Forum Index
»
Private & Independent Schools
Maybe ask the school rather than read it on an anonymous message board? |
+1. This would be the sensible approach. |
Privilege is assuming you don’t have to talk about hate speech or racism or antisemitism or sexism. My black friends don’t have the option of whether or not to discuss racism and hate speech with their kids. They live in America where racism exists and they need to prepare their kids for the world they live in. White parents as a general matter get to decide if and when they discuss racism and hate speech with their white kids. Far too many white parents never discuss hate speech and racism with their kids until they are forced to do so by something happening—like the incident at Sidwell. My Jewish friends all learned about the Holocaust and antisemetism. The Holocaust happened and we need to know about it so we prevent it from ever happening again. Antisemetism exists so you need to prepare your kids for what they may encounter. Privilege is not having to worry about that and privilege is being able to decide when you share the ugly side of life with your kids. |
Jewish mom here. I agree with a lot of this but I wouldn’t single out race here. While you say that white people have the luxury of not having to explain hate to their children, I think much of this has to do with the education system and moral equivalency taught in schools. WWII education has shifted away from teaching the evils of the Holocaust. Moral equivalency is what’s being taught in schools today. Kids are learning more about the Environmental effects of the atom bomb and less about Hitler’s motives and methods. Any good, decent human being (and I certainly believe that children are good and decent) can see that a swastika symbolizes the worst of humankind if they are educated about it. We seem to be educating after the fact. |
I am the PP who referred to privilege. I agree with you. The point I was trying to make and didn't finish (I shouldn't post late at night) was that we all have to talk about these issues to our children whether we think we are directly affected by them or not. I was raised Catholic and I had parents who taught me about the Holocaust, the evils of Hitler, antisemitism, the evils of hate speech, why it was dangerous, why it mattered, why it was wrong, etc. My kids go to a school where kids learn about the issues in an age appropriate way from a young age. My point is that there are parents who think they don't need to talk about unpleasant things like the Holocaust or slavery or genocide or hate speech or racism or homophobia, etc. They think that if they just tell their kids to be nice that it's enough. It's not. A later poster write "But, who really wants discuss putting people in ovens unless it is necessary." I would argue it is necessary. You have to do it in an age appropriate way so that you don't overwhelm or frighten your child but you have to do it. My point about privilege is that some people may think they never have to talk to their children about the gas chambers because they are not Jewish. I would argue that we must talk to our children about that whether we are Jewish or not so it never happens again. You need to start the conversation early in an age appropriate way. Think about what you were taught about slavery. I was taught a sanitized version of it that doesn't make white people too uncomfortable and I grew up in the northeast where I learned more of the full story of slavery than some of my friends from college learned in other areas of the country. You need to talk about the darkest parts of the Holocaust, the darkest parts of slavery, the darkest parts of homophobia, anti-Semitism, racism, etc. with your children and your friends and colleagues because when you don't people think these things really weren't that bad and you risk them happening again. I will also note that when I learned about the atomic bomb my parents also discussed with me the dilemma Harry Truman faced. Drop the bomb which was awful and horrible or don't drop the bomb and hundreds of thousands of lives were lost trying to bring an end to the war in the Pacific. We can teach our kids about hard, imperfect choices and the dark side of human nature. I would argue that teaching them about those things is the morally responsible thing to do. |
| The whole story about swastikas carved into benches turned out to be fake news. |
| Am I the only one who thinks the disciplinary reaction in the community letters so far has been tepid at best? There's a time for reflection, but there are certain things that warrant something closer to zero tolerance. |
| Yes, response seems very tepid to me so far. As a Sidwell parent, I was expecting something more commensurate with the abhorrent incident. Suspension or expulsion. I am profoundly disappointed. There is a bright red line here and it was crossed. It needs to be answered by the school’s leadership. Takes moral courage, I know. |
I agree, but also understand that the school has to do enough diligence before taking decisive action. It has only been 1 school day since this happened. |
Has the student been identified? If not, the school can’t take any action. |
So I posted much earlier that my kids' ECs/Sports team communiteis have recently been impacted by racist phone messages. The approach you describe was similar to what was taken in our case and it was embraced by the family that was targeted by hateful speech. The problem, and where I fell like the organization fell short, is that it didn't communicate to the larger community what had happened and what exactly had been done about it. My kids know what happened part (because word travels), they know who the perpetrators were, they know who was targeted and from where they sit the consequences appear minor. This is a problem for parents who would their kids to believe that hateful racist text message targeting a specific teammate are unacceptable and would CAUSE a massive consequence. Instead, we see a "meh" response. So I agree, there is great value in finding the teaching moments in these sorts of incidents, but the message the organizations' response sends to the "bystanders" is also important. |
Why ? When a student sexually assaulted (to put it mildly) another student several years ago they very quietly put him on leave after some time had elapsed. |
Whatever the status of identifying the student, there have been at least three letters sent out, each one more infuriating than the last. Emphasizing the light in the student who engaged in hate speech without any strong language about the fact that an inexcusable line was crossed. Almost no talk of consequences or how seriously the matter will actually be treated. Little talk of how seriously it OUGHT to be treated. Stating how the school wishes the incident could have been prevented (ha!) while failing to discuss any ideas for revisiting technology policies, etc. Mentioning discussion groups and meetings that occurred after the last incident (yes, there have been more than one!) without seeing the irony: clearly the "discussions" weren't terribly effective. Other schools facing similar incidents responded with swift, appropriate, and unequivocal condemnation when faced with similar incidents. knowing the student's identity is not a necessary prerequisite to showing backbone on hate speech. |
| They did issue swift, appropriate, and unequivocal condemnation. Both in the parent-alumni communications and also directly in conversations with the students. Just because they don’t run the behind-the-scenes details by you and sharing every detail at this stage doesn’t mean they’re not doing their job. Get off your high horse and show a little restraint as this plays out. |
Then just tell us what you Will do? make an announcement that the student will be expelled as soon as being identified? You mentioned other schools and give us more details so people can compare. For example what GDS did last year. |