New Youngkin ad starring a parent who wanted Toni Morrison's 'Beloved' removed from schools because

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I remember the case when this happened. To be sure, Beloved is a harrowing book, but that's kinda the point of it... Maybe the mother thought "a book about slavery" (in an AP English class!) would be Gone With The Wind?

If you want that kind of control over your child's school curriculum, you need to homeschool.

At least you can all see that books about slavery (from the black perspective) are indeed being taught in our public schools. Funny how Democrats claim that's just not happening.

No, Democrats correctly state that children aren’t being taught Critical Race Theory. Republicans don’t actually know what any of that means, but they know they don’t want the facts of American history taught to children. Have to catch ‘em early with the propaganda version or they might begin to side with the enslaved rather than the people who stole their lives.

AP history teacher here - You have no idea about the history that has and continues to be be taught for the last 20 years, which is a long litany of the sins of the U.S. Republicans are not challenging the truthful teaching of American history. How do you think all of these activists learned American history? Howard Zinn and his derivatives have been around for a long time.

They are challenging the teaching of systemic racism, skin color as determinative of outcome, oppressed group vs. oppressor group, white privilege, etc. You are playing semantic games. If these things are not CRT, how about you make up a more appropriate way to describe these divisive teachings?

[Anonymous]

If teaching about the existence of systemic racism is divisive, that's on the people who don't want schools to teach about the existence of systemic racism.

Next you'll say that teaching about the existence of gravity is divisive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I remember the case when this happened. To be sure, Beloved is a harrowing book, but that's kinda the point of it... Maybe the mother thought "a book about slavery" (in an AP English class!) would be Gone With The Wind?

If you want that kind of control over your child's school curriculum, you need to homeschool.

At least you can all see that books about slavery (from the black perspective) are indeed being taught in our public schools. Funny how Democrats claim that's just not happening.

No, Democrats correctly state that children aren’t being taught Critical Race Theory. Republicans don’t actually know what any of that means, but they know they don’t want the facts of American history taught to children. Have to catch ‘em early with the propaganda version or they might begin to side with the enslaved rather than the people who stole their lives.

AP history teacher here - You have no idea about the history that has and continues to be be taught for the last 20 years, which is a long litany of the sins of the U.S. Republicans are not challenging the truthful teaching of American history. How do you think all of these activists learned American history? Howard Zinn and his derivatives have been around for a long time.

They are challenging the teaching of systemic racism, skin color as determinative of outcome, oppressed group vs. oppressor group, white privilege, etc. You are playing semantic games. If these things are not CRT, how about you make up a more appropriate way to describe these divisive teachings?

Yikes and you’re a classroom teacher?

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I remember the case when this happened. To be sure, Beloved is a harrowing book, but that's kinda the point of it... Maybe the mother thought "a book about slavery" (in an AP English class!) would be Gone With The Wind?

If you want that kind of control over your child's school curriculum, you need to homeschool.

At least you can all see that books about slavery (from the black perspective) are indeed being taught in our public schools. Funny how Democrats claim that's just not happening.

No, Democrats correctly state that children aren’t being taught Critical Race Theory. Republicans don’t actually know what any of that means, but they know they don’t want the facts of American history taught to children. Have to catch ‘em early with the propaganda version or they might begin to side with the enslaved rather than the people who stole their lives.

AP history teacher here - You have no idea about the history that has and continues to be be taught for the last 20 years, which is a long litany of the sins of the U.S. Republicans are not challenging the truthful teaching of American history. How do you think all of these activists learned American history? Howard Zinn and his derivatives have been around for a long time.

They are challenging the teaching of systemic racism, skin color as determinative of outcome, oppressed group vs. oppressor group, white privilege, etc. You are playing semantic games. If these things are not CRT, how about you make up a more appropriate way to describe these divisive teachings?

Perhaps "accurate" would be a good description?

[Anonymous]

The Falls Church/Fairfax parents that want to vote for this guy to show the school boards how mad they are about last year may want to think twice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s scary that so many parents are trying to censor not only their own kids’ education but others’ education as well. And a lot of you sound ignorant and uneducated yourselves. There’s no way in hell parents should have a say in a school’s curriculum. Yikes.

