How do you ensure your kids to get a balanced view of culture war issues discussed at school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My middle school kids seem to always be getting assignments that focus on highly politicized current events and topics. The school seems to be emphasizing one point of view. I would like them to understand that many people outside of the “DC Bubble” do have different viewpoints.

Slightly different take:

We are a liberal household but the overwhelming amount of information in the curriculum and other types of assemblies (virtual) about systemic racism, etc. has really turned off my kid. I've been battling this for the entire year, trying to tone down the school message and make it more practical (and less personal) for him because I don't like where his opinions are headed. And of course, at 13, he's beginning to develop opinions that differ from mine. So that's a bit scary to me.

OK, yeah, I guess that's his white fragility. And I'm not an educator or a psychologist. So I don't know the best way to present this information in a way that doesn't alienate some white kids. (and my son isn't the only kid having this reaction). It's not just his being defensive. It's also his learning, or I should say his takeaway is that Black people can't advocate for themselves, that they are victims of everything. And no matter what choices they make in life, they will be beaten down by racism. Instead of having my son become more introspective about systems and how they may negatively impact people of color, he's beginning to see Black people as inferior. Helpless. And it's killing me. It really is. And if it's turning off some (of course not all, maybe not even a significant number) of kids from liberal homes, imagine what it's likely doing to kids in conservative homes. (I'm not putting down conservative beliefs; just that I know they are generally more focused on personal agency of people of color to get ahead and not on systems).

My kid is not White, but I see this as a problem also.

My MSer read The Pact in English Class. Decent message, I guess? And it ends well, but is is possible that this book sends some negative stereotypical messages about how young black boys grow up? Because certainly, not all young black boys grow up that way.

When my kid was younger, DC read The Stories Julien Tells and loved that series. Read them in school and got the rest from the library. Not saying all books have to be positive, but if we’re going to only have the kids read books like Stamped and The Pact, which portray Black people as ‘victims’, is that really the best idea?

Better victims than perpetrators.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid is not White, but I see this as a problem also.

My MSer read The Pact in English Class. Decent message, I guess? And it ends well, but is is possible that this book sends some negative stereotypical messages about how young black boys grow up? Because certainly, not all young black boys grow up that way.

When my kid was younger, DC read The Stories Julien Tells and loved that series. Read them in school and got the rest from the library. Not saying all books have to be positive, but if we’re going to only have the kids read books like Stamped and The Pact, which portray Black people as ‘victims’, is that really the best idea?

Better victims than perpetrators.

As if those were the only two options.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My middle school kids seem to always be getting assignments that focus on highly politicized current events and topics. The school seems to be emphasizing one point of view. I would like them to understand that many people outside of the “DC Bubble” do have different viewpoints.

Slightly different take:

We are a liberal household but the overwhelming amount of information in the curriculum and other types of assemblies (virtual) about systemic racism, etc. has really turned off my kid. I've been battling this for the entire year, trying to tone down the school message and make it more practical (and less personal) for him because I don't like where his opinions are headed. And of course, at 13, he's beginning to develop opinions that differ from mine. So that's a bit scary to me.

OK, yeah, I guess that's his white fragility. And I'm not an educator or a psychologist. So I don't know the best way to present this information in a way that doesn't alienate some white kids. (and my son isn't the only kid having this reaction). It's not just his being defensive. It's also his learning, or I should say his takeaway is that Black people can't advocate for themselves, that they are victims of everything. And no matter what choices they make in life, they will be beaten down by racism. Instead of having my son become more introspective about systems and how they may negatively impact people of color, he's beginning to see Black people as inferior. Helpless. And it's killing me. It really is. And if it's turning off some (of course not all, maybe not even a significant number) of kids from liberal homes, imagine what it's likely doing to kids in conservative homes. (I'm not putting down conservative beliefs; just that I know they are generally more focused on personal agency of people of color to get ahead and not on systems).

My kid is not White, but I see this as a problem also.

My MSer read The Pact in English Class. Decent message, I guess? And it ends well, but is is possible that this book sends some negative stereotypical messages about how young black boys grow up? Because certainly, not all young black boys grow up that way.

When my kid was younger, DC read The Stories Julien Tells and loved that series. Read them in school and got the rest from the library. Not saying all books have to be positive, but if we’re going to only have the kids read books like Stamped and The Pact, which portray Black people as ‘victims’, is that really the best idea?

Better victims than perpetrators.

SMH. I don’t want my (nonwhite) kids learning either of those narratives. At least not exclusively. I don’t want my kids to also learn about BIPOC who had rich successful lives.

[Anonymous]

If you are white, why should your opinion about racism towards black Americans count?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you are white, why should your opinion about racism towards black Americans count?

Every American has a right to an opinion. This is not China.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you are white, why should your opinion about racism towards black Americans count?

Every American has a right to an opinion. This is not China.

Sure, and your opinion is not science nor backed by history. So, if you don't want kids taught opinions about CRT, then surely you don't want them taught opinions that CRT is crap. Or the opinion that racism is not that bad in the U.S. or the opinion that such and such people are lazy and it is not racism that is keeping them down.
Rigth? Don't teach kids opinions, one way or the other?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you are white, why should your opinion about racism towards black Americans count?

Every American has a right to an opinion. This is not China.

Yes, this is America, where you have a right to believe (for example) that the earth is flat and it's turtles all the way down.

My kid is taking high school health this summer. If the nutrition part of the curriculum contains information about the health effects of eating meat (which it should), would OP consider that part of the "culture wars"? What if the alcohol part of the curriculum contains information about all beer being plant-based?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Coleman Hughes is funded by rightwing billionares and his career was built via those billionaires at the Manhattan Institute. His ideas lost in the marketplace, and we only hear about them because billionaires find him politically useful to achieve their agenda. Wealthy funders are the reason he’s part of public debate.

