If that worked, political campaigns wouldn't pay big bucks to people who know how to play the public, a public which is more ignorant, skittish, and reactionary than those of us in civilized circles can even imagine.
This isn't about straight people and their lack of knowledge about LGBT people. I hate to sound elitist, but I was stunned to find out what was considered a normal range of IQ in an article I read the other day. Moreover, I was amazed at what I read about reading comprehension, it explains a lot, even on this board. For many of the people we're talking about in the reactionary crowd, it wasn't even necessary for them to hear the rest of the story, simply hearing that a male homosexual teacher was talking to a 15 year old male student about sex would be enough. And you expect them to care about context, intent, and truth?
By E.D. Hirsch Jr.
Back in the 1970s, I had a "Eureka!" moment as I reviewed the results of reading comprehension tests. The community college students we tested had done almost as well as students at the highly selective University of Virginia — as long as the passages the community college students were asked to read dealt with familiar, everyday topics. But when they encountered passages that required historical background, they faltered. These Richmond, Va., students had difficulty understanding a passage on Ulysses S. Grant and Robert E. Lee because many of them were unfamiliar with the Civil War. That shocked me.
These students had been cheated. They hadn't acquired important general knowledge in their homes and communities, and their schools hadn't compensated for that. Their basic intelligence was sound. They simply did not have the knowledge they needed to make sense of many texts.http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2004-02-24-hirsch-edit_x.htm