Parents who are US citizens do have a say in a public school's curriculum - by voting in state and local elections, including school board. (So do non-parents who are US citizens.) That's how our democratic system works.

Parents who don't understand this either didn't get enough civics in their curriculum, or it didn't take.

It’s one thing to be able to vote for the school board. It’s quite another to advocate for banning books and content that you don’t like and to expect your school district to cater to you. Parents who can’t understand the difference probably didn’t have much opportunity to hone their critical thinking skills in school - perhaps because their parents opted them out over “concerns.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I remember the case when this happened. To be sure, Beloved is a harrowing book, but that's kinda the point of it... Maybe the mother thought "a book about slavery" (in an AP English class!) would be Gone With The Wind?

If you want that kind of control over your child's school curriculum, you need to homeschool.

At least you can all see that books about slavery (from the black perspective) are indeed being taught in our public schools. Funny how Democrats claim that's just not happening.

No, Democrats correctly state that children aren’t being taught Critical Race Theory. Republicans don’t actually know what any of that means, but they know they don’t want the facts of American history taught to children. Have to catch ‘em early with the propaganda version or they might begin to side with the enslaved rather than the people who stole their lives.

AP history teacher here - You have no idea about the history that has and continues to be be taught for the last 20 years, which is a long litany of the sins of the U.S. Republicans are not challenging the truthful teaching of American history. How do you think all of these activists learned American history? Howard Zinn and his derivatives have been around for a long time.

They are challenging the teaching of systemic racism, skin color as determinative of outcome, oppressed group vs. oppressor group, white privilege, etc. You are playing semantic games. If these things are not CRT, how about you make up a more appropriate way to describe these divisive teachings?

Are you conservative? Have you found that a surprisingly high % of history teachers are conservatives?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s scary that so many parents are trying to censor not only their own kids’ education but others’ education as well. And a lot of you sound ignorant and uneducated yourselves. There’s no way in hell parents should have a say in a school’s curriculum. Yikes.

Parents who are US citizens do have a say in a public school's curriculum - by voting in state and local elections, including school board. (So do non-parents who are US citizens.) That's how our democratic system works.

Parents who don't understand this either didn't get enough civics in their curriculum, or it didn't take.

It’s one thing to be able to vote for the school board. It’s quite another to advocate for banning books and content that you don’t like and to expect your school district to cater to you. Parents who can’t understand the difference probably didn’t have much opportunity to hone their critical thinking skills in school - perhaps because their parents opted them out over “concerns.”

More specifically, they want to ban the books so NO ONE can read them. Because right now every parent has the option to opt their kid out of certain books or content.

[Anonymous]

I was a middle schooler in the south during the Harry Potter banning craze (they moved onto other books too) and it was utterly nuts. Can we please not bring the book banners back?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
AP history teacher here - You have no idea about the history that has and continues to be be taught for the last 20 years, which is a long litany of the sins of the U.S. Republicans are not challenging the truthful teaching of American history. How do you think all of these activists learned American history? Howard Zinn and his derivatives have been around for a long time.

They are challenging the teaching of systemic racism, skin color as determinative of outcome, oppressed group vs. oppressor group, white privilege, etc. You are playing semantic games. If these things are not CRT, how about you make up a more appropriate way to describe these divisive teachings?

I agree with you, and I'd like to see more balance, but in our present climate, I doubt it will happen.

I showed your post to my spouse who thought that teaching sounds great. I mentioned that something really good happened, in the midst of all the litany of sins, and that our DC doesn't know what that was. Spouse replied that it was so narrow and restricted, not really very good at all.

Spouse has more degrees than I do, is more highly educated, and must be right. I must be wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
AP history teacher here - You have no idea about the history that has and continues to be be taught for the last 20 years, which is a long litany of the sins of the U.S. Republicans are not challenging the truthful teaching of American history. How do you think all of these activists learned American history? Howard Zinn and his derivatives have been around for a long time.

They are challenging the teaching of systemic racism, skin color as determinative of outcome, oppressed group vs. oppressor group, white privilege, etc. You are playing semantic games. If these things are not CRT, how about you make up a more appropriate way to describe these divisive teachings?