That’s a long way of saying: Don’t be fooled. Hughes has been selected by the wealthy to deceive you.

What is the agenda that billionaire founders are trying to achieve through Coleman? His messages and approach to anti racism seem very positive and balanced. Far left anti racism messages actually start to sound racist and are also funded by billionaires.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Coleman Hughes is funded by rightwing billionares and his career was built via those billionaires at the Manhattan Institute. His ideas lost in the marketplace, and we only hear about them because billionaires find him politically useful to achieve their agenda. Wealthy funders are the reason he’s part of public debate.

That’s a long way of saying: Don’t be fooled. Hughes has been selected by the wealthy to deceive you.

What is the agenda that billionaire founders are trying to achieve through Coleman? His messages and approach to anti racism seem very positive and balanced. Far left anti racism messages actually start to sound racist and are also funded by billionaires.

PP, if you think they're "far left", then please consider recalibrating your political spectrum. They're not far-left at all. They're conventional and mainstream.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Coleman Hughes is funded by rightwing billionares and his career was built via those billionaires at the Manhattan Institute. His ideas lost in the marketplace, and we only hear about them because billionaires find him politically useful to achieve their agenda. Wealthy funders are the reason he’s part of public debate.

That’s a long way of saying: Don’t be fooled. Hughes has been selected by the wealthy to deceive you.

What is the agenda that billionaire founders are trying to achieve through Coleman? His messages and approach to anti racism seem very positive and balanced. Far left anti racism messages actually start to sound racist and are also funded by billionaires.

PP, if you think they're "far left", then please consider recalibrating your political spectrum. They're not far-left at all. They're conventional and mainstream.

DP. So you don’t think there exists a single far left “anti racist” view and that they’re all conventional and mainstream?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Coleman Hughes is funded by rightwing billionares and his career was built via those billionaires at the Manhattan Institute. His ideas lost in the marketplace, and we only hear about them because billionaires find him politically useful to achieve their agenda. Wealthy funders are the reason he’s part of public debate.

That’s a long way of saying: Don’t be fooled. Hughes has been selected by the wealthy to deceive you.

What is the agenda that billionaire founders are trying to achieve through Coleman? His messages and approach to anti racism seem very positive and balanced. Far left anti racism messages actually start to sound racist and are also funded by billionaires.

PP, if you think they're "far left", then please consider recalibrating your political spectrum. They're not far-left at all. They're conventional and mainstream.

DP. So you don’t think there exists a single far left “anti racist” view and that they’re all conventional and mainstream?

Instead of asking hypothetical questions, please provide an example of a viewpoint you consider "far left".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Coleman Hughes is funded by rightwing billionares and his career was built via those billionaires at the Manhattan Institute. His ideas lost in the marketplace, and we only hear about them because billionaires find him politically useful to achieve their agenda. Wealthy funders are the reason he’s part of public debate.

That’s a long way of saying: Don’t be fooled. Hughes has been selected by the wealthy to deceive you.

What is the agenda that billionaire founders are trying to achieve through Coleman? His messages and approach to anti racism seem very positive and balanced. Far left anti racism messages actually start to sound racist and are also funded by billionaires.

PP, if you think they're "far left", then please consider recalibrating your political spectrum. They're not far-left at all. They're conventional and mainstream.

DP. So you don’t think there exists a single far left “anti racist” view and that they’re all conventional and mainstream?

Instead of asking hypothetical questions, please provide an example of a viewpoint you consider "far left".

That meritocracy, including requiring a certain level of education and experience when hiring for a job, is racist.

[Anonymous]

Talk to your kids and let them hear people with a different view's opinion too. My kids sometimes ask me about religion. I am agnostic but I do tell them about different people's views and believes on religion and different religions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Coleman Hughes is funded by rightwing billionares and his career was built via those billionaires at the Manhattan Institute. His ideas lost in the marketplace, and we only hear about them because billionaires find him politically useful to achieve their agenda. Wealthy funders are the reason he’s part of public debate.

That’s a long way of saying: Don’t be fooled. Hughes has been selected by the wealthy to deceive you.

What is the agenda that billionaire founders are trying to achieve through Coleman? His messages and approach to anti racism seem very positive and balanced. Far left anti racism messages actually start to sound racist and are also funded by billionaires.

PP, if you think they're "far left", then please consider recalibrating your political spectrum. They're not far-left at all. They're conventional and mainstream.

DP. So you don’t think there exists a single far left “anti racist” view and that they’re all conventional and mainstream?

Instead of asking hypothetical questions, please provide an example of a viewpoint you consider "far left".

That meritocracy, including requiring a certain level of education and experience when hiring for a job, is racist.

No, we need to unbundle that. Is it racist to require a certain level of education and experience when hiring for a job, when that job's tasks requires the knowledge/skills acquired through that education and experience? No. Is it racist to require a certain level of education and experience when hiring for a job, unrelated to that job's tasks, as a way of weeding out "unqualified" applicants? It might be. Is the idea that the US is a meritocratic society racist? Yes.

Something you may not know is that the term "meritocracy" was invented by an English sociologist to describe a dystopia (Michael Young, "The Rise of the Dystopia"). I wonder whether there are people who would complain about "culture wars" and "far-left" indoctrination if students in MCPS were assigned that book.

[Anonymous]

^^^Sorry, obviously the title of the book is "The Rise of the Meritocracy"