03/16/2006
Brokeback High Expulsion a Hoax, Kid Now in Real Mess
As news about Brandon Flyte's expulsion over his film project Brokeback High spread across the internet at lightning speed, a larger problem developed for the student. His claims weren't true.
He did create the film Brokeback High, and did receive high marks for it in his English class, and did show it to his marine biology class with the "snuggle scene" in it. He was punished for that, but not expelled.
However, now the teens claims of expulsion have thrown the school into chaos because of the resulting anger generated by Flyte's false claims. The school has been faced with threats of arson and violence. The school superintendent Roger Woehl says he received 10,000 emails. Woehl: "He has disrupted the school. This is clearly a behavior we don't find acceptable."
On his website, Flyte appears proud of the coverage his story has received, even leading readers to the Oregonian, which today revealed the student's hoax.
There are plenty of gay and lesbian kids across the country who suffer in oppressive and intolerant school situations. Whatever Flyte's motives for fueling the hoax, he has made something of a joke of that reality. While it is good to know that there are thousands who will stand up and cry 'foul' when an incident like this occurs, it was the wrong thing for Flyte to do. The internet is a lightning rod for stories like this.
I was fooled, plenty of others were fooled too — MSNBC, CNN, the Advocate, (if you can trust Flyte!). I guess I understand now why my emails and calls to the school weren't returned. "Wow, I appreciate your support," he said, in an email to Towleroad. It seems that Flyte not only created the hoax, but perpetuated it as well.
High schooler in trouble for lie on Web site [oregonian]
UPDATE: Brandon Flyte has updated his site once again with a response to the Oregonian article. While someone has already published his response in the comments section of this site, I'll print it again after the jump just for the record. With my attempts to contact the school going unanswered, it's been very difficult to get to the bottom of this story. Brandon's most recent comments after the jump...
Previously
Brokeback High Back in Session [tr]
High School Student Expelled for Brokeback high Movie [tr]
"By now many if not all of you have seen the story in the Oregonian, a story I awoke to with no little amount of surprise. It's expected with a story that gets this kind of momentum and is over such a controversial issue to receive a negative response, and considering the overwhelmingly positive response it's expected that the negative response should be overwhelming.
It's also unsurprising that after such a strong response, the school should try to use every tactic they have to eliminate that support, and the disruption it's caused their school. While I can appreciate their stance in trying to get the school back to normal -- and I do NOT agree with or condone the apparent threats of arson and violence that the school board says they received -- I also do not appreciate their attempt to discredit me. An attempt which has clearly begun to work.
Let me be clear on something. I never expected this level of publicity. I posted this in a few places I thought it might be of interest, but, maybe foolishly, never expected more than a few dozen people to notice or care. The attempts of my opponents to paint me as an attention-monger are lies of their own. I never contacted most of these media outlets. The Oregonian, CNN, MSNBC, the Advocate, and others, all contacted me. My website initially started as a place to inform my friends at school and elsewhere what was happening with my situation. I never sought this out. I linked to them as a point of interest in how far the story was spreading, for those who were reading my site, nothing more.
If I only wanted publicity for my film, I would have posted the film in its entirety immediately. But I did not expect this kind of attention -- in fact, I expected that those who viewed my site would already have seen the film. And I certainly would not have linked to the Oregonian if I had been aware of the underhanded tactics the administration planned to use against me.
To address Superintendent Woehl's claims, why did he refuse to elaborate on my "series of misbehaviors"? Aside from my sketchy attendance -- to which even the Oregonian recognizes I have already admitted -- I have had no prior disciplinary actions taken on me. What misbehaviors is he talking about?
In addition, the superintendent claims that the class assignment forbade sex, nudity, or violence. Yet two boys in each other's arms is not sex, bare chests are not nudity (or else the entire swim team should be suspended for indecent exposure), and my film did have some violence which I was not asked to remove. Likewise, several of the other films had violence in them that was allowed to stand.
If as Woehl claims I was landed in trouble for not following the guidelines of the assignment, and was not a blanket ban on the content of my film, why were the guidelines of the CLASS assignment upheld in a DIFFERENT class?
