Gay, Bi and Transgender young people in our schools

Firstly I need to say that I didn’t use the word ‘queer’ to substitute for ‘gay’ as some in the Rainbow Community describe  themselves or are so  labelled by others. I come from an era where the word ‘queer’ had very negative connotations, so I ‘won’t use that to talk about friends, students or anyone else in the community.

Right I got that off my chest. For teenagers, the years between 12 and 20 are difficult enough time; facing everyday issues and struggling with identity are in themselves a stressful time. For those who are trying to work out their sexuality identity, the struggle is that much harder. Much of the ‘journey to self-realization’ happens while they attend our secondary schools (in NZ).

As teachers and those who work with our students, we have a special responsibility to allow that journey to happen in a safe environment. Sadly, this is not always so. Suicide figures for teenagers in the Rainbow Community’ are much higher than for the general population. While there has been an improvement in support for all students at secondary school in the last few decades, we still have a way to go for those who are ‘different’ in any way. For the RC students, that is an absolute truth.

Some schools are lucky enough to have the PSSP (Peer Sexuality Support Programme) in their schools, but these schools are a minority. All schools by law must have ‘anti-harassment’ policies, but not all schools implement them in the manner intended.

Teachers and those who work in schools bring with them their own understandings and positions about the RC, sometimes holding very narrow and unsympathetic views. At best these people keep those views to themselves, for a range of reasons, including religious beliefs, cultural understandings and views that are ‘uninformed.’ Others are just ‘uncomfortable’ around RC students, preferring to ignore issues that arise in their classrooms. That they have an obligation as teachers to uphold ‘anti-harassment’ policies is neither here nor there. I guess you could say the same about other school policies. It comes down to the ‘collective buy in’ of staff members. Some do, others don’t.

Young people are increasingly searching for support and that can best be delivered by teachers who have a better understanding of the issues faced by our RC students (and others). That means, staff development and time to reflect. Sadly, that is not happening to the extent that the RC needs. For those schools lucky enough to have the PSSP Programme in tier schools, then there is a good starting point; both for staff development and dialogue with students. There is support from the Ministry of Education’ in New Zealand and from the strong Teachers’ Union, the PPTA, but we have a long way to go before all students feel safe in their schools.

It was great to see the revival of the Hero Parade, now aptly named the Pride Parade. Auckland’s mayor and the Auckland Central MP played a part in this fabulous celebration for the Rain Bow Community. Long may it continue, this time without break for a decade. It was so good to see young people out there, saying---‘we’re back!’

Texas wants to be the real 'lone star state.'

I read with interest a report that said that some of the populace in Texas wish to leave the USA and go it alone. That they are the 15^th biggest economy in the world speaks heaps for such a desire; they could actually do it. Apparently there has always been a move in Texas (and in other states) to do just that, but it has always been a small minority of Texans who wish to follow through.

I have often wondered at why more states don’t have movements to leave the Union, but not quite so stridently as Texas. There seems to be a move in many countries to ‘fragment;’ from Spain, to The Russian Federation and possibly regions within China. If we looked hard enough, I guess it wouldn’t be hard to find other examples of regions wishing to break away from the ‘mother state.’

I wonder if there is any such move in New Zealand. The only area I can think that would lean that way is the inland area around the East Coast. They after all never bowed down to the Crown in our struggles here.

West Australia would be the most logical state in Australia to have such ambitions and they have the wealth to manage such a transition, but in all cases, I doubt that the aspirations of the few would become a reality for the many.

What then will happen in Texas? I guess things will carry ion as per normal. I cannot see the USA fragmenting any time soon, but who knows what ‘conditions’  and events will turn the dribble into a flood? The process of ‘nation making’ has always been and always will be a continuing force in our future.

Facebook---is it allowing too much 'unreal' communication?

Facebook is part of the lives for a huge number of people worldwide. It has allowed many people to communicate in an instant throughout the day (and night!) and probably been instrumental in millions of real time liaisons, often resulting in permanent relationships. It is loved by most and has opened the ‘doors’ of communication to a vast number of people who may have normally remained lonely, isolated and friendless. Yes, Facebook has a great deal going for it.

It has its downsides too. Many of the so-called ‘friendships’ are shallow, unreal and possibly dangerous. Communicating with someone you have never met can have its issues; namely distance, possible misinformation, criminal activity, ‘grooming’ and downright misrepresentation of character and identity. That is just a short list.

Those issues have always been with us but Facebook allows for a far greater participation in social interaction for a huge number of people. Facebook often changes the way it runs and its rules. If a person is not up with the play, they can be left ‘exposed’ to the surveillance of countless millions of people they do not know, in any sense of the word. Hence, it could be said that Facebook is potentially a dangerous space for the naïve, young and not so young. Trust is a word, not a reality for many users.

For those of us who work with young people, we know that Facebook is an integral part of their lives. We see their ups and downs; the dangers, the sadness and anger when things go wrong. In its extreme, it can be life threatening as young people grapple with their own problems, issues and life journeys. Parents are often totally unaware of the actions and activities of their children online; not just with Facebook of course.

