Critical Race Theory policy in hiring at UT

[Johnny Sack 8397]

27 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Do you not hold power and privilege?  Do you have difficulty acknowledging that?

Do you have a problem teaching your children that they are materially blessed and that others aren't?

Because that's about all I really see here.  

I'll add that some of the language used is a big cringey to my ear, but it is currrent language and better that kids know what it means, at least.

We discuss it at home all the time.  And give thanks for all our blessings before every meal and before bed.

What I have a problem with is assigning victim or oppressor status collectively to a group based on their skin color. One of my best friends at my kids' school is half Mexican and half Lebanese.  He has a Mexican surname and looks like a Mexican.  Fairly dark skinned.  His wife is a beautiful blonde woman with blue eyes.  Their son looks just like dad and the daughter looks just like mom.  One day the son comes home very upset.  His teacher had the class line up by race.  Whether they were white, brown, asian or black as measures of their privilege.  He had no idea what to say.  These are young kids at a Christian school.  I see no reason to separate the kids by race.  You are dividing kids when no division really exists.  These kids are not racist.  It is difficult for any kid growing up these days to be a racist.  We want it to be discussed from a biblical perspective.  That we are all created in God's image.  That Jesus was a person of color and loves us all.  Anyone can be racist because sin can arise in all of our hearts. We are brothers and sisters.

Certainly as the kids get older, racism and the legacy it leaves until this day should be discussed.  Slavery, Jim Crow, Civil Rights leaders, etc. Got zero issue with that being taught in elementary or junior high.  

As to material privilege, at our school all the kids are privileged in one way or the other.  We have many billionaire and multi hundred million net worth families. One of my daughter's good friends has a "party house" no one even lives at on River Oaks Boulevard.  I would say we should all be thankful for our material blessings, that someone will always have more and someone will always have less, and to be generous helping the less fortunate since Jesus taught not to store up treasures on earth, but to store up your treasures in heaven.

Most of our parents simply do not want our kids being guilt tripped about shit they had nothing to do with and have no control over (past racism, the color of their skin, or they families' perceived wealth).

[Johnny Sack 8397]

6 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

And yet it seems to trigger the absolute shit out of you.

Not really.  The accusation means nothing these days.  

[wildcat09 29146]

2 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

Not really.  The accusation means nothing these days.  

Sure it does. You're just mad that we don't limit it to hooded figures that burn crosses. 

[Pancho 44181]

44 minutes ago, CDAK said:

You're being coy and pedantic. Is a "professor who studies CRT" acceptable nomenclature? What about a "professor who leverages CRT"? Twice compared it to philosophy and I think? it's fine to say "philosophy professor." But maybe that's incorrect terminology as well.

In your opinion, is it possible for a DEI initiative to leverage or be based on CRT? Perhaps the answer is "no." Maybe I should have said some DEI initiatives are based on antiracism. That is, I should have used "antiracism" instead of "CRT." 

I feel like you really want to tell stories about Harvard or Penn or whatever school you named earlier and CLS. I actually find the anecdotes somewhat interesting, so please keep posting them. But, I have no idea why you're responding to my post to convey your anecdotes.

I'm neither being coy nor pedantic.  I'm being honest.  You keep insisting there are CRT profs and I'm telling you no, there are not.  One doesn't "study" CRT per se rather they study how CRT can be applied to social situations to explain what or why.  I'm not sure why this is lost on you but it is. As mentioned before, there is no professor in America who is hired to teach CRT because CRT isn't a discipline.  It's a theory that is applied to social situations in many disciplines.  You don't major in CRT.  

Do I think someone can create a DEI initiative based off of CRT?  No.  CRT just explains what and why something is happening.  DEI initiatives should be based on solving or correcting what is happening. CRT just tells you why. This is my opinion of CRT and how I learned in in my doctoral program as well as how I used it in my dissertation.  My "solutions" in my dissertation did not involve CRT; instead, I used CRT to explain why the problem is happening and created my own "solutions" to solve for what the framework (CRT) was showing me through the data I collected.   

[Johnny Sack 8397]

2 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

Sure it does. You're just mad that we don't limit it to hooded figures that burn crosses. 

I am fuming mad.

[dcar00 14002]

28 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

 

The only way we're going to overcome racism in this country (or anywhere else for that matter) is for individuals to engage higher thinking on issues of race and discrimination and how irrational, unjust, and inhuman it is to judge based on skin color or other differences.  And further, how issues of race permeate life and society and that it's not good enough just not to be overtly racist.

we agree.

