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:

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.

I’m not making that example up. It’s something that I read that was building on the teachings of Ibram Kendi and personally consider to be “far left anti racism.” It exists. You don’t agree with it, fine. But it’s part of the dialogue in my social circle of highly educated millennials with jobs on the Hill and in media and in education.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I’m not making that example up. It’s something that I read that was building on the teachings of Ibram Kendi and personally consider to be “far left anti racism.” It exists. You don’t agree with it, fine. But it’s part of the dialogue in my social circle of highly educated millennials with jobs on the Hill and in media and in education.

It's something you read somewhere, written by somebody, who said it somewhere...

It's not "far left" anti-racism to say that the US is not a meritocracy and that employers are requiring college degrees for jobs that don't require college degrees as a way of eliminating, well, "those people" from the applicant pool.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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?

I would just quote Clarence Thomas and Thomas Sowell, since my skin color( I'm Brown, but not claiming victim status) apparently doesn't entitle me to an opinion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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?

That’s fine. As long as they also talk about the problems with all the crap ‘fake meat’ that’s on the market. And how there is no way that fake meat is better than grass-fed, organically grown beef.

MCPS is not doing this at all with discussions about BLM, in my kid’s experience. MCPS is most definitely pushing a specific narrative/agenda.

[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 there are more than two genders.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.newsweek.com/neuroscience-professor-removed-apa-discussion-after-saying-there-are-only-two-genders-1591697%3famp=1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I’m not making that example up. It’s something that I read that was building on the teachings of Ibram Kendi and personally consider to be “far left anti racism.” It exists. You don’t agree with it, fine. But it’s part of the dialogue in my social circle of highly educated millennials with jobs on the Hill and in media and in education.

It's something you read somewhere, written by somebody, who said it somewhere...

It's not "far left" anti-racism to say that the US is not a meritocracy and that employers are requiring college degrees for jobs that don't require college degrees as a way of eliminating, well, "those people" from the applicant pool.

So it’s far left and fringe, it doesn’t exist, or that person is right? Because you’re saying all 3 here. Which is it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I’m not making that example up. It’s something that I read that was building on the teachings of Ibram Kendi and personally consider to be “far left anti racism.” It exists. You don’t agree with it, fine. But it’s part of the dialogue in my social circle of highly educated millennials with jobs on the Hill and in media and in education.

It's something you read somewhere, written by somebody, who said it somewhere...

It's not "far left" anti-racism to say that the US is not a meritocracy and that employers are requiring college degrees for jobs that don't require college degrees as a way of eliminating, well, "those people" from the applicant pool.

So it’s far left and fringe, it doesn’t exist, or that person is right? Because you’re saying all 3 here. Which is it?

It's not "far left" anti-racism to say that the US is not a meritocracy and that employers are requiring college degrees for jobs that don't require college degrees as a way of eliminating, well, "those people" from the applicant pool.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:That’s fine. As long as they also talk about the problems with all the crap ‘fake meat’ that’s on the market. And how there is no way that fake meat is better than grass-fed, organically grown beef.

MCPS is not doing this at all with discussions about BLM, in my kid’s experience. MCPS is most definitely pushing a specific narrative/agenda.

"Better" is such a subjective word. I'm sure fake meat is better for the cow! It's much less resource intensive, requiring much less fresh water - which is in short supply in many areas, though fortunately not so much a problem here. Fake meat has less saturated fat, so is more healthy for some. I do find real meat tastes better, though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That’s fine. As long as they also talk about the problems with all the crap ‘fake meat’ that’s on the market. And how there is no way that fake meat is better than grass-fed, organically grown beef.

MCPS is not doing this at all with discussions about BLM, in my kid’s experience. MCPS is most definitely pushing a specific narrative/agenda.

"Better" is such a subjective word. I'm sure fake meat is better for the cow! It's much less resource intensive, requiring much less fresh water - which is in short supply in many areas, though fortunately not so much a problem here. Fake meat has less saturated fat, so is more healthy for some. I do find real meat tastes better, though.

