Help me Edit: Response to Brookings Report

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, honestly as others have pointed out, "white fragility" as a concept is both racist towards BIPOC (infantilizing and dehumanizing, see, e.g., John McWhorter) and racist towards white people - so I wouldn't give any credence to the notion that you don't have a right to respond critically to a piece of scholarship that you believe is based on flawed data. But then again, if you do it, keep surgical - they didn't understand the data, and thus, they misrepresented the data.

Disagree. The concept of white fragility is not racist. Also, John McWhorter does not speak for all BIPOC. The fact that you point out one Black academic with a non mainstream view as proof just shows you falling into the trite racist trope of letting one person's voice speak for all people of their race.

Many white people are pretty darn fragile when it comes to any discussion of race. We have reached a place in society where being called a racist is considered (by whites) worse than the actual impact of the racist behavior (on a BIPOC). This is part of white fragility. Everything in the society is built to protect white comfort.

Huh? Columbia is not mainstream? Nutty. White fragility in practice in large measure is about misogyny -vilifying and silencing woman white or otherwise. Everything is society (including AA society) is about controlling and silencing women - and the AA and the “submit to husband” messaging in parts of the black church is just one example. I don’t want that blood on my hands, either.

One professor an opinion that is different from the majority view is exactly what it means to be not mainstream. The fact that he is employed at Columbia does not mean that he must only hold mainstream views.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, honestly as others have pointed out, "white fragility" as a concept is both racist towards BIPOC (infantilizing and dehumanizing, see, e.g., John McWhorter) and racist towards white people - so I wouldn't give any credence to the notion that you don't have a right to respond critically to a piece of scholarship that you believe is based on flawed data. But then again, if you do it, keep surgical - they didn't understand the data, and thus, they misrepresented the data.

Disagree. The concept of white fragility is not racist. Also, John McWhorter does not speak for all BIPOC. The fact that you point out one Black academic with a non mainstream view as proof just shows you falling into the trite racist trope of letting one person's voice speak for all people of their race.

ok, it's not a racist theory, sound like the start of a good argument

Many white people are pretty darn fragile when it comes to any discussion of race. We have reached a place in society where being called a racist is considered (by whites) worse than the actual impact of the racist behavior (on a BIPOC). This is part of white fragility. Everything in the society is built to protect white comfort.

and you follow it up with a generalization based on race and a flat out racist assertion.

You don't understand the difference between racism and prejudice. When a person in power (in this country that typically means a white person), acts on their prejudices and causes harm to a BIPOC because of their prejudiced beliefs, that is racism (ex: hiring manager not interviewing LaQuanda Washington even though she's got a great resume, but giving an interview to Kelsey O'Connor and Kate Smith). If LaQuanda finds out about it and calls Kelsey or Kate a white b"tch, that is prejudice. LaQuanda has no power in the situation, so her prejudiced action does not cause harm in the same way that the racist action of the hiring manager does.

You can try to dismiss this all day every day, but each volley back only proves the point that white people are fragile AF and can't take being checked. God bless.

Uh huh. So Laquanda engages in misogynistic and bigoted rhetoric - and women of all colors are murdered in this country daily. But Laquanda is powerless and not contributing to a culture that brutalizes female bodies? That’s ignorant AF.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, honestly as others have pointed out, "white fragility" as a concept is both racist towards BIPOC (infantilizing and dehumanizing, see, e.g., John McWhorter) and racist towards white people - so I wouldn't give any credence to the notion that you don't have a right to respond critically to a piece of scholarship that you believe is based on flawed data. But then again, if you do it, keep surgical - they didn't understand the data, and thus, they misrepresented the data.

Disagree. The concept of white fragility is not racist. Also, John McWhorter does not speak for all BIPOC. The fact that you point out one Black academic with a non mainstream view as proof just shows you falling into the trite racist trope of letting one person's voice speak for all people of their race.