Edited May 21, 2021 by dcar00

[SmokeyTheBear 5562]

10 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

We discuss it at home all the time.  And give thanks for all our blessings before every meal and before bed.

What I have a problem with is assigning victim or oppressor status collectively to a group based on their skin color. One of my best friends at my kids' school is half Mexican and half Lebanese.  He has a Mexican surname and looks like a Mexican.  Fairly dark skinned.  His wife is a beautiful blonde woman with blue eyes.  Their son looks just like dad and the daughter looks just like mom.  One day the son comes home very upset.  His teacher had the class line up by race.  Whether they were white, brown, asian or black as measures of their privilege.  He had no idea what to say.  These are young kids at a Christian school.  I see no reason to separate the kids by race.  You are dividing kids when no division really exists.  These kids are not racist.  It is difficult for any kid growing up these days to be a racist.  We want it to be discussed from a biblical perspective.  That we are all created in God's image.  That Jesus was a person of color and loves us all.  Anyone can be racist because sin can arise in all of our hearts. We are brothers and sisters.

Certainly as the kids get older, racism and the legacy it leaves until this day should be discussed.  Slavery, Jim Crow, Civil Rights leaders, etc. Got zero issue with that being taught in elementary or junior high.  

As to material privilege, at our school all the kids are privileged in one way or the other.  We have many billionaire and multi hundred million net worth families. One of my daughter's good friends has a "party house" no one even lives at on River Oaks Boulevard.  I would say we should all be thankful for our material blessings, that someone will always have more and someone will always have less, and to be generous helping the less fortunate since Jesus taught not to store up treasures on earth, but to store up your treasures in heaven.

Most of our parents simply do not want our kids being guilt tripped about shit they had nothing to do with and have no control over (past racism, the color of their skin, or they families' perceived wealth).

Here is your problem: you view everything thru the lens of "your" community rather than the community at large. You want to protect your kids and send them to a school that will only teach a very narrow view of the world, surrounded by others from the same socio economic bubble. How can you teach kids that reality doesn't match your specific community, that they are privileged, if no-one in their bubble shows them that they are in a bubble? That is what I assume that teacher was trying to show them; that there are other structures out there that a majority of the human race has to deal with that your community is largely immune from. That is uncomfortable and it is obviously very uncomfortable to you. I'm a middle-aged white male who is not as privileged as you, but privileged compared to 90% of the rest of the world. And just because I benefited from the structures that we are looking to balance today, doesn't mean I'm racist. What makes you you, is understanding the disparity yet being too uncomfortable to want to address it so you stay in your privileged and closed community while yelling "class warfare" when called out. 

[GW Hayduke 1949]

26 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

This has boiled down from no examples.  To we need better examples.  To it's not that big of a deal.  

I have extreme concerns on how this is delivered.  Again, as stated forcing my child into an "oppressor/oppressed" category (as one example) as a small child is beyond disturbing.  If you do not.  That's fine, but let's not pretend that it's not happening.  

I understand you have extreme concerns about a situation you feel is beyond disturbing.  You aren't alone in being emotional about this stuff.  

I wonder if folks in your situation ever step back and assess what is going on and try to find out why you feel emotionally engaged.  Are you aware of the entities in the world who benefit from a segment of our population being outraged? Have you pondered who those entities might be?  What if the media that triggered the outrage was intentional propaganda? What benefit do those propagandists get from your emotions? Have you ever considered that maybe you are being played by right wing propaganda? There is always the following step of protecting ourselves from that type of propaganda.  

[CDAK 216]

10 minutes ago, Pancho said:

You keep insisting there are CRT profs and I'm telling you no, there are not.  One doesn't "study" CRT per se rather they study how CRT can be applied to social situations to explain what or why.   

This is false. Quote my comments insisting there are CRT professors. I'm happy to refer to professors that study how CRT can be applied to social situations with whatever language is appropriate. I still don't know what that is. It seems like there is no shorthand. I have to type "professor who studies how CRT can be applied to social situations" every time I want to reference a professor who is involved with CRT.

[Captainant 27250]

13 minutes ago, dcar00 said:

we agree.

Funny how that's what you focus on instead of "higher thinking on issues of race and discrimination". 

[Da Fino 2715]

35 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

One day the son comes home very upset.  His teacher had the class line up by race.  Whether they were white, brown, asian or black as measures of their privilege.

I have a very hard time believing that that shit happened at R.O.B.S.