Facebook can be all consuming; taking young people out of their reality and interrupting other important tasks, including education, participation in other ‘healthier activities and risking the formation of real time and place friendships. Tell any teenager that and they will vehemently disagree with you, conveniently forgetting that they may well have been the ‘butt’ of a cruel ‘gossip circle’ in the past week.

Those working with young people are themselves barely able to keep up with social media developments; Facebook just being one of them. We should all assume that the kids are way ahead of us in such matters. Thereon lays a danger. We as adults, parents and caregivers are not up with the play for the most part. Below the surface of the young peoples’ behaviours there is often a whole lot going on that we have no idea about. Facebook may be the ‘header,’ but the machinations will be totally hidden, leaving us thinking that the sullen mood is ‘just one of those things’ that teenagers go through.

Leaving things alone and doing nothing is no longer an option. We must become more familiar with the good and the less good of Facebook and others (yet to come!) social media platforms. We indeed have our work cut out for us. One thing we can do is be open to communication with our ‘charges,’ be we parents, teachers, counsellors or anyone else with a stake in the future of our young people.

Will we be able to swim on the 'new' beaches at the Onehunga Foreshore project?

The Manukau Harbour has been seen as the ‘poor sister,’ to its busy and dazzling counterpart on the other side of the Auckland Isthmus. This has not always been so however as in its early development the Manukau represented a ‘faster and more direct’ journey across the Tasman Sea to Australia. It was only after ships became too big to navigate the treacherous Manukau entrance that Onehunga became left behind on some sort of time warp.

The same could be said for the recreational use of the Manukau. In the early days of settlement, it was possible to see ladies dressed in their fashionable bathing costumes alighting from horse-drawn changing carriages and the ‘bay’ was quite the picnic spot.

Then came the pollution; some from badly run industrial sites and of course the terrible sewerage ponds and plant near the once beautiful Puketutu Island. One would never consider swimming amongst such filth then and even more so once the bay became disconnected and landlocked because of the new motorway.

The ‘bay’ as some of you will know is one of my favourite places (when the tide is in) for walking my beloved Jack Russell, although ‘walking’ is a bit tame to describe her manic rushing about and playing with her best friends (Doggies of course). The ‘bay’ is one of the few places where we can let our dogs loose.

Things are about to change. Maybe, we will be able to swim again, once the new beaches have been constructed on the other side of the motorway. Perhaps our dogs won’t be welcome during Summer time daylight hours, but everything is really moving along and in a few years we will be able to enjoy the ‘fingers of fill that are thrusting out into the bay. If only we could be sure that the new beaches will be clean enough; that is the question.

I have begun to swim at an off the leash area next to Waikowhai Bay, about three bays around from Onehunga. The only problem is the ‘hike’ back up to the upper car park after a swim. That sort of negates the idea of having a refreshing swim. However, the water felt and looked clean and my enquiries resulted in advice that the Manukau is fine for swimming so long as one does not do so after heavy rain. Is that not the same over the Isthmus, on the ‘sparling Waters there?

Let’s hope that things will be great for the new development and that once again, Onehunga can assume a position it so richly deserves.

Dick Smith doesn't like New Zealand beetroot in a can!

I thought that when I heard ‘the’ Dick Smith on the radio this morning, bemoaning the fact that New Zealand was responsible for the demise of the Beetroot’ farmers in Australia and that Heinz had shifted their production of beetroot to NZ, causing the loss of many jobs; both in the canning industry and for the farmers who grew the beetroot.

For a start, I didn’t know there was a ‘dick Smith.’ I had always thought it was like Jenny Craig; if there was a real person they had long departed. I now stand corrected.

Dick went on to claim that New Zealand beetroot doesn’t taste as good as the Australian product. I would have to conduct a ‘blind test’ to work that one out. He also claimed that New Zealand farmers would get their comeuppance when Heinz put the same pressure that was purported to have been placed re pricing on Australian farmers. He has a point there. Why would Heinz give a stuff about Australian farmers (and possibly NZ ones, next) when it all comes down to competiveness and profit margins. I guess ‘they will shift to China like everything else’ is what he is saying.

Maybe NZ and Aussie should work together on these issues. We do not want to be pushing Aussies out of jobs and the same should be true for them, re NZ. Unfortunately the real world of ‘global markets’ doesn’t operate like that.

So, is this another case of ‘sour grapes,’ something akin to the Aussie dude who questioned the quality of our NZ White wines? NO, I don’t think so. Dickey boy has a point, other than the one he made about ‘taste.’ Global marketing is what really drives these moves and the swings-and-round-abouts may well come back and bite us in our collective bums.

There was once a beautiful Princess called Princess Hekia!

Many sad stories are told about the land of Educasia, not the least about Princess Hekia. Her relationship to the ‘Family’ was one fraught with undertones of doubt and mystery. She had only recently arrived in the ‘Family’ but that did not stop King Jono from elevating her to great heights.

