Even though I agree with you in principle, Ricardo, I'm beginning to have second thoughts. Indeed, Pamela was condescending and did a wrong thing; but as Frau Blucher points out, she is on the side of the angels; and even if she did miss many a teaching opportunity, she may not have missed others. I was also heavily bullied as a kid, with consequences that I feel even today; and one thing I feel in retrospect is that there was never anybody who'd take my side, among all the teachers. If Pamela does that, then she does have my respect -- despite her condenscendence.

There still are so many people who actually secretely agree with the bullies. Maybe we should indeed give each other more support rather than less.

OK, I've read all these comments all day without having seen the video, since it was pulled by the time I got here. I've just watched it, and I have to say, while I could previously understand what Pamela may have been on about (having not seen the video), I now really don't get how this video could be upsetting. It is CLEARLY in support of LGBT youth. It was astoundingly apparent to me and I can't imagine how it couldn't be the same to anyone (whether you believe the confessional was staged or real, for that matter).

He refers to his bullying as bigotry (can't say I've ever heard any bigot refer to his own bigotry as bigotry). He says something about that "bullshit" other bullies may be pulling in high school. He plays on all the stereotypes about high school bullies...that they think they're big shit, but get into the real world and it hits them hard that they are suddenly tiny fish in vast oceans of people who don't give a shit about them.

And really, it screams with poetic justice, and who is NOT satisfied by poetic justice? What bullied child wouldn't get at least a smidgeon of schadenfreude at the idea that these assholes who tried to make you feel they were so much better than you went into the world to feel so much less than others?

I'm not sure how you think this misses the mark of satire, Pamela. I found it to be perfectly done and the message was quite clear. I appreciate that you're watch-dogging for things that hurt your students' feelings. But really, even under the incredibly trying, painful circumstances you've described, if that video made them upset, they're *really* going to need to gain some self-confidence and self-love by the time they hit the real world or they'll be demolished. Support them, absoLUTELY. But don't coddle...they need to be able to take care of themselves when you're not around to protect them anymore.

@anklyosaur - Please be assured that no teachable moments are being missed: The students and I are talking about this like crazy. It's an interesting conversation covering satire (what works, what doesn't), personal tastes in humor and what subjects may be still too taboo to joke about; how the video could have made it's point in a funnier, clearer way; what it means when allies disagree; how to disagree without be disagreeable (and without alienating those who disagree with you); flaming and trolls; First amendment rights & responsibilities; just because you can say it, should you?; how can bullying be prevented and ways to reach current bullies to help them understand the harm they are doing -- recent NPR reports have been helpful here. We've been watching the "It Gets Better" series and using materials from GLSEN, the Trevor Project & the Make It Better websites. The students have been working on a group performance piece that addresses the various forms & targets of bullies based on their personal stories. It's those stories and experiences I have been sharing here. Everything I know, they have taught me.

One young woman who came to late to the conversation had seen the "It Gets Worse" video on Facebook last night and was so excited about it....until she found out it was a joke. She was embarrassed to have been taken in and hurt by her crushed hopefulness. I tried to explain that several people here thought she should have appreciated the sophistication of the satire but she didn't get it. She's just pissed. Can't say I blame her. (I cheered her up with the shrew, prude and sour humorlessness comments, though. We did have a good laugh about that. And probably the BEST lesson we got out of this whole flame war here is that we're not obligated to give a shit about what other people think of us. It's been great!)

I have not told the students where all of this exchange has taken place -- they would be devastated by some of the comments here and I don't dare subject them to several sloggers who probably can't be trusted to be civil.

But I simply must share one tongue-in-cheek comment by a younger teen who asks your "pardon" for his ignorance and sensitivity: "Maybe one day when we grow up we'll understand. Until then, SUCK IT!"

LOL!!!. Guess you had to be there....

Bless you all and thanks for a week's worth of teaching material!

@ 101 - Well I'm sorry if I offended you, coz I admire everything you say. I just don't have your patience and diplomacy. And I do firmly believe, as I said in my first post, that the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

The "kids" she mentors need more than just good intentions. That's a fact. They need survival skills.

