SWS has jumped the shark

[Anonymous]

Also- to clarify. SWS does not have a PTA, which would function as a separate entity with rules about what they may and may not fundraise for. SWS was deliberately set up with a “friends” fundraising stem and many PTA-like volunteer activities organized by the lsat. I’m not sure if this type of set-up would even be allowable today. But the result is there us no real separation between administration and parent “leaders” so it is often very unclear who is making decisions (and conveniently it is very easy for the administration to pass parent concerns on to other parents). It creates an odd dynamic. And it is a hard place to be if you are a parent with concerns.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Also- to clarify. SWS does not have a PTA, which would function as a separate entity with rules about what they may and may not fundraise for. SWS was deliberately set up with a “friends” fundraising stem and many PTA-like volunteer activities organized by the lsat. I’m not sure if this type of set-up would even be allowable today. But the result is there us no real separation between administration and parent “leaders” so it is often very unclear who is making decisions (and conveniently it is very easy for the administration to pass parent concerns on to other parents). It creates an odd dynamic. And it is a hard place to be if you are a parent with concerns.

+100

Also, the current parents in charge are a big part of the problem (and have clearly posted multiple times on this thread). The principal has gone off the rails and the parents are an echo chamber. The approach is divisive and condescending to everyone in the community. There is a lot of complaining behind the scenes by parents of all backgrounds.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ This is very different than wanting a white affinity group at a school that’s 2/3rds white.

Why? You could argue it's even more important for SWS to create spaces for white parents to discuss race and address issues they are having, because they are the dominant race at SWS and the question of inclusivity has been raised repeatedly at the school. It's more delicate there, but the need for a venue in which white people actually talk about race with each other is still strong.

I mean I guess the fear here is that white affinity groups will naturally morph into some kind of exclusionary, racist organization. But why? I get that some people's knee jerk reaction is going to be "oh look, white people excluding everyone else." But if there's a need for a space for white parents to talk through these issues and maybe even share ideas, or even just to talk through discomfort they might be having with an eye towards dispelling it, why would that be bad?

Also, I would assume a white affinity group focused on race issues would sometimes invite POC to come share or provide feedback. So it wouldn't actually be a "whites only" space, but it's just a venue designated for talking about the problems white people face in creating inclusive, diverse communities, which are different than the issues POC face in those same communities.

Because a public school has no business creating racially exclusionary groups. Parents can organize it on their own if they want to.

Also I feel like this kind of stuff just creates echo-chambers where white people assume that there is only one way to be black or some kind of uniform black agenda. And these groups tend also to create the idea that there are some perfect words or books we can give our kids so that they display the appropriate anti-racist attributes. The really hard conversations never happen.

But mainly I think “affinity groups” fail to actually connect to the issues directly related to the actual school. Like, do you need to direct more resources to acceleration? Should more homework be required? What should PTA money go for? For those conversations you need everyone in the room.

1) Obviously an affinity group should not be deciding what PTA money goes to. That's what the PTA is for! In fact, everything you say should be discussed is stuff that the PTA or LPA groups already do. That's not what affinity groups do.

2) Black parents at the school explicitly asked for affinity groups so they could connect to other black parents and discuss issues that are specific to their experience. Do you also oppose that? I'm guessing the black affinity group is not advocating for a "uniform black agenda" nor do I think it is suggesting there is some perfect word or book that will fix their issues. Rather, I think these groups are formed on the premise that peopel need a place to talk things out and to provide that place. The goal is not solve racism, but to address racism by creating a venue to discuss it. The talking is the point, it's not a means to an end.

3) If a black or POC affinity group makes sense (and is being demanded by families) why wouldn't a white affinity group also be useful for the same reason. Again, there is no reason that such a group would need to advocate for a "uniform white agenda" or to identify the one book or word that would fix racism, but to provide a venue for white parents to discuss challenges they are encountering, as questions and share experiences, etc. It's like a support group.

Two responses to this:

(1) The school does not need to accept and take ownership of every parent suggestion. The response easily could have been “sounds like something that is best organized by the parents, not the school.”

(2) The “white affinity group” (cringe) was not organized to discuss challenges faced by white people or as a support group. It was explicitly organized to “unpack our perpetuation of whiteness and racism” and “practice humility.”

It is these kinds of well-intentioned but boneheaded and cringey programs that the CRT crazies seize on - and then you get people like Glenn Youngkin elected governor.

[Anonymous]

I just don't even know what "unpack our perpetuation of whiteness" means. Are white people supposed to stop having babies?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I just don't even know what "unpack our perpetuation of whiteness" means. Are white people supposed to stop having babies?

People need to start getting much more careful about their language.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I just don't even know what "unpack our perpetuation of whiteness" means. Are white people supposed to stop having babies?

If someone really wanted to stir the pot, they could report this to DCPS central as a bias incident here: https://dcps.dc.gov/page/studentparentvisitor-grievance-process

I don’t think I’d do that myself, but I might send an email to the principal about it if I were an SWS parent.

