Lurker > joe40001

https://youtu.be/nw38B0WzqQg?t=5839
(Clip should start at 1h39m19s)

Backstory, they are two people famous for puzzle solving (sudoku mostly), but not particularly good gamers, they are working together to do "keep talking and nobody explodes" they are alright at it, but still a bit britishly slow and calm on some things. The ending of this attempt crazy.

Watching this during christmas break was a good/fun time for me.

Vicious_Dios posted...

Good riddance, imo.

Why?

I like both you and them, what the heck did they ever do?

Wait wtf NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

God dammit, you all are horrible, he was awesome.

He posted an awesome puzzle with a 100 dollar prize and I solved it and bought a really cool desk trinket that makes me smile/proud whenever I look at it.

Please tell me he has an alt or something. Jesus, what is wrong with you people here?

No, you are one of the best people here.

Or at the very least you gotta find a better place to hang out and then tell me where it is.

SomeLikeItHoth posted...

All the girls you liked in high school would have given you a chance if you just tried.

This is 1000% untrue

It's weird how people will put up strawmen immediately after a post even though doing so makes it obvious that they aren't accurately representing my argument at all.

You can keep strawmanning, but like, it's pretty transparent.

gigageek1500 posted...

Here's how I see the "tinged with/defined by" distinction. The website I got it from calls this "red granite," but it seems like you would have us call it "granite with red."

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/6/9/4/AAAWDOAAC0Ge.jpg

Absolutely not, if something is almost entirely red, it's reasonable to call it red.

57.8% of the US is white, even if you assume 50% of white people are white supremacists (which would be a beyond insane assumption) that still means that 71.1% of the country is not. It's absurd to call something red when it is 71.1% green and 28.9% red. You can say it contains red, or even contains a lot of red, but you can't call that thing red.

You and I seem to completely disagree about the percentage of "white supremacy" in this country, this country is a wonderful melting pot full of many cultures and people of all races working to make their lives better for themselves, their families, their communities, and sometimes the world. America has tons of philanthropy and kindness. There is a lot of good in America. We have problems that I don't want to hide or deny, but nobody or nation is defined solely by their worst element. We are defined by our good and bad, and to suggest a country is literally nothing more than it's worst is just silly.

_HayleyWilliams posted...

Would you say white supremacy created this socio-economic disparity?

The legacy of slavery and racist policies including some such as the war on drugs which we haven't yet fixed created that disparity. Framing it as "white supremacy and racism in the past have created socio-economic disparities that are being felt today" is an ok way to frame it.

BTW, I'm super pro-fixing those disparities. Things like UBI would be amazing for that. Part of what upsets me is much of this CRT-lite is emphasizing conflict and not proposing solutions. In that interview I posted John McWhorter has a few simple suggestions (end war on drugs, teach phonics, support trade schools) that would do so much more to help black people than even 1 million white people being forced to sit through a struggle session where they are told they are complicit in white supremacy.

Please check out that interview if you really want to understand my position.

Yang has a great line about some of these modern talking points about white supremacy: "I think about going up to that farmer in Iowa and saying 'YOU'RE COMPLICIT!', he's gonna be like 'I've been hanging out in the corn fields for 8 generations, what the hell did I do?"

I'll put it another way. My life has largely being ruined by 2 things, shame and depression. And I had a largely positive upbringing/education. It doesn't take much to make a child feel bad, so considering how badly shamed I felt, I can only imagine how much shame I would feel if I was thought just because I'm white I'm an oppressor and complicit in white supremacy. Simultaneously, if I were black I was told I was defined primarily as a victim and the deck was stacked against me, again I'd likely feel incredibly depression and hopelessness. Both of these are horrible outcomes for children.

You could argue that "nobody is teaching white kids they are potential oppressors, and nobody is teaching black kids they are victims with the deck stacked against them." I disagree. But I think the important thing is that we both agree that nobody should be teaching kids such things, and so in so far as those things are being taught, they should be stopped and replaced with teachings that are 100% accurate to racial history and reality, but don't encourage racial essentialism.

Punished_Blinx posted...

https://twitter.com/exkazmer/status/1331346243755368450?lang=en

Try and beat this

lol

LanHikari10 posted...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u61F_qvdid0

I know there are no spoken lines here, but this still fits.

RLM is great

No they don't exist.

dj1200 posted...

joe, do you even do anything?

Physically, or otherwise?

Physically I'm out of shape, yeah.

I have like a job and stuff though otherwise.

