Lessons from The Elwood UFSD/John Glenn HS Hate Texts

Nothing is sacred anymore. Or private. Or local. If what happens in Vegas still stays in Vegas, they can give lessons to the rest of us and how we can stop micro from becoming macro. It seems “none of your business” is an anachronism, and all the world is entitled to your private thoughts, messages, texts, exchanges even when content and transmission are done legally and among consenting participants. Elwood School District’s John Glenn High School learned that lesson this past week.  

According to Newsday, Long Island’s only major newspaper, in early July “a group of students engaged in a string of hate-filled text messages”. We learned from various news reports the “vile” exchange between students involved rants about gays, Jews, and racist (groups unknown) language. Thanks to a text pirate who screenshot the messages and the speed of Cyberspace, the posts spread nationally like missiles fired from the KKK; a national counterattack ensued, as people hit their mark with their two cents aimed at the district office. More coins hit Elwood than tossed into the Trevi Fountain.

THE DISTRICT.  HQ responded in several ways. Two letters were sent to apprise the parents of the texts. It expressed its revulsion that a small group of students could hold such hateful, disgusting views, that it does not reflect the attitudes of the school community, and the curriculum will undergo changes to encompass lessons on tolerance and respect. Counselors would be made available for students who felt traumatized by the situation. School officials promised “a quick investigation, handled on an individual basis for each student involved, and promise serious consequences.” They have not met with the texters yet, so we wonder how the school concluded the boys texts reflect innate prejudice, to what degree such views are held, or whether they were highly insensitive or immature.  

THE TEXTERS. We do not know much about the boys. The whistleblower (the female student who posted the texts) described the subjects as “some white boys from Elwood being racist and homophobic”. The term “white boys” connotes its own questions. We have no information on their actual background, how they identify, or to what ethnicities they belong. In the 21st century, personal identity can be more complicated than assumptions based on cursory impressions. We also do not know how well, or if at all, the female student who outed them knows the texters. We do not know if there are special education students among them, which would affect the disciplinary process, in addition to other factors. To outsiders, the student profiles are wholly blank, save for the controversial exchange. 

 We also know nothing about their records. Do these boys display racist or discriminating behavior in school? As a group or individuals do they have a history of violence, intimidation or racism? Are they special ed, which requires a subset of protocols to follow. The rush to judgment and the infusion of politics militate against a fair and impartial disciplinary process and lean more towards pressuring for a kangaroo court.

THE WHISTLEBLOWER. The female student said the comments couldn’t be “dark humor” because the texts were “too hateful for that.” She also feared the boys needed “serious “repercussions so racist boys don’t become racist adults.”

There are several things going on here that may complicate the picture. Wanting to alert someone to the heinous comments is admirable. However, screen shooting the texts and then distributing to the parents of the boys and social media oversteps the bounds. The material should have been turned over to school authorities first. They could decide there is a nexus to John Glenn HS., giving them authority to act. The discriminatory texts could have an adverse effect on the welfare of the school community if brought onto the campus and then those attitudes manifested itself within the building in the form of disruptions or racially motivated misbehavioer. All the voices raised in alarm just took for granted the school had authority to act. Incidents off campus, not during school hours and unrelated to an event or the school day presents a gray area. More and more, schools have been asked to widen their scope of jurisdiction over kids who go to their schools but at the same time schools have had their authority to act forcefully limited.

We just do not know what the family situation is for each one of those boys. Sometimes a student ends up in harm’s way when parents or guardians are suddenly presented with the child’s serious misbehavior. School officials often have a relationship with the families and know the household. By presenting the situation in a thoughtful, professional manner and giving a lay of the land discussion, experienced educators  minimize the risk of further family tension or even physical abuse.  The early notification provides the dean or AP Security/Discipline and principal a chance to assess the case and how to proceed expeditiously and prudently.

A vigilante quality creeps into the way this unfolded. All students know to express grievances with the school. Certainly, high school students are well aware with whom to lodge a school-related concern. The whole process implemented to protect children and the school community--the disciplinary process—was subjugated to the haste in revealing the texts. Bypassing the normal channels condemns the boys as racists “for life” unless “serious repercussions” are handed down.

She’s way out of her league here. TGBL heartens to her passion for tolerance, but wish she applied the same dedication to protecting the rights of the accused, which follows legal statute, district guidelines, and a complex code of conduct, the law of the school. School discipline is not about a rush to judgment by political actors or before a national jury. They are not criminal defendants, despite how judicial disciplinary hearings have become. Although lost in the legalese and  growing business of education law, discipline is about accountability, guidance, individual growth. As anachronistic as it sounds, as old-fashioned as it may be, Emil Durkheim had it right, believing character building is at the heart of student discipline. The cacophony surrounding this case made everyone deaf and blind to the school’s educational component of the disciplinary mission.

