Nice White Parents
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
In general, it's not wrong. But when you're part of the majority and wield most of the power, and your kids will likely be well off despite pet programs or PTA involvement, that adds an additional layer of selfishness. |
Anonymous
So we should demonize the parents who do care enough to work with their kids at home? Makes no sense. |
Anonymous
Yes, this. I am not so selfish that I need to make sure my middle-class white kids get the absolute best of everything at other kids' expense. They already have a ton of advantages. If it enables schools to be more effective in improving the life trajectories of kids of color, poor kids, other kids who really need it, then I'm totally fine with my kids having longer bus rides or not getting as focused attention from the best teachers or whatever the fear is. I love my kids, but I don't believe they deserve anything more than any other kids (and if we can't get all the kids the very best education, then there are probably a lot of other kids who should be in line before mine to be prioritized.) This should be a basic, common sense position to take for anyone who believes in common decency and a just society, but somehow it isn't? I'm really troubled and disturbed by the way we normalize the idea that it's okay to prioritize our own kids at the expense of everyone else's kids. It seems pretty darn immoral to me. |
Anonymous
| Again, locally, the poor kids already receive a disproportionate share of resources to try and compensate for their parents’ lack of education and resources. But there comes a point where people who have more resources and naturally care about their own kids say enough and just pull their kids out of the system. Private school parents have been doing this for many years and this trend will only continue if educators and journalists keep looking for ways to shame white and Asian parents. It’s total BS to pretend most parents don’t prioritize their own kids. |
Anonymous
I think you’re being a hypocrite. If you: take vacations, buy books and educational toys, buy organic healthy food, cook healthy dinners every night, read to your kids when young, send them to summer camps, teach them skills like swimming, skiing, tennis, golf, etc. and saving for college, you’re giving them advantages other kids don’t have. |
Anonymous
WHAT? Do you have a reading comprehension problem. HOw is the poster being a hypocrite? They are literally saying their kids do not deserve anything more than other kids, and more disadvantaged kids should have priority for many things! Are they then also supposed to also not buy books, feed their kids healthy food or send them to summer camp? Why? I think you are a troll.... |
Anonymous
DP. I thought she sounded hypocritical too. |
Anonymous
I mean, I'm not sure hypocrite is the word you're looking for exactly, but if you mean that we should be donating more of our money and spending less of it on our own family, then I agree with you. We donate a fair amount but not as much as we should. We spend more on our own kids than we should. We just look at it as a spectrum, and draw a hard line at opposing things that are for the greater good in order to benefit our own kids. And we don't kid ourselves that prioritizing our own kids over others makes us good parents or good people. |
Anonymous
Test scores are not a priority to everyone, and not everyone sees their future in college. The replacement of of vocational education with "college for all" is unrealistic and paternalistic. |
Anonymous
Agreed. Her kids will already get less resources than the poor kids if they go to public schools, so it’s no big sacrifice on her part to accept that her kids “don’t *** deserve anything more than other kids.” The issue is exactly how much less her kids should receive in an effort to produce equal outcomes across-the-board and whether she would, in fact, be a bad person if at some point she stops being willing to accept her kids being taken for granted and/or used as pawns to advance an “equity-at-all-costs” agenda. |
Anonymous
All of you so-called liberals are finally starting to have th curtian pulled back on you and dare care an authentic one a hypocrite. Please? I can't believe how many of you are just seeing the completey hypocricy of liberal politics in this country. |
Anonymous
Why would private school parents care where their kids are zoned then? Keep up |
Anonymous
That's what stood out to me. Kids are being taught this. They are being taught at home that they are better and only what they want -in this case French Immersion- matters. |
Anonymous
I think it's also recognizing that, in the long run, it's not better for your kids if their advantages are based on an inherently unfair system. Either they will eventually encounter a situation where they don't have built-in advantages and fail, or your setting them up for a lifetime of anxiety where they need to circle the wagons to maintain their status. FWIW, that's basically the reality for most of MC - UMC America today. A system that isn't fair in any reasonable sense of the word, so needs to be propped up by increasingly artificial means. |
Anonymous
I've literally never heard this or anything like this expressed. I think it exposes that many MC/UMC white people wish there were "silver bullet" solutions to systemic racism, and so they interpret interventions that way. Then they feel betrayed when it turns out that their magical thinking doesn't work. Of course the solution was never as simple as "diversity". And please point me to the AA families who are "often complicit" in perpetuating that messaging. Because I've never met any. |