I agree with you, and I'd like to see more balance, but in our present climate, I doubt it will happen.

I showed your post to my spouse who thought that teaching sounds great. I mentioned that something really good happened, in the midst of all the litany of sins, and that our DC doesn't know what that was. Spouse replied that it was so narrow and restricted, not really very good at all.

Spouse has more degrees than I do, is more highly educated, and must be right. I must be wrong.

This is such a vague and poorly written post that it’s difficult to understand exactly what your spouse was saying.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I remember the case when this happened. To be sure, Beloved is a harrowing book, but that's kinda the point of it... Maybe the mother thought "a book about slavery" (in an AP English class!) would be Gone With The Wind?

If you want that kind of control over your child's school curriculum, you need to homeschool.

At least you can all see that books about slavery (from the black perspective) are indeed being taught in our public schools. Funny how Democrats claim that's just not happening.

No, Democrats correctly state that children aren’t being taught Critical Race Theory. Republicans don’t actually know what any of that means, but they know they don’t want the facts of American history taught to children. Have to catch ‘em early with the propaganda version or they might begin to side with the enslaved rather than the people who stole their lives.

AP history teacher here - You have no idea about the history that has and continues to be be taught for the last 20 years, which is a long litany of the sins of the U.S. Republicans are not challenging the truthful teaching of American history. How do you think all of these activists learned American history? Howard Zinn and his derivatives have been around for a long time.

They are challenging the teaching of systemic racism, skin color as determinative of outcome, oppressed group vs. oppressor group, white privilege, etc. You are playing semantic games. If these things are not CRT, how about you make up a more appropriate way to describe these divisive teachings?

Don't worry...if Youngkin is elected you will finally be able to teach the lost cause perspective about the civil war, do a unit on the "perils and pitfalls of the civil rights movement", etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yet another right wing parent who wants to ban books by Black authors, relating to slavery, etc. That's what this really is about.

Listen carefully:

SHE.DIDN'T.WANT.TO.BAN.ANYTHING.

The knee-jerk reaction from you idiots is so predictable.

PARENTS.CAN.ALREADY.OPT.OUT. Youngkin wants bans— bans on “crt”, bans on LGTBQ books.

McAuliffe twice vetoed bills, at least one of which was supported by Democrats like Jennifer McLellan and Sam Resoul, that would have provided for parental notification of sexually explicit material in school assignments so that parents could express a preference for an alternative.

It’s odd to suggest parents can already opt out if there’s no obligation to provide parents with the information that would equip them to exercise that option.

Ultimately there’s a real difference of opinion over parental rights and the extent to which public schools should honor parental preferences. It doesn’t seem wrong to respect the wishes of parents who don’t want their kids exposed to certain sexually explicit material when they are under 18, but the view of the Democratic establishment now seems to be that such material is presumptively acceptable, so long as it serves some other purpose, such as teaching students about the horrors of slavery or making students more sensitive to the discrimination faced by LBGTQ kids. That’s a relatively new perspective on the propriety of sexually explicit materials in schools, and it seems Democrats might want to approach it with greater sensitivity and without so quickly rushing to suggest any parents who have reservations are racists, bigots, or Luddites.

There are lots of books with sex in them. The fact that you point the finger about books about slavery or discrimination against LBGTQ kids is the tell...that's where the actual objection lies.

The reality is that there is a vocal segment of parents in Virginia who objects to any book that doesn't promote white, christian viewpoint of the world. So glad my kids are in private school where they read a wide array of high quality books and the administration does not tolerate book burners trying to hijack things.

There was never any doubt but that a lot of McAuliffe supporters revel in self-congratulatory postings about how elite, yet open-minded, they are. There’s no acceptance of the idea that other parents might be more culturally conservative when it comes to graphic, explicit sexual materials. As long as it’s in a book that has received an “award” bestowed by others with equally progressive views - often because the book deals with other favored topics written by authors who are neither white nor Christian - any reservations about the appropriateness of the material are quickly dismissed. It’s more than a little condescending, and yet so predictable.

