This thread is about a Washington Post article on "white privilege." Good enough for their readers, good enough for here.
Ahhh...Ok. I misunderstood Washington Post intention in posting about "white privilege" here at the forum. My fault...please let them know I'm sorry about their thread on "white privilege". wrbtrader
You hijacked the thread, but I feel worse for the innocent victims who coughed up the $497, or god forbid the $12,000. At least according to one review I read.
Keep trying to change the subject...its info discussed many times as you know and its an illusion that you have about 12k and $497 tags. Yet, that's not surprising considering your other thread topics. With that said, here's my initial message post that you caused you to think I've hijacked your thread that you take very personally...I wonder why ? To get you back on topic that you're unable to address... You do realize that depending upon the location a conservative has in the United States...the White teacher will be treated more favorably in many places in the North in comparison to Tennesse...a place of Southern Conservatism. If you want to talk about IP and me...as I stated...knock yourself out. It's been all discussed before or you can stay on topic about Conservatism in Tennessee. By the way, did you miss the story about the guy in Kentucky...similar topic without the "white...white...white" headlines in very large fonts ? wrbtrader
The issue is whether "white privilege" exists and whether, like CRT, it is appropriate to teach school kids that it does as a fact.
In my opinion, I wouldn't say "white privilege" doesn't exist (an invisible package of unearned assets for a white person) but I prefer to believe social status (income level, who you know as part of your network, schools you attended...instead does exist). People or the Media want to make it a racial thing so that they can make it a bad thing when it's really something else as described above. As you've realized by now...I'm not a fan of colorful topics like this because it's race-baiting for readership when there's a more visible issue that most are afraid to discuss...social status, poverty levels, education background, and so on. I've seen it first hand growing up with the military, attending private catholic schools and boarding schools in other countries. I saw it again at different Universities in two different countries. I see it with how others see my children...kids of privilege, speak fluently multiple languages, attend expensive private catholic schools, academic performance expectations, military expectations and so on... Is CRT a topic that needs to be discussed in school...maybe as one of those "option/elective classes" but I wouldn't support making such a class as part of the normal (required) curriculum because in my opinion we already get some form of education of CRT in other curriculum without calling it CRT. Seriously, you will always have those teachers in social studies class, philosophy class that encourages their students to talk about social status. There will then be someone in the class that will bring up the racial differences (benefits, privileges, or whatever it's called these days)... Then someone outside of the conversation gets offended it's about CRT...afraid it will lead to guilt about their race when in reality it's already embedded in the curriculum of other topics. It happened to my teenagers in a history class about the Plains of Abraham battle and the treatment of the Indigenous afterward. A parent called the educator and thought it was an inappropriate discussion in history class while ignoring the fact that it was an indigenous student that wanted to talk about it in the last 15 mins of the open discussion period. Oddly, you even get the same education while visiting local museums that talk about the famous French/British wars here in Québec. Once again, I'm not a fan of race-baiting topics because the same topics are in fact easily being discussed in other classes without the "race issue" because they are already embedded in other topics. Also, I'm not a fan of people that do it online regardless to the side of the camp fire they sit. What's next...suspend students that discuss it in class when an educator calls on opinions from students or threaten a student by saying we'll talk about false info about your background if the student thinks it's a race-baiting topic ? sarcasm wrbtrader
IMO, "white privilege" is a way of avoiding an accurate description of the problem. East Asians and South Asians earn more than whites in the United States. We have a black/hispanic/Native American underachievement problem for a combination of organic reasons and the perpetuation of some destructive stereotypes. I wouldn't have fired him without warnings, but it's his job to teach, not to indoctrinate.
Does the article state that the students felt they were being indoctrinated or was that the opinion of someone outside of the class ??? Indoctrination is the process of inculcating a person with ideas, attitudes, cognitive strategies or professional methodologies (see doctrine). ... Some distinguish indoctrination from education on the basis that the indoctrinated person is expected not to question or critically examine the doctrine they have learned. wrbtrader
I dunno. The School Board argues with good reason that they did give him notice but he had charted his own course regardless. My highlighted dates added and selected excerpts below. February 3 "Sullivan Central’s principal, Mark Foster, pulled Hawn aside at a football game the next day. As Hawn recalled it, the principal asked, “Why are you talking about white privilege in personal finance?” Not long after that, Brent Palmer, the school system’s assistant director of schools for personnel and operations, sent a warning email. “In many of your statements, ‘this is a fact,’ you leave little room for discussion,” Palmer wrote. “Going forward, I would ask that you provide space in your discussions for students to objectively express their various opinions.” Upheld by full school board March 4 "Hawn appealed the reprimand, appearing before the school board on March 4 to argue it should be removed from his personnel file. But the board was unpersuaded, voting near-unanimously to uphold the sanction. " Then in April there was another incident and.... Hawn decided to let the poet Kyla Jenée Lacey speak. He clicked to YouTube. Jones and several other students in the class later said they remember a group of white boys throwing up their hands in anger during the poem. “The video is definitely very confrontational and doesn’t sugarcoat, the point of it is to be in-your-face-harsh,” said a white 18-year-old in the class, who spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of backlash from her conservative family. “I think that’s what really upset the boys.” One of those boys complained to administrators, his classmates said. Within two weeks, Hawn was fired. In the letter of dismissal, Director of Schools David Cox called the Lacey video “inappropriate” and wrote that Hawn had failed to learn anything from the previous reprimand.