[dcar00 14002]

13 minutes ago, Captainant said:

Funny how that's what you focus on instead of "higher thinking on issues of race and discrimination". 

yes funny how i focused on the most important part of treating everyone the same regardless of race or other differences.

[Brisketexan 104226]

 

42 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

He has a Mexican surname and looks like a Mexican.  Fairly dark skinned.  His wife is a beautiful blonde woman with blue eyes.  Their son looks just like dad and the daughter looks just like mom.  One day the son comes home very upset.  His teacher had the class line up by race.  Whether they were white, brown, asian or black as measures of their privilege.  He had no idea what to say.  These are young kids at a Christian school.  I see no reason to separate the kids by race.  You are dividing kids when no division really exists.  These kids are not racist.  It is difficult for any kid growing up these days to be a racist. 

Cool.  I love aspirations.  Absolutely raise your kids to not be racist.

But as for your friend's son, he's not going to live his life without someone calling him a spic, doubt his American-ness, question his loyalty to his country, etc.  Because all of that shit happens right now to people who look like him/have last names like his.  Doesn't matter what kind of car he drives, how he dresses or speaks.  So, your statement that "no division exists" is demonstrably false.  HE may not have created that division.  You may not WANT that division.  But it exists.  And KNOWING that exists is how kids fight back against it, and resist it, particularly among their own peers.

For example, when his peers learn that there are people in the world who will treat their friend shitty because of his color/last name, they will hopefully have the reaction I had when I learned that (I was 6 or 7) - I thought it was the stupidest thing I'd ever heard of, and I'd never do it, and if anyone did that to one of my friends (my best friend was Honduran, for example), I'd sure as shit stand up for them.

I don't want to live in a world where black people are often treated differently/poorly, or hispanics, etc.  But I do.  Pretending that I don't, and raising my kids to believe that we don't, is a lie.  I don't believe in lying to my kids.

[Hagbard Celine 10657]

On 5/19/2021 at 4:29 PM, Brisketexan said:

I'll give the OP cash money, right now, if -- no googling -- he can tell us, coherently and with some level of detail, what "critical race theory" actually is.

it was designed by "activist judges"

[Michael Knight 12852]

1 hour ago, BabaYaga said:

This has boiled down from no examples.  To we need better examples.  To it's not that big of a deal.  

I have extreme concerns on how this is delivered.  Again, as stated forcing my child into an "oppressor/oppressed" category (as one example) as a small child is beyond disturbing.  If you do not.  That's fine, but let's not pretend that it's not happening.  

Forcing a child to be raised by an insectoid is more disturbing.

[TwiceHorn 31084]

4 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

 

Cool.  I love aspirations.  Absolutely raise your kids to not be racist.

But as for your friend's son, he's not going to live his life without someone calling him a spic, doubt his American-ness, question his loyalty to his country, etc.  Because all of that shit happens right now to people who look like him/have last names like his.  Doesn't matter what kind of car he drives, how he dresses or speaks.  So, your statement that "no division exists" is demonstrably false.  HE may not have created that division.  You may not WANT that division.  But it exists.  And KNOWING that exists is how kids fight back against it, and resist it, particularly among their own peers.

For example, when his peers learn that there are people in the world who will treat their friend shitty because of his color/last name, they will hopefully have the reaction I had when I learned that (I was 6 or 7) - I thought it was the stupidest thing I'd ever heard of, and I'd never do it, and if anyone did that to one of my friends (my best friend was Honduran, for example), I'd sure as shit stand up for them.

I don't want to live in a world where black people are often treated differently/poorly, or hispanics, etc.  But I do.  Pretending that I don't, and raising my kids to believe that we don't, is a lie.  I don't believe in lying to my kids.

Don't have kids, but this makes total sense to me.

I think there's a point where kids are a little young to be informed that the world is a shitty place.

But at some point, it becomes entirely appropriate for the reasons you mention.

[BabaYaga 15190]

1 hour ago, We’reTexas said:

Lol.

So tenets of the material are covered, but as long as the actual terms "critical".  "Race".  And "Theory" don't' appear, we're good, right? 

As stated for the 4th time, my brothers kids in Lacy, WA have brought home CRT shit from their schools.  Are they are outlier?  Maybe?  Is this happening?  Absolutely.

[TwiceHorn 31084]

I don't agree with labeling people oppressors/oppressed at the primary school level.  I don't think I have a problem with the "power" label, because it begs or prompts consideration of just what is "power," exactly, which I view as productive.

