Why does every thread about Hill schools get so grumpy?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's gentrification - that's happenin everywhere. I think it's more complicated. It's gentirifcation among one of the most liberal, educated, ambitious, not-profit-working populations in the country. How do you say what you think without the PC police freaking the f--- out? How do you balance you Child's needs against your politics? When you have nothing but compassion for the kids in DC General but don't neccessarily want to send your 5 year old into a classroom wih kids from said shelter - a "grass roots movement" for Mandarin immersion takes on a lot of underlying BS

Observing this dynamic is one of my favorite parts of reading DCUM.

+1

Added to this ^^, I have observed as a really long-time dcum partcipant that Hill parents -- alone -- combine this cognitive dissonance with the sincere belief that if they just use their mad operative skills will get them what they want out of dcps -- laws, customs, equity and the other 7 Wards be damned.

It would be funny if it wasn't so insufferable and classist. Being special counsel to the committee on ABC doesn't always translate.

What are you nattering on about? The reason the threads deteriorate is because there are a limited number of prime spots in Hill schools. Some parents think that anything other than Brent or Maury is completely unacceptable. Others of us disagree. There is a lot of handwringing about loss of in-boundary for SWS as well. I don't see a monolithic, single-perspective Hill view at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Because on the hill there are the "haves" and the "have-nots". People want to stay here. They want to send their kids to their neghborhood schools and half of those schools are great and the other half struggle with some very serious issues. There's gray area - for two hot seconds - and then those gray schools become the haves and the schools become impossible to get into.

The situation makes people lose their minds and their humanity because there is no easily affordable private option and there is no charter option. Eventually, the hill will have some of the strongest schools in the entire metro area if not the east coast, but right now it's tough - it's tough for those that want to stay but don't feel they can and its tough for those that feel they're being usurped and pushed out. And those that are in schools they like get lambasted becaude of jealousy or the parents coming into those schools have ridiculous expectations because they payed a mint for thier homes or the school are supposed to have amazing reps.

PStents of elementary kids in this city are diseased. Lottery sickness

Mostly this. Add to it probably a bigger gap between house price and school quality than in most of DC, aggravated by complex school boundaries, the middle school situation, the fact that the Anacostia river barrier means there are a lot of poor folks living in closer proximity than is the case in other DC areas this affluent , so OOB attendance is a much bigger deal, etc.

I don't think its the ideology of liberal gentrifiers so much. Affluent folk on the Hill are not more liberal than gentrifiers in Columbia Heights, or Petworth, or Mt Pleasant or other EOTP neighborhoods. But the geography of school gentrification is more straightforward in those areas.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's gentrification - that's happenin everywhere. I think it's more complicated. It's gentirifcation among one of the most liberal, educated, ambitious, not-profit-working populations in the country. How do you say what you think without the PC police freaking the f--- out? How do you balance you Child's needs against your politics? When you have nothing but compassion for the kids in DC General but don't neccessarily want to send your 5 year old into a classroom wih kids from said shelter - a "grass roots movement" for Mandarin immersion takes on a lot of underlying BS

Observing this dynamic is one of my favorite parts of reading DCUM.

+1

Added to this ^^, I have observed as a really long-time dcum partcipant that Hill parents -- alone -- combine this cognitive dissonance with the sincere belief that if they just use their mad operative skills will get them what they want out of dcps -- laws, customs, equity and the other 7 Wards be damned.

It would be funny if it wasn't so insufferable and classist. Being special counsel to the committee on ABC doesn't always translate.

What are you nattering on about? The reason the threads deteriorate is because there are a limited number of prime spots in Hill schools. Some parents think that anything other than Brent or Maury is completely unacceptable. Others of us disagree. There is a lot of handwringing about loss of in-boundary for SWS as well. I don't see a monolithic, single-perspective Hill view at all.

I'm not sure you understand the nuances of the original question.

Also, there are a limited number of desirable seats in non-Hill DCPS too, did you realize that? So that's not actually the reason that threads about Hill DCPS stand out.

[Anonymous]

Could you pleze splain what these nuances is for us country folk?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think there are many different factors. But my current theory is that on the Hill we are faced to confront income inequality in a way the rest of the nation doesn't have to, because we have to share this vital public resource with everyone (neighborhood schools).

Wait- you think that people on the hill are the only folks that have to share public schools? I think that used to be the case, but now folks actually live in SW (hello VNPG) and other areas of the city. The hill does not have a monopoly on gentrification or confronting diversity. However, I do agree that you all THINK that you do.