[Anonymous]

When I was in MoCo there was a program called Study Circles that would be more useful than what SWS was doing because it's voluntary and led by people trained to facilitate discussions around race and student achievement. https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/studycircles/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When I was in MoCo there was a program called Study Circles that would be more useful than what SWS was doing because it's voluntary and led by people trained to facilitate discussions around race and student achievement. https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/studycircles/

Those tend to be the shttiest at managing this because their jobs depend on their being ever-increasing threats.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When I was in MoCo there was a program called Study Circles that would be more useful than what SWS was doing because it's voluntary and led by people trained to facilitate discussions around race and student achievement. https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/studycircles/

Those tend to be the shttiest at managing this because their jobs depend on their being ever-increasing threats.

You could just call it "Model ADL Club."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ This is very different than wanting a white affinity group at a school that’s 2/3rds white.

Why? You could argue it's even more important for SWS to create spaces for white parents to discuss race and address issues they are having, because they are the dominant race at SWS and the question of inclusivity has been raised repeatedly at the school. It's more delicate there, but the need for a venue in which white people actually talk about race with each other is still strong.

I mean I guess the fear here is that white affinity groups will naturally morph into some kind of exclusionary, racist organization. But why? I get that some people's knee jerk reaction is going to be "oh look, white people excluding everyone else." But if there's a need for a space for white parents to talk through these issues and maybe even share ideas, or even just to talk through discomfort they might be having with an eye towards dispelling it, why would that be bad?

Also, I would assume a white affinity group focused on race issues would sometimes invite POC to come share or provide feedback. So it wouldn't actually be a "whites only" space, but it's just a venue designated for talking about the problems white people face in creating inclusive, diverse communities, which are different than the issues POC face in those same communities.

Because a public school has no business creating racially exclusionary groups. Parents can organize it on their own if they want to.

Also I feel like this kind of stuff just creates echo-chambers where white people assume that there is only one way to be black or some kind of uniform black agenda. And these groups tend also to create the idea that there are some perfect words or books we can give our kids so that they display the appropriate anti-racist attributes. The really hard conversations never happen.

But mainly I think “affinity groups” fail to actually connect to the issues directly related to the actual school. Like, do you need to direct more resources to acceleration? Should more homework be required? What should PTA money go for? For those conversations you need everyone in the room.

2) Black parents at the school explicitly asked for affinity groups so they could connect to other black parents and discuss issues that are specific to their experience. Do you also oppose that? I'm guessing the black affinity group is not advocating for a "uniform black agenda" nor do I think it is suggesting there is some perfect word or book that will fix their issues. Rather, I think these groups are formed on the premise that peopel need a place to talk things out and to provide that place. The goal is not solve racism, but to address racism by creating a venue to discuss it. The talking is the point, it's not a means to an end.

3) If a black or POC affinity group makes sense (and is being demanded by families) why wouldn't a white affinity group also be useful for the same reason. Again, there is no reason that such a group would need to advocate for a "uniform white agenda" or to identify the one book or word that would fix racism, but to provide a venue for white parents to discuss challenges they are encountering, as questions and share experiences, etc. It's like a support group.

I'm white and I think you miss the point here. While there are some people who object writ large to any "affinity group" my issue is the absurdity of the description of what the white group is to do. That appears to be mostly sitting around talking about how much white folks suck and how being an "ally" means agreeing with whatever a black person says about race. That's not being an "ally", it is condescending to people. I don't have to agree with everything a black person says. I don't have to agree that high standards in a classroom are inherently racist. I can be in favor of longer sentences for violent crime and not be a racist. White people who have actual relationships and friendships with black families have these discussions. They also know enough POC to know there is no one way or thought process that represents "black people". The idea that one vocal group of black folks/think tank want to impose not just definitions of blackness, it also the "right way" to support "black people" is cringeworthy.

The woke-police that drive this kind of garbage are the same people who have chimed in here to tell anyone who objects or has issues with this setup that it is proof they are secret racists and need to participate in the white group. Which is evidence that the white group is set up not as a discussion space where people can discuss the idea(s), but rather a place for them to be told how to behave in the manner that the people purporting to speak for "all black people" think "all white people" should behave.

AMEN!!! its much much deeper than we can really get into on this forum - but you are exactly right

[Anonymous]

I was the first reply. This. Right here. Just above.

It is the mentality that led to the White affinity Group description they keeps Trump and Fox News as threats to our country. The people behind this stuff are arsonists. They are just too juvenile to see it.

[Anonymous]

As a woman of color, I think this is great! It's voluntary, so I think it speaks volumes that so many white people are mad about it. You probably have some unpacking to do if a voluntary group makes you this mad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As a woman of color, I think this is great! It's voluntary, so I think it speaks volumes that so many white people are mad about it. You probably have some unpacking to do if a voluntary group makes you this mad.

It’s not that it’s voluntary or not. It that it expressly frames an immutable characteristic (white race) as something negative. Promoted by the school directly, this is not only Fox News clickbait, but also quite likely a violation of civil rights laws. No matter what people feel free to say on Twitter about “white people,” the government cannot engage in race-based hostility. And moreover, this kind of group actually does nothing for helping the school do its actual mission of educating kids. It’s not the way.

[Anonymous]

Of course my post got deleted - people hate truth - CURRENT SWS PARENT BTW

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As a woman of color, I think this is great! It's voluntary, so I think it speaks volumes that so many white people are mad about it. You probably have some unpacking to do if a voluntary group makes you this mad.

I think less of you after having read your post. Contrary to what I think you'll conclude, it has nothing to do with you being a POC or a woman. I think less of you because your argument here indicates to me a shallowness of thought.