Black History Month. Does your child's school do anything if there's not a large AA population?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

At our school - I am not sure they do anything specific for BHM. However, they did do some history around MLK day. Our school is very diverse - we have an "international night" in the fall when all the different cultures can participate.

PP, at least at my school, International Night is when first-generation and second-generation immigrants to the US present their cultures. It's a bit problematic to suggest this in the context of African-Americans whose ancestors were forcibly brought to the US 200+ years ago, I think. But maybe I'm misunderstanding you.

At our school it isn't limited to recent immigrants. Perhaps it wouldn't be appropriate for OP - but I was trying to indicate that our school doesn't really push the different months (BHM in Feb, Asian American History Month in May, National Hispanic Heritage Month during the period from September 15 to October 15.)

People whose ancestors immigrated to the US in 1720 or 1850 or 1910 also participate in your school's international night and present their cultures? Which cultures do they present?

[Anonymous]

I'm confused. What problem is OP trying to solve? I thought it was Spreading positive information about AA place in U.S./world history without forcing her child to be the sole propagator of information at her school, if not other schools. If that's the case, then op needs to help organize something at school during black history month and making it AWESOME, so people want to participate. A smaller step in the right direction is something during heritage month in the fall. Is AA history unique from others? Damn straight it is, but you don't attract positive attention to your subject by dismissing the contributions of other groups.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

At our school - I am not sure they do anything specific for BHM. However, they did do some history around MLK day. Our school is very diverse - we have an "international night" in the fall when all the different cultures can participate.

PP, at least at my school, International Night is when first-generation and second-generation immigrants to the US present their cultures. It's a bit problematic to suggest this in the context of African-Americans whose ancestors were forcibly brought to the US 200+ years ago, I think. But maybe I'm misunderstanding you.

At our school it isn't limited to recent immigrants. Perhaps it wouldn't be appropriate for OP - but I was trying to indicate that our school doesn't really push the different months (BHM in Feb, Asian American History Month in May, National Hispanic Heritage Month during the period from September 15 to October 15.)

People whose ancestors immigrated to the US in 1720 or 1850 or 1910 also participate in your school's international night and present their cultures? Which cultures do they present?

Wow you are hung up on this. We have had people present Germany and Ireland. They clearly were not recent immigrants. We had people who were clearly not Japanese present Japan. And my adopted daughter participated in her birth country's table. There aren't firm rules thankfully - because the point is for everyone to participate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm confused. What problem is OP trying to solve? I thought it was Spreading positive information about AA place in U.S./world history without forcing her child to be the sole propagator of information at her school, if not other schools. If that's the case, then op needs to help organize something at school during black history month and making it AWESOME, so people want to participate. A smaller step in the right direction is something during heritage month in the fall. Is AA history unique from others? Damn straight it is, but you don't attract positive attention to your subject by dismissing the contributions of other groups.[/quote]

when did OP dismiss the contributions of other groups?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can't have American history without American Indians. You can't have American history without African-Americans.

Sure you can. And then it would even be interesting!

My kid wasn't even in kindergarten before he knew that "African-American History" meant boring, preachy crap.

Wow. Your kid's school must really suck. What is so boring about AA history? Boring?

ALL OF IT.

I just don't give a shit.

Doesn't speak to me, isn't relevant to my life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can't have American history without American Indians. You can't have American history without African-Americans.

Sure you can. And then it would even be interesting!

My kid wasn't even in kindergarten before he knew that "African-American History" meant boring, preachy crap.

Wow. Your kid's school must really suck. What is so boring about AA history? Boring?

ALL OF IT.

I just don't give a shit.

Doesn't speak to me, isn't relevant to my life.

wow so anything that isn't relevant to your life you just don't give a shit about. what a way to live.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can't have American history without American Indians. You can't have American history without African-Americans.

Sure you can. And then it would even be interesting!

My kid wasn't even in kindergarten before he knew that "African-American History" meant boring, preachy crap.

Wow. Your kid's school must really suck. What is so boring about AA history? Boring?

ALL OF IT.

I just don't give a shit.