Why?

gigageek1500 posted...

That's what I was talking about. Is it true that talking about race reduces a person to their race? Is there any way to talk about racism without talking about race?

We absolutely can and should talk about race when appropriate. We can even talk about the ideas of "CRT-lite", but they need to be presented as one of many ideas and not gospel truth.

I'm going to duck out from this topic for a while, but I strongly recommend you check out that interview I linked.

LightHawKnight posted...

Was wondering why this topic is back again. Why are people feeding joe fucking numbers? Also why isn't he banned yet?

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


I want to just say that it reflects incredibly poorly on both of you the desire to censor and vilify somebody just because you disagree with or don't understand their argument. This intolerance towards discussion of important issues "like how to best fight racism" and "how to best help the underserved", will not serve you in your life, wisdom, of relationships.

I just wanted to say that quick. After this, I am done responding to both of you because of this outlook.

Intro2Logic posted...

I'm not sure why you think it says that. The definition here is referring to systems, not schools.

Now, a school where whites outperform minority students might be reflective of white supremacy in broader society, but nowhere does it suggest here that every school where this is the case is white supremacist.

Like I said, I pulled back on that quote, because there are some interpretations where it isn't making as strong a claim.

But I should point to somebody like averagejoel who explicitly is making that claim. It's not an unheard of claim for people who invoke such definitions.

_HayleyWilliams posted...

The Far-Left would have to have like, literally any significant power in the first place.

They seem to be setting the academic agenda in many places, so that's some power.

And maybe you can give us a great explanation as to how a hypothetical system where white children outperform racial minorities would not be tinged with racism and white supremacy.

Tinged with =/= defined by.

But the answer to that is that it's mostly socio-economic. Because of a history of racism and the real racial sins of this country in the past, black people currently are disproportionality poor, and poor people do disproportionally worse on average academically.

I'll put it to you this way, if you had a wealthy 2 parent black family with Kid X, and 1 poor single parent white family with Kid Y. Who do you think is more likely to get into college, kid X or Kid Y?

Obviously kid X, and so we have a classist system much more than a racist one. Racism isn't over, but to say "every college has more white students because white supremacy" is clearly bullshit. Particularly because that argument requires you define Asians to be white or else it entirely falls apart.

averagejoel posted...

that's literally the most prominent indication of white supremacy

https://imgur.com/OlnFy54

iPhone_7 posted...

A room in which the majority of people in it are white is an indication of white supremacy.

Apparently.

averagejoel posted...

this is disingenuous as fuck. "underlining racial divisions" -- how are you supposed to talk about racial divisions in the first place without pointing them out?

Underlining was the wrong word, more like "encouraging/emphasizing" racial divisions.

It's the difference between
"here's how people of different races are treated unequally" = good discussion framing.
And
"here's how racial groups are different" = bad discussion framing.

and you haven't actually shown that "CRT-lite" has an emphasis on "encouraging segregation"

Some of the high school students then echoed his objections. Im so exhausted with being reduced to my race, a girl said. The first step of antiracism is to racialize every single dimension of my identity. Another girl added: Fighting indoctrination with indoctrination can be dangerous.

Also I don't see how repeating over and over that people are primarily meant to define themselves through a racial lens could possibly do anything but that. If you emphasize race over individuality, particularly to children, particularly if you create a narrative of oppressors/victims it's going to create separation.

But I'll try to set aside even more time to source explicit examples of segregation, I just don't want to spend my whole weekend trying to prove a case to people, particularly if many of those people have already 100% made up their mind in the opposite direct and are completely unwilling to hear something that challenges their assumptions.

I'm not targeting that comment at anybody specifically right now, but there are some people here where that seems to be the case.

The only reason I've spent this much time is because there does seem to be some people who are open to the idea that just because an idea challenges the far left, doesn't mean it's wrong. Indeed I'm for more liberal policies, because the far-left CRT-lite stuff really isn't liberal at all.

Again, to independents and moderates I strongly encourage you to listen to this discussion:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bvikt3Ynsss

It's a bit more about wokeness than CRT-lite in schools but it touches on the same issues. People are starting to wake up that this "woke CRT-lite anti-racism" is actually pretty hostile mean and divisive. And even more than that, it's trash at actually helping people.

If you are 100% in the camp that far-left can do no wrong, then yeah I'm probably never going to convince you of anything.

Intro2Logic posted...

Why did you bold what you bolded here? It's just...correct?

