There was a part in Raible and Nieto’s piece where the student, Rebecca, was describing her health class: the teachers did not hate on LGBT issues or people but they did not necessarily cover those sexuality topics in a positive way. They played it off with a joke about dental damn. Then, I was reading the “Who Am I?” piece and there was one sentence that made me go “aha – here it is that hetero-normative attitude and they probably didn’t even notice” — “Although interest in the opposite sex emerges, often in the form of puppy love, same-sex affiliation remains dominant and is preferred by middle school students.” (p. 43).

I am honestly even surprised that I noticed this little detail in one of the many sentences. But it was because I had just read Raible and Nieto. This was of course written not too recently, so perhaps historically sexual orientation was still more focused on heterosexuality, but regardless, my point is that it is so very difficult for people raised in one set of norms and customs to become well versed in new ones that come up every day. There were teachers that Rebecca talked about who touched upon sexuality differences but did not feel so comfortable wading in those waters. Even today, even as a student at NYU who was probably exposed to so many different social justice discussions and can be open-minded, may still make such little slips in casual conversation and not notice, but it cause pain and feelings of nonacceptance in students. It is something that I try to remind myself about and be very aware that someone else might not be thinking what I’m thinking. Especially with all these changing identities and new ones that are being created as time goes on, we teachers need to be cognizant that just like being “color blind” is still incorrect, being simply polite or skirting along a topic, does not mean you are being open and receptive.