I have seen PG-13 movies shown at my school, during classes with nothing else going on, that had more explicit sex scenes than what I showed. I saw a film made for the assignment with explicit drug use that was not asked to be removed. Why should I be disciplined for showing a film that violated no rule in the class I showed it?
Additionally, he claims that the transfer was not mandatory. Whether the rest is a misunderstanding or not, this is an absolute lie. I asked specifically when I was called into the office and informed of the transfer if I had a choice in the matter, and I was told that I did not. If I had, I would not have chosen to attend the Community College, as I wanted to spend the remainder of my senior year with my friends.
I have not been a model student throughout high school, but in the past year I've been trying to turn it around, and to have everything thrown away in the home stretch is disheartening and insulting.
As I said, I can understand Woehl's desire to stem the disruption caused by the apparently thousands of unpleasant e-mails he's received. And, now that he's tried to brand me a liar, I know can't convince anyone of my side if they want to believe him. I'm a kid with bad attendance and he's an adult who runs a school district. People will believe him. The Oregonian clearly did, and many of the blogs that have been watching this story have started spreading that version of the story. But I hope that some people out there know a smear campaign when they see one.
I'm just a kid fighting a bunch of adults who are protecting their names by now trying to destroy mine. I plan to hold my head high and continue fighting for the truth. It seems I was premature in saying that my part of the fight had been resolved."
Posted 8:27 AM EST by Andy Towle in Current Affairs, Film & TV | Permalink
Like it?
Subscribe to FREE Towleroad daily headlines with our RSS feed!
RECENT STORIES:
Comments
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Well, I almost thought it could be a hoax. But I choose to believe better in people. Quickly, I'm beginning to feel as though that's the wrong choice.
It reminds me of that university student who went to my school who claimed the FBI went to his house to ask him questions because he took out the "little red book," a chinese communist book, from the library. It made international news and I totally fell for that one.
Well, shame on that kid. Who knows what he was thinking. It's a shame, he wasn't in trouble before... but he'll probably be now (if only to the hearts and minds of students, administration and teachers who will be pissed).
Posted by: Ryan | Mar 16, 2006 12:18:34 PM
Don't blame Andy or bloggers for not 'investigating' properly. Gimme a break! How can you even focus on that? The story was reported by legitimate, real news sources, not just on internet sites. And this kid was the one who was lying, who would have suspected this? It's not the journalists' fault, it's his fault for lying.
Posted by: matt | Mar 16, 2006 12:38:10 PM
I completely appreciate the desire to defend the underdog and you do a damned fine job of it too in most circumstances. As Brian pointed out, being more skeptical of what we read is something we can all do a better job of.
Posted by: Robert | Mar 16, 2006 12:38:56 PM
I thought something was amiss when a friend posted on his Myspace, "You have officially taken this too far" and laughed.
Posted by: Kyle | Mar 16, 2006 12:44:13 PM
Yea, call the kid a liar. Thats fair. You accuse these news sites of not researching their facts, then at the first sign of dissent, you throw this guy under a bus. Absolutely disgusting. Those of you engaging in this should be ashamed.
Posted by: John | Mar 16, 2006 12:45:08 PM
So now that "the other side of the story" has emerged we all are jumping on the bandwagon to 100% believe the other side and totally discredit the kid’s version of the story. I know from my own experience how school administrations will cover their asses and use their power and perceived integrity and "maturity" to discredit a student who challenges them. It doesn't matter how honest the student may be. It seems to me that this kid has been pretty honest about himself from the get go, admitting to his checkered past. I think it is amazing how so many people who seem angered over the lack of two sides of the story seem to now only be considering one side of it. Come on people, stop being such fucking sheep. You are what is wrong with the gay community and with America in general. You are sheep waiting for the shepherd to yell “gi” or “haw” so that you can mindlessly follow the herd or whichever goat happens to make the next wrong turn first. Give this kid some credit and at least consider that maybe he is being railroaded. I'm not saying that he is telling the full truth. I don't know and neither do any of you here. We STILL don't have all of the FACTS. Have the patience to get all of the facts and then the courage to stand for what's right.
