EventsxDirectoryxCalendarxPersonal Websites of GLBT OklahomansxAIDS & Health InfoxSearchxChatxMessage BoardxAdvertise

Support GayOKC.com! Donate here!		 Quigley - A written verbal reprimand


Get on the list!
Enter your email address here to join GayOKC.com's
mailing list!

What do you think?
CLICK HERE
to post your opinion on GayOKC.com's Message Board!

 x

The following is an email from Joe Quigley
(Posted 4-27-02)

Some of this might be a little redundant, but it needs to be included to see the unified whole.
     Recently I was verbally assaulted on my way home from school. It was the usual situation where a student felt comfortable enough calling someone "Faggot" so long as he could have guaranteed immediate escape.
     I thought a long time over a weekend, and knowing there probably would not be anything the school could do, or might even want to do (a supposition affirmed during a recent meeting with the principal at which he explained there was nothing he could do), I decided to take possession of the word, and show it for what it was. And, so, I posted the following narrative on my door.
    You may have received it before

              FAGGOT
        BUNDLE OF WOOD
      ENGLISH CIGARETTE
              BASSOON

     THE OTHER DAY AS I WAS WALKING HOME FROM SCHOOL AND JUST PASSING CLEVELAND ELEMENTARY, A STUDENT FROM NORTHWEST CLASSEN APPROACHED ME ON HIS BICYCLE. YOU MAY KNOW HIM. HE HAS LONG BLOND HAIR, USUALLY PULLED BACK IN A PONY  TAIL WITH HIS SIDEBURNS SHAVED BACK TO ABOUT HIS EARS.
     AS WE PASSED EACH OTHER I NODDED MY HEAD SAYING,”HI. HOW’S IT GOIN ?”,
    TO WHICH HE REPLIED WITHOUT SLOWING DOWN, “FAGGOT”, AND KEPT ON PEDALING.
    I KNOW THAT THE WORD “FAGGOT” IS GENERALLY USED TO IMPLY THAT THE ONE TO WHOM IT IS ADDRESSED IS SOMEHOW INFERIOR TO AND MUCH WEAKER THAN THE ONE USING IT, BUT I HAVE TO WONDER HOW MUCH COURAGE IT TAKES TO USE THE WORD ONLY WHEN THERE IS A GUARANTEED MEANS OF SWIFT ESCAPE, RATHER THAN TO DISMOUNT THE BIKE AND STAND FACING THE TARGET AND BEING ABLE TO HANDLE ANY RESPONSE.
     IF THIS EXCHANGE WAS MEANT TO BE A DEMONSTRATION OF COURAGE AND STRENGTH, WHERE WAS THE COURAGE AND STRENGTH DISPLAYED BY THE PERSON ON THE BICYCLE?
    I AM SURE THIS STUDENT WILL BRAG TO HIS FRIENDS THAT HE CALLED A TEACHER “FAGGOT”, BUT I WONDER IF HE WILL  INCLUDE THE MINOR, BUT TELLING DETAIL THAT HE WAS ONLY WILLING TO DO IT PROVIDED HE WAS ON A MOVING BICYCLE.

   The principal called the union complaining that I had violated the Poster policy (I have written of this policy before) and trying to get the union to have me remove it.
My purpose had been to claim ownership of the word and show it for what it was, the word of cowardice.
   It wasn't long before I received a directive to remove it which I did.
I had accomplished what I had intended to do as far as not running from the word and giving the student the opportunity to brag about having used it, but, rather, showed I was willing to face it, and it did not have the power it was assumed to have.
     Not content that I had followed the directive, the principal just had to issue a verbal reprimand along with a written copy of it to be placed in my file. This is one of those odd contradictions, a written verbal reprimand.
     There were two parts to the reprimand. The second part being a repeat of the demand that I follow the Poster policy.
     But even in this there is an interesting conundrum.
As you may recall, I received a copy of the policy directed to all faculty, but given only to me. The interesting feature is a section that states after practically listing all possible things that could be hung in a classroom "shall request permission" . This implies that permission can be refused. This is in the policy I received and lived with for one year.
     However, as you may recall the policy finally had to be given to all faculty as the principal got caught in this little ploy when he attempted to misapply another memo.
   The policy given to the rest of the faculty is almost identical except, where the  above quoted phrase appears., this phrase appears. "Shall request and receive". Reading that carefully, it is obvious that permission is automatic with no option for denial.
   A policy with the possibility for denial was given to me, while everyone else was given one where permission was automatic. The word "SHALL" makes that so.
    This is not right, and needs to be dealt with.
The first part of the written oral reprimand is the one that speaks volumes.
     "An unfortunate incident which happened to you occured on your off duty time (I was on my way home from school). You brought this into the school (your workplace) and posted a descriptive summary, which is quite inflammatory . This action can incite dissension on its face