A school or organization where whites are doing better is not by definition white supremacist.

It's a bit too broad a brush. But honestly I can let this one go because there are interpretations of this sentence that while imperfect are reasonable enough.

averagejoel posted...

your misinterpretation of the article you copy-pasted is certainly tinged with it

So there was literally nothing bad about the article, but because of how I bolded it, you object?

I'm guessing you want to call the article "white nationalist propaganda" but you realize that would make you look silly so your only tactic is attacking the messenger, even when I share it verbatim.

gigageek1500 posted...

Nothing bolded in part 2, the one about racism being alive and well.

I never said it wasn't. I've argued though that CRT-lite's emphasis on underlining racial divisions and encouraging segregation exacerbates, not heals the problem.

It looks like you're really focusing on the quotes that show that white people are uncomfortable talking about race. Do you think you can take their viewpoints at face value? It doesn't look like you're as uncritical of people sharing their experiences of racism.

I have not challenged people's experiences of racism. The experiences listed seem awful and I wish we as a society can move past such ugliness.

For example, earlier, you thought calling institutions "racist" was inherently disqualifying when it could be phrased as "having racism."

I do think that's a more accurate way to write it, yes. I don't damn somebody who rhetorically uses the other form, but IMO it is less accurate.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


Is The New York Times white nationalist propaganda to you?

Bishop9800 posted...

Joe "I'm trying to help black people, but don't want their history taught in schools" Numbers

No thanks. We don't need your help.

I've said it countless times, I just got done repeating it in my last post but:
The horror of slavery, the hypocrisy of Jim Crow, the terror of lynching, the devastating loss of life and property in Tulsa and in other massacres no student should get through, roughly, middle school ignorant of these things, and anyone who thinks that is politics needs to join the rest of us in the 21st century.

I have never been opposed to teaching history.

Couple more examples from this NYT article:
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/09/opinion/critical-race-theory.html

In Virginia itself, the Department of Educations website has a page devoted to Anti-racism in Education, and at the end of a long list of Terms and Definitions it reads, Drawing from critical race theory, the term white supremacy also refers to a political or socio-economic system where white people enjoy structural advantage and rights that other racial and ethnic groups do not, both at a collective and an individual level.

In the 2022 draft revision of the California Department of Educations Mathematics Framework, the chapter on Teaching for Equity and Engagement includes this language: Empowering students with mathematics also includes removing the high stakes of errors and sending the message that learning is always unfinished and that it is safe to take mathematical risks. This mind-set creates the conditions for students to develop a sense of ownership over their mathematical thinking and their right to belong to the discipline of mathematics a truly artful way of saying that diverse kids should not be saddled with the onerous task of having to get the actual answers.

In February, the Oregon Department of Education sent an update to math educators that linked to a document titled A Pathway to Equitable Math Instruction/Dismantling Racism in Mathematics Instruction. It contains a section on Deconstructing Racism in Mathematics Instruction positing that white supremacy culture in the mathematics classroom can show up in a variety of ways, including when Preconceived expectations are steeped in the dominant culture, Superficial curriculum changes are offered in place of culturally relevant pedagogy and practice and Students are required to show their work in standardized, prescribed ways.

The article author goes on to make a point I've been repeatedly trying to make in this topic:

To be sure, voices on the political right, including Youngkin, must do better when it comes to specifying what they oppose. They, and we, would be better off if they explained that they oppose philosophies influenced by critical race theory, rather than claiming C.R.T. itself is being taught. Bills intended to ban the teaching of C.R.T.-lite shouldnt be worded as if the intent was to ban the teaching of anything about race at all. And if thats what any of these bills do mean, they should spell it out in clear language in order to expose that intent to debate one within which I would be vociferously opposed, I should note. The horror of slavery, the hypocrisy of Jim Crow, the terror of lynching, the devastating loss of life and property in Tulsa and in other massacres no student should get through, roughly, middle school ignorant of these things, and anyone who thinks that is politics needs to join the rest of us in the 21st century.

But the insistence that parents opposed to what is being called critical race theory are rising against a mere fantasy and simply enjoying a coded way of fostering denial about race is facile. It is an attempt to wrest a woke object lesson from the nuanced realities of life as it is actually lived, in which the notion of a white backlash against racial progress may appeal as narrative, or as analysis of an electoral upset, but rarely tracks with on-the-ground reality.

