When  the advocacy began that finally resulted in the addition of the words “sexual orientation “ and “gender identity” to the student policies of the Oklahoma City Public schools, being as it was the Buckle of the Bible Belt and there was an extreme animus toward all things Gay and Lesbian, and knowing resistance would come from a visceral reaction to those two words, for the first three years of advocacy, no document referred to Gay and Lesbian students but to ”sexual minority youth”. 

It was a practical choice so that discussions would be on the actual topic, the need to have policies cover sexual minority students, without having to deal with any baggage connected to the words “Gay” and “Lesbian” and to leave room open to automatically add newly ascertained Gender variants even if at the time we did not have the word for something yet.

The T was added to the G,L, and B when it was obvious this was something major that was included in sexual minority youth. It was clear that over time, there would be more terms. The Rainbow Alphabet is proof we anticipated correctly.

Unlike what people have been assuming, some dressing me down claiming it was all selfishly about Gay with great certainty, and some wanting to argue they are more fully informed of all the details even more so than I am, it was the way it was. Although in conversation Gay and Lesbian were mentioned, in the original proposal and early talks, Sexual Minority Youth was the topic.

It was also easier for the original committee chair to say after he, out of nervousness, did not take a deep enough breath at the beginning of a long sentence and choked on the last word, “Lesbian”. This term kept the possibility of this happening in the future at bay and him less likely to avoid the topic in order to avoid any future choking up.

The first time the descriptors, Gay and Lesbian, were insisted upon was when a supportive elementary school principal who was on the policy committee asked for something more familiar than the vague term being used. At this point, for ease and clarification, it was accepted that sexual orientation in the mind of the committee members was easy to grasp as they were familiar with the broader term beyond Gay and Lesbian. The committee also agreed that as more was learned, sexual orientation would be a better term to use in discussion because it left room for further inclusion.

The idea that the advocacy began limited to Gays and Lesbians is a groundless assumption as the documents housed at the University of Central Oklahoma will show that our original term was all inclusive even of things we were not aware of at the time.

This is one reason that I do not abide those who say Gay men want to control everything to put themselves first.  Some might, but not in this case.

The advocacy in speech and writing had initially addressed sexual minority youth.

At a Community meeting I was challenged by a young person to justify myself because I was not doing my job and was limiting protections because I had said nothing about any progress or advocacy for Intersexed students. I had to explain we were advocating for all sexual minority youth known and yet to be known with no specific group being singled out  because, obviously to me, that person fit into sexual minority youth and was covered, and I had learned a new variant after I asked him to explain what it was, but he refused because he shouldn’t have to, so someone else did. He also had to be told this was not my job. Advocacy took up my personal unpaid time so I should not be treated like a disappointing employee. 

When actual language was to be presented to the school board for approval, knowing there would be some push back, we presented language that included the words, “Or for any other reason real or perceived”, after the usual Department of Education list of protected classes, knowing it was extremely inclusive while still leaving room for personal bias. 

As the head of the committee revising the policies and I knew, the wiggle room that would exclude the sexual minority youth would become obvious because of the subsequent complaints of unequal treatment and the offending staff members’ excuse being that the language wasn’t clear.

That is exactly what happened in the two years that language was there and was proof the language must be specific and inclusive.

So, again as a reminder, 

• the advocacy did not begin for Gays and Lesbians as some would want to believe and complain about as being self-serving, but for all sexual minority youth of which they were a part and would include all known and yet to be known gender variants. It only became Gay and Lesbian for further clarification of sexual orientation, a term the committee had some grasp of and preferred to use.
• The original officially proposed inclusive language simply added “or for any other reason real or perceived” after the already existing language knowing it was too vague and would need to be more specific.

During the advocacy the board was constantly reminded they had a choice. They could protect these kids because it was the moral thing to do and it was, after all, their responsibility to make schools safe for all students who have to attend by law, or they could do it for the selfish reason of avoiding litigation as they could not plead ignorance of a situation and need because they had been hearing bout it for over a decade and often in public.

When the language was finally added, the explanation was that the Matthew Shepherd Bill was recently passed and that increased their liability and, according to the board member making the proposal, thank gawd, out of sheer luck the weekend before he made the proposal for the additional language he happened to find on the internet that they had this liability now and why inclusion was important. The person making the proposal to the board referred to the packet of information he had supplied each member as a result of his discovery which, in reality, were the reports they had been receiving over the years and finally saw we had been right and more helpful to them than they were to themselves.

To ensure that all students were covered and they were too,  the Board added Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity bringing the whole thing back to sexual minority youth as a group about whom we had been speaking for the 12 years it took to get something done.

To further clarify, I had been reading all the historical revisions of Stonewall and, as I had  been involved in Marsha Johnson’s post mortems and spoke with her roommate and friends at the time of her death and saw how within a few scant years the stories I was hearing were not anything like the experiences and eyewitness accounts of those there that night in 1969, so to avoid the battle over who is included, the term sexual minority was chosen so as not to highlight or raise up any one group as is being done now.

I present this information because I have reached my limit in tolerating those who  relate stories with certitude while I know they have no idea what the actual facts are while knowing they are preserved at a university to be discovered later and hopefully return the story to reality.

We began advocating for all sexual minority youth not any specific ones and in a round about way with different wording accomplished the goal.

In the warm fuzzy version of history, the school district “embraced” diversity. In reality the Community forced them to address it or face preventable litigation. Avoiding law suits because of the harm they let happen to a student is not “embracing” anything. It is being forced to accept in self-defense.

Give credit where due. It was the old guys who forced the district’s hand, and it was the old guys who advocated for all those covered by the umbrella term, Sexual Minority Youth, to get the job done and have the district protect all students even the ones whose label is yet unknown.

We were inclusive and ahead of the time in acknowledging that there are gender variants of which we have no knowledge yet as the field is relatively new. So those who claim we were self serving and only out for the Gays need to do some research.

The advocacy was for all gender identities, gender expressions, and all sexual orientations. To say otherwise is false and that falsehood needs to end.

.

.

.

.

.

.