You lost all credibility by claiming the school was grandstanding by publicizing its decision.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:... Stone Ridge (currently on a DEI roll for whatever reason), keen to show its families how proactive they are on this, makes a big announcement about TKAM to its MS families. ... Instead of stopping there the school decided it needed to publicize the decision. There is no need to publicize a decision like this unless you're trying to win DEI points, which then makes one suspect the decision is a cynical one not a pragmatic one. ... Real diversity and equity is organic and comes from a healthy culture. You can't impose it by fiat, or even by grandstanding like this.

Huh? It's not like they took out an ad in the Post. It was an internal school email. The external SR website even still lists TKAM as a MS text. The only one "grandstanding" about this seems to be people like you and OP, in your effort to stir up controversy.

With SR you don't have to make much of an effort to stir up controversy.

Anonymous wrote:... Stone Ridge (currently on a DEI roll for whatever reason), keen to show its families how proactive they are on this, makes a big announcement about TKAM to its MS families. ... Instead of stopping there the school decided it needed to publicize the decision. There is no need to publicize a decision like this unless you're trying to win DEI points, which then makes one suspect the decision is a cynical one not a pragmatic one. ... Real diversity and equity is organic and comes from a healthy culture. You can't impose it by fiat, or even by grandstanding like this.

Huh? It's not like they took out an ad in the Post. It was an internal school email. The external SR website even still lists TKAM as a MS text. The only one "grandstanding" about this seems to be people like you and OP, in your effort to stir up controversy.

Anonymous wrote:Harper Lee is describing racism as it existed.

...from her personal perspective (i.e., not of someone who was the actual target of said racism).

Leaving the question of Confederate statues aside, Saddam Hussein and Hitler, let us take a look at the actual subject of this thread.

Stone Ridge (currently on a DEI roll for whatever reason), keen to show its families how proactive they are on this, makes a big announcement about TKAM to its MS families.

Decisions on curriculum are made all the time. Textbooks are changed. Topics for study are changed. This is an ordinary thing. The MS English teachers can get together and decide to teach whatever they want. They can make a decision in the best interests of the students based on an objective decision.

I don't think anyone would have an issue with this.

Instead of stopping there the school decided it needed to publicize the decision. There is no need to publicize a decision like this unless you're trying to win DEI points, which then makes one suspect the decision is a cynical one not a pragmatic one.

Come on, SR, I know you're desperately trying to prove to everyone how woke you are, but it doesn't really ring true. Aside from the total lack of diversity in your academic leadership your DEI work consists of bolt-ons. Stuff you got from a website, a book, or a conference.

Real diversity and equity is organic and comes from a healthy culture. You can't impose it by fiat, or even by grandstanding like this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Would you want to walk past a statue of the man that raped your mom?

Nobody has to ever walk past a statue of a man who raped their mother. Literally nobody.

Yes. Black peoples walk past statues of men who raped and killed their family. Literally all of them.

Literally all black people walk past statues of men who raped and killed their family.

Is that so?

Would you be asking the same question those who are Jewish in regards to a statute of Hitler? By the way, not 1 statue in Germany of Hitler resides to this day.

No, I'm asking the question of the person who made such a ridiculous assertion. I'm talking about the US not Hitler not Sadaam. Try and stay focused on the subject.

And the question was answered. If you read something other than “classics” you would know this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Would you want to walk past a statue of the man that raped your mom?

Nobody has to ever walk past a statue of a man who raped their mother. Literally nobody.

Yes. Black peoples walk past statues of men who raped and killed their family. Literally all of them.

Literally all black people walk past statues of men who raped and killed their family.

Is that so?

Yes it is so

Haha! TKAM supporters are pro confederacy! Wow!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I started this thread with ambivalence; TKAM is a good book that helped move the race conversation along during the 1960s-1990s, but had no problem if schools want to replace with another worthwhile book.

But now, seeing that the most strident defenders of TKAM here are openly arguing for confederate soldier statues and taking other similarly offensive positions, I realize that if people like that are promoting TKAM, it’s probably no longer representative of the race conversation our country should be having. This has allowed me to rethink my earlier ambivalence and shed some of the nostalgia the book carries for me.

I’m thinking time has passed TKAM by. While it was a powerful book for where our country was in the decades after its release, and therefore moving for many of us who read it as children in that era, it’s now a lot less foreword-thinking in light of where our national conversation on race has grown. So it’s more of a historical artifact of the past, and offensive in lots of ways, sort of like Gone with the Wind.

First of all, I didn't see anyone defending keeping up Confederate Statues who also defend TKAM. I am one of those people who think it is a worthwhile read and also agree that the Confederate statues, names of streets, buildings etc have to go.
By not reading this material or talking about slavery does not mean that it did not happen. Black men were murdered because of being Black. I think by studying it does not mean you think it was a positive experience! It happened and is history. We should know our history or we are doomed to repeat.

Of course we should teach about slavery and reconstruction. The question is whether a book that describes racism from the point of view of white people, and has the white characters as the savior of black characters, is the best way to do that. Maybe read some original texts (people describing their own experiences, like memoirs) or novels that are written from the perspective of the people enduring the injustice?

