Rick Mercer's Rant

Post Reply New Topic

link here

This has prompted a great deal of discussion in this country.

My take is that we will never eliminate bullying--thus it has ever been. But the experience of young people who are bullied varies depending upon the help and support that they receive from their families, their schools, their peers and their communities.

Every lesbian or gay person that comes out makes a difference. The bully that has a lesbian aunt or gay neighbor better understands that homosexuality might not be typical, but it is normal. The young person bullied for being gay (whether that young person is actually gay or not) who has a gay teacher or gay peers has a place to turn to express frustration and seek support.

So long as the gay people remain in the closet it maintains the notion that being gay is worthy of shame. It further empowers the bully just as much as it further victimizes the bullied.

There is an important distinction to be made between individuals' right to privacy and a moral imperative to waive that right. Every person is free to choose to remain in the closet, to be sure. But no one who does so can pretend that this choice does not have consequences.

So, for the record, I'm gay. Just in case anyone missed it.

I was very impressed by the Rant. I'm glad I happened to be watching RMR this week (normally I don't think to because I'm busy with stuff, but I needed a break that evening). So, Rick is gay himself, I take it? I hadn't realized that.

Anyway, what I think I agreed with most was his comment that they need to hold an assembly, with police officers present, and really slam home the point that the bullies are to blame for these tragedies. Unfortunately, unless the principle happens to have strong feelings about such things, I doubt it will happen.

By the way, what has the debate and controversy been about? I did see him on BNN last night (I was trying to find a different channel but stopped when I saw Rick Mercer) talking about it. But surely there isn't that much need for debate? Or is that just wistful thinking?

The controversy largely boils around the implication that there is an obligation for gay and lesbian public figures to come out.

Everyone can agree that bullying is bad, but there are plenty who are content to see homosexuality continue to closet itself.

It looks like we're the only ones on here who know who Mercer is and bother to comment!

I'm willing to understand that some gay people view it as part of their private lives and want to keep it that way (although I think that's because of an intolerant upbringing or living in a situation where homophobia could make their lives difficult). But as Mercer said in an interview, it is ultimately someone's choice to come out. They should just be aware that their action has indirect consequences.

But are the people criticizing the Rant conservatives who, knowing they've lost the legal battle, want to be able to pretend that homosexuality doesn't exist? If so, it's depressing that such people can still make themselves heard.

i saw the video and i got mixed up. is he saying that 300 suicides a year are caused by the ill effects of closeted homosexuality? or is he saying that bullying is causing suicides and some of the bullying is aimed at homosexual people? or that only one suicide was a known gay person but we can assume there were more?

Well, RMR always presupposes an awareness of current events. Jamie Hubley's suicide was front and center in the news--and so his suicide was the one that was the focus. But his suicide was not unique (there are 300 teen suicides every year) and homosexuality is one of the leading causes.

But unlike other leading cofactors (such as aboriginal identity), gay teens have fewer resources on which to depend. Significant resources go into aboriginal communities to provide help and support for teens who are struggling with depression, schizophrenia or anxiety, and some successes are encouraging. But it is much harder to reach gay and lesbian teens because of the vicious circle of denial, depression and anxiety.

Rick's central theme is that when high profile GLBT people come out it provides evidence to LGBT youth that their sexuality will not be an impediment to their success. They will not be condemned to a life of marginalization.

fixed it for you. i lived for 4 years on remote first nations and there was nothing of the sort - not even crisis intervention training or suicide awareness workshops for teachers or community members. in the cities, however, there some attempt to help them. even in spite of the assistance, the suicide rate of first nations people is 6 times higher than for non first nations peoples, which is even higher than for homosexual teens i believe. so perhas not the best example.

my city has made drastic changes in terms of providing a safe environment for students to be "out", which i detailed on this thread:

http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt162592.html

it is improving, at least in some cities. i had an openly gay teacher in 1989, even! more can always be done, and in fact i would say that it is still socially unacceptable to be homosexual in smaller towns and rural areas (and first nations, for the most part - double whammy).

Rick Mercer's point was badly delivered, as it did not really say a whole lot of anything except for vague emotional statements that were not really backed by anything solid. ... except one statistic that included straight teens as well.

We will take that matter up in private.



I cannot, of course, speak to your experience. But I can speak to mine. My responsibilities extend to the 198 First Nations and hundreds of reserves located in this province; their community health centres, their band operated schools and their delivery of health, social, child and family and education services. And those services most assuredly exist here.

The epidemic of aboriginal suicide is by no means sufficiently answered, but elders and leaders in First Nations and aboriginal communities are much better seized of the issues than comparable individuals in the LGBT community.



We can agree to disagree about how well his point was delivered. After all, the Rant is--by its very title--opinion, and strident opinion at that. The emotional character of the statements and the lack of a demonstrated evidence base is simply in keeping with the format of the Rant, generally.

homosexual teens have the same services, so your point is moot. previously, you were talking about services to specifically "provide help and support for teens who are struggling with depression, schizophrenia or anxiety", not general health or education services for the entire community. *every* community has such basic services as you have mentioned, but i did not see any evidence for targeted services such as you previously indicated.

i worked inone of those band-operated schools, and they had full autonomy as to how monies would be spent on students. which meant 0 education regarding suicide prevention or mental health support of any sort, except what the teachers themselves introduced of their own initiative.

they are, really? i am not sure exactly what you're saying with this statement. that elders are generally aware? well, it isn't helping at all if they are aware, so that's sort of irrelevant.


well, you wanted to discuss the rant, specifically. so i took it at face value.

EDIT: i find it interesting that you have no comment about the possibility that a least one school board is already addressing your concerns about support for homosexual youth.

Your failing to make the distinction between the provision of services and the ability or willingness of youth at risk to access them. It is meaningless for a crisis line to exist if a gay teen is too afraid to pick up the phone and talk to someone about his sexuality.

LGBT youth are marginalized from access to many services not because those services aren't available to them, but rather because these services do not expressly speak to the concerns of LGBT youth. By being presented as services for all youth, they become services for none.

By way of contrast, First Nations communities have somewhat better success, because they have the ability to speak to youth within the community in terms that clearly target their needs. LGBT youth on reserve are a glaring omission in many communities, to be sure, but at least crisis services on reserve aren't targeting themselves at white youth.



Again, I can't speak to your experience. In this province there is a high degree of centralized support by First Nation organizations for First Nation schools. There is, for example, a school assessment system, developed and managed by First Nations educators to support Band Operated schools and bring them to levels of success comparable--or better--than those found in provincial schools.



Elders and community leaders cannot fail to be aware. When a First Nations youth commits suicide, the community is far more aware of the event and the circumstance than LGBT community leaders are when a gay youth does the same.

Are they helping? That's difficult to say--how much worse could communities be in the absence of efforts on part of elders and leaders to stem the epidemic of youth suicide on reserve?

Don't imagine for a moment that I believe that First Nations youth are less at risk than LGBT youth. All I am saying is that there are means of targeting intervention and resources at First Nations youth that do not exist for LGBT youth.



Of course school boards are. It's more than a mere possibility, it's a fact. But the proof of the pudding will lie with the willingness of LGBT youth to make use of these initiatives, and that will depend very much on the individual teachers, counsellors and principals who are implementing them.