“Let that sink in. It happens here. We need this,” Natick resident Chris Therrien said at the charged School Committee meeting on Tuesday, June 20. When she sat back down, her face crumpled under the weight of all that was being said.

The “it” that Therrien was referring to is LGBTQ+ youth being thrown into the foster system when their parents don’t accept their identity. Therrien knows this first-hand. She and her wife, just a few years ago, took in some of those kids, giving them the accepting household that they deserve. 

The “this” Therrien mentioned is the School Committee’s proclamation to fly Progress Pride Flags at all Natick Public Schools year-round—a proclamation proposed by Therrien at the end of last year. Prior to this proposal, Therrien and her child had driven past a Framingham middle school and noticed the Pride flag flying outside. Therrien wanted Natick to follow in Framingham’s footsteps and show support to its LGBTQ+ students.

Katie Joyce, a Natick parent who helped Therrien garner support for LGBTQ+ students, described the need for these flags when she said, “LGBTQ people are our friends, they’re our neighbors, they’re our children—and they are petrified right now…The world for LGBTQ people is getting smaller and smaller and smaller because they look for signs of safety everywhere they go… These children need a safe space, they need to know that they’re supported, because when they walk out into that world, they do not know that.”

After impassioned speeches from both sides in a meeting packed with residents both in-person and online, the Natick School Committee—despite some reservations on the unusual process behind this decision—voted unanimously to pass the proclamation. The Progress Pride Flags could be up at all Natick Public Schools before Pride Month ends.

When School Committee Chair Dr. Shai Fuxman called Tuesday’s meeting to order, he commenced almost two hours of debate on the matter of the Pride flags.

The conversation was started by the policy subcommittee, which brought forth the proclamation. The subcommittee, which includes School Committee members Matt Brand and Cathi Collins, explained the process behind this proclamation. The Pride flags had been a topic of discussion at the June 8 subcommittee meeting, but conversation had been ongoing for much longer. For months, the subcommittee had been receiving legal counsel about the School Committee’s ability to fly the flag, in response to Therrien’s proposal and the counter-argument that the Supreme Court case Shurtleff v. Boston would make it difficult to fly the flag.

In Shurtleff, the Supreme Court ruled that the City of Boston was violating a Christian organization’s First Amendment right to free speech by denying its request to fly a “Christian flag” on a City of Boston flagpole. This flagpole was considered a limited public forum because groups could fill out a form to request that their flag be flown. Natick does not run into this problem because the School Committee’s decision about whether to fly the Progress Pride Flags is protected by its right to government speech: even though the School Committee was urged to fly the flag, the proclamation was edited by Collins, and passing the proclamation was the Committee’s own decision. Further, The Progress Pride Flag does not constitute political speech, as it represents acceptance for the LGBTQ+ community, and does not represent a political entity. With this in mind, the School Committee would not be violating other groups’ right to free speech if, in the future, they denied those groups’ requests to fly flags at the schools. 

In conversation with the lawyers, the policy subcommittee decided to bring this issue forward as a proclamation, not a policy. If the issue was presented as a policy, it would be a rule that the School Committee would be asking the district to enact. On the other hand, a proclamation is a value that the Committee is stating on its own. Brand explained: “We believe in this, and this is what we want to do.” Proclamations also can be passed faster, as they do not need to be brought before the Committee twice. 

The School Committee then had a discussion around the designation of the issue as a proclamation. Committee member Kate Flathers, wanting the Committee to stick to a uniform procedure, asked for examples of past proclamations, which she believed she had seen as statements of fact, not of opinion. Brand replied that Framingham had passed a proclamation on this topic in June 2021. The Committee also went back and forth on what decorations they are allowed to have in classrooms, what the impact of passing or not passing the proclamation would be, and the wording of the proclamation. Eventually, Fuxman decided that the Committee should hear from the public before making a decision. 

Two of the first three community members to share their opinions spoke out in dissent. One Natick resident agreed with the proclamation’s claim that equity is important, but thought that flying the Progress Pride Flag was biased and inequitable, as the flag represents certain groups and not others. She said this constituted favoritism and sent a message that other groups are not important; she called the proclamation “divisive and exclusionary.” 

