Exgay movement pundit Warren Throckmorton protests sex-ed literature that was allegedly distributed at Brookline High School on April 30 at an event hosted by GLSEN Boston.
Throckmorton calls the literature “pornography” — and it’s not difficult to see why he would call it that: Excerpts from the booklet Little Black Book: Queer in the 21st Century contain pictures of penises — some exposed for artistic purposes, some to demonstrate the application of a condom.
While I have some serious disagreements with this booklet (I will get to that in a moment), I don’t have a problem with explicit pictures and frank language in sex-ed literature for adolescent and post-adolescent males:
- Sex is, after all, the topic.
- The pictures do not portray sex acts.
- Healthy sexual development and smart decisionmaking requires that men become comfortable with the sight of their bodies.
- Here’s a dirty secret: Even Christians use the f word to describe intercourse. Some male Christians even use a sexist c word to describe “vagina.” So the frequent use of a b word to describe the anus is, quite simply, an honest use of the common language in a context that is, by definition, adult and sexual. Should sex-ed literature promote respectful language? Absolutely. But not exclusively, given the topic and the audience. Sex-ed experts seem to agree that frank language is sometimes more effective at promoting healthy behavior than polite or clinical language.
I also object to a misrepresentation made by Throckmorton.
He complains, “Contrary to public health warnings about the dangers of risky sexual behaviors, this booklet glorifies the riskiest of behaviors and then suggests that the students get tested for STDs every three to six months.” But that claim is not reflected in the booklet’s content. The booklet clearly spells out the risks of dangerous sexual behaviors — without burying the dangers in encyclopedic statistics.
All that being said, I am disturbed by the booklet’s insults against abstinence; its treatment of boyfriends as mere sex objects, perhaps picked up in a park; its failure to acknowledge any ethical decisionmaking; and its promotion — among minors — of bars as an alternative the only social outlet besides Internet chat rooms.
So, Throckmorton’s objections are not without some merit.
[Addendum: The antigay web site that is hosting pictures of the booklet has only posted a few out-of-context pages that depict explicit photos and portray sex-ed educators as encouraging youth to explore bars and to use condoms when having sex. If the booklet details specific STDs; cautionary or ethical considerations to think about; or social alternatives to bars and Internet chat rooms, then the antigay web site is not sharing them with its readers.]Unfortunately, Throckmorton misleads as often as he leads. According to Throckmorton’s press release, “These descriptions of bars suggest where adults can pick up minors for illegal sexual encounters.”
That is not what the booklet suggests; it (unwisely) recommends bars as a place to socialize. Assuming these bars are legally operated, these bars card and reject minors at the door. (I’ve always been carded at bars, on the rare occasions when I go to one.)
For reasons that he does not explain, Throckmorton seems less concerned about underage alcoholism than the imagined danger of minors being molested at bars by gay adults, whom he seems to assume are pedophiles.
(Hat tip: QueerDay)
Just to let you know, the web site that you linked to “article 8″ has been attempting to get the justices of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court” who voted in favor of the Goodridge decision to be removed.
I’ll check the other aspects of the post. But the web site is definitely another manifestation of the radical right-wing religious operations.
I haven’t been able to find any mention of this pamphlet anywhere on GLSEN’s website. I wonder what GLSEN has to say about it.
I looked at the pamphlet at the link provided. I have to say that I haven’t seen the actual pamphlet, so I’m a bit confused. Does the actual pamphlet really jump from putting on a condom to a list of bars? Or are there some pages not represented at the link? I ask this because I think the objection to the list of bars might not be as valid an objection if other avenues for meeting is included as well. Judging by that huge jump in topics, I have to wonder if there isn’t a lead up, with the bar list representing only a part of the places that gay people might meet each other.
FYI, on Stephen Bennet’s blog, https://stephenbennett.blogspot.com/, he includes statements from GLSEN Boston, Fenway Community Health and the Brookline Superintendent of Schools. Those statements make it clear that Fenway Community Health (a participant in the event) and not GLSEN distributed the “Little Black Book” AND that such distribution was a mistake. The book in question is intended for adult audiences (so THAT’S why they included bar information) and was not supposed to be at the GLSEN event.
Stephen then makes a gracious statement:
I sincerely thank everyone involved to bringing the truth to the light. I also thank those who humbly made the statements above, and pray that all will graciously extend forgiveness for a very grave error. We all make mistakes — I’m the first to admit it — and this is how we all grow. When we make a mistake, we admit it and ask for forgiveness. Then, forgiveness needs to be extended — and we move on. I apologize to all if I came across angry – however, I was. This was about the children.
Fair enough, but then he says:
Though I am completely angered that this “Little Black Book” even exists, I am thankful that the above individuals and organizations say they will take whatever steps are necessary to prevent this from happening in the future.
Is he actually saying such a book, FOR ADULTS, should not exist? Does that mean that adults should not get any information on how to avoid STDs? Does he WANT people to die from HIV/AIDS? I’m really not sure.
Throckmorton has tenure?
It’s time to terminate tax exemption for so-called educational institutions.
BTW, we live in Wellesley MA, and for a number of years, I’ve been calling for a termination of the tax exemptions for Wellesley and Babson colleges.
Mike sez: I am disturbed by the booklet’s insults against abstinence; its treatment of boyfriends as mere sex objects, perhaps picked up in a park; its failure to acknowledge any ethical decisionmaking; and its promotion — among minors — of bars as the only social outlet besides Internet chat rooms.
This alone should be cause for concern. Overall, I feel that this booklet is ridiculous for the above reasons you said. It is possible to teach safe sex without getting so colorful, as this colorfullness only serves to reinforce negative stereotypes of gays.