The Supreme Court ruled  50 years ago that the 14th Amendment due process clause extends to students accused of infractions, especially those facing suspensions. The punishment imposed results from numerous considerations’. It is one thing to fight an injustice or right a wrong, but playing judge, jury and executioner doesn’t make you a superhero. The boys, in the Durkeim model, would become better citizens through education and learn from the imposition of appropriate consequences. Turning the incident into a national political cause does not meet the criteria for personal growth.

THE TEXTS. A partial reading of the texts appeared on CBS and on Long Island news channels. The texts revealed nothing about people of color (it may have been there, but was not shown), but gays and the Holocaust feature prominently in the conversation. The boys joked about having gays instead of Jews in the holocaust (sic). It was then suggested to trap gays for a revival of the Holocaust because ” it wouldn’t kill anyone except for lgbt.” This was followed by “send them all to concentration camps to help them concentrate on being straight”. Horrible, as we all agree.

The female student posted: “Here are some white boys from Elwood being racist and homophobic. Email the principal, parents, school, I don’t care WHAT (caps her own} happens to them. You don’t openly be homophobic and racist and expect to get away with it.”

Without the full transcript to analyze, we simply do not know what specifically was said about Jews or other racial minorities beyond this. Let’s go with the fragments we do have. An overlooked but important factor in this scenario is that the text messages were taken from a private conversation. When you are talking to friends, people who know you, your guard is down and people will say outrageous things. The deeper drilling must find out if the anti-gay attitude and callous Holocaust view are deeply held beliefs or just stupid talk among friends talking to each other.

We know the female student doesn’t believe the texts were teens gone wild. She stated they were “too hateful”. Yet, that is a subjective statement. For instance, art often walks a line between acceptability and affrontedness. So does humor. Comedy often speaks in extremely bad taste, whether on stage, in film, or in a private chat on personal computers.   

A second critical element here stems from the participants’ intent. From what we know, nothing was addressed to a specific individual. No threats rendered, no one specifically targeted. Usually teens express online hate at an individual, accusing the victim of being a member of a despised group and then making contemptible comments about both. These generally contain threats of physical and mental abuse coupled with attacks on both. They never aim for humor, but send bullying missives armed with persecutorial warheads, obscenity bombs and multiple ordnance launched at a person and his perceived groups of belonging. If you want hateful, go read texts when a victim stands in in the crosshairs of teenage fury. The Elwood texts pale compared to an onslaught of genuine toxic adolescent menacing.

Frankly, much worse has been said by political leaders and clergy. Louis Farrakhan said in a speech at a Chicago mosque in 2018: “Call me a hater, you know how they do – call me an anti-Semite. Stop it, I’m anti-termite!” This was echoed by an African American Georgia Congressman, Hank Johnson, who called Jews living in Judea “like termites.” The Nation of Islam leader rails against those who support gay rights, but distinguishes between gay people and the sexual sins of homosexuality, which is against the word of God, according to him.  In another speech  Farrakhan said, “The government is my enemy, the powerful Jews are my enemy”.

 An imam at a New Jersey Mosque referred to Jews as “apes and pigs”, also in his sermon: “Count them [Jewish people} one by one and kill them down to the very last one! Do not leave a single one on the face of the Earth”. The mosque says the imam was suspended and sent for retraining. The comments were not an isolated example in contemporary North America.

American political leaders, from both left and right have made profoundly insulting and hurtful comments. From American Nazi Party Republican Arthur Jones in Chicago to Holocaust denier John Fitzgerald in California. Current Congresswomen Rashid Tlaib and Ilhan Omar have made a name nationally by excoriating Israel alone, demanding punitive action and making pejorative remarks many see as blatantly anti-Semitic.

Evangelist Billy Graham was instrumental in making opposition to gay rights a priority of the Christian Right. Franklin Graham has followed in his footsteps. When his organization, Samaritan’s Purse, did Covid19 work in April, volunteers had to sign a pledge that they agree marriage was between biological members of the opposite sex, a man and a woman. Transgender need not apply. According to an NBC news report, he said gays “would burn in hell”.

What the “white boys were getting away with” were stupid opinions and prejudicial comments in their own private talk. The words spoken by powerful people are openly homophobic and racist. Expressed in sermons, campaigns, Congress, any mountebank from which to stand and beseech the crowd to hate Jews, deny people of color, reject gays --- these are the people who shouldn’t get away with anything. Yet people cheer them, pray with them, vote for them, take photos with them. And no one stops them. When the powerful exhort the hateful, it seems “they just get away with it.” Their disciples defend them with pledges of loyalty and displays of reverence. Sure, there’s pushback, but only against the omnes you don’t like.

