Boys (and Teachers) Beware!

milkboys News, News & Opinions 30 Comments

A US high school has indefinitely suspended one of their teachers after he showed his class a film warning boys of ‘predatory homosexuals’.

Simons, a history teacher at the school, was suspended weeks before he was due to retire for showing a law enforcement class the film Boys Beware; it warns students to avoid strangers ‘because they might be homosexual’.

Made by Sid Davis Productions with assistance from Inglewood Police in California, the film was a social guidance film depicting gay men as sexual predators, prowling around high schools on the lookout for underage boys. One of the film’s scenarios shows a boy named Jimmy being lured in by a man named Ralph.

‘I’m not against homosexuality,’ Simons told KCTV. Simons said three days after showing the film, he was told by school officials that two students had complained; the school then suspended him from teaching.

Simons argued he had been using the film to highlight how attitudes towards homosexuality have changed. Why the students would report him in this case remains unclear.

Comments 30

  1. Old Dan Canada

    I instantly knew what film it was. LOL Suspended, eh? We of the Fatter Land will not accept anyone showing the Fatter Land in any negative way. Said with a nazy accent.

  2. the adorable Nathan United States

    Yeah, I figured it was *this* film. :)

    Interestingly, a few years ago a group I hang with on one of the virtual-reality worlds I frequent had this film being shown at their virtual theater. We’re all a bunch of gay and bi boys (RPing a bunch of early-teen and preteen boys), so there was special significance to us.

    Anyway, through to about the third minute or so of the film, it was pretty clear there was a “something’s not quite right here” vibe about the goings on of the older man, and about the point when they were about to reveal what the “mental illness” the man supposedly had, I was fully expecting them to say “…and the man was a child-molester,” but instead they said “…and the man was a homosexual,” and I was, like, “LOLWUT?!??”

    In any event, the existence of this film certainly demonstrates the ignorance and wrongheadedness of what people knew back then. What I’m wondering about now, though, is… what was all this stuff in the film about how, if boys avoided a gay encounter, it “might save their lives”? Where did that idea come from? oO It sounds like mostly fear and paranoia, projected onto the homosexual, simply because society of the time didn’t understand them, but I wonder if there was more to it than that, Did something actually HAPPEN once back then, where some teens were murdered and it was (wrongly) *blamed* on homosexuals or homosexuality? OO

  3. ψ ƊℯѵιԼ♥♂ United States

    “Simons argued he had been using the film to highlight how attitudes towards homosexuality have changed.”
    ~Considering the film was made in 61~original B&W shown here then remade again in 73 & 79 I definitely have to agree that things most certainly have changed in all that time. What’s amazing is that the same or very similar script was used in all three versions even though there’s almost 20 years between the first and last film.

    @The Adorable Nathan
    “Did something actually HAPPEN once back then, where some teens were murdered and it was (wrongly) *blamed* on homosexuals or homosexuality?”

    There was a case in CA labeled ‘The Freeway Killer’, a William Bonin, (the main perpetrator) who started his reign of rape & terror in 68,(probably earlier) graduating to multiple murders between 79 till 1980,(known murders) all being young boys or young men who were murdered then dumped along the highways like trash.
    Be warned this is some nasty stuff here:
    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Bonin

    So the film may well have had merit of sorts minus the homosexual slant and geared more towards…boys shouldn’t hitchhike with strangers who may also happen to be murdering psychopaths but not necessarily homosexuals.

    It was a different time then. Hopefully this teacher was really trying to show the difference between the past and present but if not I’m sure he could find a nice teaching position in Putin’s homophobic Russia.

    1. Joe United States

      Devil, your comment about homosexuals being murderers is very common. Actually serial killing is very closely fueled by sexuality. The act of murder itself is the ‘sex act’ with a large percentage of serial killers. Jeffery Dahmer was a serial killer and his victims were homosexual teenagers and young men. John Wayne Gacy was a clown who played at children’s parties, and again his victims were homosexual teenage boys and young men. Though on the surface it sounds like there is a connection, the only thing that can be surmised is that serial killers are sexual deviants. So in the eyes of the general public, any sexual deviance is equivalent to killers, murderers, rapists; and to them homosexuals are deviants as well.

