Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:My thinking is, if it's possible to give them an edge (socially, academically, physically) why wouldn't you??
I do everything I can to give my kids a leg up on the competition.
I want my kids to learn they need to work harder sometimes. They aren’t always going to have an unfair advantage. Plus they are UMC white boys. They already were born more than halfway up the ladder. If they can’t figure things out and be successful adults, shame on me as a parent.
I can't decide whether this is satire or not. The idea that your coddled white UMC boys are going to learn to handle adversity by being the youngest in your wealthy school district is ... something.
You want to teach them real adversity? Move, and for God's sake do not ever talk like this in public again. It's painfully embarrassing.
Move? Why do they can be at the top of a less competitive district because they are UMC kids with more advantages? People do that strategically too, to get into competitive state schools that accept x percent of kids at the top of their school ranking.
It’s not really adversity if they aren’t personally struggling. You realize that right?
No. So they can see what real adversity is rather than pretend adversity. They sure aren't learning any insights from you, that much is obvious.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:My thinking is, if it's possible to give them an edge (socially, academically, physically) why wouldn't you??
I do everything I can to give my kids a leg up on the competition.
I want my kids to learn they need to work harder sometimes. They aren’t always going to have an unfair advantage. Plus they are UMC white boys. They already were born more than halfway up the ladder. If they can’t figure things out and be successful adults, shame on me as a parent.
I can't decide whether this is satire or not. The idea that your coddled white UMC boys are going to learn to handle adversity by being the youngest in your wealthy school district is ... something.
You want to teach them real adversity? Move, and for God's sake do not ever talk like this in public again. It's painfully embarrassing.
Move? Why do they can be at the top of a less competitive district because they are UMC kids with more advantages? People do that strategically too, to get into competitive state schools that accept x percent of kids at the top of their school ranking.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:My thinking is, if it's possible to give them an edge (socially, academically, physically) why wouldn't you??
I do everything I can to give my kids a leg up on the competition.
I want my kids to learn they need to work harder sometimes. They aren’t always going to have an unfair advantage. Plus they are UMC white boys. They already were born more than halfway up the ladder. If they can’t figure things out and be successful adults, shame on me as a parent.
I can't decide whether this is satire or not. The idea that your coddled white UMC boys are going to learn to handle adversity by being the youngest in your wealthy school district is ... something.
You want to teach them real adversity? Move, and for God's sake do not ever talk like this in public again. It's painfully embarrassing.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:My thinking is, if it's possible to give them an edge (socially, academically, physically) why wouldn't you??
I do everything I can to give my kids a leg up on the competition.
I want my kids to learn they need to work harder sometimes. They aren’t always going to have an unfair advantage. Plus they are UMC white boys. They already were born more than halfway up the ladder. If they can’t figure things out and be successful adults, shame on me as a parent.
I can't decide whether this is satire or not. The idea that your coddled white UMC boys are going to learn to handle adversity by being the youngest in your wealthy school district is ... something.
You want to teach them real adversity? Move, and for God's sake do not ever talk like this in public again. It's painfully embarrassing.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:My thinking is, if it's possible to give them an edge (socially, academically, physically) why wouldn't you??
I do everything I can to give my kids a leg up on the competition.
It’s cheating.
It’s explicitly allowed - the opposite of cheating. I’m only familiar with Virginia but they explicitly say if in your estimation the child isn’t really for school at 5, they can delay a year and go to school at 6.
How is sports advantage a reason your kid isn’t ready for school?
Anonymous wrote:Also I am going to need more details from the sports redshirters. Most wont end up with a sports scholarship or even being a standout player. We’re you disappointed at your child if they didn’t achieve up to your expectations?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:My thinking is, if it's possible to give them an edge (socially, academically, physically) why wouldn't you??
I do everything I can to give my kids a leg up on the competition.
I want my kids to learn they need to work harder sometimes. They aren’t always going to have an unfair advantage. Plus they are UMC white boys. They already were born more than halfway up the ladder. If they can’t figure things out and be successful adults, shame on me as a parent.
Anonymous wrote:Also I am going to need more details from the sports redshirters. Most wont end up with a sports scholarship or even being a standout player. We’re you disappointed at your child if they didn’t achieve up to your expectations?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:My thinking is, if it's possible to give them an edge (socially, academically, physically) why wouldn't you??
I do everything I can to give my kids a leg up on the competition.
It’s cheating.
It’s explicitly allowed - the opposite of cheating. I’m only familiar with Virginia but they explicitly say if in your estimation the child isn’t really for school at 5, they can delay a year and go to school at 6.