Now even if you think that this guy in the video really is a bigot, I don't believe any child above 10, or even earlier, could miss the global message: his life's a mess. Being a bigot is no good.

It's condescending to the "kids" to think that they wouldn't get it if you only told them: listen until the end.

Her "kids" are hurt when they hear the word "faggot"? Well the first thing she should have taught them, if she really wanted to help them, is this: "You're gonna hear that word a million times before you die of old age, but each time you hear it, remember that the person who says this is a poor, pathetically insecure idiot who needs to take his/her frustrations about his/her life on others in order not to feel so pathetic (or who needs to copy those who do for fear of not being accepted). YOU are better than that." It might be a tad exagerated, but it's generally true, and it does help. It's an important first step.

If she didn't tell them that, or a gentler, more PC version of that, then she's not doing much to help. Protecting them from all that's bad in this world isn't very useful in the long run. After all, you and I made it through because we learned to face our situation and deal with it, since there was no one to help us, right? I got the bullies off my back at my school by bitching them into fearing me more than I had ever feared them. I reclaimed the word faggot for my benefit. I learned to say: "Yeah, I'm a faggot, so what? At least I have a brain" and "Yeah, I'm a faggot, so what are you gonna prove if you beat me up?" They never knew what to answer. And the laughter of their other, non-bullying classmates got them to shut up and leave me alone.

It's true that some kids are weaker, and they need help to understand that it will get better, that they are better than the bullies. That's what the IGBP is about, and kudos to Dan for that.

But being condescending - as this woman is - to people who did experience bullying because we don't agree with her is not acceptable, no matter whose side she thinks she's on.

She's basically blaming us for the fact that her "kids" are not able to understand this sort of humor and how it can help them, when the reality is that she's the one who should have taught them about it already.

That is, if she really wanted to help. As things stand, I think she only wants to feel good about "how she helps those kids". Yeah right.

She's like mother Teresa: so kind of her to "take care" of all those sick people. But we now know that all she did was to baptize them, give them painkillers (if that), bathe them and let them die. The money went to the vatican. But yeah, she's a saint.

I personally consider her approach and her comments to be utterly offensive, and I'm letting her know. Because in spite of her good intentions, I don't think she has a clue about how to really help bullied kids. So in the long run, I'm convinced she's hurting them.

And is that what we want? Must we seriously applaud good intentions even if they bring negative results? I don't think so.

'nuff said.

Tot spraak.

@101 - Now you're getting the point. Regardless that Pamela took the message in the wrong text, it's blatantly apparent that she supports LGBT kids and equality. SHE CARES FOR THEM. All the bullshit about her apparent "lack of humor" only makes an obvious ally defensive, because, from her point of view (and don't we all have one), she simply felt it sent the wrong message. NO FUCKING HARM DONE. PERIOD!

And Ricardo @98 - pot meet kettle. You're being as fucking condescending as they come, to Pamela (with your in-her-face comments about her ability to teach children about respect and equality). My, aren't you the one to show her just how the bear shits in the woods (snark). It's apparent that Pamela does support her students and tries to teach them the importance of equality. So nice of you to turn those that support our LGBT youth and their rights against us by blowing them the hell out of the water with that giant chip on your shoulder. Yeah. That's sure to win us supporters. Good show.

I'm with Pam. Her heart was in the right place and she makes several very good points if you take the time to scroll down and read them. Foremost among them is that the kids who are the primary target of this video don't have the sophisticated sense of humor to understand it. Plus, many of them are essentially trauma victims, so you can see how they'd be a little humorless for the next several years. That goes for Pam as well -- when you live in a war zone, you get a pass for being 'humorless' about certain things. Fuck off, meanies. You're piling on her and ignoring her logical responses like, I dunno, she's the unpopular gay kid in your high school and you're a bunch of asshole jocks....

Dang! I forgot the funniest point... The students said the "satire" actually would have worked if the guy behaved stereotypically gay with affections that he was "clueless" about. They see all of the news stories about homophobic preachers getting caught with their pants down and our "code" words to each other when we see something like that is "he doth protest too much!" (Usually followed by gales of laughter.)

