I came across this article while I was searching for something online for another class. I thought I would put it on my blog because I thought it was encouraging to find out that there are resources made to help teachers to talk about gay issues in the classroom. I have heard many times that talking about these types of issues with elementary school is inappropriate because kids are too young to handle such a controversial issue. The truth is, as Debra Chasnoff points out in her film It's Elementary: Talking about Gay Issues In School, kids already know a lot about the world around them. Students are not hearing about gay issues for the first time in the classroom. Instead, they are coming into the classroom with knowledge, and often times, with biases and prejudices that they may bring from home. This video, although I have only watched clips, shows that students are really knowledgeable and compassionate when they are given the chance to discuss homosexuality. As one reviewer says, "One of the most striking aspects of the film is the depth of awareness and sensitivity students illustrate regarding the issue". What I think is especially interesting is that Debra shows classes of students grades K through 8 talking about the issue, and the first graders were the kids who were more open minded and offered the most insight. This helped me to realize that it is crucial to be talking about these types of issues at an early age, before students become stuck in a certain negative mindset. Additionally, this particular review addresses the fact that we are not hesitant to bring about topics of race or ethnicity in the classroom, so why is homosexuality still such a taboo? One's sexuality is just as much a part of their person as their race, and we should be able to have a discussion regarding homosexuality with students, as it is reality and something that they are aware of and have an opinion about at all ages.
review of film:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3935/is_/ai_n9093531
offers video clips:
http://newday.com/films/Its_Elementary.html
Monday, October 27, 2008
Monday, October 20, 2008
blindness
I remember seeing the preview for the movie Blindness a couple of weeks ago. To be honest, I didn't think anything of it, other than I thought it looked like a movie I would not want to see. To me, it just didn't seem interesting, but I never thought about what the movie was presenting to its audience.
After talking about it briefly in class, I already began to form an opinion on the film. Reading the articles on the blog, my opinion got stronger.
We talk a lot about seeing diverse characters in literature, and the last topic of people with disabilities really made me think. Do I remember ever reading a book with a character that had a disability as the lead? I don't. My group and I talked about how important it is to have these characters, not just so kids that do not share the same disability can become exposed to it, but also so that the kids who are living with that disability can see characters like themselves in literature. More importantly, they can see these characters not struggling, not being seen as "closer to god" as one of the articles described, but just living.
This is important not just in books, but in other types of media too, such as film. One of the articles also mentioned how people with disabilities are often made villains in the media. Thinking back on the movie Blindness, I can see how this has detrimental effects.
The movie includes characters who lose their sight. A movie with a blind person as a lead would be great, but this movie turns blindness into a dangerous disease that not only negatively affects those who "contract" it, but also threatens society as a whole. This is not only very offensive, but is also very hurtful to those who are blind, and to all those who may see the movie and not think about it critically. What image is this movie presenting to us? It is showing those who lose their sight as animal-like, unable to control themselves and unable to think. As the articles posted said, it is presenting blindness as not something that is simply different than what people may experience, but as something that is dangerous, and something that should be feared. This is the complete opposite image that should be presented, and is something that is rightfully getting furious responses.
I think it is very interesting that in defense of the movie, one of the articles mentioned how blindness can have two meanings- and that this movie was merely a metaphor for how society tends to turn a blind eye to important issues. This may be true, but the same metaphor could have been accomplished without creating a film that was so offensive. Also, then, I think the fact that the creators of the movie were "blind" to this issue, and ignored how offensive its images truly are, is quite ironic.
After talking about it briefly in class, I already began to form an opinion on the film. Reading the articles on the blog, my opinion got stronger.
We talk a lot about seeing diverse characters in literature, and the last topic of people with disabilities really made me think. Do I remember ever reading a book with a character that had a disability as the lead? I don't. My group and I talked about how important it is to have these characters, not just so kids that do not share the same disability can become exposed to it, but also so that the kids who are living with that disability can see characters like themselves in literature. More importantly, they can see these characters not struggling, not being seen as "closer to god" as one of the articles described, but just living.
This is important not just in books, but in other types of media too, such as film. One of the articles also mentioned how people with disabilities are often made villains in the media. Thinking back on the movie Blindness, I can see how this has detrimental effects.
The movie includes characters who lose their sight. A movie with a blind person as a lead would be great, but this movie turns blindness into a dangerous disease that not only negatively affects those who "contract" it, but also threatens society as a whole. This is not only very offensive, but is also very hurtful to those who are blind, and to all those who may see the movie and not think about it critically. What image is this movie presenting to us? It is showing those who lose their sight as animal-like, unable to control themselves and unable to think. As the articles posted said, it is presenting blindness as not something that is simply different than what people may experience, but as something that is dangerous, and something that should be feared. This is the complete opposite image that should be presented, and is something that is rightfully getting furious responses.
I think it is very interesting that in defense of the movie, one of the articles mentioned how blindness can have two meanings- and that this movie was merely a metaphor for how society tends to turn a blind eye to important issues. This may be true, but the same metaphor could have been accomplished without creating a film that was so offensive. Also, then, I think the fact that the creators of the movie were "blind" to this issue, and ignored how offensive its images truly are, is quite ironic.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)