Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow. So much white fragility. AKA snowflakes.

Put on your big girl panties and read the book. You won’t melt.

It’s not the reading it, it’s the discussing such a loaded topic with coworkers that’s the problem. Do you honestly not see how a white person who disagrees with the book’s premise and says so during the discussion, could be placing themselves in a very precarious situation?

Yes, we agree that publicly disagreeing with a book’s premise would be a bad move, op.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just pretend to read it and nod along to any discussion group. Even if you do read it, there's no point in saying anything because it can be used against you, anyway.

True.

+1i wouldn't even bother to open it up.

+2 I wouldn’t read it and I wouldn’t give people any discussion participation other than showing up if it was required. Nothing good can come of saying anything. It’s not an actual discussion and in this setting the most innocent person can be humiliated and destroyed.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow. So much white fragility. AKA snowflakes.

Put on your big girl panties and read the book. You won’t melt.

It’s not the reading it, it’s the discussing such a loaded topic with coworkers that’s the problem. Do you honestly not see how a white person who disagrees with the book’s premise and says so during the discussion, could be placing themselves in a very precarious situation?

If someone isn’t willing to read a book with an open mind and discuss on any level (even if they disagree), then that person isn’t intellectually curious enough to be in a teaching position.

I’d also be curious why they “disagree with the premise”.

Anonymous wrote:Wow. So much white fragility. AKA snowflakes.

Put on your big girl panties and read the book. You won’t melt.

It’s not the reading it, it’s the discussing such a loaded topic with coworkers that’s the problem. Do you honestly not see how a white person who disagrees with the book’s premise and says so during the discussion, could be placing themselves in a very precarious situation?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:lol I can't believe you idiots are actually trying to defend this book

If the book said all black people are racist

and white people can't be racist

would you tolerate that,,, no.... so how the f can you tolerate it in reverse

OP here. I just started reading the book and to be fair the author doesn’t state this. She does say that racism exists among all groups, however she does state that this book is specifically geared towards a white audience and is focused on white racism. The problem I have is is I don’t think the employer should require us to read (and more specifically discuss) a book that is solely focuses on white racism. Can you imagine requiring such a conversation about Asian racism, or Hispanic racism?

If it was affecting our schools I could imagine it and it would be ok.

When you finish this read anti-racist and you will read all about black people being racist if they makes you feel all balanced.

+1

Yes, we live in a country built by white racists, most of us grew up in a society governed primarily by white racists, and most were taught with schoolbooks (when those were a thing) written by white racists.

Time for a reality check.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Could you imagine men being all up in arms about required sexual harassment training?

Except, I’ve never heard it suggested that all men are prone to sexual harassment. The fundamental premise of this book is that all white people are racist to a certain extent and how they need to overcome it. So white people are Being required to discuss their “racism” with their supervisors and coworkers.

You think all men are not prone to sexual harassment? All people are actually. Their are things people learned along the way to not sexually harass. Some were taught to treat people terribly some were taught respect.

Anonymous wrote:Could you imagine men being all up in arms about required sexual harassment training?

Except, I’ve never heard it suggested that all men are prone to sexual harassment. The fundamental premise of this book is that all white people are racist to a certain extent and how they need to overcome it. So white people are Being required to discuss their “racism” with their supervisors and coworkers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:lol I can't believe you idiots are actually trying to defend this book

If the book said all black people are racist

and white people can't be racist

would you tolerate that,,, no.... so how the f can you tolerate it in reverse

OP here. I just started reading the book and to be fair the author doesn’t state this. She does say that racism exists among all groups, however she does state that this book is specifically geared towards a white audience and is focused on white racism. The problem I have is is I don’t think the employer should require us to read (and more specifically discuss) a book that is solely focuses on white racism. Can you imagine requiring such a conversation about Asian racism, or Hispanic racism?

ETA, there are already premises the author makes that I don’t agree with, such as that at one point Irish people weren’t considered white. This is not the first time I’ve heard that, and I strongly disagree with it. Yes, the Irish were looked down upon and discriminated against, but they were certainly considered white. All racial groups discriminate against subgroups of others within their race, it doesn’t mean they don’t actually view the person as being part of the same race. My principal and many coworkers are people of color, and I would not feel comfortable at all expressing any views that don’t align with this author’s premises.

