During the last month, the WIS administration made decisions that cultivated an uncomfortable environment for LGBTQ+ WIS students. It has become clear that the WIS administration’s approach to discussions regarding sexuality is flawed and comes off as heteronormative. On Monday night, the upper school assistant principals sent out the weekly announcements, which contained a schedule for the planned sexual health education sessions that week. The sessions were divided into five groups: upperclassmen girls and upperclassmen boys, underclassmen girls and underclassmen boys, and a separate LGBTQ+ group for all high school ages. Several students arranged to meet with counselor Ms. Hutchinson the day before the sessions to voice their concerns about separating by age, gender, and sexuality. These students requested that the groups be organized solely by gender, and were taken very seriously during the meeting. The conversation was brought to the administration for discussion, however, no changes were made to accommodate the requests of the LGBTQ+ community. 

Creating a separate group for LGBTQ+ normalizes heterosexuality, as it implies that “girls” and “boys” are inherently straight by putting LGBTQ+ individuals its own category. Even though the LGBTQ+ group is open to every student, regardless of their gender or sexual identity, there is a risk that others will assume the sexuality of anyone who  attends that group. This separation increases the likelihood that closeted students will feel uncomfortable attending the LGBTQ session and will thus not receive the information they need. It also implies that all LGBTQ+ individuals will have the same sexual experiences and therefore need the same information. For example, bisexual or pansexual students will find the information provided to the straight group equally valuable. Most importantly however, it sends a strong message of alienation to closeted students, as they are more likely to be afraid of being perceived as different or abnormal. When the point was brought up that having another section for LGBTQ+ topics is making the students feel different, the administration responded by saying “Difference is okay and we want everyone to welcome that!” While this message was good natured, some students felt that it implied there was a necessary distinction between the LGBTQ+ students and straight students. In the end the school explained that they decided to keep the original groups in the hopes of trying to provide more inclusive sex education, but in reality separation is not the way to go about it and the meetings should have been cancelled or postponed until a better solution was found. The expectation the pride alliance has for the administration in the future is that they come to the LGBTQ+ community before making decisions that affect them.

Zachary Roberts, 2022