Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Google it, educate yourself. But the whole point of not teaching it is because it will most likely be taught the way you understand it, which is old and out of date.

No, that's not good enough. That is not an adequate answer in the context of a debate.

Explain your premise. Nobody knows what you mean by an "80s idea of the novel". You need to explain what you mean by using facts and examples.

There are many thoughtful posts in this thread that show a willingness to listen and learn.

Conversely, there are posts like yours which are insulting, generalized, and ignorant.

Telling someone to Google something is the usual response of those who either don't know or can't explain.

Here is a “taste” and here is the problem with white people they refuse to educate themselves, they put the burden on others. DO.THE.WORK.YOURSELF

WORK ON YOURSELF.

I'm the poster who was initially told to "educate" myself. I haven't responded until now, and I thank the other posters who tried to ask for an explanation to the "80s" comment. I see now we aren't going to get anywhere. I was sincerely interested in finding out why my interpretation was "old." I understand a newer interpretation may be that Atticus is the "white savior," but we discussed that back when I read it... in the 90s, not 80s... and dismissed it. Atticus learns in the novel. He grows. He doesn't save anybody. If anything, his experiences save him and he handles the Boo Radley narrative at the end better because of them.
I'm willing to learn. I'm not willing to be treated rudely. I also see *major* misinterpretations in these responses. Tom Robinson is not pushed to the side of the story, as little as a mockingbird. We don't shoot mockingbirds because they are innocent and do nothing to harm society. When Tom is shot, innocence was shot. It's a symbol... a major one.

Google why white women turn every lesson about racism into them being the victim and act indignant like you are right now. Stop pretending you are a victim here. Being educated may feel uncomfortable but stop with this I’m am feeling attacked BS. You could start with White Fragility and “educate yourself”

There is literally no person here claiming they are victims. We are discussing the merits of the book. Maybe you should think why your first reaction is calling white women racist. Kinda ironic, don't you think? Debate the issues, please. The book, brings up many uncomfortable moments and I think that is good. White Fragility has been proven it is bunk written by someone who wants to make lots of money. Read this review from a Black author from the Atlantic.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/07/dehumanizing-condescension-white-fragility/614146/



Have you written why TKAM is no longer relevant? Why are you afraid of having kids assigned this book? And bonus points if you don't attack white people just for the sake of attacking white people.

There is literally no person calling that person racist, they said victim (I will not be treated rudely) when nobody was rude they just offered a different opinion.

Stop attacking posters snd debate the issue. If taught properly the “Scalia” level families would lose their mind.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I am not.....

Then you have no place commenting on something about which you clearly know nothing. Stop trolling and leave the conversation to those of us who have invested significantly in the institution.

It's hilarious when people om DCUM order other people around. You don't even know who you are talking to, if it's the same poster or a new poster or whatever. You also have zero leverage, standing, or influence on what these ghosts may or may not do.

Makes me chuckle.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I am not.....

Then you have no place commenting on something about which you clearly know nothing. Stop trolling and leave the conversation to those of us who have invested significantly in the institution.

Anonymous wrote:

I am not.....

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Do you think that curricula reach a point of classical perfection and should never be altered subsequently?"

That's quite the straw man argument you defeated there. Well done! It very much missed the point though.

In my experience some SR parents support these changes but most just roll their eyes at the virtue signaling by the administration and hope common sense prevails before too much damage is done, as no one wants to speak up and risk the ire of the woke mob unless they absolutely have to.

"as no one wants to speak up and risk the ire of the woke mob unless they absolutely have to."

That's the ill-defined straw man here. Any move someone doesn't like is virtue signaling to be countered by common sense to avoid damage, none of which is defined, quantified, or agreed to with any consensus. But damn, it sounds so serious and important when you put it like that.

Just a way for people to stay mad that things change.

I don't know if you're connected with Stone Ridge or not, but if you are, you will know all too well that the liberal woke mob is most certainly in the ascendant, and that families of a more conservative bent (and their daughters) have to keep their views very much to themselves lest they be attacked.

Those of us who supported President Trump had to be particularly discreet. That was a point of view that was simply unacceptable.

They are all for "wise freedom" as long as it aligns with liberal agenda.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Do you think that curricula reach a point of classical perfection and should never be altered subsequently?"

That's quite the straw man argument you defeated there. Well done! It very much missed the point though.

In my experience some SR parents support these changes but most just roll their eyes at the virtue signaling by the administration and hope common sense prevails before too much damage is done, as no one wants to speak up and risk the ire of the woke mob unless they absolutely have to.

"as no one wants to speak up and risk the ire of the woke mob unless they absolutely have to."

That's the ill-defined straw man here. Any move someone doesn't like is virtue signaling to be countered by common sense to avoid damage, none of which is defined, quantified, or agreed to with any consensus. But damn, it sounds so serious and important when you put it like that.

Just a way for people to stay mad that things change.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Do you think that curricula reach a point of classical perfection and should never be altered subsequently?"

That's quite the straw man argument you defeated there. Well done! It very much missed the point though.

In my experience some SR parents support these changes but most just roll their eyes at the virtue signaling by the administration and hope common sense prevails before too much damage is done, as no one wants to speak up and risk the ire of the woke mob unless they absolutely have to.

"as no one wants to speak up and risk the ire of the woke mob unless they absolutely have to."

That's the ill-defined straw man here. Any move someone doesn't like is virtue signaling to be countered by common sense to avoid damage, none of which is defined, quantified, or agreed to with any consensus. But damn, it sounds so serious and important when you put it like that.

Just a way for people to stay mad that things change.

Anonymous wrote:"Do you think that curricula reach a point of classical perfection and should never be altered subsequently?"

That's quite the straw man argument you defeated there. Well done! It very much missed the point though.

In my experience some SR parents support these changes but most just roll their eyes at the virtue signaling by the administration and hope common sense prevails before too much damage is done, as no one wants to speak up and risk the ire of the woke mob unless they absolutely have to.

Anonymous wrote:OP here. Very interesting discussion overall. I appreciate the input from all sides.

My primary point isn’t that TKAM absolutely must be read by all students though, but concern that SR was willing to drop it for such superficial reasons. Much better reasons for dropping TKAM were provided in this discussion. As a SR parent I’m worried about what other ways the curriculum might be changed in such a thoughtless manner to kowtow to the most extreme of the woke crowd.