No consequence for teaching CRT

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These articles explain how CRT and gender ideology are correlated and already a part of our school culture at FCPS:

1. https://fee.org/articles/critical-race-theory-and-gender-ideology-are-ubiquitous-in-us-schools-new-study-shows/

2. https://abigailshrier.substack.com/p/critical-race-theory-and-gender-ideology

How are these concepts taught at FCPS?
1. Boys and girls are now officially referred to as male and female assigned at birth.
2. FCPS is pushing for penalizing students and staff who don’t use the correct gender pronouns of those who choose to use them to identify themselves at school.
3. Privilege Bingo
4. Back in the fall of 2020, my child’s high school in FCPS distributed a book on Racism and Antiracism to every single 12 grader during virtual learning.

I skimmed the two articles. I didn't see any reference to FCPS and only one brief mention of CRT.

You may want to take your time to read this article in full. It has everything to do with CRT and FCPS:
https://thefederalist.com/2020/09/30/fairfax-va-school-district-spent-24000-on-ibram-kendi-books-for-u-s-history-classes/

LOL. The Federalist.

More RWNJ trash.

And this one article has been posted many times in the forum as “proof.” Real proof is more than quoting the same article.

Curious--why do you think Kendi was invited to speak? Why do you think that FCPS purchased so many of his books? Why do you think that FCPS spent so much money on this speaker if they do not want to support his beliefs?

Which parts of the article posted were not true?

The article says that FCPS supports anti-racism- True
The article also says the county is using divisive and indoctrination strategies- false

FCPS no longer purchases textbooks to distribute to students - in spite of parents requests to do so, yet it purchased Kendi’s textbook and distributed it to seniors in HS, regardless of their reading proficiency. BTW, another HS in Region 2 distributed it to all seniors in the fall of 2020. Care to explain why?

His “textbook”? LOL.

How I wish I could also laugh about it. Sadly, FCPS used it as a textbook in that it was the only book given to every single student in different high schools in the county. One can safely assume the goal was limiting the teaching of racism and anti-racism to this one perspective. There were no other books, documentaries, or any other material countering Kendi’s approach provided for this purpose.

As much as FCPS denies teaching CRT to our students, the way Kendi’s book (and teachings) made their way into our classrooms is NOT consistent with teaching our kids to develop critical thinking skills, but rather with brainwashing.

[Anonymous]

If you want your kid to believe that the civil war was just about state's rights, then MLK gave a speech, we passed the civil rights act and every one was totally equal, then perhaps FCPS is not a great place for your family.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

What is DEI?

Diversity
Equity
Inclusion

So the RWNJs are anti-diversity, anti-inclusion, and anti-equity.

Noted.

I prefer diversity, inclusion, and opportunity. Why don't you?
DP

+1
Remember, the "E" stands for "equity" not "equality." There is a difference. "Equality" means equal opportunity. "Equity" means you have everyone the same. Kind of like socialism. And, we all know that does not work.

Wow, so....

Equality means everybody gets the same- same tax breaks, same social services, same help

Do you think that everybody should pay the same tax rate? Do you think that everybody, regardless of financial status, should get the exact same level of social services? A person raised in generations of poverty and a person raised in generations of wealth should both get the same supports?
How do you feel about the ADA any other laws that require accessibility? Why should we have ramps to get into public facilities if everybody has access to the same stairs?

DP. Do we want to provide equal opportunity or do we want to have equal outcomes?

No one wants to go backwards on accessibility (accessibility can be expensive so people push back but that's not what you're referencing). When you argue about that, you show that you aren't listening or prepared to listen.

I am prepared to listen and wasn't arguing about accessibility. I was trying to probe your definition and stance. How is my example on accessibility distinguishable from a framework of "equality" where everybody has the same options and those option are not tailored to the individual circumstances of the person?

How do you define equal opportunity? Does a staircase provide everyone equal opportunity to enter a building? If not, why not?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you want your kid to believe that the civil war was just about state's rights, then MLK gave a speech, we passed the civil rights act and every one was totally equal, then perhaps FCPS is not a great place for your family.