They know a lot of kids their age are struggling with their sexuality and that they are getting hardcore anti-gay messages from their parents, politicians and churches. They suspect some of the bullying is coming from sexually-conflicted teens trying to exercise (exorcise?) their "manhood". THAT's who they wanted to see in the video. In their humble opinions, it wasn't obvious enough satire and they were bothered so many people thought it was sincere. Of course, these are merely the musings of unsophisticated teens so what the hell do they know, eh?

@ 105 - I just have no patience for self-anointed saints, that's all.

And arrogance and condescencion, however horrible they are, can be extremely powerful argumentative tools when you use them knowingly. The point is precisely to make her see how offensive she is.

And for the rest, as I said at 104: "Must we seriously applaud good intentions even if they bring negative results? I don't think so." I see nothing productive in that. It's just PC crap.

@108 - What "negative results" are we discussing here? The fact that a video what removed? Big fucking boo-hoo. Pam obviously works with kids daily. Do you? Your personal experience with this situation doesn't make you the resident expert. She posted her personal feeling on the matter, but guess what? No fucking harm was done for doing so. She didn't "appoint" herself as a saint. She simply gave reasons why she felt it was inappropriate, from her hands-on experience with kids. That's it. Certainly not worthy of the personal attacks we've witnessed, including yours.

There were no "negative results," other than the pissy fit you and many others are throwing, simply because a video was taken down from Youtube. That's it in a nut-shell.

You simply could have stated you felt it wrong that the video was taken down, but you had to go and make it personal with Pam (and in no uncertain terms, tell her she's a shitty teacher). Next time, feel free to weigh in on a topic, but don't destroy the bridges we LGBT people are trying to build with straight allies. Your personal negotiation skills leave much to be desired.

It sounds like Pamela is (with her throbbing heart of gold) trying to protect her children from reality, not just bullying. Wonder what other videos she's tried to have removed in the past.

@ You haven't read my posts very attentively. Her condescending attitude is what I criticized (and yes, I do consider that she started the attacks at "get a clue").

Once a video is on the Internet, it's there forever, so I never blamed her for having it taken down.

The "negative results" I'm talking about is the fact that, as many others have pointed out, she's trying to protect the kids instead of trying to give them useful skills to survive their situation. It's not productive in the short nor the long term.

And seeing that you didn't really even try to understand what I was saying and you blindly interpreted it as arguments against her in what you felt was the issue here, censorship, I'd say the one with the chip on the shoulder is definitely not me.

My negotiation skills may be poor (did I ever say I had any?), but your capacity for text analysis is nil. To paraphrase a well known proverb, you have to learn to read before you write.

Of course, I meant @ 109 at the start of my comment @111

Does anyone else notice the theme building here?

YOU'RE NOT LISTENING TO ME.

Just about everyone is saying it.

Talk about a teachable moment.....

@102 Yay! Couldn't have said it better.

@75 Thanks for the link of the reposted video!

I loved the inversion of the theme, to tell the same story from the other side. The kids who bully other kids in high school so often grow up to be losers. It's definitely a story worth telling, and the kids who are being bullied right now, need to hear it!

I'm still curious about why it got pulled from Youtube in the first place. The script language is pretty tame, there's no background music. The only thing in the frame that might have got the attention of copyright police is that beer box. Oh, well. Unless the filmmaker tells us, I guess we'll never know.

After having read most of the comments above (I confess, I skipped a few in the middle) some points that stand out to me are:
- some people think the video was sincere when they first see it
- after realizing that it is not, some of these feel "duped"
- many of these people transfer their frustration at being duped into feelings of hurt from the content of the video
- everyone seems to think that they, themselves, are the intended audience for this video
- then there is a big argument about whether everyone else is being condescending.

However, just as the IGBP is aimed at LGBT youth, I saw this video as being aimed at the total fucking asshole youth.