(part 3 of 3)
The Grace School Mission
Paul Rossi and Grace Church Schools journey into antiracist education offers a window into its complexities. Mr. Rossi, 52, changed careers in his early 40s, and found at Grace an Episcopal school with liberal values a place he adored. He taught math and classes on existentialism and Stoic philosophy. Records show he received strong annual evaluations and was described as a natural teacher.

Slowly change came. The head of school, George P. Davison, who is white and has steered Grace for many years, pinpointed the moment his school embraced an antiracist mission.

Grace began using the language of antiracism in 2015 as part of our efforts to foster a sense of belonging, he wrote in response to The New York Times. It means believing that racism is real, that opposing it requires active engagement and that our community and curriculum are enriched when we arent blind to races influence.

Grace, he wrote, incorporated the language of critical race theory but did not rest upon that foundation. He emphasized that the school avoided using shame around race.

Mr. Rossi, along with two teachers who described themselves as progressives and asked for anonymity, was skeptical. The teachers acknowledged that quite a few colleagues appeared to support the new curriculum and they spoke of sustained pressure to demonstrate acceptance of the language of antiracism.

Last year, the @blackatgrace Instagram account anonymously accused a female administrator of once placing derogatory information in a Black students file. A teacher circulated a petition demanding her firing.

Another teacher grew worried; he had not known of the petition and feared the absence of his signature would be taken as a sign of his insensitivity. I thought to myself: Weve entered a culture of denunciation, Mr. Rossi said. We dont just denounce but if we dont do it fast enough, we could be denounced.

Pressure to join affinity groups went beyond highly encouraged, teachers said. A Latino couple asked a teacher to stop pressuring their daughter, who did not want to join the Latino one.

Grace administrators agreed to demands to seek more diverse faculty; it is largely white.

With the election of Donald J. Trump, teachers said, permissible disagreement narrowed markedly. Mr. Rossi recalled some students in his The Art of Persuasion class hankered for contrarian readings outside what he called the Grace political bubble. So last autumn he proposed a work by Glenn Loury, a well-known economist at Brown University and a Black man with conservative leanings.

An administrator, Hugo Mahabir, whose family has roots in Trinidad, blocked that. He wrote in an email to Mr. Rossi that Mr. Lourys argument delivered to the Massachusetts Institute of Technology economics faculty rings hollow, and that to give students a Black conservative view on race might confuse and/or enflame students. Mr. Mahabir did not respond to requests for comment.

The transcript of the February session with Mr. Rossis white affinity group revealed a tense, probing discussion, with teachers and students found on either side of various questions. Toward the end, the dean of student life, Ilana Laurence, offered thanks: As uncomfortable as Mr. Rossi may have made many people here, I firmly believe that our conversation would not ever have been nearly as rich and thought-provoking.

This drew support from the consultant, Emily Schorr Lesnick, who ran the affinity session. At a faculty meeting a few days later, she noted that Mr. Rossi and fellow teachers modeled an intelligent discussion.

I have been in lots of spaces with adults, with students around antiracist work, she said, where white people are kind of just saying things and going through the motions and this was not that space, and I am so so grateful. Ms. Schorr Lesnick, who is white, did not respond to a request for an interview.

That air of congratulation dissipated. Soon Mr. Rossi talked with Mr. Davison, the school head, about the dim shape of his future. He secretly recorded that conversation.

It offered a surprise. The fact is that Im agreeing with you that there has been a demonization, Mr. Davison told the teacher. I also have grave doubts about some of the doctrinaire stuff that gets spouted at us in the name of antiracist.

Mr. Davison said he was worried students were made to feel shame because of race. Were demonizing white people for being born, he said, adding later, Were using language that makes them feel less than, for nothing that they are personally responsible.

Mr. Rossi wrote of his case on the Substack site of the writer Bari Weiss, a former Times Opinion editor. In an email to Mr. Rossi, Mr. Davison claimed he was misquoted. The teacher later released recorded excerpts from that conversation, after which Grace claimed that the quotes lacked context.

Mr. Rossi was denounced at Grace and in private school circles. He rejoined that he was trapped, accused of racial insensitivity and in danger of losing his job.

This drama occurred against a backdrop of tension at the school. Months earlier, nine Black students demanded that classes be called off in the wake of Mr. Floyds death. They said peers were voicing their white opinions about how Black and brown people should protest.

The Grace Gazette, the school newspaper, surveyed 111 students and staff this spring of all backgrounds about free speech.