Bogus statement. History should be taught. Tell us where anyone is teaching that slavery was not the cause of the Civil War.
No one is saying there is not racism.
Sounds to me like you are trying to demean the impact of MLK.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

What is DEI?

Diversity
Equity
Inclusion

So the RWNJs are anti-diversity, anti-inclusion, and anti-equity.

Noted.

I prefer diversity, inclusion, and opportunity. Why don't you?
DP

+1
Remember, the "E" stands for "equity" not "equality." There is a difference. "Equality" means equal opportunity. "Equity" means you have everyone the same. Kind of like socialism. And, we all know that does not work.

Wow, so....

Equality means everybody gets the same- same tax breaks, same social services, same help

Do you think that everybody should pay the same tax rate? Do you think that everybody, regardless of financial status, should get the exact same level of social services? A person raised in generations of poverty and a person raised in generations of wealth should both get the same supports?
How do you feel about the ADA any other laws that require accessibility? Why should we have ramps to get into public facilities if everybody has access to the same stairs?

DP. Do we want to provide equal opportunity or do we want to have equal outcomes?

No one wants to go backwards on accessibility (accessibility can be expensive so people push back but that's not what you're referencing). When you argue about that, you show that you aren't listening or prepared to listen.

I am prepared to listen and wasn't arguing about accessibility. I was trying to probe your definition and stance. How is my example on accessibility distinguishable from a framework of "equality" where everybody has the same options and those option are not tailored to the individual circumstances of the person?

How do you define equal opportunity? Does a staircase provide everyone equal opportunity to enter a building? If not, why not?

Okay, so this is the first time you have ever encountered the difference between equal opportunity and equal outcome? It's going to take me awhile to respond properly and I don't have the time right now but I'll come back later on about this.

[Anonymous]

This thread is all over the place. I thought we were talking about CRT? We were talking about teachers discussing how previous policies, attitudes, culture, and laws in our country were based on racial identities and that those factors impacted the social and financial standing of blacks, so much so that those effects can be seen today. That is not up for debate. That is just fact. So, really we are arguing over whether or not that should be discussed at the K-12 level. Anecdotes about how some blacks are successful, wealthy and have generational wealth and some whites are poor, lack opportunity and have negative outcomes do not disprove the existence of general disparities caused by slavery and segregation. I still fail to see why discussing these things in school, in a rudimentary way, is negative/harmful. How is explaining to kids that history is important because it shapes the present? How is providing some context to why biases, perceptions and divisions exist a bad thing? The world is more complex than good guys, bad guys. The world is more complex than just saying, "I don't see color". Now, Im not saying that I haven't heard of examples of hard left leaning advocates taking things too far. I do think that fixating on changing the names of schools is performative nonsense to a large degree. And If I ever heard that a teacher in my kid's school told my child that he was "oppressed" and that a white student was an "oppressor", I would be livid. But the actual DISCUSSION about disparate impacts of oppressive and discriminatory policies is a pretty important piece of critical analysis and evolved thinking about government and society. Or do you just want kids to be little nationalist robots who have blind allegiance based on propaganda? THAT seems pretty damn communist to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

What is DEI?

Diversity
Equity
Inclusion

So the RWNJs are anti-diversity, anti-inclusion, and anti-equity.

Noted.

I prefer diversity, inclusion, and opportunity. Why don't you?
DP

+1
Remember, the "E" stands for "equity" not "equality." There is a difference. "Equality" means equal opportunity. "Equity" means you have everyone the same. Kind of like socialism. And, we all know that does not work.

Wow, so....

Equality means everybody gets the same- same tax breaks, same social services, same help

Do you think that everybody should pay the same tax rate? Do you think that everybody, regardless of financial status, should get the exact same level of social services? A person raised in generations of poverty and a person raised in generations of wealth should both get the same supports?
How do you feel about the ADA any other laws that require accessibility? Why should we have ramps to get into public facilities if everybody has access to the same stairs?