Pamela: Rather than making a banner of the feelings of frustration and hurt in LGBT youth who mistake the intent of this video, encourage them to realize that they are in on the joke against the bullies. It seems to me that Mr. Bonsignore is not trying to dupe LGBTs into thinking some asshole finally saw the light, not trying to give LGBTs false hope that every asshole eventually gets his comeuppance, but rather trying to dupe the bullies into realizing that "bigotry isn't fashionable anymore."

Re 75: Then they will probably like the link I posted in 45. (My favorite part is his reaction to what the psychiatrist says, like he's trying not to cry because it's true.)

@103: Thanks for writing that. I love that kind of dialogue and it's so great to see someone making a difference in that way.

@114: My guess is it got taken down because it used the word "faggot", which probably technically violates Big Brother's, I mean Google's, terms of service.

Though I'm a big fan of Dan's "It Gets Better" project, I have to say that this satirical video was stupid and insulting in general. It's essentially taking a bunch of "loser" stereotypes and saying that homophobic and abusive people will end up in those stereotypes.

First of all, the stereotypes aren't fair: there are good people who are stuck in dead-end manager jobs, who like pizza, beer, and poker, who played sports in high school and college, or who have social difficulties and trouble making friends.

Second, this just seems like insulting people for being poor, like "Haha, look at that stupid jock who ended up without a good job! Aren't we so much better than him?" It smacks of elitism. Let's attack bullies by saying that bullying is wrong, not saying they'll end up in some lesser class of people who aren't worth as much.

Finally, as Pam points out, it's just not true. The sad fact is that the bullies and homophobes of high school often become the business and civic leaders of adulthood. Let's not pretend that the world is fair and just and that mean people always get what they deserve.

If we're not going to pretend the world is fair, why have a "it gets better" project at all? I mean, the truth is (and we all should know this) that it *doesn't* always get better. For one thing, sometimes you wind up dead. Sometimes you end up a loser, broke and unloved. Sometimes you end up in a life you hate. Sometimes you just can't face the fear and never leave the closet. Sometimes... sometimes it doesn't get better.

If we're lying about the core message, what's another little lie? The point isn't to tell the truth (that's too depressing), the point is to give hope. And you don't give hope by telling the truth.

@ 119 - I would say that adult life, with all of its difficulties (and I've had my share), is still way better than being bullied in high school. Why? Because I never felt that helpless and abandoned.

Give them hope, but never lie to them, and don't shield them from reality. Because eventually, those lies will invalidate their hope.

Difficult does not mean worse.

Well, here's a final comment. And then I'll let the chips fall where they may.

@Frau Blucher, I get your point: Pamela is trying to do the right thing, so we should support her and disregard her apparent lack of humor. Sure. That's OK, especially since, in this case, as you point out, no harm is done. I do ask you, however: the fact that no harm is done in this case is more or less a coincidence. 'Friendly fire' can be a source of much harm, in that -- just as your defense of Pamela -- it drives away friends and allies who also just wanted to help (Mr Bonsignore). Not in this case; but in general it does. My rule of thumb: be sure you know that what you're firing at is not a friend. I think Pamela failed to notice that, which is a pity. (In fact, up to this point I still haven't seen evidence in her posts that she understands the video had good intentions.)

@Mel (106), I ask you the same question I ask others: do you need a 'sophisticated' sense of humor to understand the video? In what ways could it be misunderstood, and how exactly could they lead to harm?

@107: Pamela, I suspect that your emotional reaction (' these are merely the musings of unsophisticated teens so what the hell do they know') shows you're not really untouched by the 'flame war' as you claimed. If you do feel bad about it, accept my apologies. I do think I'm right; you missed the chance of showing, for instance, to the girl who was "hurt by her crushing hopefulness" how the satire in the video actually expressed exactly what was behind bullying. You could have compared this video -- a critique of bullies -- with true "bullies-who-repented" videos (there are a couple in YouTube) and shown her how both express the same message.

The point is not that these kids aren't sophisticated enough to understand the video. Any video can be misunderstood (I mention again those who wrote to Dan saying his whole 'It Gets Better' project was misconceived and actually enabled bullies to go on doing their evil deeds -- they thought about Dan as you think about Mr Bonsignore). The point is that you are 'sophisticated' enough to understand it; you could have explained it to them; and this understanding would have led to you NOT writing a condescending letter to someone who is also your ally and fights on your side.

