Anonymous wrote:I fear there will be blue, green, and stripped shirts in this fall's classes. And that the K class will actually be the 1st grade class, just rebranded. Can't wait to see the class lists...

Gee, I hope no one comes in a stripped shirt. Who sends their kids to school in tatters? Better to give them a gap year.

I fear there will be blue, green, and stripped shirts in this fall's classes. And that the K class will actually be the 1st grade class, just rebranded. Can't wait to see the class lists...

You are wrong yet again. Don't you ever get tired of making a fool of yourself. You are the DCUM whipping girl ("concrete thinking"). You can't even distinguish between at least 2 different posters.

OMG. This is really one person have a conversation with himself or herself. It's not possible that two human beings share the same thoughts written in these last posts or same writing, uh, styles.

...The last few posters are catching the fish on this issue though. I am certain the topic will soon lose most of the audience. I will miss everyone's views.

Good night.

Enjoy the cartharsis.

Anonymous wrote:

So are you suggesting that if blacks and the poor were redshirted they, too, could become NFL/NBA team owners? Really, what's your point?

Nope. NFL owner is simply an analogy. The point is well made be other recent posters though you may disagree. The point is as clear as the blue sky.

The point is - there are systems in place to help some maintain a competitive advantage, systems that are unknown to those who are not a part of them. It is the reason the average manager hasn't the experience or ability to do their job, the typical executive is not a leader, and people become angry when smart competent people show up at the office. What do they do, they can't cope with it; so they rely on the skills they learned from home and continue the legacy of, for example, redshirting and creating other artificial systems to keep control. They hire less qualified people, bully and get rid of qualified people, and protect people who mistreat others at work. C level suites and political seats are full of people who come from legacies of redshirt-like systems. I guess you don't need to wonder why the national debt grows larger by the minute.


You get the point. It is quite fascinating.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many anti-redshirters on this Board have expressed major concerns over the older age and size intimidating their children and depriving their children of opportunities in sports and classroom leadership positions, robbing their little Rhodes Scholars of essential hooks for future "Ivy" and power brokering on "Wall Street" (owning a professional sports team).

If this is true I understand their obsession and neurosis over redshirting. And why some families , rightly or wrongly, choose to redshirt their children.

Guess what - Deep down, the "redtrousers" come from families that know they can run circles around the big redshirties. What they have wanted to know is simply why the hell do people think doing that to kids is okay. The kids are the ones who wonder why they are being held back, when they are in diverse (different ages) classrooms of chidren. The last few posters are catching the fish on this issue though. I am certain the topic will soon lose most of the audience. I will miss everyone's views.

You are hilarious. How can you write this drivel with a straight face?

So are you suggesting that if blacks and the poor were redshirted they, too, could become NFL/NBA team owners? Really, what's your point?

Nope. NFL owner is simply an analogy. The point is well made be other recent posters though you may disagree. The point is as clear as the blue sky.

Anonymous wrote:Many anti-redshirters on this Board have expressed major concerns over the older age and size intimidating their children and depriving their children of opportunities in sports and classroom leadership positions, robbing their little Rhodes Scholars of essential hooks for future "Ivy" and power brokering on "Wall Street" (owning a professional sports team).

If this is true I understand their obsession and neurosis over redshirting. And why some families , rightly or wrongly, choose to redshirt their children.

Guess what - Deep down, the "redtrousers" come from families that know they can run circles around the big redshirties. What they have wanted to know is simply why the hell do people think doing that to kids is okay. The kids are the ones who wonder why they are being held back, when they are in diverse (different ages) classrooms of chidren. The last few posters are catching the fish on this issue though. I am certain the topic will soon lose most of the audience. I will miss everyone's views.

Anonymous wrote:

Oh, I see - It is another secret strategy for maintaining control via engineered advantage that usually has very little to do with competence or intellect; like corporate America. I get it, but wanted to let someone else articulate it.

...It seems this longstanding WASP secret is out of the NE prep school box. The genie is out of the bottle!

You got it! Thanks for being honest enough to pull back the curtain.

LMAO!!

Anonymous wrote:Many anti-redshirters on this Board have expressed major concerns over the older age and size intimidating their children and depriving their children of opportunities in sports and classroom leadership positions, robbing their little Rhodes Scholars of essential hooks for future "Ivy" and power brokering on "Wall Street" (owning a professional sports team).

If this is true I understand their obsession and neurosis over redshirting. And why some families , rightly or wrongly, choose to redshirt their children.

The overall theme is not one of feeling older kids will steal an opportunity or slight someone else. It seems the overall belief is there are no real proven advantages to redshirting, so we question the real motives behind it, that's the real question people skated around for hundreds of threads to get to. The last few posters are hitting the nails on the head and getting us close to the root causes of the driving factors influencing parents' decisions to redshirt the Aidens, Braydens, and Joshuas from the burbs'. There is possibly a deeper rooted issue that stems from cultural fears, which is driving this widespread trend that persists out of group generated panic.

Oh, I see - It is another secret strategy for maintaining control via engineered advantage that usually has very little to do with competence or intellect; like corporate America. I get it, but wanted to let someone else articulate it.

...It seems this longstanding WASP secret is out of the NE prep school box. The genie is out of the bottle!

Many anti-redshirters on this Board have expressed major concerns over the older age and size intimidating their children and depriving their children of opportunities in sports and classroom leadership positions, robbing their little Rhodes Scholars of essential hooks for future "Ivy" and power brokering on "Wall Street" (owning a professional sports team).

If this is true I understand their obsession and neurosis over redshirting. And why some families , rightly or wrongly, choose to redshirt their children.

Anonymous wrote:

WT? Because no poor kids or black kids play competitive sports??

Yup, lacrosse, crew, squash, tennis, sailing, water polo, skiing. Ahh. if only the poor played these sports they would be an instant transfusion of athletic talent on Ivy League and LAC teams!!

Hummh

Anonymous wrote:...In much the same way those leading some of our institutions, swaggering Wall Streeters, and power brokers with their paws on the purse strings (cookie jar) come from a fraternal line of "jocks".

Oh, I see - It is another secret strategy for maintaining control via engineered advantage that usually has very little to do with competence or intellect; like corporate America. I get it, but wanted to let someone else articulate it.