If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
Also, fat kids don't have to hide the fact they're fat from their parents, or repress "unnatural desires" for the same sex. I'm sure the church does not preach against fat kids, or acne faced kids like it does with gay kids either.
You can get bullied for many things, but at the end of the day, struggling with your sexuality is difficult whoever you are, but it must be worse if you're gay. You have to hide it from the whole world.
ok, but I still have the same question. I mean, what was his motivation for attending a catholic school where the doctrine is clearly unfair and prejudice against him? Why not go to another school?
Oh and for the record, in my experience, Catholic schools don't preach against homosexuality, not to the promote abstinence instead of contraception. The worst mine did is simply only mention the bare minimum required by law and nothing else (which in my opinion is still counter-productive, but they don't preach against homosexuality). Mine tended to have a "let's pretend it doesn't exist and hope it goes away" attitude towards sex.
Yeah, I figured it was something like that. But I mean, if it really does become a serious problem, the kid is likely to bring it up with the parents and hopefully something will be done about it. Although I'm sorta on shaky ground with that one since each family handles those sorts of things differently.
Is bullying really that serious of a problem (I'm speaking generally now not just bullying towards gays and gender queers)? How do we know that?
Very true. Fat kids, Black kids, spotty kids etc all at least should have their parents on their side - gay kids are often completely alone.
Like I said in my first post in this thread. Either you have a policy on bullying in general, which makes sense to me, or you have a policy on every conceivable kind of bullying
So do children from families where the father is in prison or their mother has left them have a higher rate of self-harm and attempted suicide rates? No - it's gay children. Children from your example can at least talk about their problems openly while gay children usually cannot.
It is, as kermit has rightly already said, a NON-story.
It's all very well saying that society should change - but it's not, certainly not fast enough.
So part of the anti-bullying policy of any sort should be better education of children on the effects of bullying - which the church (and other organisations) are obviously not doing well enough (whether it be gay, fat, spotty bullying etc).
It's obviously a NON-story to you because you no doubt grew up as a happy and popular straight child. Not everyone is as fortunate as you ...
The point being, that he should not assume that this is a NON-story to everyone .. it isn't.
But if you read the story, it says that the church "is abdicating its responsibility for children's welfare by refusing to target homophobic bullying in schools".
To me that implies it IS targeting OTHER forms of bullying - but not homophobic bullying. Or am I misunderstanding it?
Ah, well the story will put the thread in context for you. I agree - all bullying is bad but if some form of bullying is overlooked for whatever reason, surely this should be addressed? And that is the context of my debate on this story ...
You're being led.
The Church does not have a specific policy for specifically homophobic bullying, and because of that the NASUWT feel it is "failing" homosexual children. It has a general policy on general bullying, which should suffice, as bullying is bullying is bullying. There doesn't need to be a specific policy on homophobic bullying because homophobic bullying is not inherently different to other forms of bullying.
To answer your previous question, incidences of depression, self-harming, and outward signs of anger such as anti-social behaviour are higher in children whose parents are in prison. The same applies to children in care, too, and I note that schools don't have a specific policy on bullying against them, either.
Bullying is not a non-story, but this is the definition of a non-story. The NASUWT have an anti-religious agenda, and always have had, and this is juat another pathetic little dig. Nothing more, nothing less. It goes to show what teachers really think though- that most forms of bullying don't matter.
My opinion is that schools don't give a toss about any victims of bullying, so there's no homophobic discrimination, they're just twats.
Poppy-cock. Your opinion of the NASUWT is one thing, but to purport that teachers don't think bullying is a serious matter is a grossly offensive nonsense.
Indeed, and no worries teagan. Like kermit said, people get paid a lot to make something seem like it's saying something when it doesn't.
I'm just wondering how you know what the intentions of the NASUWT are?
My experiences are that teachers couldn't give two fucks about bullying. Is that offensive? Not as fucking offensive as sitting there and doing piss all when their pupils complain of bullying.
Now now Maggie, don't want to strain that old heart of yours.
Cool, that's your experience of teachers, but to then say that all teachers don't give a fuck is a gross generalisation. I had some fantastic teachers who didn't tolerate bullying at all.