High School Student Expelled for Brokeback High Movie
Brandon Flyte, a student at West Linn High School in West Linn, Oregon, was recently expelled for airing a video project he had been assigned in class which includes a same-sex "snuggle" scene. The film, Brokeback High, is a "gay love story" based on themes from Brokeback Mountain, but set in a modern day high school. The shot above was the one that got him expelled.
Flyte writes on his website: "One has to wonder if any of this would've happened had the two characters snuggling in my film been male and female. We're led to believe that diversity is encouraged in schools, but when a 17 year-old straight kid makes a serious gay love story and is expelled for it, it just begs the question of exactly what kind of policy was the administration following? I recall Tim Fields, one of the vice-principals at my school, having to think for at least a minute when asked by the office lady, 'What should I put down for 'reason of withdrawal'?' If the basis of my expulsion is so unclear to them, then surely the circumstances surrounding it are extremely questionable and the grounds on which I was removed are both unfair and unexplainable."
Wow. To me, Flyte's punishment seems egregious and blatantly homophobic.
There is a clip of Brokeback High on his website, and an area to leave comments and support. According to Flyte, "West Linn High says they’ll pay for me to finish up my last 2 months of high school at Clackamas Community College, and I'll be able to walk with my high school class at graduation and attend Prom as a guest."
Shame on West Linn High School and kudos to Brandon for having the courage to make and air his video. There's some obvious talent there. Perhaps The Point Foundation can help Brandon out in his future academic endeavors. On the other hand, perhaps Flyte could sue the school district as some high school students in California are doing.
West Linn High School's website (note the prominent discrimination policy on the front page which omits sexual orientation).
(story via gayer mechanic wales)
I'm totally joining his facebook group.
Posted by: K. | Mar 14, 2006 11:16:08 AM
He's getting lots of support! Odd that the school policy doesn't include sexual orientation, but the announcements page mentions a meeting of the Gay/Straight Alliance. I'm betting there will be some backtracking by the admin as news gets around.
Posted by: Keith | Mar 14, 2006 11:35:13 AM
He writes beautifully. Fuck high school, kid. Nobody will ever care where you went or what happened there. Just go to college and keep on truckin'. You'll move forward and become happy and successful, and those stupid fucks will never leave West Linn.
Posted by: Brian | Mar 14, 2006 12:06:31 PM
We need to call the number on the School District website and make a big fuss.
Posted by: Javier | Mar 14, 2006 12:13:04 PM
His myspace page:
http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendid=14001862
Posted by: Javier | Mar 14, 2006 12:19:19 PM
Expect a tidal wave of similar stories as Brokeback Mountain has affirmed gay themed film as the new mainstream genre. It is going to be a lot of fun watching conservatives and religious zealots squirm over the next few years. Eventually this will be so commonplace that only the extraordinary will make news. Keep these stories coming Andy. The liberation of gay America has taken a quantum leap thanks to BBM.
Posted by: Johnny Lane | Mar 14, 2006 12:19:26 PM
Definitely take a moment to watch the clip he has posted on his site. For a high school kid, it's pretty good. These clowns at the high school should, methinks, prepare for a LOT of bad press and nasty emails. Or, you know, just do the right thing and admit they fucked up big time.
Posted by: Glenn | Mar 14, 2006 12:27:40 PM
The lexicographers have formally weighed in: it's Web site, not website. ;-)
Posted by: Peter Mattachine | Mar 14, 2006 1:06:51 PM
Straight allies like him will win ultimately win the war for us. We can't win without people like him on our side.
Posted by: Mike | Mar 14, 2006 1:43:41 PM
A 17 year-old who can put together sentences like that...Holy shit. Yale should be handing him a scholarship.
Posted by: Jacko | Mar 14, 2006 2:04:12 PM
Wow... I can't believe that would happen. That school is going to definately have to backtrack and this will make some big time news. Keep us updated, tolwer =)
I wrote a story on my blog. We all should spread the news. This shit's not right.
Posted by: Ryan | Mar 14, 2006 2:30:33 PM
I don't want people like him who peddle porn, try to pass it off as a school project, and then enlist the help of gullible gays to push it, as "allies".
If this boy had made a film of a naked and underage male and female "snuggling", then tried to show it in class, he not only would have been expelled, but might have faced criminal prosecution for making pornography.
But if it's GAY, common sense on the matter gets thrown right out the window.
Posted by: North Dallas Thirty | Mar 14, 2006 2:35:43 PM
This is horrendous.
Note if you click on Clubs and Organizations, they have a Gay/Straight Alliance.
Posted by: Tim | Mar 14, 2006 2:36:21 PM
Good point North Dallas Thirty. It's a shame that so many in our community view pornography as either art or have grown immune to it from daily exposure that they fail to comprehend for most-- and certainly all minors-- it is wrong.
I think the school district was far too lenient on the film producer/student. And it's a shame our community doesn't get it: we aren't going to engender broad support for our civil rights agenda as long as porn-as-art is defended. Someone wrote: "We can't win without people like him on our side"??? Gheez, we'll never win til we put guys like him on the back of the bus --and keep em quiet.