How about visiting his site and reading HIS side of the accusations against him. He still seems very credible to me. The Superintendants story just doesn't add up. Read it and THINK and come to YOUR OWN conclusions for a change.
Posted by: Zeke | Mar 16, 2006 1:07:41 PM
Andy,
Before labeling this a hoax, shouldn't you contact Brandon to verify his side of the story? Per Jody's posting of Brandon's response to the "Oregonian's" article, he claims the administration is lying to cover itself.
I think you're jumping the gun. Instead of going where the wind blows, why not find out what the truth is? Surely Brandon's parents would know the truth. Right?
If you believe in defending the underdog, then take the time to research whether the underdog may be the victim of a retalitory smear job! It happens all the time. Just because Brandon is a teenager doesn't mean that school officials wouldn't try to hurt him.
Posted by: noah | Mar 16, 2006 1:26:13 PM
I have to agree it is ironic, as others have said, that everyone here has immediately jumped from believing the kid's side of the story wholesale to believing the school's side of the story wholesale. Neither seems to have been corroborated yet, and Brandon Flyte is still sticking by his story.
I have no idea what's going on, but I'm not assuming the Oregonian story is the end of the matter.
Posted by: Dave Rattigan | Mar 16, 2006 1:26:29 PM
I'm not ready to call it a hoax just because the school administration has told the Oregonian that it was not true. Brandon made it very clear in his postings that the school never called it an expulsion, and that it was he himself who regarded it as that. Brandon's complaint was that his going to the college was mandatory. Now the school says it wasn't. And Brandon called it a transfer.
With all the heat (and threat of legal consequences) on the school administrators, it is very reasonable that they would now say everything they can to discredit Brandon's account of things.
What we're seeing is classic 'he said, she said' dynamics in a case where the heat is on.
Until Brandon admits that he fabricated any part of his account, I am unwilling to flippantly jump on the hoax bandwagon just because the alleged perps claim it is not true. What would you expect them to say, that everything he alleges is perfectly true? Give me a break!
Posted by: Figaro | Mar 16, 2006 1:50:36 PM
Kinda shows how ready we are to consume any "I was gaybashed" story we're fed. Some people on here are now saying they don't believe it's a hoax. I guess what we want to believe often determines what we believe (and isn't it sad that we WANT to believe this kid was expelled).
Posted by: Cyd | Mar 16, 2006 1:56:37 PM
The problem now is in calling it a "hoax" or a "lie." As Figaro just pointed out, Brandon never made any claims vis a vis his expulsion that it was anything under than underhanded and that it was related to his film.
The article in the Advocate news section today indicates that Brandon said the school did bring up his film during the meeting over his "forced transfer" repeatedly.
Still, I'm backing away a bit from seeing this a pure homophobia and leaning now much more to dirty dealings by the admin to a student who just won't fit in, and who used an infraction of the rules as a chance to bounce him out.
Again I say to Andy that you weren't taken advantage of. There is something here, it's just not so clear cut anymore as to what its about. Keep covering this story and all those like it in the future. You do a great job, so good in fact, it's why I read your site right along side the AP news headlines.
Posted by: Jody | Mar 16, 2006 2:03:00 PM
CYD, and what is it that you WANT to believe?
Posted by: Figaro | Mar 16, 2006 2:07:45 PM
Brandon updated his site to answer the claims made by the school. Both stories have equal possibility to them so I think it is best to suspend judgement at the moment.
Posted by: The Angry Fag | Mar 16, 2006 2:13:18 PM
I'm a little fuzzy about what the hoax is here. When I first heard about this a couple days ago I checked the kid's site, and lo and behold the entire story about his being transfered to another school was there, along with the statement that the school did not regard it as an expulsion, but the kid, in essence, did. And that's pretty much how I took it too. He was being thrown out of his school for showing that film.