Oh yes, others in the ‘Family’ were most put out, quite literally in some cases, but their names quickly receded into history. Jono saw her as a way of keeping his supporters happy, particularly the ones from far off regions of his realm. King John decided that Princess Hekia should be made responsible for the ‘learning of the young people of his kingdom. He had heard that she had an interest in this position.

Princess Hekia moved into the newly furnished offices and sent for her underlings. She was determined to make changes to the way things had been. She met with the leaders of those charged with the learning of young people and these important people learnt very quickly that it was her way or the highway. The fact that there were many highwaymen already operating did not concern her. Princess Hekia had read somewhere that other Kingdoms were using new methods of running schools and that along with one of King Jono’s supporters in Council, the leader of the Merchants Society, there was now a strong push to replicate these methods in Educasia. Even when the leaders in the present system pointed out that there were many failings in these schools, she did not listen, such was her determination to please King Jono.

As word filtered out through official notices and promulgations, a great deal of unrest became apparent in the Kingdom. Educasia was quite unlike some of its neighbours; indeed it was seen as quite an enlightened Kingdom, with a long history of tolerance. Some would say that the King or Queen as recent history had proven, held their position at the behest of the people, all of whom had a say in who should be their leader.

People other than just employed officials began to leave notices nailed to trees and some were even printed by the members of the ‘Teachers Guild.’ The parents of many of the children also began to speak out, but all was in vain; the King and his Princess simply did not listen, no matter how much evidence that such schools were repugnant, the Guild and parents’ group produced.

As if that issue wasn’t enough to inform the King and the Princess that all was not well in the Kingdom of Educasia, another favourite product of the King’s ‘Think Tank,’ a new system of remunerating the teachers and their helpers was introduced. ‘New Pay’ was based on a system used in a neighbouring Kingdom; a huge Island Kingdom, across the wide ocean. This system used a new technology; one that had also failed in that Kingdom, but that was not taken into account by the Kings ‘advisors.’ So it went ahead and within weeks, there was an outcry at the inaccuracies of this system.

‘All will be fine,’ Princess Hekia decreed. ‘Give it a chance,’ she exhorted, while King Jono watched from his throne as he thought up more schemes to divert the peoples’ ever increasing doubts about his rule.

Every week the problems remained and there were murmurings about the stupidity of the system. King Jono began to look quite nervous when he made appearances in public. It seemed that wherever he went, he was dogged by those affected by the New Pay system. Stories circulated about people not being paid and how schools had to dip not their ‘grants’ to enable teachers to be able to feed their families. Finally, King Jono brought in a ‘fixer,’ much to Princess Hekia’s chagrin. The fixer was a smooth operator and the body language of the Princess said it all; she was not impressed at King Jono’s action.  

Smooth talking ‘fixer,’ immediately released an enouncement that he would make things right, but sure enough--- the problems continued. Finally along with the Princess and the King, the ‘fixer’ announced that the Royal Mint was going to strike more coins in order to bring in extra workers to make the system work. The teachers, officials and the parents shook their heads in amazement and decided to bide their time.

Watch out for Part 2 of ‘The Princess’s woes.’

Our MPs should represent a broad spectrum of our society, right?

I think most New Zealanders would be reasonably comfortable with the above statement. Our Members of Parliament should reflect all sections of society and the current system we use to vote our members in goes a long way to achieve this. However, it also throws up some rather interesting individuals, who tend to be on the edge to put it mildly.

Mr Prosser is such an example. The New Zealand First Party put him high enough on their ‘List’ to ensure that if they crossed over the required 5% threshold, he would get in. Surely they knew about his tendency to have ‘brain farts,’ as some have put it, some of them bordering on the extreme and most certainly the ridiculous. I wonder if this will come back to haunt them, but then again, maybe it was a cool calm and calculated move on the part of the party that seems to be quite effective at garnering enough support from certain sections of society that when added together, are more than capable of boosting the party’s fortunes. Winston Peters, the ‘Dear Leader’ is well versed in playing this ‘game.’

Mr Prosser probably says what a significant number of New Zealanders, albeit a small minority would like to say, but have the good sense to shut their mouths. I would not be surprised if Mr Peters quietly encourages such members to make statements that he knows will ring a few bells with people. Even the controversy that results could go under the heading; ‘any publicity is good publicity.’ I’m not so sure.

I suspect that the recent statements and writings of Mr Prosser would have embarrassed quite a few party members. Will they make their feelings known to party officials or will they just bide their time until it all blows over?

I must say, that some of the reactions to Mr Prosser’s ranting have been disproportionate to the actual event and comments, especially from overseas sources have been a little bit precious, some from countries whose human rights records leave a lot to be desired. Still, New Zealand can ill afford to have potential trading partners view us with anything less than adulation for our way of life and record on ‘things that matter.’

It is a pity that we all can’t just see the guy for what he is ----‘someone who burps before he thinks,’ but then again, maybe he really does think like that. Oh well, we have seen it all before and no doubt there will be other ‘fools and half-brainers’ in Parliament who will have their time in the sun too.

So, do our MPs reprenst the views held by all NZers? Well, I suppose they do. That is the price we pay for having 'freedom of speech.' I guess we can put up with the fools. We can certainly boot them out every three years.