Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They don't want their kids exposed to "those kids," which has been openly expressed many times on DCUM over the past year by pro-DL parents. The definition of "those kids" varies but it typically is code for brown children, children with disabilities, poorer children, etc.

We all know what the posters who talk about how "my kids are thriving because they aren't exposed to those kids" are really saying. Sometimes they are so overtly racist/ableist/etc that people report them to the moderator and those posts are deleted. I've personally seen and reported enough of them that I know what the other posters who are more subtle are saying when they talk about "those kids."

I think they are a large percentage of the DL forever crowd.

Amen. That's why I am torn about the idea of virtual academies for anyone who wants to continue with DL.

Anonymous wrote:They don't want their kids exposed to "those kids," which has been openly expressed many times on DCUM over the past year by pro-DL parents. The definition of "those kids" varies but it typically is code for brown children, children with disabilities, poorer children, etc.

We all know what the posters who talk about how "my kids are thriving because they aren't exposed to those kids" are really saying. Sometimes they are so overtly racist/ableist/etc that people report them to the moderator and those posts are deleted. I've personally seen and reported enough of them that I know what the other posters who are more subtle are saying when they talk about "those kids."

I think they are a large percentage of the DL forever crowd.

Anonymous wrote:They don't want their kids exposed to "those kids," which has been openly expressed many times on DCUM over the past year by pro-DL parents. The definition of "those kids" varies but it typically is code for brown children, children with disabilities, poorer children, etc.

We all know what the posters who talk about how "my kids are thriving because they aren't exposed to those kids" are really saying. Sometimes they are so overtly racist/ableist/etc that people report them to the moderator and those posts are deleted. I've personally seen and reported enough of them that I know what the other posters who are more subtle are saying when they talk about "those kids."

I think they are a large percentage of the DL forever crowd.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:IME, the ones actually fighting for DL have anxiety disorders and/or a complete inability to accurately assess risk, including that of COVID and of prolonged absence from in-person education. There are others who don't care and choose it because it's "easier," but the ones who are loud are the ones who still seem to be living in March 2020.

Boom!

Don't forget the air of superiority stemming from their valuable parental guidance and supervision. Their kids are THRIVING.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s still not safe for kids, especially with the new strains. And I’m assuming people being who have opted to continue virtual learning have found a way to make it work for them. Why does it matter to you? I believe virtual learning should permanently become an option as long as there are dedicated virtual learning teachers at each school so that no one has to teach concurrently.

No to the bolded.

I could understand a dedicated virtual pyramid in large districts, but if a family chooses virtual they don't get to monopolize resources at the school level. They can go to their base school for extracurriculars, but there shouldn't be a tie between virtual and individual schools.

+10000

No way should already scarce resources be forced to accommodate those who simply prefer to "learn from home."

Anonymous wrote:None of the pro-DL people will commit to in person school if their child is vaccinated. I predict these people will be a nightmare for school systems across the country. They will probably make up medical illnesses to justify their need of control.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:None of the pro-DL people will commit to in person school if their child is vaccinated. I predict these people will be a nightmare for school systems across the country. They will probably make up medical illnesses to justify their need of control.

Oh seriously stow it. Disingenuous is the tip of the damn iceberg with arguments like this.

Anonymous wrote:Self-sacrifice and martyrdom is an important American virtue. You are supposed to work yourself into the ground. You are supposed to find a way to do the "most" suffering for your kids and job, especially if you are a mother.

DL forever provides a really effective and visible way of suffering to demonstrate your virtue.

Anonymous wrote:A lot of MS/HS kids like it because they don’t have to get up early, deal with school bullies/social situations, they can stay at home and be comfortable, and their parents are fine with it as long as they keep their grades up. It’s mostly secondary issues apart from virus related concerns.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s still not safe for kids, especially with the new strains. And I’m assuming people being who have opted to continue virtual learning have found a way to make it work for them. Why does it matter to you? I believe virtual learning should permanently become an option as long as there are dedicated virtual learning teachers at each school so that no one has to teach concurrently.

No to the bolded.

I could understand a dedicated virtual pyramid in large districts, but if a family chooses virtual they don't get to monopolize resources at the school level. They can go to their base school for extracurriculars, but there shouldn't be a tie between virtual and individual schools.

Anonymous wrote:For those who keep saying it’s not safe, please answer this question: will you send your child back when they are vaccinated?