The only difference I see now is that the school administration is saying the transfer was not manditory, and now they're angry with the kid over the public fall-out over this. Well...duh. You have to figure they're going to go back on the attack here. They were dangling his ability to graduate with his class over his head on the condition of his behavior throughout the spring, which I took as a back handed threat to just shut up and take the punishment or else. My first fear for this kid was that as soon as it became a public blow up-the school would start inventing excuses to make things worse for him. It looks to me like that's Exactly what's happening.
When I saw the headline of this post, I was afraid that there hadn't even been a film made, let alone an expulsion given. So I read the post and I find out that, yeah, there was a film, there was an expulsion, and it all happened because of his showing the film in that class. So...where's the hoax? Looks to me like all that's different now is the school is giving spin.
Posted by: Bruce Garrett | Mar 16, 2006 2:26:32 PM
May I allow myself a very far away point of view?I'm sure Flyte was expecting a "tsunami"gay support,sure a lot of people(me included)were just puppets,sure there is"something behind the curtain"and that he is a perverse manipulator.For me the issue is neither straight kid/gay kids problems or the way the school reacted...Flyte grasped an OPPORTUNITY to be known,recognized,maybe loved.He used the community.A very contemptible way to start a life.Sorry for him.
Posted by: Pierre (from Paris.France) | Mar 16, 2006 2:44:42 PM
Healthy skepticism, even with regards to news reporting, is always a good idea. Even after reading the Oregonian article, it still seems unclear as to all of what has actually occurred in this instance.
But it's also interesting to look at how easy it is to believe the kid's story. Living in an metropolitan coastal city with a large gay population, I'm never certain what is myth and what is fact when it comes to the reported pervasive hatred coursing through, well, non-metropolitan coastal cities, but I do feel like our collective sense is that it's factual. Especially as, even if many more positive images of gays and lesbians exist in popular culture and media, there seems to have been a concurrent increase in expressed hostility (or maybe just attention to those who are hostile) in conservative media outlets.
None of that, however, should relieve Mr. Flyte of responsibility for lying, if indeed that is the case. I just think it points up a collective fear that may need to be examined from time to time. Of course, since our current government has long been in the business of exploiting fear to manipulate ends, our supposed "education president" may have taught that lesson too well to at least one member of the next generation.
Posted by: Jake | Mar 16, 2006 2:49:16 PM
I'm with Bruce on this. I don't see how this is a hoax. Brandon's own web site says the schools wasn't calling it an expulsion, but a "mandatory transfer," which in his opinion is effectively an expulsion. The only point of contention in this therefore is whether the transfer was mandatory, as Brandon claims, or optional, as the administration claims. If Brandon's claim that the school was going to pay for the college courses is true, it supports his claim it was mandatory since it appears that the school is required under Oregon law to do so in the case of suspension or expulsion ("Suspension or expulsion of a student from the regular school program does not relieve the district of the obligation to provide instruction in the residential program in which the child resides or in another appropriate facility"). Moreover, if the OregonLive story is correct about the terms of the project (no sex, nudity or violence), then Brandon did not violate the rules. There was no depiction of sex and the actors were not nude, only shirtless.
Posted by: Craig | Mar 16, 2006 3:03:13 PM
Expulsion, maybe. My attitude is: whatever.
This blog is of course in no way to blame for whatever truth got lost, if any did. But this episode does serve to come at an odd time for me, as I'm strongly wanting to pull the ripcord and get the hell out of the blogosphere. It's just too...much. Too much 'news', too many foolishnesses, too many reports of crap (not, as a rule, on THIS site) echoing crap seen three days ago, and too much time wasted.
And a huge part of my dismay is fueled by my own blog. Too...silly, really.
Posted by: Jacko | Mar 16, 2006 3:16:19 PM
Okay first of all - don't believe anything you read in the Portland Oregonian. The Oregonian is notorious for its biased and conservative reporting. When I lived in Portland there was an an actual riot of several hundred people and the Oregonian didn't publish a single article on it. If you didn't have a TV you never would have know it happened. And second, come on - the school administrators are full of shit. Why suddenly believe them now?
Posted by: Chris | Mar 16, 2006 3:53:45 PM
Pierre, if you just stick to the facts so far available in this case, you can see that Brandon-bashing at this point is not at all warranted.