My kid’s school decided to teach TKAM this year and he read it. The teacher said she was teaching it because it wasn’t part of the IDARE curriculum, but simply taught as literature. In this hard year she already had full lesson plans that spanned months for discussing and illustrating plot, symbolism, character development, vocabulary, etc. So rather than reconstructing her entire lesson plan plus figure out DL she taught it. I think and hope she’ll work toward replacing it for future years.

Also, the poster right after you is one example of the confederate statute lovers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I started this thread with ambivalence; TKAM is a good book that helped move the race conversation along during the 1960s-1990s, but had no problem if schools want to replace with another worthwhile book.

But now, seeing that the most strident defenders of TKAM here are openly arguing for confederate soldier statues and taking other similarly offensive positions, I realize that if people like that are promoting TKAM, it’s probably no longer representative of the race conversation our country should be having. This has allowed me to rethink my earlier ambivalence and shed some of the nostalgia the book carries for me.

I’m thinking time has passed TKAM by. While it was a powerful book for where our country was in the decades after its release, and therefore moving for many of us who read it as children in that era, it’s now a lot less foreword-thinking in light of where our national conversation on race has grown. So it’s more of a historical artifact of the past, and offensive in lots of ways, sort of like Gone with the Wind.

First of all, I didn't see anyone defending keeping up Confederate Statues who also defend TKAM. I am one of those people who think it is a worthwhile read and also agree that the Confederate statues, names of streets, buildings etc have to go.
By not reading this material or talking about slavery does not mean that it did not happen. Black men were murdered because of being Black. I think by studying it does not mean you think it was a positive experience! It happened and is history. We should know our history or we are doomed to repeat.

Plenty of other books can allow us to “know our history” regarding race: Invisible Man, Native Son, Roots, Beloved, Roots, etc etc etc.

Anonymous wrote:I started this thread with ambivalence; TKAM is a good book that helped move the race conversation along during the 1960s-1990s, but had no problem if schools want to replace with another worthwhile book.

But now, seeing that the most strident defenders of TKAM here are openly arguing for confederate soldier statues and taking other similarly offensive positions, I realize that if people like that are promoting TKAM, it’s probably no longer representative of the race conversation our country should be having. This has allowed me to rethink my earlier ambivalence and shed some of the nostalgia the book carries for me.

I’m thinking time has passed TKAM by. While it was a powerful book for where our country was in the decades after its release, and therefore moving for many of us who read it as children in that era, it’s now a lot less foreword-thinking in light of where our national conversation on race has grown. So it’s more of a historical artifact of the past, and offensive in lots of ways, sort of like Gone with the Wind.

First of all, I didn't see anyone defending keeping up Confederate Statues who also defend TKAM. I am one of those people who think it is a worthwhile read and also agree that the Confederate statues, names of streets, buildings etc have to go.
By not reading this material or talking about slavery does not mean that it did not happen. Black men were murdered because of being Black. I think by studying it does not mean you think it was a positive experience! It happened and is history. We should know our history or we are doomed to repeat.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Students of color learn nothing from being forced to read this white savior narrative. Worse yet they are forced to listen to the n word over and over. Just because it meant something to you once upon a time as a white person does not mean that it is a good choice for students today. This is well documented. I am white FWIW. Stone Ridge is moving in the right direction. Well done.

Agree.

Disagree. It’s one of the all time great American classics. Yet another deficit in true education to omit this work.

Most “classic literature” is BS. If you wanna read it, knock yourself out, but there’s nothing inherently schoolworthy about TKAM or any of the other usuals.

Ain’t nobody ever not landed a job because they didn’t read a particular novel.

I don’t think TKAM is a must teach book although I think it’s a must read at some point book. I think there’s a lot worth discussing, but there are also so many good options and you can only read so many books in the course of a school year. If the faculty at SR chose to replace it with something else, that’s their prerogative and I'm fine with that as long as the replacement option is equally thought provoking and well written. The goal of educators is to teach, not to protect kids from ever being offended.

I think SR has jumped the shark Re it’s DEI initiatives but is choosing a replacement text for TKAM and example of that overcorrection? Not sure it is. I think overall the teachers are tremendous and the reason we stay at the school.

I started this thread with ambivalence; TKAM is a good book that helped move the race conversation along during the 1960s-1990s, but had no problem if schools want to replace with another worthwhile book.

But now, seeing that the most strident defenders of TKAM here are openly arguing for confederate soldier statues and taking other similarly offensive positions, I realize that if people like that are promoting TKAM, it’s probably no longer representative of the race conversation our country should be having. This has allowed me to rethink my earlier ambivalence and shed some of the nostalgia the book carries for me.

I’m thinking time has passed TKAM by. While it was a powerful book for where our country was in the decades after its release, and therefore moving for many of us who read it as children in that era, it’s now a lot less foreword-thinking in light of where our national conversation on race has grown. So it’s more of a historical artifact of the past, and offensive in lots of ways, sort of like Gone with the Wind.