Doesn't speak to me, isn't relevant to my life.

wow so anything that isn't relevant to your life you just don't give a shit about. what a way to live.

not to mention - how is your post helpful to OP? if you don't give a shit - then don't respond.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
To be quite clear: You are saying that American Indians and African-Americans are not an integral part of American history. That American Indians and African-Americans are extraneous to American history. That American history does not have to include American Indians or African-Americans.l

I wonder what your definitions of "American" and "history" are.

History does not have to include everything about everybody.

The "wars and presidents" approach works fine for me. I'll skip the annoying hate-whitey stuff, thanks.

[Anonymous]

Our school no longer has a Black History Month. First, they mainstreamed black history into the curriculum when Obama was elected president. Also, they felt that a month was too much on one group, lest other ethnic and racial groups want the same time to present their stories. This change has worked out well

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm confused. What problem is OP trying to solve? I thought it was Spreading positive information about AA place in U.S./world history without forcing her child to be the sole propagator of information at her school, if not other schools. If that's the case, then op needs to help organize something at school during black history month and making it AWESOME, so people want to participate. A smaller step in the right direction is something during heritage month in the fall. Is AA history unique from others? Damn straight it is, but you don't attract positive attention to your subject by dismissing the contributions of other groups.[/quote]

when did OP dismiss the contributions of other groups?

It may not have been OP, but the person who dismissed the idea of sharing AA history with "recent immigrants." To me it is about making inroads where none may exist. The ideal may be having a big class unit in February, but if not why not start with something iN The fall?

[Anonymous]

well this thread is clearly off the rails. sorry OP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can't have American history without American Indians. You can't have American history without African-Americans.

Sure you can. And then it would even be interesting!

My kid wasn't even in kindergarten before he knew that "African-American History" meant boring, preachy crap.

Wow. Your kid's school must really suck. What is so boring about AA history? Boring?

ALL OF IT.

I just don't give a shit.

Doesn't speak to me, isn't relevant to my life.

wow so anything that isn't relevant to your life you just don't give a shit about. what a way to live.

(shrug) The rationale for including the black history stuff is that blacks don't find history without blacks in it to be relevant to their lives. I have an analogous feeling about their history.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can't have American history without American Indians. You can't have American history without African-Americans.

Sure you can. And then it would even be interesting!

My kid wasn't even in kindergarten before he knew that "African-American History" meant boring, preachy crap.

Wow. Your kid's school must really suck. What is so boring about AA history? Boring?

ALL OF IT.

I just don't give a shit.

Doesn't speak to me, isn't relevant to my life.

wow so anything that isn't relevant to your life you just don't give a shit about. what a way to live.

(shrug) The rationale for including the black history stuff is that blacks don't find history without blacks in it to be relevant to their lives. I have an analogous feeling about their history.

No the rationale is that their history wasn't included in most history books historically. Not that everyone elses history is irrelevant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
To be quite clear: You are saying that American Indians and African-Americans are not an integral part of American history. That American Indians and African-Americans are extraneous to American history. That American history does not have to include American Indians or African-Americans.l

I wonder what your definitions of "American" and "history" are.

History does not have to include everything about everybody.

The "wars and presidents" approach works fine for me. I'll skip the annoying hate-whitey stuff, thanks.

This is why you and your DC need to study Black History. You clearly know nothing! Do you know that African slaves and white indentured servants often ran away together?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can't have American history without American Indians. You can't have American history without African-Americans.

Sure you can. And then it would even be interesting!

My kid wasn't even in kindergarten before he knew that "African-American History" meant boring, preachy crap.

Wow. Your kid's school must really suck. What is so boring about AA history? Boring?

ALL OF IT.

I just don't give a shit.

Doesn't speak to me, isn't relevant to my life.

wow so anything that isn't relevant to your life you just don't give a shit about. what a way to live.

(shrug) The rationale for including the black history stuff is that blacks don't find history without blacks in it to be relevant to their lives. I have an analogous feeling about their history.

No one uses that rationale. You are ridiculous. How are civil rights irrelevant to your life?