WaPO Article-Glenn Youngkin’s own children received anti-racist educations

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't suppor Youngkin, however,
I don't think the issue for most voters is what his kids did or did not receive.
I think they don't want their kids to be forced to learn CRT, or to be forced to mask, or to be forced into school closures.

Youngkin can raise his kids with whatever approaches he is comfortable with.

Just saying I don't think this is the smoking gun you thought it was.

Yes, agree with this. His platform was that parents could have better visibility into what their kids are learning in school. He is informed and is ok with it that's his choice but he is not saying that other parents have to choose it for their kids.

It's not really a big deal.

He literally banned the materials that his own kids are being taught. There is no choice if you want your kids to be exposed to certain teachings, the only choice is if you don't want your kid taught about that Jim Crow was a thing.

You can teach your kids whatever you want at home. You are only angry because you want other kids to learn it too.

Yep. I don’t care what parents teach their kids about racism.

[Anonymous]

So, a big issue in the CRT discussion is that it isn't taught in K-12. It sounds like we're calling it the wrong thing. Shall we call it DEI instead so we can have an honest conversation? Turns out it was all semantics! These examples of the lessons are exactly what many parents are opposed to.

The ideas sound good at first. Maybe Youngkin was open to the DEI content but then saw how it played out. I wouldn't think this could be problematic - on paper - either. It wasn't until I heard the socio emotional lessons being taught in my kids' homeroom classes while school was virtual. Latino kids being told to check their privilege for bringing up the struggles their family has had during a discussion about race. Anyone who questioned allegiance to BLM (the org) was told to examine their conscience for hidden signs of white supremacy. "Debunking" myths about CRT that were not myths at all.

Someone upthread said no one is saying CRT shouldn't be taught in K-12, just that it isn't. I have not heard that. Every pro-CRT advocate I come across says it isn't taught in K-12 because it's too complex and wouldn't be appropriate at a level lower than college or law school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So he has experience with it? So what?

If it's good enough for his kids, it should be good enough for public school kids.

The school taught what it taught. Whether he or his kids felt it was good is not known.

He hasn't withdrawn them in favor of a Christian school whose curriculum aligns with his campaign. Instead, he's choosing the elitist school with the curriculum he ran against

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If course he is. Youngkin isn’t trying to improve public education, he’s trying to drive it into the ground to justify allowing for-profit schools that enrich his friends, and give his own kids more advantages by dumbing down their competition.

Ugh ignorance. 99.9 percent of private schools are not for profit.

Every not for profit is a business that does not pay taxes. That is why some of the top-selling schools in this area have a HOS making 600K plus.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So he has experience with it? So what?

If it's good enough for his kids, it should be good enough for public school kids.

The school taught what it taught. Whether he or his kids felt it was good is not known.

He hasn't withdrawn them in favor of a Christian school whose curriculum aligns with his campaign. Instead, he's choosing the elitist school with the curriculum he ran against

His children aren't in elementary schools. I think having your father become the governor when he had never been in politics is hard enough without uprooting teenagers from their high school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Look - I was a teacher in DCPS and was real upset when Obama sent his kids to private. But with age, I’ve lost my idealism & accepted the reality of our society by this point - and I’m not phased by what Youngkin is doing. They’re all a bunch of hypocrites.

I used to laugh at all the rich white people who moved to my Arlington neighborhood from DC and Alexandria so that their kids could go to "good" public schools, aka predominantly white schools. Now, the trend is to send the kids to private schools because Arlington's "good public schools" fell apart during the pandemic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't suppor Youngkin, however,
I don't think the issue for most voters is what his kids did or did not receive.
I think they don't want their kids to be forced to learn CRT, or to be forced to mask, or to be forced into school closures.

Youngkin can raise his kids with whatever approaches he is comfortable with.

Just saying I don't think this is the smoking gun you thought it was.