And there are some adherents to CRT that posit that the continued existence of white people is a threat to people of color.  Or damned close to it.  That's not productive thinking, period, and is fine for college or graduate level stuff, but is not something that k-12 kids, except maybe in an AP course, need to be considering, because there are highly variant abilities to deal with that kind of information.

[elguapo 4576]

3 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

So tenets of the material are covered, but as long as the actual terms "critical".  "Race".  And "Theory" don't' appear, we're good, right? 

As stated for the 4th time, my brothers kids in Lacy, WA have brought home CRT shit from their schools.  Are they are outlier?  Maybe?  Is this happening?  Absolutely.

It's not happening in Texas public schools and yet we still have plenty of moron parents here crying about it.

[BabaYaga 15190]

47 minutes ago, GW Hayduke said:

I wonder if folks in your situation ever step back and assess what is going on and try to find out why you feel emotionally engaged.  Are you aware of the entities in the world who benefit from a segment of our population being outraged? 

Weapons grade irony.....

[BabaYaga 15190]

3 minutes ago, elguapo said:

It's not happening in Texas public schools and yet we still have plenty of moron parents here crying about it.

Is this thread just limited to Texas?  If so, agree 100%

[BabaYaga 15190]

5 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

I don't agree with labeling people oppressors/oppressed at the primary school level.  I don't think I have a problem with the "power" label, because it begs or prompts consideration of just what is "power," exactly, which I view as productive.

And there are some adherents to CRT that posit that the continued existence of white people is a threat to people of color.  Or damned close to it.  That's not productive thinking, period, and is fine for college or graduate level stuff, but is not something that k-12 kids, except maybe in an AP course, need to be considering, because there are highly variant abilities to deal with that kind of information.

100%

[Dahobbs 17407]

12 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

So tenets of the material are covered, but as long as the actual terms "critical".  "Race".  And "Theory" don't' appear, we're good, right? 

As stated for the 4th time, my brothers kids in Lacy, WA have brought home CRT shit from their schools.  Are they are outlier?  Maybe?  Is this happening?  Absolutely.

Cite the portion of the text from the Washington statute that you believe is problematic. And then tell us why you think it is problematic. 

[workswithseed 2028]

3 hours ago, Dahobbs said:

Well shit, if someone's blog says an unnamed "whistleblower" reported these actions to them, well it fucking must have happened. That's totally a reliable source of information you have there. 

In other news, I was approached by a whistleblower who informed me that @BabaYaga is actually part of the insectoid race with the goal of planting eggs in all of our brains. Apparently, he also subsists primarily on feces. Again, this is from a totally real whistleblower. 

Am I actually reading that unnamed whistle blowers are now not trustful? 

[Johnny Sack 8397]

4 minutes ago, workswithseed said:

Am I actually reading that unnamed whistle blowers are now not trustful? 

[GW Hayduke 1949]

12 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

Weapons grade irony.....

What do you mean? I'm not emotionally triggered by what people are telling me about CRT or DEI.  I'm ok with how things played out with Mr. Potato Head also.  

I was giving you a heads up about the propagandists who try to tap into triggering emotional reactions. I'm trying to help you.  

Once folks understand they are being influenced by propaganda, there are steps to take to protect yourself. But first you have to acknowledge the problem.  

[TwiceHorn 31084]

13 minutes ago, workswithseed said:

Am I actually reading that unnamed whistle blowers are now not trustful? 

*trustworthy

Also, what about the Ukrainian phone call whistleblower was not trustworthy?   It was all corroborated independently. It was a perfect call, dontcha know.  Perfectly corrupt.

A whistleblower whose complaint has been investigated and corroborated or proven is a valid source of evidence.

A bare allegation from a whistleblower is not.

Edited May 21, 2021 by TwiceHorn

[We’reTexas 1467]

19 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

So tenets of the material are covered, but as long as the actual terms "critical".  "Race".  And "Theory" don't' appear, we're good, right? 

As stated for the 4th time, my brothers kids in Lacy, WA have brought home CRT shit from their schools.  Are they are outlier?  Maybe?  Is this happening?  Absolutely.

No, you literally asserted, without any basis, that CRT curriculum legislation had passed, which was false. Or, you were being conceptually lazy with terminology and making dubious assertion not accepted by those knowledgeable of the subject. And I LOL’d because that basically sums up the article about the WA bill fight. 

[gsoda3 3214]

i've read 473 posts here and this is what i've come away with.