From the looks of it, I wonder if the bars named are the sponsors of this book. It seems like a reasonable approach to the subject of safe sex aimed at the bar going crowd. The topic here is sex not relationships. Which is probably why the treatment does not dwell on fidelity etc but instead shows in clear and simple language how to do it.
The Boston Herald says that the promoters of the event claim that the story is a lie, that the pamphlet was never there to begin with.
https://news.bostonherald.com/localRegional/view.bg?articleid=83610
I wonder if any of the wingnuts will retract their “outrage” if it turns out to be a hoax.
That is not what the booklet suggests; it (unwisely) recommends bars as a place to socialize.
No it didn’t. Ignoring the fact that it was merely a pamphlet (not a booklet, and there is a difference) the pamphlet merely listed a few clubs that cater to a primarily gay crowd for one or two nights a week. I saw no recommendations there in the list. I saw no suggestion that gay kids go to those places. It merely listed them. It was little different than what was available through BayWindows.com–Boston’s weekly gay paper. Indeed, it was probably copied from BayWindows.com.
Quite frankly, Boston’s gay club scene is pathetic compared to cities I’ve lived in in the past. Maybe it’s a result of assimilation here in MA. But I wonder where young gay kids are supposed to meet each other. I met my partner (we’ve been togther26+years) at a gay bar. Where are young gay guys supposed to meet each other nowadays? gay.com chat rooms?
Raj,
1. the booklet consists of at least 25 pages. Something that size is not a pamphlet.
2. The antigay web site that I linked to is hosting only a few excerpts from the booklet. They don’t appear to want antigay readers to know what most of the booklet is talking about.
3. From the section on bars:
The text does emphasize socializing. Unfortunately, what little of the booklet that we’re allowed to see by the antigay group suggests that the booklet writers had no clue about the opportunities for socializing outside of gay bars, which is one of the reasons why gay bars have been on a long decline.
Points taken, Mike.
I’ll repeat a couple of points, though.
First, virtually all of the bars mentioned in the brochure/booklet/whatever_you_want_to_call_it can be found through the baywindows or innewsweekly (another gay publication) web sites. Any gay boy can find them These places aren’t secret. All any gay boy would need to do is to find these sites, and I’m sure that more than a few have. From what I saw in the early 1980s when my partner and I were going to gay clubs, what were apparently young gay boys didn’t have any problem finding gay clubs. They couldn’t get in because they were too young, but they would hang around outside apparently hoping to get picked up. The complaint regarding the bars is ludicrious.
More recently, the Internet has made it easier for gay kids to hook up. I click onto the gay.com boston chat room every once in a while to see if there is anyone intelligent chatting there. Rarely. But I’ve captured the lingo for “married to a woman” and “cheating on my boyfriend” (“need to travel”) I’m sure that there are more than a few gay kids there, though.
Second, I’ll reiterate. If it were not for the fact that I was promiscuous in the 1970s, I would never have met my spouse. That is very true and we got together on the same night that my brother married his opposite-sex spouse (as they know–long, but interesting story). And more than a few of us older gay couples seemed to have met at gay clubs.
Gay people need a place to meet. Gay boys and gay gals, too. It may be unfortunate that the ‘”meat rack” that is most gay clubs appear to provide the place. More recently, there have been developed primarily gay gyms, but they are expensive, and they can be somewhat intimidating for us lil’ gay men. High schools provide a place for hetero meeting. But gay men and gay women need a places to meet, too. Unless someone is extremely lucky and can find a same sex partner outside of a gay club (which I did with my first partner in the very early 1970s), apparently gay clubs are the venue for most meeting places. My partner and I met at a gay club. And most of our friends met at gay clubs.
It would be a mistake to denigrate these venues ab initio. It really would be. What would you suggest as a substitute? High school? Gay people need venues to meet each other. They might meet each other in person in gay clubs. They might “hook up” over the internet. In the early 1980s we were in PTown. There was a “meat rack” in the center of town. In 1982. Lots of cute boys. But I had a partner at the time. The same partner that I have now.
Gay people just need a place to meet. Each other.
Social safe havens for gay people, although worth implenting while young…are still not supported.
GSA clubs on middle and high school campuses get shot down before they are started.
Family and church are not welcoming, and it’s rarely a family would want an introduction or inclusion into when their gay teen wants to bring a dating interest home to meet the folks.
The folks usually warn to never do such a thing.
And make no bones about how much they disapprove of their child being gay, let alone having gay friends hang out at their home.
This is why any criticism of what culture develops around bars has been unfair.
But gay men and women who DON’T go to bars, but engage in shared family occasions and committed relationships get trashed too by outsiders.
Can’t win.
It’s gross and unfair, and I really hate the contradiction.
Why is it people are so upset that there is gay/lesbian coulpes/marriages? I mean if you love someone it shouldnt matter if it is man on man or woman on woman regardless what people think if someone wants to be in a same sex relationship it should be their decision not society. I give my hat off to anyone who wants to be gay because that takes a lot of courage
teenager said:
I give my hat off to anyone who wants to be gay because that takes a lot of courage
Thanks for your supportive comments, teenager. Just to help clarify, you might want to consider the above sentence would be more appropriate as: “I give my hat off to anyone who is gay and wants to be honest and open about it because that takes a lot of courage”.
While I understand it was probably just a slip of the tongue or perhaps a language issue, the claim that being gay is a choice (i.e. “wants to be gay”) has been used by many to undermine our struggles and rights. Understanding this should help you in any future discussion. Thanks again.
David