A pity that this chance was missed. But OK, life goes on; and you are doing good work, and you are helping kids who need help.

A final thought. You said: 'we're not obligated to give a shit about what other people think of us'. That's true. But don't forget that bullies say the exact same thing. (A question for your study group: when is this claim 'good' -- pro-autonomy -- and when is it bad -- pro-bullying? This may be an interesting discussion.)

Indeed, that's the point, Pamela. To the boy who said, "maybe when I grow up I'll understand it"... YOU could have explained it to him. And you didn't. And that IS a pity.

@BlackRose, thank you for at least trying to show what could be wrong with the video.

I think the point that got to me in the video was that it is such an obvious satire. It's meant to make people think at what is behind bullying, as in saying : the things that lead people to bully are utterly ridiculous (arrogance, feeling of entitlement, contempt for different people, etc.). By making bad things have bad effects, it hits the point nicely: it shows them as bad.

Note: the girlfriend left him after hearing the 'faggot' comment. That got me giggling right away, and reminded me of exactly the kind of things I used to tell myself to get through my daily tortures in highschool. I immediately felt like saying "thanks" to Mr Bonsignore. As another commenter mentioned above, the video plays with poetic justice, which I enjoyed.

As for the 'video not being true' because in real life many bullies actually do get good jobs and loving girlfriends: you can make the same accusation against Dan's whole project. The "It Gets Better" videos aren't 100% true, because some LGTB people (like some bullies, like some people of every kind) do end up having shitty lives anyway. Some go on to encounter homophobia way after highschool, perhaps throughout their lives.

The truth is probably closer to, It Often But Not Always Gets Better. Should we criticize Dan's videos because of that? Should we say they are "lying"? I think not.

Besides, think how many of these videos did make the point that they were having better lives than their bullies. They are making the same "elitist" point that you criticize in Mr Bonsignore's video. Would you criticize them for that?

The video is up on other sites besides youtube. Maybe someone could repost it with full accreditation, so that others may see.

@ Brooklyn Reader, others have suggested it was the word 'faggot' (which appears at one point) that got it out of YouTube. I'm a bit surprised that this would be enough, but I admit it is the most likely theory thus far.

Villain42 (@119), you anticipated one of the main points in my response to BlackRose -- I hadn't noticed that you had already mentioned it (i.e. that It Gets Better is also a "lie" in the sense that it doesn't always get better). Sorry about that.

Pamela, I can see how much you care about these kids.
But I am having a hard time figuring out why they should feel mocked or insulted by the video. So it wasn't "real;" it still says bigotry is wrong, bullying karma will be punished. The only people being made fun of are bullies. If a gay kid sees it and thinks it's sincere the message is, "the bullies lose in the end." And if a bigot sees it and thinks it's sincere, he takes away the message that bullying isn't so cool after all. If teenagers don't see the satire, so what? How can the message be anything but effective?
A gay kid feels mocked how, exactly, for initially believing this to be serious? Okay, so she has a moment of embarrassment--and that is where you come in as an adult and an educator and say, "Susie, the people being mocked through this video are bigots. This video is satirical, and satire has always been an effective tool to effect change." I teach Jonathan Swift's ironic essay "A Modest Proposal." Every year, some students don't recognize the satire or irony, and think that Swift is seriously suggesting infanticide and cannibalism. When they realize he isn't seriously advocating those "solutions" to the problem he is trying to address by raising public awareness, they may well feel a bit embarrassed, a bit foolish, perhaps even feel that they have been mocked for their lack of ability to sense the satire.
So would you suggest that we stop reading the essay or stop teaching it as an example of brilliant rhetoric?

Of course not; you'd suggest that as an educator, I make sure the students see exactly how the argument works and to analyze it so as to understand Swift's real point.

Try doing the same with your students regarding this video. Give them the tools they need to operate critically in this world. Self-righteous anger is too easy to mock and rarely helps a cause.