 

everyone agrees there's a problem wrt race.  the hang ups are

1.) when do you teach that   

2.) how do you fix it

 

it seems like no one disagrees with the tenets of CRT but it's used as a virtue batcall signal depending on how you think about #1 and #2.  accurate?

[TwiceHorn 31084]

7 minutes ago, gsoda3 said:

i've read 473 posts here and this is what i've come away with.

 

everyone agrees there's a problem wrt race.  the hang ups are

1.) when do you teach that   

2.) how do you fix it

 

it seems like no one disagrees with the tenets of CRT but it's used as a virtue batcall signal depending on how you think about #1 and #2.  accurate?

Might add that saying "teaching CRT" is kind of meaningless.  The contentions of CRT range from non-controversial to poisonous.  

And thus, labeling something CRT is also kind of meaningless.

[Dahobbs 17407]

11 minutes ago, workswithseed said:

Am I actually reading that unnamed whistle blowers are now not trustful? 

 

8 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

Why are y'all being intentionally obtuse? Do y'all seriously not see the difference between some random guy writing about an anonymous whistleblower on his website and actual professional news organizations reporting on a whistleblower? Again, if I say, on this website, that a whistleblower has reported to me that @Johnny Sack beats his spouse, would you find that a credible report? Why not? 

I have two issues with this report: (1) I don't believe the author that any such whistleblower exists, and (2) even if information was reported to him, I don't believe his opinion on the material accurately reflects its substance. 

[Brisketexan 104226]

10 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

The contentions of CRT range from non-controversial to poisonous.  

And thus, labeling something CRT is also kind of meaningless.

QF both truth and emphasis.  The concept of "CRT" is so wide-ranging as to include idiocy like deeming every living white person an active oppressor, and suggesting constitutional amendments to penalize them, to the most basic of common-sense conclusions like "there are still racist people in positions of power who sometimes do racist things" and "we still see some legacy effects of Jim Crow."  People latch on to what they want to latch onto.

[Nice Guy Eddie 13388]

3 hours ago, BabaYaga said:

Cute how we've moved from no examples, to no, I need better examples.  

On May 5, Governor Jay Inslee of Washington signed Senate Bill 5044 into law, which requires Critical Race Theory (CRT) training for all school staff, board directors, teachers, and administrators in public schools across the state.

My brother lives in Lacy.  He confirmed that his kids are being taught this in the classroom.  But sure, keep your head buried in the sand....

And we can't let the parents know.  Have to hide this from them.  From the "whiteness in Ed spaces"

Why is it a bad thing is school employees are required to learn more about the public and their perceptions of the world.  Second, parents shouldn't get the only say-so on what is taught in school. It's a public school so the public decides not the parents. Parents should have a right to learn what their kids will be taught but they don't dictate the curriculum. 

[Mole 4318]

A few semi-related thoughts:

1. I've read a small handful of articles in my field that use a CRT approach. One of the articles was picked up and misrepresented by various right wing national outlets for a small bit of an outrage hit. I may not have agreed or followed every logical leap the articles made, but they all challenged my assumptions and thought processes, making me better at what I do. I shared some of them with my students and it made for lively discussion and they came away with an expanded understanding of their field and how they fit into it. There's a real value and power in the way that CRT approaches things, even if it can be frustrating at times.

2. My limited understanding of CRT is mostly in how it interacts with my field. It has its own technical language and approaches things very differently than most of us are used to thinking. I don't think the explanations you'll see on major media outlets are likely to be full or meaningful.

3. Most of this outrage is third hand. Parents are upset about something, but there's little explanation of what specifically they're upset about, or that explanation doesn't really make sense. Now the fact that parents are upset (which is absolutely true) is used as evidence of a problem. It becomes a self-perpetuating problem. Outrage over outrage, but what's the source? Giving lists of upset people who are upset about being upset isn't really evidence of anything other than our outrage-addicted culture.

4. Since this is mostly focused on education, my drive-by comment is that an education that doesn't upset you or make you uncomfortable (or your kids or whoever) isn't much of an education. If your education simply reenforces your pre-existing worldview, then you might not be learning very much.

[TwiceHorn 31084]

4 minutes ago, Mole said:

A few semi-related thoughts:

1. I've read a small handful of articles in my field that use a CRT approach. One of the articles was picked up and misrepresented by various right wing national outlets for a small bit of an outrage hit. I may not have agreed or followed every logical leap the articles made, but they all challenged my assumptions and thought processes, making me better at what I do. I shared some of them with my students and it made for lively discussion and they came away with an expanded understanding of their field and how they fit into it. There's a real value and power in the way that CRT approaches things, even if it can be frustrating at times.