By a margin of about 48 percent to 43 percent, respondents said they were uncomfortable expressing dissenting opinions. And 35 percent said they had practiced wokeness to protect their reputations. There is no viewpoint diversity on race, a student wrote, because everyone is expected to view things the same way.

An Uncertain Future
The pushback against antiracism education has taken on aspects of an ideological uprising. In Boston, a new group, Parents United, has entered the fight with New Englands private schools. Mr. Bartning, the former Riverdale parent, established the Foundation Against Intolerance & Racism, with a large board that includes the academic and writer Steven Pinker; the human rights activist Ayaan Hirsi Ali; the former Fox newscaster Megyn Kelly; and Mr. Loury, the economist at Brown. Mr. Rossi works with this foundation.

Grace Church School appointed a task force to re-examine its antiracist teachings.

But the schools seem unlikely to change their approach to educating students on race. And opponents face daunting challenges. Powerful trustees say they support the schools, and administrators sound steeled for the argument. Tom Taylor, the head of Riverdales Upper School, who is white, recently published an academic article on race and private schools. He, too, is a product of such schools.

Private schools perpetuate whiteness, he wrote, and must pursue an antiracist, decolonizing and culturally affirming agenda, with no obligation to educate those who resist. Private schools who find parents unwilling to accept moves toward a culturally responsible school are free to draw a line, he wrote.

Mr. Rossi, the Grace schoolteacher, will watch from the outside. Grace Church School offered him a contract if he participated in restorative practices for the supposed harm done to students of color. Grace officials did not explain what that would entail.

Soon after, Mr. Rossi and the school parted ways. Its no longer the school I loved, he said.

And there are a zillion stories like these, if you want @AloneIBreak I can try to get together more. This is just one article covering the different angles of the issue.

(part 2 of 3)

Responding to Painful Stories
The stories make for disturbing reading. In the wake of the police killing of George Floyd, Black private school alumni formed Instagram accounts: @blackattrinity, @blackatdalton, @blackatbrearley, @blackatandover and @blackatsidwellfriends.

The posts are anonymous and difficult to fact-check. But the ache and hurt are inescapable. A Black student recalled a white peer who told him Dalton wasnt made for people like you anyway. A Black graduate of Columbia Grammar & Preparatory School recalled wealthy white classmates who complained Black students only got into certain colleges because of their race. A Black Brearley graduate wrote of being conditioned to believe white skin, straight hair, a skinny body and money was the only way I could be right in this world.

Stories come laden with complication. Students wrote of favorite teachers and treasured experiences. And there were traces of class anger. A Black working-class parent at Trinity School wrote that wealthy Black families dominated the Black affinity group and excluded her child.

These kinds of stories, taken together with shifts in the culture around racism, persuaded private school leaders to double down on antiracist education. Such efforts extend back more than four decades.

As schools got used to diversity they realized it enriched education for all students, said Ms. Haakmat, the consultant. But these schools were still way white.

New Yorks private schools declined to provide the demographic breakdowns that are required of public schools. Riverdale and Trinity officials say about 40 percent of students identify as of color, a quite broad definition; Grace officials say 33 percent of students hail from diverse backgrounds; Dalton said only that it had a strong commitment to being intentionally diverse. Riverdales head of school, Dominic Randolph, said a precise count was complicated by the number of families identifying as multiracial.

Numbers compiled by the Guild of Independent Schools of New York City showed that the percentage of students in elite private schools who identified as Black or Latino remained static since 2013, hovering at a combined 12 percent; Black and Latino residents constitute more than 50 percent of the citys population.

Lisa Johnson is a graduate of a private school in Atlanta and heads Private School Village, a Los Angeles-based organization for Black families. They love to pitch you on diversity, she said. Then your child is one of two Blacks in a class and you think, Huh, how do they define diversity without crystal-clear data?

Chlo Valdary, a Black diversity consultant who diverges from her peers and is critical of aspects of antiracist education, noted that heated rhetoric rarely challenged the status quo. Antiracism sidesteps income inequality and doesnt actually threaten the elite at all, she said.

Several teachers spoke of a performance-like quality to heated rhetoric on antiracism and pointed by way of example to Dalton, which throws an annual diversity conference that attracts trustees, parents and donors from 30 private schools. The conference this May carried intrigue, with Daltons head of school, Mr. Best, speaking of his confusion at being pushed out, saying, No one here, including me, has the full story.