Many white people are pretty darn fragile when it comes to any discussion of race. We have reached a place in society where being called a racist is considered (by whites) worse than the actual impact of the racist behavior (on a BIPOC). This is part of white fragility. Everything in the society is built to protect white comfort.

Huh? Columbia is not mainstream? Nutty. White fragility in practice in large measure is about misogyny -vilifying and silencing woman white or otherwise. Everything is society (including AA society) is about controlling and silencing women - and the AA and the “submit to husband” messaging in parts of the black church is just one example. I don’t want that blood on my hands, either.

One professor an opinion that is different from the majority view is exactly what it means to be not mainstream. The fact that he is employed at Columbia does not mean that he must only hold mainstream views.

Robin DiAngelo doesn’t have much of an academic pedigree - why exactly is she “mainstream?” No evidence of “majority view.” FFS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP.

I agree with the posters that say you should abandon this effort because you sound tone-deaf and a perfect example of white fragility. I am African-American (ADOS) 1st Washingtonian who has lurked on this site for 10 years and I view most of the DCUM posters to be unintentional segregationists. with a heavy sprinkling of bona fide racists.

The Founding Fathers of this country created a system to keep people like me subservient to White people because they believed we were inherently less than. This system was built to last so that even if slavery was abolished, even if Jim Crow was abolished, their effects would continue on. That's how systemic racism works i.e. unintentional acts of the so-called "majority" work in favor to keep the "minority" as lesser. Even though red-lining was stopped in the 80's - its effects linger. Even though Brown ended school segregation, I still felt its effects as a DCPS student attending my segregated elementary school in Columbia Heights in the 80s.

I think what many of us who disagree with you in writing this rebuttal is that two things can both be true - the majority of DCUM posters can be "segregationist" unintentionally and this is a complex problem that is not easily solved.

As an aside, an integrated school is one where the inbound students come from different races. In my opinion, Deal and Wilson are diverse but I don't view them as integrated since the neighborhoods that are considered inbound are not integrated. Diversity does not equal integration but that’s just my opinion.

As for solutions, why can’t Brookings raise awareness to an issue? Why do they have to offer solutions? History has shown us that each time a solution that could have offered equity to African-Americans was floated it was shot down, abandoned or destroyed i.e. 40 acres and a mule or the North's protection during Reconstruction, or the Civil Rights Movement. As a starting point to dismantling this system, one could become aware of the issues so that when solutions are aired - like a move away from neighborhood based schools (since DC neighborhoods are segregated) you fight for it rather than against them.

I get that you are upset they used your site without providing you notice and I understand why you're writing this. While will not agree on this topic, I wish you luck with crafting your rebuttal.

Elevating this PP's perspective again. I really think after a dozen pages of comments, this is still the most important. Other posters have also raised the issue of white fragility and tone deafness and I do think there is a good bit of that going on with your feelings on this, Jeff. I certainly believe that your intentions are good. You spend what is surely a huge amount of time deleting the openly racist content. I appreciate that effort. However, there is no way around the fact that much of the commentary is fueled by veiled racism. If this forum did not exist, those conversations would still exist in other corners of the internet or in small private groups. It feels hollow to claim that because Brookings' methods were not great, that therefore DCUM cannot be painted as racist. It doesn't take academic research to see the racism here loud and clear. Think about all the racist comments you delete. Those same posters are writing other threads, with their same racist mindsets fueling their other comments. One does not turn the racism off when jumping from one board to another. The attitudes permeate all that they do.

It almost feels that you are defending yourself, and that you feel personally offended by Brookings' characterization of the DCUM hive mind as racist. Brookings is not attacking YOU as a person. I wonder if what you might be grappling with is subconscious guilt at the fact that you earn an income from running this site where people are able to participate in continued propping up of a bad system. I don't know if you should feel guilt for that, given that we are nearly all complicit in propping up bad, racist systems unless one works for some antiracism nonprofit or something. For those who would take offense to that - check yourselves. If you work for any place where there are ever any racist actions or historic biased systems that formed the current hierarchy, and you are not publicly (within that org) working to dismantle the system, you are complicit in it. My DH is a Black man and works at a BigLaw firm. He too, is complicit in and compensated by a biased system. Every moment he does not call out the biases in the structure or each microaggression, he is complicit in the system. He makes a choice to be complicit to support his family. We all make those choices. That doesn't make it objectively right, but we all do it. I don't know how to go about fixing these systems without blowing them all up.