Makes me think this site has attracted some gay bashers scantily disguised as reasonable people. I wonder how many of the Brandon-bashing posts here actually come from participants (or their defenders) in the case.
Posted by: Bilbo | Mar 16, 2006 3:58:18 PM
Too, too sorry, Craig.
First, your statement:
"Brandon's own web site says the schools wasn't calling it an expulsion, but a "mandatory transfer," which in his opinion is effectively an expulsion."
The Oregonian reports:
"Flyte said Wednesday that he was not expelled or suspended and his being called to the office was 'not a homophobic thing.'"
Now, say the Oregonian is lying.
Next up:
"Moreover, if the OregonLive story is correct about the terms of the project (no sex, nudity or violence), then Brandon did not violate the rules. There was no depiction of sex and the actors were not nude, only shirtless."
From the Oregonian:
"The assignment, however, forbid sex scenes, nudity and violence. Flyte removed the snuggling scene for the English class and got rave reviews for the film. Several other students also had to remove scenes from their projects. The class voted Flyte best actor."
Oh, and did you see how BRANDON admits it's a sex scene?
"I have seen PG-13 movies shown at my school, during classes with nothing else going on, that had more explicit sex scenes than what I showed. "
Of course I understand why you're doing all this in the face of overwhelming fact, Craig; you've built a wonderful edifice of pseudo-intellectualism that all comes crashing down if it turns out Brandon is...um...exaggerating.
That, and you would have to admit that I was right to be skeptical about him, that his behavior was wrong, and that this wasn't something the "gay community" should be freaking over.
Like you'd ever do THAT to a gay conservative.
Posted by: North Dallas Thirty | Mar 16, 2006 4:10:48 PM
> The Oregonian reports:
> "Flyte said Wednesday that he was not expelled or suspended and his being called to the office was 'not a homophobic thing.'"
> Now, say the Oregonian is lying.
Brandon said Wednesday that the transfer (which *he* considered an expulsion but was never officially called such, kind of like the War in Iraq has not ever officially been declared a war) was retracted, not that it had never happened, and that "the school insists this was not a homophobic thing". He didn't backpedal on anything, it's just media spin and paraphrasing to twist his words.
Any time a journalist says "So and so said Wednesday that..." without DIRECT QUOTING, of more than just a phrase here or there, you should question why they didn't use the person's actual words.
> Oh, and did you see how BRANDON admits it's a sex scene?
That's just spin and you know it. Brandon states that they have shown movies with sex scenes in them at school, such that what happens in his film can by no stretch be considered a sex scene in comparison.
Posted by: Michael Scott | Mar 16, 2006 4:17:32 PM
Go away troll. The cuddling you do with today's GOP is what is truly disgusting.
Posted by: Wooldoor | Mar 16, 2006 4:20:52 PM
Mmm, can't you just smell the estrogen in the air?
Posted by: mac | Mar 16, 2006 4:22:45 PM
"Any time a journalist says "So and so said Wednesday that..." without DIRECT QUOTING, of more than just a phrase here or there, you should question why they didn't use the person's actual words."
I question why you just can't flat-out state that the Oregonian is lying.
Probably because you're trying to spin the fact that you're conducting a smear against a journalist who investigated and quoted multiple sources so that you can continue believing only the words of a seventeen-year-old kid who has more than enough reason to lie to cover his ass.
"Brandon states that they have shown movies with sex scenes in them at school, such that what happens in his film can by no stretch be considered a sex scene in comparison."
Hypocrisy on your part, isn't it?
Brandon's actual words:
"I have seen PG-13 movies shown at my school, during classes with nothing else going on, that had more explicit sex scenes than what I showed."
Note the "more explicit", which means that he's not arguing that it isn't a sex scene; he's saying that others shown were worse.
Also, note his cleverly-phrased "during classes with nothing else going on". Does that mean that these movies were approved to be shown by the administration -- or that other students were showing them without official sanction?
Nice try, though.
Posted by: North Dallas Thirty | Mar 16, 2006 4:32:45 PM