SWS - You are only invited if you’re Black

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ugh, this is just classic SWS. In theory their Black affinity group (or whatever they are calling it) is probably meant to be analogous to the GDS group or the BSA-like group at Deal. Sure, we can argue that none of these race-based groups should exist at schools at all, but fact of the matter is that they do, and have for many many years. It is just how we do things in the US, or at least certain parts of the US.

But SWS uses this weird amped up language that makes people in their community who aren't completely on board with their approach to this issue feel like they're being shamed. FWIW, they do this with everything. Heaven forbid you question whether "joy" should come at the expense of academics, or whether it is a good thing for their teachers to be recommending ADHD meds so routinely. Question these things and you're a monster and not part of their "in" crowd. This is just par for the course with SWS. If you're a parent there, just get used to it. It is how they roll.

I agree with this. It's not the concept, which I think is fine (though in the context of SWS's demographics, I actually think a POC group would be more inclusive), it's the super aggressive language coming in an official email from the school admin. The fact they re-emphasized that it was ONLY for black/African-identifying people as though other people in the community would intentionally crash otherwise.

They didn't use the word "only" (yes, it's implied, but it's not stated, to be clear). So it's no different to me than the Georgetown Day School description or the JR Asian Student Union description.

Now you're grasping at straws, so I see you get what's wrong with the sws letter from SWS Administration.

It's pretty clear to me that I wouldn't be welcome as a white person at the JR Asian Student Union or the GDS Black affinity group.

I attended both Black Engineer Assoc, Asian Student Assoc events, and other mostly white events at college and felt welcome. You should join the JR Asian Student Union, assuming you're a student there. The letter from SWS made it clear you aren't welcome at their black and African event.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
More concerned than curious. It’s a really shitty thing to do and I hope Jeff removes the details of the event so the families don’t have to worry about any weirdos crashing out of spite.

Looks like Jeff did remove the details. Sadly OP probably didn’t even give it a second thought. Imagine if someone here posted the time, date and location of her kid’s lacrosse practice.

Anonymous wrote:Isn’t this thread just proving why they need a black affinity group at SWS?

This

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
More concerned than curious. It’s a really shitty thing to do and I hope Jeff removes the details of the event so the families don’t have to worry about any weirdos crashing out of spite.

Looks like Jeff did remove the details. Sadly OP probably didn’t even give it a second thought. Imagine if someone here posted the time, date and location of her kid’s lacrosse practice.

Anonymous wrote:Isn’t this thread just proving why they need a black affinity group at SWS?

This

What's so secretive about this info? At many schools both meetings and practices would be listed on the school website.

[Anonymous]

Taxpayer-funded public schools should never discriminate against anyone on account of race. Excluding one race to make another race feel more "welcome" is wrong, plain and simple.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Taxpayer-funded public schools should never discriminate against anyone on account of race. Excluding one race to make another race feel more "welcome" is wrong, plain and simple.

Make sure to have the same energy for affinity groups based on gender, sexuality, religion etc too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Taxpayer-funded public schools should never discriminate against anyone on account of race. Excluding one race to make another race feel more "welcome" is wrong, plain and simple.

Make sure to have the same energy for affinity groups based on gender, sexuality, religion etc too.

I would if I could find one hostile to outsiders but I can't think of any that wouldn't be open to newcomers and those interested to learn more about their group. Can you think of any that exclude all others? Why would they even want to do that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ugh, this is just classic SWS. In theory their Black affinity group (or whatever they are calling it) is probably meant to be analogous to the GDS group or the BSA-like group at Deal. Sure, we can argue that none of these race-based groups should exist at schools at all, but fact of the matter is that they do, and have for many many years. It is just how we do things in the US, or at least certain parts of the US.

But SWS uses this weird amped up language that makes people in their community who aren't completely on board with their approach to this issue feel like they're being shamed. FWIW, they do this with everything. Heaven forbid you question whether "joy" should come at the expense of academics, or whether it is a good thing for their teachers to be recommending ADHD meds so routinely. Question these things and you're a monster and not part of their "in" crowd. This is just par for the course with SWS. If you're a parent there, just get used to it. It is how they roll.

I agree with this. It's not the concept, which I think is fine (though in the context of SWS's demographics, I actually think a POC group would be more inclusive), it's the super aggressive language coming in an official email from the school admin. The fact they re-emphasized that it was ONLY for black/African-identifying people as though other people in the community would intentionally crash otherwise.

They didn't use the word "only" (yes, it's implied, but it's not stated, to be clear). So it's no different to me than the Georgetown Day School description or the JR Asian Student Union description.

Now you're grasping at straws, so I see you get what's wrong with the sws letter from SWS Administration.

It's pretty clear to me that I wouldn't be welcome as a white person at the JR Asian Student Union or the GDS Black affinity group.

That's ridiculous. I was part of the Jewish association in college, and I'm not Jewish at all. I just had a lot of Jewish friends, so I joined. I was always welcomed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ugh, this is just classic SWS. In theory their Black affinity group (or whatever they are calling it) is probably meant to be analogous to the GDS group or the BSA-like group at Deal. Sure, we can argue that none of these race-based groups should exist at schools at all, but fact of the matter is that they do, and have for many many years. It is just how we do things in the US, or at least certain parts of the US.

But SWS uses this weird amped up language that makes people in their community who aren't completely on board with their approach to this issue feel like they're being shamed. FWIW, they do this with everything. Heaven forbid you question whether "joy" should come at the expense of academics, or whether it is a good thing for their teachers to be recommending ADHD meds so routinely. Question these things and you're a monster and not part of their "in" crowd. This is just par for the course with SWS. If you're a parent there, just get used to it. It is how they roll.