I don't say all this to say that you should end DCUM. I appreciate knowing the full depths of how terrible people are as an important gut check for myself. I am glad to know what the rich, racist folks are saying behind closed doors and I also appreciate the helpful things I've learned here as well.

Just want to amplify this post for its great points. Jeff is struggling with some serious cognitive dissonance re: the second bolded point.

[Anonymous]

Disagree strongly with the above post.

Jeff and other UMC parents could have headed out to Bethesda for what are academically much better schools. They stayed in DC for the diversity of experiences.

The people who are making DC schools bad are those who flee to white suburban schools (which perpetuate systemic racism by segregation of housing) not parents like Jeff who are giving DC public schools a shot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Disagree strongly with the above post.

Jeff and other UMC parents could have headed out to Bethesda for what are academically much better schools. They stayed in DC for the diversity of experiences.

The people who are making DC schools bad are those who flee to white suburban schools (which perpetuate systemic racism by segregation of housing) not parents like Jeff who are giving DC public schools a shot.

So because some people are moving to Bethesda, should those who stay in DC get a pass for opting/lotterying for schools with as many white kids as possible?

[Anonymous]

Uh, there is also diversity in Bethesda. Come on, folks. BCC is incredibly diverse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Disagree strongly with the above post.

Jeff and other UMC parents could have headed out to Bethesda for what are academically much better schools. They stayed in DC for the diversity of experiences.

The people who are making DC schools bad are those who flee to white suburban schools (which perpetuate systemic racism by segregation of housing) not parents like Jeff who are giving DC public schools a shot.

Find someone who says they are “giving B-CC a shot.” You can’t do it. That is not how people who are serious about their engagement with a school talk about that school, and therefore it’s never said about white schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Disagree strongly with the above post.

Jeff and other UMC parents could have headed out to Bethesda for what are academically much better schools. They stayed in DC for the diversity of experiences.

The people who are making DC schools bad are those who flee to white suburban schools (which perpetuate systemic racism by segregation of housing) not parents like Jeff who are giving DC public schools a shot.

So because some people are moving to Bethesda, should those who stay in DC get a pass for opting/lotterying for schools with as many white kids as possible?

No, or at the very least they should not be patting themselves on the back for living in the city. Many MoCo schools are very diverse and the housing is usually cheaper

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Disagree strongly with the above post.

Jeff and other UMC parents could have headed out to Bethesda for what are academically much better schools. They stayed in DC for the diversity of experiences.

The people who are making DC schools bad are those who flee to white suburban schools (which perpetuate systemic racism by segregation of housing) not parents like Jeff who are giving DC public schools a shot.

The people living in Kent, Spring Valley and the like do not live there for the diversity of experiences. You’ve got to be kidding me. The people living in bounds for Janney, Key, Lafayette, Mann and Murch are not giving DCPS “a shot” by spending millions to live where they do to ensure their kids are guaranteed a slot in a tiny subset of the system where very few poor, black or brown kids will be in a classroom with their kids.

Most of the others are gentrifiers (don’t argue about how you’ve been here since the 90s, you are likely still a gentrifier, look at the shifting race demographics in DC proper from 1970-now. If you are white and not a DC native, you’re pretty much a gentrifier. Just own it. You probably came here for the jobs and opportunity like everyone else, gentrification is a sad side effect) who would live in in bounds to the desired schools if they could afford it but they can’t, so the play the lottery game with charter schools until they can’t anymore. They should not get a carrot for that. If they were all going to their in bounds, neighborhood school, one could make an argument that they were “giving DC public schools a shot” but that is not what is going on here. They are trying to build a system that lets them have their cake and eat it too. Live in the city, no commute, and great walkable city lifestyle, and fix the schools for their kids. Unfortunately, their arrival then raises the property values and prices out the middle class Blacks (I’m not being racist here by only calling out blacks, pre 1990, fewer than 10% of DC residents were a race other than Black or white) who have to flee to the suburbs to be able to afford to live. So as the schools get better, more and more original residents get priced out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Disagree strongly with the above post.