 The far more dangerous and outrageous sentiments are those expressed by religious leaders and politicians because they have the power to influence myriad people. Representatives initiate legislation that, if signed into law, can have serious impact on the well being of targeted groups. A president or governor can sign executive orders that throw lives in turmoil. Just ask the families with kids in cages at the southern border. Celewbritiwes cnlend their fame to hurtful causes, influencing millions.  

THE FALLOUT. People from across the country weighed in on the hate. The besieged superintendent, in addition to the already mentioned responses, promised to revamp the school curriculum to reflect greater tolerance. He expressed his horror that such sentiments could be uttered by an Elwood UFSD student. A local activist added that the teachers should receive more training as well, even though the incident did not involve any staff. The students’ fate is still a TBD, and whatever punishment is handed down will remain officially undisclosed because of confidentiality. Translation: Give it a day before the boys tell their friends how many lashes they got, and word spreads throughout John Glenn HS.

 One would think John Glenn High School was the nation’s Ground Zero of intolerance while the rest of America basked in total acceptance of the scale of human differences.            

TGBL wonders if outraged America asked for the Nation of Islam or Christian evangelicals or house of Representative members or candidates to be punished, retrained, and excoriated with the same outrage and multi-level scale stating fully “They can’t get away with it.” If adults in respected positions of our society become heroes for their racist views and achieve success as a result, aren’t we being a bit over reactive –or premature, at the very least—in condemning to hellfire some kids for what they said online in a private conversation? What would happen if in the new curriculum of tolerance, certain people or cultural norms were held up as shining examples of hate? Right now, California districts are adopting an ethnic studies curriculum that mainstream Jewish groups find shockingly anti-Semitic and Israelophobic. TGBL hasn’t uncovered the same coast-to-coast indignation permeating California districts as it did Elwood. Perhaps the conscience sees a moral clarity  of right and wrong when your own beliefs are not at stake. What are you willing to risk to truly not “let them get away with it?”

Students are encouraged to report bullying or discrimination, if observed or victimized, to school authorities. The Elwood code of conduct doesn’t explicitly state if the incident must be on school grounds, have a nexus to the school community, take place within school-hours only, or what evidence is required. Very often students will alert school officials about events occurring on weekends, usually when violence or threats are part of the scenario, but rarely when an outside party objects to language in a general, closed conversation.

Despite the affected indignation by cyber mobs, local activists, and harried school officials--  all in shock that high school boys (or girls, for that matter) would actually make vile racial and homophobic comments--the question of what “serious repercussions” are in store for the most hated authors of hate texts in school-age America? 

  THE VERDICT. According to Elwood UFSD’s discipline code, the only charge the boys could face seems to be defamation. False or unprivileged statements or representations about an individual or identifiable group of individuals that harm the reputation of said person or group. The Elwood code says discrimination includes using a person’s actual or perceived group—since no specific person was a target, an accusation of discrimination would be difficult. Also, “unprivileged statement” is a hard left-wing political term. This case already skates on thin First Amendment ice. If the school charges the testers with making “unprivileged statements,” superintendent  Bossert better tell his legal team to clear their dockets. Rightly or wrongly, the Supreme Court ruled students do not leave their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse door. “Unprivileged statements” are another person’s deeply held political beliefs. Or dumb jokes told in poor taste—or the right to be offensively but legally politically incorrect. Most Americans are against burning the United States flag, but the act is protected free expression.

Being on the outside, The Green B Letter can only make a general assessment and is fully aware of unknown factors that may reveal themselves during the investigation and meetings requiring a different path. If the case were in our hands, TGBL would schedule conferences with the students, parents (a guidance counselor, and AP/Dean of school discipline. Get their side of the story before the whole thing goes dyslexic—handing down the punishment then asking the kids what happened, which is appropriate in other types of violations. This appears to be forthcoming. The texts warrant some form of accountability, more in the line of detention, documentation in the file. Sensitivity training won’t hurt either. Those who demand “serious repercussions” i.e. suspensions, come from the same political side that supports restorative justice and alternatives to punitive discipline. Well, you can’t have it both ways. TGBL certainly agrees addressing the issue is critical; what is found in the weeds will determine the path the district and school take.

One other item should be on the agenda—better Holocaust teaching. These boys apparently do not know that, although the Nazi ideology obsessed about Jews and placed them front and center for extermination, gays were a targeted group for imprisonment in     concentration camps. Many suffered sexual abuse and death. Homosexual inmates wore pink triangles. If they were Jewish they also wore a Star of David. On the Nazi hierarchy of subhumans, no inmate was lower, no prisoner received crueler treatment than a gay Jew. Perhaps their serious repercussions can start with a history project.