DP. Do we want to provide equal opportunity or do we want to have equal outcomes?

No one wants to go backwards on accessibility (accessibility can be expensive so people push back but that's not what you're referencing). When you argue about that, you show that you aren't listening or prepared to listen.

I am prepared to listen and wasn't arguing about accessibility. I was trying to probe your definition and stance. How is my example on accessibility distinguishable from a framework of "equality" where everybody has the same options and those option are not tailored to the individual circumstances of the person?

How do you define equal opportunity? Does a staircase provide everyone equal opportunity to enter a building? If not, why not?

Okay, so this is the first time you have ever encountered the difference between equal opportunity and equal outcome? It's going to take me awhile to respond properly and I don't have the time right now but I'll come back later on about this.

It is not the first time I have every encountered this issue. I would argue that accessibility requirements are about equity. You stated ""Equality" means equal opportunity. "Equity" means you have everyone the same." I don't think most people would share those definitions and I am curious what "you have everyone the same" means to you....because it is not what many/most people mean when they refer to equity.

[Anonymous]

how

Anonymous wrote:This thread is all over the place. I thought we were talking about CRT? We were talking about teachers discussing how previous policies, attitudes, culture, and laws in our country were based on racial identities and that those factors impacted the social and financial standing of blacks, so much so that those effects can be seen today. That is not up for debate. That is just fact. So, really we are arguing over whether or not that should be discussed at the K-12 level. Anecdotes about how some blacks are successful, wealthy and have generational wealth and some whites are poor, lack opportunity and have negative outcomes do not disprove the existence of general disparities caused by slavery and segregation. I still fail to see why discussing these things in school, in a rudimentary way, is negative/harmful. How is explaining to kids that history is important because it shapes the present? How is providing some context to why biases, perceptions and divisions exist a bad thing? The world is more complex than good guys, bad guys. The world is more complex than just saying, "I don't see color". Now, Im not saying that I haven't heard of examples of hard left leaning advocates taking things too far. I do think that fixating on changing the names of schools is performative nonsense to a large degree. And If I ever heard that a teacher in my kid's school told my child that he was "oppressed" and that a white student was an "oppressor", I would be livid. But the actual DISCUSSION about disparate impacts of oppressive and discriminatory policies is a pretty important piece of critical analysis and evolved thinking about government and society. Or do you just want kids to be little nationalist robots who have blind allegiance based on propaganda? THAT seems pretty damn communist to me.

The issue is that people then start to personify lives of the past. And this goes in reverse as well. You tell a white kid they have privilege and were considered superior in the past and they personalize it to their life today thinking they should get extra privilege or feeling like they are missing out somehow. It's important to talk about current issues and talk about the past but categorizing races into privilege and unprivileged (not to mention how many people are mixed race) ignores how far we've come in society and our current lives. It basically leaves us stuck in the past unable to move forward. I actually was the person who posted about how I think CRT is about reparations and how they should get them (and the reason they should be free of strings is because they were not treated as full humans and the only way to actually not be tied in this enmeshment is to free them from being tied to white people of the past and present and let them individualize themselves as equals). I don't think privilege today by race is really applicable to what happened in the past in that direct a way and that's where CRT gets it wrong to me. I think the past and the present need to be separated and if there is something from the past that still needs to be rectified so be it, but it's a disservice to paint current children today as living duplicate past lives of their ancestors. As far as immigrants go, they were not persecuted to the same degree and always thought of as people, so I don't feel reparations are needed for anyone other than native americans and blacks. Reparations are not a help in this time. They are a payment for past wrongs and are not tied to productivity. We need to help the poor in our current time and help people access education but that is separate from race.

[Anonymous]

An example of a black kid using CRT against a white person was that kid in Loudoun who lived in a mansion and tried to get some random girl he barely knew out of Tennessee and the cheerleading squad because he wanted to punish white people. She had to go to community college and did nothing wrong other than post a celebratory video of her getting her license speaking like a rapper. It wasn't derogatory and there was nothing about his life that didn't reek of privilege. There are lots of others. Kendri used it against adoptive parents. Another example of blaming white people verses trying to help black people keep their children if they wanted to.