Jeff and other UMC parents could have headed out to Bethesda for what are academically much better schools. They stayed in DC for the diversity of experiences.

The people who are making DC schools bad are those who flee to white suburban schools (which perpetuate systemic racism by segregation of housing) not parents like Jeff who are giving DC public schools a shot.

The people living in Kent, Spring Valley and the like do not live there for the diversity of experiences. You’ve got to be kidding me. The people living in bounds for Janney, Key, Lafayette, Mann and Murch are not giving DCPS “a shot” by spending millions to live where they do to ensure their kids are guaranteed a slot in a tiny subset of the system where very few poor, black or brown kids will be in a classroom with their kids.

Most of the others are gentrifiers (don’t argue about how you’ve been here since the 90s, you are likely still a gentrifier, look at the shifting race demographics in DC proper from 1970-now. If you are white and not a DC native, you’re pretty much a gentrifier. Just own it. You probably came here for the jobs and opportunity like everyone else, gentrification is a sad side effect) who would live in in bounds to the desired schools if they could afford it but they can’t, so the play the lottery game with charter schools until they can’t anymore. They should not get a carrot for that. If they were all going to their in bounds, neighborhood school, one could make an argument that they were “giving DC public schools a shot” but that is not what is going on here. They are trying to build a system that lets them have their cake and eat it too. Live in the city, no commute, and great walkable city lifestyle, and fix the schools for their kids. Unfortunately, their arrival then raises the property values and prices out the middle class Blacks (I’m not being racist here by only calling out blacks, pre 1990, fewer than 10% of DC residents were a race other than Black or white) who have to flee to the suburbs to be able to afford to live. So as the schools get better, more and more original residents get priced out.

I'm not looking for a 'carrot' from a childless 40 year old and a young graduate of a high school that cost more than my college when it comes to my kids' educational choices. Or really, from anyone else. Regards of what you think of my motivation, my kids are at schools that are much less white than most white kids attend, nationally or in the DC area. We are doing school integration, so if we're a target, it sure makes it seem like the goal isn't school integration, it's winning some weird and largely intraracial status game where white people call out other white people for fun and profit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Disagree strongly with the above post.

Jeff and other UMC parents could have headed out to Bethesda for what are academically much better schools. They stayed in DC for the diversity of experiences.

The people who are making DC schools bad are those who flee to white suburban schools (which perpetuate systemic racism by segregation of housing) not parents like Jeff who are giving DC public schools a shot.

The people living in Kent, Spring Valley and the like do not live there for the diversity of experiences. You’ve got to be kidding me. The people living in bounds for Janney, Key, Lafayette, Mann and Murch are not giving DCPS “a shot” by spending millions to live where they do to ensure their kids are guaranteed a slot in a tiny subset of the system where very few poor, black or brown kids will be in a classroom with their kids.

Most of the others are gentrifiers (don’t argue about how you’ve been here since the 90s, you are likely still a gentrifier, look at the shifting race demographics in DC proper from 1970-now. If you are white and not a DC native, you’re pretty much a gentrifier. Just own it. You probably came here for the jobs and opportunity like everyone else, gentrification is a sad side effect) who would live in in bounds to the desired schools if they could afford it but they can’t, so the play the lottery game with charter schools until they can’t anymore. They should not get a carrot for that. If they were all going to their in bounds, neighborhood school, one could make an argument that they were “giving DC public schools a shot” but that is not what is going on here. They are trying to build a system that lets them have their cake and eat it too. Live in the city, no commute, and great walkable city lifestyle, and fix the schools for their kids. Unfortunately, their arrival then raises the property values and prices out the middle class Blacks (I’m not being racist here by only calling out blacks, pre 1990, fewer than 10% of DC residents were a race other than Black or white) who have to flee to the suburbs to be able to afford to live. So as the schools get better, more and more original residents get priced out.