This issue is that most conservative, Christians who want to promote conservative, Christian values should do that in a private, Christian school and not push their religious code on public schools. That is where the issue is. Why should the rest of us be subject to your religious ideals? If you fall far right of society, go to a school that caters to you instead of trying to drag everyone down with you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
AP history teacher here - You have no idea about the history that has and continues to be be taught for the last 20 years, which is a long litany of the sins of the U.S. Republicans are not challenging the truthful teaching of American history. How do you think all of these activists learned American history? Howard Zinn and his derivatives have been around for a long time.

They are challenging the teaching of systemic racism, skin color as determinative of outcome, oppressed group vs. oppressor group, white privilege, etc. You are playing semantic games. If these things are not CRT, how about you make up a more appropriate way to describe these divisive teachings?

I agree with you, and I'd like to see more balance, but in our present climate, I doubt it will happen.

I showed your post to my spouse who thought that teaching sounds great. I mentioned that something really good happened, in the midst of all the litany of sins, and that our DC doesn't know what that was. Spouse replied that it was so narrow and restricted, not really very good at all.

Spouse has more degrees than I do, is more highly educated, and must be right. I must be wrong.

This is such a vague and poorly written post that it’s difficult to understand exactly what your spouse was saying.

I said that while the US was committing a litany of sins, there was one good achievement - the idea of freedom for all people. Spouse said that since it only applied to rich white men, initially, that it wasn't very notable or very good at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yet another right wing parent who wants to ban books by Black authors, relating to slavery, etc. That's what this really is about.

Listen carefully:

SHE.DIDN'T.WANT.TO.BAN.ANYTHING.

The knee-jerk reaction from you idiots is so predictable.

PARENTS.CAN.ALREADY.OPT.OUT. Youngkin wants bans— bans on “crt”, bans on LGTBQ books.

McAuliffe twice vetoed bills, at least one of which was supported by Democrats like Jennifer McLellan and Sam Resoul, that would have provided for parental notification of sexually explicit material in school assignments so that parents could express a preference for an alternative.

It’s odd to suggest parents can already opt out if there’s no obligation to provide parents with the information that would equip them to exercise that option.

Ultimately there’s a real difference of opinion over parental rights and the extent to which public schools should honor parental preferences. It doesn’t seem wrong to respect the wishes of parents who don’t want their kids exposed to certain sexually explicit material when they are under 18, but the view of the Democratic establishment now seems to be that such material is presumptively acceptable, so long as it serves some other purpose, such as teaching students about the horrors of slavery or making students more sensitive to the discrimination faced by LBGTQ kids. That’s a relatively new perspective on the propriety of sexually explicit materials in schools, and it seems Democrats might want to approach it with greater sensitivity and without so quickly rushing to suggest any parents who have reservations are racists, bigots, or Luddites.

There are lots of books with sex in them. The fact that you point the finger about books about slavery or discrimination against LBGTQ kids is the tell...that's where the actual objection lies.

The reality is that there is a vocal segment of parents in Virginia who objects to any book that doesn't promote white, christian viewpoint of the world. So glad my kids are in private school where they read a wide array of high quality books and the administration does not tolerate book burners trying to hijack things.

There was never any doubt but that a lot of McAuliffe supporters revel in self-congratulatory postings about how elite, yet open-minded, they are. There’s no acceptance of the idea that other parents might be more culturally conservative when it comes to graphic, explicit sexual materials. As long as it’s in a book that has received an “award” bestowed by others with equally progressive views - often because the book deals with other favored topics written by authors who are neither white nor Christian - any reservations about the appropriateness of the material are quickly dismissed. It’s more than a little condescending, and yet so predictable.

But if a parent has chosen to allow their child to take an AP class, then don’t they need to accept their children will be reading college level texts? If you don’t think your child is ready for college level materials, then don’t let them take a college level class. This seems like a totally reasonable level of parental choice to me.

It’s perfectly possible to teach college-level writing and analytical skills without subjecting minors to sexually explicit material. Go revel in your smut if you like, but stop pretending that a steady diet of such material is a necessary hallmark of maturity.

Lol