Well, the Hill has a longer history of it, and also perhaps has a higher concentration of left-wing lobbyists and activist who spend every day at work using their "mad operative skills" as PP put it. So I think that's what makes it more acute on the Hill, but the same dynamic could develop in other neighborhoods, agreed.

For me personally, I just can't STAND when people start engaging in musing here on DCUM that really just seems plainly racist about SES and whatnot, assuming that there is no value at all in lower income schools, teachers, parents, and children.

[Anonymous]

"Left-wing lobbyist"? Setting aside your apparent "right-wing" bias, isn't that an oxymoron?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"Left-wing lobbyist"? Setting aside your apparent "right-wing" bias, isn't that an oxymoron?

No.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Because most people on the Hill are grumpy, though they pretend not to be. The stress of always worrying whether your car will be broken into, or whether your packages will be stolen, or whether there will be a home invasion gets to people over time.

Wow, that was fast. You must be sitting by your computer just waiting for these topics to pop up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think there are many different factors. But my current theory is that on the Hill we are faced to confront income inequality in a way the rest of the nation doesn't have to, because we have to share this vital public resource with everyone (neighborhood schools).

Wait- you think that people on the hill are the only folks that have to share public schools? I think that used to be the case, but now folks actually live in SW (hello VNPG) and other areas of the city. The hill does not have a monopoly on gentrification or confronting diversity. However, I do agree that you all THINK that you do.

Well, the Hill has a longer history of it, and also perhaps has a higher concentration of left-wing lobbyists and activist who spend every day at work using their "mad operative skills" as PP put it. So I think that's what makes it more acute on the Hill, but the same dynamic could develop in other neighborhoods, agreed.

For me personally, I just can't STAND when people start engaging in musing here on DCUM that really just seems plainly racist about SES and whatnot, assuming that there is no value at all in lower income schools, teachers, parents, and children.

PP, you're part of the problem. You JUST can't understand why people want safe schools where kids learn and are challenged. You're holding the District back. So why don't you just MOVE.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's gentrification - that's happenin everywhere. I think it's more complicated. It's gentirifcation among one of the most liberal, educated, ambitious, not-profit-working populations in the country. How do you say what you think without the PC police freaking the f--- out? How do you balance you Child's needs against your politics? When you have nothing but compassion for the kids in DC General but don't neccessarily want to send your 5 year old into a classroom wih kids from said shelter - a "grass roots movement" for Mandarin immersion takes on a lot of underlying BS

Observing this dynamic is one of my favorite parts of reading DCUM.

+1

Added to this ^^, I have observed as a really long-time dcum partcipant that Hill parents -- alone -- combine this cognitive dissonance with the sincere belief that if they just use their mad operative skills will get them what they want out of dcps -- laws, customs, equity and the other 7 Wards be damned.

It would be funny if it wasn't so insufferable and classist. Being special counsel to the committee on ABC doesn't always translate.

What are you nattering on about? The reason the threads deteriorate is because there are a limited number of prime spots in Hill schools. Some parents think that anything other than Brent or Maury is completely unacceptable. Others of us disagree. There is a lot of handwringing about loss of in-boundary for SWS as well. I don't see a monolithic, single-perspective Hill view at all.

I call BS. Your straw man doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Families with kids in Brent and Maury aren't paying all that much attention to other Hill elementary schools. Even if we did suffer from this mythical fixation, what reason do we have for begrudging academic gains at Watkins, LT or anywhere else for that matter?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because most people on the Hill are grumpy, though they pretend not to be. The stress of always worrying whether your car will be broken into, or whether your packages will be stolen, or whether there will be a home invasion gets to people over time.

\

Oh, please, get over yourself. I've lived on the Hill for almost 30 years and have never had my car broken into, have had 1 package stolen and it was recovered around the block, and have never been the victim of any sort of purse snatching or home invasion. I did have my car broken into in Kalorama and my tire stolen off my car in Wesley Heights. I see a lot of Hill school threads broken down by people who obviously don't live on the Hill now, if they ever did.

Most of us on the Hill are happy with the choices that we've made, accept that there are risks inherent in every life style (how many people are killed in car accidents on highways each year?), and are excited about the improvement of our schools and the expansion of our opportunities. Have a lovely evening.

