To kill a mockingbird at SR

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Stone Ridge Kids won’t be reading tkam this year. Email sent out to MS today. Because of racist language and because Harper Lee was white so she shouldn’t write about black people. Students are unhappy about it. Me too.

I seriously wonder about people like you. Is your kid reading this book IN CLASS worth humiliating or making black students feel extremely uncomfortable? No, it’s not. Have your kid read the book at home. It’s not the school’s job to raise your kid.

Nonsense. Wonder all you want but comfort is not a defining criterion of education, nor is avoid difficult topics. Kind of the point, actually.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Stone Ridge Kids won’t be reading tkam this year. Email sent out to MS today. Because of racist language and because Harper Lee was white so she shouldn’t write about black people. Students are unhappy about it. Me too.

I seriously wonder about people like you. Is your kid reading this book IN CLASS worth humiliating or making black students feel extremely uncomfortable? No, it’s not. Have your kid read the book at home. It’s not the school’s job to raise your kid.

Why do the antiracists feel the need to be quite so offensive?

Not pp It is the school's job to educate. That is what we are discussing. Do you consider the schools teaching math science to be raising your kids? Why ask them to do that? Are you suggesting we all homeschool?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

What are you talking about? I never said not to assign The Bluest eye or invisible man. We are talking about To kill a mockingbird which some peope think it is no longer worth reading. I disagree.

Got it?

Do you think that a book has to be assigned by school to be considered worth reading? Deciding not to read in this year's curriculum it does not mean anyone thinks it isn't worth reading.

I'm an AA woman and I think TKAM is a great book to assign - we can talk about all those things about it that are flawed and how thinking about race has evolved. I'm also happy not to assign it and instead delve into some of the hundreds of other great books.

Let's face it pp. Most parents are working and aren't going to force their 12 year old to read TKMB. They wont have the time or energy. Teachers can provide background and provide necessary talking points.

If schools don't assign it than most kids won't read it. And that is a shame.

Why is it a shame? The school will assign a different book that the kid might not have read otherwise. Only so many books can be assigned per year, and SR is changing up the list to include some other perspectives and classics. Good for them. Not sure why this needed an announcement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

What are you talking about? I never said not to assign The Bluest eye or invisible man. We are talking about To kill a mockingbird which some peope think it is no longer worth reading. I disagree.

Got it?

Do you think that a book has to be assigned by school to be considered worth reading? Deciding not to read in this year's curriculum it does not mean anyone thinks it isn't worth reading.

I'm an AA woman and I think TKAM is a great book to assign - we can talk about all those things about it that are flawed and how thinking about race has evolved. I'm also happy not to assign it and instead delve into some of the hundreds of other great books.

Let's face it pp. Most parents are working and aren't going to force their 12 year old to read TKMB. They wont have the time or energy. Teachers can provide background and provide necessary talking points.

If schools don't assign it than most kids won't read it. And that is a shame.

Why is it a shame? The school will assign a different book that the kid might not have read otherwise. Only so many books can be assigned per year, and SR is changing up the list to include some other perspectives and classics. Good for them. Not sure why this needed an announcement.

If you dont get why it is a shame than you dont get it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The reason TKAM was dropped was because a bunch of kids complained about having to read the n-word in 8th grade English class. Yes, you got that right, read it silently. The discussions of the book were basically overwhelmed by kids saying that they were traumatized, language is violence, blah blah insert woke language here. A conversation about this issue devolved into accusations of racism and a race-to-the-bottom (no pun intended) of who was more woke among students. This is a general theme at SR (and other schools, from what I read); almost everything is now being framed in CT / antiracist / intersectional language. It's become a fetish and almost pseudo-religious, which is ironic at a Catholic school. This is most definitely cancel culture, no matter what the rationalizers say.

Your smugness in belittling the students' experience in dealing with this word and all it represents is reprehensible.

None of those kids has had to deal with the word at all. They are coddled, gifted kids (even those on financial aid who don't live in Chevy Chase) who are being taught that one's entire identity is based on their layers of victimhood. And that is precisely the reason why we read authors from other time periods who had first-hand experience with actual racism. By removing "difficult" texts like TKAM from the curriculum, we are teaching our girls that, (1) only people with a certain amount of melanin in their skin can write or speak about people with that same amount of melanin; that (2) race is the defining characteristic of a person, not a common shared humanity; and that, (3) words are violence and ideas cause harm. This will result in a racially- and identity- obsessed society of psychological weaklings who are ill-equipped to deal with real adversity. The point of a liberal arts education--which Stone Ridge ostensibly offers--is to aggressively engage in difficult ideas, while forcing girls to engage with others who are superficially different, thus attaining some kind of objective truth. You know, the whole enlightenment thing. Sorry, that last sentence was actually smug.

[Anonymous]

The school will assign a different book that the kid might not have read otherwise. Only so many books can be assigned per year, and SR is changing up the list to include some other perspectives and classics. Good for them. Not sure why this needed an announcement.

Agree.

