The All Boys School Conundrum

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What is St Anselm's doing right? In other words, what is it about the school that has helped it avoid the Lord of the Flies or racist/misogynist fates of Landon, etc?

The administration and teachers are kind. Many have been there for a long time. The monks and abbey bring a very calm presence to the school. The expectations of the students is high, but the environment is non-competitive. The administration and teachers work hard to support the interests of the students.

As the parent of a graduate, I agree with the poster who said it is a gem.

Would highly encourage families to check it out!!

[Anonymous]

We were able to attend St Anselm’s open house last year. It is very strong academically. Smaller than the others you mentioned. Agree with PP that it had a much calmer culture than the others.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. A lot of people have expressed that I “shouldn’t care about what other people think” and “we should do what’s best for our son and our family”. I totally agree with that. But, like any big decision in life, we are doing some due diligence and can’t help but register the negative opinions so many people seem to have about the all-boys schools in this area. Since our son is an only child we thought the “brotherhood” of all all-boys school might be a great benefit for him. He is bright and loves sports and there seem to be at least 4 great options right in the area that could fit that learning profile (and I suppose SSSA and DeMatha are options as well, but not as geographically convenient). The lord of the flies/ racist/ homophobic/ alt right elements are not appealing to us at all. No school will tell you about that on the interview. They will tell you about the brotherhood. It’s a hard topic to really “kick the tires” and find out the truth.

You think that co-ed schools have none of this? Ha.

Or all girls school . Get a group of women together and see what happens...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. A lot of people have expressed that I “shouldn’t care about what other people think” and “we should do what’s best for our son and our family”. I totally agree with that. But, like any big decision in life, we are doing some due diligence and can’t help but register the negative opinions so many people seem to have about the all-boys schools in this area. Since our son is an only child we thought the “brotherhood” of all all-boys school might be a great benefit for him. He is bright and loves sports and there seem to be at least 4 great options right in the area that could fit that learning profile (and I suppose SSSA and DeMatha are options as well, but not as geographically convenient). The lord of the flies/ racist/ homophobic/ alt right elements are not appealing to us at all. No school will tell you about that on the interview. They will tell you about the brotherhood. It’s a hard topic to really “kick the tires” and find out the truth.

You think that co-ed schools have none of this? Ha.

Or all girls school . Get a group of women together and see what happens...

You mean white women.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My husband attended an elite Catholic boys school in the Northeast. Predominantly but not exclusively white. TBH I find interest in whether these institutions are racially representative kind of bizarre--they are not representative in any other way; why would this one be different?

The school my husband attended abuts a monastery where the Church rotated known pedophiles for many decades. All of that is on the books of the criminal justice system in the state at this point. There were (and are) monks living there about whom the students were advised, by teachers, "don't be near him alone."

We get the alumni magazine, which of course does not address any of this despite it all being in the news with some regularity. It is striking to read through. Probably a third of recent graduates attend Catholic institutions of higher education--fine if it is your bag, some of them are great. Not one single admission to a service academy, no one joined the military, no one entered a police or fire academy, no one attended a community college, less than a handful of regional public institutions.

The net impression is that it's a sheltered environment in which kids are kept for either an exclusively UMC/UC trajectory or for total destruction via the experience of child sexual abuse. Sometimes both.

This would not be something we would consider under any circumstances.

So you would rule out ALL 9,000 boys Catholic schools based on what happened 30 years ago at one school. Do you also rule out going to all restaurants when you have a bad experience at one?

Not PP but my family member was part of the team that investigated prep for the sex abuse scandal and the fact that modern day Jesuit schools still hid an abuser and coached kids to slander a boy to investigators ... yep ... ruled out Jesuit schools. Not all schools Jesuit schools. It wasn’t 30 years ago it was 15 ... 15 years ago, and people still send their kids there.

So how many years would you suggest people wait before sending kids to any Jesuit schools? 50, 100, 300?

I guess I’d wait until the staff that were involved were gone, the Jesuits admit fault and pay the victims.

So how many years would you suggest that will take? 50, 100, 300?

Read it again. The PP said they would rule out ALL Jesuit schools (even those with no issues, no bad staff, no fault and no victims). So how long should we rule out ALL Jesuit schools ?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My husband attended an elite Catholic boys school in the Northeast. Predominantly but not exclusively white. TBH I find interest in whether these institutions are racially representative kind of bizarre--they are not representative in any other way; why would this one be different?

The school my husband attended abuts a monastery where the Church rotated known pedophiles for many decades. All of that is on the books of the criminal justice system in the state at this point. There were (and are) monks living there about whom the students were advised, by teachers, "don't be near him alone."

We get the alumni magazine, which of course does not address any of this despite it all being in the news with some regularity. It is striking to read through. Probably a third of recent graduates attend Catholic institutions of higher education--fine if it is your bag, some of them are great. Not one single admission to a service academy, no one joined the military, no one entered a police or fire academy, no one attended a community college, less than a handful of regional public institutions.

