S/O - What’s up with AEM?

[Anonymous]

Given all this, I've been surprised that the persistent "you wouldn't be affected by racism if you would just behave right" poster has been engaged with as constructively (if pointlessly) as she has.

[Anonymous]

The SB and CB is full of race baters. It’s a great way to silence voices of decent while they carry out their actually classist and thereby racist agendas.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know the people who are incredibly vocal. But, basically if you aren’t black, you are not allowed to have an opinion on anything that might impact black students — even if it impacts all students. So, basically if you are white you cannot have opinions.

They fail to follow their own logic to its reasonable conclusion. If a black child was dissuaded or incorrectly told they had to do something to take an AP class or whatever, it is because the child is black. Full stop. If I’m a teacher or counselor, I would be very hesitant to counsel any black child on whether they should take any class for fear folks like those on AEM label me a racist obstructionist. As a result, of I were a counselor, black children would receive less effective advice. But it would be harder for AEM types to peg their per se racist tag on me in the latter situation.

But, they don’t think that way. They think they can get what they want by bulldozing the world calling it racist. The problem is, some people are racist. But their tactics make it really hard for people who aren’t to want to stand up and engage on the issues out of fear of being labeled racist. All it means is they have fewer people wanting to help them fight their fight.

AEM should be a case study for this kind of stuff.

Very well said.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OMG. - One of them even uses white and elitist as interchangeable. That’s not ok. Almost none of the race stuff from the defacto moderators is ok.

I felt so horrible for the lgbt activist who spoke up. The way they treated him was disgusting. The mouthpieces in that site make more enemies than allies.

It was the community college post where someone said it would upset white people, but cut off the word and then replaced it with elitist. When that got laughs and was allowed to stay, I knew the admins had checked out.

Me, too. I was shocked by that.

[Anonymous]

The Administrators could so easily address many of the problems by not allowing political posts and by removing posts that name-call or shame people.

[Anonymous]

I predict a post on AEM by the end of the day about white fragility referencing this thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Administrators could so easily address many of the problems by not allowing political posts and by removing posts that name-call or shame people.

Agreed. I'm shocked no one reported the "whi.....I mean elitist" comment. I would never write that about any race b/c it's disgusting, but if it were written about a minority, that person would have been flambéd.

The letter to the editor used as an attack on a prominent AEM member, again, should have been removed. More pragmatic posters suggested such, but it was ignored.

So much political vitriol......You would think the page is sponsored by the Parissa campaign.

Oh, and all the hate towards our SROs. Ours is fantastic. The kids know him and he does a great job. If a kid is getting violent in the hallway or harming others, yes 100% the SRO should get involved. While the one poster (behave and don't get in trouble) was clearly insensitive to issues faced by other races, she did also make some points which no one should argue about. Since she is labeled a clueless racist, it doesn't matter what she says. She's not going to get anywhere on AEM.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OMG. - One of them even uses white and elitist as interchangeable. That’s not ok. Almost none of the race stuff from the defacto moderators is ok.

I felt so horrible for the lgbt activist who spoke up. The way they treated him was disgusting. The mouthpieces in that site make more enemies than allies.

It was the community college post where someone said it would upset white people, but cut off the word and then replaced it with elitist. When that got laughs and was allowed to stay, I knew the admins had checked out.

Me, too. I was shocked by that.

And not helpful when other people chime in and say things like "I'm white and went to an elite college and was coddled and had no idea to do with my life so you're totally right about community college." I wanted to post and say "excuse me, like lots of other people I worked my ass off for scholarships, took out loans, worked half time during school, worked multiple jobs in the summer, actively sought out career preparation, and was diligent in landing a job for after graduation so I could move out of my parents home and start paying off my debt." But that wouldn't have been seen as a rebuttal to the white poster, it would have been taken as a challenge by the black OP, and I didn't feel like getting in a public race fight. I already did that once on AEM as a white person living in one of Arlington's historically black neighborhoods, and am not going there again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OMG. - One of them even uses white and elitist as interchangeable. That’s not ok. Almost none of the race stuff from the defacto moderators is ok.