I'm not looking for a 'carrot' from a childless 40 year old and a young graduate of a high school that cost more than my college when it comes to my kids' educational choices. Or really, from anyone else. Regards of what you think of my motivation, my kids are at schools that are much less white than most white kids attend, nationally or in the DC area. We are doing school integration, so if we're a target, it sure makes it seem like the goal isn't school integration, it's winning some weird and largely intraracial status game where white people call out other white people for fun and profit.

It's pretty funny how personally people are taking this. Why are you so defensive?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Disagree strongly with the above post.

Jeff and other UMC parents could have headed out to Bethesda for what are academically much better schools. They stayed in DC for the diversity of experiences.

The people who are making DC schools bad are those who flee to white suburban schools (which perpetuate systemic racism by segregation of housing) not parents like Jeff who are giving DC public schools a shot.

The people living in Kent, Spring Valley and the like do not live there for the diversity of experiences. You’ve got to be kidding me. The people living in bounds for Janney, Key, Lafayette, Mann and Murch are not giving DCPS “a shot” by spending millions to live where they do to ensure their kids are guaranteed a slot in a tiny subset of the system where very few poor, black or brown kids will be in a classroom with their kids.

Most of the others are gentrifiers (don’t argue about how you’ve been here since the 90s, you are likely still a gentrifier, look at the shifting race demographics in DC proper from 1970-now. If you are white and not a DC native, you’re pretty much a gentrifier. Just own it. You probably came here for the jobs and opportunity like everyone else, gentrification is a sad side effect) who would live in in bounds to the desired schools if they could afford it but they can’t, so the play the lottery game with charter schools until they can’t anymore. They should not get a carrot for that. If they were all going to their in bounds, neighborhood school, one could make an argument that they were “giving DC public schools a shot” but that is not what is going on here. They are trying to build a system that lets them have their cake and eat it too. Live in the city, no commute, and great walkable city lifestyle, and fix the schools for their kids. Unfortunately, their arrival then raises the property values and prices out the middle class Blacks (I’m not being racist here by only calling out blacks, pre 1990, fewer than 10% of DC residents were a race other than Black or white) who have to flee to the suburbs to be able to afford to live. So as the schools get better, more and more original residents get priced out.

I'm not looking for a 'carrot' from a childless 40 year old and a young graduate of a high school that cost more than my college when it comes to my kids' educational choices. Or really, from anyone else. Regards of what you think of my motivation, my kids are at schools that are much less white than most white kids attend, nationally or in the DC area. We are doing school integration, so if we're a target, it sure makes it seem like the goal isn't school integration, it's winning some weird and largely intraracial status game where white people call out other white people for fun and profit.

It's pretty funny how personally people are taking this. Why are you so defensive?

Because people are frustrated with a crappy school system and tired of being insulted simply for wanting the school system to be less crappy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Disagree strongly with the above post.

Jeff and other UMC parents could have headed out to Bethesda for what are academically much better schools. They stayed in DC for the diversity of experiences.

The people who are making DC schools bad are those who flee to white suburban schools (which perpetuate systemic racism by segregation of housing) not parents like Jeff who are giving DC public schools a shot.

The people living in Kent, Spring Valley and the like do not live there for the diversity of experiences. You’ve got to be kidding me. The people living in bounds for Janney, Key, Lafayette, Mann and Murch are not giving DCPS “a shot” by spending millions to live where they do to ensure their kids are guaranteed a slot in a tiny subset of the system where very few poor, black or brown kids will be in a classroom with their kids.