2. My limited understanding of CRT is mostly in how it interacts with my field. It has its own technical language and approaches things very differently than most of us are used to thinking. I don't think the explanations you'll see on major media outlets are likely to be full or meaningful.

3. Most of this outrage is third hand. Parents are upset about something, but there's little explanation of what specifically they're upset about, or that explanation doesn't really make sense. Now the fact that parents are upset (which is absolutely true) is used as evidence of a problem. It becomes a self-perpetuating problem. Outrage over outrage, but what's the source? Giving lists of upset people who are upset about being upset isn't really evidence of anything other than our outrage-addicted culture.

4. Since this is mostly focused on education, my drive-by comment is that an education that doesn't upset you or make you uncomfortable (or your kids or whoever) isn't much of an education. If your education simply reenforces your pre-existing worldview, then you might not be learning very much.

But you see, your problem is that you are a CRITICAL THINKER.  No wonder you like CRT.  Gotdamn commanis.  Prolly a hommasekshul too.

Edited May 21, 2021 by TwiceHorn

[washparkhorn 9931]

3 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Everyone had idiosyncratic teachers in high school that had a hardon for one thing or another.  Most students recognized it for what it was, if they were fanatical about it.

 

[wildcat09 29146]

1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

*trustworthy

Also, what about the Ukrainian phone call whistleblower was not trustworthy?   It was all corroborated independently. It was a perfect call, dontcha know.  Perfectly corrupt.

A whistleblower whose complaint has been investigated and corroborated or proven is a valid source of evidence.

A bare allegation from a whistleblower is not.

I can't believe it needs to be explained, but for the apparently dozens of five-year-olds that are posting here, whether or not it might be reasonable to consider an anonymous source to be trustworthy kind of depends on context. It's generally better to know who a source is because the source inevitably, even if not intentionally, is going to present things a certain way. But that doesn't mean that an anonymous source is always untrustworthy. The problem with anonymity is it makes it harder to evaluate if a source is full of shit or not, but that can sometimes be evaluated without knowing the source based on other context. E.g. Are they alleging specific, verifiable facts about a particular person and does what they're alleging seem consistent with past behavior from the person they're talking about? Or are they alluding to some nefarious but not clearly defined behavior by an unidentified group of people? Or are they saying a flying spaghetti monster told them that aliens abducted and replaced Brad Pitt with a replicant?

Hopefully when these boys grow up and are a little older, they'll learn the importance of context. 

[Macklemore 2905]

2 hours ago, SmokeyTheBear said:

Here is your problem: you view everything thru the lens of "your" community rather than the community at large. You want to protect your kids and send them to a school that will only teach a very narrow view of the world, surrounded by others from the same socio economic bubble. How can you teach kids that reality doesn't match your specific community, that they are privileged, if no-one in their bubble shows them that they are in a bubble? That is what I assume that teacher was trying to show them; that there are other structures out there that a majority of the human race has to deal with that your community is largely immune from. That is uncomfortable and it is obviously very uncomfortable to you. I'm a middle-aged white male who is not as privileged as you, but privileged compared to 90% of the rest of the world. And just because I benefited from the structures that we are looking to balance today, doesn't mean I'm racist. What makes you you, is understanding the disparity yet being too uncomfortable to want to address it so you stay in your privileged and closed community while yelling "class warfare" when called out. 

The first and most important priority any parent has is to give their children the best opportunity to succeed in life. Sending your kids to a nice, private, Christian school in Houston is a good way to do it. Kids with educated parents with similar socio-economic backgrounds forming bonds with other kids and being primed to get accepted into prestigious universities, which will open doors for them the rest of their lives. There is zero problem with that and any parent that has the opportunity and means to give their child that should be commended for doing so. There is nothing more important than securing an excellent education for your kids. Paying an arm and leg in tuition for private school and making that sacrifice, you bet your ass that a lot of people would be pissed off at a CRT curriculum that is divisive and disconcerting to kids at a young age. You want to teach your kids how to be grateful for their private school and nice lifestyle - take them to volunteer at the Star of Hope or the Houston Food Bank. What I don't fucking want is some 20 something teacher to tell me that my kids and I are oppressors.

[DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12301]

 

55 minutes ago, Mole said:

A few semi-related thoughts:

1. I've read a small handful of articles in my field that use a CRT approach. One of the articles was picked up and misrepresented by various right wing national outlets for a small bit of an outrage hit. I may not have agreed or followed every logical leap the articles made, but they all challenged my assumptions and thought processes, making me better at what I do. I shared some of them with my students and it made for lively discussion and they came away with an expanded understanding of their field and how they fit into it. There's a real value and power in the way that CRT approaches things, even if it can be frustrating at times.

2. My limited understanding of CRT is mostly in how it interacts with my field. It has its own technical language and approaches things very differently than most of us are used to thinking. I don't think the explanations you'll see on major media outlets are likely to be full or meaningful.

3. Most of this outrage is third hand. Parents are upset about something, but there's little explanation of what specifically they're upset about, or that explanation doesn't really make sense. Now the fact that parents are upset (which is absolutely true) is used as evidence of a problem. It becomes a self-perpetuating problem. Outrage over outrage, but what's the source? Giving lists of upset people who are upset about being upset isn't really evidence of anything other than our outrage-addicted culture.

4. Since this is mostly focused on education, my drive-by comment is that an education that doesn't upset you or make you uncomfortable (or your kids or whoever) isn't much of an education. If your education simply reenforces your pre-existing worldview, then you might not be learning very much.

bingo

[Catdaddyhorn 3438]

1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

Don't have kids, but this makes total sense to me.

I think there's a point where kids are a little young to be informed that the world is a shitty place.

But at some point, it becomes entirely appropriate for the reasons you mention.

Racial issues are an area where I admittedly struggle in figuring out a way to approach with my 2nd grader and kindergartner. Like all of us, I want to protect them from the shittiness of society at large, but study after study says that approach only leaves them alone to draw conclusions for themselves. It's easy to be seduced into believing that kids don't take in and absorb the values our society presents to them. But the truth is studies show even kids as young as 2 or 3 years old aren't oblivious to the racial hierarchy of the world they see around them and place value on certain races over others. More often than not when I as an adult come across information that I wasn't aware of as a school aged kid, I find myself wishing that I it was presented to me then. It would've gone a long way towards explaining our world in a lot more detail and given me better understanding of it. That being said, the example @Johnny Sack provided about his kids' school seems like a poorly formed and clumsy way to accomplish the goal of expanding empathy for the society around us. So it does give me pause to think people who can't handle the task would be responsible for handling it. Especially with kids so young. 

[Pancho 44181]

2 hours ago, CDAK said:

This is false. Quote my comments insisting there are CRT professors. I'm happy to refer to professors that study how CRT can be applied to social situations with whatever language is appropriate. I still don't know what that is. It seems like there is no shorthand. I have to type "professor who studies how CRT can be applied to social situations" every time I want to reference a professor who is involved with CRT.

There is no word or language to call this person other than a regular professor (or Dr. ________).  It feels as if you want a one-word description and that's just not the case.  A prof could use CRT for 1 research paper and never use CRT in her/his research ever again.  Would you consider that person a "CRT professor?"

So yes, you'll need to specifically refer to which prof and which research project they used CRT because there is no 1 size fits all "CRT prof."  That just doesn't exist bro. 

[BabaYaga 15190]

56 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Why is it a bad thing is school employees are required to learn more about the public and their perceptions of the world.  Second, parents shouldn't get the only say-so on what is taught in school. It's a public school so the public decides not the parents. Parents should have a right to learn what their kids will be taught but they don't dictate the curriculum. 

So, just to be clear you are ok with little elementary aged children being segregated into oppressor and oppressed categories?  You are ok with little children being told to chose from a matrix their privilege's? 

What about the lawsuit in LV where a black mother of a son who is so light most think him white, and thus must attend and state in their mandatory course that required students to reveal their race, gender, sexual orientation and disabilities and then determine if privilege or oppression is attached to those identities.  Just to be clear, you are 100% cool with all this?

[SmokeyTheBear 5562]

1 minute ago, Macklemore said:

The first and most important priority any parent has is to give their children the best opportunity to succeed in life. Sending your kids to a nice, private, Christian school in Houston is a good way to do it. Kids with educated parents with similar socio-economic backgrounds forming bonds with other kids and being primed to get accepted into prestigious universities, which will open doors for them the rest of their lives. There is zero problem with that and any parent that has the opportunity and means to give their child that should be commended for doing so. There is nothing more important than securing an excellent education for your kids. Paying an arm and leg in tuition for private school and making that sacrifice, you bet your ass that a lot of people would be pissed off at a CRT curriculum that is divisive and disconcerting to kids at a young age. You want to teach your kids how to be grateful for their private school and nice lifestyle - take them to volunteer at the Star of Hope or the Houston Food Bank. What I don't fucking want is some 20 something teacher to tell me that my kids and I are oppressors.