        1. the adorable Nathan United States

          Oh, thank you for telling me about that book! :D :D >>Adds it to his Wish List at Amazon.<<

  4. Bart Netherlands

    Well we must not be too surprised. I know the gay world a long time and almost all gays prefer a hot 16-20 year old above a good looking guy above 30. And your visitors to this site are proof of that. You too would love (in jurisdictions were it was legal) to go to bed with a 16 year old guy. But of course gays don’t differ in this at all from hetero guys. I think if you give a hetero guy the option between having sex with a 16-20 year old girl or a 35 year old woman 95% will go for option 1. So the video is discriminatory because where is the video warning teenage girls for hetero men? That is what makes it wrong.

    1. nate United States

      fair point if it’s just a quick lay then almost everyone goes for the younger boy or girl every damn time.

  5. Dave United States

    I remember this film well, and it does reflect society’s attitude toward gays in the pre-enlightenment/gay rights era. Homosexuality was still officially considered a mental disease, and some police departments got their jollies constantly raiding any bar where gays gathered, and beating up the queers whenever possible. That’s why the “gay ghettos” existed in major cities. They were relatively safe places for us to live and socialize.

    Most mental health professionals at the time would never have supported the premise of this film, that all gays were dangerous predators. That was simply an extrapolation made by society and the police. From their simplistic point of view, all the child molesters who went after boys were homosexual, therefor, all homosexuals must be child molesters.

  6. Joe United States

    There are three sides to every story. 1) either the teacher was a homophobe and truly supportive to the message of the video and it offended some student supporters of homosexuality; or 2) he was truly trying to show the class the difference in the social acceptance of homosexuality today versus its acceptance of yesteryear (They did mention he was a History teacher so perhaps this is true, don’t know). 3) The article didn’t mention if the students were supportive of homosexuality and complained that the teacher showed the movie and was preaching the movies merits, or If the students complained because they are uneducated zealot religious brain-dead homophobe’s and didn’t like that the teacher was supportive of homosexuals.

    It is interesting that he was suspended because he showed a video. So I am to understand that if he wouldn’t have shown the video then he wouldn’t be suspended? The article never really said that he was suspended because of his opinion, he was suspended because he showed a video. Really? What in the video was offensive? (other than it being ass-hole stupid and wrong as shitting in bed) Sounds to me like some spoiled brat silver spooned students need a ass-whopping, and worse yet, some asshole school administrators need the same ass-whooping. The students are there to learn, critically think, and educate themselves on EVERY perspective whether they agree with it or not. The article never confirmed what the teachers opinion of homosexuality is, the story just surrounded that some students were ‘offended’ so he was suspended for that. I’m guessing these were high school kids, but I don’t know. Schools are supposed to be a place of learning and teaching of critical thought process. So what if the students didn’t like the video?They didn’t need to. Tough shit for them. Sit through it and learn from it. You don’t have to agree or disagree with its content or message, but you DO need to know what messages are out there (whether you agree or disagree is immaterial), and you DO need to understand the history of why it came about, and how it ties in with society today. Ignoring any messages out there by refusing to watch videos or movies or read books that you don’t agree with shows that you are closed minded, probably religiously fueled, and I’m sure loud-mouthed and always preaching your ways to others as the only answer. No one had to agree or disagree with the video. Just sit there, shut up, watch it, and then discuss it.

    This is a historical video and it is important and valuable in its own right to show exactly that; the social environment; the culture of hatred; how fear is instilled; the uninformed and uneducated; and to show the psychological perspective of structuring an argument by connecting one completely unrelated topic to another (homosexuals are child predators). And regardless what the message was in the class (if there was any) it is important that everyone see it, whether you agree or disagree with it or not. There is a strong historical perspective being shown in that video, and whether you agree with the message or not you should educate yourself and research any and all points of view.

    Unless the teacher was blatantly a homophobic asshole who was spewing hatred and death to homosexuals he should not have been suspended and I’m sad for him and his administration.