Precisely this. Youngkin's whole point is that it's the *parents' choice* how to raise their kids. He and his wife chose private schools for their kids. He is now governor of VA, and as such, has every right to set the direction of public schools. Especially when those who voted for him have been very specific about their issues.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anti racism isn’t necessarily CRT.

And no one is teaching CRT in VA.

For the zillionth time: WE KNOW THAT. "CRT" has become shorthand for all the anti-bias, equity-focused trainings teachers are required to take - and implement in class. But you know that.
DP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is so rich- what an absolute hypocrite

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/01/26/glenn-youngkin-report-teachers-divisive-hypocrisy/

Not at all a hypocrite. Those schools provide an incredible education. We don't know what he said to administrators. Either way, he wasn't in a position to change the CRT teachings at his kids schools. He is now for Virginia public school and he is making good on campaign promises.

Except, as we all know, CRT isn't taught in Virginia public schools. Which is a damn shame, because the hysteria over the phantom menace is proof point 1 why it really should be.

Ugh yes it is. Just not under the mantle of CRT. Make no mistake, it's being taught.

No, it really isn't, you stupid idiot. Again, you're the poster child for WHY it should be taught. Regrettably, it isn't.

Let's stop with the two fictions: 1) That it is taught; and 2) That it shouldn't be.

Of course it SHOULD be taught. Most people agree with that.

No, "most people" do NOT agree that it should be taught. Speak for yourself.
DP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't suppor Youngkin, however,
I don't think the issue for most voters is what his kids did or did not receive.
I think they don't want their kids to be forced to learn CRT, or to be forced to mask, or to be forced into school closures.

Youngkin can raise his kids with whatever approaches he is comfortable with.

Just saying I don't think this is the smoking gun you thought it was.

Precisely this. Youngkin's whole point is that it's the *parents' choice* how to raise their kids. He and his wife chose private schools for their kids. He is now governor of VA, and as such, has every right to set the direction of public schools. Especially when those who voted for him have been very specific about their issues.

So it’s not about choice unless you agree with his choice?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is so rich- what an absolute hypocrite

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/01/26/glenn-youngkin-report-teachers-divisive-hypocrisy/

Not at all a hypocrite. Those schools provide an incredible education. We don't know what he said to administrators. Either way, he wasn't in a position to change the CRT teachings at his kids schools. He is now for Virginia public school and he is making good on campaign promises.

Except, as we all know, CRT isn't taught in Virginia public schools. Which is a damn shame, because the hysteria over the phantom menace is proof point 1 why it really should be.

Ugh yes it is. Just not under the mantle of CRT. Make no mistake, it's being taught.

No, it really isn't, you stupid idiot. Again, you're the poster child for WHY it should be taught. Regrettably, it isn't.

Let's stop with the two fictions: 1) That it is taught; and 2) That it shouldn't be.

Of course it SHOULD be taught. Most people agree with that.

Gah---name call much. But I guess your the tolerant one. It is being taught. My child is being taught CRT this year. I have the books and all to prove it. Perhaps you should get out of your bubble because no most people do not think CRT should be taught. Anti racism, definitely. CRT is inherently racist against both whites and blacks. Something tells me you haven't actually read up on CRT. Educate yourself.

DP. Please provide us with specific examples of how your child is being taught CRT this year.

Reading How to Be an Antiracist Hardcover by Kendi CRT 101 and this is in middle school not mention the fact that at every turn idea that because you are white you are bad is shoved down their throats. Wish they would do a deep dive on the 1960's civil rights movement and leaders.

We are well past "peace, love and understanding," love. Much of the Civil Rights movement was run by white people. Should we consult the teachings of Malcom X?

White people are happy to announce they're "color blind" and think that solves everything and lets them off the hook. Meanwhile, people of color want to be seen for who they are and what they have experienced. Every time you advocate for a "color blind" society, you invalidate those experiences.

The very fact that you keep insisting that conversations about race should be on YOUR terms is evidence enough that you should say less and listen more.