To all of the "helpful" people who have lectured me on what I should be teaching my students, have you actually bothered to read any of the entries where I detail 1) the discussion topics we've covered; 2) the resources used; 3) the students' own words about why they did not like the alleged satire; and, 4) their suggestions for how to improve the video so it's not a "punk."

I have tried to share with them the different perspectives presented here and, frankly, they feel condescended to by many of you. One comment: "I guess our feelings and opinions don't count with those people because we don't think the way they think we should."

And, yes, they know what satire is. (I overheard several of them discussing 'A Modest Proposal" during our Leadership Academy last week -- I was impressed.) They are also smart consumers of 21st century media. They thought the video was lame and demeaning. They were especially offended by one of the suggestions here that they should be comforted by a story about a bully growing up to be a loser -- even though the story was fake. One response to that notion: "I stopped believing in fairy tales a long time ago."

They also picked up on the elitism of a service worker in a retail outlet being portrayed as a nobody -- a job quite similar to ones their family members hold. I have to admit, that slight had eluded me until they pointed it out. (One girl immediately went to Mr. Bonsignore's TED profile and checked out his academic & work record. It was difficult for her to understand why being the night manager at the Ladies Foot Locker is a degrading job.)

I've decided, after spending the day with you all and with them, they are smarter, more insightful and far more compassionate than the rest of us. Nobody needs to tell them what to think or how to feel. We're the ones who need a lesson from them.

@128 Careful, Pamela, no one has said anything bad about your kids, on the contrary, they've said kids are "smart" and "have brains," more so than most people give them credit for. You haven't let them see the comment thread, but have "told them" what it says, and have reported that they feel "condescended to" by what has been said.
You may be forgetting that a lot of the people who comment on Slog have been badly bullied themselves, and have talked about how humor helped them through it, or how they really did see a highschool bully years later in a dead-end job (and yes, that's elitist, but that's life, too.) I don't think anyone has said that your students shouldn't think what they think, they've said that we as adults have the power to give young teens a different perspective on some things.
Maybe this video itself is too "raw" for your students to see the humor in right now, but to suggest that you have nothing to teach them, that you are learning everything important from your 14 year olds, and how dare people on this thread suggest things you could tell them? I think adults do, in fact, have a lot that they can teach kids, and it's silly to suggest otherwise.

@Canuck -- as clarification, while I have not told them where exactly this conversation has taken place, I have provided them with many of the comments here -- directly, without editing, without commentary. I am an honest enough educator to know my own biases so I have not attempted to convey the the comments here in my own words. They have read your passages and many others in toto.

Clearly, I must be an inept communicator for you to have interpret my comments as saying "I have nothing to teach them" -- what do you think were doing all day yesterday and everyday we're together? When all is said and done, after providing them with all the resources and ideas and opinions I can get my hands on, THEY ARE ENTITLED TO MAKE UP THEIR OWN MINDS! I refuse to indoctrinate or dictate to them what they should believe. The best gift I can give them is an opportunity to exercise their critical thinking skills.

You and others here have tried every which way to convince them that they should have liked that fake video and taken comfort from it because it was done by someone sympathetic to them. They aren't buying it. And I am not going to make them.

My comment was not about trying to get anyone to love the fake video (personally, I thought it was silly). They were directed at your comments and your apparent 'there there' attitude. I only know from your writing how you are with these kids. And from what I've read here you see them as victims and treat them accordingly. Martin Luther King has a great quote "Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will." What you've said here makes it seem like these kids are mostly a source of validation for how wonderful you are.

@ 132 - The point I was making all along.

Is there anyone left who still doubts her absolute bad faith? She's accusing us of her own crime...

