Preston Xanthopoulos: Don't take the magic and beauty of rainbows away from our children

We really need to let children be children for as long as they can be, because, the moment they have to deal with adult stuff, that naïve sparkle that charms most kids eyes, won’t be there as often.

I could be talking about a lot of things with this topic but I’m going to go to a recent controversy at a Waukesha, Wisconsin, elementary school.

The school is hosting its annual spring concert where adorable children will sing songs, spread smiles and provide lots of photos and videos for parents to display and embarrass those little kids with once they become teenagers. The theme of the event is “The World."

But, like everything in this super-divisive world, it is not without controversy.

Some songs to be performed include, "Here Comes the Sun" and “What a Wonderful World." One teacher, however, had to make a point. A first-grade teacher chose to have her class sing “Rainbowland" by Miley Cyrus and Dolly Parton and the administration said, “no." It's a catchy little country ditty, I support its message, and I love all things Dolly Parton.

The song is about acceptance of the LGBTQ community. Why are 6-year-olds being taught anything about sexual orientation at school? Why are they being used as performative activists to teach a moral lesson to society at a spring concert?

Let’s look at some lyrics: “All the hurt and the hate going on here.” Why are 6-years-olds singing about hurt and hate? Why is anyone singing about hurt and hate at a spring concert that is, by its nature, intended to spread the joy of newness and life? “Brush the judgement and fear aside." Fear? Why are 6-year-olds talking about fear? It doesn’t matter what the context is, these are words children should not be singing at a school concert, particularly one intended to spread happiness and jubilation. These are words that don't need a context for a first-grader to know what they mean. They’re bad words.

However, due to the nature of the song that got axed, there is of course a massive backlash. The administration who nixed the song from the performance is being called, bigoted, non-supportive of LGBTQ students, etc. etc., because the song is about rainbows and rainbows are the symbol of the gay community. I’ll get to “rainbows" in a moment.

The school says the song was canceled because it could be perceived as “controversial” and therefore goes against school policy. School policy states that “controversial” is anything “on which opposing points of view have been promulgated by responsible opinion; which may be the subject of intense public argument, disagreement or disapproval; which may have political, social or personal impacts on students and/or the community; and which is likely to arouse both support and opposition in the community.” Obviously, a song sung by 6-year-olds in support of LGBTQ inclusion, is controversial, whether I think the topic should be or not. It simply is. Therefore, it does not conform to school policy. Period. End of story.

Now to rainbows. The LGBTQ community does not “own" the rainbow. It has been adopted as a symbol of the community and I think that is a lovely message. But, it’s not “owned” by anyone. There are a lot of songs about rainbows that have nothing to do with this topic. Kermit the Frog comes to mind. (Apparently, at one point the school or someone was going to ban that, but decided not to because they realized rainbows aren't “owned” by anyone and Rainbow Connection is an awesome happy, non-politically or socially charged tune.)

So, why are 6-year-olds being taught that a rainbow is a symbol of something more? Yes, they are. How do I know that the kids weren’t just naïve about the message behind “Rainbowland” and thought they were just singing about a happy utopia of love and rainbows? Because the teacher behind this controversy said so. In response to the cancelation of her students singing this song, she said, “These confusing messages about rainbows are ultimately creating a culture that seems unsafe towards queer people.” Who is “confusing” a 6-year-old about the “messages” about rainbows?

The only thing a 6-year-old needs to know about a rainbow is it’s that beautiful, magical thing in the sky, probably created by unicorn flatulence, which may have a pot of gold at the end of it, if you believe in Leprechauns; or potentially the chem trail for that creepy, flying tiger in Cartoon Network’s, “Uncle Grandpa."

Seriously? People are really trying to take that innocent image of a rainbow every child has away from them to make it means something more? Why? Why would you take that naïve joy from a child? That’s exactly what this teacher did with her class. She made the rainbow itself “controversial" and this needs to stop for the reasons I noted at the outset. We don't get a long time in life to believe in magic rainbows and unicorns and fairies. We too early find out a rainbow is just an “arc made by light striking water droplets."

Literally and figuratively, we need to let children believe in the simple magic of a rainbow for as long as they possibly can. Don't take it away from them. Life will do that itself, unfortunately, in due time.

Alicia Preston Xanthopoulos is a former political consultant and member of the media. She’s a native of Hampton Beach where she lives with her family and two poodles. Write to her at PrestonPerspective@gmail.com.

This article originally appeared on Portsmouth Herald: Preston Xanthopoulos: Don't take the magic of rainbows from our kids