Professional Documents
Culture Documents
LIVEOUTLOUD.INFO
PAGE 1
Questions
Quotes to Consider
It is important that we question the distinction between insults and hate speech. Furthermore, it is important to
ask ourselves whether we believe words can evolve, be reappropriated, and change meaning. As members or
allies of the LGBTQ, do we believe words like faggot, homo, and queer, can mean something different than
they used to?
When insults are appropriate, in fact, they are no longer insults, but rather acceptable ways of describing people one does not like. Banning the use of a word or even broadly suggesting in a code that all students should
be tolerated does not guarantee that the experience of the school climate improves, especially if nothing else
really changes (Mayo, 2006, p. 41).
Questions
What do you think about what Ana said? What do you think about what Darren said? Do you feel
that one of these students had a stronger opinion than the other?
What would you have said to Ana? To Darren?
Does emphasizing the actions of individuals distract from thinking about school culture on the
whole?
What do you feel is meant by the phrase the social fractures that maintain difference? (see quote
below)
Quotes to Consider
We all know that words are powerful. It seems, however, that we have gotten fixated on speech as the one
thing we need to change in order to make people feel safe and respected.
In these examples of students looking for the right words to say to others, one gets the feeling that the correct
words have a magical quality that will heal the social fractures that maintain difference (Mayo, 2006, p. 43).
LIVEOUTLOUD.INFO
PAGE 2
Topic #3: Can Changing Individual Behavior Bring About the Kind of Change We Want?
Questions (see quotes below)
Do you believe your school engages in discriminatory practices? If so, what do those practices
look like?
Do you think emphasizing individual accountability for safe environments is the best solution to
problems of inequality or discrimination?
Quotes to Consider
In dealing with hate speech and discrimination, schools often cite individual behavior as the source of the
problem. Saying the right thing only requires a momentary change of pace for a homophobic student. Part
of the frustration of the majority of students who feel they are being unfairly asked to monitor what they say is
that they cannot see any real change in the school from not saying all they would like to say. While an individual can cause considerable damage by saying hurtful or hateful things, we need to consider the context in which
these things are saidwhat the school climate is like and whether or not schools and their employees discriminate against LGBTQ studentsand the tendency for school codes of conduct to focus on individual action.
We also need to focus less on what nondiscrimination policy does and more on what we want our school community to become or be like.
Even policies and rules that purport to protect sexual minority students will not work because they are still
guided by institutions intent on maintaining a veneer of acceptance of sexual minorities through the establishment of conduct codes centralizing individual agency. Though individual acts are sanctioned, schools as institutions continue to engage in substantially discriminatory practices (Mayo, 2006, p. 34).
While damage done by hateful speech is considerable, we need to think more broadly about the context
in which that speech takes place as well as the tendency for codes of conduct to focus on individual action
(Mayo, 2006, p. 34).
In other words, focusing too much on what a nondiscrimination policy or conduct code does and not enough
on what one might want ones school community to become means that the play of meanings and spaces for
different kinds of communication will be diminished (Mayo, 2006, p. 42).
Finding the right words only requires a momentary abatement of the business as usual bias. Part of the frustration of the majority of students who feel they are being unreasonably asked to curtail their speech or alter their
word choice is that they cannot see any real change in not saying all they would like to say. Perhaps because
they have lived under school codes and relatively silent curricula, students have learned that changing the
words one calls another person is sufficient (Mayo, 2006, p. 44)
References:
Mayo, C. (2006). The tolerance that dare not speak its name. In M. Boler (Ed.), Democratic dialogue in education: Troubling speech, disturbing silence (pp. 33-47). New York, NY: Peter Lang Publishing.
LIVEOUTLOUD.INFO
PAGE 3