I agree with you! Of course ‘better’ is subjective. That’s my point.

There are pros on cons to ‘fake meat’ and there are pros and cons to grass-fed, organic beef. We should teach kids to learn about both and make decisions for themselves as to what they prefer.

MCPS is NOT doing that. My middle schooler spent an hour during HERD/Advisory this year learning about the Guiding Principles behind BLM. There eas zero discussion about why some people might take issue with some of the methods and rhetoric used by BLM.

MCPS has embraced CRT and BLM and decided to teach kids one narrative with one perspective. This is what I have a problem with. YMMV

[Anonymous]

*was not eas

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I’m not making that example up. It’s something that I read that was building on the teachings of Ibram Kendi and personally consider to be “far left anti racism.” It exists. You don’t agree with it, fine. But it’s part of the dialogue in my social circle of highly educated millennials with jobs on the Hill and in media and in education.

It's something you read somewhere, written by somebody, who said it somewhere...

It's not "far left" anti-racism to say that the US is not a meritocracy and that employers are requiring college degrees for jobs that don't require college degrees as a way of eliminating, well, "those people" from the applicant pool.

So it’s far left and fringe, it doesn’t exist, or that person is right? Because you’re saying all 3 here. Which is it?

It's not "far left" anti-racism to say that the US is not a meritocracy and that employers are requiring college degrees for jobs that don't require college degrees as a way of eliminating, well, "those people" from the applicant pool.

Here is my personal experience with employers trying to address race problems.

The employer first tries to hire black people equally qualified (by education and experience) as the rest of the applicant pool.

Those candidates are HIGHLY sought after. Employer is not able to attract them.

Employer then reduces a the requirements, finds applicants, and hires.

The black employee is then assigned work as they would be if they had the preferred experience and education, or at least similar.

The employee is not able to meet expectations.

The company then slowly stops giving them the work they were hired to do. The company avoids difficult conversations about how the employee is not fulfilling the needs of their role because they’re scared of being called racist (or, if they’ve done bias training, managers are even scared that they *are* racist).

The employee is gently counseled out after a couple of years.

Nothing offered right now by far left OR mainstream “anti racism” training or theory addresses any of this. I would love to see people engage with this real problem. But telling more employers they should do what my employers have done, which is lower the bar for hiring? No. That’s not helping.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here is my personal experience with employers trying to address race problems.

The employer first tries to hire black people equally qualified (by education and experience) as the rest of the applicant pool.

Those candidates are HIGHLY sought after. Employer is not able to attract them.

Employer then reduces a the requirements, finds applicants, and hires.

The black employee is then assigned work as they would be if they had the preferred experience and education, or at least similar.

The employee is not able to meet expectations.

The company then slowly stops giving them the work they were hired to do. The company avoids difficult conversations about how the employee is not fulfilling the needs of their role because they’re scared of being called racist (or, if they’ve done bias training, managers are even scared that they *are* racist).

The employee is gently counseled out after a couple of years.

Nothing offered right now by far left OR mainstream “anti racism” training or theory addresses any of this. I would love to see people engage with this real problem. But telling more employers they should do what my employers have done, which is lower the bar for hiring? No. That’s not helping.

Oh, my.

[Anonymous]

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.

Let the school teach your kid. You are not bright enough to teach them.

[Anonymous]

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.

At this point in time there is no "culture war" in the US.

Call it what it is!

GOP trying to overthrow the government (Democracy) gaslighting, Russian trolls, Grifters.

You don't like it here, leave move to Russia or China. Your culture fits in better there.

Also, get yourself a dictionary. Clearly, you need an education.

[Anonymous]

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.

Let the school teach your kid. You are not bright enough to teach them.

Au contraire. OP should be homeschooling her kids. She is far brighter than any of these education majors.