Pam Ahern, who has led a group of moms concerned about “gender ideology” in schools, equated supporting targeted LGBTQ+ youth to elevating the importance of the mental health and suicide risk of the LGBTQ+ community over that of other groups. She explained that middle-aged white males have the highest rate of suicide, and NPS should acknowledge that risk in their middle-aged white male teachers. She proposed that the School Committee pause the proclamation and release a different one supporting the mental health struggles and suicide risk of all groups. To this end, she also wanted the School Committee to fly the suicide prevention and awareness flag.  

Despite the concentration of opposition early on, the tide quickly turned towards support for the proclamation. 

Attendees spoke out fervently against the point that flying the Progress Pride Flag would constitute favoritism of the LGBTQ+ community. Instead, as one Natick parent and teacher put it, “It is a statement that at this point in our country and our society and our community, we have a group of people who need our support more than others right now.” Another Natick parent explained that while her Black children would love to see the BLM flag flown around town, they would not be offended by Pride flags being displayed at schools. On the contrary, “they see it as something that unites us, they see it as community, they see it as friendship…For children in our community, this is a signal of safety, and in our schools, it feels like a warm hug,” she said. One Jewish community member spoke about her terrifying experiences seeing swastikas around town, but asserted that she would not see Pride flags being flown at schools as a threat or as LGBTQ+ people being granted favoritism over Jewish people. Instead, she said she would feel comforted. “We don’t see it as taking away from our safety because we know that marginalized communities protect marginalized communities, and our liberation is tied to everyone’s liberation,” she said. 

One lifelong Natick resident talked about how flying the flag would honor the progress that has been made and that still needs to happen in terms of LGBTQ+ visibility and comfort in schools. She attended the Natick Public Schools as a closeted teen. She didn’t feel safe being out then, in an environment where LGBTQ+ people were barely mentioned and the few students who were open about their identity were bullied. She said, “I believe this proclamation and the flying of the Progress Pride Flag outside schools is not in essence favoring one group over the other, but uplifting an often demonized and dehumanized community. Flying this flag would honor and be symbolic of the fight queer students have fought to be heard, to exist visibly as themselves.” She now works in the Natick Public Schools, and sees the way things have changed since she was a student. LGBTQ+ people are talked about more often, students shut down bigoted “jokes”, and, as she said, “queer students are louder and more visible, and this is vital to their ability to grow and thrive.”

Other community members vehemently opposed the downplaying of mental health issues faced by LGBTQ+ youth. “I really was just gonna listen, but when we start talking about suicide…for many years I sat on this board with the Metrowest Health Survey, and every year that that survey was done, the one thing that came back about the Natick Public Schools is that our LGBTQ youth felt afraid,” one Natick resident said. She also gave perspective to what earlier speakers had said about suicide statistics. Although it is true that middle-aged white men made up the highest percentage of deaths by suicide in the U.S. in recent years, the percentage of them that have considered suicide in the past year lies at around 9%, as another Natick resident shared. For LGBTQ+ youth, this figure is 45%. And for transgender youth, it is even higher: more than half of transgender youth have considered taking their own lives in the past year. These numbers and more are backed up by the Trevor Project. 

As many attendees and Committee members pointed out, these statistics prove that the LGBTQ+ community needs support, and hanging the flags is only the beginning. They argued that the School Committee and other people in power in Natick must also include more LGBTQ+ representation in the curriculum (such as in the books students read and in a more inclusive health education), among many other steps. A former NPS student who dedicated hundreds of hours of their childhood to fighting for the Natick Public Schools to be more inclusive of the LGBTQ+ community said, “The issues faced by LGBTQ+ youth are worthy of comprehensive policy. Our community expects actions to follow words.” 

The School Committee, after listening to these arguments, voted unanimously to pass this first action. Some Committee members had reservations due to the short time period for considering this proclamation and the lack of a second read (which is needed only for policies, not proclamations, according to Collins). 

In their final discussion, Committee members echoed and added to arguments that had been brought up by the public. Brand shared that his straight, cisgender daughter would love seeing Pride flags in schools because, in his daughter’s words, “When everyone in my school feels like they belong, it makes me feel like I belong.” Flathers added, “As a parent, as a citizen, it is hard to imagine voting any other way but yes.”

• Please send news tips, photos, ideas to natickreport@gmail.com
• Please support our summer internship program