    I am an educator, however I do not teach history, psychology, or sociology. If I did this would definitely be one of the films that I would show, and I would not care who it offended. If it offends you then good. Everyone needs to be offended. It teaches you that not everyone has (or had) your same opinion, and no matter who you are you need to understand that. If you want to be ‘blind’ to history the you will surely repeat it. Everyone needs to live and work together. We don’t ever have to agree, but we do need to understand each other. The important part is that whatever our ‘opinions’ are they should never be used to shove our ways down everyone’s throat (as the religious right tries to do) and our ‘opinions’ should never be used to impede the civil rights of anyone else.

    1. Penboy United States

      @Joe:

      Great post and I thank you! I just have one modifier to your good comment:

      “Ignoring any messages out there by refusing to watch videos or movies or read books that you don’t agree with shows that you are closed minded, probably religiously fueled, and I’m sure loud-mouthed and always preaching your ways to others as the only answer.”

      First, above all else, consider the source of the article, books, videos and or movies. I refuse to read or watch such media if I know/can see that their source is absolute religious: words like god(+)/jesus/christ/bible/etc in the URL of the site or other sites that I know are completely bias toward religion, et al (such as FOX News, etc). I already know that they won’t provide any objective information/evidence for their views.

      .

      @zenji:
      “What’s frustrating to me is trying to find the actual content of the students’ complaint.”

      This appears to be it: “He argues he showed the film to highlight changes in the attitude towards homosexuality.”
      From here: http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/teacher-suspended-showing-film-warning-boys-homosexual-predators060515

      But the possibly “real context” could very well be that (since this happened in Missouri) those religionist administrators of that school were pissed that this teacher was presenting factual history and the truth of how homosexuality was viewed by “most” Americans at that time.

  7. zenji United States

    What’s frustrating to me is trying to find the actual content of the students’ complaint. Has anyone got a link they could share revealing the written/verbal complaint?

    1. Bart Netherlands

      Yes. Because if the complaint is that it is wrong to portray gays as feeling sexually attracted to teen boys, than she/he is a nut case. 90% of gay males lust for teenage boys. But as I have explained above there, are other arguments why this video is discriminatory. But if the video says most gays can feel sexual attraction for a 15 or 16 year old. Then that video is 100% right.

  8. daveboy Canada

    It’s absolutely ridiculous this teacher has been suspended. Obviously Mr. Simons showed this old film to demonstrate how bad things were, back in the ’50’s. I was born then and grew up in that era, and I definitely can tell you that’s exactly how people thought back then. For a young boy with a deep and supposedly dirty secret, it caused much self-loathing and suffering in silence. I watch it every once in a while on YouTube for its comedic entertainment value, and perhaps I find a bit therapeutic. Oftentimes the comments are quite amusing as well.

    How anyone could be offended and actually complained about it is beyond me. I can’t believe this lead to school officials taking action and suspending against Mr. Simons for doing a good job teaching his students. Did they actually misconstrue the intent on showing it? Perhaps there were other motives involved here, and Mr. Simons will be ineligible for his pension now? What a bunch of dumb block-heads they are.

    1. zenji United States

      Exactly Dave. Again, the actual student complaint content is missing, so there isn’t a way to fully understand the incident. I’ve noticed journalism is pretty much a cop out 95% of the time these days.

      1. daveboy Canada

        “I’ve noticed journalism is pretty much a cop out 95% of the time these days.”

        Quite so. I searched around a bit on the internet and couldn’t come up with any real details behind the complaint(s). Seems so many news agencies in the past several years have resorted to cheap tactics. It seems they tend to leave out a few critical details of a news story in order to cause massive sensational media attention, and help to fill their coffers with advertising revenue.

  9. Matt United States

    If the teacher was just trying to show how far homosexuality and gay rights have come over the years then I don’t personally see a problem with him showing this film. If the students complained it may be because they didn’t understand the teachers intent.
    Huckleberry Finn is a book that illustrates haw far African American rights and attitudes have come in history and yet there are many black people who would complain about a showing of that movie because it contains the N word.