Could you imagine men being all up in arms about required sexual harassment training?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:lol I can't believe you idiots are actually trying to defend this book

If the book said all black people are racist

and white people can't be racist

would you tolerate that,,, no.... so how the f can you tolerate it in reverse

OP here. I just started reading the book and to be fair the author doesn’t state this. She does say that racism exists among all groups, however she does state that this book is specifically geared towards a white audience and is focused on white racism. The problem I have is is I don’t think the employer should require us to read (and more specifically discuss) a book that is solely focuses on white racism. Can you imagine requiring such a conversation about Asian racism, or Hispanic racism?

If it was affecting our schools I could imagine it and it would be ok.

When you finish this read anti-racist and you will read all about black people being racist if they makes you feel all balanced.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:lol I can't believe you idiots are actually trying to defend this book

If the book said all black people are racist

and white people can't be racist

would you tolerate that,,, no.... so how the f can you tolerate it in reverse

OP here. I just started reading the book and to be fair the author doesn’t state this. She does say that racism exists among all groups, however she does state that this book is specifically geared towards a white audience and is focused on white racism. The problem I have is is I don’t think the employer should require us to read (and more specifically discuss) a book that is solely focuses on white racism. Can you imagine requiring such a conversation about Asian racism, or Hispanic racism?

I mean, if the majority of teachers were Asian or Hispanic and there were multiple studies about the detrimental effects of their racism/implicit bias on educational outcomes for their students then yes?

Anonymous wrote:lol I can't believe you idiots are actually trying to defend this book

If the book said all black people are racist

and white people can't be racist

would you tolerate that,,, no.... so how the f can you tolerate it in reverse

OP here. I just started reading the book and to be fair the author doesn’t state this. She does say that racism exists among all groups, however she does state that this book is specifically geared towards a white audience and is focused on white racism. The problem I have is is I don’t think the employer should require us to read (and more specifically discuss) a book that is solely focuses on white racism. Can you imagine requiring such a conversation about Asian racism, or Hispanic racism?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t have a problem with it, school books for the last 400 years have focused on black fragility.

Actually your premise is incorrect. And this isn’t simply a required reading, it comes along with required discussions, in the workplace, with your coworkers and supervisors, on a subject where the focus is on white people’s racism. In such a situation it would be incredibly easy for someone to voice a dissenting opinion that could be regarded by someone else as racist, and all hell would break lose. Do you really not understand how requiring such a topic of conversation in the workplace could be extremely problematic?

No. It’s only a problem for somebody that is so racist they don’t want to listen and change.

BTW this is not new. I learned this when I was getting my masters in education 20 years ago.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The book will only be inflammatory because some people will not like the truths they hear. It challenges you to understand your implicit biases, or contributions to allowing discriminatory systems to continue. It is hard to hear. And, while I didn't necessarily agree with everything, it was quite eye opening.

If you're turned off by the title (I was too), you are someone who should read it.

If you think hearing what she has to say (noted above) is "offensive" or "inflammatory", you DEFINITELY should read the book. It talks about that defense mechanism quite effectively.

Since when do we just bury our heads in the sand b/c we may not like something? Quit being a baby and give it a read before you start complaining. Geez.

Do you not see the problem with this? What if a white teacher doesn't accept it as truth and says it during the book discussion? How well do you thing that will go over. White teachers will have no choice but to act like they are totally on board with the message even if they feel differently.

Yes. They will continue to hold racist ideals that all black /brown kids are trash, not as cute, smart, forgiveable, or have parental support aa white kids and treat them accordingly. Because, the achievement gaps is ALL the parent's fault. I have a neighbor with a black son who is in the same class mine. Her son is sweet, very much a "boy" like mine who can sometimes be silly/ naughty. I notice her son gets chastised way more than my kid and my son is borderline very naughty. I cannot help but notice these and some other differences. Maybe this book is needed.

lol you are a simpleton who is this they you are talking about get a clue lady

You are a simpleton if you don’t know this whole thread is about teachers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow. So much white fragility. AKA snowflakes.

Put on your big girl panties and read the book. You won’t melt.

I am one of the people arguing its approach Is not constructive and there are - and I have been exposed to - much better ways to deal with this topic and generate change. I already read the book. That’s how I have an opinion on it.

I’ve never read a book that is 100% agree with. This one is not bad, maybe one or two points I would push back on, but you fervorous opposition is telling.