gay hate and discrimination.

Before I continue, the usual disclaimer (of course he didn't deserve to die.) But, as I suspected at the time, the unseemly rush to embrace this case by gay groups as an example of the poor treatment of homosexuals was a ridiculous over-simplification.

Newsweek bravely runs a long account on the background of the late Larry King. According to the article, he had various diagnoses of psychological problems as a child (ADHD, "reactive attachment disorder", autism). He started telling students he was gay when he was 10. He hung out with girls. By 12, he was on probation for a vandalising a tractor and in counselling. At 14, he told his (adoptive?) father that he was bisexual. His father says he did not reject his son because of this, but Larry started telling teachers his father was hitting him. Authorities put him in a group home, and he was taken to gay youth group meetings.

He started dressing like a girl, wearing make up to school and stilettos (!). (Do they allow girls to wear stilettos?) He told his mother he wanted a sex change operation. The article strongly indicates that he was not exactly shy and retiring about these changes:

....teachers were baffled that Larry was allowed to draw so much attention to himself. "All the teachers were complaining, because it was disruptive," says one of them. "Dress code is a huge issue at our school. We fight [over] it every day." Some teachers thought Larry was clearly in violation of the code, which prevents students from wearing articles of clothing considered distracting. When Larry wore lipstick and eyeliner to school for the first time, a teacher told him to wash it off, and he did. But the next day, he was back wearing even more. Larry told the teacher he could wear makeup if he wanted to. He said that Ms. Epstein told him that was his right.

Ms Epstein, an assistant principal, is gay herself, and is seen by some of the other teachers as having been far too encouraging of Larry. One teacher complained:

She [the teacher] was approached by several boys in her class who said that Larry had started taunting them in the halls—"I know you want me," he'd say—and their friends were calling them gay.

Ms Epstein appears to have generally downplayed the prospect of any action.

The most amazing story of teacher support for Larry is this:

One teacher was very protective of Larry, his English teacher, Mrs. Boldrin. To help Larry feel better about moving to Casa Pacifica, she brought Larry a present: a green evening dress that once belonged to her own daughter. Before school started, Larry ran to the bathroom to try it on. Then he showed it to some of his friends, telling them that he was going to wear it at graduation.

There's plenty more in the article; it's a fascinating read.

The thing is, Ellen got this story completely wrong. Assuming the reporting is basically accurate, (yes I know, perhaps a risky assumption) it shows how amazingly willing the Californian education and child protection system was to accommodate and even encourage a troubled, possibly gay, possibly transgender boy, who insisted that he live out his perceived sexual or gender identity in a highly attention seeking fashion since before he was even a teenager.

His killer had a troubled background too, from a broken home with drugs and domestic violence featuring. His was left alone a lot, and seems to have an unusually detailed knowledge of Nazi Germany. He was, in short, far from your typical example of how a modern, half-way well adjusted American teenage boy would react to silly taunts by a cross dressing boy such as Larry gave out.

Anti-harassment strategies in schools in America seem so to have gone so far that they are emphasising sexual identity issues rather than de-emphasising them, which I would have thought is the more appropriate attitude for the education system.

Here's my simple version of a school policy for sexuality issues, based on privacy:

1. You are all too young to be having sex anyway, you know.
2. You've likely got 60 years ahead of you, as an adult, to work out who you are and who you want to sleep with.
3. We therefore don't care who you're currently attracted to, or even what gender you think you are or should be, and no one else needs to know either. For all you know, your feelings about all this may change in future anyway.
4. You have the right to privacy as to your feelings, and that right should and will be respected. No harassment over presumptions about your sexual feelings will be tolerated.
5. Just get on with some learning, hey?

Sort of a "don't ask, don't tell" policy I guess.

Update: Doesn't it seem that there is an enormous amount of wasted time the American school system could save itself in policing dress codes by introducing student uniforms? What exactly is the reason uniforms seem to have never existed there in the public system?