  10. horselips United States

    What’s funny about this film is that during the 60s, homosexuality only existed in a parallel universe – and since all us boys were straight, it was OK to circle jerk, trade blowjobs and even butt fuck – after all, it was all ‘no homo,’ just an aspect of a good and trusting friendship. Practice don’tcha see, just practice, so we’d know what to do with girls. Kissing was verboten, as that was really queer, but everything else was good as long as nobody told and we never got caught. Truly the good ol’ days of teenage sexperimentation.

    What’s really scary about this event is the suspension of the teacher. Suspicion and accusation have no place in education – it smacks of the Catholic Inquisition in Spain and Protestant witch hunts in Germany and early Massachusetts. Anyone could skulk to the authorities and destroy anyone else they wished. Once denounced, by anybody for any reason, you were doomed. In ancient Rome during the wars with Carthage, to utter the word ‘peace’ was a serious crime. In medieval England it was high treason to ‘compass (contemplate) the death of the king.’ In World War 2 Japan, the Though Police ferreted out anyone suspected of defeatism. Are we now subject to some new version of thought police?

    This kind of censorship has a chilling effect on free speech, thought and conscience in what’s supposed to be the open marketplace of ideas. Controversial films, books and articles should be exhibited freely, and then analyzed, and hotly debated. I shudder to think students should be denied the value of applying critical thinking to films like Birth Of A Nation and Triumph Of The Will. Students must learn to find fallacies, draw correct conclusions, and arrive at the truth. That’s how they’ll grow up to be true free thinkers, safe from disinformation, half truths, and biased agendas.

    1. Penboy United States

      “Practice don’tcha see, just practice, so we’d know what to do with girls.”

      Well, I’ve stated similar a few times before: ……. During the ages of say [about], 8 years old and older, and then through the teens, a boy’s 10,000+ erections [but who’s counting?] during this period are just “dress rehearsals” getting ready for the “big event” (in the minds of most heterosexuals).

      What’s psychologically “funny” is that so many adults who should know better (and many milkboys as well) keep saying erections during the younger years “aren’t sexual”. Horseshit (oops, sorry horsey). Just because we don’t understand why at younger ages we experience erections so often doesn’t make them any less sexual. Think about this with some common sense; if erections are sexual during and most certainly after puberty (when we finally become conscience of its purpose), why would the same physical reactions (simultaneous nerve endings and mind control) be any less sexual when younger?

      .

      and, horsey, did you actually say this?:

      “This kind of censorship has a chilling effect on free speech, thought and conscience in what’s supposed to be the open marketplace of ideas. Controversial films, books and articles should be exhibited freely, and then analyzed, and hotly debated. I shudder to think students should be denied the value of applying critical thinking [any serious media] … Students must learn to find fallacies, draw correct conclusions, and arrive at the truth. That’s how they’ll grow up to be true free thinkers, safe from disinformation, half truths, and biased agendas.

      Well, well, I guess there are times when we think alike ….. could we even possibly start to be ….. how do I say this? ….. Left and right bosom buddies finally? As you said, “shudder the thought.” I’ve been agreeing with you maybe too many times lately. Maybe those bar-b-ques just might happen after all? :-)

  11. Student John Canada

    The trouble with that video is the implied double standard. Jimmy is of an age to be a bad influnce, hot-wire Chevy’s and hang around the pool hall and generally be a bad influence on younger kids, if he is so inclined. But the naughty bad man man only picks up “nice” boys, earning scout badges and excelling in Sunday School.

  12. BitterOldQueen United States

    The video is hilarious for the sheer campiness of it…

    I think Jimmy knew what “the score” was all along. He was just a shameless tease… LOL!!

  13. Sinal Netherlands

    Is there also a fim made “Beware of the heterosexual”?
    Because many girls also became victim. Good that you always can recognize a homosexual, because they wear a suit :-)

    1. Penboy United States

      “Good that you always can recognize a homosexual, because they wear a suit.”

      Of course. :-) There’s a reason that gays dominate the fashion industry (let’s not forget those who need to remain in the closet for business and family reasons).

Leave a Comment