[Anonymous]

abrams kendi is a charlatan

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What exactly is CRT? Can you give an example of someone teaching it?

A very brief summary:

It is the theory that systemic racism is in society and is hampering the progress of African Americans.

It is not teaching that slavery was bad and that African Americans were mistreated. That is history and is being taught as it should be.

An example of inappropriate CRT: "privilege bingo"

So, you don't believe systemic racism exists? Do you also think vaccines are a woke conspiracy? Do you think the earth is flat?

NP. I object to privilege bingo in K-12 and I can't see any value in teaching any child that the land of the free and the home of the brave is oppressing them or that they are oppressors.

Can you explain the value to K-12 students to be taught that?

What is “privilege bingo?” I’ve never heard of this. Is that a Tucker Carlson Blog / newsmax type thing?

It was a bingo game played at Oakton high last year titled 'Identifying Your Privilege' . Students were to cover the squares that applied to them like being white, cisgender, parents are married, parents are employed, had their own room or had parents in the military. That was the only thing that caused it to make the 6pm NBC4 news - that military families were privileged. Otherwise it would have been swept under the rug and filed under "didn't happen".

OMG that sounds horrible. /s

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:An example of a black kid using CRT against a white person was that kid in Loudoun who lived in a mansion and tried to get some random girl he barely knew out of Tennessee and the cheerleading squad because he wanted to punish white people. She had to go to community college and did nothing wrong other than post a celebratory video of her getting her license speaking like a rapper. It wasn't derogatory and there was nothing about his life that didn't reek of privilege. There are lots of others. Kendri used it against adoptive parents. Another example of blaming white people verses trying to help black people keep their children if they wanted to.

He is right. And any adopted person, of any race will tell you that.
Secondly, the issue with the student-how does his privilege negate what she did? Your thought processing is quite odd.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:An example of a black kid using CRT against a white person was that kid in Loudoun who lived in a mansion and tried to get some random girl he barely knew out of Tennessee and the cheerleading squad because he wanted to punish white people. She had to go to community college and did nothing wrong other than post a celebratory video of her getting her license speaking like a rapper. It wasn't derogatory and there was nothing about his life that didn't reek of privilege. There are lots of others. Kendri used it against adoptive parents. Another example of blaming white people verses trying to help black people keep their children if they wanted to.

Using CRT against another person? What does that even mean?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:An example of a black kid using CRT against a white person was that kid in Loudoun who lived in a mansion and tried to get some random girl he barely knew out of Tennessee and the cheerleading squad because he wanted to punish white people. She had to go to community college and did nothing wrong other than post a celebratory video of her getting her license speaking like a rapper. It wasn't derogatory and there was nothing about his life that didn't reek of privilege. There are lots of others. Kendri used it against adoptive parents. Another example of blaming white people verses trying to help black people keep their children if they wanted to.

Using CRT against another person? What does that even mean?

It means “I’m white and fragile and can’t be reminded that we treated PoC like crap for hundreds of years without spilling my diaper.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:An example of a black kid using CRT against a white person was that kid in Loudoun who lived in a mansion and tried to get some random girl he barely knew out of Tennessee and the cheerleading squad because he wanted to punish white people. She had to go to community college and did nothing wrong other than post a celebratory video of her getting her license speaking like a rapper. It wasn't derogatory and there was nothing about his life that didn't reek of privilege. There are lots of others. Kendri used it against adoptive parents. Another example of blaming white people verses trying to help black people keep their children if they wanted to.

Using CRT against another person? What does that even mean?

I'm not familiar with the cheerleader incident, but I think it has something to do with "cultural appropriation." What is really confusing to me is that it is fine for Hamilton to have people of color in the roles of white men, but not vice versa. I am not speaking about Black Face--which is clearly offensive. But, things like wearing clothing of other cultures. The first i heard of this was when a girl in Utah wore a prom dress with a mandarin collar. That was just silly criticism.

So much of this makes no sense.