I felt so horrible for the lgbt activist who spoke up. The way they treated him was disgusting. The mouthpieces in that site make more enemies than allies.

It was the community college post where someone said it would upset white people, but cut off the word and then replaced it with elitist. When that got laughs and was allowed to stay, I knew the admins had checked out.

Me, too. I was shocked by that.

And not helpful when other people chime in and say things like "I'm white and went to an elite college and was coddled and had no idea to do with my life so you're totally right about community college." I wanted to post and say "excuse me, like lots of other people I worked my ass off for scholarships, took out loans, worked half time during school, worked multiple jobs in the summer, actively sought out career preparation, and was diligent in landing a job for after graduation so I could move out of my parents home and start paying off my debt." But that wouldn't have been seen as a rebuttal to the white poster, it would have been taken as a challenge by the black OP, and I didn't feel like getting in a public race fight. I already did that once on AEM as a white person living in one of Arlington's historically black neighborhoods, and am not going there again.

You could have been a Black person living in an historically Black neighborhood and received the same reaction from the AEM "enlightenment club"

[Anonymous]

Said PTA President is doing her school and community a disservice with her choice of words. Please fight for the disadvantaged and the kids who face an uphill battle. But you can’t alienate every white family at the school in doing so. I fear that’s what she is doing. I wouldn’t want my kid to go to school there — seems their PTA president assumes anything negative a white person says about a person of color is racist. That’s not a healthy environment. I wouldn’t want to teach there either. Just wait. There will be accusations of racist teachers soon enough.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But at least she (and others) put that Daily Caller poster in his place.

Very disappointing to have our very own APS parents spreading GOP propaganda. WTF?

Yeah, cause AEM and APS are strict members of the Democratic Party and no other opinions are tolerated. This exchange is an exact reflection of what you're complaining about with AEM.

It’s one thing to have a different opinion. It’s another to quote a dubious source.

[Anonymous]

To play devil's advocate here, a lot of the "race-baiting" can also be seen as pushing UMC white folks (like me) to consider our implicit biases. A PP posted: "If a black child was dissuaded or incorrectly told they had to do something to take an AP class or whatever, it is because the child is black. Full stop." The implicit point in the post, leading to the PP's conclusion that such accusations would chill the teacher/counselor from giving good advice, is that the teacher/counselor had a valid reason and that it wasn't just because the child is black. But none of us know that for a fact as applied to any particular situation. If a black parent is saying that's the issue and the teacher is saying that's not the issue, why do we assume the black parent is wrong and the teacher is right? Why would we not consider that as a possibility? It's not considered polite to talk about race anymore among the white community, which is fine and dandy when it comes to no longer making gross generalizations about minorities/people of color, but it's also a convenient way to shut down points about things that white folks continue to do to preserve their own privilege.

In addition, a lot of the recent racially tinged discussion began with the infamous "whitesplaining" post during the boundary discussion. That post was largely correct. The historically black community around Drew had been asked what it wanted and said what it wanted. At the last minute, white outsiders to that community came in and said, no you don't understand THIS would be better for you. The proposal may have come from a good place, but it was absolutely contrary to what the community clearly said it wanted and it was billed as "what's best" for that community. Whitesplaining was a provocative way to put it, but that is in fact what was going on.

