I attended, via zoom, the January 11 Berkshire Hills Regional School District School Committee meeting that centered on public reaction to the “Gender Queer” book controversy at DuBois Middle School, and I heard a report from a friend about the related school forum held the week before. There was a fair bit of outrage expressed. The prevailing feeling at both meetings was of unequivocal support for the book and the teacher who had offered it as a resource, and there was a feeling of enduring disappointment in the behavior of the school administration and the Great Barrington Police Department. Most of the more than two dozen speakers I heard on January 11 aligned with this view. (It seemed that all the commenting administrators and school committee members did, too.) The exceptions were two parents attending virtually.
I do not feel strongly on the central question of “Should ‘Gender Queer’ have a place in our middle school?” In my experience, kids will gravitate toward the things that speak to them, and those that don’t will go over their heads. But I am going to go out on a limb and suggest that the general South County public might take a somewhat more conservative view. “High school, probably yes, middle school, probably no,” is what I have mostly heard, with some small disagreements within this general position. This is my unofficial assumption after talking privately to more than a dozen local friends and acquaintances.
But the problem is, not one of those people — thoughtful, involved, concerned about the welfare of all — is willing to say what they think out loud. Why aren’t we hearing from them? Some have never spoken up and certainly can’t imagine doing it now, when the punishment for uttering a wrong word could be swift and unforgiving. Others are not new to public speaking, but it is this particularly tricky issue of kids and gender that they are afraid of addressing. They are fearful that by suggesting that the book doesn’t belong in an eighth grade classroom they will be called homophobes. They are scared that to express support for the school or the police would bring down fury on their heads. They are fearful of reaping professional harm by suggesting, “This has all gotten a little out of hand, don’t you think?” One friend used to have a devil-may-care attitude about speaking out on any number of important issues. She wouldn’t touch this one with a 10-foot pole. Another told me his kid had advised against saying anything out loud about it.
“You have nothing to gain,” they said, “and lots to lose.”
That kid is attending a good college. It is a sad state of affairs when college students believe adults have lots to lose by stating their opinions. I don’t feel strongly about “Gender Queer,” but I do feel strongly about the central importance of dialogue, debate, and the free exchange of ideas, and this ongoing saga has revealed that we are not engaging in dialogue, debate, or a free exchange of ideas. Instead, the folks speaking out are, for the most part, those whose opinions hew most closely to the most progressive take on the question at hand, and most everyone else feels, rightly or not, cowed into silence.
In the void left behind, the speakers would be excused for believing that their views are just about universally shared. Silence makes room for a whole lot of mistaken assumptions. What happens when people go underground with their real thoughts, real questions, and real beliefs? Nothing good.
I was pleased to hear State Rep. Smitty Pignatelli openly share his opinions the other day when he was asked on WAMC about the “Gender Queer” controversy. Good for him. He could have just offered a terse, “No comment.” He started out his comments by saying, “I think some people are making a bigger deal out of it than is necessary.”
I agree with him. I am not outraged about the specter of a book ban, because there never was any specter of a book ban. I am not outraged about the police response to the “Gender Queer” complaint, because while I don’t think it was the right call, it is clear that our police force is not a bastion of intolerance. I am not outraged by the school’s ham-fisted response, because they have profusely and repeatedly apologized for it, acknowledging their mistakes, and there is no good reason not to take them at their word. They are just humans and humans make mistakes all day long, even the powerful ones. (As an aside, I hope School Committee Chairman Steve Bannon’s got 20 more years in him. Can you imagine anyone else jumping up to take over his thankless volunteer role when he steps down?)
So, if I am not outraged, why am I speaking up? Because not only the outraged ought to be speaking up. Because when I see so many good people who aren’t willing to make their opinions known in public, it reminds me of all the people who will be expressing those opinions in private this November at the ballot box.
The survival of democratic governance depends on our common right—and also responsibility—to speak freely, even if our voice trembles, even if it results in name-calling. It is called the First Amendment for good reasons. This democratic experiment of ours depends on our listening to one another. It might mean establishing new, real-world environments—NOT virtual environments—in which everyone present can feel empowered to ask questions, to get things wrong, to learn from each other, to disagree, even strenuously, without demonizing the person with whom you have a disagreement, to come to new understandings, to walk away saying, “I never thought of it like that.” I would love to participate in debates like that. They are the only way to make things better.
The mission of Berkshire Hills Regional School District is: “To ensure all students are challenged through a wide range of experiences to become engaged and curious learners and problem solvers who effectively communicate, respect diversity, and improve themselves and their community.”
If we believe in this mission and aim to help our schools fulfill it, we need to be the ones to show how the hard work of community improvement is actually done: by showing curiosity, striving to communicate effectively, modeling face-to-face engagement with one another, and respecting diversity in all its forms, including diversity of opinion.