And no one is saying that. What they are saying is, "hey kids, yall have a great life and your parents have given you what you need and more to succeed in life. Now, let me tell you about the others in this world and how your experience doesn't necessarily relate to 99% of the current human experience. And if you are white, nothing wrong with that, but you may want to know that your experience will more than likely be better than anyone elses."

Why does that scare you? How does that take from you? Your mindset perpetuates the issues because you would rather build a bubble around yourself and your children rather than accept the obvious and work to address it. And now they will grow up oblivious to the issues because they only got a small controlled view of the world, skewed thru your fear. 

[Captainant 27250]

1 minute ago, BabaYaga said:

So, just to be clear you are ok with little elementary aged children being segregated into oppressor and oppressed categories?  You are ok with little children being told to chose from a matrix their privilege's? 

 

Lol well for one, you're referencing Johnny Sack's private school that he chose for his children and isn't publicly funded. So I'm not quite sure what you're throwing a tantrum about, baby aga.

[BabaYaga 15190]

1 minute ago, SmokeyTheBear said:

And no one is saying that. What they are saying is, "hey kids, yall have a great life and your parents have given you what you need and more to succeed in life. Now, let me tell you about the others in this world and how your experience doesn't necessarily relate to 99% of the current human experience. And if you are white, nothing wrong with that, but you may want to know that your experience will more than likely be better than anyone elses."

Why does that scare you? How does that take from you? Your mindset perpetuates the issues because you would rather build a bubble around yourself and your children rather than accept the obvious and work to address it. And now they will grow up oblivious to the issues because they only got a small controlled view of the world, skewed thru your fear. 

Because that is not how these examples are being framed.  Certainly not my brothers who son has sever learning disabilities and god damn well isn't privileged at all other than he was born into a 2 parent household  and is being told he's an "oppressor"

[BabaYaga 15190]

2 minutes ago, Captainant said:

Lol well for one, you're referencing Johnny Sack's private school that he chose for his children and isn't publicly funded. So I'm not quite sure what you're throwing a tantrum about, baby aga.

You are certainly entertaining in your complete and utter inability to grasp much of anything yet assume so much.  Keep it up.  

[CDAK 216]

I'm not insisting that there are "CRT professors." I really don't care. "Professor," "doctor," "cosseted butterfly," whatever term you want to use is fine. This is tangential.

I thought CRT was prevalent in DEI initiatives, at least at my company. You say, "that's impossible, by definition DEI initiatives cannot be based on CRT." I think you're drawing too fine (and blurry) a distinction. But, I'll use "antiracism" in lieu of CRT going forward when discussing the basis for certain DEI initiatives if that's allowed by the professors.

8 minutes ago, Pancho said:

There is no word or language to call this person other than a regular professor (or Dr. ________).  It feels as if you want a one-word description and that's just not the case.  A prof could use CRT for 1 research paper and never use CRT in her/his research ever again.  Would you consider that person a "CRT professor?"

So yes, you'll need to specifically refer to which prof and which research project they used CRT because there is no 1 size fits all "CRT prof."  That just doesn't exist bro. 

 

[Johnny Sack 8397]

anti-racism is like anti-facism

The very freaking thing they are against. 

[Captainant 27250]

Just now, BabaYaga said:

You are certainly entertaining in your complete and utter inability to grasp much of anything yet assume so much.  Keep it up.  

The specific instance you're talking about - elemetary age kids being segregated and arbitrarially labelled as "oppressor" or "oppressed"? That was sack's personal anecdote about his children at his religious private school. From this very thread. So I'm not quite sure why you're mentioning it as an example of "CRT GONE WRONG!!!" Maybe it's what tucker mentioned last night...?

[BabaYaga 15190]

Just now, Captainant said:

The specific instance you're talking about - elemetary age kids being segregated and arbitrarially labelled as "oppressor" or "oppressed"? That was sack's personal anecdote about his children at his religious private school. From this very thread. So I'm not quite sure why you're mentioning it as an example of "CRT GONE WRONG!!!" Maybe it's what tucker mentioned last night...?

There are dozens of other examples all across the country stating the same thing.  But by all means, keep up the good work.