Mr. Best introduced the keynote speaker, Rodney Glasgow, a Black diversity consultant who leads a private Quaker school in Maryland. Mr. Glasgow, a popular speaker on the private school circuit, promptly laid waste to that world, describing it as laden with insidious whiteness and built to replicate the plantation mentality.

Mr. Glasgow ended with a flourish, comparing those Dalton parents who pushed out Mr. Best to what he described as the white supremacists who invaded the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6. Dalton featured his speech prominently on its website until questions arose. It has since been removed.

AloneIBreak posted...

So, what are some things occurring in schools (K-12) to which you are opposed?

From the New York Times:
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/27/us/new-york-private-schools-racism.html

Several years back Grace Church School, an elite private school in Manhattan, embraced an antiracist mission and sought to have students and teachers wrestle with whiteness, racial privilege and bias.

Teachers and students were periodically separated into groups by race, gender and ethnicity. In February 2021, Paul Rossi, a math teacher, and what the school called his white-identifying group, met with a white consultant, who displayed a slide that named supposed characteristics of white supremacy. These included individualism, worship of the written word and objectivity.

Mr. Rossi said he felt a twist in his stomach. Objectivity? he told the consultant, according to a transcript. Human attributes are being reduced to racial traits.

As you look at this list, the consultant asked, are you having white feelings?

What, Mr. Rossi asked, makes a feeling white?

Some of the high school students then echoed his objections. Im so exhausted with being reduced to my race, a girl said. The first step of antiracism is to racialize every single dimension of my identity. Another girl added: Fighting indoctrination with indoctrination can be dangerous.

This modest revolt proved fateful. A school official reprimanded Mr. Rossi, accusing him of creating a neurological imbalance in students, according to a recording of the conversation. A few days later the head of school wrote a statement and directed teachers to read it aloud in classes.

When someone breaches our professional norms, the statement read in part, the response includes a warning in their permanent file that a further incident of unprofessional conduct could result in dismissal.

This is another dispatch from Americas cultural conflicts over schools, this time from a rarefied bubble. Elite private schools from Los Angeles to Washington, D.C., from Boston to Columbus, Ohio, have embraced a mission to end racism by challenging white privilege. A sizable group of parents and teachers say the schools have taken it too far and enforced suffocating and destructive groupthink on students.

This is nowhere more true than in New York Citys tony forest of private schools.

Stirred by the surge of activism around racism, Black alumni have shared tales of isolation, insensitivity and racism during school days.

And many private school administrators have tried to reimagine their schools as antiracist institutions, which means, loosely, a school that is actively opposed to any manifestation of racism.

This conflict plays out amid the high peaks of American economic inequality. Tuition at many of New Yorks private schools hovers between $53,000 and $58,000, the most expensive tab in the nation. Many heads of school make between $580,000 to more than $1.1 million.

At a time when some public schools are battling over whether to even teach aspects of American history, private school administrators portray uprooting racial bias as morally urgent and demanding of reiteration. Some steps are practical: They have added Black, Latino and Asian authors, and expanded course offerings to better encompass America and the world in its complications.

Other steps are much more personal. The interim head of the Dalton School, Ellen Stein, who is white, spoke five years ago of writing a racial biography of herself to better understand biases and to communicate with other races. The Brearley School declared itself an antiracist school with mandatory antiracism training for parents, faculty and trustees and affirmed the importance of meeting regularly in groups that bring together people who share a common race or gender.

Kindergarten students at Riverdale Country School in the Bronx are taught to identify their skin color by mixing paint colors. The lower school chief in an email last year instructed parents to avoid talk of colorblindness and acknowledge racial differences.

Private school leaders, along with diversity consultants, say these approaches reflect current research about confronting racism and stamping out privilege.

Theres always the same resistance Oh my God, youre going too far, said Martha Haakmat, a Black diversity consultant who serves on the board of Brearley. We just want to teach kids about the systems that create inequity in society and empower them rather than reinforcing systems of oppression.

Studies show that very young children, she said, are aware of skin color. Better to address it Yes, that woman has Black skin. What do you think of that? than to let children view white skin as the baseline.

More broadly, Ms. Haakmat said, private schools need to sidestep white old boy networks in hiring and integrate antiracism into the curriculum: If you teach statistics, why not touch on economic and racial inequality? Or use biology classes to teach of eugenics and how race has framed the way we think of humans? That, she said, is thoughtful antiracism.

Critics, a mixed lot of parents and teachers, argue that aspects of the new curriculums edge toward recreating the racially segregated spaces of an earlier age. They say the insistent emphasis on skin color and race is reductive and some teenagers learn to adopt the language of antiracism and wield it against peers.