The sad thing about this whole exchange is that we are all on the same side, Pamela is mentoring gay teens in a small homophobic town, I volunteer with a gay/straight group where I live, others who have commented have lived through homophobic bullying, etc. The one word that has been bandied about the most is "condescending." Pamela sees the attempts here to justify using/watching the video as condescending, people here have seen her comments, in turn, as condescending. For a bunch of liberal people who are all ostensibly on the same side, we seem to be having a very hard time making our points without getting someone else's back up. Without THIS sounding too condescending, I think it's interesting to go back a re-read the comments and see how they escalate from "why did this happen/why don't you like it" into f-bombs and name-calling. It's pretty easy to see how, when you feel someone isn't "hearing" you, to make the next comment just a little meaner. I think we're all trying to do good work here, and while we may not get it right every time (any parents out there know this is true a lot of the time), I think we are all trying to make things better. Whew.

@ 134 - Canuck, you NEVER sound condescending.

You should try harder. (LOL)

Wait, I taker that back - That's what I'm here for.

@135 Try HARDER?? That is SO condescending, Ricardo... :)

@ 137 - I know, I'm the resident expert. ;-)

I CAN'T BELIEVE I MISSED THIS

Pamela,
No one says that your students have to like the fake video. But they seem to be reading a hell of a lot of ill will into it. I understand that given where they live and what they have experienced it is understandable to expect humor involving anything to do with homophobia to be homophobic or anyone who isn't part of your own group to be condescending to you, but I would have hoped that kids who are as intelligent as you've described could understand that support comes in different forms.
Okay, so it is elitist to suggest that a career as an assistant manager at Lady Footlocker is not someone's life goal. Did your students see Dan's and Terry's original video, in which Terry says that living well is the best revenge as elitist, too?

You can be proud of your parents and the work they do and still want a better-paying, more satisfying career. I'd wager that the parents who have retail jobs hope that their kids have more options than that, as well.

Without trying to resort to name-calling, I'd suggest that a bunch of easily hurt and thin-skinned (for whatever legitimate historical reason) young people have got their panties in a twist, and rather than attempt to pull the offending material out of ass-cracks, you have cranked it tighter.

Maybe your students need to learn the wisdom of the great rabbinic sage, Reb Rodney King: "Can't we all just get along?" At least those of us professedly on the same side!

Oh my god, I just watched the video here: http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xf3xbo_…... I really don't understand how anyone could take that seriously, and if they did, how it could possibly be construed as anything other than anti-bully. So confused about Pamela's reaction...

Oh yeah, but Pamela *is* on the good guys' side, so I'm not going to me mean to/about her. I just LOVED the video! SO freaking funny!!!

not going to *be* mean, i meant

Clearly this video, good or bad, has provided an incredible teaching moment for Pamela and anyone else who mentors groups of LGBT teens. It has brought her band of kids even closer together and opened many avenues of discussion.

Her apparent concern? That some "un-mentored" LGBT teen sitting alone in his/her room somehow will be traumatized by this video, therefore she asks that the video be removed. This thread has morphed and meandered in an interesting way since then, but I still don't buy the original position - that the video warrents censorship to protect teens who somehow will have a bad reaction. I truly don't think any teen would "stumble" upon this video without knowledge of the vast, vast treasure trove of positive LGBT stuff that has exploded upon the scene (due to Dan's good work and momentum).
I say leave it up - let the discussions continue - allow other mentors to do their work....

I can't believe there's a debate going on about whether or not this is fake. It's fucking sarcasm for christ's sake.

@145: Duder, keep up! The "is it real" debate was over before we got to #50. And I think the word you're looking for is "satire," not "sarcasm."

@11: "if you hate feminine characteristics in a man then you hate women to some extent; something your girlfriend will pick up on."

Hate and disrespect can overlap, but they are not the same thing. Venn diagram. You can hate what you respect, and you can enjoy what you disrespect. Plenty of women condone or outright approve of men who think less of femininity than masculinity, so your warning here is based on a very idealized notion of female response to male behavior; one which may occur among your friends but is not widespread. Alas.

Ah, Pamela!...

We're on the same side, and you see "condescending" here.

All I see is this: you sent a letter to a person who is on your side. A letter in which you doubted his good will and good intentions without any evidence as far as I can see. That's what I protested against, and I still do: I think that was uncalled-for. It is as if you had written to Dan about how the It Gets Better project actually supports bullying: it misses the point.