     For whom is it inflammatory, and for whom will it incite dissension?
Perhaps those who would like to use the word "faggot" with impunity.
    Is revealing it as a word used by a coward under cowardly circumstances actually going to divide the faculty and cause people to start fighting?
    I am confused.
Will it divide those who abhor it from those who choose to use it?
And, why is disempowering the word inflammatory while its use is neutral(?).

     I have, therefore decided to send the principal the following response:

"TO:       MR. WELDON DAVIS, PRINCIPAL
FROM: MR. JOSEPH M. QUIGLEY, TEACHER
DATE: 04/24/02
RE:      POSTED NARRATIVE

     As you have stated on more than one occasion, things would be a lot better if the district had a non-discrimination policy that clearly spells out the inclusion of Gay and Lesbian Students.
    I am confident that you would agree with me that even though something might appear to be obvious, sometimes our job as educators is to explain the obvious so that there is no doubt and no confusion. We have done this with those derogatory words that are applied to many groups so that the students know without a doubt that those words are unacceptible and are not to be used, and if they choose to use these words they know there are consequences that they must face.
     However, we fall short in that process when it comes to words like “faggot”, so that students are not necessarily aware that this word, and other pejoratives applied to Gay and Lesbian people, is not appropriate.
     There have been those occasions when I have been  walking toward the bus stop at 23 and May, students from NWClassen have hurled that word at me from an automobile as they passed at 35 to 40 miles an hour. I cannot say who said it at that speed, only that it has been hurled.
     There have been students in the hallways who have taken advantage of the number of people in the halls at passing time who freely vocalize that word toward me or others so that, in spite of saying the word, their identity can be protected by the crowd.
     This same inability to identify the name caller is presented when a student runs down the hall passing my room which is within feet of a corner. If I had to get to the door to apprehend the student, he or she would have had ample time to turn the corner, or run down the stairs. If I were near the door, the name would not be hurled.
     In all these instances, I cannot report more than the fact that the name was thrown out,  but could not say by whom, a situation that eliminates the possibility of correction, punishment, or education.
    And so it was on that Friday when the student chose to direct that word at me as I walked home, and knowing that because of the location and lack of witnesses the school would not be in a position to address the issue beyond a “he said.he said” stand-off.
     In light of this, and after a weekend of reflection I chose to claim ownership of the word, disempower it and show it for what it was, a word used by bullies and cowards. I chose to stand up to the word.
     In retrospect perhaps I should have come to you explaining a situation that you would be powerless to address, asking permission to hang the disempowering narrative. But, in the process of owning and disempowering this word how effective would it have been if permission were to be denied, and the word retain its power?
     I feel it is necessary to point out that when I received your directive to remove it by a particular time and date, it was removed by that time, on that date.
     It concerns me at this point, that even though the directive was properly followed and the incident has now been brought to your attention, the alleged violation of a selectively applied policy is all that is being addressed.
     If a restrictive policy on the posting of any type of material in the classroom can be added to the Faculty Handbook in spite of its being unique to NWClassen, perhaps a nondiscrimination statement inclusive of Gay and Lesbian Students, even though unique to NWClassen, could be added as well."

So there are now separate policies that I am required to follow with the most restrictive being the one of choice when it comes to me. The principal has decided that to take possession of the word, disempower it, and show that it does not have its assumed power is inflammatory, while having a clear cut policy or statement to ban the word is unnecessary.

Joe Quigley

 

Previous postings from Joe Quigley:

 

CLICK HERE TO RETURN TO FRONT PAGE

 

GayOKC.com COPYRIGHT © 1998 - 2002 ROBERT D. ABIERA. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. (NO, THIS IS NOT JOE QUIGLEY'S PERSONAL WEBSITE!)