Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Shouldn’t we rename it after Justice Earl Warren? He wrote the opinion. It was the courage of the Supreme Court that made it happen.

True but if we are going to go with a courageous person not on the list, you won’t find a better name than Nat Turner.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Loving is an acceptable alternative. I'm surprised at the people who think its funny. Who cares if your immature teen makes fun of a name? It's what they do. It's a weak reason to not use Loving as a school name.

There are several other excellent reasons already covered in this thread why many of us think that the name is not the best choice. And no, I very much prefer that my children who attend W-L not be known as the Washington-Loving Genitals, which apparently what some Yorktown students are already calling them. I'm okay if you think my children and I are immature because of that.

Most teens are immature. This is a sorry name for a school. The people who chose it are bending over backwards to be politically correct and are recommending a name that almost everyone hates just to show how progressive they are. Maybe, Washington-Lee is not a good name, but it has been the name for many, many years. If you are going to change it, please change it for a better name that will not be mocked.

I am glad you understand the immaturity of children, but it's a sorry state for adults who can't set an example and show respect for a couple that let their lives be dragged into the public for the benefit of others. You could show your children that respect and not condone their behavior, or at least not emulate it yourself. It just seems as though most of the people who use the fact that the name will be mocked really don't want their kids going to a school named for an interracial couple.

Anonymous wrote:Shouldn’t we rename it after Justice Earl Warren? He wrote the opinion. It was the courage of the Supreme Court that made it happen.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Warren-Loving high school?

Loving is the unpopular bit, not Washington.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Loving is an acceptable alternative. I'm surprised at the people who think its funny. Who cares if your immature teen makes fun of a name? It's what they do. It's a weak reason to not use Loving as a school name.

There are several other excellent reasons already covered in this thread why many of us think that the name is not the best choice. And no, I very much prefer that my children who attend W-L not be known as the Washington-Loving Genitals, which apparently what some Yorktown students are already calling them. I'm okay if you think my children and I are immature because of that.

Most teens are immature. This is a sorry name for a school. The people who chose it are bending over backwards to be politically correct and are recommending a name that almost everyone hates just to show how progressive they are. Maybe, Washington-Lee is not a good name, but it has been the name for many, many years. If you are going to change it, please change it for a better name that will not be mocked.

I am glad you understand the immaturity of children, but it's a sorry state for adults who can't set an example and show respect for a couple that let their lives be dragged into the public for the benefit of others. You could show your children that respect and not condone their behavior, or at least not emulate it yourself. It just seems as though most of the people who use the fact that the name will be mocked really don't want their kids going to a school named for an interracial couple.

Take your straw man and shove it up your ass. The name sucks.
- person in an interracial marriage

I'm also in an interracial marriage. Respect the people who made your relationship possible. Recognize what these people went through.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Loving is an acceptable alternative. I'm surprised at the people who think its funny. Who cares if your immature teen makes fun of a name? It's what they do. It's a weak reason to not use Loving as a school name.

There are several other excellent reasons already covered in this thread why many of us think that the name is not the best choice. And no, I very much prefer that my children who attend W-L not be known as the Washington-Loving Genitals, which apparently what some Yorktown students are already calling them. I'm okay if you think my children and I are immature because of that.

Most teens are immature. This is a sorry name for a school. The people who chose it are bending over backwards to be politically correct and are recommending a name that almost everyone hates just to show how progressive they are. Maybe, Washington-Lee is not a good name, but it has been the name for many, many years. If you are going to change it, please change it for a better name that will not be mocked.

I am glad you understand the immaturity of children, but it's a sorry state for adults who can't set an example and show respect for a couple that let their lives be dragged into the public for the benefit of others. You could show your children that respect and not condone their behavior, or at least not emulate it yourself. It just seems as though most of the people who use the fact that the name will be mocked really don't want their kids going to a school named for an interracial couple.

Take your straw man and shove it up your ass. The name sucks.
- person in an interracial marriage

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Warren-Loving high school?

Loving is the unpopular bit, not Washington.

Anonymous wrote:Warren-Loving high school?

Anonymous wrote:Shouldn’t we rename it after Justice Earl Warren? He wrote the opinion. It was the courage of the Supreme Court that made it happen.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Loving is an acceptable alternative. I'm surprised at the people who think its funny. Who cares if your immature teen makes fun of a name? It's what they do. It's a weak reason to not use Loving as a school name.

There are several other excellent reasons already covered in this thread why many of us think that the name is not the best choice. And no, I very much prefer that my children who attend W-L not be known as the Washington-Loving Genitals, which apparently what some Yorktown students are already calling them. I'm okay if you think my children and I are immature because of that.

Most teens are immature. This is a sorry name for a school. The people who chose it are bending over backwards to be politically correct and are recommending a name that almost everyone hates just to show how progressive they are. Maybe, Washington-Lee is not a good name, but it has been the name for many, many years. If you are going to change it, please change it for a better name that will not be mocked.

I am glad you understand the immaturity of children, but it's a sorry state for adults who can't set an example and show respect for a couple that let their lives be dragged into the public for the benefit of others. You could show your children that respect and not condone their behavior, or at least not emulate it yourself. It just seems as though most of the people who use the fact that the name will be mocked really don't want their kids going to a school named for an interracial couple.

Take your straw man and shove it up your ass. The name sucks.
- person in an interracial marriage

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m not sure if this has been addressed already, but as an AA, I’m somewhat insulted that Mrs. Loving apparently did not identify as AA and instead considered herself Native American.
https://www.google.com/amp/amp.timeinc.net/time/4362508/loving-v-virginia-personas
https://michaelleroyoberg.com/current-events/the-loving-decision-and-the-concealed-history-of-virginias-native-peoples/

And a Native American would probably be insulted if she had chosen to identify as AA. Many of us are a blend of multiple backgrounds - at some point it becomes impractical to identify as all of them and you choose. Maybe someone identifies with a particular part of their background more because of closer family connections and relationships with relatives from that part of their background. Or maybe someone feels a particular group, like native americans, gets even less attention in the general conversation or advocacy and, sharing geneology, would like to speak up particularly for them over another group.

Be insulted, if you see it as about African Americans and your personal perspective. I suspect Mrs. Loving had a number of challenges and was going to be on the losing end no matter what decisions or statements she made.

DP. Are you kidding about Native Americans would have been offended if she had said she was AA. Clearly you have no undrstanding of history. The one drop rule and clear thinking at the time that blacks were basically subhuman made it very unlikely that any Native American would feel that way. Throughout this countries history there have been African Americans who have been able to "pass" and received more acceptance from whites, and instead of using that to teach whites that they are no different than any other black person and thereby help to diminish negative stereotypes, they played into the being different than other blacks narrative. I think that's what the pp is referring to. Loving basically tried to distance herself from being black to try to gain certain advantages for herself. I'm not sure what there is to celebrate about her. I applaud the judges/justices who had the courage to say barring interracial marriage was wrong.