I agree with this. It's not the concept, which I think is fine (though in the context of SWS's demographics, I actually think a POC group would be more inclusive), it's the super aggressive language coming in an official email from the school admin. The fact they re-emphasized that it was ONLY for black/African-identifying people as though other people in the community would intentionally crash otherwise.

They didn't use the word "only" (yes, it's implied, but it's not stated, to be clear). So it's no different to me than the Georgetown Day School description or the JR Asian Student Union description.

Now you're grasping at straws, so I see you get what's wrong with the sws letter from SWS Administration.

It's pretty clear to me that I wouldn't be welcome as a white person at the JR Asian Student Union or the GDS Black affinity group.

That's ridiculous. I was part of the Jewish association in college, and I'm not Jewish at all. I just had a lot of Jewish friends, so I joined. I was always welcomed.

Mazel tov.

[Anonymous]

At a small, alternative K-8 school in Rockville they recently started advertising about a Staff & and Families of Color school based bbq. I guess the only school teachers/families that will not be in attendance will be folks who identify as white. I found this school sponsored activity exclusionary and not well thought out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Times are changing, and racism isn't institutionalized anymore. There is still racism on an individual level, but not institutional.

This event is perpetuating institutional racism. I get that many PP don't see it that way, and instead see it as righting a wrong, or rebalancing the scales or something. But bottomline is it perpetuates institutional racism.

Please explain. My understanding is that this was meant to create a safe space for black students and families to connect and build community. Institutional racism, to me, would be more focused on things like admittance policy or the institutional levers that create a high school that is not representative of the public school student body in DC. The impacts institutional racism appear alive and well even if the policies have changed.

[Anonymous]

Are the issues facing blacks folks at SW unique to SWS versus matters present at many/most other schools. What acts or omissions are we talking about? I get that some things are subtle and hard to pin down, but seems like some actions items are in order if they can be identified.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Are the issues facing blacks folks at SW unique to SWS versus matters present at many/most other schools. What acts or omissions are we talking about? I get that some things are subtle and hard to pin down, but seems like some actions items are in order if they can be identified.

I'm sure all the non-black folks on this thread will have strong opinions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How "marginalized" are black students at SWW? Aren't they 1/3 of the school?

Zero percent marginalized. Black students are 1/3 of the school and the school does a ton of Black focused events. The school has Black Lives Matter posters. The library prominently displays books with Black characters. There is a yearly “Black Joy” art project that all lower elementary kids participate in and a special school wide event to display the artwork. There is a gigantic mural of a Black child on the side of the building.

All of which I have zero issue with.

What I find problematic (and illegal) is explicitly inviting only Black families to a school event and calling yourself inclusive.

Zero percent marginalized. You have to be kidding me.

Do tell. How are Black students marginalized at SWS? I’ll wait.

You are ignoring that this came about because of how Black families felt at SWS. Up to now, DCUM complained SWS was too white.

Why not just answer the simple question?

Yes that would be offensive BECAUSE white families are not a majority, the same as it would be offensive if families did something for straight only. But JUST AS I wouldn't be offended by families of LGBTQ+ kids having a gathering, I am NOT offended by families of Black kids having a gathering or families of Dyslexic kids having a gathering.

The difference between you and me seems to be that you simply don't believe that Black families have any unique concerns that would warrant such a gathering, do you? "I don't see race" right?

Still dancing around answering a question? I think the reason why is obvious.

I straightforward answered the question that it would be offensive and stated why. FFS.

You don't believe Black families have any unique concerns, or frankly don't care, do you? Answer my question.

List the unique concerns. That is the question. How are Black students marginalized at SWS?

They have been marginalized by not being included and feeling left out of the white yoga pant wearing clicks that DCUM has complained about SWS for years ("it's too white!" "You have to wear yoga pants to fit in!"). And they literally voiced this to school administration.

SWS stats are
27.7% Black
2.5% Asian
3.7% Hispanic
53.6% White
12.1% multiracial

So Black students are outnumbers 2-to-1 by white students, but they still make up more then 1/4 of the student body. Is such a larg group being marginalized? Seems to me the marginal groups are Asians and Hispanics.
https://www.myschooldc.org/schools/profile/98

"Marginal" and "marginalized" are diffi words. You can tell from the letters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s legal until someone is willing to sue

We like it be legal if only whites were invited? Holy hell would break out!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: The announcement doesn't say anything about white people not being invited (unless I missed it?). It says the talks plan on focusing on a certain group. Anybody is welcome to come and participate as long as they are on topic.

Correct, it doesn't.

It does. It doesn’t say “whites are NOT invited”, but it says they are excited to invite “all families of children who identify as black.” If your child doesn’t identify as Black, you are not invited.

I honestly don't view this as anything different than having such an email for any other specialty group from parents of LGBTQ+ kids to parents of kids with special needs. Literally just don't care.

Most of the time those aren’t phrased in an exclusionary way, though.

Assuming this is legal, people are free to issue exclusionary invitations. But what they aren’t free to do is control other people’s reactions to being excluded, or be surprised when people react badly.

Well, maybe it's because of the millions of dollars being spent by Christian nationalists and others to stir up outrage about things exactly like this? I suspect that 75% of the people expressing their opposition don't live within 100 miles of DC.

And perhaps why suddenly there's a big long thread about it when affinity type groups and clubs have existed at schools for ages, whether it is the Black Student Union, Asian Student Union, Black Student Engineers, Girls who Code, etc (all clubs at JR, btw). My HS had these types of clubs 25 years ago, but now there's outrage?

It makes sense when the groups are a very small minority. Not a sizable portion of the student body.

Ah so no Girls who Code group, GotR, etc?

Unless there is a “boys who code” and “boys on the run” group, then, yeah, honestly.