A "SkandalöseSex survey" shook capital in September. On behalf of BerlinerSenats BefragtenWissenschaftler * in two universities pedagogical professionals. "Sex-Schnüffeleian Berlin schools" titled BZund Bild.Es was speech of "intimate" or "PikantenFragen", which teachers would be asked. The CDU group of House of Representatives even saw "DieMenschenwürde massif" violated, compared survey with practices of Third Reich and demanded deletion of all collected data.
What happened? Have teachers of ihremArbeitgeber been asked to indicate which positions or practices y prefer beimSex? None of it. Skandalisierbar was only of of her sexual orientation, and this question did not derArbeitgeber for completion of his personnel files, but warTeil a voluntary and anonymized survey. The answer to this question does not reveal any intimate sexual preferences, but only sex people with whom one wants to enter into a relationship or which one finds Sexuellattraktiv.
Ulrich Klockeis a social psychologist at Humboldt University in Berlin and, toger with Meike Watzlawik (Sigmund Freud Private University), leads Skandalisierte survey at Berlin schools.
But why do we, as scientists, want to know that? This justified question was posed by Harald Martenstein, who, with his Tagesspiegel columnist, had triggered "scandal". Our survey should investigate what Lehrkräfteund or pedagogical professionals about diversity and discrimination at Schulendenken and how y deal with it. The focus was on gender and sexuelleVielfalt, i.e. situation of lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans * Undintergeschlechtlichen (LSBTI) adolescents, as well as young people who do not conform to gender norms, for example because y As a girl prefers to play football than to make makeup or to become a boy more FürBallett interested than for fast cars. These youngsters are clearly häufigerOpfered by bullying (Journal of Adolescent Health, Berlan et al., 2010) and try three to five times as often to take life (Journal of Adolescent Health, Marshal et al., 2011 and Clark et al., 2014) – for CDU group leader Florian Graf "indiscriminate things". The sexual orientation of skilled workers was a vielenerfragten variable (besides gender, age, taught subjects UndJahrgängen, contact with LSBTI etc.) and was by no means in foreground unseresInteresses. The fact that skilled workers who have had experience of ir sexual Orientierungähnliche, such as LSBTI-adolescents, more for Dieseengagieren, do not seem absurd, however, so that sexual orientation Mitin questionnaire was taken.
Even more intimate questions were not scandalizedSo why all fuss? Was it an honest concern about data protection of Berlin teachers? DieCDU hinted at fear that red-red-green Senate wanted to judge SeineLehrkräfte from now on because of ir performance, but because of ihrersexuellen orientation. But why did you fear same dannnicht for or questions about person, for example, by gender and age of teachers? Even more "intimate" questions to teachers in or studies, such as your mental illness (German medical Journal, Weber Weltle Lederer, 2004) or political Preferences (Journal of Pedagogy, RUPF Bovier Boehnke, 2001) were not comparable to scandalized. In front of LetztenVolkszählung, in which selected citizens are obliged to participate, CDU politician Armin Empörtesich even that DieKonfessionszugehörigkeit should no longer be recorded.
Date Of Update: 04 November 2017, 12:03