All that said, the political posts, from Parisa vs. Theo to whether charter schools are a good idea, are ridiculous and detract from real discussion of issues. I generally think less of everyone who posts on those threads because they have such poor reasoning skills. And the reason they have such poor reasoning skills is that they are never tested by having to defend their positions outside of the echo chamber. That's the real problem with all of this political correctness.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To play devil's advocate here, a lot of the "race-baiting" can also be seen as pushing UMC white folks (like me) to consider our implicit biases. A PP posted: "If a black child was dissuaded or incorrectly told they had to do something to take an AP class or whatever, it is because the child is black. Full stop." The implicit point in the post, leading to the PP's conclusion that such accusations would chill the teacher/counselor from giving good advice, is that the teacher/counselor had a valid reason and that it wasn't just because the child is black. But none of us know that for a fact as applied to any particular situation. If a black parent is saying that's the issue and the teacher is saying that's not the issue, why do we assume the black parent is wrong and the teacher is right? Why would we not consider that as a possibility? It's not considered polite to talk about race anymore among the white community, which is fine and dandy when it comes to no longer making gross generalizations about minorities/people of color, but it's also a convenient way to shut down points about things that white folks continue to do to preserve their own privilege.

In addition, a lot of the recent racially tinged discussion began with the infamous "whitesplaining" post during the boundary discussion. That post was largely correct. The historically black community around Drew had been asked what it wanted and said what it wanted. At the last minute, white outsiders to that community came in and said, no you don't understand THIS would be better for you. The proposal may have come from a good place, but it was absolutely contrary to what the community clearly said it wanted and it was billed as "what's best" for that community. Whitesplaining was a provocative way to put it, but that is in fact what was going on.

All that said, the political posts, from Parisa vs. Theo to whether charter schools are a good idea, are ridiculous and detract from real discussion of issues. I generally think less of everyone who posts on those threads because they have such poor reasoning skills. And the reason they have such poor reasoning skills is that they are never tested by having to defend their positions outside of the echo chamber. That's the real problem with all of this political correctness.

That all gets lost with comments like: “whi.....I mean elitist"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To play devil's advocate here, a lot of the "race-baiting" can also be seen as pushing UMC white folks (like me) to consider our implicit biases. A PP posted: "If a black child was dissuaded or incorrectly told they had to do something to take an AP class or whatever, it is because the child is black. Full stop." The implicit point in the post, leading to the PP's conclusion that such accusations would chill the teacher/counselor from giving good advice, is that the teacher/counselor had a valid reason and that it wasn't just because the child is black. But none of us know that for a fact as applied to any particular situation. If a black parent is saying that's the issue and the teacher is saying that's not the issue, why do we assume the black parent is wrong and the teacher is right? Why would we not consider that as a possibility? It's not considered polite to talk about race anymore among the white community, which is fine and dandy when it comes to no longer making gross generalizations about minorities/people of color, but it's also a convenient way to shut down points about things that white folks continue to do to preserve their own privilege.

In addition, a lot of the recent racially tinged discussion began with the infamous "whitesplaining" post during the boundary discussion. That post was largely correct. The historically black community around Drew had been asked what it wanted and said what it wanted. At the last minute, white outsiders to that community came in and said, no you don't understand THIS would be better for you. The proposal may have come from a good place, but it was absolutely contrary to what the community clearly said it wanted and it was billed as "what's best" for that community. Whitesplaining was a provocative way to put it, but that is in fact what was going on.

All that said, the political posts, from Parisa vs. Theo to whether charter schools are a good idea, are ridiculous and detract from real discussion of issues. I generally think less of everyone who posts on those threads because they have such poor reasoning skills. And the reason they have such poor reasoning skills is that they are never tested by having to defend their positions outside of the echo chamber. That's the real problem with all of this political correctness.

That all gets lost with comments like: “whi.....I mean elitist"

Okay, but again, why not just take a minute to consider whether whiteness has anything to do with the system of higher education and how we assess merit and prestige? What does it cost you to think about that? Are you really that insulted to be called white? The comment was obnoxious but the point may be valid.

[Anonymous]

I had to take AEM out of my news feed because it was raising my blood pressure. I've left the group once before, and I think I just need to do it again. I consider myself pretty liberal, but I'm genuinely conflicted on the CA race and that makes me a racist on AEM. F that.