I'm grumpy because asshats like PP have nothing better to do than sit around and post sh*t on anonymous forums tthat they pulled out of their asses. I challenge her to find data showing that home invasions are a "thing" on the Hill. Also, you don't have much to worry abount if you are in possession of enough common sense to not leave anything of value visible in you car or have packages delivered when you aren't at home because, you know, packages never get stolen anywhere other than the Hill.

[Anonymous]

I've lived near Ludlow Taylor for almost ten years now, and there's been terrible tension around the schools. It used to be pretty easy to get into Brent, Maury Peabody and SWS from OOB, but when those places dried up and families were paying more than ever for housing, there has been some bitterness for sure. I think it's frustrating to see neighbors who are happy and excited about neighborhood schools or charters and to not feel like you can do the same because you don't like your neighborhood school and haven't gotten lucky in the lottery.

This is definitely changing in our neck of the woods as more and more people are feeling excited about Ludlow Taylor and JO Wilson.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because most people on the Hill are grumpy, though they pretend not to be. The stress of always worrying whether your car will be broken into, or whether your packages will be stolen, or whether there will be a home invasion gets to people over time.

\

Oh, please, get over yourself. I've lived on the Hill for almost 30 years and have never had my car broken into, have had 1 package stolen and it was recovered around the block, and have never been the victim of any sort of purse snatching or home invasion. I did have my car broken into in Kalorama and my tire stolen off my car in Wesley Heights. I see a lot of Hill school threads broken down by people who obviously don't live on the Hill now, if they ever did.

Most of us on the Hill are happy with the choices that we've made, accept that there are risks inherent in every life style (how many people are killed in car accidents on highways each year?), and are excited about the improvement of our schools and the expansion of our opportunities. Have a lovely evening.

I'm grumpy because asshats like PP have nothing better to do than sit around and post sh*t on anonymous forums tthat they pulled out of their asses. I challenge her to find data showing that home invasions are a "thing" on the Hill. Also, you don't have much to worry abount if you are in possession of enough common sense to not leave anything of value visible in you car or have packages delivered when you aren't at home because, you know, packages never get stolen anywhere other than the Hill.

I think "asshat" PP was being sarcastic. Yeah - don't leave valuables in car parked on the street and get your packages delivered to USPS, FedEx Kinkos, or UPS store rather than home. Problem solved. Everyone can smile now. You're welcome.

[Anonymous]

I think it's because there are a large number of parents who sunk a ton of money into real estate and they know that their children are facing second-rate educations at the local public and public charter schools. It doesn't matter how hard you work or how much you insist otherwise, even the best public offerings in DC are still weak when compared to Montgomery or Fairfax County.

As for crime, I still can't get a damn package delivered to my doorstep without it being stolen. I think it's worse now than it was 15 years ago. Home invasion? Nope, don't worry much about that or violent crime. Don't leave stuff in your car and the windows seem to remain intact.

My house is a dump, but I do like living on the Hill and because my house payment is low, I can afford private school. More importantly my children are getting an excellent education and live in a city they love. They look forward to school each day, which they didn't when they attended the "better" public options.

If I'd dropped 800K on a house I'd be bitter and angry, which plays out a lot on this board. At least that's what I figure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think it's because there are a large number of parents who sunk a ton of money into real estate and they know that their children are facing second-rate educations at the local public and public charter schools. It doesn't matter how hard you work or how much you insist otherwise, even the best public offerings in DC are still weak when compared to Montgomery or Fairfax County.

As for crime, I still can't get a damn package delivered to my doorstep without it being stolen. I think it's worse now than it was 15 years ago. Home invasion? Nope, don't worry much about that or violent crime. Don't leave stuff in your car and the windows seem to remain intact.

My house is a dump, but I do like living on the Hill and because my house payment is low, I can afford private school. More importantly my children are getting an excellent education and live in a city they love. They look forward to school each day, which they didn't when they attended the "better" public options.

If I'd dropped 800K on a house I'd be bitter and angry, which plays out a lot on this board. At least that's what I figure.

Yeah, but people are now paying $800K to live Shaw, Eckington, Petworth, etc. It's more than housing costs. People who live on the Hill LOVE living on the Hill. I haven't met a Hill resident yet who wants to live anywhere else. But when they can't get into a school they're comfortable with, that's exactly what they have to consider and it seems unfair that some can get the "good" public schools and some can't.

Add in the fact that the Hill is full of accomplished Do-ers who are used to making things happen by pulling the right levers, pushing the right buttons, making the right connections. People like that go a little apeshit when none of it works in their favor. Witness the vitriol in that epic Ludlow-Taylor thread. . .