Posted by: Michigan-Matt | Mar 14, 2006 2:44:32 PM
Greatest thing that could happen to his career. Most people pay $5000 a month for this publicity.
Posted by: Guy | Mar 14, 2006 2:54:56 PM
ND30 & MI-Matt...while the steam from my ears is going down after reading your posts, perhaps you can explain to us precisely what is "pornographic" about the snuggling shot. There's no nudity, nothing explicit about it. It would most certainly not be considered "child pornography" no matter what the sex of the participants. Is there some clip from this video that you've seen that we haven't?
Or are you two just seriously fucked up? I'm pretty sure I know the answer.
Posted by: Glenn | Mar 14, 2006 2:56:05 PM
Thirty, did you even bother to watch the clip? If so, you've got a very warped view of "pornography".
Guess what? High school kids "do it". Have been for decades now. Brandon's film shows no nudity and no sex, so how can you consider it porn? Because it simply insinuates that two kids had sex? Geez, if that's porn, then "Fast Times at Ridgemont High" is porn.
Grow up.
Posted by: "Radical" Russ | Mar 14, 2006 3:10:47 PM
North Dallas Thirty, STFU!
I watched the "offending clip" and despite your ranting to the contrary (and your obvious fear of gay sexuality) it's not "porn" by any sense of the terms. I think you have some unresolved personal issues which are CLEARLY clouding your judgement. As for West Lynn High School, the City of West Lynn is not known for it's "progressive" view of the world.
Posted by: Robert In WeHo | Mar 14, 2006 3:12:57 PM
Oh good god, "pornography"? "Put him at the back of the bus and keep him quiet?", give me a break.
Gays like you two will set back years of work if you ever get the chance. Civil Rights were never won by asking "pretty-please, may we have our rights?", and they certainly won't be given by the political party you both support, not for gay people. Sorry, but I'm not content to be a Ken Mehlman queer.
Posted by: brent | Mar 14, 2006 3:14:00 PM
The same goes for you Michigan-Matt, STFU!
You have no clue what you are talking about.
Posted by: Robert In WeHo | Mar 14, 2006 3:17:08 PM
ND30, two shirtless teenage males snuggling or kissing in bed in one scene of movie does not make it porn and it is utterly irresponsible for you to suggest otherwise unless you can prove that they 1) were completely nude (not just shirtless as the picture shows and the teen states on his web site) and 2) engaging in sexual activity (and snuggling is not sexual activity). The evidence currently before us suggests neither 1 or 2 is true. And if it was male-female, mere snuggling wouldn't rise to the level of pornography either. The difficulty that would arise from a male-female pairing would be if the female's torso was bare, but even that would be a stretch to say its porn. There is an enormous difference between being merely inappropriate for teens and being child pornography. And for the record, I don't see the scene as being a problem, especially when taken in whole with the movie meant to be the student's own portrayal of Brokeback Mountain.
Posted by: Craig | Mar 14, 2006 3:19:42 PM
Where did someone even come up with this as porn? That makes no sense. Since when does male chests = porn? /boggle.
No, we need to defend this kid with the best effort of the entire gay community. The school is wrong and MUST issue him a complete apology, as well as provide a fair means for him to make up all the school work he missed without being penalized.
Like I said before - we need to defend this kid and spread the word so it hits main stream media.
This is a big story and a lot of people could be convinced that more gay civil rights protection is needed. There should be anti-discrimination laws in ALL states that protect GLBT students and that's the point we need to drive home. This is the sort of story that convinced everyday Americans.
Posted by: Ryan | Mar 14, 2006 3:21:56 PM
Andy thanks for sharing this story. Not that you would ever drop the opportunity to see a Brokeback headline pass - please follow this story through for us.
Posted by: J.B. | Mar 14, 2006 3:23:10 PM
WOW NTD this is reactionary even for you. If this is gay porn than what do you call the flims Falcon produces?
Teenagers get naked and cuddle some I know I did. I did it in a nonsexual way with girls and boys. Both you and MM are over reaching on this bad boy.
Posted by: Donald | Mar 14, 2006 3:23:49 PM
Geez, if that's porn, then "Fast Times at Ridgemont High" is porn.
"Fast Times at Ridgemont High" is a R-rated movie. Indeed, it nearly was an X-rated movie until a few seconds of the scenes with Jennifer Jason Leigh were cut.
If you want to consider them in the same vein, go right ahead. Remember, R-rated movies are not considered appropriate for high-school-aged individuals, and public schools are not usually allowed to show them as part of the curriculum without direct parental approval.
Guess what? High school kids "do it". Have been for decades now.
And pedophiles have been raping little children for centuries. But that doesn't make IT right, or a fit subject for high school filmmaking.
What I want explained is why it's so important that a 17-year-old kid be defended for defying his teachers, who were more than willing to allow him to show the rest of his film, and including a sex scene.
How about for once the gay community show some responsibility by saying, "You know what? That sex scene wasn't necessary to the story of the film. You left it in there in defiance of your teachers, and we won't support that. The fact that you chose to portray a message about gays does not give you the right to unnecessarily defy authority."
Posted by: North Dallas Thirty | Mar 14, 2006 3:25:32 PM