Two more links: hot teachers and a call for support for Zach

I'm in a linking mood today.  Five posts in one day!  Can you tell I'm procrastinating on grading?

Here's a great post from Apocalyptic Historian (aka Lisa) about the professor rating sites and "hotness."  It's a discussion we've had here before, but here's her powerful take:

So a site rating professors on their “hotness” cheapens what we do. And I wonder what students who view that site read into the hotness factor. Do they dismiss it? I assume the “hotness” of a professor isn’t a large impetus for taking a class, but I worry about students like a friend I had in college who assured me that she was going to get an A in one particular course because the professor was a “perv” (her word) and she supposedly gave him what he wanted: she always wore short skirts and sat in the front row. RateYourProfessors.com takes a what is a professional relationship—the student-professor relationship—and situates it in a sexual atmosphere. That the owners and administrators of the site don’t do the same for their sister sites rating teachers, lawyers and doctors just shows how far we have to go in establishing and acknowledging that there must be appropriate boundaries...

Right on.

And thanks to Jonathan Dresner, let me note that Anne Zook links to this appalling story of Zach, a 16 year-old gay teen who has been shipped off to a Love in Action (reparative therapy) camp against his will.  Like so many folks, Zach has a Myspace account with a blog for messages of support.  Let's swamp this kid in love, compassion and prayer!  How I hope that someday he finds a place like All Saints!  If any of my youth group kids are reading this blog, please say a special prayer for brother Zach and all those suffering with him, and give thanks for the community that embraces you and loves you as God made you to be.

As a Christian who knows firsthand how Christ transforms us, I grieve what is being done in His name to this sweet kid.   I've known plenty of folks who went through what Zach is being sent through and are, as we put it, now "ex-ex-gay."  Check out the folks at Ex Gay Watch, and the powerful, moving, and funny "Doin' Time in the Homo No Mo Half-Way House."  Sigh.  I mentioned last week that I planned on inviting NARTH into my gay and lesbian studies class in the fall.  At the moment, I'm so angry about Zach I'm rethinking that decision.

Off for some quinoa and broccoli for dinner, with organic almonds for dessert.

Comments

[djw]

From the NARTH website:

NARTH respects each client's dignity, autonomy and free agency.

We believe that clients have the right to claim a gay identity, or to diminish their homosexuality and to develop their heterosexual potential.

The right to seek therapy to change one's sexual adaptation should be considered self-evident and inalienable.

OK, great. If you do invite them, I think they need to be asked some pretty pointed questions about their relationship to Ex-gay organizations like Love in Action who are willing to do this to people against their will. Are they censured? Kicked out of the network? Is any action taken against them at all? And if not, why not, especially given the affirmation of choice and agency in their mission statement?

Many, many years ago, I let a 17 year old stay on my couch for a few weeks after she came out to her parents and things got ugly. At the time, I thought there must be a sort of underground railroad, a network of safe places for these kids to go, but I don't know anything about any such thing. The world needs it, and thousands of kids need access to information about it.

[Hugo Schwyzer]

That's a good point. I support the individual's right to seek out therapy, as NARTH asks; I don't support it being foisted onto unwilling juveniles. It would be a very good question to ask.

[John]

What would you say about me if I judged Gay Rights organisations by a splinter group like Love in Action? By "reconsidering" your NARTH invite, that is exactly what you are doing-Tarring all Change therapies with that brush, (including ones like Courage) and hearing only one side of the story. ( which is tragic, if true). I'm not suprised NARTH doesn't want to come and beard the lion in your class. I wouldn't either, if you jumped to sweeping conclusions based on one case. It's all very well to parade one's tolerance for differing opinions, but it is cases like this which really show up our (and I mean our, not just your) stereotypes, and show how much the tolerance rhetoric comes from the heart.

[mythago]

John, "gay rights organizations" are not trying to use "reparative therapy" to persuade or force heterosexuals to become homosexual. I wouldn't have any tolerance for a group that did, and I wouldn't expect you to either.

[Hugo Schwyzer]

John, don't worry, I'm going to invite NARTH. I will ask them to comment on Love in Action, however. Remember, dear friend, I post in haste and rethink in leisure.

[The Angry Clam]

And people get upset when I demand mandatory sterilizations of the adult population without a specific reproductive license.

Parents that ship their kids off to these things and, worse yet, places like Tranquility Bay are sick puppies.

[mythago]

It's a handy way to, say, cover up abusing your children, isn't it?

(And you seem rather optimistic about how those licenses would get handed out.)