Most of the others are gentrifiers (don’t argue about how you’ve been here since the 90s, you are likely still a gentrifier, look at the shifting race demographics in DC proper from 1970-now. If you are white and not a DC native, you’re pretty much a gentrifier. Just own it. You probably came here for the jobs and opportunity like everyone else, gentrification is a sad side effect) who would live in in bounds to the desired schools if they could afford it but they can’t, so the play the lottery game with charter schools until they can’t anymore. They should not get a carrot for that. If they were all going to their in bounds, neighborhood school, one could make an argument that they were “giving DC public schools a shot” but that is not what is going on here. They are trying to build a system that lets them have their cake and eat it too. Live in the city, no commute, and great walkable city lifestyle, and fix the schools for their kids. Unfortunately, their arrival then raises the property values and prices out the middle class Blacks (I’m not being racist here by only calling out blacks, pre 1990, fewer than 10% of DC residents were a race other than Black or white) who have to flee to the suburbs to be able to afford to live. So as the schools get better, more and more original residents get priced out.

I'm not looking for a 'carrot' from a childless 40 year old and a young graduate of a high school that cost more than my college when it comes to my kids' educational choices. Or really, from anyone else. Regards of what you think of my motivation, my kids are at schools that are much less white than most white kids attend, nationally or in the DC area. We are doing school integration, so if we're a target, it sure makes it seem like the goal isn't school integration, it's winning some weird and largely intraracial status game where white people call out other white people for fun and profit.

It's pretty funny how personally people are taking this. Why are you so defensive?

'Why are you taking my intensely personal critique of your motivations and decisions about how to raise your children so personally?'

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Disagree strongly with the above post.

Jeff and other UMC parents could have headed out to Bethesda for what are academically much better schools. They stayed in DC for the diversity of experiences.

The people who are making DC schools bad are those who flee to white suburban schools (which perpetuate systemic racism by segregation of housing) not parents like Jeff who are giving DC public schools a shot.

The people living in Kent, Spring Valley and the like do not live there for the diversity of experiences. You’ve got to be kidding me. The people living in bounds for Janney, Key, Lafayette, Mann and Murch are not giving DCPS “a shot” by spending millions to live where they do to ensure their kids are guaranteed a slot in a tiny subset of the system where very few poor, black or brown kids will be in a classroom with their kids.

Most of the others are gentrifiers (don’t argue about how you’ve been here since the 90s, you are likely still a gentrifier, look at the shifting race demographics in DC proper from 1970-now. If you are white and not a DC native, you’re pretty much a gentrifier. Just own it. You probably came here for the jobs and opportunity like everyone else, gentrification is a sad side effect) who would live in in bounds to the desired schools if they could afford it but they can’t, so the play the lottery game with charter schools until they can’t anymore. They should not get a carrot for that. If they were all going to their in bounds, neighborhood school, one could make an argument that they were “giving DC public schools a shot” but that is not what is going on here. They are trying to build a system that lets them have their cake and eat it too. Live in the city, no commute, and great walkable city lifestyle, and fix the schools for their kids. Unfortunately, their arrival then raises the property values and prices out the middle class Blacks (I’m not being racist here by only calling out blacks, pre 1990, fewer than 10% of DC residents were a race other than Black or white) who have to flee to the suburbs to be able to afford to live. So as the schools get better, more and more original residents get priced out.

I'm not looking for a 'carrot' from a childless 40 year old and a young graduate of a high school that cost more than my college when it comes to my kids' educational choices. Or really, from anyone else. Regards of what you think of my motivation, my kids are at schools that are much less white than most white kids attend, nationally or in the DC area. We are doing school integration, so if we're a target, it sure makes it seem like the goal isn't school integration, it's winning some weird and largely intraracial status game where white people call out other white people for fun and profit.

It's pretty funny how personally people are taking this. Why are you so defensive?

'Why are you taking my intensely personal critique of your motivations and decisions about how to raise your children so personally?'

Why does your vigilant narcissism lead you to pink fight with random strangers on the internet to make yourself feel better about yourself? Seek help.