You're clearly beyond help. There's still hope for your children. We educate children for the benefit of society -- your wishes as a parent are duly noted but ultimately inconsequential. Literally no once cares what you as a parent want -- your opinion really doesn't matter.

Oh my word. You are truly unhinged and "clearly beyond help." If we acknowledge someone's race, we're called "racists." If we choose to ignore it and treat everyone equally, we're called "racists". At this point, rational people have tuned you out and are simply living their lives. Sounds like you've got a lot of baggage to be worked out. Therapy?
DP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:He campaigned on the evils of CRT and the need for parent choice on masking and followed through with day one executive orders. He sends his kids to a school teaching CRT (or at least what his campaign considers to be CRT) that requires masking. A good education for me, not for thee. Clearly he didn't care about either issue and was just pandering

He has one kid left in high school, who will be graduating this year (I believe). No doubt Youngkin is as happy as I am that his kids will be done with CRT/equity training nonsense.

[Anonymous]

Meant I'm happy as my youngest is a senior too. ^^

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So, a big issue in the CRT discussion is that it isn't taught in K-12. It sounds like we're calling it the wrong thing. Shall we call it DEI instead so we can have an honest conversation? Turns out it was all semantics! These examples of the lessons are exactly what many parents are opposed to.

The ideas sound good at first. Maybe Youngkin was open to the DEI content but then saw how it played out. I wouldn't think this could be problematic - on paper - either. It wasn't until I heard the socio emotional lessons being taught in my kids' homeroom classes while school was virtual. Latino kids being told to check their privilege for bringing up the struggles their family has had during a discussion about race. Anyone who questioned allegiance to BLM (the org) was told to examine their conscience for hidden signs of white supremacy. "Debunking" myths about CRT that were not myths at all.

Someone upthread said no one is saying CRT shouldn't be taught in K-12, just that it isn't. I have not heard that. Every pro-CRT advocate I come across says it isn't taught in K-12 because it's too complex and wouldn't be appropriate at a level lower than college or law school.

As someone who actually has been exposed to CRT in coursework, it would be a lot simpler for me to have useful conversations if I understood what people were actually talking about, and if it didn’t seem as though some people are flinging everything they possibly can into whatever it is that they’re calling CRT — from motives that I, at least, find suspicious. So, yeah, call it something else, and define it more clearly, and I’d be glad to engage, and might even agree with some of the concerns.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, a big issue in the CRT discussion is that it isn't taught in K-12. It sounds like we're calling it the wrong thing. Shall we call it DEI instead so we can have an honest conversation? Turns out it was all semantics! These examples of the lessons are exactly what many parents are opposed to.

The ideas sound good at first. Maybe Youngkin was open to the DEI content but then saw how it played out. I wouldn't think this could be problematic - on paper - either. It wasn't until I heard the socio emotional lessons being taught in my kids' homeroom classes while school was virtual. Latino kids being told to check their privilege for bringing up the struggles their family has had during a discussion about race. Anyone who questioned allegiance to BLM (the org) was told to examine their conscience for hidden signs of white supremacy. "Debunking" myths about CRT that were not myths at all.

Someone upthread said no one is saying CRT shouldn't be taught in K-12, just that it isn't. I have not heard that. Every pro-CRT advocate I come across says it isn't taught in K-12 because it's too complex and wouldn't be appropriate at a level lower than college or law school.

As someone who actually has been exposed to CRT in coursework, it would be a lot simpler for me to have useful conversations if I understood what people were actually talking about, and if it didn’t seem as though some people are flinging everything they possibly can into whatever it is that they’re calling CRT — from motives that I, at least, find suspicious. So, yeah, call it something else, and define it more clearly, and I’d be glad to engage, and might even agree with some of the concerns.

*That should have said myths about BLM, not CRT.

It's strange to me that people think that parents in NoVA, as multicultural as it is, decided they don't want history to be taught or that there are racists swarming the area, unbeknownst to us until recently.