Am I saying your students don't have the right not to like the video? No. They can like or dislike whatever they want. I am saying that you did something wrong: you mistook an ally for an enemy. Do you see the difference?

I hope you do. My point has always been about friendly fire, and fire against a video that is in many ways very funny and defends the cause (not everything that defends the cause will please your students, of course, but that's another topic for discussion).

I hope you will see that you did something wrong here, and stop thinking that I (or others here) are accusing your students. As far as I can see (and I'll let the others speak for themselves), I am not.

But all in all, please keep the good fight. It's better to have fallible human beings who sometimes feel angry for the wrong reasons than to have perfect angels on one's side. For one thing, the latter would be very boring and create feelings of insufficiency in the others!

As for the rest, I wish you the best.

Amen, ankylosaur - your words have been thoughtful, throughout.

I think the main problem is that Pamela says things like, "Nobody needs to tell them what to think or how to feel" and "When all is said and done, after providing them with all the resources and ideas and opinions I can get my hands on, THEY ARE ENTITLED TO MAKE UP THEIR OWN MINDS!" but isn't practicing what she preaches.

Listen Pamela, I know you think you are doing the right thing, and I'm sorry to say this because you seem like you could be a nice person, but you are WRONG. One piece of information that you keep ignoring is the fact that you are talking to a group of people who know what they are talking about based on experience. I was the president of my high schools Gay Straight Alliance. I wouldn't be telling you this if I didn't know I was right. You are not doing these kids any favors by teaching them to be offended by something as simply harmless as this video. You are going to end up teaching them to be taken in by those "I'm sorry" types of creeps who who write heartfelt sounding diatribes about how Jesus can cure them. Kids need to know how to read something for what it is, not just project their own feelings onto it.

Also, your claim that the author of the video agreed with you and took it down is just silly. The video wasn't taken down by the author. It was removed by YouTube. You can find this information out by trying to access the file again. I don't know why you would assume he agreed with you when you also say that he didn't contact you directly in response at all. The video was immediately re-posted to a different site. Perhaps your students are also ready for a lesson in the difference between an observation and an inference.

And as for this:
"Dang! I forgot the funniest point... The students said the "satire" actually would have worked if the guy behaved stereotypically gay with affections that he was "clueless" about."

I seriously can't believe you would consider yourself to be in a position to judge anyone's taste with a comment like that. Most people would consider that a lot more homophobic than what is in the video. I assume the "affections" part is a typo.

The It Gets Better Project is a teaching tool for kids to learn from the experiences of successful (emotionally, socially, and even, yes, financially) adults. It's not a forum for everyone to commiserate about how oppressed they are.

I apologize to @151 but I never read the unregistered comments. I have no idea why I read yours. Must have been some sort of supernatural guilt.

The only thing that might redeem this whole thread would be if it turns out that PamelaGRW is satire. But, if you're for real Pamela, I want you to know we love you deary. You keep on fighting that good fight. Just maybe consider aiming your guns a wee bit higher over the heads of your allies so we can avoid friendly fire.

What's sad, I mean really sad is that this isn't how bullies necessarily end up.

Homophobia is accepted because it's accepted at the top-level.

We think the worst homophobes, racists, and sexists are all "redneck hillbilly hicks".

I got news for you... they're not. When you protest Target's political donations, awful policies, glass ceilings, school administrators who don't care, or a systematic abuse of people, do you really think you're talking about night-managers at a Lady's Footlocker or someone else?

The video's funny, but it's just naive self-comfort if you think this is how most bigots end up.

What's sad, I mean really sad is that this isn't how bullies necessarily end up.

Homophobia is accepted because it's accepted at the top-level.

We think the worst homophobes, racists, and sexists are all "redneck hillbilly hicks".

I got news for you... they're not. When you protest Target's political donations, awful policies, glass ceilings, school administrators who don't care, or a systematic abuse of people, do you really think you're talking about night-managers at a Lady's Footlocker or someone else?

The video's funny, but it's just naive self-comfort if you think this is how most bigots end up.

Ha. I just read Pamela's comments. Nice and I agree.