The net impression is that it's a sheltered environment in which kids are kept for either an exclusively UMC/UC trajectory or for total destruction via the experience of child sexual abuse. Sometimes both.

This would not be something we would consider under any circumstances.

So you would rule out ALL 9,000 boys Catholic schools based on what happened 30 years ago at one school. Do you also rule out going to all restaurants when you have a bad experience at one?

Not PP but my family member was part of the team that investigated prep for the sex abuse scandal and the fact that modern day Jesuit schools still hid an abuser and coached kids to slander a boy to investigators ... yep ... ruled out Jesuit schools. Not all schools Jesuit schools. It wasn’t 30 years ago it was 15 ... 15 years ago, and people still send their kids there.

So how many years would you suggest people wait before sending kids to any Jesuit schools? 50, 100, 300?

I guess I’d wait until the staff that were involved were gone, the Jesuits admit fault and pay the victims.

So how many years would you suggest that will take? 50, 100, 300?

Read it again. The PP said they would rule out ALL Jesuit schools (even those with no issues, no bad staff, no fault and no victims). So how long should we rule out ALL Jesuit schools ?

How long are you going to wait for jesuits to fix their problems? That is the answer to your question.

[Anonymous]

^ it’s not the Jesuits that had this problem. It’s taken the first Jesuit pope to steer the course in a different direction.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here. A lot of people have expressed that I “shouldn’t care about what other people think” and “we should do what’s best for our son and our family”. I totally agree with that. But, like any big decision in life, we are doing some due diligence and can’t help but register the negative opinions so many people seem to have about the all-boys schools in this area. Since our son is an only child we thought the “brotherhood” of all all-boys school might be a great benefit for him. He is bright and loves sports and there seem to be at least 4 great options right in the area that could fit that learning profile (and I suppose SSSA and DeMatha are options as well, but not as geographically convenient). The lord of the flies/ racist/ homophobic/ alt right elements are not appealing to us at all. No school will tell you about that on the interview. They will tell you about the brotherhood. It’s a hard topic to really “kick the tires” and find out the truth.

So your search doesn't get confusing:
SSSA = St. Stephens St. Agnes (coed in VA)
SAAS = St. Anselm's Abbey School (all boys DC)

Also, this site can confuse St. Anselm's, St. Alban's, and St. Andrew's.

[Anonymous]

When boys get together, it often turns toxic. Look at fraternities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dcum is not real life. I wouldn’t let anything here impact your real world decisions.

The Instagram posts about racism in these schools are real though, and recent dcum discussions center on those posts. There are many lovely all-boys schools in the country. I’m not sure why the ones in dc seem particularly problematic on matters of race.

Ummm. Many all boys schools in other parts of the country have issues with race too. It might not be as apparent but it is there, most likely.
DC is a very racially divided city, more so than other parts of the country.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When boys get together, it often turns toxic. Look at fraternities.

Not all boys are frat boys. Many will never aspire to be a part of that crowd.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When boys get together, it often turns toxic. Look at fraternities.

Not all boys are frat boys. Many will never aspire to be a part of that crowd.

But alas when away from their parents they act in ways their parents have never seen nor would ever believe.

Don’t be naive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dcum is not real life. I wouldn’t let anything here impact your real world decisions.

The Instagram posts about racism in these schools are real though, and recent dcum discussions center on those posts. There are many lovely all-boys schools in the country. I’m not sure why the ones in dc seem particularly problematic on matters of race.

Ummm. Many all boys schools in other parts of the country have issues with race too. It might not be as apparent but it is there, most likely.
DC is a very racially divided city, more so than other parts of the country.

My god what sort of fantasy world do you live in? Are there talking frogs and magical unicorns there? Because if you think somewhere else has "lovely all-boys schools" with no racial problems you really, seriously, need to wake up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When boys get together, it often turns toxic. Look at fraternities.

Wow. Sexist much? I would hold up the toxicity of catty women in sororities, all girls schools or the workplace, to the old boys club, any day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

So you would rule out ALL 9,000 boys Catholic schools based on what happened 30 years ago at one school. Do you also rule out going to all restaurants when you have a bad experience at one?

My goodness, what a lot of bad faith counterarguments in one post.

It was not 30 years ago, and of course it was not one school. The criminal cases at this one school alone, putting aside all other schools and the situations in which criminal cases have not (or not yet) been filed) involve acts up to 2000.

In the last two years, the school has also challenged a state law that extends the statute of limitations. So the cover-up, an element of the crime, is still underway.

If all restaurants were run by the National Restaurant Association, we might avoid them all. In any event, as you are doubtless aware--and to be candid it's a bit shocking to me that your post doesn't even nod to this--being sexually abused is a lot higher-consequence than getting a bad appetizer.