The anti-PC poster that keeps bumping this thread is a jackass. Quit feeding him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Agree.

The anti-PC poster that keeps bumping this thread is a jackass. Quit feeding him.

When you can't debate the issues, you resort to name calling.

Yet you're so concerned about offending people's sensibilities?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

What are you talking about? I never said not to assign The Bluest eye or invisible man. We are talking about To kill a mockingbird which some peope think it is no longer worth reading. I disagree.

Got it?

Do you think that a book has to be assigned by school to be considered worth reading? Deciding not to read in this year's curriculum it does not mean anyone thinks it isn't worth reading.

I'm an AA woman and I think TKAM is a great book to assign - we can talk about all those things about it that are flawed and how thinking about race has evolved. I'm also happy not to assign it and instead delve into some of the hundreds of other great books.

Let's face it pp. Most parents are working and aren't going to force their 12 year old to read TKMB. They wont have the time or energy. Teachers can provide background and provide necessary talking points.

If schools don't assign it than most kids won't read it. And that is a shame.

Why is it a shame? The school will assign a different book that the kid might not have read otherwise. Only so many books can be assigned per year, and SR is changing up the list to include some other perspectives and classics. Good for them. Not sure why this needed an announcement.

If you dont get why it is a shame than you dont get it.

Or you are unable to articulate your point, which is more likely than me not being able to get it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

What are you talking about? I never said not to assign The Bluest eye or invisible man. We are talking about To kill a mockingbird which some peope think it is no longer worth reading. I disagree.

Got it?

Do you think that a book has to be assigned by school to be considered worth reading? Deciding not to read in this year's curriculum it does not mean anyone thinks it isn't worth reading.

I'm an AA woman and I think TKAM is a great book to assign - we can talk about all those things about it that are flawed and how thinking about race has evolved. I'm also happy not to assign it and instead delve into some of the hundreds of other great books.

Let's face it pp. Most parents are working and aren't going to force their 12 year old to read TKMB. They wont have the time or energy. Teachers can provide background and provide necessary talking points.

If schools don't assign it than most kids won't read it. And that is a shame.

Why is it a shame? The school will assign a different book that the kid might not have read otherwise. Only so many books can be assigned per year, and SR is changing up the list to include some other perspectives and classics. Good for them. Not sure why this needed an announcement.

If you dont get why it is a shame than you dont get it.

Or you are unable to articulate your point, which is more likely than me not being able to get it.

I have already explained why I think it is an important book to read. If you werent convinced by that there is nothing I can say to convince you. I am wasting my time.

Go back and carefully read. I can repeat if you have questions but you probably wont.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Agree.

The anti-PC poster that keeps bumping this thread is a jackass. Quit feeding him.

When you can't debate the issues, you resort to name calling.

Yet you're so concerned about offending people's sensibilities?

Nah, I and several others tried to debate the issue. You keep moving the goalposts. You’re not discussing in good faith and are instead just trying to stir up shit. Classic troll behavior.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The reason TKAM was dropped was because a bunch of kids complained about having to read the n-word in 8th grade English class. Yes, you got that right, read it silently. The discussions of the book were basically overwhelmed by kids saying that they were traumatized, language is violence, blah blah insert woke language here. A conversation about this issue devolved into accusations of racism and a race-to-the-bottom (no pun intended) of who was more woke among students. This is a general theme at SR (and other schools, from what I read); almost everything is now being framed in CT / antiracist / intersectional language. It's become a fetish and almost pseudo-religious, which is ironic at a Catholic school. This is most definitely cancel culture, no matter what the rationalizers say.

Your smugness in belittling the students' experience in dealing with this word and all it represents is reprehensible.

None of those kids has had to deal with the word at all. They are coddled, gifted kids (even those on financial aid who don't live in Chevy Chase) who are being taught that one's entire identity is based on their layers of victimhood. And that is precisely the reason why we read authors from other time periods who had first-hand experience with actual racism. By removing "difficult" texts like TKAM from the curriculum, we are teaching our girls that, (1) only people with a certain amount of melanin in their skin can write or speak about people with that same amount of melanin; that (2) race is the defining characteristic of a person, not a common shared humanity; and that, (3) words are violence and ideas cause harm. This will result in a racially- and identity- obsessed society of psychological weaklings who are ill-equipped to deal with real adversity. The point of a liberal arts education--which Stone Ridge ostensibly offers--is to aggressively engage in difficult ideas, while forcing girls to engage with others who are superficially different, thus attaining some kind of objective truth. You know, the whole enlightenment thing. Sorry, that last sentence was actually smug.

Sorry, this is such a leap and full of stereotyping about the girls at SR and what they are teaching them at the school. And yes, quite smug.

[Anonymous]

But also pretty accurate...

-SR parent

[Anonymous]

Wow I bet most of you never read the follow up to TKMB. Your heads will explode.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wow I bet most of you never read the follow up to TKMB. Your heads will explode.

The book Harper Lee never wanted published.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:But also pretty accurate...

-SR parent

+1