The nerves of some parents were not soothed when more than 100 teachers and staff members applauded Daltons antiracism curriculum and proposed two dozen steps to extend it, including calling on the school to abolish any advanced course in which Black students performed worse than students who are not Black.

A group of Dalton parents wrote their own letter to the school this year: We have spoken with dozens of families of all colors and backgrounds who are in shock and looking for an alternative school.

This upswell of parental anger, fed also by discontent with Daltons decision to teach only online last fall, led the head of school, Jim Best, who is white, to leave on July 1. Daltons diversity chief resigned under fire in February.

Bion Bartning, who notes that his heritage is a mix of Jewish, Mexican and Yaqui tribe, pulled his children out of Riverdale and created a foundation to argue against this sort of antiracist education. The insistence on teaching race consciousness is a fundamental shift into a sort of tribalism, he said.

No head of school agreed to an interview. Those at Dalton, Riverdale and Grace Church answered some questions by email. Several dozen faculty members declined interviews; in the end six spoke only on the condition of anonymity, for fear of upsetting employers. A dozen parents at five schools agreed to interviews, only one on the record.

For parents to speak out, said a white mother of private school children, was laden with risk. People and companies are petrified of being labeled racists, she said. If you work at an elite Wall Street firm and speak out, a top partner will tell you to shut up.

Another parent framed the primal class stakes: Wealthy parents plot and compete to get a child into a private school secure in the knowledge that education married to social connections will ease the way into an elite college and a gilded career. A letter or call from the counselor at a top private school can work wonders with college admissions offices.

Why risk all that?

bump

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


Dude, fighting against segregation and racial division is the opposite of white nationalist. I'm pushing for equality and solutions that will actually help black lives, you are not.

I am dedicated to policies that help will help marginalized people. I don't consider myself a white supremacist and nothing you can say can convince me otherwise.

ScazarMeltex posted...

Dude, I once watched a mod (former now) go to bat for Nazis under the guise of defending free speech. Like literal actual swastika carrying nazis who advocate for genocide. Then, when I called it out I got fucking warned over it. It's why fursonanongrata doesn't post here anymore.

The ACLU has repeated fought for the right to speak of many such awful groups. The idea behind free speech as an ideal by definition has to apply to even those you disagree with or find to be offensive. If you don't support the right of everybody to speak you don't support free speech as an ideal.

I support free speech, this obviously doesn't mean I defend the perspective all those who would speak.

I truly don't understand the perspective of people who need to censor opinions they find challenging, particularly in cases like mine when those opinions are "racial division = bad", "racial essentialism = bad", "racial segregation = bad", "end the war on drugs = good", "education reform to help underperforming students do better = good".

If you really want to understand, I recommend you listen to this conversation:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bvikt3Ynsss

Intro2Logic posted...

To me, it comes off hollow to rail against something for paragraphs on end (despite being unable to show much if any concrete examples of it in actual practice),

It's time consuming to provide detailed sources, I can and have in the past, but I've found if the people aren't open to them in the first place the effort is almost entirely wasted.

and then try at the end to distance yourself from the movement actively working to ban it, at a time when they are making progress in that effort.

Censoring books is not in service of any movement I'm a part of. Just like I'm for police reform, but that doesn't mean I'd support anything done in "police reform's name" such as abolishing the entire police department or something.

Please stop trying to turn it into team sports, it's not. Like I said before, even if X is bad, that doesn't mean anybody who opposes X is somebody whose opinion I am accountable for. Plenty of people can point to the same problem without them being on some kind of team. Furthermore, I don't think most republican politicians actually care about this problem but instead care about how they can leverage it for their own ends. Banning perfectly fine race related books from libraries the conservative equivalent of virtue signaling and I explicitly do not endorse it.

I hate political tribalism because it turns real problems into false binaries. I'm not playing that game. I take issues with specific issues/policies, I don't play this team sport game.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


What would you say is the difference between a passionate person and an immature one?

Unrelated PS: This is a pretty hype topic number

nfearurspecimn posted...

jaded

That's often what it seems like. "I can't relate to them, they are immature." And by that some people mean "they have excitement for life, and try new or adventurous things, also they are willing to look silly."

And IMO that's not an age/maturity thing but a just healthy person thing.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


What do you mean by "mature"

Why?

