Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am okay with my DC learning about anything. Saying that, as far as I understand it, CRT is about tearing down the current system as it is deemed racist - this is total BS and I am absolutely not okay with that. Do I think kids should be aware of systematic racism - absolutely, it exist and it should be dealt with!But do we have to tear the entire system to fix it - i don’t think so, that is inviting chaos an anarchy!

You misunderstand. CRT is a theoretical framework for looking at the law, and history.

So, to take an example that is pretty well understood, CRT led to a reevaluation of sentencing discrepancies. Rather than just accepting that cocaine possession was worth 2 years in jail, but crack was worth 10 years, critical race theorists examined the reasons why those discrepancies existed. SURPRISE! It was because of race. So, they advocated for political change because "the law" was not neutral. It was racialized.

Basically, it's a lens through which to view the law and history. To take another analogy, it's like a lens used to look at literature. You can read a classic book for the story, or for the prose, or as a way to understand how certain groups existed within the time and place when the book was written. So, you can take the same book and apply different lenses to understand it in different ways.

All of which to say, CRT is not actually prescriptive. It's not about tearing down racist systems, even though I think we should tear down racist systems. It's about identifying the places in the law and in US history where race intersects with our understanding.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1) I actually studied CRT at the graduate level and that's not what's happening in schools here. Letting children know racism exists and has been an important part of our history is not CRT. Here's a reading list for those asking what it is: https://researchguides.library.vanderbilt.edu/c.php?g=414672&p=3327226. I recommend this article: https://harvardlawreview.org/1993/06/whiteness-as-property/

2) I am in favor of kids learning about the history and presence of racism in the US at grade appropriate levels (e.g. my first grader can't learn about legal history because he still doesn't have much understanding of the legal system, but he can learn in a fairly basic way about segregation, and we talk at home about how this influenced our city and school system).

Good summary. That's how I feel about it. My kids need to learn about the history and presence of racism in the US. I get really mad the more I read and learn about important things that were glossed over or skipped in my own education.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don't you wonder who these folks who are constantly bringing up CRT are?

That's circular reasoning from Fox News hosts, whipping up these poor sad, sorry wives into a frenzy so they have something to do and don't realize what sorry, sad lives they have and go vote for the GOP status quo.

They lock themselves in their McMansions scared that Black people are coming to ask for reparations or something. I feel sorry for them, Karens!

You are disgusting!

Anonymous wrote: I need a definition of CRT before I can answer the question.

Anonymous wrote:I am okay with my DC learning about anything. Saying that, as far as I understand it, CRT is about tearing down the current system as it is deemed racist - this is total BS and I am absolutely not okay with that. Do I think kids should be aware of systematic racism - absolutely, it exist and it should be dealt with!But do we have to tear the entire system to fix it - i don’t think so, that is inviting chaos an anarchy!

Anonymous wrote:1) I actually studied CRT at the graduate level and that's not what's happening in schools here. Letting children know racism exists and has been an important part of our history is not CRT. Here's a reading list for those asking what it is: https://researchguides.library.vanderbilt.edu/c.php?g=414672&p=3327226. I recommend this article: https://harvardlawreview.org/1993/06/whiteness-as-property/

2) I am in favor of kids learning about the history and presence of racism in the US at grade appropriate levels (e.g. my first grader can't learn about legal history because he still doesn't have much understanding of the legal system, but he can learn in a fairly basic way about segregation, and we talk at home about how this influenced our city and school system).

Anonymous wrote:Don't you wonder who these folks who are constantly bringing up CRT are?

That's circular reasoning from Fox News hosts, whipping up these poor sad, sorry wives into a frenzy so they have something to do and don't realize what sorry, sad lives they have and go vote for the GOP status quo.

They lock themselves in their McMansions scared that Black people are coming to ask for reparations or something. I feel sorry for them, Karens!

Anonymous wrote:Absolutely! I want to learn it myself. I grew up in the south and the whitewashing was so prevalent that I'm not sure anything I learned about history was real. As an adult, I've made it a priority to relearn as much as possible.

How can we make things better in the future if we aren't willing to learn/teach the truth about the past?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, I'm totally fine with it. I guess I really don't get the uproar? I'm not saying that to be obtuse, I truly don't understand why it's so controversial to teach kids about redlining, racial covenants, three strikes you're out, etc. I learned about redlining and disproportionality in high school (in not particularly liberal part of Wisconsin, mind you) in the late 90s, it's not that new. Somehow we all survived.

That's not CRT.