LinkDaLunatic posted...

bruh

They 2 are different conversations. One conversation was me trying to understand "ok, does 10 pushups a day even do shit" and the other was "ok, well this seems to be more about him and his goals, and so me trying to understand the merits of it might come across as dismissive towards his efforts, and so I should clarify that is not my intention."

The pushups might not do shit, particularly at low numbers, but like even so I don't want to get in the way of somebody trying to do something positive for themselves.

dj1200 posted...

Doing push ups daily gets me in a regular pattern. And you misread. 30 a day for this month, then 50, then 100.

You do you. I was not trying to be a hater or diminish your efforts.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


joe40001 posted...

And also just know that anytime you fall back into your habit of drive-by insults, you betray your claim that you don't put any weight to my opinion.

I literally just said it and you still can't help yourself. You can't handle perspectives that differ from your own, I get it. But I'm going to be honest, these random insults at this point just make you look insecure/petty.

Be honest with yourself, if you see a child crying and saying "Tim is a dumb dumb doo doo head" do you really think "oh, the child crying and throwing insults is clearly the more intelligent person, and I can only assume that their assessment of this 'Tim' is spot on"?

No you don't. So for your own sake maybe keep that in mind before you just keep tripling-down on childish insults. It's not a good look.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


You engage a lot with somebody you apparently don't care about the opinion of. Furthermore I've had plenty of discussion with other civil and reasonable people, even on CE, so you can't speak for anybody but yourself.

All of your arguments to me are, at best, "I reject your reality and substitute my own.", and that's only ever going to get you so far in a critical thinking discussion about actual reality.

One thing I will agree with you with, is that me trying to communicate to you seems pointless.

So go ahead and live in your narrative bubble and don't bother me. I welcome it.

And also just know that anytime you fall back into your habit of drive-by insults, you betray your claim that you don't put any weight to my opinion.

TC, out of curiosity is there a celebrity or famous person who you'd give a 6 to so we could get some perspective?

dj1200 posted...

Put it like this, I won't get in better shape by doing nothing.

You won't do anything by doing nothing, that is not evidence that doing any given thing will result in any given result.

"You won't become an astronaut if you don't eat crackers."
"Does eating crackers help you become an astronaut?"
"Put it like this, you won't become an astronaut by doing nothing."

I'm sure push-ups are a tiny bit good for you, but idk, seems like 10 push ups per day don't really move any needle healthwise. Am I wrong about that?

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


That's not a valid response.

Are we really at a point where you can't understand a summary of a situation?

I know I have you tagged as "bad faith", but this is a pretty big low, even for you.

catboy2 posted...

If a lot of people were talking about that, it'd make you more depressed. Just be happy that the few people who have a social life on this board aren't very open about it here.

No, I actually enjoy hearing about other people's lives if they are going well.

Flockaveli posted...

My shorty took me to see Spider Man the other day and we fucked in her car afterwards.

Nice

Guide posted...

I accidentally triggered some thing which changed a bunch of numbers into the same number. My day is ruined, my disappointment immeasurable. Perhaps another time.

You can undo with the undo button or with control z. If you still have the tab open you should be able to do that.

Zero_Destroyer posted...

"Oh man, this lady is really attractive!"

you:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWERcCnKT98

She's not attractive, and she looks like somebody who has sold their dignity and is doing a shameless faux-sexy performance for a mob of faceless horny people on the internet.

It's far more a sad, desperate, condemnation of modern society than it is in any way "attractive".

You know when people say it's bad to "objectify". Well whatever "objectify" means in the most pejorative sense is what she is doing to herself.

People can be sexy, or do porn or whatever, but something about that image is just soo... desperate, lonely, shameless, and self-objectifying. I'm surprised anybody finds it attractive at all.

dj1200 posted...

Its to get me ready for the 50 a day then 100 a day. I'm gonna do sets of 10. Would it make a difference? I dunno, try it. Can you do 10 good form push ups in a row?

I can do some pushups but I'm heavy so they are bad form.

I just don't get the point. It makes you a tiny bit better at doing pushups, but aside from that it's not like it's going to make a major difference in your health or life or anything, right?

That image perfectly sums up something about modern society. I'm not sure what the word is for that something, but whatever the concept is it is a bad thing.

Would it even make a difference to do 30 a day?

I can't remember the last time I saw a "I met a hot girl in class at my job" or "I'm going out to a crazy party" or even "Me and my buddies are going to do [wild or adventurous thing]"

Is everybody just at home all the time now?

Do people still do exciting things?